Talk:Barenaked Ladies/Archive 1

message: What are the origins of the name? Was it chosen to cause controversy, gain attention or did it just seem like a good idea at the time? Thryduulf 17:27, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Barenaked Ladies started when Steven Page and Ed Robertson got together in the late 80's. Ed was in a band at the time, and had promised that they would appear at a charity show. When the show organizers called him to make sure they were coming, he had forgotten all about it, and his band had broken up. He assured them that he would come, with his new band, Barenaked Ladies. The name was made up earlier, when Steve and Ed were far back at a boring concert, and making up fake band names. Ed then proceeded to call Steve and let him know that he'd signed them up to play. It was just going to be a one-time gig, but by chance it kept going, and became the actual band. This is the explanation given by the band themselves, and is included in their biography. Just wanted to clear that up. :) --Patteroast 10:53, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: origin of the name

message: BNL recorded the song "Grim Grimming Ghosts" (from the Haunted Mansion) for Disney, and it was featured on the collection "Disney's Music From The Park" (which also has an astounding rendition of Davy Crockett sung by Tim Curry. Swirsky 21:41, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Single? 

message: Several removals:
Later that month, BNL was an opening act for Dave Matthews Band at a weekend-long festival at Randall's Island in New York City.
-While perfectly true, there was nothing particularly special or historically important about this performance, it doesn't bear mention in the article any more than any other preformance.
all of which they performed at Camp Tamarack to a crowd of adoring 6 to 18 year-old youths during the Summer of 1990.
- Similarly, this seems like a pretty trivial mention of one random show in discussion of Gordon when the show really has nothing to do with the album, and the band played many shows.
The band has also collaborated with singer Tom Jones for a track on his 1999 album Reload.
And again, while this is true, it's one of many single track collaborations the band has had, and this one was not particularly notable as successful or special in a way that it needs to be mentioned in the notes on Stunt.
TheHYPO 15:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. All to be removed? Lukasa 18:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Good point. I also recognise the name, but without checking with the band somehow I can't verify it. You're correct about it being a generic cover band though: in the iTunes originals with Barenaked Ladies, Steve said that "Ed's band were all over the map...they played everything from Talking Heads,  to Peter Gabriel, to Tears For Fears, and some...canadian classic rock" Lukasa 16:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removals 

message: I think that the "desperation Records" article should be put into the barenaked ladies article.  What are you opinions?
:Fair enough.  -arctic gnome 01:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: This article seems to be decently written, but hardly any refrences are cited at all. This should probably be worked on.
Shamrox 09:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a fair point, but it's probably not an easy task. Much of the information comes from common knowledge of the fanbase, and other information is from live conversations with band members, concert banters, and other sources that aren't the kind of thing that is easily citable. Other info can come from articles someone read a long time ago about the band that they haven't had in their posession for a long time. Someone should probably go through the band's PSPS Bio and cite anything that is cited in there (though it should be noted that there are some typos and mis-infos in that book anyway so...)TheHYPO 17:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No refrences cited 

message: Should the CMCC get its own article? It's not really an entity of Barenaked Ladies (eg: Desperation records is really just a 'name' that BNL uses to release its records while this CMCC is a seperate group of many artists that just happens to have Steve Page as it's main spokesperson (and I suspect as a key figure in forming the group). Anyone agree that it should get it's own article (and just have a reference in this article)?TheHYPO 17:39, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: CMCC?

message: I'd like to suggest/submit that my site, Rock It Old School, be added to the site listing; It has a unique contribution of information (music and instrument information), and is a more complete/accurate listing of lyrics than the lyric site linked. It has also been noted by the band as being quality in these regards. However, I'm not going to be one to self-advertise by adding my own site; If anyone else feels that it is a valid link for inclusion, please add it ot the list, or feel free to discuss here if you're not sure. TheHYPO 00:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential website addition? 

message: First of all, can someone cite evidence (or at least a story behind) the following being noted as singles?
* "War On Drugs" - when was this released as a single? I simply can't imagine this happening.
* "It's Only Me" - was this actually released?
* "Alcohol" - I know there was a 6-song Stunt Sampler that this song was the title track on, but was this song ever actually intended as a single?
* "Govatsos Shuffle" - how was this a single?
* Rock spec. 1997-8 saw several releases of Brian Wilson 2000 and the live. I don't think it needs to be multi-listed. Just like Old Apartment was released as both BOAPS and RS within the 96-97 frame.
* "Grim Grinning Ghosts" - was this a single? What do we base this on?
* "Fight the Power" - I'm not sure about this one. Was it actually the single from that soundtrack?
I would also like to reshuffle the primary/secondary/live album distinction (if so, Holidays might be a secondary release, since they wrote only a small part of it). I think the releases should be split by the significance of release, not the type of content. IE: Rock Spec and Disc One should be primary, since they had major commercial releases, charted, had press releases, appearances and touring, etc.
As for secondary, I have a few hesitations about it.
* Shoebox EP, though titled 'EP', is pretty much a CD single. It's a 4 track including 2 versions of the title. I'd call it a single, and not necessarily include it as a release (no more than the current 'Easy EP' is really an EP).
* As You Like it is definately a secondary release,
* Barenaked On A Stick is definately a secondary.
* Is Barenaked 4 Hannukkah? It's really just a sampler repackaging for download. I'd say that a note about it on the BN4Holidays article is sufficient, and it's not really a secondary release. If it has to be mentioned in the article, I'd say under a seperate 'online repackaging' section with Everything Acoustic?
I think maybe Primary, secondary for things like Barenaked On A Stick, As You Like It; and 'online releases' for itunes, the EPs and I think all the tour lives can be summed up with "Most Shows from all major tours since 2004" with a barenakedladies.com link. It's tough because, though I think iTunes is a notable release due to its exclusive recordings an interviews, I wouldn't call Everything Acoustic or HannukahEP even secondary releases. Tertiary at best, since they are just repackages. Perhaps even less significant than single releases, which we don't list here - at least not physical singles)
Thoughts? TheHYPO 07:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Grim Grinning Ghosts was released as a single, I'd love to buy it - I've been looking for a good copy for a while. -MBlume 23:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discography questions, rewrite... 

message: I'm planning on going through three or more sources: Behind The Music, a significant lengthed interview with Ed spanning their entire careers, and the iTunes Originals audio. In the meantime, I have added a references holding area at the bottom of the page. To reference something, here's the format:
fact...fact...factthe citation
That's all you need to do. Here's the format for, say, citing a podcast - something that would be handy for BNL. see Template:Cite_podcast for usage instructions - note the required and optional tags:

Others BNL articles might make use of: Template:Cite_web (for websites), Template:Cite press release, Template:Cite video (for TV episodes or video), Template:Cite email, Template:Cite book (such as PSPS).
All citations are listed here: :Category:Citation_templates 
If you want to add citations to another BNL article (or any article), you should add a references section at the bottom of articles (just before the external links). All you need to put down is the following. The references will automatically be listed in it:
==References==
TheHYPO 08:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References. Let's get using them. 

message: Technically, The band's first album on Sire was Gordon was it not? Would this not put them on Sire starting 1992? I know the band was still pumping out Yellow Tapes past new years 1992 - so shouldn't they be on Page Pubs through 92?   Anyone know what "John King Artist Consultants" actually is? What they did for the band etc.? TheHYPO 18:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Labels?

message: I find it odd that the Barenaked Ladies tables at the bottom of all BNL-related articles list the singles which have official releases and videos, whereas the previous_single/this_single/next_single tables listed on the single pages oft include singles which are not listed in the before mentioned table, and do not even have articles.
Which seems the more logical course of action -- adding articles for those singles and adding them to the BNL table, or removing them from the timeline and correcting the order? JPG-GR 05:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some people have different ideas of what qualifies a single. "A" had a radio promo released but never had a video and didn't have much of a release. "Alcohol" was the title track of an album promo disc but also never had a video. The article for Stunt indicates that it was a moderate radio hit, so that implies to me that someone remembers it being a radio single, but it wasn't a high profile one and I suspect it has been forgotten (assuming the statement about the radio single is accurate). It's pretty hard to confirm things from that period. Similarly, there IS a radio promo for It's Only Me from Disc One, but it was never "promoted" as a single so whether is counts as a single is up in the air. TheHYPO 23:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, either way, it would be nice to have consistency in the two navigation boxes. JPG-GR 17:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't disagree but I don't have an opinion as to which one should 'reign'. It's not the only problem. Other problem include album chrono boxes - right now Barelaked Nadies is on the chronology (I forget where - before Everything to Everyone I think) even though it's a DVD, not a CD and contains no real original material (other than commentary). I wouldn't put it there, but someone did and because wiki has no guideline defining exactly what should in the chrono (I'd say only major album releases, but others could argue it...), it's not easy to deal with. TheHYPO 06:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and fixed the -album- chronology stuff in the various infoboxes, which basically involved removing both Barelaked Nadies (not an album, a DVD) and iTunes Originals (not an album, an... edition of iTunes originals hehe). As for the singles... that's still tough to say. At this point, I'm inclined to prefer -neither- of the current lists, but more a version in the middle (for instance, I would count both FFTFT and TLTL from Maroon, but not A) JPG-GR 19:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think FFFT or TLTL are debatable. Both had radio singles and music videos. Both are clearly singles. I don't know which list you have that lacks one of those singles... TheHYPO 07:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The list at the bottom of the BNL page. And, this just proves the point about these lists needing some serious work. JPG-GR 06:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For me, a good general rule would be "if there's a video, it's a single," but then you have to ask about both LiaDT and TTWF, which I don't think I'd count either. There's no simple rule, I supose. JPG-GR 06:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: You're misunderstanding me. I'm -not- saying that those two singles are questionable. I noticed they were missing because I was going through the list of what -I- thought would be the notable ones, and those ones stood out like sore thumbs as missing. And, currently, neither FFFT or TLTL are listed in the table at the bottom, nor have they been. (Template:Barenaked Ladies) I'd add them, but for the life of me, I'm not sure which of them came first anymore. JPG-GR 23:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, they don't have articles written on them yet, which may be why they are lacking. JPG-GR 23:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

text: OH, you mean that table. I think you answered your own question. I assumed you were referring to the 'discography' section of the site. Yes, the template has only existing song pages. "Single" might be a mistitling, but I believe the point is to collect all the pages on BNL songs that exist on wikipedia, though I didn't make the template. TLTL came first, but I wouldn't bother adding it until someone makes a page for the songs. They are likely to thus add the page themselves after making it. TheHYPO 07:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Singles

message: One (or two?) videos of BNL appeared in the install CD of Mac OS ...maybe 9 or 8.5, along with QuickTime. Did anyone remember that? It'll be interesting to write on the article? --Alessandro De Rossi
* An encyclopedia isn't really the place for trivia. -- Wizardry Dragon (Talk to Me) (Support Neutrality on Wikipedia) 20:27, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha, yea, that's actually how I first discovered them. Old Apartment came with my first Mac, an LCII. Later when I upgraded to a beige desktop G3, I found the One Week music video on the install disk. Good times.Funkbomb 03:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia 

message: Is there really any evidence that the band's name is "often" abbreviated as "BnL" as opposed to "BNL"? JPG-GR 06:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd change it to 'occasionally', but a belt buckle sold at the current tour had the lowercase n —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheHYPO (talk • contribs) 21:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  BnL 

message: I hae a problem with the latest revisions from "They" to "It". I know it may likely be gramatically more correct, but it just doesn't sound right in terms of what's being described. The band doesn't have humourous banter. The members do. I think at least part of the 'Its' have to be reverted TheHYPO 07:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Singular v. Plural? 

message: I saw this advertised during their live show last friday; BNL seems very eco-friendly, perhaps this deserves a little more attention in the article. A side slide show was saying that they use bio-diesel for their tour buses and that the entire show is using green energy. 
http://www.reverbrock.org/barenakedplanet/
That's what comes up on Google. 
Lovok 01:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done TheHYPO 06:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barenaked Planet 

message: Listening to BnL's "iTunes Originals" which intersplices interviews with Ed and Steve with rerecorded specials, Steve states explicitly that the Yellow Tape was the first indie album to go *gold*, not platinum. I'm changing it accordingly until someone verifies otherwise. Funkbomb 04:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if you're right, you're. This isn't America, it's Canada. Gold is 50k, platinum is 100k. That said, I've only ever heard Yellow tape cited as being the first indie to go gold (50k) in Canada; but if none had ever gone gold, even if the tape went platinum later, it would still be the first to go gold. I see some pages on yahoo that mention platinum, but they all seem to be pretty much ripped from the same wiki page and other similar articles, so I'm not sure if there's a source on platinum or not yet. TheHYPO 07:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright then, wouldn't it seem reasonable to change it to gold, with the statistic at 50K? this is a verifiable source.Funkbomb 03:38, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Yellow Tape" 

message: Tomorrow after work I will remove the fair use image gallery of album covers at the bottom of the article, as it is not allowed by the WP:NONFREE policy.  Also, we need to garner consensus and choose three or four songs to sample from the band, and they need to be integrated into the article, not clumped together at the end.  Cheers, ➪HiDrNick! 03:06, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're mean.  --74.14.32.156 03:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not my intention to be mean; however, these sorts of changes are happening on many articles due to this policy.  If the fair use problems are not worked out, someone else will just come along and remove the samples altogether.  ➪HiDrNick! 13:21, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use concerns 

message: a) Canadian Music Creators Coalition Website  is not a fan site, so I see no reason why it is being deleted, and you haven't explained any reason to delete it. It's a musician rights group which the band (steven in particular) have had a hand in forming, and the group is mentioned in the article
b) barenaked.net is virutally official. It's the most populated, up to date and relevant message board, including the official message board which is really no longer supported. The band has, in the past, included .net, and mysd.org along side the "official" board on their site, without distinguishing them as lesser fan boards.
TheHYPO 05:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, fair enough.  I've restored the links.  ➪HiDrNick! 07:44, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fan sites? 

message: I trashed the paragraph on this PSA because I felt that a PSA from 1990 bears little historical important in the careers of the 20 year old band. While I'd argue that some of the recent notes are just as trivial, their recentness bears mentioning until they are a bit more outdated. TheHYPO 06:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ballad of Gordon 

message: I've cited a good number of facts in this article already. The problem is that an entire paragraph will be cited from the same TV interview (Distinguished Artists, which was a thorough hour long interview), so I've cited at end of paragraph. I think you're being unnecessarily stingy by putting a  tag after every sentance. I believe that citing the end of paragraph (previously, I had cited the first three paragraphs of the "origin" section at the end of the third paragraph). Citing [1] after every sentance is going to make reading the article distracting and unweildy. Proper citation format does not require every sentance to be cited either, as far as I know. The problem is that there is no way to indicate what a citation encompasses, but I am clarifying here that most of the citations at end of paragraphs cover the entire paragraph. 
My problem with the wikipedia citation system is that it permits me to put Distinguished Artists and Behind The Music as "general references" if I wanted, which would just bullet point them at the end of the article, indicating that they were both used throughout the article. But if I did that, someone would come along and start  tagging every little fact, since you wouldn't know what came from those programs or not. So now there's going to be about 100 citations for each program on each little fact that comes from it? TheHYPO 04:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation issues