Talk:Eagles (band)

WP:LAME: "Eagles vs the Eagles"

Since the issue won't seem to go away with the removal of "the" in front of the band's name, I have added this ongoing "dispute" to "Lamest Edit Wars". I put quotes around dispute because it is not even a dispute except for a very small minority of editors. Don Felder's book is not titled "Heaven and Hell: My Life in Eagles (1974-2001)", the official website constantly uses "the" when speaking about the band, and multitudes of reliable sources (particularly interviews with the band members themselves) prove conclusively that we are not about to "rewrite the rules" here and start calling them "Eagles" strictly and across the board. It's not going to happen because it is provably incorrect. While I know this isn't the end of this, I hope anyone out there watching this page who still believes, despite all evidence to the contrary, that "the" needs to go understands that WP is supposed to follow standard norms, and it is simply not standard anywhere to eliminate "the" when referring to the band in most instances. Anyone disagree? Let's discuss it if that's the case. Thank you! :> Doc talk 04:06, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

P.S. - Just for the heck of it, here are some totally random excerpts from each band member (from reliable sources) describing the band...

• Don Henley - "There's something we've created called the Eagles that's more important than any one of us individually."
• Glenn Frey - "For myself, I think having a wife and kids has taught me that the Eagles is a family." My Note: Interesting as to the "Eagles is" vs "Eagles are" a family. Let's not cross that bridge yet...
• Randy Meisner - "All that stuff and all the arguing amongst the Eagles is over now."
• Bernie Leadon - "We had written a bunch of songs of a similar vibe, and the Eagles were not interested in the ones I wrote at that time."
• Don Felder - The title of his book says it all, but... "To give the Eagles their due, there was something spine-tinglingly magical about their sound."
• Joe Walsh - "Also the Eagles have really been busy."
• Timothy B. Schmit - "I've been really busy with the Eagles for quite a long time now." (Right in the beginning of an ABC News Radio interview widely available on YouTube but not appropriately linkable here for copyright reasons.)

In every quote we have a lower-case "the" in front of "Eagles". From their own mouths. What more is there to say, really? Doc talk 08:36, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Please point out One studio album cover with "The Eagles". Mlpearc powwow 15:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, there was The Very Best of the Eagles for one. On the others you don't find the definite article but that is a stylistic choice, just as you won't find it on albums by the Pretenders or the Ramones. That's why the article is simply titled "Eagles" but that doesn't preclude the necessity of the definite article in running prose. Please see the past discussions on the archived talk page and the edit summaries on the history page for consensus on this subject. As Glenn Frey used to say at the start of every concert: "We're the Eagles from Los Angeles California." Piriczki (talk) 19:06, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The band is certainly known colloquially as "the Eagles", and I think it's fine to refer to them as such throughout the body of the article. However, the band's actual name is "Eagles" and I think that should be addressed in some form in the lede. How about "Eagles, known colloquially as the Eagles", or "The Eagles, officially Eagles,..."? Joefromrandb (talk) 04:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I made a bold edit, just to see what people think. Another possibility is to stick with "The Eagles" and add a footnote. The footnote could say, "While the band's official name is "Eagles", most people, including the band members themselves, refer to the band as 'the Eagles". (Or something like that.) Joefromrandb (talk) 04:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no objections to your changes to the lede, and we must remember that the "The" is capitalized only in the beginning of a sentence, and is lowercase in any other instance. All reliable sources follow this standard. I wouldn't add the footnote you suggest, as it would be original research without proper attribution. Doc talk 08:34, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I have restored the lead to the correct grammatical form. The name "Eagles" is bolded but is correctly preceded with "The" which is NOT bolded because it isn't part of the official name but is still grammatically required in this sentence. Why some editors find it so difficult to understand this simple fact is quite astonishing. Afterwriting (talk) 12:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It most certainly is not "grammatically required". The band's name is "Eagles" and there is certainly nothing ungrammatical or wrong about refering to them as such. The fact is that almost everyone, including the band members themselves refer to Eagles as "the Eagles". That is what I was attempting to distinguish with my edit. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:15, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It most certainly is grammatically required in most instances as Eagles is a plural noun. Therefore whenever the group's name appears in a sentence it is usually grammatically correct to have "the" before it - and incorrect not to. The only exceptions to this principle would be in sentences such as "The first Eagles album to be released on CD was ..." I also agree with the comments below citing Led Zeppelin. If this band were called the "Led Zeppilins" (plural) then "the" would also be ordinarily required before the name. And if the "Eagles" were called "Eagle" (singular) then "the" would not usually be required - but would be in instances such as "the Eagle album with the highest sales was ..." The principle is not a difficult one to grasp and implement. Afterwriting (talk) 15:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

So by that standard we must say, "Axl Rose is the lead singer of the Guns N' Roses"? Joefromrandb (talk) 05:46, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

No, because nobody else out there does that, and WP would look foolish if we did it when no reliable source does. They would omit the "the" in that particular example. But you also can't say "ex-Guns N' Roses Slash", as you'd have to add "guitarist", "member", etc. after the band name. But you can singularize the Eagles name to say "former Eagle Randy Meisner". It is done all the time. And you could say, "former Eagles bassist...", but not "former the Eagles bassist...". One would write, "former bassist with the Eagles" vs. "former bassist with Eagles". And no reliable source writes, "Don Henley is a founder of Eagles", they add the "the" in front of the band's name or write it in a different way. Doc talk 20:31, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Again, I'm not contesting that sources use "the Eagles" and we should follow that. I'm contesting Afterwriting's assertion that it is "gramatically necessary". And I repeat, by that standard we would have to say "the Guns N' Roses", which you have correctly pointed out would sound ridiculous. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't know about grammatical correctness and all that, but the way the Eagles are treated is much the same as Red Hot Chili Peppers. There's no "the", yet some major reliable music sources[1][2][3] show that "the" is very commonly added to their name (which is often shortened to just "the Chili Peppers"). That's what they (and we) do for the Eagles. I can't speak to any other case. Doc talk 21:43, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

It kind of is grammatically correct to use "the" when referring to them. Robert Plant could say, "When I was in Led Zeppelin...", but no former Eagle says, "When I was in Eagles...": it just doesn't happen. They always say, "When I was in the Eagles...". Trust me, I know your heart's in the right place with this, but sooner or later another editor will come along and erase all instances of "the" again because they think it is grammatically incorrect to have it, since they are simply called "Eagles". And we'll go back to square one again ;> Doc talk 21:56, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

It's fine grammatically to use "the". My point was there's nothing grammatically incorrect with "Eagles". Either way is perfectly valid; "the Eagles" just happens to be the commonly-used name. My point was that while it's fine to use "the Eagles" throughout the article, there should at least be one mention that "Eagles" is the actual name. "The Eagles" seems to do it indirectly. I'm fine with the way it is now; I just think it could be done better. Joefromrandb (talk) 02:19, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, there is nothing "grammatically incorrect" with "Eagles" as the name of the band ~ either "Eagles" or "The Eagles" is okay. What this issue is about is when the name is used in sentences. As I have explained above, it is usually grammatically correct - at least in English - to have "the" before "Eagles" and other plural nouns. I do not know whether the definite article is usually required in other languages which use them in such instances. Afterwriting (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

High price for tickets

I am sure that I heard on the Radio Four programme You and Yours on May 4 2011 that this band once charged a high price for one of their concerts, and then tickets to sold out very quickly. Is this information in the article, or did I miss it? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 21:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. "Once" meaning recently? And if the prices were "high" and they still sold out, it doesn't appear noteworthy unless it set some sort of a record in ticket sales (highest priced, fastest to sell, etc.) Cheers :> Doc talk 02:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Length of introduction

Does anyone else think the intro is too long? It should at least have some paragraphs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.104.68.234 (talk) 21:51, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Comment The lead is meant to summarize the page. Big page - Big lead. There ARE sentence breaks - to make paragraphs you'd have to combine things. Reads fine to me. Ckruschke (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2012 (UTC)Ckruschke

James Gang in Associated Acts

Does anyone else think that James Gang should be listed in the Associated Acts section? I feel it is a key band to have in the list since it brought Joe Walsh, a key member of The Eagles, to fame. The Eagles are listed as an associated act on James Gangs' page. Can one group be associated to another but not vise versa? I do see here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_musical_artist#associated_acts "Groups with only one member in common" is listed as reasons NOT to include an associated act. Going by these guidelines, The Eagles should be removed from James Gangs' page.

Unless I am missing something, one or more of these three things must happen.

1. The Eagles should be removed from James Gang's associated acts.
2. James Gang should be added to the Eagles' associated acts.
3. The 'Template:Infobox musical artist' guidelines should be changed to allow "Groups with only one member in common".

FoxMulder900 (talk) 23:42, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Requests for comment at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles

You are invited to participate in an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles on the issue of capitalizing the definite article when mentioning the band's name in running prose. This long-standing dispute is the subject of an open mediation case and we are requesting your help with determining the current community consensus. Tvoz/talk 23:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)