Talk:The Replacements
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Where's the NPOV
As a big Replacements fan I was glad to see a Wikipedia article on the band. But much of the article lacks a NPOV. Take the line "The band's first LP, 1981s Sorry Ma Forgot to Take Out the Trash, defined the band's sound and ethos." Who says? The line as written would be fine for a web site of rock criticism given it's very subjective nature but not for an encyclopedia. Maybe if Paul Westerberg said it I'd feel better about the line but it would still have to be written thus- "In an interview in__________, on ___________, Paul Westerberg said that the band's first LP, 1981s Sorry Ma Forgot to Take Out the Trash, defined the band's sound and ethos." By the way, I doubt the first album defined the Replacements sound given it's Minor Threat-like hardcore nature. It's more likely that the band's sound was defined by their 1983 release, Hootenanny.
The same with the line, "Too sloppy and unprofessional to be heavy metal, yet too bar-band sounding to be punk rock, the band never fit in from the beginning." Did they want to be heavy metal? Did they say that? Were they trying to be? And I have never heard them described as "too much of a bar band to be punk". If anything in the days when the band were on Twin Tone I heard them constantly described as punk. So where does this line come from? The writer of the article's own opinion? Sources need to be cited.
And this, "Of all the bands from the '80s, the Replacements were perhaps the most overlooked, the most deserving of widespread, popular appeal. And the fact that they never got it just made them all that much better." Completely not NPOV. - Buster 15:55, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mention in Wall Street Journal
This article is mentioned at the end of this Wall Street Journal article: "Check out Wikipedia's entries on deconstructionism, the history of records, or the Replacements, then consider that those entries and some 868,000 others are the work of volunteers. I find that impressive -- revolutionary, even."
wow, thats an amazing article... !!! Xsxex 23:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Is It Time For A Rewrite?
I'm with Buster. While I agree with a lot of the subjective material in this article, I think the entire thing could do with a wave of the NPOV wand.
Also I think the writing slips into humor a few times ("looser (not loser)", "instead play covers, which they were also too drunk to play"). It's nice to hear the stories, but it feels out of place on wikipedia.
There are also a couple of places that could use fleshing out or correcting. By most accounts, Bob was fired; the article makes it sound like he walked. Also I think the story of the "diastrous opening tour" needs fleshing out. Maybe explain their hostility towards an indifferent crowd. For the singles, there are numbers next to some indicating their chart position, but which chart?
It might be nice to add more structure to the article. Start off with a paragraph saying who they were and their general sound and reputation. Go with a chronological discussion of albums without veering off on tangents too much -- just sound, notable songs, critical/fan reaction, impact on band. Maybe divide this by the Twin/Tone Years and Sire Years. It would be nice if the chronology could impart the sense that they always flirted with success, but were undermined by their self-destructive tendencies. Add a separate section for post-Mats projects. Add a section on people they've influenced.
This article is in need of a rewrite. I'm a huge HUGE fan, but this article needs some serious work, NPOV and otherwise. Help me or I will get to it eventually. Ee60640 12:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] About that picture...
The picture of the band, which the caption says was taken in 1985, is actually a Twin/Tone promotional affair that dates back to about 1981.
[edit] Discography page
I removed the discography, with the exclusion of studio albums, and put it on a new discography page. Bsd987 22:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I also made a category for The Replacements, so if you see anything connected to The Replacements directly not in a category, please add it. I've checked for songs, finding a page for Kiss Me on the Bus, which is only a stub and I put that to the songs subcategory, and I made a page for I'll Be You. Let's get pages for all the singles, or at least all the singles that charted. Bsd987 23:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] pop punk early in career
The New York Times has refers to the early years of The Replacements as pop punk. I am using this as support to add this band to the "pop punk groups" category. Here is a link to the article: [1], here's a direct quote from the first 2 sentence, "The Replacements entered the 1980's ripping and roaring, becoming the smartest, brashest, loudest pop-punk band ever to perform songs by Kiss, Cher and Black Sabbath. They left the decade with thinking caps on, recording contemplative, more classic-sounding rock, pop and roots music before breaking up in 1990, too soon to cash in on the alternative-rock explosion they helped create." Xsxex 23:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bob Stinson
Didn't Bob Stinson use to wear a dress onstage from time to time? (unfortunately, I never saw them live even though I lived in the Twin Cities.) Seems like an interesting factoid to work into the article. I know some articles were written after Bob died, about him and the Replacements that could be linked to. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 166.34.148.192 (talk) 15:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC).
