Talk:The Band

Featured Music Project evaluation

The Band has been evaluated according to the Featured Music Project criteria, most recently affirmed as of this revision. The article's most important issues are listed below. Since this evaluation, the article may have been improved.

The following areas need work to meet the criteria: Comprehensiveness - Sales - Pictures - Audio - References - Format/Style

The space below is for limited discussion on this article's prospects as a featured article candidate. Please take conversations to the article talk page.

• Comprehensiveness: good start in "overview" section, but needs more on musical style and legacy
• Sales: Not covered at all
• Pictures: Need fair use rationales
• Audio: Needs sound samples
• References: Inline cites needed, consider adding books on more general topics (e.g. folk rock in general, or music history)
• Format/Style: needs a copyedit, consolidate short paragraphs, remove "overview" section (lead should be overview)
• Lead could use some work, but generally pretty good
• Discography looks good, but why are singles only given for 1965? Is this discography comprehensive? If not, then consider making a subpage for the details

Band at 2008 Grammy's

It says in the article that the band is set to reunite for the 2008 Grammy Awards to receive their Lifetime Achievement Award. Does anyone have a source to site for this or proof that this is really true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Particleman624 (talk • contribs) (20:16, 19 January 2008)

Controversial Content

The long-standing controversy about the songwriting credit for the songs recorded by The Band has led some editors to remove content that they disagree with. When such content has citations to support it it should remain. It should not be allowed to be removed. Doug.r.macrae (talk) 03:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

The article implies that Rick Danko agreed with Levon Helm about the songwriting credits, but I don't think that's accurate. I've read the interview with Rick Danko, and it seems to me that what he is agreeing with is Levon's claim that the "spirit" of The Band changed due to Robbie's ego, and when Robbie and Grossman started dominating The Band's business management. And he MAY agree that Robbie and Grossman took advantage of the rest of the members to obtain their existing royalty rights. But that's different than saying he agrees that Robbie didn't deserve the songwriting credits. Maybe he did believe that, but that's not what he said in the interview. 170.85.72.189 (talk) 12:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Capitalization of "The"

This seems to be the only article for a band that capitalizes the word "the" in the name, which goes against the Manual of Style. Should this be changed or is there consensus to keep it? If the latter, should "The Band" be capitalized everywhere on Wikipedia or just on this page? Robbie Robertson's page doesn't capitalize the "The" except for the first mention for some reason. Same with Rick Danko and Garth Hudson more or less. Richard Manuel's page is inconsistent, sometimes even within the same sentence: The 40 concerts of the Bob Dylan and the Band 1974 Tour, from January 3 to February 14, 1974, were meandering musical marathons featuring two sets of Dylan backed by The Band...

I think we should agree on a consistent formatting across Wikipedia. If there's consensus for this to be the one exception to MOS:THEBAND, then that there should be a footnote about that on said page. – MW_(t•c) 17:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I really dislike that MOS, especially for The Band, but gave up on it long ago (the Beatles just looks wrong to me, too). The history is here. --John (User:Jwy/talk) 17:58, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I was most disappointed to discover that MOS:THEBAND doesn't actually provide any advice specific to The Band. In offering my response regarding this issue, I feel obliged to disclose that one of my pastimes is to collect silly Wikipedia edits, but I would point out that "The Band" may be "the exception that proves the rule". So I think we should have a serious deliberation on this, and if a conclusion is reached to "decapitalize" the definite article preceding "Band", then I shall be pleased to add this to my "silly edit" collection. Fabrickator (talk) 18:11, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Yeah I saw that. Seems like the article got changed back at some point in the past ten years so I'm curious if it's because the consensus has changed – MW_(t•c) 20:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

More turd polishing that doesn't move the project forward, if you ask me. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 11:33, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

BLP

Is this tagged as a BLP because two non-defining latter-era members are still living, or because no one recognized the need to change it following Garth's death? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 11:33, 1 October 2025 (UTC)

Cite needed question

In relating the info on their second album there is a statement that the music contained therein stood in contrast to the popular music of the day. Why does that NEED a citation? Anyone alive then - or anyone taking the time to research what was in the Top 100 albums in 1969 - would be led to conclude the group did not sound anything like much of the other popular music that charted that year. Not trying to be difficult as finding a cite for what I perceive as common knowledge seems tedious and unnecessary at best. I would appreciate another view/explanation on this from another editor. Thanks!THX1136 (talk) 21:49, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

It's standard for Wikipedia. If its not obvious to everyone (blue sky), it can require a citation if challenged. In this case, I'm sure there are citations out there as that is the album's main claim-to-fame.

Somewhat analogous to someone insisting that when John Lennon was mentioned in an article, they felt it necessary to say he was in the Beatles. Unnecessary for me (and probably you), but some now and more as time goes on will need it.

--John (User:Jwy/talk) 22:54, 7 March 2026 (UTC)