Talk:Blink-182

Latest comment: 11 months ago by Maelcum in topic 182 referring to Scarface?

Broken timeline

edit

The timeline in the bottom of the article has visual artifacts on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhsevs (talkcontribs) 04:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC) Edit as of June 2020: This seems to now have been fixed. Thanks twimc. Jhsevs (talk) 03:05, 6 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Does a band with only two former members really need a timeline?

edit

In my opinion this band does not need a timeline, as there have only been two former members. By looking at the years, it is clear who was in the band at what given time. I don't think having a timeline for this band brings anything new, as there hasn't been any complex lineup changes. I think the members of each year can be easily identified without it. In addition, the albums can also be easily identified without the time line. At this point, I think it just takes up space and it's just a visual representative of colors.

Pinging @Aria1561:, @Binksternet:, @Isento:, @Ohnoitsjamie:, and @Sock: what do you think? 2001:8003:3302:BC00:655F:5C9A:BA0B:83 (talk) 07:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

One former member, definitely not. Two is borderline; I wouldn't be terribly upset if it was removed, but if it was 100% up to me, I'd probably leave it in, given the popularity of the band. Honestly, I'm more bothered by university articles using tables for notable alumni. That drives me nuts. OhNoitsJamie Talk 13:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
Doesn't seem like such a bad idea to me. The graphic timeline helps the reader to picture the band's makeup over time. Even though two positions remain unchanged throughout. Binksternet (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
I think it should stay. In addition to showing the 2 former members' time in the band, it also shows the band's hiatus. Overall there's been 3 different lineups, which is (just barely) enough to warrant it.Xanarki (talk) 16:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Current Infobox image

edit

Starting a new discussion for what image should be used in this page's infobox until a more recent image of the current lineup can be used. Rather than people constantly changing the image (which has been very common recently), it should be determined here as part of a larger discussion. Should the most recent image of the band be used, or the most recent image that displays the current lineup? Will however be reverting to the most recent image of the band until a consensus can be reached. Please provide your thoughts on this topic if you have them. Thank you! PopDisaster182 (talk) 19:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply

Buddha as an album

edit

If Wikipedia can't use a band member's opinion about their own work, what purpose does it serve? Buddha is an official album. You can go to Spotify right now and find it under Blink-182. The title of "Nine" makes no sense without it. The article currently feels more like it's holding to a few fans' limited defintion of an album rather than using the facts available. If Buddha can't be listed and "Nine" is listed as their eighth album, then this page has failed as a source of info. Rorys1989 (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

182 referring to Scarface?

edit

In a documetary about Al Pacino, his biographer Lawrence Grobel stated, that Blink-182 have their name from the 182 times, Pacino used the word "Fuck" in the movie Scarface.

https://www.zdf.de/3sat/kulturdoku/al-pacino-star-wider-willen-kulturdoku-102.html a film by Lukas Hoffmann

41:02

grz Maelcum (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)Reply