Talk:Alvin and the Chipmunks

Suggesting article split for Alvin and the Chipmunks (band)
This article feels undecided whether it is about the virtual band featured in the franchise, or about the franchise itself. It has a band's infobox and its opening statement refers to the band, yet this article also serves as the main article of the entire Alvin and the Chipmunks franchise (TV shows, movies, and music releases).

I suggest a split to be made so that this article's sole purpose is for the francise, and an article to be created for Alvin and the Chipmunks (band). Lazz_R 19:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Support, preferably under the name Alvin, Simon, and Theodore. This article seems fairly confusing, as it is going back and forth between the franchise and the band, and giving the chipmunks their own article would easily solve this. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Support, this article should be an overview of the franchise, with extra details moved into the appropriate "sub"article or removed (like the in-universe character bios). ~EdGl   talk  17:57, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Support but under thr name of The Chipmunks Fanoflionking 19:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Support per above. This article could do with being split. Sahaib3005 (talk) 17:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alvin and the Chipmunks. 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/20150625170157/http://www.alvinandthechipmunkslive.com/ to http://www.alvinandthechipmunkslive.com/
 * Added tag to http://www.alvinlive.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:12, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Is one reliable source enough to make an addition?
According to this article in The Hollywood Reporter  : https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/chipmunk-song-turns-60-secrets-a-holiday-classic-1169762?fbclid=IwAR1Jwbny9pKCN85Y2V2V_sdzmPCaBGwjYRxnx1nFKOFscTJcfG9NE9TgjwQ, the Chipmunk sound during their busy recording heyday was secretly provided by 60's era session vocal group, The Eligibles. This fact should change the claim that Bagdasarian was the only voice on the recordings. However, this article is the only source of this news, and given the fringe quality of this bit of trivia, it's unlikely to ever receive additional mainstream coverage. Question: is this single source sufficient to qualify for inclusion in this article? I'm a bit hesitant to edit it in, allowing for the possibility that it is a made up claim and Bagdasarian is no longer around to dispute it. Still, the logic of hired, uncredited session men--typical of the era--is believable. ShelbyMarion (talk) 17:16, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Hmm. I would say no, because its only one source. However, according to mediabiasfactcheck.com, hollywoodreporter.com is Factual, but biased towards the Left-Center (source: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hollywood-reporter/ ). LK55ABF (talk) 13:27, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

The Wikipedia entry for Johnny Mann states that he was the singing voice of Theodore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14D:4480:B9E0:11B6:4E24:2B74:FCFC (talk) 06:56, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Removed juvenile vandalism.
Edited the following garbage: "Alvin, the mischievous troublemaker, who quickly became the star of the group after doing the Jordan; Simon, the tall, bespectacled intellectual; and Theodore, the one who is getting the best head."

Seriously, people have nothing better to do than to insert sexual inneuendo into an article on Alvin and the Chipmunks? That's more than a little pathetic. Changed to: "Alvin, the mischievous troublemaker; Simon, the tall, bespectacled intellectual; and Theodore, the chubby, shy one." HillbillyProfane (talk) 05:42, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

removed the redirect
no redirects

"Ian hawke" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ian hawke. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 3 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC   678  04:13, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Requested move to "The Chipmunks"

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc . talk  12:41, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Alvin and the Chipmunks → The Chipmunks – Per WP:COMMONNAME, the article's name should reflect the most common usage. The band is known widely as the Chipmunks. The article was moved to the Chipmunks in 2006, but it was moved back in 2007. Neither of those moves was discussed. The band was first known as David Seville and the Chipmunks, as seen on 1959 and 1960 record labels, but it was shortened to the Chipmunks later in 1960, and it remained the Chipmunks from that point onward. The prefix "Alvin and" was never used officially, and is not a common usage either. Binksternet (talk) 15:25, 12 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose One quick look at Google Ngrams,, shows that the current title is more well-known. Ollieisanerd  (talk) 16:01, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * How can a Google Ngrams search result include the years before the prefix "Alvin and" was ever used? I don't trust that result at all. It reeks of recentism, for a group that was invented in 1958–1959. John Bush's first biography of the virtual band (as published by AllMusic) gave them the name of the Chipmunks, and exactly none of their music was published under the name Alvin and the Chipmunks until 1992's Chipmunks in Low Places. There was an animated TV show with the band called The Alvin Show during 1961–62, then there was another cartoon TV show called Alvin and the Chipmunks from 1983 to 1990, which did not change the band's name at the time. It was only after the 2007 film Alvin and the Chipmunks (film) that the Alvin prefix was stuck on the front end for good. So for the first two decades of the band's virtual history they had no such prefix, and from 1983 to 2007 the Alvin prefix was not common. AllMusic still can't figure it out; they have two biography pages of the band, one under the short name (http://www.allmusic.com/artist/chipmunks-mn0000069707) and one with the Alvin prefix (https://www.allmusic.com/artist/alvin-the-chipmunks-mn0000744969/biography). It's the same text. The 1983 book The Chipmunk Story by Janice Karman gives the short name throughout. Zero zilch nada on the prefix "Alvin and". She should know! Binksternet (talk) 17:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the ngrams starting in 1800, Google just automatically puts it to that year. Here's a version of it where it actually starts when they were first created: . Your point about how the prefix "Alvin and" wasn't that popular until 2007 is correct, it's just that the films significantly boosted the popularity of them, and all of the films start with "Alvin and". The films are what I imagine to be why most people even know of them in the first place, and the films are much more recent. Ollieisanerd  (talk) 21:08, 12 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose, the name commonly used, that most readers will search for, is "Alvin and the Chipmunks". That's what's on their Hollywood star, and is used in most any reliable source discussing the franchise. The article is about the band and the franchise and the characters, which as a whole, is called "Alvin and the Chipmunks". Nothing wrong with using more recent sources to determine the WP:COMMONNAME.--Cerebral726 (talk) 18:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose per other opposing editors. --Killuminator (talk) 18:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, "Alvin" is regularly included in the name. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:51, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Common and historical name is current name. Steel1943  (talk) 17:32, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Binksternet you have it backwards - Alvin and the Chipmunks is the COMMONNAME here. Never heard this referred to as "The Chipmunks" in all my life. – Davey 2010 Talk 17:50, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment. Note that Article_titles supports the suggested move. The example given is the state of Rhode Island which is formally known as State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. is just concise enough to establish the topic. Binksternet (talk) 19:05, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Rhode Island is simply Rhode Island now, they removed the rest from the name. Killuminator (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The concision content guideline still applies here. Binksternet (talk) 19:34, 13 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment. The ratio of albums released by the Chipmunks (short name) versus Alvin and the Chipmunks is infinity up through 1991, with 34 albums in a row credited to the Chipmunks (short name). In 1992, the first "Alvin and" album was released: Chipmunks in Low Places. After that, more albums were released as the Chipmunks, with "Alvin and" creeping in here and there. "Alvin and" albums were released in 1994 and '98 but short billing appeared in '95 and '96. A film soundtrack was released in 2003 billed as Little Alvin and the Mini-Munks, so who knows where that one fits into the larger scheme. In 2007 and 2008, albums were released under "Alvin and". Not counting re-releases of older recordings, I calculate a ratio of 36:5, or seven times more music released under the short name. Binksternet (talk) 19:05, 13 May 2023 (UTC)


 * •Oppose - come again? 4theloveofallthings (talk) 20:59, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose - "Alvin and..." is the most common point of reference. See WP:COMMONNAME. Given WP:NAMECHANGES, it seems odd to regress to pre-21st century vernacular for an entity that remains popular and in franchise today. Since the 90s, titles almost ubiquitously follow the more recent convention. Doughbo (talk) 21:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.