Talk:Warning (Green Day album)

message: I (Kingturtle 05:05, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review 

message: I added Suffocate to the B-Sides, because it was released on the Warning # 2 Single, although it was recorded earlier, for nimrod.Hammer55 21:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suffocate 

message: :"Many speculated that Green Day had painted themselves into a corner and would be unable to return to punk music. Nonetheless, many fans hold this album in high regard as being creative, experimental, and overall musically successful."
The words "many speculated" are used to justify a personal opinion in the following two sentences. It would be better to quote a specific source that criticises the band and then a source that highly rates the album.
--IslaySolomon 10:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weasel words 

message: I was under the impression that this was the only album NOT produced by Rob Cavallo since 1994, and I am not in the minority with this assumption, but when I went to prove it I found these sources:
source one
source two
Does anyone have any online sources that say that Green Day were the sole producers?--Jude 07:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Production 

message: jesus christ this was imo one of their best well all their albums are masterpieces and this didnt stray from that at all wtf? im so shocked
Me too. Really though, everyone must listen to this... Itsmehbro (talk) 11:37, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  lowest selling album? 

message: According to their official website and the iTunes Store, the album titles are "Warning" and "Nimrod", but Wikipedia has them as "Warning:" and "nimrod.".  Shouldn't this be changed? --Muéro(talk/c) 06:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The official names are "Warning:" and "nimrod." though for organisational purposes iTunes uses its own format.--Jude 08:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Colon

message: this album is just Alternative Rock! there are no punksongs on this album! i think you never listened to this record!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.167.250.157 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 16 March 2007
:Hello!  I'm sorry but changing the genre actually takes a debate and a general consensus.  Your edits have been reverted many times now and it's because they are unhelpful to the article.  Thank you for taking the issue up here on the talk page, however.  Please try to Keep Your Cool, though.  Please do not change the genre on the article until you have more support in this area.  Your vote counts as one against the current consensus.  Please be patient!--JUDE talk 22:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The main reason that the genres are listed as such is because of their performance on the Alt. Rock charts.  I can list a few songs that have punk rock influence on Warning:.  The only compromise I'm willing to make is that it be changed from "Punk Rock" to "Pop Punk" however *never* Pop Rock or "Power Pop" which I've never even come across, to be honest.--JUDE talk 03:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

text: please see my response here--JUDE talk 05:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WARNING IS ALTERNATIVE ROCK!

message: Edit warring is very disruptive -- see WP:3RR among others -- and can result in blocks being issued. In this situation, however, one party is using a number of IP addresses to revert back and forth; we could block those addresses, but doing so is a bit clumsy and will probably affect multiple people. As an alternative, I've semi-protected this page for a week. Please discuss the article and develop consensus as to which page version is best; it's really easier, and saves time for everybody involved. I'm acting as an administrator, in this case, and should avoid taking any particular stand as to the content of the article, but may take steps to encourage the dispute resolution process. Thanks, and best wishes. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: There currently is a dispute as to what genre Warning: is to be considered.
Please leave your opinion here.  Currently as it stands, Warning: is listed as Punk Rock, Alternative Rock, and Folk punk.
My vote is that Warning: be considered Folk punk, Pop Punk, Alternative Rock, and/or Punk Rock.  Please be sure to use the wikipedia related link for your genre vote as to eliminate confusion and made up genres.  Thank you very much for your time.--JUDE talk 20:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's not Punk Rock, could you suggest a genre?  I know that you find this amusing, but we need to get this over and done with.--JUDE talk 18:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, sir, however I have listened to this album for the full seven years that it's been out.  I'm not arguing with you anymore.  You do not listen to my argument, and you do not state yours in a manner in which I can understand.  I'm just going to keep reverting your edits, and if I get banned, no big deal.--JUDE talk 18:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre Dispute

message: There are very few instances I can find where the colon is included in the title of the album.  Green Day's official site does not include the colon in the title just as they do not typecase the previous album as nimrod. (which has recently been changed here on wiki back to Nimrod.)  On the website www.greendayauthority.com, by far the largest Green Day fan site and one that is more comprehensive than the band's own site, Nimrod is spelled as nimrod. yet Warning is still simply the title alone, with no colon at the end.  I realize that on the cover of the album and of every single released from the album, it says Warning:, but the same goes for Nimrod as nimrod., so i think some standard must be set.  For as long as Nimrod remains as such, I feel that Warning should certainly not have the colon included.  In general, however, I think Wikipedia articles need to stop assuming that because an album title is typeset a particular way on the album cover that it necessarily means that is how the title must always be spelled, because it is complete nonsense.  For example, the band Weezer's name is spelled in all lowercase on every album they have ever released, and yet the band name is never taken as necessarily always lowercase. Also, the single for "Warning" also uses the colon on the cover, yet the song is never spelled with the colon elsewhere, even in the tracklisting. Ringer7 04:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, a rule on Wikipedia says that the title of an article should be the name under which the entity is most notable. This is, as you stated, Warning, not Warning:. I do think however, that it should be mentioned in the article, so I have added a sentence to the intro. - Face 19:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no need for either the "." in Nimrod or the ":" in Warning. These are simply for stylistic and artistic reasons, and have no bearing on the actual name of the album. (Think, do you say "Warning" any different to "Warning:").Nouse4aname (talk) 13:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Title

message: How come Macy's Day Parade is not a single anymore?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.49.65.174 (talk) 03:22, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean how come it doesn't have it's own Wikipedia article anymore?  It was nominated for deletion, and consensus was that it should go.  You can read the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Macy's Day Parade (song). ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 03:57, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: That allmusic.com site has this album as Punk rock, Pop punk, Alternative Rock, and Post-grunge. So, I've discussed it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RickWilliams75 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hey 

message: What's the source on Poprocks and Coke being released as a non-LP B-side? I understand Maria was, but I've never heard of another version of Poprocks and Coke.
* It's not, I assure you, however, do you know where you found that? Disco dude rock (talk) 01:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poprocks and Coke 

message: I have moved the following review from the article to TALK. please fix it here before putting it back in the article: 
:I was never a Green Day fan before I heard this album.  To tell you the truth, I had never actually really listened to Green Day before this album.  And though Warning: was not received particularly well by the public because of its new approach (described above), this album was the one that got me into Green Day and has turned them into my favorite band of all time.
:The title track is a terrific way to begin the album.  A terrific melody and great beat you can tap your foot to drives the song forward.  "Warning" is all about...well, as the lyrics state, living without warning.  Do everything spontaneously, and don't think of the consequences.  A great song with a great message.
:"Blood, Sex, and Booze" is definitely different from tracks the band has worked with in before.  It starts with a woman slapping Billie, yelling "You understand me?"  And Billie responding with an, "Aww, shit."  It's about kinky stuff...this may be about a time Billie and Adie were in a fight.  They're in a fight, and Billie's saying, "Don't make me beg for blood, sex, and booze."  In other words, the good things that his wife gives him.
:"Church on Sunday" is another cool track with a good beat and cool melody about how Billie Joe Armstrong saved his marriage.  "It's a song about when you're in a long term relationship with somebody, you have to keep reinventing it, and it takes a lot of compromise," Billie said in an interview.
:"Fashion Victim" is about how everyone in America's brainwashed and will do just about anything - including pay any amount of money - just to fit in.
:As mentioned above, Warning drifts away from Green Day's punk roots.  "Castaway" is about how many of Billie's punk friends will probably hate him for writing such an album.
******author you can post this on the article..thanks  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chevron24 (talk • contribs) 14:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  review 

message: I don't think Poprocks and Coke was ever recorded for Warning, and there was no source for it, so i removed it. --Chickenguy12 (talk) 10:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poprocks and Coke recorded for Warning? 

message: I'm pretty damn sure Misery was written by Billie Joe Armstrong. The credits on the album don't say any different. I think whoever changed it was thinking of where it says on Mike's credits: Farfasia (On Misery) and took it as Farfasia [and lyrics to] Misery. --24.255.37.229 (talk) 01:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misery not by Billie Joe? 

message: I am okay with the way it is now, but I was just wondering what was so bad about it before that needed "cleaned-up"? Just a question. --BLAguyMONKEY! (talk) 05:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need to have multiple citations, so I removed those and replaced with "Credits for Warning adapted from liner notes.[19]". As for the subheaders, when appropriate like with enough names/credits, it's pretty much conventional for personnel sections to be split this way in WP:Albums articles. Dan56 (talk) 05:52, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. --BLAguyMONKEY! (talk) 06:03, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't need to say "adapted from liner notes" if you're citing the notes; The citation itself says that. I removed a bunch of extraneous people from the section: techs, management, A&R guys, etc. have little or nothing to do with making the album. It's common for liner notes to include the names of the band's management, publicist, road crew, etc., but these people have almost nothing to do with recording or producing the album. Our purpose isn't to repeat every individual mentioned in the liner notes, just those directly involved in the recording & production; It's the same principle by which we don't list the entire cast & crew in film articles...who strung the guitars, booked the tour, or brewed coffee has no relevance to the album itself. --IllaZilla (talk) 07:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: My edits to the Personnel section

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Warning (Green Day album). 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/20150924151606/http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=1 to http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=1&table=SEARCH_RESULTS&action=&title=&artist=Green%20Day&format=&debutLP=&category=&sex=&releaseDate=&requestNo=&type=&level=&label=&company=&certificationDate=&awardDescription=&catalogNo=&aSex=&rec_id=&charField=&gold=&platinum=&multiPlat=&level2=&certDate=&album=&id=&after=&before=&startMonth=1&endMonth=1&startYear=1958&endYear=2009&sort=Artist&perPage=25
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) 16:40, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why didn't somebody make an article about Macy's Day Parade because I know it was released as the 4th and the final single off the album. Because everytime I make new articles on Wikipedia, they (Wikipedia) or someone else ("nominates") (to) remove the article WITHOUT any reason at all..... Itsmehbro (talk) 11:40, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Didn't Green Day release Macy's Day Parade as the fourth single? 

message: There's a little disagreement between me and another editor regarding the genres of the album. While we both agree what to list, the disagreement comes from what order to list them in. I really don't like punk rock being listed first, because while a few sources cite it as such, there's others that say the album is not punk rock.
I was saying that pop-punk should be listed first, but there's also this source that says its not pop-punk. So because of that, maybe power pop should actually be listed first (which has four sources supporting it vs. five supporting pop-punk and one opposing it)? I currently have punk rock listed second-to-last, but with the four sources opposing it (kind of cancelling out the four sources supporting it), it should probably be listed last, or arguably, not even included in the infobox at all. But I can settle for it being  the last genre listed. MoonJet (talk) 11:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre arrangement 

message: Can people PLEASE stop vandalizing this page to say it's "underrated"? That is a matter of subjective taste and should not be on Wikipedia. 173.77.248.53 (talk) 18:08, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism