Talk:Garbage (band)

GA Nomination

As the one who originally nominated the article for a GA reassessment, I was happy to see the article back up at GAN. After taking another look at the article, I'm happy to say it is much improved, though in my opinion not yet up to GA standards. Below are my suggestions to improve the article. The below list isn't necessarily an exhaustive list of issues with the article, but it's definitely a good start. That said, it seems like it might be alot of work, so I've failed the article nomination since I would imagine it might take a while. That said, I'd be happy to take another look at the article once you feel it to be up to spec. If the article gets renominated, feel free to drop me a note and I'll take another look: the GAN page can get a bit backlogged sometimes, so that might speed things up. Anyways, without further ado:

• The biggest problem with the article is that it is almost completely a biography of the band. That is to say, the vast majority of the article is simply historical information. What about the band's sound? Their live performances? Group dynamic? Any major controversies? Have they ever won a Grammy? Any other awards? I'm not saying that all of this needs to be included, but you've really gotta give the reader more information than "X happened. Then Y happened. After that, Z happened." As a good example of what I mean, check out Nine Inch Nails. Yes, it's an FA article, but I think you might be able to see what I mean.
• Additionally, the article goes into waaaay too much detail about the band's chart performance. That kind of raw data is much better left to the Garbage discography article. When it comes to the band itself, does it really matter that ""Only Happy" peaked at #55 on the Hot 100"?
• Another short-coming is that the entire article only has one image (in the infobox). Surely there's some images that would help describe each of the band's periods? Again, I'd recommend taking a look at the NIN page. But, be careful using copyrighted images. Try and use free ones wherever possible, and only use copyrighted stuff where it really helps the article.
  •  Done Ultra! 19:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
• Assuming you take my above advice into account, I'd recommend placing all the historical/biographical stuff into subheaders of one large History section or something like that. Also, since each sub-section is basically based on each release, I'd recommend using the {{main}} template.
• Overall, the citations are formatted very inconsistently. I'd recommend going through the code a couple times and cleaning things up a bit. For instance, wherever possible, a publisher value should give the publisher's proper name, not website. So for instance, use Billboard not Billboard.com). Also any date value (but NOT accessdate) should be wikilinked like so: [[2008-04-03]].
• All of the years are generally overwikilinked. In most cases, a year should be left unlinked.
• Also concerning dates, consider how specific you need to get, given that this is an article based on the band, not each and every release. For instance, do we really care that the band "relocated to Friday Harbor, Washington on March 1, 1997" It's a good fact to mention, but do we care what day it happened on? Does it have any relevance to anyone? There's alot of too-specific dates throughout the article. For instance: ""Push It" debuted at #52 on the May 9", "On February 23, 1993, Manson was signed as a solo artist to MCA", etc. To solve this, I'd recommend either mentioning just the year, or if multiple things happened in quick succession mention the month as well, or, if the date doesn't have that much relevance, don't mention the date at all. I would guess that it's would often be pretty clear what year something happened in, given the context around the fact. Maybe it would be smart to mention the year once for the first thing that happened in that particular year, then leave it as assumed until the year changes.
• The text overall needs a thorough copyediting. It is largely over wikilinked, unencyclopedic in tone, and full of typos. A few examples: "with no compensation from any", "chart for four weeks from", "Lyrics were penned at a cabin", "Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway and Finland, as well as the top 40 in Germany, Austria, Switzerland", ""Vow" bubbled under for two weeks", "The band confirm that" (wrong tense), "nominations for Best Rock Song and Best Rock Performance By A Duo Or Group" (no period), etc.
• Is the entire paragraph about Goodbye Mr. Mackenzie neccessary? It's important in relation to Manson, but I'm not sure what the relevance is to Garbage.
  •  Done Ultra! 19:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
• In fact, alot of the first section seems unneccessary. For instance, does it relate that much to Garbage what artists Marker has remixed music for?
  •  Done Ultra! 19:38, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
• In general, keep in-line citations at the end of sentences. Try and avoid putting them in the middle of a sentence, unless the a very specific part of the fact is so unbelievable or contentious it is unavoidable.

That should do it for now. If you have any questions or concerns with my review, feel free to drop me a line. Also, if you feel my review is in error, you can have the review reassessed at WP:GAR. Good luck! Drewcifer (talk) 07:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Chronology

I'm not much of an expert on Garbage or even really a fan, but when browsing through the article, something struck me as a bit odd - under the "Formation (1993-94)" section, mention is made of Xfm, which wasn't even created until 1997. Also, on several occasions times months are mentioned, but it is not clear to which year they refer. Any ideas?

Opticrom (talk) 12:00, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to ask the same question: How could "Vow" be played on XFM in December 1994 if XFM didn't exist until 1997? Also that section is titled 1993-1994, yet the story starts in 1983 when Vig and Marker founded Smart Studios, then Manson was singing in 1984 and they contacted her to sing lead vocals. It all sounds like it happened in 1984. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.95.55.115 (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

They could be talking about the pirate radio station that was stationed in a ship off-shore. They, XFM, were not the only ones doing that at that time to avoid scrutiny of the authorites. EnveeNV (talk) 19:54, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "Hits" :
  • ""''Hits'' (Stupid Girl trade ad)"" | (Retrieved - 2008-02-24)
  • ""''[[Hits]]'' ("[[Special]]" trade ad)"" | (Retrieved - 2008-02-24)
  • ""''Hits'' ("[[When I Grow Up]]" trade ad)"" (Retrieved - 2008-02-24)

DumZiBoT (talk) 01:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Manson's solo album

I've removed the lines "Manson is reluctant to talk about her album, preferring to wait until it is released in early 2008. Manson was scheduled to finish recording the album in September 2007." Clearly, this information is out of date: if anyone has any references about a new release date (or any pertinent information at all about the album), the article would benefit from this information being added Dom Kaos (talk) 15:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Wrong info in the article?

In the article it says: Manson has worked with a number of people on the project including Scottish songwriter Paul Buchanan, US rock musicians Jack White, Billy Corgan, Beck, Greg Kurstin and David Arnold.
Yet on her facebook page Shirley Manson writes: I never said that I wrote music with Jack White, Billy Corgan OR the very lovely and talented Beck. Someone else did and so it got written up that I did in the press but it never happened.At least not in the real world. Maybe in my head.
Source: [1]
So I remove the sentence from the article, because I think there's no better source for this as Shirley Manson herself. ;) --84.142.240.140 (talk) 11:47, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Album Info - Too Much??

It seems to me that the sections on each album are far too detailed for this piece on the band & much of the information would be more appropriately placed under the individual albums. Gwladys24 (talk) 21:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

NHL2000

I thinks it would be nice trivia to include that Garbage - Push It was the main theme for NHL2000 icehockey game... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.101.3.25 (talk) 10:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

While we are on the subject of games. We could include As Heaven Is Wide and Only Happy When It Rains since both were on the first edition of the Playstion One console game called Gran Turismo.

Even on Gran Turismo's page https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Gran_Turismo_(1997_video_game) there is no mention of the music in that game.

As a player of that game i can say that it added to the replayability of that game. Garbage were not the only ones who were featured in that game either. I even added a section on the talk page asking why there is no section on music.

I do small edits for wiki, mainly dead link removals or links that resolve to porn, small grammar corrections or make sentences written by people whose main language is not english more readable to english speakers. Starting a whole new header and all that is beyond my capabilitites since i forgot the syntax. I dont want to screw up a page. EnveeNV (talk) 20:06, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

File:GarbageLivein2005.jpg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:GarbageLivein2005.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:19, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Garbage (band)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Garbage (band)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "PR":

• From Blood for Poppies: "GARBAGE UNVEIL "BLOOD FOR POPPIES"". BBGun Press. Retrieved 2012-03-08. Debut single from forthcoming NOT YOUR KIND OF PEOPLE available for download for free from WWW.GARBAGE.COM; "BLOOD FOR POPPIES" to be released on limitied edition, white-vinyl 7-inch for Record Store Day
• From Not Your Kind of People tour: Watson, Rob. "Press Release: Blood for Poppies". Garbagedisco. Retrieved 2012-03-08.
• From Scottish Parliament: "Scottish Parliament and Scottish Executive". Scotland Office. Archived from the original on October 4, 2006. Retrieved 2006-11-08. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |deadurl= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

there was a incident in garbage's last concert.

http://kultura.gazeta.pl/kultura/1,114526,11834058,Bil_kobiete_na_koncercie_Garbage__Wokalistka_kazala.html

because i used non-english source, so someone must translate it and confirm that the incident was true --82.139.5.13 (talk) 09:10, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, it was an incident. Here's another source (in English) about it: http://www.gigwise.com/news/73376/Garbage-star-throws-woman-beater-out-of-gig---watch But I think it's not relevant to be included on Garbage's main page. Also it's not the first time when Shirley Manson stopped a concert because of various incidents.Deepblue1 (talk) 09:55, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• • Maybe it would be included in Controversies section --82.139.5.13 (talk) 09:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

• • • Why do you have to interfere or troll about in this article with your chatty unnecessary a-sides? Okay so there was an incident, so what? Nobody got hurt, what is the big deal? Really? Did the man or the woman apologise to the other with a gift basket of fruit and chocolate? Just why do you have to come in to this article OP and interupt the peace here? Please leave and don't come back to this article if all you want to do is disrupt and hurt us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.89.3 (talk) 07:37, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

• • • • This that nodoby get hurt, this doesn't mean that it should be never mentioned. Even it wasn't about disrupting and hurting and interrupting the peace. He just wanted to say what he wanted. That's all. So there's nothing to be mad at. --178.235.183.165 (talk) 14:32, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

  Not on Garbages' page. No. But on her own page, yes. The behavior of stopping some misogynist creep wife beater goes right up her ally and she should be known for her outspoken attitudes when it comes to stopping one sex of attempting to undermine the other.

  I tried to watch the clip but there is not one. However the page with text is still there so we can ssume it did happen.

  For those who say here that nobody got hurt ithink you miss the point. Shirley stopped the gig to stop the women from getting hurt more than she already was. She was getting beat up so the gig stopped. EnveeNV (talk) 20:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Musical Style section and references

Garbage hasn't been influenced by Curve, nor have they ever said they are influenced. The other artists mentioned have been truthfully and correctly cited, however some resentful Curve fan decided to include Curve and cite another resentful Curve fan's (or maybe their own) blog-diatribe on Garbage in comparison to Curve.

This is misleading, and pathetic, and it's been removed. --Lapadite77 (talk) 09:31, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the claim that Curve influenced Garbage. Every band is influenced by other bands. And in this case, Garbage and Curve both made electronic rock music (plus their vocalists are pretty similar). That source that you removed (a trashy Pitchfork review of a Curve compilation) is definitely malicious regarding to Garbage. I think that Curve should be mentioned, but using a different source. Deepblue1 (talk) 12:01, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, all bands have their influences (Garbage has mentioned theirs), and that Garbage hasn't been influenced by Curve in particular is my opinion, however Garbage, to my knowledge, has never claimed Curve an influence, so I removed it because it is not a proper/truthful reference for the inclusion of the band, but a spiteful review from a Curve fan. You can't just make a claim and cite some random opinion post as a source. I've no problem with a valid source for Curve (or any other band) being an influence on Garbage being cited. --Lapadite77 (talk) 23:32, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Here's one reliable source, Allmusic: http://www.allmusic.com/artist/garbage-mn0000194246/related (see Influenced By section). I don't think that Garbage ever claimed that they were influenced by Curve, but that doesn't mean that they weren't at all (at least for Garbage's debut album).

Here you can read this:

“ Toni Halliday has occasionally commented on the comparisons between both groups, stating in an 1996 interview with Volume magazine, that she could "see bits of Garbage in what we've done, just like we see bits of Sonic Youth or the Valentines or really any band that was doing something supposedly outside the norm. In a way it's very flattering to be tied in with (Garbage drummer and co-producer) Butch Vig, not just because he's a brilliant human being, but because he's a brilliant producer, and he's worked on some of our favourite records. But eventually Garbage are a pop band, and Curve were never a pop band". ”

Deepblue1 (talk) 13:03, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

"...really any band that was doing something supposedly outside the norm" - that says enough (also, what an arrogant statement). Are all bands that did anything outside the norm going to be grouped together and claimed to have influenced each other?

There's literally no sonic evidence that Garbage was at all influenced by Curve, nor has Garbage ever claimed them an influence, amidst all the artists (a lot) they noted over the years. Nothing of their music sounds like Curve's - the similarities start and end in the mere act of experimentation. Curve actually started electronic stuff after Garbage did theirs, so if anything Curve followed what Garbage was doing since their experimentation with such elements came after Garbage's success with it. Furthermore, Curve never had songs like Stupid Girl, Queer, A Stroke of Luck, Dog New Tricks, Milk, etc. Sorry, as much as Curve fans like to repeat the notion, there's no evidence of an influence there. --Lapadite77 (talk) 05:42, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

"There's literally no sonic evidence that Garbage was at all influenced by Curve". Just listen their music. For example "Fait Accompli" from 1992. I'm a big fan of both bands, and I can see the fact that Curve influenced Garbage, at least a little bit (guitar tone, basslines, rhythms). That doesn't mean that Garbage copied Curve (like some envious Curve fans claimed). It's not the same thing at all. Also take a look at the Garbage's Similar Artists on Last.fm; Curve is by far the most similar band from that list. And both bands are amazing.

"Curve actually started electronic stuff after Garbage did theirs". No. Curve started their electronic stuff much earlier. Listen for example the songs Sandpit, Low and Behold, Cherry, Today Is Not the Day, Unreadable Communication, Left of Mother, Cuckoo, all released before 1995 (before Garbage released their debut album). Plus Curve always used synths behind the loud guitars. Listen closely. Deepblue1 (talk) 15:17, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

No, there's no sonic evidence whatsoever. I've listened to all of Curve's albums (and I like their music), otherwise I wouldn't be posing this. Just because you want there to be doesn't mean there is. I don't like the Cocteau Twins, but I know they're an influence, particularly on Shirley. Those are purely categorial suggestions, and in any event I see Angelfish (not coincidentally, Shirley's old band), The Cardigans, Hole, No Doubt, Veruca Salt, and Republica listed before Curve - bands they sound nothing like and are nothing like. That says everything. It's absurd you're citing a music listening/suggestion site that gives potential similar interests relative to the bands. Do you understand that it's merely categorial data? Do you say all industrial bands are influenced by each other, or that all Thrash bands are influenced by each other, and so on and so forth? your logic is flawed and your bias is transparent. There is no particular sonic influence here. And I'd pointed out a bunch of songs that sound nothing like Curve.

Look at the music site you cited in the wiki page - 'Influenced by: The Cure, The Cars, Wire'... Lol; bands with no relation to Garbage beyond some of them not being limited to one genre - again, categorical grouping (every band has it in these kinds of sites). I don't see The Cure or The Cars being cited here, but conveniently Curve is there for the Curve fan. Why not just cite a Pandora or Spotify page? They musically categorize bands too. Isn't it telling a Curve fan is the one insisting Curve is an influence? Why aren't you citing all the rock bands that EVER delved into electronic stuff (there's many)? Why aren't you citing in the Curve page all the bands they were really influenced by? And no, Curve properly delved into (and continued with) electronic after Garbage, with their Come Clean record. They were a guitar-driven rock/alternative/shoegazing/gothic/industrial band before. Oh are both Garbage and Curve hard to categorize into one genre, like so many other bands? Oh well I guess they must sound the same and one must be influenced by the other. Seriously, there's nothing valid here. But if you want to keep that source, a music discovering/listening site, be my guest. Anyone with a brain who goes to check it will question the validity. --Lapadite77 (talk) 21:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Btw, since you like to contribute to the pages, why don't you contribute to Garbage's or Shirley Mansons's own influence/legacy section? --Lapadite77 (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry @Lapadite77:, but you've completely lost me with this post. You might not want to admit it, but many songs on their debut - including "Vow" and "Supervixen" - owe more than a debt to "Clipped" alone, yet alone the rest of their Curve's debut album. I was all for removing that nonsense Pitchfork source (from back when it was basically a blog) and replacing it with a genuine one, but you're so vehemently denying any influence whatsoever, that it makes me question your motives for your position. It's obvious we should all screw that Pitchfork source back where it belongs, but it's also clear that Vig - at least - has been influenced in some capacity by Curve's sound. Once a genuine source is found, it should be included. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Actually, i've been transparent and reasonable from the start, when I first stated there is no sonic evidence of Curve being an influence on Garbage. I know Curve fans obsessively insist there is, no need to beat that point. What it does is question Curve's fans motives, actually, which are transparent every time - and questioned in my previous post with logical points you conveniently ignore. Did you understand my points? I posted logical rebuttals to clearly biased and fundamentally illogical reasons. I personally stated I do not care for some of Garbage's influences but still realize they are influences, plus, I like Curve's music. However, they are not one. And do you really find a music discovery/suggestion site to be a valid source for citing influence? Again, might as well just use a Pandora as a source. What I realize is that Curve fans generally don't seem to be able to distinguish, discriminate, or contextualize in this regard. Loud, layered guitars have been used by many bands. Electronic fusions have been done by many, many bands. Clipped evokes no particular Garbage song. Again, any similarities start and end with the mere approach to music making - something not remotely enough to closely associate bands and label one an influence on or rip off of another (but clearly, Curve fans deem it enough). But to indulge the idea, realize that many bands throughout history, including the most acclaimed and popular, have made songs that have evoked prior songs or general approaches, sometimes specifically with particular riffs for example, and the bands themselves sometimes have never even heard of the artists they're supposed to have been influenced by or stolen from. That Curve fans want to closely associate Curve with Garbage as opposed to a myriad of other fusion artists and bands that influenced Curve (and suspiciously isn't mentioned on their page), and that influenced Garbage (which they've humbly noted over the years, in notable contrast to Halliday's arrogant statement posted here by Deepblue) is ultimately not my problem. It's like Exhorder fans compulsively insisting on associating them with Pantera, claiming the latter stole their style, when Patnera sounded like no one and is one of the most influential and acclaimed modern rock/metal bands. That's probably the main issue with Curve fans, they echo the logically-flawed, generally-associate-me mentality of Curve's singer: she could 'see bits of Garbage in what we've done, just like we see bits of Sonic Youth or the Valentines or really any band that was doing something supposedly outside the norm. In a way it's very flattering to be tied in with (Garbage drummer and co-producer) Butch Vig" (or maybe she was actually rightfully taking the piss out of that idea with the bolded statement, and if so, I'd give her props there). So like I said, so be it, run with it to your liking, use your 'source'. At least is not that pathetic blog cited by a hateful Curve fan. I do find it funny you both agreed it was invalid, nonsense, yet neither evidently took the initiative to remove it. In any event, it's all cool - your association stays there. --Lapadite77 (talk) 02:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Take look at this interview, where Vig notes influentials bands for debut: (about 2:28) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSiWVe941bY --Lapadite77 (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I do ask, why do you not contribute to Garbage's own influence/legacy section if you're so keen on contributing to influences? or is Curve's inclusion only what matters? --Lapadite77 (talk) 03:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

First up, I'm not a Curve fan. They're a name I hear about every so often, but aside from watching about half a dozen videos recently on Youtube, I've never heard much of their work. But even I noticed the similarities almost immediately. And the influences section of Garbage's AllMusic article is a fine source for Curve's inclusion on an influences section. You don't need an interview where a member of Garbage explicitly says "Yes, we are definitely influenced by band X" to include "band X" in an influences section. Interviews, Reviews, the influences section of a credible site such as AllMusic, they're all acceptable sources. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Lol, yeah that's what both your posts indicate (sarcasm). And no, it is not. Music suggestion/discovering sites with their categorical genre/style grouping are not by any means a valid source. But like I said, do as you wish. Hey, why don't you also include The Cardigans, Hole, No Doubt, Veruca Salt, Republica (all listed before Curve on lastfm site), The Cure, New Order, Leftfield, Wire, The Cars, Iggy Pop (all on allmusic site)? They're all too suggestions in addition to Curve on your "source", why only hellbent on Curve? And why is there no section on the myriad of bands that influenced Curve on their wiki? Transparent. I leave this stale discussion with Shirley Manson's early word on it: "We're nothing like Curve....when a band is young and it hasn't made its own mark, then people will compare you to others. Always."

Leave it to Curve fans to compulsively hang on to an early suggestion, 20 years and 5 very different, eclectic albums later. It's hilarious when you read some Curve fans on the internet in Garbage-related sites and videos say stuff like "rip-off, don't listen to this, go buy Curve albums instead". Lol, could they be any more transparent? I don't think may people would've even heard of Curve if it wasn't for a bunch of their resentful overzealous fans trying to associate them with Garbage. Not that you two are necessarily like them. But hey if you were on some music fans discovery/suggestion site, it would certainly group you with the obnoxious rest ;) Cheers. --Lapadite77 (talk) 03:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Been a garbage fan since 1995. I have never heard of the "curve" association. Let alone heard of curve. I know from Shirley's own mouth who her influences are and Curve was not among the list of greats that came out of her mouth. Want to post curve as being an influence on Garbage then give us Shirley's lips saying it. This is not beign nasty but asking for the truth. Posting some random site with some info, not saying you did this, on how some bands influenced others is not good enough and i support the removal of such a reference. EnveeNV (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Influence/Legacy section

There should be one created. Both Garbage and Shirley Manson have influenced a myriad of artists and pop music/culture (musically, image-wise, attitude, etc), during their time and today. Many artists have mentioned their influence (along with Shirley Manson's), especially current artists. I feel this section should be created, with citations from particular artists themselves and publications that have written about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lapadite77 (talk • contribs) 05:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

In Garbage's style/influences section, it should also note their film and director influences, on their videos. I can recall them and Manson talking about being major film fans and being influenced by and giving nods to some French directors and surrealists filmmakers and artists. Their surrealism influences are most noted in the videos for Push It and Blood for Poppies.

Publications have also over time noted Garbage's own visual style and ambitions and the influences on other artists' visual approach and output, something that could also be included in the proposed section for their own influences in the modern pop/music landscape. --Lapadite77 (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Had recently come across a Vanity Fair interview with the band, wherein the journalist proposed their music/approach too been an influenced on bands like Sleigh Bells. --Lapadite77 (talk) 15:10, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I saw their ambitions to be involved in films as well, during the charlie rose interview which was supposedly in 99. This interview was just before the release of The World Is Not Enough in 99. EnveeNV (talk) 20:19, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Genres

Genres/styles should be cited in the article not necessarily in the info box. Also, indie rock, darkwave and downtempo should be included, the latter in place of trip hop, and "electronic" should be eliminated as electronic rock is already included. Post punk should also be included since is it particularly incorporated in albums Bleed Like Me and Not Your Kind of People. --Lpdte77 (talk) 02:00, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

If you have sources for these genres, add them. If you don't, don't add them. Per WP:RS. If you want it added as prose, go ahead, but you need to find sources first. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:53, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The sources you had made using the beautiful garbage article are not strong, the source here state "They consciously picked up elements from shoegazing, trip-hop, and indie rock -- anything sonically interesting in the underground, crafting them together with skill and a keen commercial eye.". Having elements of a genre, does not place the group within the genre. Before reverting my edit, please discuss this further here. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:24, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Actually, before playing alpha editor (e.g., Wikipedia:OWN) and automatically reverting contributions you disagree with, as always and expected, YOU should voice your concern in the talk page first. ALL sites, reviews, etc will state them as incorporating elements of multiple genres, do you understand that? You've cited yourself, for your "pop" inclusion in Garbage (album) infobox, a review - by the way, from the same reviewer I cited here - that does the same thing. Using the logic you employ, your source isn't strong as the reviewer, after describing significant, encapsulating elements of alt rock, merely notes it "comes off as pop". Again, your agenda is transparent. This is a credible source, which you yourself championed, and notes particular genres blatantly incorporated, and that had been included here before. Don't revert it again, otherwise you're again engaging in disruptive editing, and in danger of violating three-revert rule. It should be removed if multiple editors here object and a consensus to remove it is reached. Wikipedia:COLLAB --Lpdte77 (talk) 18:54, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

You may be right. User:Andrzejbanas may (or may not?) need to start a discussion to remove the genres. However, similarly, you also need to have a discussion before adding the genres. (Especially when you don't have any sources to support it.) Also note that consciously picked up elements does not necessarily mean that they're a shoegaze band. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 19:03, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

You've misinterpreted. I started this discussion suggesting the inclusion of the aforementioned as-yet uncited genres, and to promote discussion of the inclusion and sourcing of genres/styles in the article, as Walter Görlitz too noted below. My subsequent back and forth with Andrzejbana here is over a particular citation used for genres I included, in case that wasn't evident. And no, genres are generally listed in the order in which they might encapsulate the band best/most. This band is an alternative/rock band first, it's the most prevalent genre noted in the web, and what they're generally first classified as; the inclusion of genres after that does not necessarily translate to the band being strictly pegged by such genres (especially since all their albums are sonically very different), but that they've delved into them; as is the same principle for any and every artist/band on Wikipedia. The electronic, trip hop, industrial, indie, grunge, etc, genres you might see listed here after alt/rock are not denoting they are purely an electronica band or an industrial band or a trip hop band or a grunge band but that their records incorporate such genres. That should be understood. Your conclusion in this statement: "'consciously picked up elements' does not necessarily mean that they're a shoe gaze band" is incorrect. That quoted phrase is essentially another way of saying "incorporates", which is sufficient for the inclusion of other genres musically present, outside the core of alternative rock. If other editors object in some way to this in particular and/or my edit, please voice your concern here, a consensus is reached and a revision is made. Until then my cited contribution can stay there. --Lpdte77 (talk) 23:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Moreover, Andrzejbanas does need to start a discussion to remove properly cited genres, as he's not owner of the article or the cited material, as none of us are; he needs to post his personal objections in here before making his automatic reverts of other editors' formal contributions, especially since it's evident, contrary to why he's said he's here, he doesn't or hasn't constructively contributed. --Lpdte77 (talk) 23:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

A discussion of genres should be added to the musical style section. They should be what reliable, secondary sources have to say about the band, not what the band thinks they are or what sound they're trying to create. I would start with http://www.allmusic.com/artist/garbage-mn0000194246 ("rock group") and the prose in www.allmusic.com/artist/garbage-mn0000194246/biography—never use the genre cloud. Then add reviews over the length of the band's career from places like Rolling Stone, Spin, and other music-specific sources. Also, look at the categories in which their songs and albums have won awards. Once you have referenced sources on genre, move it to the infobox. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, thank you Walter. That has yet to be implemented here. Can you give your input on the above discussion? --Lpdte77 (talk) 23:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: I'd suggest immediate semi-protection for Garbage (band) and all Garbage-related articles (Shirley Manson, all Garbage album articles - Garbage (album), Version 2.0, Beautiful Garbage, Bleed Like Me, Absolute Garbage, Not Your Kind of People, etc.), since some supposedly "random" IP has started messing around with the genres on all Garbage-related articles since this discussions' inception. I'd also request a WP:CheckUser to see if any member who has participated in this discussion has been responsible for any of the recent vandalism and edit warring. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:15, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree with this. --Lpdte77 (talk) 00:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Anyone disagree that the "electronic" umbrella genre should not be there since electronic rock is already included and fits best? thoughts? --Lpdte77 (talk) 00:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd leave it as we don't know what the original sources had said. I'm assuming WP:GOODFAITH. BTW, I don't need to have a discussion to remove uncited material. If you want to add stuff, find a good strong source first. I'd also note that I'm not lording over an article as I'm encouraging discussion which is what you are supposed to do. Assume good faith with me as I promise I'm just making articles better. If you found strong sources for what you enter, instead of making bizarre claims like what you write doesn't need sources, than I'd be totally down with it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:48, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

"as we don't know what the original sources had said" can you elaborate on this reason with respect to the electronic redundancy?

No, you removed cited material you disagreed with, as evidenced in your second reply here and in the diffs. Misleading and cherry picking again. I'm not assuming anything, I call it as I see it, which is, again, evident in your actions as editor in Garbage articles and talk pages. That's all.

"bizarre claims like what you write doesn't need sources" more lies and cherry picking. I'm not even surprised. Link to where I said that. Walter Görlitz echoed what I'd said initially (with respect to the genres), that the info in the info box is not meant to be cited per se but to summarize the content cited in the article page. And you obviously ignored that as you continued what you were doing. That is all I have to say to you with respect to this. --Lpdte77 (talk) 01:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Lapadite77, take a chill pill. Andrzejbanas has not given anyone a reason to not assume good faith. Either start discussing this issue [Genres!] decently [ie, not resorting to this sort of POV nonsense], or this could very easily spiral into ANI territory. I have suspicions you wouldn't want that. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:38, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

He and I were largely referring to a discussion/edits from another Garbage article. He'd given me plenty of reason to doubt it there. You calling me out is no surprise, by the way. I also responded to a false accusation he made of me, in case that's not evident.

I'm sorry, I know you don't like me, but are you accusing me of being that "random ip"? Cause that can easily involve administrators. --Lpdte77 (talk) 02:00, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@Lpdte77: This Homeostasis07 is like a crybaby. He has 2 main bad habits: complaining at admins for every nonsense and accusing of "random ip" edits (without any evidence) of those who disagree with him. You can hardly find a more annoying user on this site...178.138.33.49 (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, well. Hi to the Romanian IP talking nonsense about me on a Garbage page. It's been such a long time. Nice to see you can still hold a grudge after more than 2 and half years. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:44, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Well, on the electronic rock issue, these are the sources that describe the band as such: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. I think electronic rock is more relevant here. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. So, support for keeping only electronic rock, and, more to the point, the sources all state electronic rock (so I assume no one will object). I shall remove "electronic" from the info box. --Lpdte77 (talk) 01:24, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

"Garbage reigned in the late-period glory days of alternative-rock radio, probably because their sound was a hectic amalgamation of almost everything that mingled on the format's airwaves: electronica, punk, industrial rock, grunge, and the occasional trip-hop": http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/16606-not-your-kind-of-people/ --Lpdte77 (talk) 02:11, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Indie rock (first few come across):
http://host.madison.com/entertainment/music/madison-rockers-garbage-releasing-first-new-album-since/article_f395f7ca-edd4-11e0-8795-001cc4c002e0.html
http://www.addictradio.net/en/artist/garbage
http://www.cduniverse.com/productinfo.asp?pid=3020547&style=music&fulldesc=T
http://www.jsonline.com/entertainment/madison-rockers-garbage-working-on-first-album-since-2005-131044763.html
http://www.last.fm/music/Garbage
http://www.allmusic.com/artist/garbage-mn0000194246 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lapadite77 (talk • contribs) 04:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Discography section

Shouldn't the Discography section be above Concert tours?--Lpdte77 (talk) 04:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Garbage (band). 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:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for www.cafemomo.com/news/9905news.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150120022918/http://www.billboard.com:80/charts/1996-02-10/radio-songs to http://www.billboard.com/charts/1996-02-10/radio-songs
• Attempted to fix sourcing for fmrecords.com.au/viewartist.cfm?ArtistId=250

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:47, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Fixed link makes no mention of the band, the other two are dead. Section needs better citations and a rewrite. Karst (talk) 18:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Garbage (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.cafemomo.com/inprint/9411volume.shtml
• Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.cafemomo.com/news/9611news.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:02, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

was their first album really a "sleeper hit"?

Page has the following text in the opening: "Garbage's debut album, Garbage, was critically acclaimed and an unexpected smash". The words "unexpected smash" are linked to https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Sleeper_hit . The later page includes in its definition "despite having relatively little promotion or lacking a successful opening". In this light, the statement about Garbage's debut album being a sleeper hit is certainly false as the Garbage page also notes: "The album debuted on the UK album chart at No. 12.[36]", so it certainly had a successful opening. I also doubt that the album had relatively little promotion, though I don't know. As to whether the album's success was expected or not, it's hard to imagine that nobody expected success from Vig's first studio album after he produced Nirvana's Nevermind. I suggest reword to "Garbage's debut album, Garbage, was critically acclaimed, sold over 4 million copies, and was certified double platinum..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.113.28.133 (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Garbage (band). 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/20080210010426/http://www.garbage.com:80/news/news.php?uid=320 to http://www.garbage.com/news/news.php?uid=320
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120926103557/http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1997_articles/mar97/butchvig.html to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/1997_articles/mar97/butchvig.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ianfleming.org/007news/articles/garbage-official.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040411020642/http://www.sonymusic.co.jp/Music/International/Special/Garbage/ to http://www.sonymusic.co.jp/Music/International/Special/Garbage/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930160910/http://www.geffen.com/garbage to http://www.geffen.com/garbage
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050508004119/http://www.garbage.com/news/journal.php?uid=157 to http://www.garbage.com/news/journal.php?uid=157
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090202040125/http://www.garbage.com/news/journal.php?id=20031017 to http://www.garbage.com/news/journal.php?id=20031017
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090202044201/http://www.garbage.com/news/journal.php?uid=152 to http://www.garbage.com/news/journal.php?uid=152
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071112005045/http://www.garbage.com:80/news/news.php?uid=315 to http://www.garbage.com/news/news.php?uid=315
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.garbage.com/news/news.php?uid=336

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:32, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Garbage (band). 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/20131021002156/http://www.newrock1019.com/garbage-to-release-live-dvd-one-mile-highlive-in-may/ to http://www.newrock1019.com/garbage-to-release-live-dvd-one-mile-highlive-in-may/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 22:20, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Garbage (band). 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/20101001190109/http://www.citypages.com/1995-11-01/arts/taking-out-the-garbage/1/ to http://www.citypages.com/1995-11-01/arts/taking-out-the-garbage/1/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081016065148/http://www.garbage-discography.co.uk/news/?p=88 to http://www.garbage-discography.co.uk/news/?p=88
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://absolutegarbage.net/band/trivia/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 08:56, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Years Active

I'm not going to do it myself, but 1993–present, that's not exactly correct is it? 86.41.149.167 (talk) 22:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Is your point that they have had spells on hiatus during that period ? RGCorris (talk) 12:56, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Band Description

I see that the description of the band as American/Scottish-American has flipped a number of times over the article's lifespan, but there has never been any discussion regarding it and both descriptions have persisted for some time. Can we establish a consensus?

I think the argument that "they were formed in America, and that's what matters" to be unconvincing and at odds with other articles in Wikipedia.

• If three Americans formed a band in England, would that make the band English?
• How about if two English men and American meeting in America, is that an American band?
• Does one American forming a band in London with two Englishmen make it an English band?
• Or one American meeting three English? Are they English?
• What about three Australians and one English, formed in England, is that an English band?
• How an English band that picked up some Americans along the way, is that an English band because of where it was formed?

The music industry is an international business where established musicians get about. Bands formed by those individuals are often international by nature, and the location where they happen to meet largely irrelevant. What distinguishes the band far more is the origins or nationalities of the individuals. So to suggest that Manson is in an American band is misleading the reader. The band is mainly American, but not solely American. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 10:41, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, if we're going by your logic:

• Arcade Fire has two American members – described as a Canadian band
• The Police had an American member and a French member – described as a British band
• The Velvet Underground had a Welsh member – described as an American band
• Gogol Bordello currently has members from several different countries – described as an American band
• U2 has two English-born members (they both grew up in Ireland, but still) – described as an Irish band
• Deep Purple has had an American member since 1994 – described as an English band
• Evanescence has had a German member since 2005 – described as an American band

The bottom line is, you can't apply the same logic to every single band. Comparing Garbage's case to that of all those other bands sounds like WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Plus, stating that the place where members formed a given band is "largely irrelevant" and that "what distinguishes the band far more is the origins or nationalities of the individuals" is your own personal opinion. My opinion is that, in many cases, a band's place of origin is far more relevant than the individuals' nationalities – the article is, after all, about the band as a whole, not the individual band members. Aside from the fact that Shirley was born in Scotland, what other ties does the band have to Scotland? Garbage as a collective is American, as they formed and established themselves in the United States. snapsnap ^(talk) 05:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Well, SnapSnap, that’s your own personal opinion as well. I (and clearly so do others) find it misleading to ignore the nationality of band members, particularly that of the lead. I’m just curious why you haven’t rushed over to the pages of the original examples mentioned to change those if this is your logic. You say “what other ties does the band have to Scotland?” Surely that’s a pretty large one? I have better things to do than get into an editing war about it, but I don’t get your reasoning here. 2A00:23C6:4205:7B00:4853:9DA3:FD5:6F68 (talk) 12:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Touring line-up 2019

Saw them at Kew the Music on July 13th and I'm pretty sure the drummer wasn't Butch Vig. Anyone know the name of the drummer (I think Shirley mentioned it but I didn't catch what she said) and whether this is a permanent change or whether Butch will be back ? RGCorris (talk) 12:14, 15 July 2019 (UTC)