Template talk:The Smashing Pumpkins

message: In Billy Corgan's MySpace message announcing the next Smashing Pumpkins album "Zeitgeist," he refers to it as the 6th album from them, meaning he doesn't consider Machina II an album. Based on the history of the songs on Machina II, it may be better to call it a compilation than an album. Machina II is mainly composed of songs for a new album that never came out and B-sides off the studio Machina I. Basically, do you think Machina II should be listed under compilations and not albums. Pisces Iscariot, b-sides off Siamese Dream, already occupies this position. I believe it makes the most sense to put Machina II there too. --SpacePope 01:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well MACHINA II was supposed to be another disc to an album that never happened thanks to Virgin Records. Then it was released as another album, only for free and in MP3 format instead of a physical CD. I'd say thats different than b-sides of an album, and therefore not a compilation. -- Reaper  X 04:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Machina II, compilation, not album

message: Do you think James Iha and Billy Corgan's solo albums should be included in the 'related articles' section of this template? I think they should be...--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 19:28, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Solo albums

message: So, we're having a slight disagreement about whether Early 1989 Demos is a title or not. User:Werideatdusk33 is claiming it isn't, while I'm saying that it is currently treated as one. I agree that there is no official title, but it is treated as an unofficial title elsewhere in Wikipedia. If this is to be deemed not a title, then the capitalization (and possibly the name) of the article needs to be changed, the italicization and likely the wording in the article itself needs to be changed, and the italicization in the discography needs to be changed. Consistency please. --PEJL 14:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early 1989 Demos 

message: *There seem to be questions of what singles should be included.  For a while it was down to only singles that had commercial releases - excluding bona fide Pumpkins hits like "Everlasting Gaze" and "Drown."  These were added back in.  Recently someone added "Doomsday Clock" even though it had no single release - it was just released early on iTunes.  Whereas songs like "Crestfallen," "I of the Mourning," and "Heavy Metal Machine" had some kind of limited release but are not on the template.  Should we include these?  Or go back to songs that are either commercial singles or successful hits?  Or even further, and just songs with commercial single releases? -Werideatdusk33 (talk) 00:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singles 

message: Should The Frogs (band) be included in the template? Corgan and the band did quite a lot for the guys. StevePrutz (talk) 06:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Frogs = related band 

message: I know this has been a recurring issue here, but since Billy has spent a lot of time trying to explain that "Smashing Pumpkins" just happens to be whoever is playing these songs with him at the moment, shouldn't we get this infobox up to snuff with that?  Lisa, Ginger, and Jeff were involved in the last tour, but haven't played on a single recording, including the new album.  Meanwhile, Mike Byrne, Mark Tulin, and Kerry Brown are confirmed as participating in the new SP album... so are they SP?  Point being, I think it makes sense to just list "Billy Corgan", maybe with James, Jimmy, and D'arcy listed under because they are the only *true* past members.  What do you guys think?  It just seems like a more accurate, simple way of looking at it. -Werideatdusk33 (talk) 21:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Band Members 

message: I think the album should simply have one page, with sections about each EP release... the template already looks ridiculous with a whole section devoted to one album's unconventional release.  I'm proposing to merge the Teargarden by Kaleidyscope, Vol. 1: Songs For a Sailor article into the main Teargarden by Kaleidyscope page, and I likewise think the template should simply have a link to Teargarden under "Studio albums", with no mention made of the individual EP releases.-Werideatdusk33 (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started a specific navbox for Teargarden releases/singles. I know it's way early, but I think it's going to be inevitable. (In my sandbox at User:Steveprutz/Sandbox4... feel free to comment or express ideas). StevePrutz (talk) 14:17, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now reserved . StevePrutz (talk) 13:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teargarden 

message: Is anyone still considering the Teargarden project a "studio album" at this point? It's more of a box set, or maybe compilation. I suggest the link be moved. StevePrutz (talk) 16:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Teargarden's placement on navbox 

message: So, it's pretty standard to shorten down titles in instances like this, where a template has grown to massive sizes. A passerby IP seems to object, but there's nothing lost in shortening a monstrous title like
* Shiny and Oh So Bright, Vol. 1 / LP: No Past. No Future. No Sun. 
to 
* Shiny and Oh So Bright
This is especially true as long as there seems to be no particular plans for a Vol 2. I'm not suggesting renaming the article, just tidying up the template a bit. Sergecross73 msg me 18:24, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Second request for discussion. No comment all month so far... Sergecross73 msg me 23:35, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shortening titles