Talk:Matchbox Twenty

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Alternative music Portal This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project's importance scale.

This band is not an alternative rock band. Alternative rock is a form of rock that is an alternative to what is mainstream. Matchbox 20 is as mainstream as a band can get.

Contents 1 changed "alternative rock" to "modern rock" 2 Name 3 Fourth album 4 Live Album 5 Back to 'Alternative Rock' 6 Discography 7 This article is a stub 8 Wrongtitle tag & lowercase/uppercase 9 Requested move 9.1 Survey 9.1.1 Survey - in support of the move 9.1.2 Survey - in opposition to the move 9.2 Discussion 10 Why did the move happen?

[edit] changed "alternative rock" to "modern rock"

I agree with the first comment. Matchbox 20 is most definitely not an alternative rock band, I changed the link to modern rock, the two are sometimes interchangable but modern rock is more accurate.

maxcap 11:57, 1 October 2005 (UTC) Reverted alt rock to modern rock. As the definition is presented in Wikipedia, Matchbox Twenty fits the bill nicely. Alt rock, not so much. It might be considered lazy to reference Wikipedia, so you can refer to this SPIN magazine article [[1]] from 1998. Matchbox Twenty certainly hasn't become less mainstream since then. They were certainly marketed as an alternative band initially, but just about any [[2]] act with a guitar was marketed as such in the mid 90's.

[edit] Name

Something many visitors would be interested in is the origin of the group's name. Can someone add that?

--AlanH 02:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

I heard that they are called that because a standard box of matches has 20 matchsticks in it, but I don't have a source for that. Can someone confirm this?

Tosus 09:07, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I have heard many rumors about how they got their name. The most interesting one is that they use to play under the name Jeep... however due to trademark reasons they had to change their name. So they picked matchbox twenty, being that the number twenty car in the matchbox collection is a Jeep.... any truth to it? Not sure I am not in the band... but it is an interesting thought...

[edit] Fourth album

Someone added that the band will be reuniting in 2006 for a fourth album. I can't find any information about this anywhere else except sites that copy Wikipedia. Please add a reference to this information. ~ Hibana 18:52, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

While there was no definitive discussion of a fourth album, Rob Thomas did express that he would like to continue matchbox twenty in an audio interview through iTunes (Matchbox Twenty isn't Finished). Enderu 02:03, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Live Album

I've seen various places that there is an album of a live concert in Sydney. One track from this concert can be found on the data content on Mad Season. Is this an official release? If so, it should be added to the discography I think. Tosus 09:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Back to 'Alternative Rock'

Things like Unwell are most certainly not grunge. MT is post-grunge-ish, but not 'modern rock'. 'Modern rock' is a radio format, not genre. --69.145.122.209 02:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll concede the modern rock isn't a genre, that was a stretch on my part. But Matchbox20 is hardly alternative rock. They are absolutely as mainstream, top40, Adult-oriented rock as you can get. When they were signed the record industry was pushing nearly everything that had a guitar as an"alternative" band even Bon Jovi. maxcap 23:29, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

But how would you label Unwell? Not adult-orinented as some things. Besides, their albums are listed as Alternative Rock. Shall we compromise?--69.145.123.171 23:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, AOR is a readio format as well. --69.145.123.171 23:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know it's a radio format. I'm trying to make a point, get it? maxcap 23:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

My sarcasm/irony/journalitic term sensor is down. --69.145.123.171 00:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discography

Is the discography correct?

http://www.rockonthenet.com/artists-m/matchbox20.htm

Has something different on it, and All I need was released as a single (in Australia at least).

[edit] This article is a stub

I'm going to replace the stub on this article. The article in many parts doesn't cite it's facts, is poorly written and lacks overall content and information. A stub doesn't simply apply for short articles, but also for articles that are either poorly written or don't comply to Wikipedia standards.

Lincalinca 07:09, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

So why not use the "cleanup" template?

--AlanH 09:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Much as I'd like to agree that the article needs a cleanup, I don't think it is even at a standard I'd say it needs a cleanup. It needs an exorcism right now. But yeah, good point, I guess maybe we should throw that on there.

--Lincalinca 12:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrongtitle tag & lowercase/uppercase

Why does this article have a wrongtitle tag on it, saying that the article's title should be "Matchbox 20", and then the article text starts out by saying that the band's proper name is "Matchbox Twenty"? I believe there is no technical limitation to naming the article "Matchbox 20" if that's the proper name, but the article indicates it isn't, so should the wrongtitle tag be removed? - Brian Kendig 03:16, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

I've never seen it spelled as matchbox twenty. I've only seen Matchbox Twenty and Matchbox 20. I agree, the technical limitation tag should be removed. Ryan 14:08, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

The band's web site uses the name "matchbox twenty" in lower case, so I'm guessing that's the proper way to spell the band's name now. Which raises another question: since the first letter of the article name has to be capitalized, shouldn't it be Matchbox twenty, instead of Matchbox Twenty? If the band's name is supposed to be all lower case, then what's the point of capitalizing Twenty, other than that it "looks better" that way? - Brian Kendig 14:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely, the band's name is matchbox twenty (look at their 2nd or 3rd album's cover). Brian, you do raise an interesting point about capitalizing "Twenty"; however, I think that having it "look better" is a pretty good reason, don't you? --Matt Yeager 04:46, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Looking at a band's album covers to determine the capitalization of its name is a pointless exercise: graphic designers might decide to render a name entirely in lower case, entirely in upper case, or an unconventional mixture, merely to achieve a certain look. If there's a source in which a legitimate band representative says, oh yes definitely it should always appear always lower case, cite it. Otherwise, the name should be capitalized in the standard format. (My typing these four sentences is ten times as much time as anyone should spend thinking about Matchbox Twenty.) 2fs 04:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

There are many references to the band's name changing from Matchbox 20 to matchbox twenty, including this article [3] and how Metacritic spells it [4]. Purifiedwater 03:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I moved this discussion from the top of the talk page to here. Purifiedwater 03:26, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Although there are many incarnations of their spelling the band name with all lowercase letters, I don't believe this applies here. There are many references to the band as Matchbox Twenty, possibly to equal measure as matchbox twenty or Matchbox 20. If case laws applied in every case, artists who capitalise all of the letters in their name on their album covers would have to be reflected in this way. I'm for removing it. For all we known, the band's next album (if and when it ever comes out) will have the name with capitals.

--lincalinca 11:10, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the idea that album covers aren't the best source for determining this. But the band made a big deal about its big name change back when it happened, and a lot of people have commented specifically on this -- usually out of annoyance with Rob Thomas's grammar-bending. :-) Here's a few cases where the lowercase spelling is specifically mentioned:

[5], [6], [7] ("Fifty Worst Band Names" - scroll down to #28), [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], and this from CNN.com [13].

I mean, it's not a big deal, and it's not worth an edit war or anything...it's just that Rob Thomas made such a fuss about it, and enough people have in turn fussed back about it that it's worth mentioning. :-)

Purifiedwater 16:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

The name can be correctly formatted as Matchbox Twenty, Matchbox twenty, or matchbox twenty. Refer to the Atlantic Records websites and related press releases: [14] [15] Adraeus 06:22, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

The official name is matchbox twenty. However, I don't have the official source for it, so I'm going to keep looking, then change it. --NukeMTV 15:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

The official name may be typeset as "matchbox twenty", but when it comes to capitalization, we follow our style guide, and not the quirks of individual bands. Note that KISS (band) and P!nk are redirects to titles that are formatted as standard English. I've moved this article from Matchbox twenty to Matchbox Twenty accordingly. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, unless things have changed recently, we tend to put articles ... at the name of what the article describes. Their name is "matchbox twenty". Therefore, the article is at "matchbox twenty". Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 06:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Um... speaking as someone who's closed about a thousand move requests in the last six months, I can say with a high degree on confidence that we "tend to put articles" at names that are formatted according to the standard rules of English. If you like, I can provide a list of twenty examples of articles that have moved from sylized capitalizations/typographies to standard ones while I've been watching WP:RM - early on, I was corrected for doing otherwise. Since you reverted my move, I guess I'll open a move request and go through the full procedure. -GTBacchus^(talk) 08:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

The reasoning for the move is based on the Manual of Style and several precedents, if you disagree with these guidelines, feel free to discuss them on their respective talk pages. - Cyrus XIII 06:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Cite it. Better yet, I'll do it for you. From Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Album titles and band names: "Convention: In band names and titles of songs or albums, unless it is unique, the standard rule in the English language is to capitalize ... ". Note that phrase... "unless it is unique". Which allows for exceptions. Such as one wherein the actual name of the band (or album) is in lowercase. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 07:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

(deindent) Your interpretation of the "unless it is unique" bit has a central flaw: If it would apply to all cases of non-standard capitalization of album titles or band names, the rest of the paragraph it is from would be entirely without purpose. That is probably why WP:ALBUMS did not adopt this clause in the first place and there is still WP:MOS-TM, which clearly states that all-lowercase trademarks should be capitalized.

Also note that I do not appreciate the attitude you are displaying in this dispute, like stepping over good faith edits of two fellow editors without seeking a productive discussion first, your confrontational tone here and [removed, due to a misunderstanding]. - Cyrus XIII 07:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

First off, while MOS (tm) isn't a bad place to start looking for ideas, it's just a guideline, not policy. If we look at another, more specific quideline (one that I found useful), Wikipedia:Naming conflict#Proper nouns, "If neither the common name nor the official name is prevalent, use the name (or a translation thereof) that the subject uses to describe itself or themselves" (emphasis mine). Later in that same page, it mentions that "We cannot declare what a name should be, only what it is" (emphasis theirs). Now, Wikipedia:Naming conventions is policy, so that's something we have to go by. I suppose I should have copied the entire paragraph... the article is simply saying which words to capitalize (you know, like how you're never supposed to capitalize "in", and you're always supposed to capitalize "It" in titles), and saying "unless it's one of these words, or it's a unique title, capitalize all the words." Finally, Cyrus, I apologize for miscommunicating myself and have replied on your talk page. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 20:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

[edit] Why did the move happen?

Not to stir up more trouble if consensus has already been reached, but why did the move from matchbox twenty to Matchbox Twenty happen? There's clear precedent for humoring musicians when they officially render their name in odd ways, such as blink-182, mewithoutYou, k.d. lang, and of Montreal. (And I do believe that Matt Yeager's interpretation of "unless it is unique" is correct -- if this case doesn't qualify, then what would?) And as per Matt Yeager's other points, again, policy and precedent support putting/keeping the page at matchbox twenty, even if guidelines throw some doubt on it. Purifiedwater 18:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Haha, I see that there's a naming dispute on blink-182 also. I still stand by my point, though. Purifiedwater 18:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

There's also discussion at WT:MOSTM, which seems to be the most relevant guideline in such cases. The consensus I've observed is for following individuals, such as k.d. lang and bell hooks, in their capitalization eccentricities, but not humoring trademark holders in the same way, thus Time (magazine) (not TIME), WWE Raw (not WWE RAW), and TNA Impact!, not TNA iMPACT!. All of these conventions are controversial, but what I'm describing is what seems to me the most stable rule with the most support from experienced Wikipedians. I hadn't seen the mewithoutYou and of Montreal examples before - if brought in to WP:RM, I suspect those would be moved, based on how the wind's been blowing recently. -GTBacchus^(talk) 19:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I think more importantly (and directly to this article's value), the band doesn't exclusively use the complete lower case variation. In many situations, the band's name is printed with "title case" (I.e. all words have the leading letter as a capital). In fact, my tickets from when I saw them had title case (those were printed by Ticketek and MB20 were brought to Australia by Michael something, a local presenter, who printed k.d. lang all in lower case, so this is my basis for believing the band doesn't have their own preference for the appearance of the name, meaning that a standard naming (or case) convention would take place. That's how I see it, anyway.

--linca^linca 12:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)