Talk:The Records

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Pop music

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

New Wave music (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Wave music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.New Wave musicWikipedia:WikiProject New Wave musicTemplate:WikiProject New Wave musicNew Wave music articles

Merge from John Wicks (singer)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was do not merge into The Records. -- DarkCrow^Caw 19:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We appear to have two articles about The Records, as the Wicks article is pretty much all about this band. Merging seems an obvious outcome.--Michig (talk) 06:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The puffery in the Wicks article could be toned down a bit too. Piriczki (talk) 12:28, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. The Records page relates to the activity of the original group 1978-1982 and subsequent CD reissues. The John Wicks page relates to John's solo activity after The Records disbanded. These are two distinct and largely unconnected stories. WillBirch (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point but could there be one article that diverges at some point chronologically, with a post-1982 section covering the individual members' careers? Just for the sake of keeping everything related to the Records in one place and making it one very good article. More balance might be needed though. Piriczki (talk) 01:07, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. This proposal is contrary to the policy of both (a) standard reference sources for the band and (b) Wikipedia itself. Allmusic only includes one CD Wicks has released on its 'The Records' discography page; the review of that CD says "Calling this "the Records" is a bit of a cheat". Trouser Press calls it a Wicks solo release and ignores his other CDs. Wikipedia has entries for "Creedence Clearwater Revival", and both factions of the group who play the music after an acrimonious breakup: "John Fogerty" and "Creedence Clearwater Revisited." Separate pages ensures that factions do not constantly revise the main page, requiring constant moderation.(Swarles Barkley (talk) 18:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)) Thank you, Will. In the last several years many outright lies about The Records have appeared on too many sites. A plethora of Web pages that have absolutely nothing to do with the band carry or have carried amateurish 'reviews' and grandiose fawning manifestos that frequently begin: 'Why John Wicks and The Records are the best ...', or: 'The Who's (or whoever, pick your favourite) new album is good, but not as good as John Wicks and The Records'. Whether or not Wicks approved this style of 'promotion', the technique is insidious, and moreover has nothing in common (thank goodness) with the artist(e)s formerly known as The Records. ----[reply]

I also disagree with a merge. There were some formatting errors on the page (along with the above comment) and I added some additional sources that show Wicks had a viable career as a solo. Obviously The Records was the height of his career, but it was not the only thing. Trackinfo (talk) 22:42, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Are versus Were

The Records appear to be touring again as John Wicks and the Records and have a current website. IMO they are no longer defunct. I guess the question is whether or not it is essentially the same band. Thoughts from others on the status? Bahooka (talk) 16:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's been the case for years. It was previously discussed above that this article refers the original group that existed from 1978–82. For "John Wicks and the Records" see John Wicks (singer). Piriczki (talk) 18:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Bahooka (talk) 16:10, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Records. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150130092538/http://www.therecords.com/biography.htm to http://www.therecords.com/biography.htm

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) 07:48, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]