Talk:The Who discography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Discographies (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Discographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's collection of discography articles and lists. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to discography-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 
WikiProject Rock music (Rated List-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Genre[edit]

Personally, I think these genre classifications are stupid and should really be deleted. It's all rock music, even the first three albums. For details of the particular sub-sub-genre The Who were exploring on that particular album, people can visit the particular album page. Besides, who are we to say that, for instance, the first album is "Maximum R&B" above all else? The Who described their music as such at the time, yes, but they also described it as "power pop", so why not call it that? Or "mod", which is how most people referred to it then and now? I'm not saying we should dispense with these descriptions, I'm saying they should be discussed in detail...but on the particular album page. For the first three albums, the descriptions are too narrow. For the later releases, the labels of "Rock." ad nauseam are redundant. Who's with me on getting rid of this? We could just replace it at the top with something like "The Who explored various rock subgenres on the first three albums, such as mod, power pop, and psychedelia, before delving into the hard rock idiom on 'Tommy' and 'Who's Next', a direction they would continue to pursue for the rest of their career."

i second that, but it mihgt be important to find something worth mentioning in the genre column. Joeyramoney 23:04, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. When not screwed up by ill-informed edits, it gives useful information about the evolution of the band's music, and hints of what to expect for people who are considering giving an album a try. – B.Bryant 06:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
It really doesn't. When the genres are accurate, they're too vague (Pop, Rock, Psychedelia). "Maximum R&B" isn't a genre at all, it was a marketing gimmick for their early gigs, and I don't even want to comment on describing an album as "satire". These terms cannot be understood by anyone who hasn't already listened to the albums, and they don't need to be told what it sounds like. I say chuck 'em. MightyMoose22 >Abort, Retry, Fail?_ 12:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

why the hell do I get directed here when I type in...[edit]

when I type in "magic bus" ????

I noticed that as well and fixed it. It's more appropriate for it to go to the song. OsFan 14:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Live Albums[edit]

How about adding The Blues to the Bush as a live album? It was an internet-only release, but it's still an official live album.

I think you are missing several versions of Tommy. I have a 1989 Live Tommy on VHS Cassette with Phil Collins, Billy Idol, Elton John, Patti LaBelle, and Steve Winwood. (CVS Msic Videl Enterprises, (Bar Code (ISBN?): 4474-49028-3)

There was also a mid seventies version of Tommy that had Rod Stewart in the Cast (LP record). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_%28album%29#1972_orchestral_version

Also it is available as CD. see http://www.amazon.com/Tommy-Performed-Symphony-Orchestra-Soloists/dp/B0000086D3

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.18.216.61 (talk) 08:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC) 

Merge[edit]

I reckon The Who Songs should be merged into this page, like The Beatles discography, if not deleted completely. There's very little point to it being its own article. MightyMoose22 >Abort, Retry, Fail?_ 08:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to assume that the two months of silence means that nobody cares if the List of The Who songs page just gets deleted outright? Good to know. MightyMoose22 >Abort, Retry, Fail?_ 05:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Notable Songs[edit]

Is "Notable Songs" NPOV? Should we use a more objective standard, such as "top selling songs"? Or at least "Songs with individual articles"? – B.Bryant 06:11, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


Missing Album/Film[edit]

The only Who album I own is "Who's Better, Who's Best". I had hoped to find some info about it here. It is not included on this page. I would request that a Who fan who knows about this album please update this page. Here is what I see online about the album.[1] TonyTheTiger 05:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, there seems to be a similarly title film "The Who: Who's Better Who's Best"[2]. I could add the album, but I think a bigger Who fan should incorporate both of these into the page. TonyTheTiger 16:09, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The album is a minor compilation (not particularly widely available, didn't sell that well), and The Who have released dozens of them. Unfortunately, because we can't practically list them all, this is one of the many to be lost by the wayside. The film is a VHS compilation of various music videos and a few early live/mimed performances. Again, it's not particularly worth a mention when compared to everything else that's not included on the page. I'm sorry that it happens to be the one that you've got and that this page wasn't as helpful as you had hoped, but I'm sure you'll understand that we can't include everything, and we do unfortunately have to draw the line somewhere. Sorry again. MightyMoose22 >Abort, Retry, Fail?_ 16:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Who's Better, Who's Best is a "minor compilation" that "didn't sell well"? It went Top Ten in the UK and is a gold seller in the USA. Clashwho 03:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

You are saying this is a minor omission. Could you describe what omissions are closest to the borderline on this discography so I can understand this decision. TonyTheTiger 00:31, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Not really, as there are literally dozens of them and I wouldn't know where to start. Take a look at all the links on this page for example. Could you describe why Who's Better, Who's Best is more worthy of inclusion than all of the others? MightyMoose22 >Abort, Retry, Fail?_ 19:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
why are these live-albums not in the list?
you could add them in "other appearances
(I'm Dutch, so my English might not be that good...
They're all unofficial releases.
All official albums are released by Brunswick, Decca, MCA, Warner, Track, or Universal/Polydor.
I haven't got Live From Toronto, so I don't know who released that. The problem is that the copyright belongs to whoever made the recording, so a release doesn't have to be anything to do with the band or their record label.
But if you want to make a new Live albums section and put them all in (including the 1982 MCA release Who's Last) I don't think anyone will burn your embassy for it. :)
  • Those are all official live releases no matter who released them. They're not bootlegs. Join Together was released by MCA in the USA and it's included in The Who's official discography from the box set. Clashwho 03:32, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
"Those are all official live releases no matter who released them." That's a contradiction. The definition of "official release" is that the band (or at least their label representatives) had something do do with it. "Unofficial" is not the same thing as "bootleg". I stand corrected on JT, though... And I've just noticed the Eel Pie logo on the TCT Albert Hall recording, so I was wrong about that, but IOW is definately unofficial. As I said, I don't know about Toronto.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.6.83.187 (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

Isle Of Wight is an OFFICIAL release, on the Sony Legacy label.

Also, in 2017, Eagle Entertainment released the 2004 Isle Of Wight set on cd and dvd/blu-ray. So how do we get this unlocked to add to it? After all, this is a community! Rayfromtexas123 (talk) 05:08, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't you think the appeareances on Live Aid/Live 8 should be mentioned? Joep Vullings 18:18, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Who's Missing and Two's Missing[edit]

I think these albums are worth adding to the compilations section. They contain material not found anywhere else. Clashwho 10:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Isn't "Teenage Wasteland" on "Who are You?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:Dookie95]|Dookie95]]] ([[User talk:Dookie95]|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Dookie95]|contribs]])

No, Teenage Wasteland is on the The Lifehouse Chronicles. You're probably thinking of Baba O'Riley, which is on Who's Next. —Erik Harris 00:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jointogether.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Jointogether.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:25, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Odds and Sods track listing be from the original version?[edit]

This list is from the 1998 reissue which includes a lot of bonus tracks. Just wondering, as none of the other albums list the bonus tracks.204.73.103.253 (talk) 05:13, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Removal of track listings?[edit]

Would anybody have any problems with me removing the track listings from this article? Let me just explain why I think this is a good idea.

Currently, the article is slightly confusing. You see the name of an album followed by a listing of all the tracks. So, to find the album you're looking for, it's necessary to scroll through many screens of information trying to visually pick out album titles from the track titles. This makes it impossible to get a quick overview of the released albums.

The track listings are, in most cases, just duplication of information which is already available on the relevant album's article.

So, my proposal is to make this page more like Pink Floyd discography in that it should contain a listing of albums with release dates and chart positions with a link to the album articles for those who require more information. As well as making this article more usable, this would also ensure we only have an album's track listing in one place, making it easier to ensure its correctness and keep it up-to-date with information on bonus tracks from re-releases.

Thanks, Thebrid (talk) 11:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Tommy Demos 1968[edit]

Would this fit on here, and if so, where? It was released by Yellow Dog in 1993, and is definitely an important document in Who history. 97.112.192.230 (talk) 03:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Being that it's a bootleg, I'd say no. Sbamkmfdmdfmk (talk) 13:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Singles Charts aren't right[edit]

The Who never had a number one hit single(Hard to believe), yet it lists several in the article. Fixed it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Predictor92 (talkcontribs) 18:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Formats missing[edit]

The formats of the released albums, which I find quite important, are missing. --Kabum555 (talk) 09:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

LP compilation missing[edit]

One double-LP compilation is still missing, The Who: The Best Of The Last Ten Years '64 - '74, see [3] (general information) and [4] (with pictures of the inner sleeves photo collage). Released in 1974 on two different labels in both France and Germany, it would be notable as probably the first stereo releases of Dogs (with a longer outro than on Thirty Years of Maximum R&B), Doctor doctor, and Whiskey man, with notably different mixes at least on both Whiskey man and Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde, plus a version of I'm a boy very different from at least the one on My Generation: The Very Best of The Who (drums faster and less prominent, vocals about a key higher, especially in the chorus). Always preferred this version of I'm a boy by far. --87.151.17.105 (talk) 13:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

French Charts[edit]

http://www.infodisc.fr/Album_W.php (look under the drop down menu for The WHO) has completely different (and much better) chart placings, e.g.

My Generation 70 A Quick One 50 The Who Sell Out 3 Tommy 2 Who's Next 2

105.227.67.99 (talk) 14:15, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Singles section[edit]

I have checked with the books for the U.S. Billboard Hot 100 and the U.S. Cashbox. I also checked France. I'm pretty sure that Cashbox was the main reason for the tag being placed on the section. Whoever placed the tag, please let me know if I addressed your concerns. - Bossanoven (talk) 01:49, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Several editors made so many unexplained and inaccurate edits to this section that I could not even identify the last stable version to revert back to. I verified or corrected the U.S. positions but the other countries have no references listed so I added the tag. Piriczki (talk) 15:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Also, WP:DISCOGSTYLE suggests no more than 10 charts. I think its arbitrary but don't be surprised if someone wants to remove the Cashbox column if it puts the number over 10. They also don't like anything derived from references that they don't have access to. Piriczki (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Who discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 July 2016[edit]

I sources that The Who have gold albums in Australia and Belgium.

Tcl1111 (talk) 02:32, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Not done Please provide reliable sources which support this and specify which albums you're discussing. ~ Rob13Talk 02:43, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 July 2016[edit]

I have sources that The Who had Who's Next go gold in Belgium[1]and Japan[2]. And Who's Better, Who's Best was certified 2x Platinum in Australia[3]

References

2600:1006:B10B:4848:10DF:24:6C6B:6CBA (talk) 03:38, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Not done The first two links don't say what you claim they do. The last link is for the recorded concert, and the relevant information is already in the article. ~ Rob13Talk 03:43, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 July 2016[edit]

I got a link that Tommy the soundtrack went gold[1]

References

Hb2hhhhhhhhhhhh (talk) 00:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

  •  Done ~ Rob13Talk 00:57, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 July 2016[edit]

Who's Next was certified Platinum and so was Who Are You that was certified 4x Platinum [1]

References

2600:1006:B16D:F5:CCFC:2F12:B4D6:E06F (talk) 21:46, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Not done Your source contradicts the things you stated.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 July 2016[edit]

This is a more question when is the 30/500 protection lock going to expire thank you 2601:342:0:8F5A:E01D:1747:BD6:9E66 (talk) 17:35, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

It is currently indefinitely ECP-protected, as the notice at the top should tell you when editing (emphasis mine):
  • 02:34, 9 July 2016 NeilN (talk | contribs) changed protection level for The Who discography [Edit=Require extended confirmed access] (indefinite)
nyuszika7h (talk) 17:46, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
This request, the few immediately above it and several requests on related articles asking when their protection expires have, obviously, been made by socks of Никита-Родин-2002, the reason for the protection. - SummerPhDv2.0 20:44, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on The Who discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 July 2016[edit]


tommy and whos next went platinum in canada [1] [2]

References

Russoaaron (talk) 16:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Not done It's not clear from that source that the award is platinum, nor is it clear which "Tommy" they're talking about, the album or the soundtrack. It's also not clear that an auction listing is reliable. Could you provide a better source? ~ Rob13Talk 16:15, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 July 2016[edit]


It is said that The Ultimate Collection was certified 2x Platinum in Australia. [1]

References

?tidy (talk) 18:19, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Sock blocked. ~ Rob13Talk 18:26, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 August 2016[edit]

Please put Canadian Platinum certifications for Who's Next, Tommy and Faces Dance. Because the website of Music Canada says so.[1]

Isotopeqs (talk) 01:02, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

References

Not supported by reference. ~ Rob13Talk 23:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Who discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:22, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 January 2017[edit]

Tommy went gold in Italy add the certification [1] 73.104.46.191 (talk) 02:43, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Done -- Dane talk 04:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Who discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:44, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 24 July 2017[edit]

Could you edit the sales certification from 3x platinum to 5x platinum [1] 49.228.253.197 (talk) 20:11, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done Not a reliable source. ~ Rob13Talk 20:13, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
Note: Block evasion by Никита-Родин-2002. See the archive at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Никита-Родин-2002. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 05:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 July 2017[edit]

Would like to update the discography by adding relevant releases such as the live Join Together set, the 2017 Live At Isle Of Wight 2004 release, and several more. Rayfromtexas123 (talk) 04:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC) **My bad...Join Together is there. How about the Isle Of Wight 2004?

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 05:58, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 September 2017[edit]

change the tommy riaa 2x platinum certification to 3x platinum[2] 93.73.18.186 (talk) 20:58, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. A blog is not a reliable source. SparklingPessimist Scream at me! 21:03, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
@SparklingPessimist: Please see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nikita. This page is a major target of this vandal. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 05:45, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 September 2017[edit]

change the US certification for Quadrophenia from Platinum to 2x Platinum. check the 3rd source the 2 others i did not put there just there for no reason i can't delete them[3] 176.67.26.218 (talk) 17:00, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done. The forum posting linked to is both unreliable and inaccurate. The RIAA has not certified Quadrophenia 2x platinum. Piriczki (talk) 17:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Piriczki: Please see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nikita. This page is a major target of this vandal. His requests commonly include the unreliable source you speak of. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 05:46, 15 September 2017 (UTC)