Jump to content

Talk:Take That

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Images

[edit]

Why are the album cover images constantly deleted? The Backstreet Boys page has many album images that stay. Can someone clarify why the TT keep being taken off? How are they breaking copyright laws if other pages can feature them?

Surely we can find a better main image? A clearer one that shows them better and larger. Again, any better ones keep getting deleted. Confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlebrowninkpot (talk • contribs) 09:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

maybe because they weren't copyrighted/ I quite like the current pic, sadly I don't have that many up close ones off all of them, though I have a few of Never Forget(and the one on Jason's page is also mine)

Musical

[edit]

I might have missed it, but is there any mention in the article of the jukebox musical that will be made based on their music? -- Annie D 06:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added reference to the musical. Light Defender (talk) 08:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The musical is unofficial, so only warrants ONE mention in the 'Other Media' section - not a link at the TOP of the Take That page, a separate weblink, an image AND a paragraph about it along with the 'other media' point. This is blatant advertising, not information and you Light Defender need to stop vandalising this page. The band have clarified that they don't support the musical nor have any connection to it other than their songs being featured in in. EITHER WAY the information about the musical can go on it's OWN page (which it has one already filled by you), not the Take That page. There is FAR more relevant information about the actual article - TAKE THAT - that isn't on the page as it is. Please keep the topic relevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thatter (talk • contribs) 12:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The musical is not unofficial? Whether Take That are 'officially backing the musical or not does not change the point that it is a 'Take That' Musical. It is referred to in the press as the 'Take That' Musical and it is based solely on the music of 'Take That' . The music has very officially been licensed by 'Take That'. It would be strange if there wasn't a link to the musical page from here. (As the user above pointed out in June last year) Light Defender (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to butt into this discussion, but the more interesting question for THIS article is, what effect has the musical had on the band, if any? Did the creation of, publicity for, and tour of the musical actually help the band popularise its comeback? I have no idea if this is relevant, I'm just asking - if it is so, then something else ought to be said in the article. If not, then I agree that the material that is now shown under other media is probably good enough for now. After the musical opens on the West End, if it becomes a really big hit, then perhaps a little more about it will be of interest in this article. Best regards, everyone, and try to be calm. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies

[edit]

There is no mention of Gary Barlow's brief acting career He appeared in the TV show "Heartbeat" (1 episode, 2000)in the episode "The Son-In-Law" (2000) as character "Micky Shannon" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.192.22.33 (talk) 11:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC) source: imdb.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.192.22.33 (talk) 11:46, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this could go on Garys page, if it's not already there?

Also, the biography for Robbie Williams has a link to his personal Wiki-page, none of the others have the internal link.

I don't know why someone added the link to his page. There was a mini biography under Robs heading like the other four. Hopefully someone will rewrite it.

No joke

[edit]

I honestly thought they were a christian rock band. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.63.78.95 (talk) 00:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've obviously never seen the Do what you like video nor the original Give Good Feeling ;)

Page protection

[edit]

The following edit is the matter of an edit war:

Barlow is unconnected to the musical and commented that it has “the smell of the end of the pier” about it. (Reference: http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article1907803.ece We can relight our own fire, thank you])

Please reach a consensus on whether to include or exclude this statement at Talk:Never_Forget_(Musical)#Edit_dispute so that this article can be unprotected. Thank you. --  Netsnipe   ►  11:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A compromise statement can set forth the facts that the musical uses songs composed by Barlow in the 1990s and that in 2006 Barlow and EMI licensed the songs for use in the show. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

{{for|the musical based on Take That songs of the 1990s|Never Forget (Musical)}}

I've removed the above disambiguation link for Never Forget, the Take That musical. According to Wikipedia guidelines disambiguation "is the process of resolving conflicts in article titles that occur when a single term can be associated with more than one topic, making that term likely to be the natural choice of title for more than one article."

As it's incredibly unlikely that users would type "Take That" into the search box and expect to arrive at the page to an article practically (it seems) unconnected with the band, and as the titles are not even close in being similar, this usage of disambiguation links is incorrect in my view.

Howie ☎ 20:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Totally correct. This was advertising by someone involved in the show and needs to have an eye kept on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlebrowninkpot (talk • contribs) 00:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Street Beat/Cutest Rush

[edit]

Can people please stop mentioning Street Beat and Cutest Rush? As revealed many times now this was a false story created by NMS and the members didn't know each other before the audition. Thanks! OrangeTigger73 (talk) 00:36, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

in other media info

[edit]

why was the in other media info shortened? I added Shameless and someone else added The Office prior to that... both(and others) gone nowOrangeTigger73 (talk) 00:48, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of why Robbie Williams left Take That

[edit]

This is a pretty important event, because it was why the band disbanded in the first place. However in the article the explanation doesn't go beyond after Williams left the band. Someone should fix this up --Hamster X 04:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. We need to focus on the circumstances in which Williams left the group; specifically his drug and alcohol abuse, friction with the other members, etc. As well as his conflict of ideas with Barlow over the group's material, Williams' problems with Nigel Martin-Smith should be covered (being sued by NMS for owed commission in 1996) --User: Cluebert 04:17, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

list of songs + history of the band (managers, etc)

[edit]

There's no mention of their full list of songs produced so far. Would also be nice to have a bit on the various managers and other people involved in Take That's success, etc. --Rebroad (talk) 13:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

request to semi-protect page

[edit]

There have been no announcements made regarding the return of Robbie Williams to the band yet people persist in editing him back into the band here. It should be protected to prevent such vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.154.23 (talk) 17:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2010 update

[edit]

Mentioning of their participation of the charity single "Everybody Hurts" for Haiti earthquake.--Cooly123 01:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)


Free image

[edit]

Whilst the free image isn't great, our image policy states that it must be used instead of a non-free image. BUT, there must be a better free image out there. Thousands of people must have taken photos at their recent shows, and I'm pretty sure one of them would like their photo at the top of the Wikipedia article. I'll try to scour some forums. Someone might also like to try Flickr to see if there's a suitable CC-licensed image there. Black Kite (t) (c) 10:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Is there any way we can get a free licensed picture of Take That, all we seem to be getting at the moment are copyright infringements and fan photos that arent good enough mainly because they dont show the whole group in focus...Yids2010 (talk) 00:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Daily fan blog?

[edit]

This article looks more like a daily fan blog than an encyclopedia article. --80.135.246.16 (talk) 14:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Record Label Problem

[edit]

I corrected many pages noting the Sony/BMG issues, BMG and Sony were separate major record labels when Take That was signed to BMG, so they never were with Sony, I corrected the 1st page and debut album to BMG, Sony has BMG now, but at that time, it was not the case. Xilefeniotan (talk) 01:10, 19 febuary 2011 (EST)

File:Take That pop art.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Take That pop art.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:13, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie spotted outside Denmark hotel?

[edit]

Where is the reference for Robbie having been spotted outside his hotel in Denmark looking fine when he had food poisoning? I have looked this up on Google and can find no mention of it anywhere. Is there any evidence to back this up?

Robbie's apparent departure

[edit]

Although the tabloids are stating he has left Take That, the official statement of the band states clearly that the five piece of Take That are on a break here. They have not left each other's company, Robbie is releasing a solo album whilst Take That have their annual year off after their tour. Until the band state otherwise officially through their website or appropriate channels, Robbie is still part of Take That. Tabloid rumour mill is not good enough, we need an official statement before changing anything. Virus101 (talk) 10:33, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a "tabloid rumour" if Gary Barlow has actually stated to the press that Robbie Williams has left Take That. I agree that we need to look into finding more supportive evidence that Barlow has made such a statement, but as it currently stands it's more than just a rumour from the mill, it's a statement from a member. Burbridge92 (talk) 15:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it was also announced that Gary Barlow's words were taken out of context. Take That management has today come out and rubbished these rumours here and here. It also says here at the bottom of the article that once Robbie Williams completes his solo album he will return to Take That. Virus101 (talk) 18:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They must have changed his wording a lot to get that out-of-context. None-the-less, we have the evidence we need. Regards, Burbridge92 (talk) 19:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've just reviewed those articles you posted links for, definitely a blatant change of wording there. Burbridge92 (talk) 19:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it appears that Rob won't ever be announced as leaving Take That, he'll just release a solo album during the year that Take That take off and always remain part of the group. Virus101 (talk) 19:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice for them if that was the case, but we can never say never I suppose. In any case, it appears the lineup will be stable for the forseeable future at least. Burbridge92 (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Williams only rejoined Take That for one year. The official press statement made in 2010 stated this quite clearly. Now that year is up, he's left again. It was only a temporary arrangement, and that was made clear all along. The press statements made in Oct 2011 are refuting rumours that THE BAND are splitting up (i.e. the other four members). It does not suggest anything about Robbie Williams, though the statement makes it clear that he is welcome to rejoin the band whenever he wishes though there are no current plans for him to work with the band again. It is quite apparent that Williams has clearly left the band and should be listed as an ex member until an official announcement is made that clearly states he is working with them again. 88.104.31.32 (talk) 03:12, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's been made quite clear on a number of occasions that the band are now officially considered a four-piece. This has been confirmed by Gary Barlow on both The One Show and Alan Carr Chatty Man this week. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.16.11 (talk) 23:01, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. I agree that Robbie is not "officially" part of the band anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faltasian (talk • contribs) 06:23, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no proof that Robbie Williams would be leaving Take That as soon as he rejoined it. As of now, we might as well put him on the current members list until further announcements commence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.22.70.242 (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Complete list of songs?

[edit]

I notice most other artists have a link to a page documenting a complete list of their songs. Is there a reason why Take That do not? I would be happy to work to create one. --Jonie148 (talk) 20:18, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV - fan page?

[edit]

It's mostly stylistic choices, and choices about what is included vs excluded, but it reads so much like a fan page or record company bio. Just because you find a citation saying 'Greatest boyband eva' or whatever, doesn't really mean that it is true, you know what I mean? I've a feeling that you could likely find someone notable effusing praise about any boyband, particularly after they 'breakup'. I say this being aware that the response will be along the lines of "well, if you don't like it, edit it with sources" yada, yada. But I really don't have the interest to do that. I just clicked through on a link that had their 2006 album as 'high selling' and thought to myself "weren't they a nineties band? How are they having success on that scale in 2006?". The article doesn't really answer that except to say 'They are so talented and beautiful and they write such good songs. Everyone thinks they are the greatest band since sliced cheese'.

So, on behalf of those seeking fair and balanced wikipedia articles, please editors, just try a little to make this a little more objective and a little deeper. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.240.207.146 (talk) 02:32, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name of section

[edit]

Just to give everyone a heads up; I have renamed the section "Everything Changes and Superstardom" to "Everything Changes, Nobody Else, and Superstardom" so all the studio albums are clearly visible in the band biography. If anybody disagrees, please discuss it with me before reverting, Thanks --Jonie148 (talk) 08:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Music Industry Trust honours Barlow

[edit]

Okay I can't seem to find anything regarding 45 million in this article. Can you point me to it? Here's the whole article from here http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/music-industry-trust-honours-barlow-7959103.html

Take That star Gary Barlow is to be celebrated with an honorary award from the music business.

The singer-songwriter will be the recipient of the annual Music Industry Trusts Award with a charity dinner to recognise his contribution over the past two decades.

It comes just weeks after Barlow organised a huge concert outside Buckingham Palace for the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, and went on to be given an OBE in the Birthday Honours.

The X Factor judge also co-wrote and co-ordinated the recording of a chart-topping Jubilee song, called Sing.

Barlow follows in the footsteps of last year's MIT Award winner Jools Holland, while previous winners have included Sir Elton John, Sir Tom Jones and Kylie Minogue.

The 21st annual MIT dinner on November 5 will benefit music therapy charity Nordoff Robbins and the Brit Trust.

David Munns, chairman of the award committee, said of Barlow: "He is one of the UK's most accomplished artists - a unique musician, songwriter and producer who embodies both success and distinction, and who serves as a dedicated ambassador for many charities.

"I can't think of another artist who works with both Simon Cowell and Her Majesty The Queen."

Last year's event featured a video message from the Prince Of Wales who praised Holland's work.

--Krystaleen 15:32, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Read it again," they said. A proper reply in this discussion would be nice.--Krystaleen 01:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

4 piece or 5 piece?

[edit]

There seems to be some disputes about this. Is there any reliable source that states whether Robbie has left again?--Krystaleen 02:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'Hiatus as of 2012'

[edit]

People adding 'Hiatus as of 2012' (or similar text) to the years active section, then others removing it again in a seemingly never-ending war is really starting to annoy me. Can we please decide once and for all; Are they on a Hiatus or not, and if so, is this noteworthy enough to put at the top of the article? Rant over. Thank You. --Jonie148 (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No Si Aqui No Hay Amor - Single?

[edit]

It has recently come to my attention that in 1994, in parallel to the release of Love Ain't Here Anymore, Take That released No Si Aqui No Hay Amor in Spain only.

I am aware that Wikipedia does not look too kindly on Country-specific singles, but I am equally certain that if it is not deserving of it's own article, this single should at least merit a mention in the main text of this article and within the singles area of Template:Take That. I would be interested to know what other editors think of this proposal, details of the single release can be found here; [1]. --Jonie148 (talk) 13:43, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Williams

[edit]

I am confused because this page describes Robbie Williams as "originally part of the line up", and is also listed on the list of "former members." That's fine, but the page for Robbie Williams himself reads "He is a member of Take That." Just wondering.

Take That!

[edit]

I have a very vague memory that the band were originally called Take That! (with an exclamation mark). I can't find any evidence for such a claim though. Can anyone else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.244.24 (talk) 22:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Take That. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 16:24, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Take That. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 04:26, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Take That. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 21:05, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Take That. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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 08:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Take That. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:02, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Take That. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:00, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Take That. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie possibly left because........

[edit]

I think that Robbie left because he wanted to be something more than a backing vocal singer. So he became a solo artist. Yes you maybe thinking that I made this up because he came back to help them with the flood album. I think that that is because he thought that by coming back to them he may stay and make more money. But it turns out he was wrong the only solo bit he did in it was parts of 'the flood' and 'S.O.S'. But look how far he has come! Please give feedback on what you think (possotive or Negative) And I will try to answer any questions.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Take That. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Back To The Rudebox

[edit]

To whom it may concern: I have read the discussions and the hidden message regarding Robbie Williams' stint in take that as being an active member or being a former member, that which reads:

-5 November 2012 IS CURRENTLY THE LAST TIME ROBBIE WILLIAMS WAS A MEMBER OF TAKE THAT. THOUGH HE WILL MORE THAN LIKELY REJOIN THE BAND AGAIN IN THE FUTURE, HE IS NOT CURRENTLY INVOLVED WITH TAKE THAT, OTHER THAN FOR OCCASIONAL ONE-OFF PERFORMANCES. HIS LINE ON THIS GRAPH THEREFORE TERMINATES AT THE LAST TIME HE WAS A MEMBER OF THE BAND IN A CONSTRUCTIVE CAPACITY. PLEASE DISCUSS ON THE ARTICLE TALK PAGE BEFORE CHANGING THE DATES RELATED TO WILLIAMS ABOVE.-

So here I go, I did change a couple of things regarding Robbie Williams and Take That.

I believe I must make this very clear first: I did not change Robbie's status back to "Current Members" either on the left of the page, or the "BAND MEMBERS" section. That would start a long and unnecessary discussion between the fandom and the wikipedians alike. I did, however, add an "Inactive" status to his profile. You'll notice a change in the 1.10 part of the "History" section, where I changed the title from "second departure" to "distancing". The graph was also slightly altered. Once again I insist, I did NOT change Robbie's status back to "CURRENT MEMBERS" , instead, decided to create a second colour and a id value box that reads 'Non-active member. Since Robbie has been in and out of Take That, and still considers himself part of the group, plus the rest of the band members always being welcoming with open arms when performing with him anytime (The X Factor 2018 Finals, for example), I believe this change will make readers understand Robbie's situation in Take That much more easily.

Please feel welcome to edit the changes if the majority disagrees with them. And for those who do have much better experience in editing wikis, if you decide to make these changes look "prettier" to the reader, also feel free to do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2800:21C1:C000:347:A804:6292:F41F:62B7 (talk) 20:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I changed Jason's colour to Orange. How didn't anybody think of this before?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2800:21C1:C000:347:A804:6292:F41F:62B7 (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to discuss this - the vast majority of people who edit this aspect of the article don't bother. I'll start by emphasising that I won't be making any changes to your edits until a consensus on this matter is reached by you/me/other interested editors. I don't know if there will be any other editors who reply to you, but I'll try and explain my own perspective. As you may or may not be aware, the nature of Williams' membership of the group is currently the most contentious aspect of this whole page - it makes up a large proportion of all the edits and reversions here. The "inactive member" angle has been implemented before, but has proven controversial - the consensus on the page at present is that Williams should not currently be considered a member of the group. In my opinion, Barlow's comments in interviews about the band having an open door policy do not equate to an official statement that Williams is currently a member of the group. As you note, it is obviously a complicated matter since Williams does do the odd performance with the band from time to time, but the position of the band's official website is that:

After becoming a dad for the second time and hankering for a solo revival, Robbie took the decision to leave Take That once more, albeit under much more amicable circumstances second time around – the boys in the band remain firm friends

I therefore personally feel like it misrepresents the situation to use the term inactive member, and in particular, I feel it is misleading for the Members graph to imply that Williams has made any significant contribution to the band since 2012. A few minor things too; either Williams' or Williams's is grammatically correct, as long as the article uses one or the other consistently throughout; and Jason's line on the Members graph certainly used to be orange when I first created it - I'd totally agree with it being changed back (I seem to remember the rationale another editor used for altering it was to make the line colours consistent with the microphone colours the band members use when on tour). Feel free to discuss further :) Also, if you're new to Wikipedia, you might want to check out these two pages. --Jonie148 (talk) 04:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About Robbie Williams departure in Take That

[edit]

On 28 April 2014, Williams announced on Twitter he was to become a dad for a second time, and consequently suggested he would be unable to join Take That on their album and tour. Although welcome to return to the band at any time, Williams chose not to return for group's seventh and eighth studio albums and their accompanying tours, focusing instead on his solo commitments. He continued to write music with his colleagues and performed with the group on several occasions since 2011's Progress tour and plans on returning at some point in the future.

I found this from the article and it was proves that Robbie left the group on April 28 2014 and not in 2012, like some people mean he did. Please stop editing the page, Robbie Willams was a part of the group from 1990 till 1995 and again in 2010 till 2014.

- Fona2000

@83.73.220.197: please cite the source you claim for this. Changing the article without providing a source is disruptive, especially to articles about living people: see WP:BLP which you are required to follow. The Mirror Cracked (talk) 19:55, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you read this, it says that Robbie left the band on April 27 in 2014, right before the departure of Jason Orange and before the recordings of III (2014 album) https://takethat.com/history/#

This is the official Take That timeline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.73.220.197 (talk) 21:57, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@83.73.220.197: Thanks for discussing, I'm eager to see this resolved at this point. I can't speak for other editors, but on my own behalf I'll give in gracefully re. the 2014 date (although I will note that a) there are news articles from 2011 and 2012 that suggest Williams left earlier, and b) he has not made any significant contribution to the band whatsoever since the Progress tour and the Progressed promo stuff wrapped up). My issue has largely been with the addition of 'occasional appearances' to the Members graph, and misleading statements about the nature of Williams' non-membership at present in the article body. As long as that stuff stays out of the article, I'm happy. --Jonie148 (talk) 23:00, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for editing without noticing this section previously. However, this certainly isn't as clear cut as the above suggests. Robbie's departure was announced - and indeed confirmed - in 2014, but the sources are clear that (unlike Jason) he never resumed activity with the band after the Progress cycle ended in 2012. To show him in the members section as part of the band until 2014 is misleading in my opinion. This is something that needs a consensus to avoid potential edit warring. U-Mos (talk) 22:51, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed --Jonie148 (talk) 10:01, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

January 2020 edits

[edit]

@Fona2000: Please comment here your justification for repeated reversions [1] [2] [3], which restore a version that goes against the initial consensus of the above section (happy to discuss that further) and the implied consensus from recent edits by multiple users. The WP:BRD process dictates that you should now discuss your desired edits; an WP:EDITWAR does not benefit anybody. Thanks, U-Mos (talk) 21:56, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie officially left the group with a tweet from April 2014. Not in 2011 or 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fona2000 (talk • contribs)
@Fona2000: Thanks for responding, but please do not the restore edits unless the changes achieve a WP:CONSENSUS. I will have to ask for admin intervention if you continue to edit unconstructively. Please also be aware that the reversion you are making is undoing multiple other recent edits. I have nothing to add to my above rationale regarding Robbie's second departure date, which Jonie148 agreed with. Feel free to respond to that. U-Mos (talk) 23:29, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I promise:), let’s talk -Fona2000

@Fona2000: What's unfortunate is that at the same time as writing this, you reverted the article for a fifth time. This is in clear violation of WP:EDITWAR, despite repeated warnings to stop. We are discussing now, which is positive, but only if that discussion leads to a consensus for your preferred edits should they be enacted on the article. So I've undone your edit again, and am stating very clearly that if you revert again I will request make a report regarding your edit warring here. On the subject itself, we have two dates important to Robbie's departure: the date he was last actively part of Take That (in 2012), and the date that his departure was announced (2014). Per the above, I believe that his actual activity in the band supersedes any announcement date, which can be (and is) covered in the text of the article. Same goes for the band's 1996 break-up, which I changed from the date it was announced to the date a couple of months later when they actually ceased activities as a band.
Other material you are currently persistently reverting is: section headings to include first names of members and wording around Gary Barlow's stillborn child. These appear to be uncontroversial edits to me, but you're welcome to discuss them too if you have any rationale for changing them back. Once more, please do not edit the article while this discussion is in progress. U-Mos (talk) 06:34, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie William’s departure in 2011 or 2014?!

[edit]

Hello

I was wondering why you keep changing on when Robbie left take that. No sources tells that he left in 2012 but different tells that he left the group right after “the progress tour“ in 2011 and some other says in 2014 right before the recordings of the “lll” album took place, causing Robbie became a dad for the second time.

Looking forward to here from you FONA2000 Fona2000 (talk) 15:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{u|Fona2000]} thanks for reaching out. The first thing to note is that 2012 as Robbie's (second) departure date is the current WP:CONSENSUS version and show should remain unless there is agreement to change it. You have been warned about this (and even blocked from editing) previously. The Newsround source does indeed report that Robbie had left in 2011, which could be integrated into the text of the article, but this was refuted at the time, so Robbie appeared with the band throughout 2012 as a full-time member. His departure was announced in 2014, but he had not been active with the band since 2012, so 2012 is his departure date. U-Mos (talk) 00:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I completely disagree... Robbie didn’t have anything to do with take that in 2012, his last appearance in the group was in 2011 and he officially makes his second departure in 2014. So if you ask me I’ll say that he left on April 24th 2014. Please link me the article where it says that he was a part of the group in 2012. Fona2000 (talk) 03:25, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Orange didn’t attend to any Take Events in 2013 or 2014 so do you all so want to change that to 2012...? That is not right, you’re doing it all wrong. Fona2000 (talk) 03:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie officially left in 2014 so that’s what I’m doing to write. Fona2000 (talk) 03:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fona2000 Once again, I am working to preserve the current WP:CONSENSUS. Please consider taking the opportunity to revert your disruptive edits while this discussion takes place. Currently, the article reads that Williams was a member through 2012 (while the band were mostly inactive) using this source for his final appearance in November of that year. It could be argued that 2011 is more accurate - implementing this would involve editing more than just the band members section so the article agrees with itself, and also a consensus to do so. No objection to that if other editors agree. Per to WP:BRD process, you have made your edits, they've been reverted, so we're here in the discussion stage - restoring your preferred version is disruptive to the process at this time. U-Mos (talk) 05:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But he left in 2014 so 2014 is the right year. Fona2000 (talk) 13:47, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to present an argument a bit more convincing than that tautological statement. I'll point you once again to the importance of articles reflecting consensus on Wikipedia. --Jonie148 (talk) 15:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well so take a look at this link from the official Take That site. Check the timeline on the event happening on April 27th 2014. https://takethat.com/history/# Fona2000 (talk) 17:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as has been discussed that is the date that Robbie's departure was announced, the wording of which is clear that he never returned after that last performance in 2012. Orange, on the other hand, reconvened with the band during 2014 and quit soon after. U-Mos (talk) 21:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2020

[edit]

It Only Takes a Minute charted 1 June 1992 not 1982 as stated in the article Mancbranch (talk) 07:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 10:11, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie left in 2011, read the article before destroying it

[edit]

Robbie left in 2011, read the article before destroying it, in 2012 he was only making a on/off appearance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.164.22.202 (talk) 18:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have produced zero sources to support your proposed changes that go against the rough consensuses out of not one, but two discussions above. KyleJoantalk 18:07, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging U-Mos and Jonie148 to this discussion per their responses during the previous ones. KyleJoantalk 18:11, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's world outsite from wikipedia, do you know that? please check this link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/15164993#:~:text=X%20Factor%20judge%20Gary%20Barlow,That%20for%20the%20second%20time.&text=With%20their%20tour%20over%2C%20the,on%20his%20new%20solo%20album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.164.22.202 (talk) 18:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The date in the article says 4. October 2011, that's the date of his second departure;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.164.22.202 (talk) 18:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bless your heart for thinking that the publication date of the BBC News article is the exact date Williams departed the group;)
That aside, per U-Mos: The first thing to note is that 2012 as Robbie's (second) departure date is the current WP:CONSENSUS version and show should remain unless there is agreement to change it. There are policies on Wikipedia like WP:CON, do you know that? KyleJoantalk 18:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think so ;) a lot of the articles on wikipedia has very much false information  ;)

1. https://www.hindustantimes.com/music/robbie-williams-leaves-take-that-again/story-w3No7Ni2aadpcwxETjFoXN.html

2. https://www.walesonline.co.uk/lifestyle/showbiz/take-back-four-good-robbie-1803459

3. https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/robbie-williams-has-quit-take-that-again-83055

4. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/8842756/Robbie-Williams-quits-Take-That-again-after-10m-comeback.html

5. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2011/oct/21/robbie-williams-announces-solo-album

Do you want me to find more new articles, about robbie williams departure in 2011? 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.164.22.202 (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping KyleJoan. Momentarily ignoring the fact that the current revision of the page is an absolute mess, I'll state my position. When I implemented the members graph back in 2014, it was in response to much the same debates which continue now, about the precise dates of Williams' membership of the group. It was a debatable matter then, and it's still a debatable matter now. The original date the members graph stated that Williams had left was the 29th of July 2011. Since then, the members graph has rightfully undergone lots of revisions by other editors, and the consensus seems to have been that representing Williams' second departure date as 2012 was favorable. I'm largely ambivalent as to whether 2011 or 2012 is used (as long as one of the two is); my greatest desire is just to reach a firm consensus, as this aspect of the page has disproportionately been the subject of much ire and drive-by vandalisms for almost six years now.
Regardless of how many sources you have 93.164.22.202, you need to watch your tone, as being impertinent will make it a lot less likely that other users will support your position. Remember that many of the editors you're insulting have already put a lot of unpaid time into improving and maintaining this page. --Jonie148 (talk) 22:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As I noted in the talk page section above, the reports that Robbie had left the band in October 2011 were directly refuted at the time. This is, however, complicated by some of the above articles being dated later in that month. Further complicated by Robbie being due to perform with the band at the Olympics closing ceremony in 2012, but then pulling out, and actually performing with them later in the year - but only for one song. Certainly it was not generally accepted he had left at this time, hence the speculation around if he was involved in the return to the studio in 2014 and the later announcement that he was not. So what might be a good idea - with agreement - would be to more directly discuss these contradictions in the article, particularly the 2011 reports that he had left. My feeling is 2012 remains the best departure date to list, as he remained involved in the band's limited activities in that year. U-Mos (talk) 00:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This BBC News article states that Williams left twice, in 1995 to embark on a solo career, and again in 2012, so I'm in agreement with U-Mos. It is more appropriate to follow sources that report events in hindsight rather than in the moment. KyleJoantalk 08:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALERT! False information in the Take That article

[edit]

Since last restoring of the article of take that, there's now very much false information on the article so the page can no longer be trusted, therefore i recommend people who wants to read whats right to check the take that article on takethat.fandom.com.

Looking forward to restore it to the right edition in march 2021. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.137.181 (talk) 12:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2020

[edit]

I need to change the image 149.22.27.24 (talk) 20:18, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Change it to what? Neiltonks (talk) 21:44, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Williams' rejoin in 2020

[edit]

Williams rejoined Take That for a one/off performance i maj 2020, during the covid-19 charity gig. He appeared as a full time member, and i think that we should include it in his timeline in the article, i've been doing some researching and many newspapers in the UK, describe it as Williams' first Take That-performance since 2012's Music Industry Trust Awards. If we should make the article about williams' activity in the group complete i think we should include this in his timeline.

He didn't only make an guest appearance in the group, he rejoined the band and i think that makes a difference. Please think about it, and maybe we can discuss how we write it in the article... my example: Robbie Williams (1990–1995, 2010–2012, 2020) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.138.241 (talk) 08:12, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-52839880

What do you guys think?

Williams rejoined the band for one performance, so the only appropriate way to annotate this in the timeline would be Robbie Williams (1990–1995, 2010–2012, 29 May 2020), which I oppose. KyleJoantalk 08:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again

But if we aren't writing this in the article, i kinda feel like we are giving false infomation about williams' activity in the band. Robbie Williams active years in the band were from 1989 to 1995 and at the progress recordings in 2009 to 2014 right before the recordings on III, but he last preformed with the band in 2012 at the Music Industry Trust Awards. as said before he offically first left the band in 2014. and after that he had preformed with the group several times, examples in 2016, 2017 and 2018 but only as a guest. On May 2020 he offically rejoined the band for a one/off performance, after a 6 year hiatus from the group.

So in the big picture Robbie Willams active years in Take That: 1989-1995, 2009-2014, 2020 --NikolajPeter1810 (talk) 09:01, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of hours-long reunion (for a live show) is not sufficient to count as a reunion. Publicity and press for the event may suggest otherwise, but you've got to appreciate that headlines about Williams rejoining Take That are a great source of clickbait revenue for journalists, rather than an accurate representation of the situation. Jonie148 (talk) 11:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

fan page

[edit]

This entire article reads like a fan wrote it. needs a complete overhaul. Iammrjam (talk) 10:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iammrjam: Feel free! :) --Jonie148 (talk) 08:47, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2022

[edit]
File:Wonderland cover.jpg
This is a blank request. Please use your words --Jonie148 (talk) 10:41, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2024

[edit]

In the section "1995–1996: Break-up and Greatest Hits", it says "teenage girls threatened suicide and were seen lining streets in tears, to the point that telephone hotlines were set up by the government to deal with counselling them".

The idea that the UK government set up these helplines is not stated in the source - https://web.archive.org/web/20110709173420/http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/take-that-metro-radio-arena-newcastle-475430.html.

A BBC article from 1996 states that the helplines were in fact set up by the Samaritans - https://www.bbc.co.uk/videos/c722qz14p65o.

My suggestion is to remove "by the government" and replace it with "by the Samaritans". 2A00:23C6:9113:CE01:5FC:D249:47ED:9EA9 (talk) 15:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done LizardJr8 (talk) 03:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Take_That&oldid=1259237383"