Talk:Ramones (album)

message: The title of this album is just 'Ramones', without the 'The'. Can someone who is authorized to do it exchange this page, The Ramones (album), with the Ramones (album)? Thanx!Face 19:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Jkelly 20:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks dude!Face 21:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move to 'Ramones'

message: 53rd & 3rd really warranted it's own article, as it's a pretty famous song and the original page had more material, which could be expanded even further. this page is a mess, and over the next day or so will be expanded greatly. it seems the "songs" section merely served to pad it out. a lot more info is available on this subject. Joeyramoney 18:58, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  overhaul 

message: Both this article and the main Ramones article portray the album as a commercial failure, based on the fact that it only rose as high as #111 on the Billboard Hot 200 chart.  However, that is actually not that bad a showing, given that they were a totally unknown band who sounded quite unlike any established band (aside perhaps from The Stooges), and given that the album came out on what was then a little-known record label (Sire Records).  Even though they were (and still are) rarely heard on mainstream radio, they actually found their audience pretty quickly and they did pretty well commercially right from the start.  Timothy Horrigan (talk) 17:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: #111 on the Billboard album chart

message: does anyone know if the claim of a lost track called "Gimme Therapy" is substantiated. The claim does not have adequate citation.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.251.232.139 (talk) 01:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never heard of it, are you sure you're not getting confused with "Gimme Gimme Shock Treatment?" But either way unless you find a reliable source to verify what you have presented, it shouldn't be on Wikipedia. CrowzRSA 22:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  lost track 

message: That section is a misnomer, since it only lists recent rankings. I was expecting to find in it reviews at the time (= reception). --Jerome Potts (talk) 10:31, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Critical reception" 

message: Was "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" a single released in 1976, as the infobox claims? The infobox has a link that takes you to a page devoted entirely to a cover of that song by a Swedish guy. Seems to me if there is no relevant page about a Ramones single that was perhaps released in 1976, then the link should be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.175.188 (talk) 03:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend" single 

message: This is a problem that seems to afflict articles on many of the early Ramones albums -- the writing credits for the songs are not as they are stated in the liner notes for the albums.
For example, all the songs (except Let's Dance) on this first album are credited to "The Ramomes", according to the liner notes of both the original vinyl and recent CD issues.  The song "Let's Dance" is credited to Jim Lee alone.
If someone wants to make the (attributed) point that in fact some given songs were in truth the work of specific individuals and credited to the band as a whole for financial reasons (or whatever), that's fine -- but the article should make this divergence explicit.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.92.148.18 (talk) 18:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious Writing Credits 

message: Re: I Wanna Be Your Boyfriend, the slowest and the only romantically colored piece on the album, was solely written by Tommy. The text has themes of irony and humor and depiction of violence. - This is said of the text which consists of 8 lines and goes like this : 'Hey, little girl /I wanna be your boyfriend/Sweet little girl/I wanna be your boyfriend/Do you love me babe?/What do you say?/Do you love me babe?/What can I say?/Because I wanna be your boyfriend'. -- Evermore2 (talk) 11:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ...depictions of violence, anyone? 

message: ... should be, in fact, seventeen, according to Rombes, among many others. So where this piece about the instruments taking three days and vocals taking four days might have come from? -- Evermore2 (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seven days of creation... 

message: Hi
During the copyedit some issues came to light that may need attention:
;Background
*"She started writing about us in Rock Scene" and "more press like The Village Voice" - this is a quote of Joey Ramone, it should only be italicised if the original was italicised.
;Promotion
*"nearly all at CBGB." - what is CBGB?
;Compositions
*"in the same way as the twentieth through thirty–third seconds." (para1) - in the same way as the twentieth? there are only 14 tracks on the album, if the expanded CD is meant, it should be stated as such. through thirty-third seconds? - unsure as to what was meant here.
("Listen to My Heart")
*"...autobiographical and very real way I can not..." - seems to be missing some words.
("Let's dance")
*"at the very first sample of the tape" - not sure of context here.
Chaosdruid (talk) 11:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much, CrowzRSA 18:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyedit April 2011 

message: Johnny said that the when writing the lyrics they were "trying to be offensive."[29]
This is incorrect, Johnny says that they weren't trying to be offensive. Not that they were. More specifically he says "We weren't trying to be offensive, we were trying to be normal"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.224.43.75 (talk) 09:21, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Trying to be offensive" 

message: According to this article, the album is being added to the Library of Congress National Recording Registry, which is kind of an honor and might be worth noting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.92.196.42 (talk) 15:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This album is being added to Library of Congress National Recording Registry 

message: I don't see any current discussion on this so I have removed it for the moment. If it is returned I would expect that there be some detail given as to what the issues are. If there are strong enough arguments for the tag...we may want to reaccess the GA. If it isn't that much, lets just fix it and not tag please.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I found two spelling problems and corrected them.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:13, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy edit tag on Reception section 

message: Why was this remonved? The reference was from the RIAA website itself.108.81.33.59 (talk) 19:08, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *I am sooo sorry about that, I didn't scroll down in the citation so I thought that it was just referring to Ramones: Raw when it said Ramones. With the source (), I'm going to re-add the material in its proper place. Thanks for using the talk page!! CrowzRSA 20:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The album recently went gold 

message: "Sessions began in early February 1976 and were completed within a week"
This does not fit to the release date stated in the article (February 4)!
Rolf riebig (talk) 20:34, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release date 

message: Substituted at 03:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The original lyric "I'm a Nazi, baby, I'm a Nazi, yes I am" was still sung live, appearing for instance on Loco Live. This should probably be added to the mention of "Today Your Love, Tomorrow the World". Geschichte (talk) 09:15, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazi lyrics 

message: The redirect Ramones(album) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Steel1943 (talk) 21:29, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Ramones(album)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]