Talk:Blink-182

Does a band with only two former members really need a timeline?

In my opinion this band does not need a timeline, as there have only been two former members. By looking at the years, it is clear who was in the band at what given time. I don't think having a timeline for this band brings anything new, as there hasn't been any complex lineup changes. I think the members of each year can be easily identified without it. In addition, the albums can also be easily identified without the time line. At this point, I think it just takes up space and it's just a visual representative of colors.

Pinging @Aria1561:, @Binksternet:, @Isento:, @Ohnoitsjamie:, and @Sock: what do you think? 2001:8003:3302:BC00:655F:5C9A:BA0B:83 (talk) 07:20, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

One former member, definitely not. Two is borderline; I wouldn't be terribly upset if it was removed, but if it was 100% up to me, I'd probably leave it in, given the popularity of the band. Honestly, I'm more bothered by university articles using tables for notable alumni. That drives me nuts. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Doesn't seem like such a bad idea to me. The graphic timeline helps the reader to picture the band's makeup over time. Even though two positions remain unchanged throughout. Binksternet (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

I think it should stay. In addition to showing the 2 former members' time in the band, it also shows the band's hiatus. Overall there's been 3 different lineups, which is (just barely) enough to warrant it.Xanarki (talk) 16:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

It is historical information, the fact we have that information is great. Why would we want that deleted and forgotten? Liachra (talk) 03:34, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Current Infobox image

Starting a new discussion for what image should be used in this page's infobox until a more recent image of the current lineup can be used. Rather than people constantly changing the image (which has been very common recently), it should be determined here as part of a larger discussion. Should the most recent image of the band be used, or the most recent image that displays the current lineup? Will however be reverting to the most recent image of the band until a consensus can be reached. Please provide your thoughts on this topic if you have them. Thank you! PopDisaster182 (talk) 19:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Buddha as an album

If Wikipedia can't use a band member's opinion about their own work, what purpose does it serve? Buddha is an official album. You can go to Spotify right now and find it under Blink-182. The title of "Nine" makes no sense without it. The article currently feels more like it's holding to a few fans' limited defintion of an album rather than using the facts available. If Buddha can't be listed and "Nine" is listed as their eighth album, then this page has failed as a source of info. Rorys1989 (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

182 referring to Scarface?

In a documetary about Al Pacino, his biographer Lawrence Grobel stated, that Blink-182 have their name from the 182 times, Pacino used the word "Fuck" in the movie Scarface.

https://www.zdf.de/3sat/kulturdoku/al-pacino-star-wider-willen-kulturdoku-102.html a film by Lukas Hoffmann

41:02

grz Maelcum (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Change page title to match "blink-182" formatting

In every CD, streaming service, ticketing systems "blink-182" has always stylised their title with all lower case, this page should be changed to reflect that more accurately. Liachra (talk) 03:31, 28 August 2026 (UTC)