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. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The song "The Great Escape"'s link leads to another song with the same name.
they are radio friendly, pop-ish rock band with indipendent and unique music style with alternative feel ---> pop-rock,indie,alternative rock they have nothing to do with pop-punk or emocore, no matter they have been influenced by some emo/pop-rock bands like jimmy eat world. Xr 1 20:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
The whole section about their style needs to be changed or deleted. Their sound is not that different from other bands to require a section like that.-alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.209.96 ( talk) 06:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand why emo isn't under the genre list. If they are "a self declared emo band" and they have "various emo and pop-punk influences" then why isn't emo under their genre?
Razorblade666
18:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
They are emo. its pretty obvious if u listen to them.
look at the lyrics for Broken Man,"I want to swallow these pills to get to sleep","But I guess you were better off without me"," But I will stand a broken man"
thats pretty emo.
I don't get why people always think its a bad thing to be emo —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Iandrummer204 (
talk •
contribs)
02:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
why don't we just stick with the genres that their myspace says? i guess they know what genre they are, they say Alternative, Pop Rock and Emo. Even though they do sound a little pop punky too. Matt 2601 atl ( talk) 14:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
If they were emo wouldn't they be dead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.214.77.65 ( talk) 00:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm one of the biggest fans of this band. About the genre in the 1st album they came up as an Indie Rock band with some emo songs such as "Broken Man". After that their songs took a new way and started to sound little Pop Rock. At the end the band can be listed into two genres "Alternative Rock" and "Pop Rock". Zizo1990 ( talk) 22:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Is there a reason we have at least 14 references in this article and they don't lead anywhere? Looking back at the history it appears they used to link to something but someone has deleted them all. Perhaps someone could fix that? -- BHC 08:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)\!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by XOchelseyXO ( talk • contribs) 15:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
They are not emo, if you go to the article on emo it is a type of hardcore punk and they are pop-punk. hardcore punk is heavy fast and has your average punk lyrics. So emo is the same thing just emo lyrics. They sing about falling in love not wishing their wrists were bleeding. I will not lie they have emo lyrics in one song but the style of how they play it is not emo.... the only true emo band is my chemical romance and they deny the whole thing.
p.s. I like boys like girls, im just saying there not emo —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.248.244.189 (
talk)
01:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
ya the articale says their emo and wiki is stupid if keeps it like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.226.74.247 ( talk) 20:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to know where was that article about The plane crash that killed them. I have been trying to look for it and i can not find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcastro27 ( talk • contribs) 19:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
wtf, they're not dead. Wtf are you talking about? 72.72.215.178 ( talk) 20:56, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
They are emo. Go to their myspace (myspace.com/boyslikegirls) and one of their genres is emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwertluis ( talk • contribs) 23:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Geez please Louise, they are influenced, or inspired, by emo, just as much as they are influenced/inspired by alternative, indie and pop punk. Nobody claims they are 100% emo. If you don't like non-emo bands to be influenced by emo-bands that's a personal matter, not an encylopediatic one. -- 78.34.40.254 ( talk) 13:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Think about this: 1. My band's myspace page says that we are pop punk/zouk/folk, I don't know what zouk is, and avoid pop punk as much as humanly possible.
2. You can say, and even believe you are a pterodactyl, but you are NOT a pterodactly.
3. A reliable website can contain an article written by someone who has absolutely no idea what the underground genre really sounds like. Do you think John Lenon knows what emo really is?
-Cap'n Jazz -Rites of Spring -Frodus -Heroine -Sleepytime Trio
Here are some bands that are NOT emo:
-Fall Out Boy -My Chemical Romance -Panic! At the Disco -Weezer -Jimmy Eat World -At the Drive In -Dashboard Confessional
Which category do Boys Like Girls belong in?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.232.134 ( talk) 20:18, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
We need to gauge consensus on which image will be used in the lead. The image that is not used in the lead, can be placed elsewhere in the article. The options are this (Image A) or this (Image B). Let's keep this civil folks. — R 2 11:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
The current picture is over exposed and grainy and has only one hundredth of the resolution of the other picture. While a high quality image of all four band members would be ideal, it is best to go with the one good image that wikipedia does have
I think it's best to get a new, recent picture of the whole band? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.164 ( talk) 08:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Might I suggest this photo:
Boys Like Girls
A google search produced that picture. But it's also 1 of the photos from their
"Official Boys Like Girls Photos" album on their
Facebook
It does show all members clearly. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ausher8 (
talk •
contribs)
07:33, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Someone improperly closed a table, making it difficult to read the studio albums. I fixed the issue. I also accidentally signed the page. That error has been corrected.
Silvarus ( talk) 23:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I've made some major edits to the article structure, mostly based on the Switchfoot article (which is a good article). Hope it's okay with everyone. Andrew Duffell ( talk) 21:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I've continued the clean up, and I'm now happy with the introduction. It contains just what is needed to introduce the article, and any further detail can be written into the main body of the article.
I'm going to continue to work through tidying up the article as and when I have time, but any help would be appreciated. I think all the information is there, but it just needs structuring better from its piecemeal form.
Andrew Duffell (
talk)
14:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
The band is going to perform at "The View" show on the 22Th of December. This information must be added. Zizo1990 ( talk) 22:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody verify this piece of information? "The song is about Johnson's previous relationship with his long time lady friend, Molly" - regarding the song Two Is Better Than One. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.132 ( talk) 08:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
It says in the introduction " Recently, on November 17th, 2011 at 5:17 AM, Martin Johnson tweeted "...#boyslikegirlsisdone", revealing that the band the group announced an indefinite hiatus asserting that it has not broken up, rather that the members are taking a rest and engaging in various side projects."
but in the section "2011-Present: Departure of band's bassist & upcoming third studio album" it has this statement ""In November 2011, Martin tweeted he will post a video update the following day, which was later accompanied by a second tweet "...#boyslikegirlsisback". It was later revealed that the band would be commencing the preparation of the upcoming third studio album in the frontman's place back at Los Angeles. On November 19, 2011, another video update from the official Boys Like Girls YouTube channel was uploaded, confirming that Boys Like Girls is currently recording a new album""
So these two statements are contradictory because they cannot announce their hiatus and and retrn to work for a studio album within days of each other. Faceestrella ( talk) 12:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Boys Like Girls. 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.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Peter Dzubay: I stand corrected. This is not a WP:LANGVAR issue at all. See American English band articles ( Talking Heads, E Street Band, 10,000 Maniacs) and British English band articles ( The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Queen (band)) and others ( U2, Midnight Oil, Crowded House, The Band). So why are you insisting that bands of people, this article does fall under WP:BLP after all, should have impersonal pronouns (it, etc.) rather than treated as a collection of people (they, etc.): https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Boys_Like_Girls&type=revision&diff=719612771&oldid=719603547? A self revert is in order and discussion should ensue, or does this discussion have to be brought to a wider audience? 208.81.212.224 ( talk) 20:06, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
PS: The case of "Boys Like Girls" is not a simple one. The words suggest plural, but the phrase as a whole is a singular statement. Except it's also a two-way pun, a triple entendre, suggesting both "boys who are similar to girls" (a plural construction), as well as the notion "As with girls, thus with boys" (another singular unit). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:57, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Evidence it's not a WP:ENGVAR matter: Here's Google News searches of first American-biased sources, followed by British-biased results for the same search terms (except for the American sports material, swapping in a British team instead), generally favoring the treatment of teams and bands as plural, though at least historically, bands with singular names have often been written about in the singular, and usage also varies by context. We also know that corporations and the like are usually given in the singular. (Note: These searches cannot force returns strictly from US or UK publishers, just lean the results one way versus the other. One can do a general Google search limited to US vs. UK sites, to an extent, but it will return mostly unreliable sources like blogs and forums).
Sports teams, in current news sources: Try Gnews US search for "San Francisco Giants is" -wikipedia -wiki
[1]; virtually every hit is for something else, like "<player name> of the San Francisco Giants is ...", "<player name>'s former team, the San Francisco Giants, is ...", etc., not something like "The San Francisco Giants is playing against ...". Now use "are" instead of "is"
[2]; almost all hits are for the constructions expected: "The San Francisco giants are struggling ...", "If the San Francisco Giants are to continue their ...". Try the same sort of search for Manchester United, and constrain the results to the UK version of Google News:
"is" again loses badly to
"are" (worse than it looks because of the false-positive skew). You can do the same kind of search on various other team names with the same result.
Band names, in current news sources: If you do searches like this on band names, you find that those with singular-sounding names get singular treatment fairly often (with "is") [3] (UK: [4]), [5] (UK: [6]), etc. (but with lots of false positives as in the Giants example). However, plural is usually the majority usage in modern sources despite the form of such names [7] (UK: [8]), [9] {UK, about even until seeing way more false positive for "is" than for "are": [10]), etc. Those with plural-looking names get plural treatment most frequently. This is best tested with bands that have long histories, cannot be confused with something other than the band (thus, The Cure or Foreigner won't do), and which are presently charting, currently touring, or have announced upcoming tours, and are actual bands, not things like "Kenny McChesney" or "Calvin Harris & Rihanna". Google News won't produce many modern hits for defunct bands, and I'm not sure style is going to be reliably determinable for brand-new "one-hit wonders" who also don't have much RS coverage anyway, plus many have weird character substitutions and other quirks in their names, which interfere with search-result accuracy (even using "Panic! at the Disco" is pretty iffy).
In a few cases, the numbers seem fairly close between "is" [11] (UK: [12]) and "are" [13] (UK: [14]), until you see just how many of the "is" hits are false positives ("'An Evening with Huey Lewis and the News' is included with ...", "The opening scene, set to 'Power of Love' by Huey Lewis and the News, is ...", etc.), and how few of the "are" hits are mistakes. In other cases, like Pet Shop Boys, the "is" usage [15] is utterly dwarfed by the "are" usage [16].
Any name ending explicitly in "Band" or "Group" or the like automatically leans toward singular usage strongly [17], because of the type of name (it is self-referentially reinforcing that it is a singular unit). Here, the "are" cases [18] are the ones with lots of false positives, e.g. "fans of the Dave Matthews Band are ...". The same can also happen, to a lesser extent, with names that sound like a single person's name or nickname, as in Steely Dan ( "is" leads against "are"). Plural-looking names without a leading "The" (e.g. Guns N' Roses) may seem to break even ( "is" vs. "are", until you remember that most false positives are in the "is" results. The results are not entirely consistently in favor of plural treatment, especially if the band name is a phrase that doesn't intrinsically sound like a band, e.g. 3 Doors Down ( "is" beats out "are", even accounting for the false-positive skew.
Band names, in historical N-gram corpora: N-grams can, tentatively, be useful for historical comparison, but the data has too many obvious gaps in it, producing zero returns for phrases that we know for a fact (e.g. from matching Google News searches) are frequently used by reliable sources; among those producing no returns at all from Ngrams are "Led Zeppelin was" (but plenty for "were" [which dominates], "is", and "are"), "Fleetwood Mac are" (but plenty for "was" [which dominates], "is" and "were"), and many others, that readily turn up in the GNews searches. On the up-side, the publishers in this case can be constrained to US vs. UK. And while, as noted above, there are always false positives, these are much fewer in Ngram searches because it only returns hits for contiguous phrases unbroken by punctuation. At any rate, to the extent the data is usable, is suggests that over the course of the last few generations, the predominant pattern across English usage has been to lean toward treating plural band names with plural grammatical constructions and vice versa, but with plenty of overlap.
This pattern is nowhere near absolute, however:
Conclusions: There is no rule, literally, in theory, or in practice. Usage leans toward plural generally, but this trend is much stronger for band names that sound plural, and may sometimes even be reversed for singular-sounding names, though this result is not at all consistent, and is more apparent in half-century-wide Google Books N-gram searches (which have very weak and gappy corpora for this sort of material, and thus verge on unreliable) than in modern news searches (also imperfect, due to a higher false-positive rate from ignoring punctuation, but this is easy to detect just by looking). The discrepancy demonstrates that the singular practice for singular-ish names is declining (probably because of arguments within publishers that mirror the recurrent one within Wikipedia). There is no ENGVAR matter; usage is not consistently different between US and UK treatment, and there is only very weak and circumstantial evidence of any alleged preference for always-singular treatment in American sources, and much evidence that directly contradicts this idea; to the extent there may be any slight trend in this direction, it is weak and growing weaker by the year, and certainly falls far short of ENGVAR's "strong national tie".
Recommendation: If MoS were to address this directly, it should say essentially this, in shorter wording: When writing about a band, team, organization, or other collective entity, use formulations that sound the most correct grammatically when spoken aloud, as a general default. However, prefer plural constructions when approaching the entity as people living lives, making public appearances, and doing other things that draw attention to members as individuals. Prefer singular forms when approaching the organization as an unitary business entity, legal property, or a socio-cultural phenomenon. Following the majority of modern sources, it is most common to use the singular for corporations, nonprofits/NGOs, major laboratories, governmental bodies, political parties, and social movements, due to the nature of their organization and of the actions that make them notable; teams, bands, performance troupes, field research teams, and other smaller-scale collaborations take the plural by default, unless their name strongly suggests the singular, or they are being considered explicitly as a unit (e.g., the group sued its [not their] record label). Unless someone can strongly refute what I've researched and reasoned so far, without cherry-picking, I will probably propose an amendment of this sort to MOS:BIO. People really need to stop fighting about this. Especially stop waving bogus nationalistic flags above the issue; that vitality-sucking nonsense needs a stake though its heart right now. This is perennial, lame drama, and it's just tiresome. Noise like this is precisely why so many Wikipedians get sick of, even angry about, style disputes and the time and productivity they waste. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 14:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boys Like Girls. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boys Like Girls. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boys Like Girls. 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).
The help request has been answered. To reactivate, replace "helped" with your help request.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Boys Like Girls. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
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. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The song "The Great Escape"'s link leads to another song with the same name.
they are radio friendly, pop-ish rock band with indipendent and unique music style with alternative feel ---> pop-rock,indie,alternative rock they have nothing to do with pop-punk or emocore, no matter they have been influenced by some emo/pop-rock bands like jimmy eat world. Xr 1 20:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
The whole section about their style needs to be changed or deleted. Their sound is not that different from other bands to require a section like that.-alex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.209.96 ( talk) 06:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand why emo isn't under the genre list. If they are "a self declared emo band" and they have "various emo and pop-punk influences" then why isn't emo under their genre?
Razorblade666
18:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
They are emo. its pretty obvious if u listen to them.
look at the lyrics for Broken Man,"I want to swallow these pills to get to sleep","But I guess you were better off without me"," But I will stand a broken man"
thats pretty emo.
I don't get why people always think its a bad thing to be emo —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Iandrummer204 (
talk •
contribs)
02:28, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
why don't we just stick with the genres that their myspace says? i guess they know what genre they are, they say Alternative, Pop Rock and Emo. Even though they do sound a little pop punky too. Matt 2601 atl ( talk) 14:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
If they were emo wouldn't they be dead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.214.77.65 ( talk) 00:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm one of the biggest fans of this band. About the genre in the 1st album they came up as an Indie Rock band with some emo songs such as "Broken Man". After that their songs took a new way and started to sound little Pop Rock. At the end the band can be listed into two genres "Alternative Rock" and "Pop Rock". Zizo1990 ( talk) 22:09, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Is there a reason we have at least 14 references in this article and they don't lead anywhere? Looking back at the history it appears they used to link to something but someone has deleted them all. Perhaps someone could fix that? -- BHC 08:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)\!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by XOchelseyXO ( talk • contribs) 15:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
They are not emo, if you go to the article on emo it is a type of hardcore punk and they are pop-punk. hardcore punk is heavy fast and has your average punk lyrics. So emo is the same thing just emo lyrics. They sing about falling in love not wishing their wrists were bleeding. I will not lie they have emo lyrics in one song but the style of how they play it is not emo.... the only true emo band is my chemical romance and they deny the whole thing.
p.s. I like boys like girls, im just saying there not emo —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
76.248.244.189 (
talk)
01:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
ya the articale says their emo and wiki is stupid if keeps it like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.226.74.247 ( talk) 20:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
I would like to know where was that article about The plane crash that killed them. I have been trying to look for it and i can not find it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcastro27 ( talk • contribs) 19:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
wtf, they're not dead. Wtf are you talking about? 72.72.215.178 ( talk) 20:56, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
They are emo. Go to their myspace (myspace.com/boyslikegirls) and one of their genres is emo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qwertluis ( talk • contribs) 23:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Geez please Louise, they are influenced, or inspired, by emo, just as much as they are influenced/inspired by alternative, indie and pop punk. Nobody claims they are 100% emo. If you don't like non-emo bands to be influenced by emo-bands that's a personal matter, not an encylopediatic one. -- 78.34.40.254 ( talk) 13:04, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Think about this: 1. My band's myspace page says that we are pop punk/zouk/folk, I don't know what zouk is, and avoid pop punk as much as humanly possible.
2. You can say, and even believe you are a pterodactyl, but you are NOT a pterodactly.
3. A reliable website can contain an article written by someone who has absolutely no idea what the underground genre really sounds like. Do you think John Lenon knows what emo really is?
-Cap'n Jazz -Rites of Spring -Frodus -Heroine -Sleepytime Trio
Here are some bands that are NOT emo:
-Fall Out Boy -My Chemical Romance -Panic! At the Disco -Weezer -Jimmy Eat World -At the Drive In -Dashboard Confessional
Which category do Boys Like Girls belong in?
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.232.134 ( talk) 20:18, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
We need to gauge consensus on which image will be used in the lead. The image that is not used in the lead, can be placed elsewhere in the article. The options are this (Image A) or this (Image B). Let's keep this civil folks. — R 2 11:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
The current picture is over exposed and grainy and has only one hundredth of the resolution of the other picture. While a high quality image of all four band members would be ideal, it is best to go with the one good image that wikipedia does have
I think it's best to get a new, recent picture of the whole band? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.164 ( talk) 08:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Might I suggest this photo:
Boys Like Girls
A google search produced that picture. But it's also 1 of the photos from their
"Official Boys Like Girls Photos" album on their
Facebook
It does show all members clearly. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Ausher8 (
talk •
contribs)
07:33, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Someone improperly closed a table, making it difficult to read the studio albums. I fixed the issue. I also accidentally signed the page. That error has been corrected.
Silvarus ( talk) 23:37, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I've made some major edits to the article structure, mostly based on the Switchfoot article (which is a good article). Hope it's okay with everyone. Andrew Duffell ( talk) 21:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I've continued the clean up, and I'm now happy with the introduction. It contains just what is needed to introduce the article, and any further detail can be written into the main body of the article.
I'm going to continue to work through tidying up the article as and when I have time, but any help would be appreciated. I think all the information is there, but it just needs structuring better from its piecemeal form.
Andrew Duffell (
talk)
14:30, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
The band is going to perform at "The View" show on the 22Th of December. This information must be added. Zizo1990 ( talk) 22:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Can somebody verify this piece of information? "The song is about Johnson's previous relationship with his long time lady friend, Molly" - regarding the song Two Is Better Than One. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.1.132 ( talk) 08:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
It says in the introduction " Recently, on November 17th, 2011 at 5:17 AM, Martin Johnson tweeted "...#boyslikegirlsisdone", revealing that the band the group announced an indefinite hiatus asserting that it has not broken up, rather that the members are taking a rest and engaging in various side projects."
but in the section "2011-Present: Departure of band's bassist & upcoming third studio album" it has this statement ""In November 2011, Martin tweeted he will post a video update the following day, which was later accompanied by a second tweet "...#boyslikegirlsisback". It was later revealed that the band would be commencing the preparation of the upcoming third studio album in the frontman's place back at Los Angeles. On November 19, 2011, another video update from the official Boys Like Girls YouTube channel was uploaded, confirming that Boys Like Girls is currently recording a new album""
So these two statements are contradictory because they cannot announce their hiatus and and retrn to work for a studio album within days of each other. Faceestrella ( talk) 12:46, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Boys Like Girls. 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.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:37, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Peter Dzubay: I stand corrected. This is not a WP:LANGVAR issue at all. See American English band articles ( Talking Heads, E Street Band, 10,000 Maniacs) and British English band articles ( The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Queen (band)) and others ( U2, Midnight Oil, Crowded House, The Band). So why are you insisting that bands of people, this article does fall under WP:BLP after all, should have impersonal pronouns (it, etc.) rather than treated as a collection of people (they, etc.): https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Boys_Like_Girls&type=revision&diff=719612771&oldid=719603547? A self revert is in order and discussion should ensue, or does this discussion have to be brought to a wider audience? 208.81.212.224 ( talk) 20:06, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
PS: The case of "Boys Like Girls" is not a simple one. The words suggest plural, but the phrase as a whole is a singular statement. Except it's also a two-way pun, a triple entendre, suggesting both "boys who are similar to girls" (a plural construction), as well as the notion "As with girls, thus with boys" (another singular unit). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 09:57, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Evidence it's not a WP:ENGVAR matter: Here's Google News searches of first American-biased sources, followed by British-biased results for the same search terms (except for the American sports material, swapping in a British team instead), generally favoring the treatment of teams and bands as plural, though at least historically, bands with singular names have often been written about in the singular, and usage also varies by context. We also know that corporations and the like are usually given in the singular. (Note: These searches cannot force returns strictly from US or UK publishers, just lean the results one way versus the other. One can do a general Google search limited to US vs. UK sites, to an extent, but it will return mostly unreliable sources like blogs and forums).
Sports teams, in current news sources: Try Gnews US search for "San Francisco Giants is" -wikipedia -wiki
[1]; virtually every hit is for something else, like "<player name> of the San Francisco Giants is ...", "<player name>'s former team, the San Francisco Giants, is ...", etc., not something like "The San Francisco Giants is playing against ...". Now use "are" instead of "is"
[2]; almost all hits are for the constructions expected: "The San Francisco giants are struggling ...", "If the San Francisco Giants are to continue their ...". Try the same sort of search for Manchester United, and constrain the results to the UK version of Google News:
"is" again loses badly to
"are" (worse than it looks because of the false-positive skew). You can do the same kind of search on various other team names with the same result.
Band names, in current news sources: If you do searches like this on band names, you find that those with singular-sounding names get singular treatment fairly often (with "is") [3] (UK: [4]), [5] (UK: [6]), etc. (but with lots of false positives as in the Giants example). However, plural is usually the majority usage in modern sources despite the form of such names [7] (UK: [8]), [9] {UK, about even until seeing way more false positive for "is" than for "are": [10]), etc. Those with plural-looking names get plural treatment most frequently. This is best tested with bands that have long histories, cannot be confused with something other than the band (thus, The Cure or Foreigner won't do), and which are presently charting, currently touring, or have announced upcoming tours, and are actual bands, not things like "Kenny McChesney" or "Calvin Harris & Rihanna". Google News won't produce many modern hits for defunct bands, and I'm not sure style is going to be reliably determinable for brand-new "one-hit wonders" who also don't have much RS coverage anyway, plus many have weird character substitutions and other quirks in their names, which interfere with search-result accuracy (even using "Panic! at the Disco" is pretty iffy).
In a few cases, the numbers seem fairly close between "is" [11] (UK: [12]) and "are" [13] (UK: [14]), until you see just how many of the "is" hits are false positives ("'An Evening with Huey Lewis and the News' is included with ...", "The opening scene, set to 'Power of Love' by Huey Lewis and the News, is ...", etc.), and how few of the "are" hits are mistakes. In other cases, like Pet Shop Boys, the "is" usage [15] is utterly dwarfed by the "are" usage [16].
Any name ending explicitly in "Band" or "Group" or the like automatically leans toward singular usage strongly [17], because of the type of name (it is self-referentially reinforcing that it is a singular unit). Here, the "are" cases [18] are the ones with lots of false positives, e.g. "fans of the Dave Matthews Band are ...". The same can also happen, to a lesser extent, with names that sound like a single person's name or nickname, as in Steely Dan ( "is" leads against "are"). Plural-looking names without a leading "The" (e.g. Guns N' Roses) may seem to break even ( "is" vs. "are", until you remember that most false positives are in the "is" results. The results are not entirely consistently in favor of plural treatment, especially if the band name is a phrase that doesn't intrinsically sound like a band, e.g. 3 Doors Down ( "is" beats out "are", even accounting for the false-positive skew.
Band names, in historical N-gram corpora: N-grams can, tentatively, be useful for historical comparison, but the data has too many obvious gaps in it, producing zero returns for phrases that we know for a fact (e.g. from matching Google News searches) are frequently used by reliable sources; among those producing no returns at all from Ngrams are "Led Zeppelin was" (but plenty for "were" [which dominates], "is", and "are"), "Fleetwood Mac are" (but plenty for "was" [which dominates], "is" and "were"), and many others, that readily turn up in the GNews searches. On the up-side, the publishers in this case can be constrained to US vs. UK. And while, as noted above, there are always false positives, these are much fewer in Ngram searches because it only returns hits for contiguous phrases unbroken by punctuation. At any rate, to the extent the data is usable, is suggests that over the course of the last few generations, the predominant pattern across English usage has been to lean toward treating plural band names with plural grammatical constructions and vice versa, but with plenty of overlap.
This pattern is nowhere near absolute, however:
Conclusions: There is no rule, literally, in theory, or in practice. Usage leans toward plural generally, but this trend is much stronger for band names that sound plural, and may sometimes even be reversed for singular-sounding names, though this result is not at all consistent, and is more apparent in half-century-wide Google Books N-gram searches (which have very weak and gappy corpora for this sort of material, and thus verge on unreliable) than in modern news searches (also imperfect, due to a higher false-positive rate from ignoring punctuation, but this is easy to detect just by looking). The discrepancy demonstrates that the singular practice for singular-ish names is declining (probably because of arguments within publishers that mirror the recurrent one within Wikipedia). There is no ENGVAR matter; usage is not consistently different between US and UK treatment, and there is only very weak and circumstantial evidence of any alleged preference for always-singular treatment in American sources, and much evidence that directly contradicts this idea; to the extent there may be any slight trend in this direction, it is weak and growing weaker by the year, and certainly falls far short of ENGVAR's "strong national tie".
Recommendation: If MoS were to address this directly, it should say essentially this, in shorter wording: When writing about a band, team, organization, or other collective entity, use formulations that sound the most correct grammatically when spoken aloud, as a general default. However, prefer plural constructions when approaching the entity as people living lives, making public appearances, and doing other things that draw attention to members as individuals. Prefer singular forms when approaching the organization as an unitary business entity, legal property, or a socio-cultural phenomenon. Following the majority of modern sources, it is most common to use the singular for corporations, nonprofits/NGOs, major laboratories, governmental bodies, political parties, and social movements, due to the nature of their organization and of the actions that make them notable; teams, bands, performance troupes, field research teams, and other smaller-scale collaborations take the plural by default, unless their name strongly suggests the singular, or they are being considered explicitly as a unit (e.g., the group sued its [not their] record label). Unless someone can strongly refute what I've researched and reasoned so far, without cherry-picking, I will probably propose an amendment of this sort to MOS:BIO. People really need to stop fighting about this. Especially stop waving bogus nationalistic flags above the issue; that vitality-sucking nonsense needs a stake though its heart right now. This is perennial, lame drama, and it's just tiresome. Noise like this is precisely why so many Wikipedians get sick of, even angry about, style disputes and the time and productivity they waste. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 14:08, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boys Like Girls. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boys Like Girls. 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}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boys Like Girls. 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).
The help request has been answered. To reactivate, replace "helped" with your help request.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:13, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Boys Like Girls. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC)