Template talk:Green Day
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] I fought the law - it is a single
I Fought the Law is a cover, but it was also released as an iTunes single http://ax.phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/browserRedirect?url=itms%253A%252F%252Fax.phobos.apple.com.edgesuite.net%252FWebObjects%252FMZStore.woa%252Fwa%252FviewAlbum%253FplaylistId%253D5305681%2526selectedItemId%253D5305679 http://top40-charts.com/song.php?sid=9337&sort=chartid I think this is good enough to qualify putting it in the "singles" section. anyone else?? Aeris gd 07:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC) Oct 5, 2006
[edit] Famous songs again?
Is there a point in making separate sections for Singles and Famous Songs? I think not! Andrew Eng 11:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Famous songs
Should Jesus of Suburbia be included in the "Famous songs" section? I'm adding it, but should it be there?Trogdor077 01:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)Trogdor077
- Naw, its not big enough, not like basket case for instance. Why was this template made smaller?? --
Mac Davis] ⌇☢ ญƛ. 08:31, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
What exactly is the criteria for a famous song? Jtrost (T | C | #) 21:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
- Either being a huge hit or being a single. Which is why Jesus of Suburbia should be there. --PokeOnic (Talk) 21:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Shouldn't it just be called "Singles"? WesleyDodds 03:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- Do note that the Famous songs list isn't meant to contain all their singles, only some of their more well-known songs. Jesus of Suburbia has been removed as it wasn't a huge hit. Andrew Eng 17:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- What I meant was that any selection of "Famous songs" is kind of arbitrary, as others have stated. "Singles", however, can be conclusively listed. WesleyDodds 03:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Do note that the Famous songs list isn't meant to contain all their singles, only some of their more well-known songs. Jesus of Suburbia has been removed as it wasn't a huge hit. Andrew Eng 17:01, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
- Shouldn't it just be called "Singles"? WesleyDodds 03:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Colors
There's been a lot of color changes around in this template. Can someone give a good reason why there is so much ado about the colors of this particular template? Circeus 23:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- Every once in a while people change it to look more like a Green Day thing. Then someone else reverts i back. I dunno why people like the light blue one so much, but whatever. --PokeOnic (Talk) 22:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
- I dunno why people like the light blue one so much
- Maybe because all other band templates use that color scheme? I'm not sure whether a specific project has established it, but so far nobody has protested it (except in the case of this particular template, for some reason.) Circeus 01:05, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- I had it a nice green for a few hours, because red and black looked horrible. All band templates look like this, and I agree now. — [Mac Davis] (talk) (Desk|Help me improve)
- There is no reason for all band templates to have the same colour. They are not connected with each other in any way other than the fact that they are related to bands. They are not like music infoboxes which base colours on what type of release it is - they are individual entities that should be free to use whatever colours best suit the article in question. There is no point in over-standardisation for the sake of it - it does not benefit Wikipedia. However, individualising templates makes them more relevant to their topic area and will therefore be more apporopriate that a one-size-fits-all system where everything looks the same. DJR (T) (WC) 11:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- I should add, in reference to edits made of this page, that by "colour scheme", I do not include multi-coloured links. That is probably going too far, bearing in mind that the purpose of the template is to aid navigation and some of the colours are pretty much illegible. By "colour scheme", I mean background colours and headings (per {{Arctic Monkeys}}. DJR (T) (WC) 12:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
- I had it a nice green for a few hours, because red and black looked horrible. All band templates look like this, and I agree now. — [Mac Davis] (talk) (Desk|Help me improve)
[edit] Jason White and Jason Freese are not in Green Day
They are just session musicians who play with them sometimes. St jimmy 11:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Hence why they are on the second row and smaller. It,spretty standard in these templates. Circeus 21:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
OK St jimmy 10:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Well...
I did a famous songs section, but it is songs that are famous to fans, not any old Joe Schmoe. Like St. Jimmy, for instance, or Dominated Love Slave, they are popular among fans but may not be well known among others. I guess it is free for constructive criticism. Notice not all singles are there.
Therealmikelvee 16:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- This isn't the best way to use the template. There should be a category anyway listing all Green Day songs; we should only list the singles on the template. In addition, it should conform to the standard band template look, so all those colors should go. WesleyDodds 21:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Other
I added an 'other' section which has The Network, Cigarettes and Valentines and American Idiot: The Motion Picture on it. Thee things tie in with green day, but couldn't be placed anywhere else on the template. Scrumshus 20:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Singles
She, J.A.R., Walking Contracdidction, Macy's Day Parade, and Maria are not Green Day singles. They have no Billboard status chronology, but although msuic videos were made for some of them, they were never official singles. Removed.
She, Walking Contradiction, and Macy's Day Parade ARE singles. Please refer to their articles. Orfen 01:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Source?
J.A.R. is a single. It actually reached number one on Billboard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_(1995_film)#Soundtrack
[edit] Color Suggestion
Can we all agree on these colors (or some varitation of them)?
It's sort of American Idiot-ish but still calls back to the Kerplunk, Dookie and nimrod days. Much better than the current "standard" of light blue and light grey. scrumshus Talk to me
- I think it says older Green Day more than American Idiot. But I actually like it because it is actually different than all the other band templates. Orfen User Talk 20:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
What happened to ALL of the band templates as uniform? That was the idea. — [Mac Davis] (talk) (Desk|Help me improve)
- I don't understand. What's wrong with this template? scrumshus Talk to me
-
-
- Me too. scrumshus Talk to me
-
- The green backround is very bright and it's hard to read the text upon it (this is made worse by the fact that one line is white text and one is black). I think customized colours are a good idea in general, but you have to be careful you keep the template readable. It is, after all, meant to enhance the main article, not distract attention away from it.
plattopustalk 14:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] pop rocks and coke?
Mr. Mac Davis, why did you delete J.A.R. and I fought the law and put on Poprocks and Coke under the singles section? Just because Poprocks has a music video on the DVD doesn't make it a single. Anybody else can confirm? Aeris gd 19:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if it was released as a single, but it was proved above that J.A.R. is a single. Hello2112 23:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- Unlike "J.A.R.", "Poprocks and Coke" wasn't released to raio as a single and didn't chart. In fact, if I remember correctly "Maria" was released to radio to promote the comp. So it doesn't belong. WesleyDodds 02:22, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Foot In Mouth EP
Which category should it be put in: EPs or Compilations/Live? Hello2112 23:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The EP section
Whoever it is, stop adding the three other EPs. They are SINGLES. And leave the American Idiot EP there. This is seriously getting irritating, and I consider it vandalism. Hello2112 23:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
