User talk:2603:9000:D70D:11D2:818A:FE95:BD79:3133

I changed it back . ..
I changed it back to what you prefer, but for the record, the initial objection was that it wasn't sourced. Then, when I provided the source, the objection transformed into The Hype not being a "completely different" (in *all* respects??) band. Duh. But they certainly weren't "the same band that *just* changed their name," as one response earlier stated. Interestingly, the source I provided was also used for several points in the article (including this same point) - about which there was language *in* the article explicitly stating this very thing, that *not only* the name, but *also* the lineup, and *also* their entire record-deal/recording history was distinct. . . so *NO*, it wasn't just "the same band," that *JUST* changed their name. Besides, if you are going to use that argument, it's not consistent with a claim for Ivan McCormick's membership, who the article states was no longer involved after "a few weeks," meaning he wasn't involved in that "Hype-to-U2" transformation gig later on. Dik was, of course, though involved. Again, it's not as simple as either "an entirely different band" (if this is the standard then are any overlapping lineups a conflation of various different bands?) OR "an entirely different" band. It had substantially the same lineup, but not entirely, and its *entire* professional recording career, starting with the *very first single* is particular to U2.
 * The article is not about just the band's career from the point after they renamed themselves U2 in 1978. It's about their entire existence, which began in 1976. Which means, all people who used to belong to the band are considered ex-members, not just those who belonged when it went by its current name. The former members of The Chicks are still considered former members of that band, even though they were in the band when it was known as the Dixie Chicks.

Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 13:23, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

That's doesn't address the issue - one has to be purposefully pedantic to argue it that way. The Dixie Chicks comparison is apples and oranges, since every member and former member of that band was a member for 3 or 4 years and involved in at least two albums. Again, it's not that any name change is simply a name change and nothing more. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it's not. The totality of the circumstances isn't the same with U2 and The Chicks. And your first sentence about it not being about "the band's career from the point after they renamed themselves" simply begs the question -- it assumes the answer (you're assuming, not arguing *how* it was simply a name change and nothing more), but demonstrates nothing about when the band came into being. The fact that the band had an origin - a prior project that berthed it, which the article addresses, doesn't change any breaks in identity continuity. Any piece discussing an organization will discuss it's origins, that doesn't mean it came into being when its precursor's did. So, no, you're wrong- U2 came into being in the wake of The Hype ceasing to exist - not b/c it couldn't have been otherwise. . . sure, bands can change names - but a lot more went on here.

August 2020
Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to U2, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. ''Your edit warring on U2 is likely to lead to a block if you do not stop. Please stop doing so. Kevin''Hallward's Ghost (Let's talk) 22:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Welcome!
Hello! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. You are welcome to edit anonymously; however, creating an account is free and has several benefits (for example, the ability to create pages, upload media and edit without one's IP address being visible to the public).

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! KevinHallward's Ghost (Let's talk) 22:21, 23 August 2020 (UTC)