Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a45a978a487bf689

Jump to content

Talk:The Who

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateThe Who is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleThe Who has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 3, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
January 27, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
February 22, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
September 30, 2013Good article nomineeListed
October 14, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
January 6, 2015Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 23, 2005.
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

Wrong I formation

[edit]

Your information about the rock group the Who is not right.

My cousins formed the original rock group called "The Who" in 1960. 2600:6C64:6AF0:8B20:252E:C727:2892:966F (talk) 13:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

yeah, and i thought of the iPhone before Steve Jobs--but here we are. ~2026-39058-59 (talk) 22:44, 9 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Katie Jacoby back in the touring band

[edit]

As per Brian Kehew's blog (https://www.thewho.com/backstage-blog/thursday-28-august-2025-jones-beach-wantagh-ny/) Katie Jacoby has rejoined the touring musicians on violin -- I can't add her to the list of active touring musicians, but someone should! Opheliascarlet (talk) 16:17, 11 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

The Who’s retiring?

[edit]

They just did their last tour but I noticed the years duration is “1996-present” and I thought “aren’t they retiring?” since they just finished their final tour. Unless Daltrey and Townshend specifically said they only stopped touring but the band themselves will go on…..? RayKVega (talk) 18:12, 3 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

This has come up again recently. Does anyone have any sources describing the situation one way or another? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 22:45, 1 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The Who capitalization: An exception to MOS:THEBAND?

[edit]

This article inconsistently capitalizes the band name the Who mid-sentence. I count 89 of the Who and 8 of The Who.

Following Wikipedia standard style, MOS:THEBAND (and referenced in WP:THENAME and MOS:THECAPS), the definite article at the beginning of a band's name should be lower-case style when used mid-sentence. So, per the style, the band would be referred to as the Who. When the definite article begins the title of an album or other artwork, it should be capitalized. Again, per the style, referring to the specific album, correctly it is The Who By Numbers. And, per MOS:SIC, if a direct quotation uses capitalization that is different from Wikipedia style, the original capitalization should be used. So, if that's the way it's written in a quoted reliable source, it should be "This author says this about The Who."

Archived discussions have asserted that The Who is an exception. However that exception hasn't been carried over to the manual of style. As a result, this article has drifted to an inconsistent use.

I think this problem should be fixed, and done so in one of two ways:

  1. Implement an exception in MOS:THEBAND and then ensure that articles on the band consistently use that exception.
  2. Correct articles on the band to consistently use the MOS:THEBAND standard as written.

I argue against a potential third option of asserting an exception for this band but not implementing that exception in MOS:THEBAND, as we will only be perpetuating the inconsistency (and debates about it) for years to come.

I note that an exception to the policy was debated about the Beatles in 2012, and received a great deal of input. Ultimately, the decision was that the Beatles should be consistent with what is in MOS:THEBAND.

Personally, I think The Who and the Who are equally understandable, and so I would lean towards a consistent policy rather than creating an exception.

Thoughts? Davidwbaker (talk) 19:33, 17 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

The project-wide discussion in 2012 used the Beatles as a popular example, and the result of it was we established MOS:THEBAND for all bands. Before 2012, band pages were inconsistent.
Regarding setting an exception for the Who, the only discussion here was in 2020 which you can see at Talk:The_Who/Archive_4#The Who versus the Who.. Hardly anyone participated, the arguments for an exception were weak, and no consensus was formed. This page should have been following MOS:THEBAND ever since 2012.
Right after I hit "submit" on this post, I will comb through the page and return it to standard en.wiki style. It's not a big deal. Binksternet (talk) 22:09, 17 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
In November 2025, these article moves were performed based on the assumption that The Who was correct and not MOS:THEBAND:
Oddly, the move discussion and subsequent move weren't mentioned here. Davidwbaker (talk) 03:31, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
I moved them back. The requested move discussion on one of them was closed without giving MOS considerations the appropriate greater weight. No discussion occurred at the other one. Binksternet (talk) 22:18, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thanks so much! I did some consistency cleanup. Davidwbaker (talk) 23:36, 18 September 2026 (UTC)Reply