Talk:The Who

Life House box set

About four days ago (as I'm writing this), the Who announced a super deluxe box set related to the Lifehouse sessions, spanning 155 tracks across 10 discs, along with a Blu-ray disc, a 100-page hardcover book, and a 170-page graphic novel that's developed for at least four years now. I'm attempting to sort these sources out and I'm wondering how much should be included in the articles for the Who, Lifehouse (rock opera), and Who's Next. The box set is estimated to be released in September 15.

https://www.thewho.com/the-who-announce-super-deluxe-multi-format-release-for-whos-next-life-house/

https://variety.com/2023/music/news/the-who-whos-next-boxed-set-11-discs-atmos-1235672925/

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/the-who-whos-next-life-house-deluxe-edition-annoucement-1234790099/ Carlinal (talk) 16:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

The Who versus the Who

User:Pawnkingthree: Reviving an old discussion: Talk:The_Who/Archive_4#The_Who_versus_the_Who.

I'm fairly new to this. The problem here is the need for consistency. If we do it one way for one thing (New York Times versus The New York Times), then it must be done always that way no matter what for everything. Even when it looks completely out of line with almost every other source in the world (just about).

I can understand the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc.. I can not understand the Who. It makes no sense. It looks completely bonkers. Yet, some editors maintain we must go all in, and do it for everything because of the MOS and consistency. Language doesn't work that way - it's often chaotic, illogical and not consistent. Whatever the rule is on this, it should be based on most common usage, and ultimately consensus. MOS is a guideline not a rule, and we are free to change the guideline on a case by case basis. There will be exceptions to any guideline, this should be one. Any proper noun two words long and starts with "The" is a good candidate for an exception. -- GreenC 22:05, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Language may be chaotic, illogical and inconsistent, but that doesn't mean an encyclopedia should be. There's nothing wrong with having a style guide. MOS:THEBAND states that all bands should drop the capitalization mid-sentence. I don't quite see how two words in a band name versus three or four makes any difference. Of course the MOS is a guideline subject to the occasional exception but there must be a good reason for the exception. I get that you think it looks completely bonkers - I was on the side of The Beatles rather than the Beatles during that battle over a decade ago - but ultimately it was decided that common usage and consensus favoured the lower case. Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:28, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't see how spelling it The Who is "chaotic", it's actually normal. We use most common usage all over Wikipedia, in many ways. Except with this. It's an aberration. Inconsistent. MOS:THEBAND allows for exceptions, says "should in general". I can understand "the Beatles" (if it's "the Beatles"), and I have no problem with the Washington Post.

Then there is this: the Who. You honestly think that's right? Imagine if we did this: the Washington Post. An italic lower-case the is bizarre and jarring, nobody does that. But that's the logic. That one RfC doesn't address these issues with blue linking because I think if it did it would run into its own logical inconsistencies and complications ie. the rule for proper nouns that are italic, we don't blue link "the", but for proper nouns that are not italic, we blue link "the". -- GreenC 02:42, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I honestly don't see any difference between "the Who" and "the Beatles." I would say "a Who record" just as I would say "a Beatles record". I would say "a record by the Who" just as I would say "a record by the Beatles." Genuinely not getting the distinction, sorry. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Can you respond to what I wrote in the second paragraph? You see nothing with with "a record by the Who", is that correct? -- GreenC 17:07, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Correct. I don't understand the distinction you are making between newspapers and bands. Newspapers such as the Times seem to come under the general MOS:THETITLE guideline. Yet another section, MOS:THECAPS, notes there are "special considerations" around certain topics such as bands. Perhaps someone else more knowledgeable about the MOS can chime in because I'm clearly not grasping your points. Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Because we normally blue link proper nouns, and proper nouns are normally capitalized. If you say "the Who" is one thing, but writing "the Who" is different. Thus with newspapers, we say "the New York Times" and not "the New York Times. See the difference? It's the same logic with The Who. The italics of newspapers makes it more clear what the point is. It's strangely bizarre to blue-link a leading lower-case "the" in a proper noun. -- GreenC 05:09, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Wrong I formation

Your information about the rock group the Who is not right.

My cousins formed the original rock group called "The Who" in 1960. 2600:6C64:6AF0:8B20:252E:C727:2892:966F (talk) 13:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

"Jigsaw Puzzle (album)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Jigsaw Puzzle (album) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 17 § Jigsaw Puzzle (album) until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)