Talk:The Subways

Circular links

There's no point linking to pages that redirect back to this article. -- Hoary 12:35, 2005 Apr 2 (UTC)

I added a link to the official purevolume space as their is a blog their and you can listen to their music their. It is official.---guitarjunkie66 15:12, 2006 Feb 3 (UTC)

The Press paragraph

Unfortunately, some members of the British press, such as The Sun, only seem to notice the band because of Charlotte's excellent dress sense It doesn't sound right to me and it's obviously not NPOV. I don't want to remove it without replacing it, but I can for the life of me think of something that might fit and be NPOV. Anyone have any ideas? Lawful Hippo 21:57, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Discography

The discography needs to be cleaned up. Young For Eternity should have it's own article.

Member Pages

Can we make pages for Billy Lunn and Josh Morgan? Even if they're as small as Charlotte's page, anything is better than nothing.

removed negative intro

The negative introduction seems un-fair and a little untrue. Further, it is completely un-substantiated in the article. --Mr magoo 17:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Will 20:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Agreed. Though someone seems keen on making sure that there is some sort of negative intro, disregarding whether it be true or not.Will 20:36, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Abusive contributions

Someone with the username Lukedavey is continuously posting points of view and unnecessarily abusive comments. I'll maintain the page for as long as is needed until he stops.

Billy losing his voice

84.66.55.114 edited out the fact that Billy had lost his voice due to nodules on his vocal chords. The Subways Official Site confirms this. Also, saying simply that he has lost his voice implies that it will be better in a few days. I'll edit it back to saying he's got nodules. Obviously, there may be a good reason for taking this out that I've missed, in which case feel free to correct me! Sven945 14:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Return to Touring

I put up there that they will return to touring, rather than it is hoped. I don't want anyone to think that I changed it because I'm a teeny fan who is bubbling over with hope. I just changed it because they'll be opening for Taking Back Sunday at the end of June and into July, and I think we can all safely assume that they'll be easing into full touring with that. Starla Dear 15:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Uncommon?

Why is the lineup and way the band was formed considered 'uncommon'?

I guess because they're all very close, not just as friends and fellow band members but as people away from their profession. I don't think it's all that 'uncommon', though, seeing as many bands have siblings/boyfriends-girlfriends in them. Starla Dear 00:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I have edited the article to downplay the strangeness of the lineup. Think it reads a little better now aswell. 195.153.45.54 10:47, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

indie pop?????

i completely disagree with this. the subways are indie rock not pop and its a disgrace to call it that. i think it should be changed.

I've read elsewhere, maybe even once on this page that the Subways where a post-grunge/indie-rock band, and listening to their album, Young For Eternity they are clearly not pop and are very grungy in many songs. I've also read on many sites that they are mix of grunge and Britpop. 81.157.244.217 21:49, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

i think it could be fair to class some of their songs under indie pop, though i definitely agree that the post grunge/indie rock should stay. maybe post grunge/indie rock/indie pop? they have songs that do lean into all of those different genres so it is hard to classify them the three of them have said they are fans of hugely varied styles of music, from kylie and basement jaxx to sonic youth and metal bands jackwantstheoneontheright --82.12.111.233 19:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

according to their self-operated "Myspace" page they classify themselves as garage, rock, indie

Stratosuckers

I've removed the reference to the new album being called "Stratosuckers" until somebody cites a source. Jamesthegill 12:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Subwaysyfe.jpg

Image:Subwaysyfe.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Subwayslogo.jpg

Image:Subwayslogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 12:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Subwaysband promo.jpg

Image:Subwaysband promo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

YouTube link for "This is the club" Video

I believe that it's fair to leave this link, as the contest required entrants to post the video to their YouTube account Greebowarrior (talk) 12:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Members.

Does anyone else think each member should get there own article, even if they are short? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.176.176.188 (talk) 18:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Basically, no. In my view if would be more beneficial to find citable sources for the main article, which presently has none to speak of. Walk before we can run, so to speak.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Subways. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100325213029/http://www.en.wosp.org.pl:80/woodstock to http://www.en.wosp.org.pl/woodstock/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:33, 10 January 2016 (UTC)