Talk:No Doubt

message: I see the latest revision to the article says that Gabrial McNair and Stephen Bradley are members of No Doubt's touring band. Do you think there's any justification for including them as regular band members, seeing as they have recorded on every No Doubt album since Tragic Kingdom in 1995, and No Doubt's official website even refers to 'our very own Gabrial McNair' in an article about Oslo? Terrafire 18:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Members

message: How should No Doubt be classified in the intro?  Here's how I would think No Doubt's albums would be classified:
* No Doubt: ska and pop with some New Wave
* The Beacon Street Collection: ska and pop/rock
* Tragic Kingdom: ska, pop, and rock
* Return of Saturn: rock with New Wave and some pop
* Rock Steady: dancehall and ragga with pop/rock and some ska
* Everything In Time: varied because it was a compilation album
No Doubt also did "Oi to the World" (punk rock with ska influence), "Monkey Man" with Toots & the Maytals (reggae and ska), "It's My Life" (pop/rock), and "DJ's" (reggae and ska).
It seems to me that the best way to classify No Doubt would be to introduce it as either ska/pop/rock or ska-punk and point out its influences in reggae and new wave.  — ShadowHalo 03:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do see what you mean about ska/pop/rock appearing messy, though I think rock is a tad too broad and doesn't carry enough meaning.  I took a look at the pages for some other third-wave bands, and they were all listed as ska punk, ska-core, or third wave ska.  So how about introducing No Doubt as ska punk (one phrase without any slash) and then mentioning its influence from pop, reggae, and new wave?  — ShadowHalo 7:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When first introducing a band in an article's lead section, the genre description should be as broad as possible to give those unfamiliar with music genres a frame of reference.  For example, if you're looking up the Sex Pistols, introducing them as punk rock is fine, because they are classified simply as that one genre of rock.  Same thing with introducing Iron Maiden as heavy metal.  However, a band like The Cure fits into a number of genres/subgenres, so it's best to just introduce them as rock.  I think No Doubt is a comparable case to The Cure.  WesleyDodds 10:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ack, sorry about that last post.  I think I was dozing off; anyway, I meant to say third wave ska instead of ska punk since calling it a third wave ska band categorizes the band and its influence on ska revival rather than its music so much since third wave ska ranges from swing to pop to punk rock and everything in between.  — ShadowHalo 03:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre

message: Does anyone have a source for either Gwen's upcoming solo album (if it is going to be released) or No Doubt's upcoming album?  The dates in this article regarding the albums are inconsistent.  — ShadowHalo 07:48, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Upcoming Album

message: I think the opening to this page is quite weak.
:fix it then SOADLuver 02:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening 

message: That awards section has been annoying me for quite some time and it needs to die (by which I mean I'd like to organize it).  Would it be appropriate to move each award to the article on that song/album and then organize the remaining awards on this page?  —ShadowHalo 08:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the awards regarding songs and albums to the individual pages.  If someone objects, feel free to revert so we can discuss the best way to organize the stuff.  —ShadowHalo 12:01, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards 

message: This article needs to be blocked from editing. Someone who doesn't like No Doubt is vandalizing it.HorseApples 03:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: I tried to condense the introduction to this article, but it was fully reverted.  Mine might have been flawed, but as it stands it gets too needlessly specific about certain things that would be better left to the 'history' section.  A couple of paragraphs summing up the band, their claim to fame, and their status is what's needed, and whats leftover can be folded into the rest of the article. --LeCorrector 06:49, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To clarify, I didn't fully revert it.  I added the part about diamond certification as well as the band's founding into the old lead.  Considering that "the relative weight given to points in the lead should reflect the relative weight given to each in the remainder of the article" (see WP:LEAD), a description of the band's history seems appropriate in the lead.  Also, the lead is supposed to duplicate information in the article, so rather than "folding over" information from the lead to the article, it should be the other way around.  —ShadowHalo 08:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the tag for lead length. Not just is the lead three paragraphs, which is completely normal for articles of this size, but it's currently very well-written, as it encompasses what the article is about. -- Kicking222 13:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup Intro 

message: I have reviewed this article and decided that it is worthy of Good Article status. The article addresses the band's activities and provides a compelling view of the band. Well done to all of you who have worked on getting the article up to the present good standard. Perhaps after the close of the peer review, somebody could nominate this for featured article status. It certainly isn't far off that now. Wikiwoohoo 22:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? It states in one place: "did not match the success of their previous but" Previous what?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.32 (talk) 08:30, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article status

message: From just reading the start I noticed two things. 1) I know they didn't do well due to the popularity of grunge at the time in the early 90s, but isn't the article talking about 1986? I don't think grunge was mainstream then, but then I'm no expert. Beyond Nirvana and Hole I don't care, lol. 2) Third-Wave Ska... I knew what that was, but I bet most people don't. It might be better if you use a word that people understand straight away without clicking on the link, becuase all my friends and my mom (who are no Doubt fans, but not as big as me) were like, 'WHAT???'. They haven't even heard of ska, so they were majorly confused. I know that term is more correct,but still. Otherwise, the article is looking pretty great.80.43.26.174 16:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as the part about the popularity of grunge, that comes after the part where it states they released their debut album in '92.  It doesn't mention anything about grunge until then.  ShadowHalo 16:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, you were talking about the lead.  I've reworded it; thanks for pointing that out.  ShadowHalo 16:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Third wave ska entails ska mixed with all sorts of genres, from Latin to hardcore punk to R&B.  No Doubt didn't have as much ska in its later work, but it was still there to some degree, so third wave ska is a much simpler term then trying to account for everything.  Plus, No Doubt's biggest impact was as one of the figureheads of the mid 90s ska revival.  ShadowHalo 17:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Grunge & Third-Wave Ska

message: I noticed that in the "singles" section, there are two errors that I am not sure how to fix: 
1) "Happy Now" may not have technically been released in the U.S., but it certainly did get airplay (at least in the socal area). Does anybody know if it was officially released in the U.S.?
2) "Bathwater" was most definitely released in the U.S., got lots of airplay, and I think I even remember a music video. I'll research and see if I can find a Billboard ranking.
catgirl667
:"Bathwater" never charted on the Hot 100.   ShadowHalo 22:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  that may be true, but there is a footnote indicating that "Bathwater" was only released in Australia. Why is that footnote there if the song was released in the US? catgirl667
can anyone list any third wave ska influences in their songs? I listen to third wave ska and I hear no third wave ska at all in their music..  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.145.96.51 (talk) 03:53, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: singles

message: ----
Does anyone remember the original name for the song "Don't speak"? I remember they performed the original version once for MTV of VH1. It was very happy and written pre-break up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RobertGary1 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it was still called dont speak, and the chorus was pretty much the same  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.200.188.213 (talk) 18:07, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oringinal name of "Don't speak" 

message: Why it is not featured yet...its a beautiful article!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.224.38.21 (talk) 14:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not as comprehensive as it could be and probably wouldn't pass FAC.  For examples, it doesn't do a good job of explaining the band's role in the third wave of ska, and the information about the sound of each album is somewhat lacking.  ShadowHalo 16:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FA Status

message: It is not at all clear.Its very blurred and you cant make out the members.Especially the lead singer Gwen Stefani —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.224.35.235 (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So far that's the only free picture we have of the four main members.  If you can find a better free image, feel free to replace the one that's there.  ShadowHalo 08:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Image:Sophie3.gif is unsourced and can be deleted any day.  The picture at Akon has now been deleted.  Like the picture in this article, the one at Justin Timberlake is taken from Flickr and is freely licensed.  WP:NONFREE only allows for a freely licensed image to be used in a situation like this.  ShadowHalo 07:34, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It's very unlikely that the uploader is the copyright holder of that image.  Also, it states "© All rights reserved" next to the image.  ShadowHalo 18:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Picture

message: I'm sorry but why was the latest band appearance made during Gwen's tour stop in Irvine, California removed under the reason "recentism"? It was a fairly big event considering that the band is preparing a new album. Was the source I provided not credible enough?  Kiki 18:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Recentism.  "Wikipedians ought to carefully consider whether they are regurgitating media coverage of an issue, or actually adding information which will remain salient over time."  It's nice to know this stuff, but it really doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article.  In a year or two, nobody is going to care about individual performances that the band makes.  ShadowHalo 18:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, alright then. Thanks for the link and reply. Kiki 19:39, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Irvine encore

message: According to the Simpsons Season 7, Episode 21, Josh Weinstien, one of the executive producers mentioned that Eric Stefani illustrated No Doubt in the background of "Homerpalooza" at 11 minutes, 30 seconds.   
I also remember that No Doubt was animated in King of the Hill.  Does anyone remember this episode?  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.161.235.12 (talk) 07:14:19, August 19, 2007 (UTC) 
:I've been told that the commentary actually states that it was either Eric Stefani or Eric Keyes, a friend of the band.  The King of the Hill episode you're thinking of is "Kidney Boy and Hamster Girl: A Love Story".  17Drew 11:38, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: No Doubt in the Simpsons

message: Please speak out here . Lots of people are listing this site as a source for various articles, but time and time again it gives invalid information.
Hoponpop69 18:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: If you agree a source listing ND as [[post-grunge]] and [[adult alternative]] is a bad source...

message: I've just changed it too "Apple Core". Eric Keyes posted on the official forum clarifying it as Apple Core not Apple Corps. --Baker1000 (talk) 22:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Then add it. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Erm, I did. Someone changed it back, I've just changed it again.--Baker1000 (talk) 00:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Also known as

message: Nationmaster states that it will be released in 2009, but I found another source  (ctrl-f to find No Doubt) saying it will be released 2010. Is there a solution?--F-22 Raptor IV 23:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Scratch that, I found an MTV source claiming they won't release new music in 2009.--F-22 Raptor IV 00:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, they did release Stand and Deliver. I cannot find it in iTunes, but it is available when you purchase tickets. --Trevorrrj (talk) 12:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Small Prob with New Album 

message: Well, i was wondering if we should create an article for there reunion tour that currently happening. Any thoughts. Simple yes or no with an explanation will be fine.
:: Yes: Because it's a current tour thats happening. Also so we can have somewhere to put the tour dates and additional info instead of cramming everything in one paragraph on the No Doubt article. --1234Sticky (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article for No Doubts 2009 Reunion Tour? 

message: From the Vandals article:
"The Vandals maintained a close friendship with fellow Orange County band No Doubt, who covered the album's title track "Oi to the World" for a Christmas compilation in 1997. Their version, which was produced by Vandals guitarist Warren Fitzgerald, received mainstream exposure and popularity and spawned a music video. Partly thanks to the exposure brought by association with No Doubt (with whom the Vandals also toured), fan interest in Oi to the World! increased and in 2000 Kung Fu Records, which by now had grown in size, re-released the album with new artwork and a bonus overture, as well as a new intro for the title track."
Anyone have any other info on this? It's not in the discography article, either.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.64.111.153 (talk) 12:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  1997 Christmas album not mentioned 

message: I know that Gwen Stefani runs a solo career from time to time but I think that the Harajuku Girls tour photo is completely unrelated to the No Doubt article. I suggest the pic to be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travsam (talk • contribs) 15:49, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gwen Stefani Harajuku Girls Tour Photo 

message: How is the band associated to Starpool, Shirley Manson, Garbage and 311? Jonathanmjefferies (talk) 14:20, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Associated Acts 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on No Doubt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150825121721/http://www.mtv.com/ to http://www.mtv.com/#/news/articles/1432752/19960408/no_doubt.jhtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150503124440/http://www.style.com/vogue/feature/032204/page2.html to http://www.style.com/vogue/feature/032204/page2.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100617054617/http://www.rollingstone.com:80/music/news/;kw=%5B13193,150933%5D to http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/;kw=%5B13193,150933%5D
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: For some odd reason, my name keeps getting misspelled. I will correct the spelling, but then somebody keeps going in and edits the incorrect spelling of my name. I am the co-founder of this band, so please contact a current member and they will verify that my name is Gabriel Gonzalez with a "z", not an "s". Thank You Gabriel The Gun (talk) 16:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gabriel Gonzalez 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on No Doubt. 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/20090223124634/http://www.nodoubt.com/band/ to http://www.nodoubt.com/band/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070701163046/http://www.riaa.com:80/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblDiamond to http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblDiamond
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090223124634/http://www.nodoubt.com/band/ to http://www.nodoubt.com/band/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:17, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on No Doubt. 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/20120512142437/http://www.mtv.com/music/artist/no_doubt/artist.jhtml to http://www.mtv.com/music/artist/no_doubt/artist.jhtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ew.com/ew/report/0%2C6115%2C276102_4%7C7534%7C%7C0_0_%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070701163046/http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblDiamond to http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblDiamond
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C987345-2%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120306012807/http://tv.yahoo.com/dawsons-creek/show/spiderwebs/episode/10146 to https://tv.yahoo.com/dawsons-creek/show/spiderwebs/episode/10146
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061113042726/http://www.universalmusicgroup.com/News.aspx?NewsId=327 to http://www.universalmusicgroup.com/News.aspx?NewsId=327
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/%3Bkw%3D%5B13193%2C150933%5D
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714190757/http://www.nodoubt.com/news/default.aspx?nid=20605 to http://nodoubt.com/news/default.aspx?nid=20605
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) 21:48, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Gabrial McNair and Stephen Bradley are the only members listed as Touring/Session. However, I believe many of the proclaimed Former Members should be listed as Touring/Session as well.
My main source for this are No Doubt's first three albums. In all three albums, it is clearly stated that the official band members are Gwen Stefani, Eric Stefani, Adrian Young, Tony Kanal, and Tom Dumont (and the pictures only shows those five members). As such, I believe that the other members from those time periods should be listed as Touring/Session (Gerald Boisse, Eric Carpenter, Alex Henderson, Phil Jordan, Don Hammerstedt, and Paul Caseley).
However, things get a bit blurry for the founding members. In my opinion, the following individuals should be kept as Former Members and not Touring/Session because they were all a part of the first lineup, albeit prior to the studio albums' recordings (which clarified who the official members were): John Spence, Jerry McMahon, Chris Leal, Chris Webb, Alan Meade, Gabriel Gonzalez, and Tony Meade.
Does anyone else agree with these assessments? Xanarki (talk) 22:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many former members, anyone else agree?