Talk:Foo Fighters discography

Revisions by 67.86.33.74
It is my belief that the "Other Songs" section looks cleaner and clearer when the extra information is put between brackets in stead of behind a hyphen. Also, there is no reason for the removal by this user of the information I added.

I.e., his


 * "A320" - 5:45 - Soundtrack to the 1998 film Godzilla.
 * "Win Or Lose" ("Make A Bet") - 3:29 - Out Cold Soundtrack; A Remake of the originally released "Make A Bet" song featured on the Learn to Fly Part 2 single.

as opposed to my


 * "A320" - 5:45 (Track #9 on the Godzilla Soundtrack from the 1998 film) - 1998
 * "Win Or Lose" - 3:29 (Track # 3 on the Out Cold Soundtrack; a remake of "Make A Bet" which was released on the Learn To Fly Part 2 single)

Is the latter not clearer and more complete than the former? Also, something that doesn't matter much probably, I'm in the progress of (very) slowly completing discographies of some bands (I've already completed Asian Dub Foundation and Cypress Hill discographies), and where applicable I also add "Other Songs" sections to those, in the same style as I did here, which adds coherence across wikipedia.

On a final note, the title of the song is "Win or Lose", not "Win or Lose (Make a Bet)", as is seen on the page that this user referred to directly.

I hope some people see this and respond ^^

EzraZebra 23:12, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The Other Side of Aids - Soundtrack
Why doesn't Foo Fighters list the soundtrack they made for "The Other Side Of Aids"? Is it because they have reconsidered the lunacy of Christine, who allowed her child to die? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.11.23.13 (talk) 19:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

TCATS certification
This album is STILL only certified as platinum. It may have sold over 2 million units, but is NOT certified 2x platinum. BGC (talk) 14:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Released cover recordings
Tenacious D Fan (talk) 12:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Exhausted
The song Exhausted really shouldn't be included in the Singles discography. The reason being that it is only a promotional single and not an actual commercial single. Singles discographies on wikipedia, according to guide lines should not include promo only singles. Promo only singles, if listed at all should go in a seperate section, under the title "Promo singles" or "Other charted songs". 193.195.193.52 (talk) 13:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Music Videos
Since when did This Is a Call have a music video ? There is not one and it should not be listed in the Music videos section. 193.195.194.44 (talk) 12:15, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Splitting singles
Foo Fighters have now released singles over three decades. They have also released a lot of singles. Far to many to just have in one table. QuintusPetillius (talk) 20:12, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I disagree. There are plenty of bands who have similar size discographies to Foo Fighters and there has been no reason to split singles there, just as there isn't here. Could you even explain why more tables is a better thing? To my mind it just makes the article longer and makes comparing chart performances of different singles more awkward. Bands like Pink Floyd (discography), The Beatles (discography), Oasis (discography) and Red Hot Chili Peppers (discography) are not split so I see no reason why Foo Fighters should be. Officially Mr X (talk) 20:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not fussed either way. It does kind of clearly split up the three eras or decades of Foo Fighters, but I am not sure if it is in Wiki guidlines anyway. So I don't care which way it goes. Update: I have just noticed that User Quintus has added the Austrian chart for the 2011 onwards section, which isn't in the previous decades but Wheels, Rope and Walk are the only singles to have been on that chart anyway. But if it is not in guide lines then this is not necessary and like User Officially Mr X has mentioned there are other artists with larger singles discographies that have not been split up. mjgm84 (talk) 08:02, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Belgian chart - singles
Guidelines say that there should be approximately 10 different singles charts in a discography. We currently have way more than that in the Foo Fighters one. The problem with the Belgian chart is that the hits listed are not all from the same chart: Some are from the "Ultratip" - combined sales and airplay chart, and some are from the "Ultratop" - sales only chart. Perhaps the Belgian chart could be removed ? QuintusPetillius (talk) 10:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Bubbling Under Hot 100
I just realized that on WP:USCHARTS, it says this: "On singles discography tables, add 100 to the corresponding Bubbling Under peak if the song never entered the Hot 100 proper (e.g. 101 for a song that peaked at #1 on the Bubbling Under and got no higher). Ideally, a footnote should indicate that this is a Bubbling Under peak." I triple-checked to make sure that it is really correct information, and it is. I don't want to start an edit war by undoing any edits on the page but I thought this should be brought to attention...


 * Also see my talk page section 8 this is what convinced me to look into the matter. MuSiClOvEr (talk) 16:15, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Music Videos
I don't think it is necessary to include all the fan made videos in the Music Videos section. Also Hot Buns was not a music video as such. mjgm84 (talk) 09:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Singles: divided into decades or as one list
There have been queries in the past about the singles part of the discography being divided into decades (90's, 00's and 10's). This was mainly done due to different charts being relevant at different times during band's career. Wiki guidlines state that charts should be included that are relevant to the bands success and suggests approximately 10 different charts. Just in case anyone wanted to change the singles discography back to one big long list rather than being divided into different decades then I think the following charts should be used: US Hot 100, US Airplay, US Alternative Songs, US Mainstream Rock Tracks, US Rock Songs, Australian Singles Chart, Canadian Singles Chart (now called Canadian Hot 100), Irish Singles Chart, Netherlands Singles Chart, New Zealand Singles Chart, Swedish Singles Chart and UK Singles Chart. These are the singles charts that have been most relevant to the band throughout their whole career and so would be suitable if the singles were to be put back in one table. It also narrows the number of charts down to 12 - which is a little closer to the approximate 10 given in the Wiki guide lines. Extra charts can always be added on the pages for each individual release of course. Comments appreciated.QuintusPetillius (talk) 16:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Also WikiProject Discographies/style states that a limit of "approximately" 10 separate charts should be used and suggests using charts where the artist has had "relative success". A number of the charts we have until now been including for the singles discography lack references/archives for the band's whole career. For example the Canadian Alternative chart is missing information for the entire decade of 2001 - 2010, and therefore cannot be considered as showing the band's "relative success". It has also been compiled by different providers such as RPM magazine and now America's Music Charts. Also a chart called Canadian "Active" Rock has also been added, also compiled by America's Music Charts and it is questionable if these are even official charts as the official Canadian charts are now compiled by Billboard. However I do not see it as a problem to include these charts on the individual pages for each release for now.QuintusPetillius (talk) 20:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Number of charts
Please note we are now keeping the number of charts to 10 for each table as per guidelines. QuintusPetillius (talk) 10:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Belgian "Ultratop" and "Ultratip" singles charts
It needs to be made known that the Belgian Ultratop and Ultratip charts are completely different charts, that are compiled differently and are not an extension of one another. It is all explained on the official website here:  Ultratip is based mainly on airplay while Ultratop is based entirely on sales. User Cathartica cannot get his/her brain around this.QuintusPetillius (talk) 12:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Dispute
Ok, so as mentioned in the paragraph above the Belgian Ultratop and Ultratip charts are completely different charts, that are compiled differently and are not an extension of one another. It is all explained on the official website here:. It took a very long time for User: Cathartica to understand this, and that user was intent on putting false chart positions in the table. The same also applies to the US Bubbling Under Singles Chart: It is NOT an extension of the US Hot 100. In fact on Record charts it states the following: ''On singles discography tables, do not add 100 to the corresponding Bubbling Under peak if the song never entered the Hot 100. Doing so would violate WP:SYNTH by creating information not directly supported by the source (i.e. the notion that the Bubbling Under chart is an extension to the main chart and the position). It should be indicated as an uncharted song with a footnote to indicate the Bubbling Under peak.'' We had this all sorted out before User Cathartica came along. The same user also wants to put US Airplay chart positions in the column for US Hot 100 positions, again this is incorrect and we already had them in a separate column.QuintusPetillius (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Demo
I found a link to a demo of I'll Stick Around if someone can verify. The Mo-Ja&#39;al (talk) 18:31, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Unless its an official release it should not be included in the discography.QuintusPetillius (talk) 18:40, 8 November 2019 (UTC)