Talk:Simon & Garfunkel

Reunited

When thiS article says that the duo were reunited several times and "most famously in 1981", should it add that they have reunited in the zeroes? Vorbee (talk) 10:22, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

That's already covered in the article. Popcornduff (talk) 10:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Overlinking

To the edit-warring anonymous editor who won't communicate: we shouldn't link Ireland. Please read WP:OVERLINK. Popcornduff (talk) 20:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Lead

This edit adds too much detail and verbosity to the lead. It turns the second paragraph into a bloated wall of text that's more than twice the length of the other paragraphs.

Here are some examples:

• All these dates: In mid-1965, in late 1965, in the issued dated January 1, 1966, December 1967 It isn't necessary to say precise dates/months/etc in the lead, just the year is fine.
• an acoustic song on the duo's debut LP—was overdubbed with electric guitar and drums Let's not get into the weeds with explaining overdubs and edits and individual songs in the lead. This belongs in the lead of the Sound of Silence article.
• two short acoustic versions of "Mrs. Robinson" Again, too much focus on individual songs when this should be a broad overview of S&G's entire career + impact
• Most of this: Across 16 consecutive weeks between April and July 1968 the film's soundtrack album and the duo's next studio LP, Bookends (April 1968)—featuring the hit version of "Mrs. Robinson"—alternated at number one on Billboard's Top 200 ... devotes too much attention to specifics with dates and data that can be more generally summarised.

Per WP:INTRO, Editors should avoid lengthy paragraphs and overly specific descriptions – greater detail is saved for the body of the article. Popcornfud (talk) 12:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm completely with you. -- Steue (talk) 00:19, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Pronunciation of their names: English or German?

More than 40 years ago I've heard or read (in Germany) that one of them shall have complained that their names got pronounced English, but he (they both??) wanted them to be pronounced German (the original way). Does any one else remember this? Perplexity.ai couldn't find any reference (no wonder: more than 40 years). And the given Website simonandgarfunkel.com doesn't have a feed back link. I don't have an e-mail account and I'm not in the social media, but could someone ask them? They're still alive. -- Steue (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Critical Reception and Legacy Section

It seems like this section should be expanded to include more positive commentary and more recognition of their impact and influence. Right now, almost all the critical response that is included is negative, and then the section mentions some rankings of their songs. Surely this band received positive commentary too, and their wider significance should be mentioned? They were very popular and widely praised, and impacted the history and development of music, but I don't get that from the section as it is currently written. LouMichel (talk) 10:17, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this section has required expansion for years (I tagged it as such back in 2018). Negative criticism from reliable sources is legit, but this is one of the most acclaimed bands in history, so the article is remiss in not reflecting that. Popcornfud (talk) 23:42, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

False titles

Creating a section to discuss the false titles in the lead as this was contested. I oppose the use of false titles for the reasons given in the essay WP:FALSETITLE. If a consensus forms here to remove them I'll respect that, but please follow WP:BRD and get consensus instead of edit-warring. Cheers. Popcornfud (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

MOS states very clearly that use of a definite article "the" is not required in this context. Furthermore, in American English (which should probably apply here, given the topic) the use of the singular definite article "the" – implying that this person were the only one, rather than one of many – is particularly strange: we generally don't suppose that the use of a descriptive noun such as "singer" equates to a "title". That's a cultural convention, nothing more. Granted, using a noun without a definite article may not be what some people were taught by their prescriptive school teacher, but that provincial usage does not dictate how the language works globally, and other forms of English are also valid. Additionally, the fact that this editor is trying to cite a page that they control to establish policy is incredibly inappropriate, and I object to that on principle. Jason A. Quest (talk) 04:22, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

I wrote the essay to explain my arguments against false titles, so I don't have to explain them here or in edit summaries. There are countless such essays on Wikipedia, such as WP:TNT, WP:COMPRISEDOF or WP:INTOTHEWOULDS. It sounds like you're objecting to the use of user essays on Wikipedia in general. Popcornfud (talk) 05:22, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

...Pulling up a lawnchair and making some popcorn... But seriously, I don't think it's inherently inappropriate for Popcornfud to link to an essay primarily written by them (not "cited" to "establish policy"); it would have been nice had they noted their high degree of involvement in the essay, but it is just an essay, not a policy. I do think that hashing this out here rather than edit-warring is the appropriate path, and I'd hope all involved agree. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:42, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

"Was" or "were"?

I know that in US English, band names are treated as singular, but I'm not sure this applies to duos where the name consists simply of the names of the duo's members - for example, Hall & Oates and Sam & Dave are both treated as plural in their articles. Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2026 (UTC)