Talk:Faces (band)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is there any reason not to move this to the unambiguous The Faces? As well as "faces" being the plural of face, there's also a 1968 John Cassavetes film called Faces. This should be a disambiguation page pointing to the three, imo. --Camembert
- The band were called The Faces. The entry for their previous incarnation The Small Faces has the "The" in the title so it's inconsistent not to include it in the title of this article. Lee M 00:20, 29 Aug 2003 (UTC)
- I disagree. Not all bands take the article as part of their name (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Music standards), and I think this is one that doesn't (though The Small Faces definitely does). In many cases, it is possible to google to see what the standard is, but I can't come up with any combination of search terms that is particularly revealing. Allmusic.com doesn't include the, however, but does include it for The Small Faces. Of course, given that there are disambiguation issues, The Faces might be the best title even if it isn't the correct name of the band... I'm rather agnostic on that front (get it?... music joke... Agnostic Front). Tuf-Kat 03:49, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)
-
- I've never seen an official representation of the band name with the article. For example, all of the album covers have only 'Faces'. --patton1138 22:22, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I agree, it's definitely Faces and NOT The Faces. --Bonalaw 12:41, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Yes, the name of the band has no article, but in sentences where the article is appropriate in regular English, the article should remain (not capitalized, though). This is probably all due to the fact that in a sentence, removing the article makes it an awkward utterance. So, most of the edits you have made in removing the article should be reverted. I use as evidence the article by Ian McLagan in the Five Guys Walk into a Bar... box set: '...and it's a shame the Faces never recorded it,' emphasis mine. --patton1138 17:28, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Looking over my edits, I think there's only one that makes a sentence sound a bit stilted, which is "Although they enjoyed relatively modest success compared to contemporaries such as The Who and The Rolling Stones, Faces played a vital role in the birth of what would eventually become punk." And I think even that slight awkwardness is a reasonable payoff for increased accuracy. --Bonalaw 07:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- it's not increased accuracy, it merely sounds awkward. the band's de facto name (as always used in speech) is the faces. if you want to include "the" as part of the band name, whatever, but it is always said beforehand. it is not at all helpful to a wikipedia article to use bizarre english. 67.172.61.222 03:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- Looking over my edits, I think there's only one that makes a sentence sound a bit stilted, which is "Although they enjoyed relatively modest success compared to contemporaries such as The Who and The Rolling Stones, Faces played a vital role in the birth of what would eventually become punk." And I think even that slight awkwardness is a reasonable payoff for increased accuracy. --Bonalaw 07:37, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- One year later, this sentence reads: "Although they enjoyed modest European success compared to contemporaries such as The Who and The Rolling Stones, but in the USA and the UK The faces surpassed the live succes of The Who and The Stones by miles." This is a nightmare for several reasons, and I can't believe it's been allowed to stand. I think we still need something strong here.
-
[edit] Moved
I moved this page from "The Faces" to "Faces (band)". There is no "The" in Faces. Introducing an error isn't the way to go. --Davidp 20:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)