Talk:Red Hot Chili Peppers/Archive 1

message: just wondering, why was this article rewritten around the 23rd or 24th of december? it seems to me that the article before that date was a lot more comprehensive and higher quality.
Ukato 12:02, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  article change? 

message: * 1985 "Hollywood"
--> was missing
* 1988 "Fight Like a Brave"
--> 1987
* "Behind the Sun" can't be from 1988 because it's from mother's milk and with John, not Hillel.
* 1990 "Taste The Pain"
--> was missing
* 1990 "Show Me Your Soul" (from the Pretty Woman soundtrack)
--> was never a single
* 1994 "Soul to Squeeze" (from the Coneheads soundtrack)
--> i have this single since august 1993 !!!
* 1996 "Warped"
--> i have this single since sept. 1995, before OHM came out !!! it was the first OHM-Single!
* 2001 "Parallel Universe"
--> 2000 ... the Australasia-Tour was 2000!!!
* 2000 "Road Trippin'" 
--> i have it since 2000!
--84.59.159.134 22:53, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography 

message: 'RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS' IS THE BEST BAND I'VE EVER SEEN! CREATIVE, EXELLENT MUSICIANS BUT ALSO NICE AND HUMOROUS CALIFORNIAN GUYS HAVE SUCCEEDED TO WIN PEOPLES' LOVE FROM THEIR EARLY STEPS IN THE WORLD OF MUSIC. HOWEVER, RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS' SOUND CAN NOT BE EASILY CHARACTERISED OR BE IN ONLY IN ANY SPESIFIC MUSIC CATEGORY. THIS IS BECAUSE THEIR MUSIC IS A FANTASTIC COMBINATION OF MANY CULTURES, SUCH US ROCK, FUNK, POP AND AMERICAN FOLK MUSIC.
Thanks for your comments on RHCP. If you feel the category on the article page is inaccurate, be bold and change it! 
Side note: when you add to a talk page, please use proper case. People will think you are SHOUTING AT THEM when you only use all capital letters. Maybe you mean it to be LOUD, but it's difficult to read after a few words in a row. Also, if you have an wikiID, please sign your post with a ~~~~. That will automatically put your ID and date / time stamp after your message. Like this: Gbeeker 19:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Because wikipedia isn't a fansite :) Jackpot Den 21:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS 

message: does anyone know when the chili peppers visited Wales in the UK many years ago?
I noticed the name of the new album changed 3 times today.
Anyone have sources?
DrIdiot 22:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Album? 

message: What about the album The Best of The Red Hot Chili Peppers? I found it first on their online store , and then here  (covers not the same, but track listing is, so I'm guessing it's the same) but why is it not in the discography?
they have a lot more stuff that's not in the discography by alot I mean like two more discs maybe... XD
:Then WHY are they not listed?? --daunrealist 19:21, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  not that official release, not from warners --82.83.58.210 22:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Best of the Red Hot Chili Peppers 

message: my friend told me that greatest hits was the order of their 14 most successful songs to the date it was made. Which would in a sense make sense why songs like Can't Stop and Zephyr Song aren't on it. but my question is that i'm pretty sure that aeroplane did better than parallel universe.   
And with another compilation this time being What hits?! would it be the same deal it was there most succeslful songs in rating order to that date. But it can't be as Under the Bridge is on there, and not Give it Away. which as the article confirms was a hit before Under the Bridge. For that reason i believe that the compilations are their own favourite choices.   Klyv
:Yes. Universally Speaking should never be favoured over Can't Stop..for example..  if we look at the songs their success. Therefore, you're probably right.SoothingR 17:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compilations 

message: i read once that they had a compilation called "under the covers" but i haven't been able to find it anywhere else, i'm not even sure it exists-- Klyv
It exists. But I think it's out of print.
:Yes. It does. It can be verified here.SoothingR 22:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Under the Covers

message: I was wondering what the most preffered song of all chilli peppers song's is so i'm starting this. Everyone who see's this write down your favourite song. Difficult question as it is write down a maximum of 3. I always find more songs that become my favourite but these are currently my favourite. write yours under mine.
Klyv
*Easily
*Can't Stop
*Knock me down
Hmm... Guess they'd be:
*Otherside
*This Velvet Glove
*Under The Bridge
- beeblebrox 11:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Favourite Song

message: Someones messed up this article big time. It also looks too short. 
PJB 14:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does this article look funny? 

message: I'm sorry, but I think something must be mentioned about RHCP putting socks around their penises at some point during their concerts.  The origin if it can be found, how it began, etc...Sorry it's just that's the one thing that I associate penis in the sock with.
Im sure thelonious monster never did that. Never heard of that Thelonious band ! Bad article !!!
The socks thing started with when they were all living in an apartment from which the landlady removed the door because they wouldnt pay the rent. Anyway one of Anthonys Girls became obsessed with him but he wanted to end it so one time when she arrived at the flat he walked out with a sock on his cock. They did it first for an encore at the Kit Kat Club, much to the managers dismay as he had specifically specified no male pubic hair was to be put on show --Christopher.tomlinson@gmail.com 10:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  socks 

message: This article has major POV issues.  For example, in the "1990's" section, the quote:  "One Hot Minute...should be considered more as an experimental record than a real RHCP album" is a matter of opinion; there is no fact backing it up, and no citation listed indicating that the band members themselves think this. Another example is in the 1980's: "it featured a stunning rendition of Sly & the Family Stone's 'If You Want Me To Stay'."  "Stunning" is a subjective modifier; this is an encyclopedia, not a band review site.  The entire article needs to be conned for NPOV - but before anyone does it, I feel discussion is necessary. Baeritone 15:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure I fixed all that. St jimmy 11:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Why does this article link to List of best selling music artists if Red Hot Chili Peppers is not listed on that list? Was a mistake made in this article or that one?
:I removed the link - it can always be added again if RCHP get included on that list. Pako 19:33, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needless link? 

message: I'm fairly certain that a few of those bands are mixed up. It currently reads
"The music video features the band dressed as famous performers from the 1950's until today including Elvis, The Beatles, Cream With Jimi Hendrix, Parliament-Funkadelic, Garry Glitter With David Bowie, The Sex Pistols, The Misfits, Poison,Nirvana and Avril Lavigne."
However, the 'Beatles' are actually Buddy Holly and his band. Also, what they describe as Avril Lavigne is really supposed to be RHCP themselves. You can tell because they all are dressed like the often are as of late.
I agree with this, they are definitely supposed to be The Crickets, not the Beatles.  The glasses are a dead giveaway.
*The fact that they have their logo in the background of the supposed 'Avril Lavigne' one might mean you're right. Also, If you were going to pretend to be yourself (if that makes sense) then you wouldn't NOT exaggerate it like they did in this clip... if that also makes sense.
*who ever put in avril lavigne is just dumb. i suppose Anthony would have put on some makeup or clothes to look like a whiny girl. but he didnt.
::I think Blink 182 would be better in place of Avril Lavinge. Dwnsjane2 04:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dani California Bands 

message: I think we fixed the problems with this article and the cleanup and neutrality dispute tags should be removed. St jimmy 09:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I added headings to the history sections that are similar to those at Weezer and Led Zeppelin. Organization is much better now, even though I think "Other information" should be integrated with other sections rather than having its own section that has no notable place in this article. — Webdinger BLAH | SZ 23:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: According to the box at the bottom, there's been a lot of different members of RHCP. Anyone care to organise who was doing what when? Jackpot Den 21:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Started a bit of cleanup on this; listing dates of members that I could verify on the band web site and other biography sites.  Listing instruments would be nice as well, but haven't done so yet. Xinit 22:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Members 

message: The intro was way too long, and way too detailed; all the membership changes, drugs, etc, is better left to the article itself. Xinit 20:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro 

message: I was reading Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music#Music_charts and wondered where these #1 hits were from; assuming Billboard only, but were there other charts that they listed on? Xinit 23:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number one hits... where? 

message: before there was:
"Through line-up changes and personal problems, the band has crafted a sound that combines elements of funk, punk, psychedelia and pop."
i changed it and wrote: 
"Through line-up changes and personal problems, the band had started with original sound that combines elements of Funk, Punk, Rap, Psychedelic rock and lately Pop Rock."
i think is better and more correct..zagozagozago
:: Looks good to me. Xinit 17:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro, Genres 

message: always for User:WesleyDodds, why u delete discography in main page,and only linked to "red hot chili peppers discography" page??
i think is better have the discography in main page, not in other page linked.
if it is an "Already on Discography page" we can delete discography "stand alone" page and put directly in main page, no?? zagozagozago
:It's a general guidleine that when a page gets too big, we split off appropriate sections into new pages.  Before splitting it off, the page was 42 kb, which hinders readbility for more than one reason.  WesleyDodds 18:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  discography in an other page?? 

message: There was a list added, then removed, then edit warred over for a bit. Currently, the list is not there. So, do we want a section listing songs covered by RHCP, or no? Discuss. - Corbin Be excellent 07:52, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covered songs 

message: This is in answer to an email I recieved from Poppyto who has re-added links to a guitar tab / guitar education site...
From WP:EL, I can't find a single argument FOR the links, but I can find many against...
Links to normally avoid
Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, unless it is the official site of the article's subject or it is a notable proponent of a point of view in an article with multiple points of view. (See Wikipedia:Reliable sources for further information on this guideline.)
This is original research; tabs or video instruction often fall in that category.
Links that are added to promote a site. See External link spamming.  
So far the extent of your contributions to WP are those links if I can judge by your contributions page
A website that you own or maintain (unless it is the official site of the subject of the article). If it is relevant and informative, mention it as a possible link on the talk page and wait for someone else to include it, or include the information directly in the article.
Combined with my point above, I become suspicious that you're promoting your own site, especially with your nickname appearing on contributions there.
Xinit 21:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Learn to play guitar" videos 

message: does anyone know if there is anything behind RHCP's planetary theme?  We have: Behind the Sun, On Mercury, Subway to Venus, (earth), Disk 2 in Stadium Arcadium is named Mars, Disk 1 in Stadium Arcadium is named Jupiter, (saturn), (uranus), (neptune), (pluto)  We also have: parallel universe, universally speaking, death of a martian, and the space-like cover of stadium arcadium.  should we expect a song with saturn through pluto in their titles?
just curious... if anyone can pour some light on the subject, please let me know.
208.101.159.221 13:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celestrial theme? 

message: Why hasn't anyone included this information yet? http://ultimate-guitar.com/news/general_music_news/red_hot_chili_peppers_accused_in_plagiarism.html --84.249.252.211 20:04, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about you do it? Xinit 20:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  How about you do it? I simply asked because I had no time, had no experience with how to handle this kind of information on Wikipedia. Stop being smartass if I asked why anyone hasn't ALREADY included this information even after such a long time. --84.249.252.211 01:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Apparently nobody else has had the time or the desire to add these allegations, either. I'm afraid I don't tend to take comments under a header such as "FUCK" to be at all serious, let alone those made by people who aren't logged in. From what I saw in a quick search, it's one DJ that said this, and I haven't found any mention of lawsuits, or any other FACTUAL information that I'd add to a WP article... just a DJ's statements. If you have better sources than the one you included above, I'd love to see them. Xinit 00:28, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  Whose sockpuppet are you, anyhow? I'm attempting to keep this article on a course towards Wikipedia's idea of a good article.  I don't own this article any more than you do, but I am trying to steer it toward the generally accepted guidelines for a good article about a musical group.  It's not a good article, but it's getting better. If you and your puppeteers would only work with us to improve the article, that would be appreciated. Xinit 01:09, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Agreed. If you'd like to argue the point, then you should probably start using some decent logic, instead of heading a section with "FUCK" and hoping people will bow down before the profanity. - Corbin Be excellent 03:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: simmer down guys.--the Dannycas 17:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FUCK