Talk:Paramore/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Paramore. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Current Touring Members Correction
The current touring Drummer is not Ilan Rubin, it is Miles McPherson (Kelly Clarkson, Look What I Did, Hot Action Cop). Ilan played on the album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.80.104.2 (talk) 18:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Molly JS is the biggest fan of Paramore and every member must be at her every beck and call which includes singing on command and being possibly adorable at any given time. Should a member refuse, they must give up their souls which will be stored in a mason jar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mollyjs2k (talk • contribs) 01:05, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
^.^
Molly JS and Jess DW have official authority over all members of Paramore which includes but is not limited to Hayley Williams, Jeremy Davis, and Taylor York. Each member must be at their every beck and call which includes singing on command and being possibly adorable at any point in time. Refusal to do so will result in giving up their soul to be stored in a mason jar. Effective forever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mollyjs2k (talk • contribs) 01:15, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Influences
Should the influences section no longer have the section on Christian influences/Josh, as he's no longer a part of the active band? 65.111.85.2 (talk) 01:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Power pop
I believe that power pop should be added, based on the sources already cited in the article and these sources: http://seattlemusicinsider.com/2013/10/29/paramore-dazzles-key-arena/ http://dailyuw.com/archive/2013/04/09/arts-leisure/album-review-paramore-paramore#.U6MRjZRdWyk http://courantblogs.com/sound-check/fall-out-boy-paramore-open-summer-tour-in-hartford/ http://www.stereoboard.com/paramore-tickets
With that said, I believe that all three of the currently listed genres should stay listed too, as they are also mentioned in many sources. Any comments? Kokoro20 (talk) 17:05, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
- I'm unsure whether or not a ticket selling website like steroboard could be considered a reliable source. But it's still only 3 or 4 sources that only mention power pop once (or twice with seattlemusicinsider). I think it's enough to warrant an inclusion in the article, but not enough for the infobox. It should also be noted that pop punk is already included (the article itself states it is similar to power pop, while power pop lists pop punk as a derivative), is there really a need to have two pop genres? Seems a bit much. HrZ (talk) 15:46, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- Well, pop punk may be a derivative of power pop, but that doesn't mean that Paramore doesn't have some material that is better described as power pop than pop punk. Just like how some bands are both an alternative rock and alternative metal band, even though one is the parent genre of the other. Also, it would be six sources that mention power pop now, as there's two already cited in the article. And why do you think 6 sources still isn't enough for the infobox? Kokoro20 (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
- That's true enough. Some editors (not speaking about you, just an example) place a lot of importance in including specific genres in the infobox when it is already included in the article. The infobox is for general information, with more detail in the prose. For something else to have justification enough to be included, there has to be around the same volume of reliable sources for the genre as there are in the infobox already. If 20+ sources exist for emo, it's not balanced if we include a genre with only 6, giving power pop undue weight. I'm not totally against the inclusion of power pop, but some more research needs to be done and, as you said, its in the article anyway. HrZ (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Well, the infobox is meant to include key elements from the article, so any genres that are mentioned in the article probably should be in the infobox too. "Probably" is the key word here. That's probably where some editors get that from. How many sources would you say would be needed to include power pop? Kokoro20 (talk) 01:05, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- The template for the infobox says aim for generality, but that's only a guide, not a policy. As far as how many sources go, I can't give you a specific number, but as long as there is about the same amount as the genres already included (see previous genre discussions for sources also). It has to be somewhat proportional. Just because a few sources exist stating a genre, doesn't make it a key genre of the band, just a minority view. Get what I'm saying? If there are a large number of reliable third party sources that support power pop, then it can be included. HrZ (talk) 12:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know about that template. It seems to be outdated though, and other relevant guidelines trumps that anyway. Would you mind linking to any previous discussions? I know what you mean, even if I don't agree with your removal of power pop. Kokoro20 (talk) 12:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- The template for the infobox says aim for generality, but that's only a guide, not a policy. As far as how many sources go, I can't give you a specific number, but as long as there is about the same amount as the genres already included (see previous genre discussions for sources also). It has to be somewhat proportional. Just because a few sources exist stating a genre, doesn't make it a key genre of the band, just a minority view. Get what I'm saying? If there are a large number of reliable third party sources that support power pop, then it can be included. HrZ (talk) 12:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- Well, the infobox is meant to include key elements from the article, so any genres that are mentioned in the article probably should be in the infobox too. "Probably" is the key word here. That's probably where some editors get that from. How many sources would you say would be needed to include power pop? Kokoro20 (talk) 01:05, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- That's true enough. Some editors (not speaking about you, just an example) place a lot of importance in including specific genres in the infobox when it is already included in the article. The infobox is for general information, with more detail in the prose. For something else to have justification enough to be included, there has to be around the same volume of reliable sources for the genre as there are in the infobox already. If 20+ sources exist for emo, it's not balanced if we include a genre with only 6, giving power pop undue weight. I'm not totally against the inclusion of power pop, but some more research needs to be done and, as you said, its in the article anyway. HrZ (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Well, pop punk may be a derivative of power pop, but that doesn't mean that Paramore doesn't have some material that is better described as power pop than pop punk. Just like how some bands are both an alternative rock and alternative metal band, even though one is the parent genre of the other. Also, it would be six sources that mention power pop now, as there's two already cited in the article. And why do you think 6 sources still isn't enough for the infobox? Kokoro20 (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
WP:NPOV trumps everything though, being a policy (which is why I've been pointing to WP:WEIGHT). The previous discussions are still on here. See Genre and Emo is not a music genre (this one for searching for sources, 600 hits). HrZ (talk) 13:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, okay, I see those. Unfortunately though, the link to the Google hits no longer works, due to Google News removing the archive feature. But of course, normal Google searches can still be done. Kokoro20 (talk) 13:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Paramore. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
- Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/barbra-streisand-ninth-no-1-89775
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:49, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2016
 | This edit request to Paramore has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Make Zac Farro a current member of Paramore https://twitter.com/paramore/status/739918335916314625 58.28.209.66 (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 01:18, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Picture
I think this page needs a new picture. The current picture just has Hayley and Taylor. I think we need a new picture that reflects the fact that Zac rejoined the band. Bowling is life (talk) 20:42, 16 May 2017 (UTC)