# Talk:A Thousand Suns

Upon release, the album was met with generally favorable reviews [5] and has been a commercial success debuting at number 1 on over ten charts.
Although commercially successful, the album received mixed reviews upon release. Andy Lowson (talk) 14:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

New single, confirmed by Joe Hahn's twitter that they shot a video January 18, 2011.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.13.149 (talk) 04:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC) 

Can you cite a reliable source?  ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ②  05:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
charts: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linkin_Park/Diskografie--Gbuvn (talk) 18:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Which claims a release date of March 25 but provides no source. It does say it charted in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland; that'll require some more digging to verify. —C.Fred (talk) 19:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
…And two of the three chart appearances don't hold water; the linked sources do not show that the song charted in Germany or Austria. It appears to have spent one week at #47 on the Swiss chart per http://swisscharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Linkin+Park&titel=Burning+In+The+Skies&cat=s and http://austriancharts.at/showitem.asp?interpret=Linkin+Park&titel=Burning+In+The+Skies&cat=s. The question is whether either of those chart sources are acceptable. —C.Fred (talk) 19:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
…And accessing the chart position via the preferred source at WP:GOODCHARTS says it charted in Austria also. *boggle* —C.Fred (talk) 19:26, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Which cover is the right one (main cover), this one or this one? 83.131.83.7 (talk) 01:04, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

The white one, in the article. Friginator (talk) 01:45, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

For an album like this, alternative rock is FAR too vague and gives an incredibly poor idea of sound. I'm thinking of alternative rock, electropop, experimental rock and alternative hip hop. But this is open for debate. But it cannot remain as it is.

Not sure who added this. Please remember to sign your post in the future. On the point of topic, this has been debated quite significantly before. The sheer number of proposed genre's was ridiculous and is clearly visible in this talk page's archive.  ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ②  17:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Exactly. It's not necessary, and there has been clear consensus. (This was added by User:Titan50, by the way). Friginator (talk) 23:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Alternative rock is, on its own, a poor genre for this to be labeled. At the very least, it should be electronic rock. (I don't have an account, so I'll sign this as LP fan)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.1.0 (talk) 00:56, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
I have heard some alternative metal and nu metal and rap metal sounds from this album than rap rock and alt rock.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMetallican (talk • contribs) 01:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC) 

Going by what editors hear would violate both verifiability, as it isn't published, and the restriction on original research. —C.Fred (talk) 04:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I agree, far too open. I would put Electro rock, industrial rock, and probably progressive rock...seeing that is an album that is just a progression...similar to The Wall (Pink Floyd)...except as an industrial/synth version. Alos that it is similar to the sound of ReAnimation, but far less rapping oriented. Who agrees...?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.248.168 (talk) 01:06, 17 November 2011 (UTC) 

Find reliable sources that support that. As long as these are just your personal opinions, they don't belong in the aritcle, as they are just original research. Sergecross73 msg me  03:25, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Per this source http://www.allaccess.com/alternative/future-releases Iridescent is being released as the fourth single off of the album on April 19 but there is currently no way to add it to the album page or discography. Calabe1992 (talk) 21:40, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
Linkin Park's youtube channel also states that Iridescent is a single that has been released in this album, if thats any further justification. Wolfantom (talk) 05:02, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

 Question:   I cannot readily determine if that source is reliable or not. As I'm sure you know, the key to all entries on Wikipedia is verifiability. Do you have a corroborating source you can cite as well to go with it?  ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ②  07:20, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Information collected since previous post indicates that the version of the song being released is unique for new movie soundtrack http://www.linkinpark.com/profiles/blogs/iridescent-transformers-3 ... the album page has now been edited but it is incorrect as the version of the song being released is not actually from the album. Calabe1992 (talk) 14:51, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I have disabled the edit request as the page has been edited. Please see the article history for the editors who have added in the information. Woody (talk) 20:15, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

A Thousand Suns spent 37 weeks on the German Albums Chart making it the band's shortest running album, charting shorter than Hybrid Theory which spent 72 weeks on that chart. sourcesource.
Please include :) ! --79.199.34.137 (talk) 01:29, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I think more should be added to the genre list. There are 2 hip hop songs (Wretches and Kings, When They Come For Me), and Mike even called them hip hop, and if not, they're at least rap rock. The Catalyst is techno rock or synthpop. So shouldn't these be added to the list? "Alternative rock" is way too vague to describe an album that mixes many, many different genres of music.Panic Reaper (talk) 20:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, there are different genres, but why should that information be crammed into the infobox, which is only supposed to summarize the contents? Also, do you have any sources to back this up?  There's been consensus on multiple occasions to leave it at Alternative Rock. Friginator (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
An interview with MTV - http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1647836/linkin-parks-thousand-suns-leaves-past-behind.jhtml They call the 2 songs hip hop. Also, http://allmusic.com/album/a-thousand-suns-r1943041 AllMusic calls it Alternative Metal, Post-Grunge, Pop-Metal, and Rap-Metal. And I think Electro-rock could be added (as it's the most obvious). You can't summarize an album that is so diverse and filled with many genres... with something as simple as "Alternative rock". The Catalyst (talk) 14:36, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
I very much agree that it NEEDS to have electronic rock added to, or replacing alternative rock as the genre description. (I don't have an account, so I'll sign this LPfan)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.1.0 (talk) 00:59, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I've tried to change it a lot, and I added a very reliable source like these guys asked but they're still being assholes about it. I'm gonna change it now, considering Allmusic IS a reliable source. The Catalyst (talk) 02:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
(Response to Panic Reaper) Oh yeah man I understand. I've tried adding so much verifiable info but it never lasts. This website is what THEY want it to be, not you. Wikipedia says Green Day's Warning is pop rock, when all the sources under professional ratings say that it is pop punk, just like all of Green Day's other albums. But yet, Wiki gets to have itself call just one album pop rock. 71.104.253.11 (talk) 23:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Upon release, the album was met with generally favorable reviews [5] and has been a commercial success debuting at number 1 on over ten charts.
Although commercially successful, the album received mixed reviews upon release. The album as a whole has been likened to a progressive rock album, and compared to Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon and Radiohead's Kid A.[2]. 
This is written in the intro, so which one is wrong? RichV 09:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

If you're referring to the reception alone, then I would say "positive" should be replaced by "mixed". Friginator (talk) 15:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
I really don't see anywhere near necessary talking about Dark Side of The Moon or Kid A in the introduction just because one reviewer from an unknown website said "it's no kid a, but it's trying to explore its genre as radiohead did" --Walkabout86 (talk) 16:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:A Thousand Suns/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Rp0211 (talk · contribs) 19:57, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Infobox
The genre of the music should be put under the "Style and composition" section; references would not be needed in infobox once this occurs
The "Recorded" section should look like this: 2008–10; NRG Recording Studios


### Lead
...took place at NRG Recording Studios in North Hollywood, California from 2008 until early 2010. → "North Hollywood, California" should be wiki-linked together
The band has acknowledged that the album is drastic departure from their previous work, experimenting on different and new sounds for A Thousand Suns. → Put "a" between "is" and "drastic"; Replace "experimenting" with "as they experimented"
"On this record, the concepts blend human ideas with technology [...] Human fears, your fear of what's going to happen in the world, the music kind of references that", said Mike Shinoda on an interview with MTV. → According to WP:QUOTE#Formatting, quotes should not be in the lead section; try and phrase out the general idea of what Shinoda is saying
"If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the mighty one," a quote made famous by J. Robert Oppenheimer in reference to the atomic bomb. → Try and find a connection to this album with this. If you can, paraphrase it to remove the quote from the lead.
The lead single for the album, "The Catalyst", was sent to radio and released to digital music retailers on August 2, 2010. → Expand information about this single (chart performance, performances, etc.)
Three more singles were released to promote the album, namely "Waiting for the End", "Burning in the Skies" and "Iridescent". → Put this information before the information about their tour to improve the flow of the prose
Despite these, the album has been a commercial success debuting at number 1 on over ten charts. → Replace "these" with "this"; Replace "has been" with "was"; Put a comma after success; Change "1" to "one"
The album has been certified gold by the RIAA... → State what year it was certified gold
When you reference another album (other than the one the article is about), make sure to include the year after it in brackets; Ex: Minutes to Midnight (2007)


### Writing and recording
Recording for the album began in 2008, shortly after the release of Minutes to Midnight.[4] → Include year in brackets after "Minutes to Midnight"
...and stated this "sound[ed] a little daunting to me... → Replace "this" with "that it"
Bennington continued composing for the album whilst touring with Dead by Sunrise... → Replace "whilst" with "while"
"We tend to be perfectionists and its sort of how we work, We like being... → Add a period after "work" instead of a comma
...although he stated that the eventually A Thousand Suns at its completion... → Remove "the" from the sentence


### Style and composition
...and contains the high pitched sonar "ping" from "Echoes" at the end of "Robot Boy" and continuing into "Jornada del Muerto". →  Not sure if this has a source or not
It has also been stated that the album honors the hip-hop group Public Enemy. → Verifiable?
The opening line of the first and second verse ("To save face, how low can you go?" and "So keep pace, how slow can you go?") are references to the Public Enemy song "Bring the Noise", which opens with the verse "Bass! How low can you go?" in a melodically similar fashion. → Verifiable?
Chuck D would later provide vocals on a remix by HavocNdeeD. → Verifiable?
Chester Bennington stated in an interview with MTV News[3] who referred to Linkin Park's... → Source not needed as it is mentioned at the end of the quote
Compared to their previous record, Minutes to Midnight, the amount of vocals contributed... → Put year in brackets of album after "Minutes to Midnight"; "Minutes to Midnight" does not need to be wiki-linked as it is mentioned earlier
On "The Requiem" and "Fallout", Shinoda alters his voice using a Vocoder device. → Verifiable?


### Release and promotion
...are available as downloadable content in the "Linkin Park Track Pack" → Change "are" to "were"
The band released another video game called Linkin Park Revenge (an edition of Tap Tap Revenge), which features four new songs from the album as well as six songs from previous albums. → Verifiable?
The song "Wretches and Kings" is featured in the trailer for the video game EA Sports MMA. → Verifiable?
Six songs from the album ("Blackout", "Burning in the Skies", "The Catalyst", "The Messenger", "Waiting for the End", and "Wretches and Kings") are available as downloadable content in the "Linkin Park Track Pack" for the rhythm video game Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock. → Verifiable?
The track pack was released on October 19, 2010 on the PlayStation Store, Xbox Live Marketplace, and Wii Shop Channel. → Verifiable?
In addition, for those who purchased Guitar Hero: Warriors of Rock from Amazon.com between October 17 and October 23, they received a copy of A Thousand Suns. → Verifiable?
"The Catalyst", which was released on August 2, 2010. → Verifiable?
The winner of this contest was Czeslaw "NoBraiN" Sakowski from Świdnica, Poland, whose remix is featured as an additional track on the album, available via Best Buy and Napster. → Verifiable?
Two of the remixes (by DIGITALOMAT and ill Audio) have since been released via the band's webpage as free mp3 downloads, while two others have (by Cale Pellick and DJ Endorphin) been released on an exclusive German release of "The Catalyst". → Verifiable?
"The Catalyst" was certified gold by the Recording Industry Association of America.[40] → Specify year it was certified gold
"Waiting for the End" was released as the album's second single on October 1, 2010. → Verifiable?
On January 22, 2011, Linkin Park announced that their next international[52] single... → Put source at end of sentence
reaching number 35 in Austria,[56] number 35 in Portugal,[56] number 26 in German airplay[57] and number six in Mexico.[58] → Put comma after "German airplay"
On April 13, 2011, Shinoda confirmed that the album's third US, fourth international and overall final single will be "Iridescent". → Replace "will" with "would"


### Reception
Expand "Commercial" subsection with more chart info and more about its certifications
As was the case with its predecessor, Minutes to Midnight... → Put year in brackets after "Minutes to Midnight"
David Buchanan of Consequence of Sound gave the album a respected 3.5 stars out of five... → "...gave the album three-and-a-half out of five..."
MTV conducted a poll on how fans received the song; most were positive, however a large amount were dissatisfied. → Verifiable?


### Track listing
Put a source for the "iTunes Deluxe Edition Bonus Content" subsection


### Personnel
Verify this section with a source (Allmusic is a good source for this)


### Charts and certifications
No issues


### Release history
No issues


### References
OVERALL MESSAGE WITH THIS SECTION: There are many errors within this section, so make sure you proofread all of the sources and make sure they comply with WP:REF. I listed the issues of the first 31 sources as a guide.
Reference 3 → MTV should be wiki-linked; Publisher is "Viacom" and needs to be included
Reference 4 → Publisher is "Viacom" and needs to be included
Reference 5 → "Rolling Stone" needs to be wiki-linked; Publisher is needed and also needs to be wiki-linked
Reference 6 → Does not work anymore and comes up with error message
Reference 7 → Include the publisher (which is "Prometheus Global Media")
References 8 & 9 → "MTV.com" is not needed here; Publisher "Viacom" is needed
Reference 11 → Source is "MTV"; Publisher "Viacom" is needed
References 12, 18, 24 → Put "Viacom" as publisher
Reference 13 → Include publisher
Reference 14 → Put "IGN Entertainment" as publisher
Reference 17 → "Linkin Park" should not be italicized
Reference 19 → "Billboard" should not be wiki-linked as it was used before; Include "Prometheus Global Media" as publisher
References 20, 31 → Reformat sources to comply with WP:REF
References 22, 23 → "Linkinpark.com" should not be italicized
Reference 25 → "MTV.com" is not needed here
Reference 26 → Put publication date of article
Reference 29 → "Shinoda, Mike" should not be included as the work of the article

After thoroughly reviewing this article, I have decided to put the article on hold at this time. While there are numerous issues to be addressed, I believe all of them are minor issues that can be fixed within quickly. They are mostly issues with prose, citation of sources, and reference formatting. I will give you the general seven days to fix these issues and/or address issues that you believe do not concern the good article criteria. If you questions, please feel free to ask. Rp0211 (talk2me) 22:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. Might take a while, though. I have schoolwork, so finishing this up might take a while. Thanks! Jal11497 (talk) 13:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to ask if ambient could be added as a genre for A Thousand Suns? There are moments on the album mainly interludes where the music is very discordant such as on Wisdom, Justice and Love,  The Requiem and Fallout where the Vocals are being morphed to sound more machine like and on the former where there is a droning sound with a piano added on top of it. I'm not going to add it in, I just wanted to know if it was enough evidence or consensus to add it. Netherwood (talk) 16:11, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

A Thousand Suns sold more than 2,500,000 copies worldwide to date, AND NOT 1,700,000 as MjDangeorus says! This Link: 
http://fanofmusic.free.fr/ajax.php?m=Charts&s=BestSellers&p=BestSellers&Act=106 
is current as of December 2010, in fact this data match with the sales of MediaTraffic at the end of 2010... this is the Link:
http://www.mediatraffic.de/albums-2010.htm
and, as you can see, A Thousand Suns sold 1,700,000 copies worldwide as of December (end) 2010, with 600,000 copies in the USA (http://fanofmusic.free.fr/ajax.php?m=Charts&s=BestSellers&p=BestSellers&Act=106 ). BUT to date, A Thousand Suns sold 850,000 copies in the USA, watch this Link:
http://www.hitsdailydouble.com/news/newsPage.cgi?news09031m01
and more than 2,500,000 copies worldwide.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.250.119.26 (talk) 22:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC) 

The problem is that the source you cited for the 2.5M figure is not a reliable source. It appears to be a free website started by a fan.
However, the HITS Daily Double source does appear to be reliable, so the 845,000 sales figure in the US appears to be supported. —C.Fred (talk) 22:56, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
I look at the worldwide sales and A Thousand Suns sold 2,500,000 copies worldwilde to date! In fact I asked directly to MediaTraffic (http://www.mediatraffic.de/) to confirm my data and he confirmed that A Thousand Suns has sold 2.5 million copies, this is the link:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=168310119969901&set=o.299303286810530&type=1&theater
then... a thousand suns sold 2,500,000 copies worldwide to date.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.19.119.191 (talk) 11:10, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
AND... A Thousand Sun had already passed a half million in sales one months into its relase, in October 2010 and not December (after two month). This is the sales of A Thousand Suns in its first week:
- 1° Week: 523,000 copies (http://www.mediatraffic.de/albums-week39-2010.htm);
- 2° Week: 211,000 copies (http://www.mediatraffic.de/albums-week40-2010.htm);
- 3° Week: 151,000 copies (http://www.mediatraffic.de/albums-week41-2010.htm);
- 4° Week: 115,000 cpies (http://www.mediatraffic.de/albums-week42-2010.htm).
TOTAL = 523,000 + 211,000 + 151,000 + 115,000 = 1,000,000 copies worldwild as of 23 October 2010 (in one month into is relase).--Voilet92 (talk) 12:24, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

A user placed a {{non-free}} template in place on the grounds that the live version's album cover was too similar to the original and not necessary (he recommends taking it out of the picture altogether). I thought it would make it look rather shabby to the average reader (not wht GAs are about). It then brought up a question for me: Is this release really even important? I think I could just condense all this to prose somewhere. Anyone got thoughts? dannymusiceditor  ~talk to me!~  15:44, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

I would agree with condensing it somewhere else, with the track listing listed among the other track listings. The section as is has no sources or anything anyway, and is pretty short, especially compared to the rest of the article. Kokoro20 (talk) 23:12, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:A Thousand Suns/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)

Grabbing this for a review. Miyagawa (talk) 17:57, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for taking this up! I know there are some things I haven't checked that I should've by now. There are a few dead links that I think are fixable (some are not and I think are better left that way). Ref dating might need changed so it's consistent with everything else, but other than that, I await your comments. I have yet to have had a GA pass so I don't know what it needs just yet. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  19:33, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
No DAB links.
Yeah, 14 dead links. Best bet is to try archive.org to see if any of them can be resurrected that way, however some of these will be from links you've already archived. So run the external link checker to the right on this page and just check that an archive version of each is working.
Today, I repaired references #42, #46, #59, #60, and #76. #3 and #38 are irreparable. #68 can't be archived, but I can easily find a replacement. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Number 3 can be replaced with [1], I'll have a look to see if I can track down something to cover the information at #38. Miyagawa (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Has the numbering changed? The Billboard cite at #38 appears to be fine. Miyagawa (talk) 16:51, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Possibly. It was a Linkin Park official post regarding the album's release in Switzerland and Austria, but there aren't any archives old enough to view it. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  02:34, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Repaired link #3. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:46, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
I am  Done with as many as I find able to be fixed. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  16:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Per WP:ALT, you'll need to add alt text to your images.
Is this absolutely required? I can give a couple examples of featured articles that have images that don't have alt text. I understand it says "Absent or unhelpful alternative text can be a source of frustration for visually impaired users of the Web", but I don't see anything that says it's required for good or featured standard. That being said, I have added it to some of the images on the article; it's just that I think it would be difficult to give a short n' sweet dose of alt text on some of these images and that it'd require a bit more detail. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  04:33, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Which are the ones you're having trouble with - I'd be happy to give it a go. Miyagawa (talk) 10:32, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
The one of Shinoda in the first paragraph seems tough to keep short and sweet, but I've thought of something for the others. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  13:06, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
I'd probably just go with something as short as "A bearded man plays a guitar." It only needs to give a very broad overview. Miyagawa (talk) 14:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Lead: It could do with a summary/overview of the main points of the critical response in the final paragraph.
 Done (I think). I added a bit more, but still looks a bit smaller than the others.
Writing and recording: Maths don't quite add up for that statement in the first sentence. Minutes to Midnight was released in May 2007, so even if work on A Thousand Suns started in January 2008, it'd still be seven months. So I'd drop the shortly - but you could say "less than a year" or similar if the work began prior to May 2008.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  03:38, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Link Mike Shinoda the first time the name appears in Writing and recording since it'll be the first time it appears in the body of the article, and give the the full name as well (the first time).
Once you've done the previous one, you can remove the links from the image caption in this section.
Both  Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  03:38, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Speaking of that image, you might want to play with the widths of the two images to make them appear the same height as it'll be far neater.
Is this better? dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  03:56, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Spot on. Miyagawa (talk) 10:33, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Link Hybrid Theory when it appears for the first time in the second paragraph of that section, and delink it from the third.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  03:39, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Tidy the image widths in Style and composition too.
Delink Berlin, Germany and Madrid per WP:OVERLINK. Świdnica is less known, so keep that.
 Done
Typo on "Waithing for the End".
 Done
Cite #15 - remove ungabungaify and replace it as the publisher with You Tube, then remove You Tube from the work section of the cite.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Cite #26 is missing the accessdate and the date on the review itself.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Cite #41 is missing the source details, but I'm not sure that it can be considered to be a reliable source either. Have a look at WP:QUESTIONABLE  and let me know what you think.
I don't see what's wrong with it. Appears to be Gundam's official website. I have a feeling you're saying there's something more than just the date of the reference that's missing...what would that be? Or have I fixed it? It doesn't appear to be such a heavy claim, anyway, so I think they'd be okay to use for this little tidbit. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
( hadn't realised it was the official website - in which case that's fine. Miyagawa (talk) 14:09, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Same reliable source question about #42.
This one on the other hand, does seem unreliable. I can only find other sites that are equally unreliable, unfortunately. Should I just remove it? Or could I use this (I doubt it)? [2] dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:01, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
You could use Template:Cite AV media notes and cite the soundtrack for the game? Miyagawa (talk) 14:09, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I'm allowed to do that. Most of those types of videogames don't have liner notes to their soundtrack (I don't think), and I don't have the game to confirm anyway. But I know it's darn well true, I'm just not sure there's any reliable things to back it up. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  20:52, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
There is one! I've replaced it accordingly. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  18:45, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Just noticed that you've got a few different capitalisation formats for the official Linkin Park website; linkinpark.com, Linkinpark.com and LinkinPark.com. I personally prefer the latter, but I'd say to go with either the second or third option (and make sure everything matches).
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  18:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Cites #73 and #132 - I'd recommend that you use template:cite tweet instead of the web one. Both the sources for those tweets are fine, btw.
Fixed the first, and replaced the second one altogether as it had no mention of the game it won it for. Used said replacement reference to fix unreliable source #42 as well. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  18:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Cite #83 - needs the access date, and you'll need to add the archived source for this as it's linking to a version of the page which doesn't mention Linkin Park at all right now.
Irreparable - no archives before 2013. No additional sources to support this claim, as far as I can find. This seems to be somewhat of a bigger problem that I never noticed. The discography of the band (an FL) and the individual song articles don't even talk about this chart at all, this is the only place I see it. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:43, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Cite #87 - needs an access date.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  16:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Cite #96 - is dead, but not sure it was reliable in the first place.
Doesn't show up dead to me, but I did notice this shortly before the review came and it worried me. I have been unable to find the album's worldwide sales from a reputable source; all I get is this and fan forums. Actually, I've got an idea. I could add up all the certifications it has (respective to regions) and say "The album's certifications amount to at least this many copies sold worldwide." dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  20:52, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
That'd work for me. Miyagawa (talk) 11:00, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I've changed my mind. This can't work. The certifications don't count for the same kind of thing - some are shipments, others are sales. One of them is unknown which it is. I think I should cut this altogether. WW data might be needed for an FA, but I have no plans of taking this article there. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  16:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
You use EW.com but Entertainment Weekly in another, I don't mind which you use, but just use the one.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:52, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Cite #78 and #51 and #54 should be filled out in the same manner as #126.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  15:10, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Cite #130 needs to be filled out to the same as the other MTV cites.
This one's an odd one. The page has no date nor author. The publisher is different, however. Do you want me to change it to "MTV News"? dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  15:15, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Cite #131 now redirects to the main Billboard website - so update the url and change the billboard.biz in the cite to Prometheus Global Media. Also needs to be added to #184 through #187.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  11:14, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Cite #165 through #168 need accessdates. Likewise #170 through #181.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Cite #195 can be swapped out using the Linkin Charts album listing at the Official Charts Company website as it's dead, and the OCC is more reliable anyway.
 Done dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  14:52, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
In summary regarding the citation formatting - each cite needs to be formatted in a similar manner - and so since you've got publisher details on some of them, you'll need to add them wherever possible. Check where you've used multiple cites from the same source that they're formatted the same and include all the same types of information.
@Miyagawa: I'm done. Except for the worldwide sales, which I've consulted you for. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  16:20, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

@DannyMusicEditor: Great, it all looks really good. I'm happy for you to remove the WW sales line since it can't be easily referenced to a reliable source. I agree with your assessment about the need for it in GA vs in an FA. Ping me back when you've done that and I'll take a final look but I think that it should be ready for a pass shortly. Miyagawa (talk) 17:41, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Overall the article is a million times better than when it was nominated for GA back in 2012. The Guild of Copy Editors did a darned fine job as it all reads quite well. Although the list above looks long, none of it is dreadfully complicated and once you've had a chance to work through it then you'll have your first GA on your hands. Good job so far! Miyagawa (talk) 23:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
@Miyagawa: Done. dannymusiceditor  what'd I do now?  22:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Great. Happy to promote! Miyagawa (talk) 22:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey all, I'm still not quite sure about the genre list in the infobox for this album's article. First off, 7 genres in an infobox would be overkill. Second, the "Style and composition" section clearly notes various traces of a couple of those genres, alternative rock and rap rock, but are not part of the album's main sound that is described with the other 5 genres. Do you all have any ideas how to stop this dispute, whether to agree with me and remove the two genres that there are only "traces" of, or just cut it all down to rock? Please let me know what is decided. Thanks....SirZPthundergod9001 (talk) 23:16, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Can we have a consensus on not including nu metal in the infobox? It's too controversial and misleading. There are cases when genres sourced in the body are not presented in the infobox because of their controversial nature... 188.170.175.58 (talk) 06:05, 17 August 2023 (UTC)