Talk:T.S.O.L.

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

sssss

Line-Up Is Wrong/Incomplete[edit]

A major problem with this article is that the line-up listed in the article is only applicable to the first few years of the band's existance. By around '86 or '87, there were no original members left in TSOL. Someone who actually cares about this article (not me) should update it to reflect that. --216.239.66.204 (talk) 01:32, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bias[edit]

This article is VERY biased and contains biased views on the band's albums. I suggest editing the article so it remains more objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jremington (talk • contribs) 22:40, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Band Name Rumor[edit]

i have removed the "True Sons Of Liberty" rumor, as it is just that: hearsay, and therefore cannot be subject to citation. If we can at least find a good source stating that this was/is rumored to be true, perhaps it could be added back in. --MiraFisrefly (talk) 16:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming that the fact that the band's official website is http://www.truesoundsofliberty.com is good enough without further citation. --Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a flyer circa 1980 that lists the name True Sons of Liberty. A Dead or Alive production at the North Park Lions Club in San Diego. Date is "Friday the 13th." Lineup is The Adolescents, Eddie And The Subtitles, and True Sons of Liberty. [MRAT] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.65.170.218 (talk) 00:37, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Magazine on page 58 of its August 22, 1981 issue refers to the band as True Sons Of Liberty in its brief review of Dance With Me. Ironically, the blurb misspells the word "liberty" as "libery"alainsane (talk) 06:58, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Breakup?[edit]

Are there any facts behind this so called breakup? Ive been hearing things about a Europe tour this year. and to the guy who said Black Flag started hardcore, I believe it was the Middle Class who started hardcore.. --Unfamous13 (talk) 20:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Flipside Vinyl Fanzine Vol. 1[edit]

T.S.O.L. are featured on Flipside Vinyl Fanzine Vol. 1, Side 1, Track 9, a cover of "Suppose They Gave a War" performed by The West Coast Pop Art Experimental Band. --24.68.50.33 (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

House of Blues[edit]

No mention of the shooting at "The House Of Blues" during 'Code Blue'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.76.7.38 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WTF?[edit]

Hardcore punks don't wear make-up and all-black clothes. And TSOL did not create hardocre punk music. It's common knowlege that Black Flag did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.83.233.131 (talk • contribs) 04:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In all fairness a few hardcore punks did wear makeup, but this wasn't common. TSOL didn't start hardcore punk, you're right, but they were anarcho and goth-punk pioneers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.3.144 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And, uh, plenty of hardcore punks wore all-black. Plain black pants and t-shirts were pretty common, although not as common as, say the stereotypical blank grey t-shirt and jeans. But no, they didn't create hardcore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SwitChar (talk • contribs) 14:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever said Black Flag created hardcore punk is a total dumbass for 2 reasons: 1) He's stating an opinion as a fact 2) It's not a very educated opinion, Black Flag was only really hardcore right after Henry Rollins joined. I'm not the punk police here to tell you The Clash aren't punk and Black Flag isn't hardcore though, it's just far from "common knowledge." I would say the Dead Kennedys or D.O.A. started hardcore punk. --The Secretary of Funk (talk) 09:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To say that one band (i.e black flag ?) 'created' hardcore is naive and inaccurate... like all musical and artistic movements, hardcore arose organically as a natural progression from the punk that preceded it...Music Terminology like this is usually attributed retrospectively ('grunge' is a classic example) once a particular sound has emerged and been acknowledged...quite often it is not the artists themselves but peripheral contributors like writers that create these names. This sort of genre-tagging also effectively allows the insidious practice of stereotyping to flourish; pigeon-holing,labeling and designating a uniform appearance to people according to their taste in music is a practice that does not sit well with those who truly understand and live by a punk-rock ethos...admittedly there are individuals who do fall into these typical categories & unfortunately stereotyping is part of our psychology BUT we must always hesitate in applying music and dress as a rule of thumb.....it is lazy and offensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffluent (talk • contribs) 23:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i think it was the bad brains :) when i was into hardcore i used to get offended if somebody called me a punk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.147.170.76 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TSOL or T.S.O.L.?[edit]

I've been working on a discography of the band in my userspace & it has caused me to raise the question of whether this article should be titled TSOL (without punctuation) or T.S.O.L. (with punctuation). The band's releases seem to vacillate between the two styles. Here's a breakdown:

It seems to be almost an even split, though the punctuated version seems to have been the original (having been used on the band's first 3 releases: the T.S.O.L. EP, Dance with Me, and Weathered Statues) as well as the most often-used in the last decade (Divided We Stand, F#*k You Tough Guy, Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Free Downloads). The un-punctuated version seems to have first been used after the lineup change of '82, and been used most often by the "other" lineup (the one with Joe Wood and Mitch Dean). Thoughts? --IllaZilla (talk) 21:08, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've completed my discography article (User:IllaZilla/TSOL discography), and after mulling it over for a day I'm of the opinion that T.S.O.L. should be the title:

  1. It's the form in which the name appeared on their first several releases.
  2. It's the form in which it's appeared most often on releases by the original/current lineup.
  3. It's the form used by Billboard and Allmusic.

Unless some objections surface, I'll probably move the article tomorrow or Tuesday. I'm anxious to get the discography article live but I want its title to match that of the main article. --IllaZilla (talk) 02:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhh-kay, I'm going for it. I'll take care of the related page moves to match and clean up redirects. If anyone has serious objections, we can always reverse it. --IllaZilla (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

I recently wrote T.S.O.L. discography and I'm currently working on all of the album articles. Once that's done I intend to put some work into the band article. In the process I'm coming across some good sources, so I'm going to save them here for future use.

  • Lots of decent results from a search of the Chicago Tribune (includes results from LA Times): [1]
  • Drowned in Sound review of Disappear: [2]
  • TSOL on '09 Warped Tour: [3]
  • Announcement of '01 UK tour: [4]
  • Subsequent cancellation of '01 European tour: [5]
  • Downloads announcement on Spin: [6]
  • Vinyl release of Downloads: [7]
  • Punknews.org staff reviews of Downloads: [8]
  • Also lots of decent results from punknews.org search: [9] & [10]
  • Christgau reviews of Beneath the Shadows: [11]
  • Grisham's '03 governor bid: [12]
  • Grisham in Tim Armstrong's web series: [13]
  • Sputnikmusic emeritus review of Dance with Me: [14]

--IllaZilla (talk) 19:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Website[edit]

I would like to point out that the website www.truesoundsofliberty.com is currently in the side template. It leads to an e-cig website. Just pointing out. 2myname1 (talk) 07:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on T.S.O.L.. 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: 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) 12:54, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Date inconsistency[edit]

The intro and infobox say the band was formed in 1978, but the "History" section claims it was formed in 1980. Can somebody knowledgeable about this subject confirm which is correct? Meelar (talk) 15:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

beneath the shadows album date...[edit]

absolutely everything else online has this album being released in 1982, which makes it impossible for it to have been recorded in 1983.

only the black line on the timeline and the actual Beneath the Shadows wikipedia article have the date as 1983...that im able to find.

i could go fix it all, but i dont really want to if its just going to end up getting undone. Snarevox (talk) 11:11, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is the band name an acronym?[edit]

The article currently starts with "T.S.O.L. (True Sounds of Liberty)". As a punk teenager in the 80s, I was under the impression that the meaning of T.S.O.L. was deliberately ambiguous, possibly with multiple meanings or none at all. (And yes, I know they did one album as True Sounds of Liberty.) I was poking around on the Googlemachine tonight to see if there was any support for the claim that T.S.O.L. stands for True Sounds of Liberty. Most of what I found making this claim appears to be sourced from Wikipedia. I did find one pre-Wikipedia (1999) RS here https://www.ocweekly.com/i-was-just-an-asshole-6393905/. I also found a (probably not RS) interview from 2000 here https://juicemagazine.com/home/t-s-o-l-3/ in which Jack says that the name originally stood for True Sounds of Liberty, which arguably implies that it no longer stood for anything by that point and hadn't for years. I'm still inclined to believe that T.S.O.L. doesn't stand for anything, but as the article currently has no support at all for the claim that it stands for True Sounds of Liberty, I'd thought I'd leave the links that I found on the talk page. An RS on the legal dispute might be enlightening as to what exactly was the name that the original members regained, but I couldn't find anything on that. There might be contemporary articles available online from the Los Angeles Times on the dispute, but it's behind a paywall and I already subscribe to enough newspapers. (Probs no one else much cares, but I got to spend a few hours thinking about albums and bands I loved in a misspent youth, so at least I gained that from my "research".) CAVincent (talk) 03:42, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:T.S.O.L.&oldid=1204265189"