Talk:The Decemberists

message: Kudos to the person who wrote the overview section of the article.  It is exactly the right length and tells me exactly what I want to know when 
I am wondering stuff about a band.  If only every band's description was written by you!
Plagiarism? I'd just like to point out that the Overview section is almost exactly the same as the overview section on Last.fm. Last.fm overviews are editable by uses too so I wonder which is original... Daniel 17:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Overview

message: I think the "decembrists" as in, the important historical group for which this band named itself, should show up as the primary page for this listing, it's what I came to this page looking for....
I edited the opening paragraph a bit, but I think it needs more work. The terminology seems muddled in general and the description seems like it could be more fitting. I'll probably tackle it when I have more time if no one else does. 67.171.73.62
Given that the first lines of "Here I Dreamnt I Was an Architecht" are "and here I dreamt I was a soldier /
and i marched the streets of Birkenau", can it really be called "whimsical"? RMG 05:02, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure the extra explanation about the name is necessary. I think it can be inferred from the different spelling that they're not named solely after the Russian group. Either way, the opening sentence is awfully awkward now, and I can't think of a good way to re-write it. 158.223.25.221 18:29, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is necessary. Before the above quote was mentioned, I thought the alternative spelling was just a different way of writing Decembrists, and surely if I thought that, other people will too. As for it being awkward, I only think it appears like that because the article doesn't have a proper introduction for it to follow on from. But then I did write it, so I'm a little biased there.--Nathan (Talk) 02:07, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I kept the reference, but did some re-writing. 158.223.25.94 13:54, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

text: "The metaphor associated with the month of December" is non-sensical. The atmosphere of December is what he's talking about in the quote above. 158.223.25.211 15:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncategorized discussions

message: Is there a citation for that Frankly Mr Shankly Butcher album for 2006? It doesn't seem very likely to me... certainly doesn't sound very "Meloy-like"... Barbara Osgood 01:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because it was a hoax. 158.223.1.117 18:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I think you mean The Smiths. - BalthCat 00:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you mean Cursive. - Nathan412 02:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Good.  I forgot to check the composer on their version before I posted that, so I thought later that I might have put my foot in my mouth, and then forgot to check when I got back to a computer :) - BalthCat 04:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Frankly Mr. Shankly Butcher

message: At the moment, the beginning of General Information really needs some work. The first part of the first sentence reads like it's referencing the Decemberists' songs, not the Decemberists themselves. Can anyone think of a suitable reword? Also, I think some of this should be moved up to the introduction. --Nathan (Talk) 18:41, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  General information 

message: RJN, I posted this to your talk page already, but I don't know what you're trying to do here. "The Decemberists, fronted by singer/songwriter Colin Meloy, is a five-piece indie pop band from Portland, Oregon" is an awful sentence. There's no reason to stick the Colin Meloy clause in the beginning that way, and as the sentence and the band name itself refers to the individual members, the verb should be plural. Further "The Decemberists are" gets 13,100 google results, while "The Decemberists is" returns 529. 158.223.1.117 17:23, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Band names are collective proper noun. "The Decemberists is" is correct. All the members make up one band. The Decemberists is a single entity (they are one band). Since the noun as a collective is singular, the proper verbs to use are "is" and "was," not "are" and "were." For example, "The United States is a country" not "The United States are a country." This has been discussed at several band articles. See the discussion on "is" and "are" here for band names ending with "s". Just because there are more hits does not make "are" right. Most people do not know how to use collective proper noun correctly. —RJN 17:31, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "In American usage, a collective noun takes a singular verb when it refers to the collection considered as a whole, as in The family was united on this question or The enemy is suing for peace. It takes a plural verb when it refers to the members of the group considered as individuals, as in My family are always fighting among themselves or The enemy were showing up in groups of three or four to turn in their weapons. In British usage, collective nouns are more often treated as plurals: The government have not announced a new policy. The team are playing in the test matches next week." American Heritage book of English usage. The sentence as constructed refers to the individual members. Again, your version sounds extemely awkward. The fact that "are" is by far the more common usage places the burden of proof on you, and while there is a case for the use of "is" here, it's a very weak one. 158.223.1.117 17:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Decemberists is a name of one band. X amount of members make up this one band/one entity (collectively referred to as The Decemberists). "The Decemberists" could be replaced by "The band" in a sentence. It would be, "The band is" not "The Band are". Again, there have been many discussions on other talk pages because people do not know how to use collective noun and collective proper noun correctly. "The Decemberists" is a collective name for one band with X amount of members. Yes, I talked to an English professor about this already. —RJN 17:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what a collective noun is. Did you not read what I quoted above? In British usage, collective nouns almost always take a plural verb. In American usage a collective noun takes a plural verb when the sentence refers to the individual members of the group. The name "The Decemberists" and the fact that the sentence refers to the band's five piece nature implies a plural verb. I couldn't care less if you've asked an English professor about this. Your English teacher doesn't dictate usage. Google clearly shows that "The Decemberists are" is the favored usage. "The Decemberists is" sounds bad, your appeals to authority notwithstanding. 158.223.1.117 17:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a collective noun and the proper word to use is "is".  Google results are irrelevant.  The rest of the Internet isn't trying to be an encyclopedia concerned with the best of grammar; we are.  --Cyde Weys 17:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, as per the quote from the American Heritage Book of English Usage, collective nouns do not always take singular verbs. A google search is reflective of common usage. You're making an argument based on prescriptive grammar, and an incorrect interpretation of it at that. Prescriptivism doesn't hold up when the disparity in usage is so vast. 158.223.1.117 17:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Grammar is one thing but WP:3RR is quite another.  You have been temporarily blocked for continued reversions on this article in violation of Wikipedia policy.  --Cyde Weys 18:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Interesting topic, but I tend to agree with the anon - I think in this case are/were is better.  I say this because it is in wider usage, even in wikipedia: if we look at the only three featured articles with pluralised names, we see: The Beatles were a pop and rock music group..., The Sex Pistols are, despite their short existence, one of the most influential..., The Supremes were a very successful... I agree that in general bands should use "is" (e.g. Built to Spill is..), but when the band has a pluralised name (e.g. The Beatles), I think an exception should be made, Brendanfox 22:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those are British bands so they get to keep "are". In American English, we don't do that. Yes, it is correct to use "are" and "were" in British English. In American English, collective nouns/collective proper nouns take the singular form. It sounds "better" to you because the name of this band ends with "s". Just because it sounds better doesn't mean it is correct. Outside the U.S., "are" and "were" are correct. This is an American band, so it should get the American grammar. Not many people know how to use collective noun/collective proper noun correctly in American English. In British English, it is correct to say "Aerosmith are a band" instead of "Aerosmith is a band."  I just checked The Supremes article, it says, "The Supremes was" because it is an American band. —RJN 01:13, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Supremes was changed from "were" to "was" after my post.  Being from Australia, I don't know much about American grammar conventions, but even when reading American magazines like Pitchfork and Rolling Stone I've never seen this usage. That said, I don't particularly mind, I just think its an interesting discussion, Brendanfox 11:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening Sentence 

message: "The Decemberists' next album titled The Crane Wife will be their major label debut and it is set to release on October 3rd, 2006"
Is this usage of the verb "to release" standard in American English? It looks absolutely horrible to me, but then I'm only an ignorant Brit, so I don't want to change it (especially given the discussion above!). FWIW I'd say "The Decemberists' next album titled The Crane Wife will be their major label debut and it is set to be released on October 3rd, 2006" as the album is a passive object; the record label/distributor releases the album. Tdrawler 14:00, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "for release" would be idiomatic American. Changed. --Dhartung | Talk 20:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that clarification, "for release" makes much more sense in British English as well! Tdrawler 21:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "to release" ? 

message: There was a guy in the band playing a teardrop-shaped instrument that looked like a large electric mandolin on the Conan O'Brien show.  What instrument was that?  Plus there was a second female member singing, clapping, playing shaker and glockenspiel.  Is she a member of the band as well?  Badagnani 08:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The new member is Lisa Molinaro who was added to replace Petra Hayden. I believe Chris Funk was just playing an oddly shapped guitar but I may be wrong. 207.126.230.225 00:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The guitar is either a 12 string version of a Vox Starfire Mk VI or a copy. Bjart 00:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It looks like a Starfire Mk VI Acoustic: V252, but it isn't a 12-string. 69.12.130.233 10:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is in the green screen video. I couldn't find an undeleted copy of the Conan video on YouTube at the time. Bjart 10:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm dumb (this is the ip commenter again) and it *is* a twelve string. I don't know why I thought otherwise. He uses this one a fair amount in their live shows too. 207.126.230.225 01:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instruments/members 

message: About 1/4th of the article's prose is dedicated to the Decemberists' run in with Colbert, which, if we judge by the amount of attention given by this article, appears to be the single greatest achievement this band has ever accomplished, by far. hateless 17:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wasn't that merged in from another article or something like that? ANyway, it definitely has a "You had to be there" quality. I'm not even sure where to begin whacking. --Dhartung | Talk 19:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The space given to Colbert is disproportionate. One paragraph should be sufficient. Meanwhile, how about some critical reactions?66.183.165.57 20:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I just trimmed it by 1000 characters and it's still huge! Someone else can take a crack or I will tomorrow. --Dhartung | Talk 05:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I cut out another 600 characters. It's still more space than it deserves but it doesn't feel like it's taken over the entire article now. --Dhartung | Talk 04:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if audio recordings count for citations (I've seen this disputed elsewhere), but Colin mentioned that they had no idea about what would take place on Colbert except for Frampton on Fresh Air with Terry Gross 207.126.230.225 01:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I heard this same interview, so I added the citation for the link above for the audio from the interview. I am not sure why such an audio source would be disputed. Infinitejpower 20:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The greatness of being associated with Stephen Colbert 

message: Would you really call her a "former member"? Surely she just guested on "Yankee Bayonet". As I recall, they considered a few singers for that duet part.66.183.165.57 20:00, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Laura Veirs

message: First and foremost, these guys are great!  I have noticed repeated references to the military, soldiers and wars.  To me, the imagery congers up a more 'old fashioned' soldierly archetype, say something or someone out of WWI/WWII or earlier in the case of some of their songs.  I'm just thinking thinking out loud here, tossing out my opinion and seeing if anyone agrees.  It definitely works for them; their style, the esoteric words and references as well as their music really paint quite the picture.   I love it, really different than anything else currently out there... it's refreshing.  But, I'm thinking there has to be some sort of influence behind this... and I have no clue where its coming from.  Just my 2¢.  Thoughts, comments? DasGooch 00:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do agree with you here, as I am an avid fan. Of course, we'd need some sort of cited research to include that in the article I think. Ninja Joey 04:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, indeed.  I'd say the dated lyrics are proof enough.  I mean, not exactly, as I agree that some sort of tangible info is required.  Just found it interesting that I was repeatedly pulling out the old dictionary while listening to them.  DasGooch 13:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Militaristic Influences

message: :Image:LiveFromSoHo.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 23:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:LiveFromSoHo.JPG

message: :Image:Picaresqueties.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 09:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Picaresqueties.jpg

message: The use of images not in compliance with our fair-use criteria or our policy on nonfree content is not appropriate, and the images have been removed.  Please do not restore them. -- Merope 01:36, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. Some info may have been lost in the shuffle, please add it to the new version instead of reverting. Please feel free to change the table to your liking, my edit was pretty quick. I'm not comfortable with the chart data on the albums as it doesn't even say which charts the data is from. Someone more knowledgable may want to fix that.  --Zytsef 23:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair Use Criteria - Discography 

message: :Image:LiveFromSoHo.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 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 23:26, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:LiveFromSoHo.JPG

message: This is fake, please stop adding it. It's bordering on vandalism.
Ninja Joey (talk) 10:11, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wastrels in a Drainpipe 

message: Seriously? This article refers to the Decemberists as progressive rock. This could not make less sense. Regardless of the supporting instrumentation, the songs are all incredibly simple as far as chords and melodies. There are few if any time signature changes or key changes. The Crane Wife 3 has three chords - one progression throughout the song. The Crane Wife 1 has four.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.9.16 (talk) 03:53, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Prog Rock??

message: Recently, this was deleted from the article from the introductory paragraph:
(Concerning the Decemberists' literate lyrical style):
"For example, one song, "When the War Came," uses a little-known story from the Siege of Leningrad to describe the heroism of civilian scientists during warfare. The lyrics state: "We made our oath to Vavilov / We'd not betray the solanum / The acres of asteraceae / To our own pangs of starvation". Nikolai Vavilov was a Russian botanist whose laboratory, a seedbank containing 200,000 types of plant seeds, many of them edible, was preserved throughout the siege, during which millions of people died"
I have not reverted the edit, because i think it does bring up a topic of discussion...to elaborate, i believe that a section discussing the lyrical style of The Decemberists would be good and neccessary (to cite good examples to give the reader a better sense of their epic style)...any suggestions and/or comments Fanofranz (talk) 12:43, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold. Go for it. Zytsef (talk) 02:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Nikolai Vavilov]] story and possible Decemberists style section

message: While I can understand while such a piece can cause controversy, the sentence I chopped out of the entry just doesn't "cut it" for now. How we define controversy here is hard. But there's a reason to be skeptical of the idea of using the latest nontroversy of people on blogs being mad as proof of it being controversial (this applies to both sides, BTW)
But the tiny war over how often they open with the Soviet Anthem should be on for a little while. Until people stop caring and move on to the latest 'nontroversy'
Editorial comment: The Decemberists were responsible for that 75K person Obama rally? Are the Media debunkers actually trying anymore?
--RobbieFal (talk) 23:10, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A centrist is one who believes that the Communists are as bad as the Nazis and a rightist is one who believes they are worse. If they are playing the moral equivalent of a hymn to Hitler, then they are controversial. Do not make the "cocooning" mistake of assuming that everybody in the world thinks like an uppermiddleclass, StuffWhitePeopleLike, Obama-rally-attending Wikipedia editor, or should think like one. --Zimriel (talk) 23:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Zimriel, You were moving along fine until you went for the personal attacks. I'll punt the entire job of handling the "controversy" thing to some other poor editor. A lot of other people adhere ridiculously close to the 'rules' and i'm sure they'll love the job. --RobbieFal (talk) 23:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Objection works for me, as i've noted. --RobbieFal (talk) 00:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet Anthem 

message: I just tried to access the page for Her Majesty, The Decemberists but it has been deleted. Does anybody know what happened to it? 99.234.1.72 (talk) 01:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The link is now fixed.  The link in the article went to a redirect page, and the page to which the redirect linked had been deleted as a typo.  All is right with the world now. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 01:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 'Her Majesty' Deleted

message: According to their most recent mailing list email, the next album's going to be called 'Hazards of Love'. I had a quick look on the site but they hadn't mentioned it on the news page yet. I'll keep an eye out for any cite-able sources. Richard Jackson (talk) 23:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New album has a title 

message: The Decemberists eschew the angst of modern rock? Really? I'm pretty sure that you can't close your eyes and pick a Decemberist song off the chart without hitting at least two references to rotting bones and drowned sailors. I don't know whether that's properly described as 'angst' or not, but it's certainly not 'upbeat,' and it seems odd to me that you can have a section describing the Decemberists' music style without even a passing mention of the persistent morbid fascination in its lyrics.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.51.117 (talk) 01:20, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eschews angst? 

message: In the latest Decemberists' newsletter, it was mentioned that the Decemberists are working on what will "no doubt become [their] sixth record at a barn in an undisclosed location near Portland."  Should this be mentioned on the main site? (207.210.43.250 (talk) 02:22, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Upcoming Sixth Album?

message: I just bought a new cd side-project called Black Prairie (with Jenny Conlee, Chris Funk & Nate Query) that shows Jenny Conlee-Drizos instead of Jenny Conlee. Should this page be updated to reflect the name change?  Switchbladesista (talk) 07:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Last name change for Jenny Conlee

message: does The Decemberists redirect to this pop trivia rather than to the actual Decemberists? Volunteer Marek (talk) 19:35, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why 

message: 'Thus ended what fans commonly refer to as "the golden years" of the Decemberists.'
This is quoting the section under "History" titled "2003-2005: Kill Rock Stars".
That doesn't have a source, and the nature of the sentence leads me to believe that it's opinion. Can anyone find a source for this?
Luke32113 (talk) 04:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: "Golden Age of the Decemberists"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on The Decemberists. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061109190719/http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,66969,00.html to http://wired-vig.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,66969,00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071026002654/http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/page/news/35595-exclusive-the-decemberists-sign-to-capitol-records to http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/page/news/35595-exclusive-the-decemberists-sign-to-capitol-records
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071024184249/http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/39925-video-stephen-colbert-vs-the-decemberists to http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/39925-video-stephen-colbert-vs-the-decemberists
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I feel like it would be relevant to mention that the decemberists created a board game in 2016 called "Illimat" which, with the help of designer Keith Baker, was later published by twogether studios. I'm not sure what the most reliable source would be to prove the existence of a board game, but  here's the boardgamegeek page: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/210040/illimat and here's the announcement from the decembertists' website: https://www.decemberists.com/news/announcing-illimat/ (And sorry if I'm not following the right wikipedia decorum or something, this is my first time in a talk page) 104.177.148.249 (talk) 15:25, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of Illimat?