Talk:Linkin Park/Archive 4

Rap metal
Linkin Park is a Rap metal band not a Rap rock band. It's called rap rock if rock and hip hop is mixed together but Linkin Park mixes metal and hip hop so then it's a Rap metal band. --Alice Mudgardens (talk) 22:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Rap Metal is better known as rapcore. Hence, why there is no real rap metal article. -- ShadowJester07 ► Talk 23:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm not sure why someone changed it to Rap Rock in the first place.... I changed it back to Rapcore to avoid the redirect. -- ShadowJester07 ► Talk 00:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I changed it to Rap rock, because until literally today, Rapcore was a redirect] to Rap rock. It was reversed a few hours ago by an anon. I generally prefer the term "Rap rock", because it's a more general term. Rapcore, at least in my interpretation, is rap rock with hardcore punk influences, making it a subgenre. Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Parsecboy (talk) 02:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Why does Rap rock article seem like it should actually be called Rapcore? O_o Meh, I'll leave that for someone else to figure out while I continue to add subtle black metal references to articles. Good Day -- ShadowJester07 ► Talk 10:05, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Who has changed it back to rap rock when it should be rap metal. --Alice Mudgardens (talk) 21:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't change it, but I did look up the difference between the 2 just out of curiousity. According to our lovely Wikipedia, rap rock and rap metal quite often categorize the same genre of music. If you type rap metal into the search box it automatically diverts you to rap metal so I would venture to say they are interchangeable. My underlying point is this, is this a battle that should be fought? Look at it this way, at least someone didn't change it to emo...ugh.--Sashall08 (talk) 09:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Their more recent work would be classified as rap rock, not rap metal, which is a sub-genre of rap rock. Therefore, it's best to use the broadest terms to describe them. Parsecboy (talk) 14:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Live in SoHo EP
Shouldn't we include the iTunes exlcusive: Live in SoHo EP? RafaeldKsonic (talk) 12:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC) iTunes: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?id=275321835&s=143441 IGN Review: http://music.ign.com/articles/857/857211p1.html

Projekt Revolution
Shouldn't we include their live album projekt revolution.--Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 00:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Old V.S. New
They should compare and contrast them when they first started and now. They should also explain the many fans were dissapointed when their new album came out. A lot of people at my school complained about Minutes To Midnight. Grcaphistory (talk) 14:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia is factual, not opinionated. The only opinions that count are from critics, which were pretty mixed. So there is no reason to mention that some people don't like the album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.198 (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

You could say something like "The bands new sound surprised many fans" or something like that. Personally, I think that is NPOV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanthic-Ztk (talk • contribs) 02:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

But it's peacock words or something.Petero9 (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

It's ok to say many fans were disappointed with the album as long as that can be found in reliable sources. --Pwnage8 (talk) 23:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)


 * The term "many fans" should be avoided an account of WP:Weasel. It would be more appropriate to say, "Linkin Park's new work generally received positive remarks from critics, especially from Charles O'Critic and Rossie McMusic, who both claimed it was..." The purpose of this is to directly attribute the claims of a statement to a specific source, which can be verified .--   StarScream1007  ►Talk  00:10, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Obviously a reliable source would be a critic. And if one of them wrote "many fans were disappointed with the album" or something along those lines, it can be included. --Pwnage8 (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily; what makes one critic's opinion more special than his peers, so much that the Article solely reflects his view? The main point WP:Weasel is to assure that all vague claims can be directly attributed to source. Thus, the article offers a couple opinions as opposed to just forcing one. (WP:NPOV) ;). --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  00:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Who said it should only represent one viewpoint? I think you misread. --Pwnage8 (talk) 00:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps. At least its clearly stated for anyone who is not familiar with the policy. :p --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  01:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you just say it surprised some fans? Petero9 (talk) 03:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * We have to go by what the sources say. We can't make up stuff. --Pwnage8 (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

If anything it's probably a 50/50 split between fans and critics viewing their last album negatively and viewing it positively. Might as well just have what references there are to the reaction reflect that, and as far as I can tell they already do. Deanster321 (talk) 20:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Rapcore
Why don't we have rapcore instead og rap rock. Rap rock only means when rap is mixed with rock and rap metal is the same just with metal. When you say rapcore you are talking about both the genres. --Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 20:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * See, above. There's an additional explanation here.--  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Because rapcore tends to be associated with hardcore punk, hence the "core" in the name. Linkin Park is not hardcore punk, so Rap rock is better. Also, it's a broader genre, which is better for infoboxes. Parsecboy (talk) 22:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Linkin Park are not hardcore punk, I agree, but they do clearly have some influence from it. I don't see how "rap rock" is any more accurate than "rapcore", which is more commonly used on other wikipedia articles. I know that other articles don't necessarily have any influence over this one, but rapcore is certainly more general than "rap rock". James25402 (talk) 13:33, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No, "rapcore" is a sub-genre of "rap rock" (i.e., it's rap rock + hardcore punk), just like "hardcore punk" is a sub-genre of "rock". If anything, rap rock is the general term, with sub-genres like rapcore and rap metal. Can you give examples of songs where LP is influenced by hardcore punk, because I can't think of any. Parsecboy (talk) 13:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There won't be much point in me giving you examples, since you've clearly made up your mind that rapcore is not appropriate and without citations, you will simply dismiss my opinions regardless. However, since you have asked, I will answer. Given Up clearly has elements of hardcore punk, including screamed vocals, a breakdown, a fast tempo. No More Sorrow has elements of metalcore (the 'chug-a-lug' riffage), which fuses hardcore punk with metal. I could carry on but quite honestly, it's mainly Chester's vocals that give the songs a hardcore punk influence, his combination of clean singing and screamed vocals. A lot of the rhythms, particularly on the choruses where the overdriven guitar kicks in are similar in tempo and riffage to hardcore punk. "Rapcore" is certainly closer to Linkin Park's sound than "rap rock", which may or may not be the umbrella term. Linkin Park have, at no point, played rock music, aside from Minutes To Midnight, where rap vocals are at an absolute minimum, therefore they have not fused "rap and rock". Rise Against are a hardcore punk band, amongst other sub-genres, would you simply label them punk rock because it's the umbrella term? Hell, why not call Linkin Park a rock band, that's clearly the simplest way to label them. "Rap rock" needs to be changed to either "rap metal" or "rapcore" for accuracy. And as a side note, if you are indeed correct that "rap rock" is the umbrella term, let's see some citations for that, because unless you can cite it, your opinion is not valid. As far as I can see, the term "rap rock" has created some controversy on this Talk page, so if consensus agrees, this may need to be changed unless you can prove that "rap rock" is more accurate to use than "rap metal" or "rapcore". James25402 (talk) 13:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Citations from RS's that define 'rap rock', and also claim Linkin Park to be 'rap rock'.

--  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  14:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Awards
I Have listed all of Linkin Parks awards. Should we have this in the article. --Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 09:06, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

All the sources is on english wikipedia. If know on answears im puting this on the LP page


 * It's highly unorthodox to have entire sections devoted just to awards on Wikipedia articles - especially when almost all of them - except for Grammy awards are not that notable. Also, I'm removing the reward section from the talk page - It's still going to be stored in the history if you need it for anything. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  15:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The Pearl Jam article has a big award section and Soundgarden has the same. So why can't Linkin Park have one. --Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 16:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The Pear Jam article only lists notable American awards and nominations, which are appropriately formated and referenced. Given there is an FA-status article that has this, I do not really see any harm in adding it. Just make sure it has references and looks somewhat presentable. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  16:58, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Er, good format, but your supposed to use actual references, as opposed to Wikipedia articles. I'll take it from here. Good Job. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  20:41, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Er is a Norwegian word. Can i put it on the LP Page now. This is just a list over the awards LP has won. --Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 09:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Done, finished. See you later --Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 10:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC).

They won the 2007 MTA EMA award for best band... RafaeldKsonic (talk) 09:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I think we're going to need another reference as well, The "  " reference is overburdened, as the latter links to it in the reference section are not working properly (see 'x, y z'). --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  03:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Genre
I changed the rap rock genre to rapcore/rap metal/rap rock because all of these genres are the same genres and are linked to the same page. --Wellwater Conspiracy (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There's no point to link three things that just re-direct to the same page. :p --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  20:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

They also make Rapcore and I added this info. Volkov talk 00:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Rapcore is a redirect to Rap rock, moreover, Linkin Park doesn't have any hardcore punk influence, so rapcore isn't a correct genre anyway. Parsecboy (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It's hardly as if they have no hardcore influence. For instance, Chester's more agressive vocals are closer to typical hardcore vocals than metal ones. Given Up is a song that's not far off hardcore/metalcore. Relative Degree, Brad and Rob's old band, played hardcore. Deanster321 (talk) 23:02, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

mike shinoda back up vocals
it says in the style section that mike does all the backup vocals live. that's almost true but phoenix sings in the little things give you away, so i don't know if that's significant enough to mention, but just saying it's not 100% accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.106.105.242 (talk) 02:18, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Linkin Park
Have any of you heared about the WikiProject Linkin Park --Freedom (song) (talk) 20:18, 24 April 2008 (UTC).

Copied from another website
On muzizinfo.com's article on Linkin Park, I noticed this entire artcile on wikipedia has been copied from here http://www.musizinfo.com/search/label/Linkin%20Park —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.62.34.236 (talk) 21:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The Copied it from us; I know for a fact that most of this article was hand-written by other editors. Look at the other band profiles on the sites, they have been taken word for word from other Wikipedia articles. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  22:47, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of alternative rock as a genre for Linkin Park
In the aim of establishing a Wiki-wide consensus as to whether or not Linkin Park is alternative rock, please visit and add to the discussion here. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I think so. I wouldn't know how else [other than "alternative rock"] to clarify songs like "What I've Done", "Shadow of the Day", "The Little Things Give you Away", many more. "Post-grunge" a possibility? By the way, WesleyDodds, haven't we met before?

Tezkag72 (talk) 22:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, some other songs do have a grunge element to them, like "Numb", and on purevolume they categorize themselves as Rock / Grunge / Electronica. -- ↑ɻ ⅞ θʉɭ  ђɥл₮₴Ṝ  07:48, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

MTV's 22 Greatests Bands...
Linkin Park was ranked #6. Here is a source (sort of) http://www.amiannoying.com/(S(vczc3t55cyo5tk45n2xdwufr))/collection.aspx?collection=1530

It's been a while since they aired that particular tv special, but this is the most reliable source I can find. I think it would be neat for the Wikipedia page to be thorough on how fans and critics have praised Linkin Park for their sound.

Also, Rolling Stone Readers have ranked Hybrid Theory #58 of their 100 best albums (published in 2002). http://www.rocklistmusic.co.uk/rstone.html

Linkin Park's Minutes To Midnight is #25 in The Rolling Stones top 50 of 2007. http://www.rocklistmusic.co.uk/rstone.html

I don't know if you already mentioned them being #25 in Rolling Stones top 50. Also, I don't know if hybrid theory being #58 is even worth mentioning. However, I think Linkin Park being ranked #6 on MTV's 22 Greatest Bands is worth mentioning.JCStreetSoldier1234 (talk) 14:23, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Fanmade Remix Albums?
OK... umm.. I wish I had the power to get rid of that, but apparently only certain people have the privelage to add stupid things. Some people might think this is uncylclopedia.com, but it's not. JCStreetSoldier1234 (talk) 14:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I assume you're talking about the redlinks that were in the template at the bottom. I removed them, but so you know how to do it in the future, you can just click on the "v" in the top left corner of the template to go to the template page and make changes from there. Thanks for pointing the problem out. Parsecboy (talk) 15:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Head strong
Another song from Linkin Park was Head strong. I guess that this is not mentioned in the main article. Volkov talk 10:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It appears that it's just a cover of the Trapt version. I'm sure they've covered a bunch of songs, it's not really notable. Parsecboy (talk) 13:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I also wonder if Chester Bennington is the singer of Head strong. Volkov talk 10:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm Linkin Park doesn't sing this song.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.198 (talk) 04:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Parsec and I cannot seem to find any reliable sources to confirm that Linkin Park actually covered the song. Unless someone can fetch an RS to verify Linkin Park actually covered the song, it's likely a case of mistaken attribution. Feel free to join the actual discussion, Talk:Head strong (Linkin Park song). --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  04:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I recall reading that LP covered Trapt's Headstrong, but how is it relevent? I've also heard mension of Linkin Park covering many other songs, from Jet's Are You Gunna Be My Girl, to a cover of Deftones' My Own Summer (Shove It) which is on youtube. What concequece are covers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.91.10 (talk) 04:47, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Hard Rock?
Hmmm I don't think Linkin Park could be considered Hard Rock. I can't even think of one song that is hard rock, besides Crawling, but that's pushing it. But then again, this will probably be changed soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.200 (talk) 16:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea I think that needs to be changed, seeing as they really can't be determined as "Hard Rock".It just doesn't fit them.  Mr. Green  Hit Me Up  Userboxes  16:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There are some RS's that refer to LP as Hard Rock,.
 * --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  19:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I found sources from YouTube. --- Volkov talk 18:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Youtube isn't a reliable source. And neither are those other sources since those articles have been made by someone so it is biased...Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 19:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The latter portion of that statement makes no sense; a) all articles/sources are biased to an extent b) most sources are usually created by people ;) --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  20:41, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol thats true sorry. I had a history exam earlier its making me think about sources and usefullness and bias and everything! But anyway they aren't as reliable as other sources, like Allmusic or NME. Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, some editors do not regard Allmusic as an RS when it comes to labeling Genres (See latest archive), which makes no sense to me since Featured Articles like Slayer and Pink Floyd use it source their genres. :p -  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah i guess its a matter of opinion really. As most people know, Allmusic does have a tendency to mix up genres, such as using death and black metal as the same thing. But still, to Wikipedia it is one of the most reliable sources on music :P Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 21:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Points of Authority on Hybrid Theory is a single!!!
I don't understand why Points of Authority isn't listed as a single. They even made a video for it. Sometimes it even plays on Fuse's Loaded, and it's on Frat Party at the Pankake Festival.. So can anybody explain this to me? I'm a monkeys uncle if this isn't a single, and no, I'm not confused with the reanimation version, I know that's also a single. However, I am, 99% certain that Points of Authority is a single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.198 (talk) 05:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think it was actually released as a single. It's just a well known song of theirs that they happen to have made a video for. There are also videos for each song off of reanimation, but there are only 3 singles off it (Enth E Nd, Frgt/10, Pts.Of.Athrty). 70.106.116.118 (talk) 03:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe you're correct. Videos don't necessarily = singles. Parsecboy (talk) 03:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Even if the video was a single, it was not from Hybrid Theory. The video is for the remix of POints of Authority from the Reanimation. I do recall seeing the video on TV around the time the Reanimation came out. Does that make it noteworthy of a single? (I know I'm a RS) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanthic-Ztk (talk • contribs) 02:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park hasn't changed genres
The latest album was billed by the band to be somehow different from their previous works but it is the same basic style, theme, and mood of their previous and is certainly numetal. edit the opening to reflect this truth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.191.74.20 (talk) 19:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Tell that to Bennington. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  20:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

What the band says during their pre-release marketing and what the band actually produce are not the same. Ask metacritic. They are numetal and always will be. http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/linkinpark/minutestomidnight —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.191.74.20 (talk) 20:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Haha it's just the Hybrid Theory! They are meking Hybrid music!

Anyway, shouldn't it be better if the picture on the Linkin Park page was a picture of all six bandmembers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DF Seishou (talk • contribs) 20:55, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, the Anon's claims may actually be worth adding to the article based on the MetaCritic reference. Sure it may need to be rephrased, but the general claims of critics can be added to this article as long as they satisfy WP:NPOV/WP:RS.
 * Try looking on Flickr for appropriately licensed/free images. --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  21:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

HELP
Does any of you have a reliable source for who the music videos. I'm now talking about who direced them. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Name Of The Band
There is no park named Lincoln Park in Santa Monica, California, and as far as I know there never has been. The band could therefore not have taken its name from such a park. There is a park with that name in Los Angeles, but it is not near enough to Santa Monica to be mistaken for being in Santa Monica.

I suggest this claim be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.227.25.150 (talk) 04:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Look at immediate reference from ask.men.com. Linclon Park in Santa Monica is now called 'Christine Reed Park'. Lurk Moar --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  12:59, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a Lincoln park in New Jersey, though I don't believe the band's name derives from there. Itower (talk) 17:35, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Reanimation
well, i know this album is a REMIX but it has songs un-released before such as "my december" shouldn't we tell that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.64.17.23 (talk) 04:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Reanimation is mentioned in the discography section, as well as on the main article for the LP discography. As for "My December", it had already been released on the 2nd disc of Hybrid Theory. Parsecboy (talk) 05:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

linkin park's genre
okay....here's a new thing....all the songs in the new album minutes to midnight were rock....so i think genre rock should be added to their genres.....what do you guys think....(Xtreme moi (talk) 22:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
 * There are already subgenres of rock listed so it doesn't really need it Jakisbak (talk) 09:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Best-selling band of 21st century??
I heard that they are the best selling music artist of the 21st century, i cant find a reference but is there any truth in that??

maybe theyre just best selling rock band or something?

but if there's any truth in that or any other similar claim then i think it would be very worthy of being included in the article

cheers. 82.7.41.213 (talk) 21:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Linkin Park Charity Gets Donation From Major League Baseball
By: Lauren Moraski

Linkin Park's Mike Shinoda and David "Phoenix" Farrell were on hand yesterday (Thursday, July 24th) in New York City's Times Square to accept a $25,000 donation from Major League Baseball and Champs Sports. The money isn't going to the band, but to its organization, Music For Relief, which helps natural disaster victims rebuild by providing housing, education programs and other resources. Music for Relief also raises awareness about climate change.

Shinoda says its really important for the guys of Linkin Park to stay active in charitable causes, and are using their Projekt Revolution tour to support it: "We're really pleased to be able to say, for the second year now, one dollar from every ticket sold is going to charity. This time it is going to Music For Relief to be able to use the many different organizations we hope to work with. In the past we've worked with American Forest, the Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity, and we're hoping to team up with other great organizations like those."

Linkin Park is in the midst of its Projekt Revolution tour, which stops in Raleigh, North Carolina tonight (Friday, July 25th) and wraps August 24th in Woodlands, Texas.

Major League Baseball's Authentic Collection is sponsoring the group's Projekt Revolution tour for the third time this summer, while this year's edition of the tour marks Champs Sports' involvement for the second time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.126.110.124 (talk) 12:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you have the link to the actual article? That would help with sourcing the information properly if it goes into the article. Thanks for bringing this up. Parsecboy (talk) 14:04, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Busta Rhymes
I'm not really sure why users are adding Busta Rhymes to the 'associated acts' field of the infobox. LP and Busta Rhymes have only worked together on one song (to my recollection). Other bands/artists have worked with the Linkin Park to release singles (like "Pts.OF.Athrty" and "Enth E Nd / Frgt/10") and vice versa. The field should only be reserved for bands that contain members of Linkin Park, or Artists/groups that the band has worked with to produce an entire album. Thoughts? --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  07:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Makes sense to me. Parsecboy (talk) 12:44, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree ! Jakisbak (talk) 16:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Fourthed? Petero9 (talk) 04:22, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, Bustha Rhymes was part of their act during project revolution till he had to leave due to personal financial reasons.. therefore he has to be part of the "associated acts" field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.160.124.40 (talk) 16:18, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I have three live bootleg videos where Bustha is performing WE MADE IT with LP on stage... therefore he has to be part of the "associated acts" field. http://www.theboombox.com/2008/06/04/busta-rhymes-joins-projekt-revolution-tour/ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-I3qpZ--60(Llewellyn101) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.160.124.40 (talk) 16:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * That's not really a strong enough reason to add him to the Assoc. Act list, if he only performed ONE song with them. They have performed with various other artists, including Jonathan Davis of Korn, during similar tours. It would make more sense to add him if he did more work with them. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  16:28, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Minutes to Midnight GAN
I put minutes to midnight up for GAN, now im not the best at english so any help would be appreciated when it gets reviewed. Thanks Jakisbak (talk) 16:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

New Album Demos
Mike Shinoda is already working on new material for the 4th album. Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article. If it is, I didn't see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.59.1 (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It already is in there at the end of the minutes to midnight section.Petero9 (talk) 04:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

LINKIN PARK UNDERGROUND
You guys really should add the LP Underground Cd's to the Discography!! Or give me a status that I can do it myself xD

DF Seishou (talk) 10:47, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Fourth Proj. Rev.?
This article states that LP just finished their fourth Revolution Tour, when there have been 5. One in '02 with Cypress Hill, Adema, and DJ Z-Trip, Another in '03 with Mudvayne, Xzibit, and Blindside, a Third in '04 with Korn, Snoop Dogg, The Used, and Less Than Jake, A fourth in '07 with My Chemical Romance, Taking Back Sunday, HIM, Placebo, and Julien-K. This one in '08 with Chris Cornell, The Bravery, Busta Rhymes, ASHES dIVIDE, and Street Drum Corps. Making this last one the fifth, not fourth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.168.153.86 (talk) 23:30, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

New Live DVD/CD 2008
A few hours ago Mike Shinoda announced that they are putting together a live DVD/CD from the performance at Milton Keys, and they need the fans to name the album.

Here's what Mike said on Linkin Park's Myspace Blog

'''Note From Mike: Help Name The New CD/DVD!

Note from Mike:

Hey everyone. I'm happy to announce that we are putting together a new live CD/DVD for you guys! We recorded the show at Milton Keynes (Projekt Rev, UK), and we will be releasing it in a DVD/CD combo pack as soon as we can get it done.

However, we're having trouble naming the album...so we want you to name it! '''

I suggest that this should be put on the Linkin Park main article to let people know about it.. Also Mike started a thread on the official Linkin Park website stating this fact. Here's the link http://forums.linkinpark.com/showthread.php?t=9915 Randomdudeof2010 (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Add it when it is covered by a reliable third party source. According to WP:RS, forums are not considered reliable sources, regardless of their authenticity, which I am assuming is a reason built from WP:V. Thanks for the heads up. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  22:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I think Mike Shinoda's Official blog is a pretty good reliable source. Not only that, but at the same time Linkin Park also posted a blog on their official website as well.. Here's a link to Mike's official blog where he states the fact http://www.mikeshinoda.com/blog/Linkin_Park-Special_Events/help_us_name_the_dvd Randomdudeof2010 (talk) 00:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That's about the best source you can get, seeing as he is a member of the band. Tezkag72 (talk) 00:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I would say that's good enough.Petero9 (talk) 02:05, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Genre section
The genre section of every band on this entire site has disappeared. Did the bands sue us or something because we listed genres they didn't like to be classified as? --Arcai, 10-12-2008, 8:44 AM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.21.39 (talk) 12:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)


 * No, Linkin Park had nothing to do with it. The "genre" field of the Infobox Musical artist was removed from the template, because it is quite frequently a battleground for editors who could be spending their time more productively by improving the article, instead of fighting about whether band x is in genre y or not. There are relevant discussions located here and here where you may want to voice your opinion. Parsecboy (talk) 12:53, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Please stop removing the genre field. There is no point. It doesn't show anyway, as pointed out on my talk page by Parsecboy. Right now there is no consensus whether it will be brought back or not, as the issue is still being discussed. If it is brought back, then the article will look awfully silly without it, and if it is decided that it wouldn't be brought back, THAT would be a good time to remove it. --Pwnage8 (talk) 01:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Most popular community
This should be added to the second sentence so it becomes: "Since their formation in 1996, the band has sold more than 50 million albums[4], won two Grammy Awards and amassed more than 4 million fans online.[5][6][7]

http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=110529 http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10118851-2.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20 http://www.mikeshinoda.com/blog/Linkin_Park_/linkin_park_surpasses_4_million_on_ilike

From the sources I checked, it looks like that is the largest community of fans on any service on any social network. It should go in the opening and then be explained in more detail perhaps in the Awards section. Savagelandcowboy (talk) 07:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Just checking in because I think this change is important. Savagelandcowboy (talk) 03:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I reverted the change because I think it is very important. From the articles:

This is the largest number of fans that have gathered together in support of one artist on a single social platform

Lots of bands have sold 50 million records or won a Grammy, none have 4 million fans on one community which makes it pretty notable. I understand some resistance to change on the article but this is a solid addition and we have to keep up on the news. It essentially makes them the biggest band on the internet and that is a lede worthy factSavagelandcowboy (talk) 23:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The reference only accounts for one social network; chances are the number will be much larger when you factor in other networks like LastFM, Facebook or Myspace. The comment should reinstated into the article into a more appropriate place with a more accurate figure, and relevant context. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  00:41, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

It should go somewhere else: it's not necessarily accurate for the same reason that tv polls aren't accepted by statisticians. That's my two scents 00:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The 4 million is remarkable because it is on a single site, which can be empirically verified and compared to any other social network. I get what you guys are saying, will edit accordingly. Savagelandcowboy (talk) 02:56, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Dave Farrell (Phoenix) article
Why is the wikipedia article for him not here anymore? Clicking his name redirects it back to the Linkin Park article. Because every other band member has a separate wikipedia article, Phoenix should also have one too. It's not like LP is a lesser-known band and its band members aren't well-known.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.90.142 (talk) 00:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The Farrell article was apparently deleted recently for failing Wikipedia's notability standards. While he is part of a very notable group, Wikipedia requires several third-party sources about a subject for it to merit its own article. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  03:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

New Linkin Park Instrumental
Recently, linkinparktv's youtube account uploaded this video: In it, it shows Mike Shinoda working with Pro Tools 8 BUT also towards the end it features a new instrumental of a song. Should this be added in? 24.6.53.39 (talk) 05:47, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

No, there's already info that they're working on new songs. That's my two scents 00:34, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

"They are also known for their several collaborations..."?
I object to this claim. Yes, Linkin Park have collaborated with many artists in the past, but saying that they are known for that is a stretch. The Reanimation isn't that well known and a lot of people don't even know about it. Collision Course is far more notable, but even then, that doesn't justify the claim. A lot of Hip hop/R&B acts feature artists on their studio albums, and when you see all the singles nowadays, the vast majority feature other artists. And as far as singles go, We Made It and Numb/Encore are the only ones that are collaborations. Well, ones with notable appearances, anyway. My point-- LP are hardly well known for their collaborations. So, does anyone object to it's removal?Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 00:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I would. Collision Course debuted at #1 and that's fairly unusual, therefore notable.Savagelandcowboy (talk) 10:11, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is notable. But, my point was it doesn't justify the claim that LP are known for their collaborations. Someone changed it anyways. So it's all good. "They are also known for their several collaborations..." has been changed to "They have also collaborated with several other artists...". Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 21:01, 26 December 2008 (UTC)