Talk:Van Halen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Van Halen was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Van Halen    (Inactive)
WikiProject icon This article was within the scope of WikiProject Van Halen, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.
 
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Rock music (Rated B-class, High-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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Metal (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

"Balance" and "Live: Without a Net" in the Discography[edit]

Two different users have added these titles to the Discography. They are not live albums. "Balance" was one of their tours, and Live: Without a Net is a video. There is a difference between tours and videos and live albums, and they are treated as such in Van Halen discography. The listing in the main article is only for live albums, not for concert tours and videos. I'm asked for consensus to leave these items out. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 17:16, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

You are correct; a video is for a videography, and a tour is for a list of tours.Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 18:33, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Mitch Malloy again and again[edit]

The Mitch Malloy claims just won't go away. Seems like he or his followers keep adding him to the list of "official" members of the band, even though no one in the band has ever corroborated his story. Wikipedia policy is pretty clear about requiring sources other than yourself. But Malloy seems hell-bent on violating that policy to insert himself into Van Halen history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.63.8.237 (talk) 19:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. That he auditioned is not in dispute, but others did at the time, too. So the only real reason to note him and list him at all is his uncorroborated claims that he was offered the spot. Without independent corroboration from the Van Halen camp, or some other independent source (not an interview with Malloy, and not audio of his audition hosted on a fan site) that is meaningless. And regardless, he was never an actual full member. He never played a show with the band, nor recorded anything other than an audition demo. Any statement other than he was auditioned is undue emphasis at best, and blatantly false at worst. He should not be listed in the infobox, nor in the time line. I am removing those immediately as false. And we really need to decide if the audition is worth a whole section full of uncorroborated claims. My thought: NO! oknazevad (talk) 05:26, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Actually, Malloy's assertion that he auditioned for Van Halen is also in dispute. A recording of him at 5150 studio does not mean he auditioned for the band. Steve Brown from Trixter has recorded with Eddie at 5150 studio, that doesn't mean he was auditioning to Van Halen's the second guitarist. No band member has corroborated this audition. Mitch Malloy needs to be permanently deleted from the Van Halen article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.65.214.187 (talk) 04:14, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Genres[edit]

The current list appears to reflect long-standing consensus. Let's discuss any new changes to the genres here. I will notify Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Music genres task force of this discussion. — MusikAnimal talk 04:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi guys. Don't put any stock in my edits on that particular issue. I was simply trying to discern and maintain the status quo amongst apparently widespread IP editor warring, which I had reported to another admin earlier today. I didn't know there was a consensus discussion buried somewhere. That should have been linked out here, so thanks for finding it. Is there a template for permanent Talk page archival links like this one, which are immutable above the archival process? Thanks! — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 04:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I guess we could use {{consensus}} to link back to the discussion, but let's see what this one yields. If no one feels strongly about changing the genres we can stick with what we have. If I were to throw in my opinion, I'd say "arena rock" is a fitting genre, and some sources seem to back that. — MusikAnimal talk 04:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems that "arena rock" is an experiential colloquialism which could be expounded upon in the body (as could anything), and "hard rock" or "pop rock" or "heavy metal" are objective (encyclopedic, library-based, archival, whatever the word is) definitions. So is there a Wikipedia guideline or policy on how many genres to include in the infobox or lead? If two or three, then I suppose "heavy metal", "hard rock", and "pop rock" are applicable as the complete gamut. It doesn't seem like there's much discussion to be had, right? — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 04:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
I've said it before and I'll say it again: arena rock is a compositional choice which shapes a song's structure. As such it is a legitimate musical genre. For instance, the composer who is writing an arena rock song will be thinking about simple but powerful musical lines as opposed to complex or technically challenging lines. Arena rock is every bit as much a genre as speed metal. Binksternet (talk) 00:47, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh okay, great. I didn't realize that because the arena rock article doesn't go into much detail, and I was just trying to faciliate some discussion here upon request. I just saw REO Speedwagon with Chicago last week, so I definitely got that arena vibe from REO. I was hoping that there's an exact guideline featuring a list of recognized or prominent genres and how many are customary. Maybe there's another arena/hard rock band who's at Good status, to look at. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 06:21, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
About the comment "arena rock is a compositional choice," can I, as a composer for my band that mostly plays in our drummer's basement, write arena rock for my band? I doubt many people would call that anything but pretentious. There is no universal agreement among music writers and professionals about arena rock being a genre. Yes, some RS do use it, but erratically, and in different contexts. Some call it a genre, others disagree. As far as I can tell, the term came out of the phenomenon in the early 1970s of bands (who played music of different genres) beginning to play in packed arenas, leading to new, energetic, and less intimate experiences for the fans and the musicians. (Roger Waters compares this phenomenon to the Nuremburg rallies.) That's a phenomenon that spans many genres. It speaks more to a band's ability to pack large venues than to what the music is going to sound like. It speaks to the live concert experience that fans can expect. I don't think we Wikipedians should be trying to define something that the professionals in the field have not settled. Dcs002 (talk) 04:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music/Music_genres_task_force#Arena_rock_-_Genre_or_not.3F, which is why I find your comment above to be unduly dismissive. You saw that I brought multiple useful examples of "arena rock" being used as a genre, especially the book All Music Guide to Rock, and the C.J. Watson "family tree" of rock which includes arena rock on the same level as speed metal or soft rock. At that same discussion, you did not supply a single source to back up your argument. Binksternet (talk) 05:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, let's take this discussion back to the Music genres task force. A consensus there can provide the kind of guidance needed to answer the questions being raised here. Dcs002 (talk) 08:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Cleaning up the timeline[edit]

Is anyone opposed to doing the above to the timeline? It gets the red bars out of Eddie's and the Bassists' bars which are a little confusing. I think it makes everything a little more informative and certainly easier to read. Note that background vocalists usually aren't placed in the timeline like they currently are as I have seen around the site. DLManiac (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. That Michael Anthony was the backing vocalist during his tenure with the band (and is sometimes regarded as a better singer than Dave) is a major part of contributions, and has been noted outright as missing in reviews for A Different Kind of Truth. Highlighting that role with an overlap bar makes sense. Especially if we are going to keep a multiple-colored bar for Sammy (which we should). Fact is, the lack of any mention of Eddie's keyboard playing, which is far more notable and historically significant than his backing vocals, is more disappointing. oknazevad (talk) 03:12, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
I agree about the keyboards, and was considering mentioning it. However, I see a little ambiguity with having the overlapping vocals bar, when you compare this timeline to say, one like Styx's because they have three "lead vocalists" all listed as overlaps, and other members that sing background vocals are not listed in the timeline as such.DLManiac (talk) 04:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)


I believe I have a better solution that solves everyone's worries! It includes Eddie being lead vocalist at the incarnation of the band, specific contributions for back ground vocals, and Eddie's Keyboard playing. Let's talk about it! The only thing in question is whether the keyboards end at the end of Gary Cherone's tenure or the end of the Sammy Reunion. Because no keys on A Different Kind Of Truth. Also, maybe how to include Dave's acoustic contributions, but I think those are probably too minimal to worry about. DLManiac (talk) 19:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Looks good. I wouldn't end Eddie's keyboards, though. While A Different Kind of Truth may not have any keyboards on it, neither did most of the early albums, and he's still the keyboardist of record and may play them on tour (though I believe they may have a touring keyboardist for those purposes). It remains one of his roles in the band, though, and should be continued to present. oknazevad (talk) 00:46, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
He definitely didn't play them on the 2012 tour. They play Cradle and Jump with pre-recorded tracks. I'm gonna go ahead and throw this up there, extending the keyboards, and we can change it if we need to later. Thanks for the input! DLManiac (talk) 02:02, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Sammy Hagar era: changing style and a string of number one albums (1986–1996) neutral Objectivity (Eddie/Alex/Sammy hearsay with no citations)[edit]

There seem to be a huge number of "citation needed" supposed facts concerning the rift between Sammy Hagar and the VH brothers, I recommend removing them as their objectivity is clearly not neutral, and there are opposing views with citable sources from the press that contradict them.

I agree for the most part. If something is challenged and no one has provided a source, let's remove it. But please make sure to maintain the narrative and not just have a portion of the band's history missing just because a source is needed. I'd rather provide basic information and leave a "citation needed" tag. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 11:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Appropriate?[edit]

Out of curiosity, is including the ongoing public "tiff" between members - current and former - appropriate for an encyclopedic article? Feels a bit like a fan magazine read to me.THX1136 (talk) 14:22, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Kinda agree. I would say the criticism of DLR by Eddie may turn out to be important if it leads to another line up change. Unless everyone just grudgingly continues to work together, which would make this a non-factor in the long run. Either way it's still too WP:CRYSTALBALL. As for the criticism of Sammy and Michael, who really cares. We already know that they don't get along, that's why they're not in the band anymore. It's not news, really, and Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS, so we really don't need to summarize every news story that comes out. I say we take it out. oknazevad (talk) 16:12, 23 June 2015 (UTC)