 | Alternative music: Nirvana Template‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Grunge music, Courtney Love, Heavier Than Heaven, Kurt & Courtney, and Tom Grant don't belong in the Discography section. A separate section (maybe "Related topics") would probably be best for these. -- LGagnon
I'm confused why "Drain You (Live)", which never charted, gets the distinction of being a part of the singles page, where as "On A Plain", which did chart, doesn't get that distinction. Neither was released as a commercial single, so wouldn't it make sense to have both or neither?
"Polly (Unplugged)" was also released as a promo single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.101.57.67 (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The term "popular" is subjective (that is POV). Anyone can claim that a song is popular because they liked it, and that seems to be what happened here. I'm switching it to "Singles" as that would fit the NPOV policy much better. -- LGagnon July 3, 2005 00:56 (UTC)
I re-arranged the singles in chronological order, they seemed to be random before --Surachit 01:13, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed this template to mirror the visual style of {{Dream Theater}}, {{Rush}}, {{IronMaiden}}, etc. I'm trying to change all navigational templates like these to a single uniform style, so if you see any more please let me know. 
plattopustalk 05:43, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
This template seems unecessarily large. Articles such as Singles, although admittedly in-depth, should nonetheless be listed in a separate Discography article rather than filling up too much space on a template. For many of the articles linked on the template (Heavier Than Heaven, for example), the template is bigger than the article itself, making things look a bit lop-sided. Would anyone object to a downsizing? Thenugga 00:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't be stuffed logging into wikipedia to comment this but, why the hell was Fecal Matter deleted!? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:210.50.72.133 (talk • contribs) 05:41, July 10, 2006.
A big band is worthy of a big template, thats what I say. There are many templates contructed the same way anyway. The Smashing Pumpkins, The Beatles, etc. I don't see a problem with it, it's just extra informative. I have also reverted the template so that it includes Fecal Matter. --Reaper X 01:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Call me petty for bringing this up, but I think we need consensus on this. All Apologies and Rape Me are together as a single. So should they be listed as either:
Thoughts please, an edit war over this would be freakin stupid. -- Reaper X 20:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like the paragraph about Wallace's work on Nevermind might be simply a plug for him. Does anyone agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.191.228.105 (talk • contribs)
plattopustalk 05:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]Kurt cobain should be written as Kurt Cobain (1967-1994) in the band members template so readers notice he has passed away —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.246.27.219 (talk) 08:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]
while 1991: The Year Punk Broke is considered primarily a Sonic Youth release, Nirvana is featured quite prominently with 5 songs included, should it be added to the video release section of the template? --Pantophobia 22:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Between EPs and Compilations is currently listed "Outcesticide". It is not an official compilation so I think it should be removed or flagged as "unofficial". But if you leave it into the template, I think you should add every other compilations everly appeared... finally I think the best solution is to remove it. What do you think about this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.37.96.186 (talk) 16:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]
EDIT: No answers; I finally deleted it.
How did people come to this consensus that Smear isn't an official member?? He was asked to join the band, toured with and recorded with the band... Please, define official member. --Endless Dan 13:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He came with them on tour, but he didn't record with them. He did not play on "You know you're right", I don't think. Maybe he was more of a touring member, like Lori Goldston. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.224.161.24 (talk) 07:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe someone can help me out, but why is this template on the Foo Fighters page? I can see why it would be on David Grohl's page, but Foo Fighters? Just looking for some clarification.06:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)Mogthetormentor (talk)
I don't think this template should include unoffical releases like the In Utero DVD and the Smells Like Bleach tribute album. mjgm84 (talk) 13:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Should Paul McCartney be added to the additional touring members section? 220.244.162.100 (talk) 23:33, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing as the McCartney/Nirvana song has been released in a studio version, it is now appropriate to add Pat Smear to the current line-up and move Kurt Cobain to the departed members section. Discuss. 220.244.162.100 (talk) 06:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Other compilation albums are also said to contain Nirvana tracks, although I have yet to personally confirm this. As I own the above five albums, I can verify personally that Nirvana indeed appears on each one.
That said, given that Nirvana discography is already listed on the template, one might wish to make the argument that we oughtn't include compilation albums, although I personally would contend that we should include them.
Just something to consider. Cheers, allixpeeke (talk) 19:51, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
