This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The article now says that a new album entitled Invisible Reflection is to be released this year. There are no sources to this, and I couldn't find anything on google... hope it's true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.20.189.249 ( talk) 15:46, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The article talks of a new Cure record in the works, but according to this article http://musicfeeds.com.au/news/the-cure-rule-out-plans-for-new-music/ there won't be as Robert Smith feels "no need to capitalize on anything" and just focus on touring. Very disappointing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.180.180.172 ( talk) 17:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article be higher than a b article?

This article is pretty good, but still has a few issues that need fixing before it can be considered GA class. The main issue is referencing. It is spotty in some cases. Some sections are VERY well referenced, but other parts lack ANY inline cites at all. Please add references to the following paragraphs in order to meet referencing requirements at WP:WIAGA:

• "Between May and July '79, The Cure toured ...."
• "Dempsey was sacked from the band immediately following the tour's completion ..."
• "In May 1990, Roger O'Donnell left the band ..."
• "Mixed Up was followed in 1992 by the album ..."
• "Lol Tolhurst sued Robert Smith and Fiction Records in 1994 ..."
• "The Cure released Wild Mood Swings in 1996, however ..."
• "1997 saw the release of Galore, the follow-up to The Cure's ..."

The above are the first lines of paragraphs that lack ANY referencing whatsoever, so it is impossible to verify the information that the paragraphs report. Please provide inline citations, just like the rest of the article, so that I may remove the hold and add this article to the GA list. If the fixes cannot be made in the next 7 days, I will be forced to fail the article. -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 17:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The deal with the lack of citations in certain paragraphs is that I, the main contributor to the article, have been very slowly working on the article, focusing on certain areas before moving on to other ones. However, the article was put up for GAC before I had intended it to be. Nevertheless, I think I can clean up and reference the necessary areas in the given time. WesleyDodds 20:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I apologize if this is not the correct way to request. I would like to add the below link to the external links page; however, I saw that I first need to post it here for consideration. Thank you.

I would also like to see another link added

• The Cure at Last.FM

Rbalfanz ( talk) 04:40, 10 May 2008 (UTC)rbalfanz

I apologize too if this is not the correct way to intervene, but the style of the band's music is not Gothic ata ll. If you want to know, ask Robert Smith. He, better than anybody knows that. So please don't contradict him in this.

• The Cure/Archive 2 discography at Discogs

I think it's very useful information for any one interested in The Cure.

All objections have been addressed. Consider taking this article for a peer review WP:PR on the way to featured status. Good job! -- Jayron32| talk| contribs 04:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations! Great article. I would also consider getting it featured, after a PR specifically requesting copyediting. Keep it up! -- SidiLemine 15:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to say that this is a very well done page! Even the links to the members pages are very well done! Good job!

Forgive me if i've missed this completely but I can't find any reference to Curiosity the Cure Anomalies 1977-1984 (the collection of live and other random tracks included on the double play casette version of Concert). Seems like something that should be listed somewhere on one of these Cure pages. extraordinary 14:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure people have noted this user's edits where text gets removed from the 'Recent years (2003–present)' section. The user has so far received 3 warnings on his/her talk page (see: User talk:82.44.212.202). If any further edits are made, please can whoever reverts it add another warning using the the warning templates: {{ subst: uw-delete4}} next and finally {{ subst: uw-delete4im}} before requesting the IP address is blocked on WP:AIV. Cheers -- JD554 11:21, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

4th warning given. Next one is {{ subst: uw-delete4im}} and then request to block on WP:AIV. -- JD554 07:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Just checking and the guidelines and the warning given is now the last warning. Any more edits from 82.44.212.202 and a request for blocking will be made to WP:AIV -- JD554 08:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

sigh I've reported 82.44.212.202 to WP:AIV. Hopefully the IP address will now be blocked, albeit temporarily. -- JD554 09:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't bother doing anything beyond reverts for a while because the user's IP kept changing. The user claims he/she works for the band and has rationalized removing the material before due to knowing "the truth" about the situation, which really isn't all that helpful or acceptable per WP:Reliable sources. WesleyDodds 09:59, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

you should add Suretone Records, cause that's the label they're on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.228.177.213 ( talk) 20:01, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Why does the information about Lol Tolhurst producing the first two And Also The Trees albums keep being deleted? I see no problem in having the information in this article as it also talks about Robert Smith's other projects. -- JD554 11:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

This is a great page, but I couldn't help but notice that there is no references whatsoever to the Cure song "Burn", which appeared both in the Brandon Lee movie "The Crow" and on the soundtrack in 1994.

http://www.thecure.com/discography/?AssetID=1097977

Its an amazing song and I think it is very worthy of a mention - but thought I better leave it to the pro's to add it.

Cheers :)

RedTrinity

124.148.51.164 ( talk) 13:03, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I've been contributing to this article for quite a while now. When I open the Cure's page, their always is a bit of vandalism, so please watch out for the vandalizing and block their account or IP's from editing. Dirtyharry1994 ( talk) 08:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Revisionist nonsense. The Cure are post-punk if anything.

Gothic rock derived from post-punk. WesleyDodds ( talk) 09:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

"Revisionist nonsense"? Interesting choice of words. NSR77 ^T 20:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

New wave shouldn't be there because they are not new wave. Alternative rock, gothic rock, and post-punk are correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.252.190 ( talk) 05:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Robert Smith rejects the gothic label. Enough said. '...they are not new wave.' How old are you? Twelve? The Cure were considered post punk and new wave in the very early eighties. Even if you're a kid, you can do some research and find out simple facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.16.96.203 ( talk) 05:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, they aren't goth, but did go through a goth/dark phase from 81-82, with Faith and Pornography. And then Disintegration returned with those element. The band itself is not goth, though - considering most of their albums are pop, post-punk, alternative, new wave, or whatever you want to call it - not goth. 98.229.101.216 ( talk) 03:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

What matters is what reliable sources call them [1] [2]. -- JD554 ( talk) 11:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:The Cure/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. Jezhotwells ( talk) 16:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b ( MoS):

   I made some copy-edits, but I feel taht the prose could be improved throughout. It is rather choppy with many repeated truns of phrase that could be improved. MoS compliant. Jezhotwells ( talk) 15:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c ( OR):

   A number of dead links which have been tagged. Ref #1 [3] is OK , but it is now 2009, could do with an update on this statistic; Ref #36 was dead but i find a replacementa t Billboard, w=howver this does not support all of the diffrenet statements referenced, due to Billboard restructuring their site; ref #45 I can't find a direct replacement for; ref #54 [4], The Brits have removed their archives, not at the Internet archive, either; ref #60 [5], I am sure you can find a better review that one on an online shopping site, not very RS;

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

OK, just a few references need fixing and the prose could do with a thorough brush up. On hold. Major contributors and projects will be informed. Jezhotwells ( talk) 15:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC) OK, all looks fine now. Keep GA status. Thanks for your hard work. Jezhotwells ( talk) 22:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• Dead links have been updated - although I removed the reference for the release date of 4:13 Dream as this isn't controversial and likely to be disputed. -- JD554 ( talk) 08:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

To address the cumulative sales total: these number are hard to come by and often aren't updated for years. This is the best we've got for now. WesleyDodds ( talk) 08:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

• I've given the prose another go over, but I'm not sure I can I identify the choppiness you mention. It seems to do pretty well for readability. -- JD554 ( talk) 09:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Time we updated sales info? Is this source reliable? http://www.shout.ru/index_thecure_e.htm Revan ltrl ( talk) 21:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Why do I have a feeling this is not the line-up of the cure:

Michael Gibson – lead vocals, guitars, keyboards (since 1976) GO GO – guitars, keyboards (1976–1978, 1983–1993, since 2005) Jesus Zalapa – bass, keyboards (1979–1982, since 1985) David "Big Daddy" Fatass – drums, percussion (since 1995)

someone might want to semi-protect the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.162.220.50 ( talk) 03:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

In events like these isn't it prudent to report users that make these type of edits? U21980 ( talk) 05:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe the external links added by User:Alessandr79 should be used [6]. Firstly they are in Italian and therefore not accessible to the majority of readers per WP:ELNO#7 and given the username, the journalists name given on the website and the editor's insistence that they are a journalist [7] [8], that the links are spam promoting that website, which fails WP:ELNO#4 and WP:EL#ADV. -- JD554 ( talk) 09:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I double checked the items and concur with your assessment. Along with the EL guidelines that you quote it looks like a clear COI violation. Thanks for taking the time to check things out and for posting your findings here. MarnetteD | Talk 18:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Just because this article does not mention the other labels in it main text does not mean that this group did not record for the labels that are listed in the infobox. This is a wikipedia article and that means that there may or may not be inaccuracies in it. It is written by volunteers and, thus, may never be a comprehensive and complete article about every item about The Cure. You need to investigate off wiki to find out whether these labels are in error. MarnetteD | Talk 11:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

It says that the band have had 13, but they have had 14 if you include 2001's Acoustic Hits. This was a studio album, where the band re-recorded 18 of their older songs. It was released as a bonus disc to Greatest Hits (The Cure album), but that does not mean it should be overlooked. For example, Michael Jackson did HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I, half studio, half greatest hits, and that is saw as a studio album too. -- 77.99.231.37 ( talk) 13:56, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I can see why it is excluded, but the case is especially strong for its exclusion since The Cure's latest album is 4:13 Dream, 4 representing the number of members of The Cure, and 13 representing the number of albums they had released to that point. U21980 ( talk) 05:05, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

As a bonus disc to a greatest hits album, I wouldn't include it in the account, although it'd be interesting to get others' feedback/perspectives. - KaJunl ( talk) 17:32, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi everyone,

I just noticed that the lineup for the band reads as follows: Robert Smith, Simon Gallup, Roger O'Donnell, Lol Tolhurst, and Jason Cooper

Now I know that this was probably changed to reflect the "Reflections" show lineup, but from all available sources at the moment, Lol or Roger have not formally been asked to rejoin the band. Missing from the lineup is Porl Thompson who may still be an active member of The Cure. It may be a minor point, but should this be changed back? U21980 ( talk) 14:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

To be more specific, the Wikipedia page for The Cure consists of two different lineups. One listed under the picture of The Cure which is the one mentioned above and one listed under the Members section which has the following line-up listed: Robert Smith, Porl Thompson, Simon Gallup, and Jason Cooper. U21980 ( talk) 23:34, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

As of this moment, the lineups have been changed to reflect the official status of the band as of the 4:13 album and 4Tour. If there are any concerns, I would like to discuss them.

Thank you! U21980 ( talk) 19:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

What should probably be done is for us to do something a little more like the lineup section of Avenged Sevenfold: a chart showing when members were a part of the band. -- 207.231.32.22 ( talk) 15:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Although the Cure's membership situation has since changed, the issues quite rightly raised by U21980 have still not been adequately addressed. As of 28 September 2012, there appear to be two outstanding issues with the band "Members" information contained in the article's Infobox.

1. The photograph and accompanying caption shows a live version of the band from more than five years ago, which has since undergone several line-up changes. Porl Thompson has not appeared live with the band since 2009, and publicly announced in May 2012 that he had left the group. Roger O'Donnell has also been confirmed as an official member for more than a year. Should the photograph and accompanying caption therefore be changed to reflect the personnel changes of the past five years?

2. Reeves Gabrels is currently listed as a Member in the article's Infobox. However, The Cure have already publicly stated that he was only standing in as a live guitarist for their summer festival tour of Europe (May-Sept 2012). Until such time as The Cure might make an official announcement to the contrary, should the article's Infobox therefore not reflect only the confirmed band membership of Robert Smith, Simon Gallup, Jason Cooper and Roger O'Donnell? Te Irirangi ( talk) 11:16, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

In the part about Lol's departure in 1989, it says: "however it has since been revealed that he contributed nothing to the album in either performance or song writing"

First of all, it should be "songwriting". Secondly, this statement is quite harsh. While it is undoubtedly true that Lol contributed little to the album, he did contribute both in terms of recording and songwriting. According to Roger O'Donnell's account of the recording of Disintegration, Lol wrote the original demo for Homesick (although it was changed a lot by Roger, Boris, and Simon), and he also recorded some parts for the album (as is implied when Roger states that "much of the time I had to go in and redo Lol's parts"). According to Lol himself back in the day (which might not be a reliable source), he contributed more to Disintegration than to KMKMKM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MelancholyRose ( talk • contribs) 17:32, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

The Cure are not emo, honestly they don't have much to do with the genre. We should change it. 88.104.14.162 ( talk) 19:31, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

and you did. good pick though: emo --> alternative. that works! it is better than before when it said the cure was just simply a rock band --not really typical for a pure rock band. Cramyourspam ( talk) 21:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

i think something really needs to be said about the cure's *influence* on emo, though, because it's been profound. i mean in the mcr-sense, not the d.c. punk sense. are all these 'emo' bands not merely copying the cure, really? so, i'm going to add a short sentence into the legacy section and ask that somebody else expand upon it.

Tolhurst was credited on the Desintegration album's liner notes as playing 'other instrument', not 'instrumentS' as stated in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.66.146 ( talk) 14:58, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Tolhurst was credited on the Desintegration album's liner notes as playing 'other instrument', NOT 'other instrumentS'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.66.146 ( talk) 15:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

For over a month there has been an edit war over the nationality of the band. This is unproductive and counter to Wikipedia policy (see WP:3RR). I have reverted the text back to the version that existed before the warring began, as per WP:BRD. It is up to the protagonist who wants a different version to present and discuss their case here. If this is not done and the warring continues, a report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring is the next step. PaleCloudedWhite ( talk) 11:04, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I already reported this article and a few others (these anons have been very busy edit warring) at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring a few days ago and nothing came of it, so you'd probably be better off requesting it be protected if they continue. -- I need a name ( talk) 16:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

At the moment there are currently two navboxes at the bottom of each Cure-related article, which, to me, seems excessive, so I propose that they be merged into one. There would be two ways of going about this:

• Option A: combining all of the information into one single navbox
• Option B: having the two current, separate navboxes inside one single navbox

I am in favour of option A. Please comment whether you agree with the proposal (and which option) or think it should stay as is. Lachlan Foley 08:58, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Look, I don't wanna get into an argument with a load of Cure heads who've probably been to the very beech, but why is the Camus novel described as absurdist?

Trying but failing to sound unpretentious, reading the novel said nothing to me about absurdism, but did make me question, in some small way, the nature of existence.

Unless the words have completely twisted since I was a kid in the '80s (which could have happened, as it's happened in other genres) that novel is not absurdist. The protagonist's mother died today. She didn't give him an exploding cigar.

Is this wiki policy?

Do you consider The Idiot or Lear absurdism?

Just asking, like. Ganpati23 ( talk) 06:18, 28 November 2014 (UTC)