Wikipedia

Talk:AC/DC/Archive 8

< Talk:AC | DC
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Vaughan J. in topic 1st concert in the Americas
Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9

Browning book

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

While Michael Browning's time managing AC/DC should certainly be covered in the article, I'm thinking the book may not be totally reliable as history, i.e. it probably contains factual errors. Nothing malicious, just details like names, dates and chronology. It was written primarily from Browning's own memories and not researched or checked against other sources. I find it hard to reconcile his account of booking AC/DC at the Hard Rock in Melbourne some time in mid 1974 and then booking them again a few weeks later when they were stuck in Adelaide with this list of 1974 AC/DC tour dates, for example. It's certainly a usable source and an entertaining read but should be used with caution with regard to historical details. MaxBrowne (talk) 07:14, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 22 March 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago11 comments10 people in discussion
This RfC was closed because consensus was reached against moving the page. Rational: AC/DC (the band) is the primary topic - Mlpearc (open channel) 23:30, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

– in line with standard encyclopedic logical conventions, the primary meaning is the electrical concept which should take precedence. AC/DC (band) is clearly secondary. Readers will concur. Thanks. Hansmuller (talk) 09:27, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). wbm1058 (talk) 10:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
At 22:09, 29 August 2006 Nintendude moved AC/DC to AC/DC (band): ambiguous topic
At 17:38, 3 September 2006‎ ProhibitOnions moved AC/DC (band) to AC/DC: Article moved without discussion; no real ambiguity
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on AC/DC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:42, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on AC/DC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:51, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Why is the main picture outdated?

Latest comment: 7 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

The current picture shows an outdated lineup from 2009. Malcolm Young, Brian Johnson, Phil Rudd, and Cliff Williams are no longer members of the band. The picture should be replaced to show the current lineup of Angus Young, Axl Rose, Stevie Young, and Chris Slade. Wikitam331 (talk) 03:40, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The photo is of what might be regarded as the "classic" AC/DC line-up (Bon fans will disagree). Photos with the appropriate licensing from the Rock or Bust tour could be used in the article, but I'd still prefer a "classic line up" for the main pic. MaxBrowne (talk) 05:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Seriously? Too right, Bon fans will disagree. I'm just surprised that any AC/DC fans would not consider the line-up prior to Bon's death to be the "classic" line-up! As for a current line-up, surely it's now Angus & whoever he wishes to recruit, if there is even to be any more AC/DC. Gwladys24 (talk) 13:16, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Best leave it until we get more news, which could be months, years or never. Flat Out (talk) 05:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

It's also good to keep in mind that this page is to discuss issues regarding the main page and not a fan page forum to discuss your personal opinions on what constitutes the "classic line-up" or what your personal preference is for the main pic. That's irrelevant here. Please stay on topic. (Sellpink (talk) 03:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC))

Putting my two cents here. I've seen the image change over the years bouncing back and forth from Bon Scott to Brian Johnson led AC/DC. "Classic AC/DC" is too opinionated to justify the use of an image. The image should reflect the band in it's current state as much as possible unless the band has been disbanded for quite sometime with a more notable image of the band used properly. Since AC/DC was active relatively recently with several new members the image should reflect the Axl Rose led AC/DC.Acdcguy1991 (talk) 17:23, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Who is the lead singer of the group?

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

It's been attempted in many recent edits to restore Brian Johnson as the current lead singer. However, this is both unsourced and inaccurate, according to this blabbermouth article written on July 30, 2017, where it is stated that Johnson is apparently not returning to the group. Claiming that the article is outdated should be accompanied by a reliable source, otherwise these edits are simply introducing incorrect information, and could be interpreted as vandalism. -- Radiphus 14:12, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I havn't heard any changes since Rose was announced as the new frontman. I could be out of date - FlightTime (open channel) 14:44, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
As far as i know, there has been no announcement of a new lead singer. They may keep bringing in guest vocalists for future projects. We need to decide on either putting Rose with the other past members, without replacing him with anybody else (definetely not Johnson), or just leave him there with the other current members of the group until further notice. -- Radiphus 15:01, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on AC/DC. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

The archive worked, but I've updated the URL of the original ref.--Gorpik (talk) 11:56, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Potential new album

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

If you feel so strongly about including the section, it should be fairly simple for you to explain why it should be included. Please use the talk page here to justify the inclusion, rather than edit-warring over it. Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, let's wait for an official band statement and not rely on a "friend of the band" opinion. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:36, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
I added a link to the original interview with Australian website The Rockpit, while trying to avoid undue weight. Seems a reasonable source. MaxBrowne (talk) 00:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Associated acts - Guns n' Roses

Latest comment: 6 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Every so often, someone adds Guns n' Roses to the Associated Acts list in the infobox, only for it to be reversed. Now, given that Axl Rose has completed a full tour singing with AC/DC and Angus Young has guested in several GnR shows, making this a two-way collaboration, I think we have reason enough to include GnR as an associated act. Or, in any case, we can settle the discussion here. Thoughts?--Gorpik (talk) 09:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Angus guesting with GNR, imo, doesn't justify the inclusion. It's usually used for acts with two or more other members in common. RF23 (talk) 10:19, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
The two bands started in entirely different milieus and circumstances, they both have their own sets of fans who are not necessarily fans of the other band and their musical styles aren't even all that similar beyond falling under the broad "hard rock" category. It was only late in the two bands' respective careers that they started appearing as guests at each other's shows. So I'd be inclined not to include GNR as an "associated act". MaxBrowne (talk) 11:11, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Guesting at live shows is not enough. The two bands should be recording together on more than one song. Binksternet (talk) 18:41, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

OK, pretty clear consensus against including them. At least, now we can refer to this discussion.--Gorpik (talk) 09:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Significant article issues

Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I really hate to be "that guy", but I have to point out some significant issues with this article that make me question if this FA is really still at featured article status. There are a high number of statements missing citations, a serious concern of whether or not there is any WP:OR in here. The number of one or two-sentence paragraphs are also a concern as it does not convey a professional standard of writing. Reading the prose, I would challenge that it does not appear professionally written at this time, and I can provide some specific examples on request if need be. I understand this is an FA from 2006 and the standards have changed, but it looks like this article needs some work to keep its star. Red Phoenix talk 14:42, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

It definitely needs work. Uncited statements are easily spotted, so that alone is reason for concern. Maybe we can knock it into shape without needing to take it to FAR. --Laser brain (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
I would really hope not to have to go that far. I'm a fan of AC/DC, but music articles aren't my forte when it comes to Wikipedia; I'm almost exclusively a video games article editor, and not one with a lot of time on their hands to aggressively research and go after this. I hope there is someone out there who can take this up. Red Phoenix talk 15:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Can't have an infobox that doesn't even mention Bon Scott

Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

No we don't have to include everyone who ever filled in on a tour, but anyone who was in the band as a full member on a reasonably permanent basis should be included in the infobox. Axl Rose barely even deserves to be listed as a member, he's never sung on an AC/DC album and he's primarily associated with a different band whose fans don't even have that much overlap with AC/DC's fans. Including Rose in the infobox but not Bon Scott or Brian Johnson shows a complete lack of appreciation for the band's history. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 03:54, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

I would be open to removing Larry Van Kriedt, Colin Burgess and maybe Dave Evans from the list of former band members, since their time in the band was short and they do not appear on any recordings (apart from one single with Evans). MaxBrowne2 (talk) 03:51, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I don't think those ones merit being in the infobox. We have a whole article dedicated to past members.--Gorpik (talk) 08:33, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
OK tentative consensus to reove then. I'll do it and see what happens. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 11:46, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Heavily influenced by the scottish 'Alex Harvey Band'

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Bon Scott was heavily influenced by the scottish 'Alex Harvey Band'. Instead of the crazed-clown lead guitarist outfit of the Alex Harvey Band, AC/DC used the crazed schoolboy outfit. Bon Scott even sounded like Alex Harvey.
You can clearly see the stage look and vocal similarity here:
Alex Harvey Band - 1973:
<iframe width="427" height="240" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3rQ6BBc8f6Y" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

and

<iframe width="300" height="240" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/R861Dw30_Ds" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Note: Malcolm and Angus Young were all scottish-born too. Must be in the genes.

Main influence I hear is Chuck Berry to be honest. Anyway this is all original research. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:23, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Portal:AC/DC for deletion

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:AC/DC is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at this MfD discussion page until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 23:00, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Line Up 2019

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

AC/DC is in stand-by since 2016, but actually the band work for a new album with Brian and Phil Rudd.

In the page of wiki, it's wright Axl rose 2016-present and Chris Slade 2015-présent, it's WRONG.

Why a change my edit ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laazrockit (talk • contribs) 18:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

See previous comment.--Jimi Henderson (talk) 19:03, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Chris Slade is not actually member of AC/DC...Official actually member of AC/DC it's Angus and only Angus ! since 2016 Chris Slade does nothing with AC/DC...Axl play with Guns and nothing other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laazrockit (talk • contribs) 22:55, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Change current lineup at top of page

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Officially, what is currently known is that Angus Young and Stevie Young are the current members of the band. Bassist Cliff Williams retired after their last tour. As of August 2018 Drummer Slade currently doesn't know if he's in the band. Link below. https://loudwire.com/acdc-chris-slade-hasnt-seen-band-end-rock-or-bust-touring/ Axl Rose said in numerous interviews in 2016 that he was helping his fellow musicians out and that he was just filling in for Brian Johnson. Unofficially the rumor is that Brian Johnson, Angus and Stevie Young, Cliff Williams and Phil Rudd will be releasing an album and touring in 2020. I propose that the band member section be changed to reflect that the Drums, bass, and vocals are currently unknown and a section in the main article explaining why those current members are currently unknown. RyanConnell5150 (talk) 20:23, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Seeking page protection consensus

Latest comment: 4 years ago22 comments9 people in discussion

I am seeking consensus (per this discussion) in regards to my RfPP report (which was denied) The denial is not the issue, what I state in the report is. For years now IP's have been going to the pages of Bon Scott, Angus Young, Malcolm Young and changing "Australian" to "Scottish" in the lead. Yes they were all born in Scotland, but the band was formed in Australia and that what we've gone by forever. I have made hundreds of reverts on those pages throughout the years and I think it's time to set indefinite semi-protection on them. IMO this is getting old. Opinions ? - FlightTime (open channel) 22:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

I'd be in favour of that. The Youngs and Bon Scott were Australian citizens, regardless of where they were born. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:03, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
I agree, too. It is quite tiring to see those editions once and again.--Gorpik (talk) 11:42, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
I would not agree to that. We're using our most powerful tool for something that can be resolved with a simpler solution. The most I would be willing to consent to is extended page protection and a comment describing the situation. (brought here by request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians) Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Extended would work also. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:21, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Saw this advertised at the pump. Similar to Walter, I'd not be in favor of indefinite semi-protection. I'd only be willing to endorse pending changes protection and probably only for this page, not the band member pages. I understand this is a frustratingly common occurence, but for these editors, they think they're helping. It's very bite-y to prevent them from editing this whole page because of a dispute over one word. — Wug·a·po·des​ 03:14, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
@Wugapodes: What's the difference between going to the page to revert and reviewing a PC post (time/work load wise I mean)? - FlightTime (open channel) 21:21, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Not much, but that's not the main consideration of the protection policy. This is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and in order to protect pages administrators need evidence that protection is the only way to respond to heavy and persistent vandalism. This is neither. Looking at the band member pages, IP editors edit them maybe once a month, and the edits aren't even vandalism. Most of the edits seem to be good faith. While the consensus of registered editors may be that they're Australian, these people were born in Scotland. Stating that they're Scottish isn't vandalism ("On Wikipedia, vandalism has a very specific meaning: editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose, which is to create a free encyclopedia, in a variety of languages, presenting the sum of all human knowledge."); that a person born in Scotland is Scottish is a reasonable opinion, and editing the page to reflect that is a good faith attempt to correct what seems to be an error. Our protection policy explicitly forbids using semi-protection "to privilege registered users over unregistered users in (valid) content disputes" and the fact that so many people disagree with registered editors suggests that the articles should be improved to explain why people born in Scotland are not considered Scottish. We don't protect pages because dealing with anonymous editors is inconvenient, and the nationality-related edits are neither frequent nor egregious. That's why the request for protection at RFPP was rejected and why I also am opposed to this request as well. — Wug·a·po·des​ 07:36, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
It's not really a dispute. A lot of it is nationalist vandalism. This page doesn't see as much of it as the band members' pages. Bretonbanquet (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Indefinite semi-protection looks to me like overkill for this issue. Bondegezou (talk) 14:18, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
@Bondegezou: Would you consider permanent Extended confirmed protection ? - FlightTime (open channel) 21:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
Extended protection is a higher protection level than semi-protection. Semi-protection allows editors with 10 edits and 4 days tenure to edit while extended confirmed protection restricts editing to registered users with 30 days tenure and 500 edits. — Wug·a·po·des​ 07:36, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
I think a better approach would be to find a form of words that acknowledges both the band's Australian-ness and their Scottish-ness. Bondegezou (talk) 10:32, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
This sounds like exactly the type of situation pending changes was designed for. I see a lot of similar issues come up on other articles there and once click is all that's necessary to take care of it. Pending changes has the great advantage that it doesn't BITE the newcomer but also prevents the edit from being widely seen. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 14:07, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Admittedly I've had 1 or 2 articles indef-protected purely due to vandals/socks (and the article(s) were barely ever edited), In this specific case indef-protecting would exclude everyone editing it and given it's a highly edited page I'd much prefer something less overkill like Extended-confirmed protection. –Davey2010Talk 20:46, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Extended confirmed

A lot of editors are saying that Extended confirmed would be more appropriate, that would work for me. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:56, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

If that's the general consensus then it works for me also. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:41, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed would certainly be better than indef-protected. Abzeronow (talk) 18:14, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
What? Indefinite semi-protection is too restrictive but extended-confirmed protection is OK? That's backwards from my understanding of the protection levels. If the goal is to allow most changes while screening out IP and just-registered editors from changing nationalities then extended-confirmed is stepping up from a .22 to an elephant gun. Pending changes protection would be the relative BB gun in this situation. It seems a much less disruptive solution to the specific issue complained of. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:27, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Didn't see that semi-protection was proposed, thought by what Davey said, they meant admin-only protection. Yes, I agree that pending changes is the best solution since it is less bite-y to newcomers and it can catch good faith edits that assert these Australians are Scottish (they are Scottish-born, but Australian nationals). Abzeronow (talk) 17:18, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
@Abzeronow:, the original request made by FlightTime at RfPP was for indefinite semi-protection. I took that as understood as the basis for discussion. Apologies if I assumed incorrectly. I've generally seen the admin-only protection of the type you mention as "full protection", which I don't think anyone would favor. Thanks for your reply. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
I think my misunderstanding of Abzeronow first comment in this thread, started the confusion, but my original thoughts were of indef semi-protection. Sorry for the mix up, - FlightTime (open channel) 21:02, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Surely the current members need updating

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

It's common knowledge that Angus, Brian, Cliff and Phil are back in the studio, recording a new album making use of Malcolm's past session material. Surely it's time to shift Axl to the past members... even Axl says Brian is back! Stub Mandrel (talk) 19:41, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Common knowledge is not how Wikipedia works. See WP:RS. HiLo48 (talk) 23:39, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Done AnotherUserame000 (talk) 18:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Brian Johnson

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Is he in or is he out? Infobox lists Brian as a member, whereas the Current Members does not. BigJoeRockHead (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Bring back the tour pages

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It would not be difficult to cite the significance of many tours that AC/DC embarked on, and I don't believe it was a necessary move to remove the pages. I say we bring them back. SweetTaylorJames (talk) 05:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Axlrose is not a member of AC/DC. He filled in for Brian Johnson who is now back with the band. 72.9.126.57 (talk) 03:51, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

  Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:21, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Please remove Axl Rose (Lead Vocals) and Chris Slade (Drums) from members section on the right hand side and 'Current members' at the bottom, as this is false. Current line up includes Angus Young, Stevie Young, Phil Rudd (Drums) and Brian Johnson (Lead vocals). Evidence Below. Thank you.

https://www.straight.com/music/1113406/acdc-rumour-update-photo-shows-phil-rudd-and-brian-johnson-vancouver MintBerryCrunch12 (talk) 13:14, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

See diff.--Jimi Henderson (talk) 17:22, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
@MintBerryCrunch12:   Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. GoingBatty (talk) 00:41, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Members.

Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

You do realize that Brian Johnson is back in the band, right? AustinDeLarra (talk) 05:12, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

There are lots of rumours, but no official confirmation. Wikipedia does not deal with rumours, however insistent they are.--Gorpik (talk) 07:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Then why does the wiki page for Johnson state that he is once again the lead singer for the band? Looneybunny (talk) 21:59, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Same as with everything on Wikipedia, because someone had written it :) It is one of the many rumours and I have just rewritten that so it is closer to what the source says.--Gorpik (talk) 11:03, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

The only actually official member of AC/DC is Angus, not Chris Slade and Axl Rose, référence ? Nothing ? Axl and Chris Slade play the Rock or bust tour and nothing (talk).

Malcolm? Timtam90 (talk) 04:29, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Members

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The members should be the founding members and shouldn’t have Stevie young in it.... “Members” with the original crew and then “active members”... Don’t really care about this band but it feels disrespectful that Malcolm isn’t in the members when he helped found the band and wrote songs...

This would be like Led Zeppelin saying members and putting John Bonham's son as the drummer.. and you have to actually look/ know who played on the albums. He should be the first thing...

If you joined in 2014 you don’t count sorry Stevie Timtam90 (talk) 04:26, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I think it was better when the infobox included key past members like Malcolm Young, Bon Scott. e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AC/DC&oldid=890788011. How about we restore this? MaxBrowne2 (talk) 04:36, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
I agree. I'm fine with not having some guy who played a few gigs before they ever recorded anything, for instance, but relevant past members should be there. @Timtam90: if you look at the infobox parameters, that is the current members list; it is not in this article, but the consensus for all music band articles. Your Led Zeppelin example is irrelevant because they are not an active band.--Gorpik (talk) 07:37, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Brian’s back

Latest comment: 4 years ago7 comments6 people in discussion

Why do they have Axlrose as lead singer? Brian’s been back for months. Venom0674 (talk) 04:02, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah we heard the gossip. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 04:31, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi ya'll, please consider adding this information, it seems that the boys are back to the (almost) classic lineup as photos have been uploaded to their official website and then removed. Please see this article. Cheers! Ronnieroxx (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
The article says that the info is not confirmed.--Gorpik (talk) 08:38, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Well, it is now confirmed, https://pwrup.acdc.com . Would you be so kind and update this event and also the member list? Thanks! Ronnieroxx (talk) 12:33, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Is it not more accurate to set Brian, Cliff and Phil's return to August 2018, instead of September 2020? The studio sessions for the upcoming album started in August 2018, with Brian, Phil and Cliff involved.

Magnuskberg (talk) 22:23, 1 October 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.128.185.90 (talk)

Yes, when there is a good source for it. The band were basically on hiatus after the tour with Axl finished, with no bass player, and restarted when the recording sessions started. Brian, Cliff and Phil were clearly part of the band from that point, and not from September 2020, which is pretty ridiculous. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:27, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Axl Rose is out, and Brian J is back, as per the article itself, and even the band's official website. Please update the current band members to bring it up to date. 98.207.176.151 (talk) 10:17, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

  Already done P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 22:24, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Brian Johnson, Phil Rudd, and Cliff Williams rejoin dates?

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I see in this article it says the three of them rejoined in 2020. Because it was confirmed in 2020, that makes sense BUT there were pictures of them recording in 2019. The article List of AC/DC members states that they rejoined in 2018. Obviously the two articles should say the same year, but should that be 2018, 2019, or 2020? TJD2 (talk) 06:55, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

We don't really know yet. Let's wait a bit, probably the band themselves will clarify this issue as they start giving interviews to promote the new album.--Gorpik (talk) 07:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Axl Rose was not an official member

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I would argue that Axl Rose should be removed from any indication as official member of AC/DC. There is not a single source that states this. He was never listed as a member on the bands website, and he never claimed to be either. He was stepping in ON TOUR to assist the band completing their remaining dates, much like Stevie Young did back in 1988 or Paul Gregg did in 1991. We state Wikipedias facts on reliable sources, but it are only insinuations and perceptions from some Wiki members who have appointed Rose as official member. Magnuskberg (talk) 00:04, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This article states that the first drummer of ACDC was Colin Burgess when in fact the very first was Peter Clack (with the band for 10 months). Please add Peter Clack into this article where necessary. Reference "Peter Clack" Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Clack Awezt (talk) 02:50, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

  Not done Clack's article states that he was "an early member" of AC/DC, not the original drummer. In fact, according to the source used for that article, Clack was the second drummer, following Burgess.--Gorpik (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 January 2021

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Where it says "origin," add New South Wales between Sydney and Australia. Australia has administrative subdivisions and they deserve to be recognized. Trevor LaFleur (talk) 00:37, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 06:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Ballbreaker and Stiff Upper Lip were re-issued in 2004

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Would like to correct the fact that Ballbreaker and Stiff Upper Lip were both re-issued & remastered for 2004; not 2005 and 2007 as the article currently says ("In 2003, the entire back-catalogue (except Ballbreaker and Stiff Upper Lip) was remastered and re-released. Ballbreaker was eventually re-released in October 2005; Stiff Upper Lip was later re-released in April 2007.").

The images in these links can prove that: https://www.discogs.com/es/ACDC-Ballbreaker/release/925105 https://www.discogs.com/es/ACDC-Stiff-Upper-Lip/release/6513241

Juansleony (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Juansleony (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

  Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Discogs is not a reliable source, please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 21:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

The current article doesn't mention any source neither. And, anyways, this is not about discogs as a source, instead, is about the pictures of boths discs as what matter. Online, everywhere, you'll find both Ballbreaker and Stiff Upper Lip back covers stating 2004 as the year of their re-issue by Epic/Columbia/Sony. I just used pictures from discogs because they were decent in resolution, not because discogs is the/my source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juansleony (talk • contribs) 05:04, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

  Done. Juansleony, every piece of information needs a source, and Discogs is indeed not reliable. We can't cite images either. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Blues rock

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I have never heard their work being called blues rock. Wolf O'Donnel (talk) 00:36, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

You've heard "Ride On", right? "The Jack"? "Down Payment Blues"? ok the blues influence is more obvious in the Bon era, but it's always been there. [1] [2] [3] MaxBrowne2 (talk) 00:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Australian English

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm a Kiwi so our variety of English is similar ("Labor" party and all). I'm pretty sure Australia uses -ise rather than -ize? MaxBrowne2 (talk) 01:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Thunderbolt symbol

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

I added the thunderbolt symbol (⚡) as it is their common style of writng the band name. However, I noticed mobile operating systems (e.g. Android) render it ad an emoji rather as an Unicode character. Is there a way to prevent operating systems to render it as yellow emoji? Should I write it AC DC with an SVG symbol instead? Thanks in advance.--Carnby (talk) 16:35, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

I think WP:TRADEMARK is probably applicable here - specifically "Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words or letters (e.g., "♥" used for "love", "!" used for "i")" - and it should just be "AC/DC" which is also the article title. Chaheel Riens (talk) 16:44, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Well I decide to put that strange symbol because there are other pages using stylisations. Do you think this stylisation and this one should be removed as well?--Carnby (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Not really interested in getting involved in WP:OTHERSTUFF - I have no interest in either of those pages so other editors can decide that. As far as AC/DC goes, as the logo appears to be a trademark[4] I stick by my interpretation of WP:Trademark. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:07, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
We are not obliged to use non-standard characters to indulge artists' idiosyncracies. Do we have to retitle Prince's page to https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/af/Prince_logo.svg/130px-Prince_logo.svg.png?
@Chaheel Riens: I humbly accept the editors' consesus. However the thunderbolt symbol as far as the U.S. law (and Wikimedia policy) is concerned, is not coyrightable. Also, I think we need a precise guideline about all these "stylisations".--Carnby (talk) 09:02, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2021

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

In the 7th paragraph under the "accolades" section, change "The RIAA also certified Back in Black as double Diamond (20 million) in US sales, and by 2007 the album had sold 22 million copies, which made it the fifth-best-selling album of all-time in the US." to:

"The RIAA also certified Back in Black as double Diamond (20 million) in US sales, and by 2021 the album had sold 25 million copies, making it the fourth-best-selling album of all-time in the US.

See the following website for reference:

https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=top_tallies&ttt=T1A&col=certified_units&ord=desc#search_section JFaga (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Punctuation error

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

First paragraph in the introduction: 'but the band themselves call it simply "rock and roll".' Should be 'but the band themselves call it simply "rock and roll."' gangplank galleon (talk) 06:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Not an error, because the band don't call it "rock and roll.", but "rock and roll" - they don't punctuate it. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

George Young shouldn't be in the infobox

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

He was in the Easybeats of course, he was about 10 years older than Malcolm and Angus. He was very supportive of them, he'd roadie for them and fill in on guitar or bass if someone was sick or unavailable, but he was never a full-time member of the band. He is included in List of AC/DC members and it may be ok to include him in the AC/DC#Former_members section, but not in the Infobox. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 06:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. This is a recent addition to the infobox and, in my opinion, a wrong one.--Gorpik (talk) 14:10, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Earache Records

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Some AC/DC material got released by the label Earache Records 2600:2B00:A600:5200:40AB:80D:CF89:7872 (talk) 20:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

We need a source to know, so can you send the website link where we can see the material? If it’s not a reliable source, we might not put it in. Vaughan J. (talk) 22:27, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Power up release date

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Power up is a really good album; I play it a lot. The release date should be listed as November 13th 2020. 2603:8000:D900:EF0E:D54F:7F9D:513D:427B (talk) 00:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

If you look at the article about the album here, or look here, you can see the release date is listed as 13 November 2020. Vaughan J. (talk) 06:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Discography

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Missing "Who Made Who" album in 1986 2601:245:4300:FB20:79A0:C09E:4666:2A2B (talk) 17:18, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Who Made Who is a soundtrack album, to the movie Maximum Overdrive. On the discography section, it shows only studio albums, so there's no need to add Who Made Who on the discography section. VJtheDJ (talk) 07:39, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Fixation with nationality

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

It's bad enough constantly arguing about whether AC/DC are an "Australian band" (of course they bloody well are), now we have to say "English singer Brian Johnson" and "English bass player Cliff Williams" and "Welsh drummer Chris Slade" and "American singer Axl Rose"? And to me "Native Australian" means "Aboriginal Australian". This is getting ridiculous. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 10:06, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 February 2023

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion

The album For Those About To Rock was AC/ DC's first number one album and most importantly, it was the first HEAVY METAL ALBUM to reach number one on the Billboard 200 chart. Being that AC/DC is a heavy metal band according to its Wikipedia description and sound!! 2600:6C67:447F:F6FC:B122:AB36:385B:5643 (talk) 14:58, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

The band, and many of their fans, hate the term "Heavy Metal", but worth noting (with proper sourcing) that it was a #1 billboard album. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 22:09, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
  Not done: your request is unclear. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Also please provide reputable sources. GiovanniSidwell (talk) 23:07, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2023

Latest comment: 1 year ago6 comments4 people in discussion

In fact, the title AC/DC did not come from sister Margret, but from their sister in law. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi8gE-i2IFc at 1:09. 108.16.122.101 (talk) 05:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

  Note: This is Interesting, but since there are plenty of sources that attribute the name to the sister, I don't feel comfortable going ahead with the change (based on a youtube video). I will leave this open for others to check and decide. M.Bitton (talk) 12:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
  Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. This is a tricky one, but I think it's more likely that he misspoke as opposed to the variety of sources reporting this incorrectly. Is there any further reporting on this, any other instances of this being attributed to their sister-in-law? Actualcpscm (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
@Actualcpscm: I seriously doubt he misspoke. See this (@15m) where Angus repeats the same thing (explaining that it was his sister in law, the wife of George, that came up with the name). I suggest reopening the edit request to attract more input. M.Bitton (talk) 13:35, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
In that case, we have two instances of Angus making this attribution; maybe we should evaluate how reliable the sources for the other story are. I don't know much about AC/DC, so I think it would be better if someone with some understanding of the field provided insight.
As far as I understand it, edit requests should be used when there is a clear suggestion and the only remaining hurdle is for a user with the proper permissions to check and implement that suggestion. I don't think using them to attract discussion is really their intended purpose. Referring to WP:EDITXY, any open request should meet the SUNS criteria. In my opinion, controversy or uncertainty should be resolved before re-opening the request. Actualcpscm (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
There are a bunch of interviews where Angus or Malcolm says sister-in-law, but there are also some where Angus says sister. I suspect that the truth is the sister-in-law, and that when the term sister is used it is just a short hand, especially since there is one instance where an interview says "your sister Margret" and Angus corrects him to sister-in-law. 165.106.136.108 (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 March 2023

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Please change "Malcolm and Angus Young developed the idea for the band's name after their sister, Margaret Young, saw the initials "AC/DC" on the AC adapter of a sewing machine." to "Malcolm and Angus Young developed the idea for the band's name after their sister in law (by their brother George) saw the initials "AC/DC" on the AC adapter of their sister Margaret's sewing machine."

Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi8gE-i2IFc (1:09) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOb11bSfxeY (15:00)

See "Semi-protected edit request on 12 March 2023" for discussion on topic. 165.106.136.108 (talk) 20:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

  Not done:

Already stated here, - FlightTime (open channel) 20:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure if you read the above. It is not "stated here" 108.16.122.101 (talk) 02:02, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2023

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please change "...after their sister, Margaret Young, saw the initials "AC/DC" on the AC adapter of a sewing machine..." to "...after their sister in law (by their brother George) saw the initials "AC/DC" on the AC adapter of their sister Margaret's sewing machine..." 108.16.122.101 (talk) 23:31, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

  Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:33, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2023

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Change ‘Australian band’ to ‘British band’.

AC/DC is not an Australian band. The band members are British. Just because they’ve lived in Australia for a time, does not mean they’re Australian and it certainly doesn’t make their band Australian. The original members themselves identify/identified as British. AC/DC will ALWAYS be British. 2001:8003:F228:1500:C429:38C1:3999:57AB (talk) 08:35, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

  Not done: see above Cannolis (talk) 09:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
  Not done: You have to know that Angus and Stevie are both Scottish, as they were born in Glasgow.
AC/DC is an Australian band, as they started in Sydney, Australia.
Yes, the Young family lived in Australia, as they migrated from Scotland 10 years before the band was made. But, that doesn't change their nationality to be "Australian". They're still technically Scottish.
And yes, the other band members other than Angus and Stevie (Brian and Cliff) identify as British, as they were born in England. But there's Phil Rudd, born in Melbourne, so technically ⅖ of the members are British.
Hope that makes you understand why they're an Australian band. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 03:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

GA nomination reverted

Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I've reverted the GA nomination added on 26 March. Vaughan J., see the GA nomination instructions and this thread. If you still want to nominate the article, please get the input of significant contributors here on the article talk page first. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:57, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

"stylised as ACϟDC"

Latest comment: 1 year ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is there any source supporting writing the band's name as "ACϟDC" with a Greek Koppa, or is this an invention by wikipedia editors because the symbol looks a bit like a lighting bolt? It was added back in this edit without comment [5]. From a google search this appears to be a very uncommon way of writing the band's name, with a search turning up ~ 70 uses across the internet, mostly on usocial media. 192.76.8.88 (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

  Removed as unsourced. - FlightTime (open channel) 20:30, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

GA nomination question

Latest comment: 1 year ago8 comments3 people in discussion

Vaughn J., per the GA instructions, did you ask other major contributors to the article if they agree the article is ready before you nominated this for GA? I see Bretonbanquet and Gorpik are still active among major contributors, for example. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:42, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

No not yet. I'll go ask them if they agree if they it is ready for it or not in another section of this talk. I do feel like it does meet the citeria for GA, but I'll ask them in another section. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 06:36, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
I have a question. According to the instructions, to be a reviewer you must not have made significant contributions to it. This would mean I am not a good candidate for doing the review. Am I missing something? Gorpik (talk) 07:38, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Judging from this I'd say you have not contributed enough for it to be a problem, and you could do the review. The top few people on that list would not be able to review as they've contributed quite a bit more. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:43, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
What you're saying is, if an article is nominated for GA, and if I'm the top 1 in authorship in the article, then other people can review it even though they are below top 1? — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 11:02, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
No, the concern is that a reviewer should not review text they created. If someone has created a significant amount of the text in an article, they should not be a reviewer of that article. In this case Gorpik has made quite a few edits but the fraction of text they've created is quite small, so they would not be reviewing their own text. That means they can review. Someone in the top five or ten editors on that list would be reviewing their own text, and should not do the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Ohhhh got it! That is noted. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 11:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
OK. Then I'll do the review. Thanks for the clarification. Gorpik (talk) 11:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

GA nominee agreement

Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments3 people in discussion
AGREE
The majority of the people I pinged agrees that this article is ready. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 06:21, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pinging active users that have contributed to this article: @Bretonbanquet, @Gorpik and @Palindromedairy to ask this question below:

Do you guys agree that this article is ready for it to be a GA nominee yet? Reply with "Agree" or "Disagree" and then tell me if you think if it's in the criteria or not. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 06:36, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

  • Agree. The article is well written, comprehensive and stable. It has lots of recent editions (mostly by yourself), but they are mainly technical; this is, they improve references, wordings and the like, not actually doing major updates on the content. The article is well organised and includes criticisms and controversies in a fair way. Gorpik (talk) 12:18, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Agree. There will likely be some adjustments to wording, grammar, or minor factual points to resolve, but fundamentally I think it's ready. Bretonbanquet (talk) 10:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Semi-protected edit request on 17 September 2023

Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion

In the "Discography" part of the infobox, just put it as "AC/DC discography", as having it as "Albums and singles" and "songs" is unneeded. 2601:407:4181:4260:8C9C:4997:7A42:813 (talk) 17:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

"Albums and singles" and "songs" link to separate articles. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
  Not done – "Albums and singles" and "songs" link to seperate lists. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 00:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 1 year ago58 comments2 people in discussion
Failed, per my request. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 00:39, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:AC/DC/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shaidar cuebiyar (talk · contribs) 02:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)


Starting the review

Generally, I will be going through each of the criteria below, in order. I reserve the right to return to earlier comments or sections and revise or add to them until my review is finished. Unless otherwise indicated, maintain existing wikilinks and formatting. The review process should take about a week. I will allow an additional week for any requested changes to be made before making my decision. I have no problem with editors starting to fix up the article before I have finished, but caution them that I may not see their improvements until late in my review process: I may refer to problems that no longer exist.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 02:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking this review! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 03:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
I've finished my review. You have one week to address the issues describes below. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:38, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

The six good article criteria

A good article is:

Criterion 1

  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct  ; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation  .

    2. Hat notes and Infobox

  • Why both {{EngvarB|date=December 2022}} and {{Use Australian English|date=July 2013}}? As for the latter Australian English should have been checked more recently than ten years ago.   Removed the EngvarB template
  • Recheck all date formats & update {{Use dmy dates|date=October 2018}}.   Done
  • Delink common terms e.g. Sydney, New South Wales   Done
  • Delink previously linked terms e.g. Angus Young (2nd link in infobox), likewise for similar.   Partly done – did the exact opposite, delinked on the image captions
  • At past_members= Consider replacing extensive list (15 members) with link to #Former members section below.   Done

Lead

  • Delink common terms e.g. rock, Sydney   Done
  • Check Aus Eng e.g. lineup > line-up   Done
  • Brevity: why do we have "founded by ... lead guitarist Angus Young" followed in next sentence by "founding member and songwriter Angus"?   Done – see below
  • "subsequently stabilised" When? Presumably after debut album (1975). However, if Evans was fired in 1977, how is this "stabilised"?   Partly done – see below
  • Why aren't relationships (if any) between various Youngs in this band specified? ¶1 Mentions Malcolm, Angus and Stevie Young. ¶2 has "the Young brothers", which implies all three. (I already know the first two are brothers and the latter their nephew but one should not assume an average reader knows.)   Removed – see below
  • Brevity: It was a widespread success, launching the band to new heights and becoming the second-best-selling album of all time. > It became the second-best-selling album of all time.   Done
  • Specify where "the band's breakthrough album"   Removed the words "the band's breakthrough album".
  • ¶3: avoid overuse of terms e.g. "album" (8×), "band" (4×).   Done – see below
  • Reword line-up changes from Rudd to Wright to Slade to Rudd...   Done
  • Clarify "biggest chart hit since" as both reached No. 1.   Done
  • ¶4: Malcolm Young > Malcolm; Chris Slade > Slade.   Done
  • Simplify: "became involved in legal troubles."   Done
  • Delete phrase "previous drummer" (already known from ¶3).   Done
  • Shorten sentence starting with "Long-time bassist..."   Done

Formation and...

  • 1st sentence should include "brothers", "in Sydney"   Done
  • After Malcolm and Angus are introduced use "Malcom" not "Malcolm Young" and "Angus" not "Angus Young" in rest of main text. Similar for other siblings Margaret Young and George Young.   Done
  • Delete extraneous "," in: "vocalist Dave Evans, and drummer Colin Burgess."   Done
  • Simplify repeated cites from book sources e.g. <ref>{{Cite book |last1=Elliott |first1=Paul |year=2018 |title=AC/DC: For Those About to Rock |publisher=Harper Grant Books |pp=15, 17 |isbn=978-174379488-3}}</ref> becomes <ref name="Elliott 1">{{Cite book |last1=Elliott |first1=Paul |year=2018 |title=AC/DC: For Those About to Rock |publisher=Harper Grant Books |isbn=978-174379488-3}}</ref>{{rp|15, 17}}. When using same book just change page number template at end e.g. <ref name="Elliott 1" />{{rp|20}} for current ref [5].   Done
  • Clarify: "Angus had tried other costumes" When did he try all these if Chequers was their first gig?   Removed the costumes sentence
  • Brevity: "Dennis Laughlin, who was the original lead singer with Sherbet." > "Dennis Laughlin (ex-Sherbet)."   Done
  • Neutrality: "Evans did not get along with Laughlin, which also contributed to the band's bitter feeling toward Evans" > "Evans and Laughlin were incompatible, consequently other members developed bitter feelings toward Evans" Note: "the band" does not have feelings but its members do.   Done
  • Brevity: "after their sister, Margaret Young" > "after Margaret" Sister already mentioned.   Done
  • Fact check: first album with band's logo: High Voltage or Let There Be Rock (1977)? Contradicts adjacent ¶, which states "[it] has been used on all studio albums [except] international version of Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap." Answer below
  • What it is saying is that the high voltage sign symbol has been used in every album starting with High Voltage, except the international version Dirty Deeds. It's not talking about the current logo. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 08:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
  • add (brother) after 1st introduction of George Young, referred to as George thereafter.   Done
  • Apply title case for song titles. e.g. "Can I Sit Next To You, Girl" and "Rockin' In The Parlour" > "Can I Sit Next to You, Girl" and "Rockin' in the Parlour".   Done
  • "would be released on 22 July 1974" > "was released in July 1974"   Done
  • Brevity: "By the middle of 1974, the band had built up a strong live reputation, which led to a support slot for the visiting Lou Reed in August." > "By mid-1974 the band had a strong live reputation, resulting in supporting Lou Reed in August."   Done
  • Apply similar logic to final ¶, which is much too long.   Done
  • Delink 2nd and subsequent appearance of previously linked terms e.g. Harry Vanda linked twice in this section.   Done

Bon Scott joins, and beginnings (1974–1976) > Bon Scott joins (1974–1976)

  • Fix Heading per above, band had already begun in previous sectn.   Done
  • Fix lead sentence both for brevity and clarity. Also, "joined" appears to be missing.   Done
  • Clarify relationship between Scott and Lovegrove better described as "former bandmate"   Done
  • Trim/delete sentence starting with "The band had recorded only..." Consider replacing with "Their debut single's tracks were re-written and re-recorded with Scott."   Done
  • Check: "By October 1974" Album's article has it recorded in November.   Done
  • ¶2 Simplify the convoluted descriptions of personnel changes particularly sentences starting with "While Bailey and Clack were still..." and "The period December 1974 to..."   Done
  • "that would survive for the next two years." > ", which lasted two years."   Done
  • Delete B-side / "Love Song" as not notable.   Done
  • ¶3 gives the impression that "It's a Long Way to the Top" was on High Voltage (Australian). Re-write 2nd last sentence and place it after sentence talking about 2nd album, T.N.T..   Done

Initial success, and record deal (1976–1977)

  • Remove extraneous "," from Heading. (Likewise elsewhere).   Done
  • Check ¶ sizes (here and elsewhere). Specifically ¶3 and ¶4 should be merged.   Done
  • Tour names don't have quote marks, e.g. Lock Up Your Daughters tour.   Done
  • Delete "the only major music magazine which was still relatively receptive to traditional rock music". This point is covered in next sentence.   Done
  • "the band hated punk rock" > "they hated punk rock"   Done
  • De-link 2nd punk rock (likewise elsewhere for other over-linked terms).   Done
  • "manager Michael Browning" > "Browning". Already established his role and first name.   Done
  • "Angus Young" > "Angus". Adjust other people's names: generally referred to by last name after first appearance. Exception is for Youngs: to avoid confusion use their first name.   Done
  • When? "has to date sold three million copies"   Done
  • There seems to be a contradiction regarding Dirty Deeds. ¶2 has "released in the same year in both Australian and international versions" i.e. in 1976. But also has "[it] was not released in the US until 1981." Was the international version not released in North America?   Done
  • Explain: "failed to get a response from the crowd"   Done
  • Reword sentence starting with "They toured extensively..." Clarify why return to Australia?   Done
    • Consider the sentence "They continued to tour throughout Europe, then returned to tour Australia in late 1976 to rebuild their finances and record their fourth studio album, Let There Be Rock" This covers two main ideas: touring, returning to Australia. For the latter it gives three reasons: to tour, to rebuild finances and to record an album. It seems confusingly worded. I would go with splitting the sentence and rewording: "They continued to tour throughout Europe and then Australia. From late 1976, after rebuilding their finances, they recorded their fourth studio album, "Let There Be Rock" or similar.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:14, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Knife incident resolution: AC/DC dropped from rest of tour?   Done
  • The "knife" incident where Butler brandished a "silly" flick-knife comb at Malcolm resulted in AC/DC being taken off the rest of that tour. This is significant enough to be included in this article.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Cliff Williams joins...

  • Re-word "In mid-1977, bassist Mark Evans was fired. Evans..." > "In mid-1977, Mark Evans was fired. He..."   Done
  • By the way, do average readers know that Mark Evans is not related to Dave Evans? Answer below
  • Awkward: "bass player who had played with" > "bass guitarist for"   Done
  • Trim: "Under the guidance of booking agent Doug Thaler of American Talent International and later the management of Leber-Krebs, they gained invaluable experience of the US stadium circuit, supporting leading rock acts such as" > "From booking agent Doug Thaler (American Talent International) and management of Leber-Krebs, they experienced the US stadium circuit, supporting rock acts," Or similar.   Done
  • ¶3: Short ¶, consider combining with adjacent one.   Done
  • Delete B-side as not significant enough.   Done
  • Give year for live album. Should include its being their first live one.   Done
  • "major breakthrough". Where? Both T.N.T. and Dirty Deeds did better in Australia.   Removed the words
  • ¶5 Scott on drums. Does this mean no vocals?   Done
  • Since his death is extensively described at the Bon Scott article, the description in this article of Scott's final day(s) requires reworking:
    • "Scott purportedly passed out", "alleged drug-taking" and "Pulmonary aspiration of vomit was cited as" according to whom?   Removed the words
    • Clarify Alistair Kinnear's role.   Done

Brian Johnson joins and...

  • replace "the band" with AC/DC first time.   Done
  • Trim lead-in sentence.   Done
  • De-link: Moxy, Mutt Lange.   Done
  • Link Brian Johnson first time in main text (outside of Lead). Also check Lead: he's linked twice.   Done
  • Delete "was" from "and was received mixed reviews"   Done

Line-up changes and...

  • Who produced Flick of the Switch?   Done
  • "minor success" is subjective. Give charting e.g. top 40 or other indicator of success.   Partly done – see below
  • De-link and trim "drummer Phil Rudd" to "Rudd".   Done
  • Consider removing start of sentence "Former Procol Harum drummer..." Leaving "Rudd had already completed the drum parts." As Wilson's drum parts were not used, this could be in the album's article but not significant enough here.   Removed
  • "in the summer of" Australian summer?   Done
  • Combine short ¶¶.   Done
  • Explain "the group returned to the charts". Implies previous singles did not chart.   Done
  • Consider adding fellow inductees to sentence with "AC/DC were inducted". Vanda & Young were inducted at same ceremony, at least partly for their work as AC/DC's producers.   Done
  • De-link and trim to Vanda and Young. Also delete "their original producers"   Done
  • "sold more copies than the previous two studio releases combined" Verify.   Done
  • Album titles are italicised, Back in Black not "Back in Black".   Done
  • Specify "Another member of the Young family" "Angus and Malcolm's nephew" should be mentioned here.   Done
  • Consider splitting ¶5 and combing latter part with ¶6.   Done

Popularity regained

  • "major success" Where? The article provides US charting and certification. Was it a major success elsewhere?   Done – see below
  • Check over-linking of Billboard items. Only link first time in main text.   Done
  • Consider "In September 1991..." to end of ¶. No mention of relevance i.e. AC/DC performing.   Done – see below
  • Album article has Live called AC/DC Live. Fix link.   Done
  • De-link Monsters of Rock second time. Clarify which show was recorded for Live at Donnington. Currently implies its their Moscow show.   Done
  • Furthermore Liva at Donnington was first released in 1992, DVDs were not released until after 1995.   Done
  • Compress sentence starting with "Released as a single, the song reached..." i.e. combining number 1 on chart and first number 1 single on chart. While there de-link Mainstream Rock.   Done
  • De-link video game. Avoids blue wall.   Done
  • Re-word "the band's strong desire". Bands don't feel.   Done
  • Recording studios for Ballbreaker are unnecessary detailed here, leave them for album's article. Retain Rick Rubin as producer.   Done
  • In discussion of Bonfire why is there no mention of Scott?   Done

Popularity confirmed

  • De-link and trim "brother George Young". I won't call out further de-linkages for these types of over-linked terms but remove them from the article.   Done
  • Remove phrase "released also charted -" Redundant.   Done
  • Concision: "who went on to release a series of remastered albums as part of their AC/DC remasters series." > "which issued their AC/DC remasters series."   Done
  • Delete extraneous "," in "memorabilia, and notes" Also similar elsewhere.   Done
  • Check tense: "Ballbreaker and Stiff Upper Lip was later", "the band was inducted"   Done
  • Vary sentence/¶ beginnings: too many start with "In/On [date], blah blah..." I count 4¶¶ in a row here.   Done
  • De-link music event as common term.   Done
  • Article on concert has "one of the largest events". Does the record still stand?   Done
  • Clarify "Columbia Records released a double and triple DVD titled Plug Me In" Presumably "Columbia Records released Plug Me In as both double or triple DVD video album" or similar. Likewise fix next sentence.   Done
  • Concision: "On 18 August 2008, Columbia Records announced the 18 October Australian release, and 20 October worldwide release, of their fifteenth studio album, Black Ice" > "Black Ice, their fifteenth studio album appeared in Australia on 18 October 2008 and issued worldwide two days later."   Done
  • Re-write: "The 15-track album was the band's first studio release in eight years, was produced by Brendan O'Brien and was mixed and engineered by Mike Fraser." > "Produced by Brendan O'Brien, mixed and engineered by Mike Fraser its 15 tracks were their first studio recordings in eight years." Or similar.   Done
  • Any significant charting for Black Ice?   Done
  • Wikilink "[[Rock 'n' Roll Train]]"   Done
  • Specify: "recorded a video for a song from" Which song?   Done
  • ¶8 is repetitive. Its content should be reduced for concision and combined into end of ¶6.   Removed the whole paragraph entirely
  • Re-word sentence starting with "On 29 September, the band..."   Done
  • Reconcile: ¶7 has "The 18-month Black Ice World Tour supporting..." while ¶10 has "...closed the Black Ice World Tour... ...after 20 months in which AC/DC..."   Done
  • Last ¶ in this section is too short. Combine with previous.   Done

Multiple line-up changes... > Malcolm Young retires (2014–2018)

  • Heading change: Surely this is significant enough to warrant its own Heading?   Done
  • We only need to be told about the Youngs' nephew once in main text. It was mentioned in 1988. Likewise Stevie replacing Malcolm, only needed once in this section.   Done
  • Malcolm's cause of death?   Done
  • ¶3 Remove "attempting to procure a murder," and entirely remove 2nd sentence (keep ref). Because the attempting to procure a murder charge was dropped after a day it is not needed in the band's article. Such details are in Rudd's own article.   Done
  • Change tense: "the band was photographed" > "the band were photographed" Read hidden note in Lead after "AC/DC are". Check other similar examples.   Done
  • Adjust: ", as his hearing loss had accelerated and he risked complete deafness if he persisted on the road." > "– he risked complete deafness if he persisted."   Done
  • ¶6 Repeats some of the same information as above. The first two sentences should be compacted into one.   Done
  • "His last show with AC/DC" Implies no more to follow? What about replacing "last" with "most recent"?   Done
  • Similar problem occurs with Williams' "final show". Especially since the band itself was on hiatus at the same time.   Done

Reunion and...

  • ¶1 has too much speculation. This should be condensed considerably.   Done
  • How long was the hiatus? Answer below
  • I see a case for four years: Hiatus started at end of Rock or Bust tour: 20 September 2016. No confirmed activity until 7 October 2020. Speculation or rumours do not count as activity. How do you know the hiatus was over in 2018? As this section is titled Reunion the length of the hiatus should be given and verfied in its first sentence; something like After ? years the members reunited. or similar.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:06, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
  • ¶1's final sentence should be changed to "AC/DC officially confirmed, on 30 September 2020, the return of Johnson, Rudd and Williams to the line-up alongside Angus and Stevie Young, reuniting the Rock or Bust version."   Done
  • Condense ¶2 also. Then combine with remnant of ¶1.   Done
  • What happened during 2021 or 2022? Answer below
  • Is 7 October 2023 going to be their first show in seven years?   Done

Musical style

  • ¶1 too long, ¶2 too short.
  • ¶1 is overly focussed on Malcolm's playing.

Influence

  • With that Heading I expected to also read about musicians/bands, which were idolised by AC/DC members particularly the Young brothers, Scott and Johnson. Instead this section deals only with how they influenced others.
  • Since they started in 1973 why is there so little on their influence before late 1970s? Other than Cave, there is no acknowledgement of their impact on the rock scene beyond US/UK.

Genres

  • Dodges early genre dabbling by Evans-era or Scott-era group.

Criticism

  • ¶1 Largely negative commentary focusing on their sexist/misogynistic lyrics. No discussion of the members' musicianship or performance styles.
  • ¶2 Solely views from one critic, albeit some positive commentary on lyrics.
  • ¶3 Largely details press claims about Ramirez liking group's lyrics of one song. No response from members.

Awards and...

  • No significant awards/honours before 2000? They had been performing for more than 25 years by then.   Done – see below
  • ¶1 focus too much on stealing a street sign. Consider deleting "Later that day, the plaque with the name of the group was stolen, perhaps by an enthusiast or collector. The plaque was replaced two hours later, and stolen once again a mere three days after the fact." and modifying the next sentence.   Done
  • De-link "It's a Long Way to the Top" Check entire article for other over-linked terms.   Done
  • No such awards: 2003 Music Winners Awards try [[APRA Music Awards of 2003]]   Done

Members

  • No hiatus for Angus or Stevie? Did they work as AC/DC during 2016 to 2018?   Done
  • bass > bass guitar   Done
  • Was Axl Ross touring member only? If so, move to appropriate sub-section ahead of Laug and delete touring from associated parentheses.   Done

Discography

  • Was T.N.T. Australia only?   Done

Tours

  • Given their debut performance was on 31 December 1973, how can they have started touring Australia in that year?   Removed
  • When did their first headlining Australia tour begin? This should be in main text.   Removed
  • More support act tour gigs are in main text. Earliest appears to be Lou Reed (August 1974). Their must have been more before 2003.   Removed the whole section entirely
  • More to follow.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
  • There are still too many previously linked terms, too many full names after first introduction. Too many overused words in main text: e.g. album/albums (≈80×), band/band's (>120×).
  • Still too many sentences start with "In/On [date], ..." This is especially true at starts of ¶¶.
  • No history of Angus, Malcolm, Colin or Dave before AC/DC.
  • No indication that Malcolm was originally on lead guitar and formed the group before Angus joined. See here.
  • No details of mentorship by Vanda & Young. More early years available: <ref name="Kimball">{{cite web |archive-url=https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20100316061732/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/35967/20100315-0848/www.milesago.com/Artists/acdc.html | url = http://www.milesago.com/Artists/acdc.html |title=AC/DC |last1=Kimball |first1=Duncan |publisher=Milesago: Australasian Music and Popular Culture 1964–1975. Ice Productions |year=2004 |archive-date=16 March 2010 |access-date=24 September 2023 }}</ref>

Have fun.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:15, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

More work needed at this criterion. You have one week from time stamp.
shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:35, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Criterion 2

  1. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline  ;
    2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)  ;
    3. it contains no original research  ; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism  .

    2. References

    I will be checking all the references and each comment below is under their number as they existed at this edit. The order in the article may change from this numbering as refs get moved, added or deleted. Newspapers, journals and other works/websites are generally italicised but publishers are not. Use dmy date format for all dates except in article titles or direct quotes. Every effort should be made to identify author(s). Wikilink work or publisher but not both. Any bare urls or dead urls should be fixed immediately. Although not compulsory, I recommend archiving urls where possible. Where multiple tabs are placed in the main text, check that they are in numerical order. For article titles use wikipedia formatting, which may differ from that of the source. For book refs provide page numbers or range, if used multiple times add {{rp}} template with page numbers or range. If replying before I finish, maintain list order.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:25, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

    1. Change Angus back to Angus Young (first time mentioned in main text). Van Kriedt playing saxophone is not verified, need another source or delete that instrument. Members' previous bands are rarely mentioned in article. Since infobox has Marcus Hook Roll Band, this must be mentioned and verified. Other notable former bands of members should be mentioned, too. Malcolm and Dave Evans were former band mates – non-notable short-lived group Velvet Underground (not US group of same name). Two other reliable sources usable to verify some content for early years are:
      1. <ref name="McFarlane">{{cite book |last1=McFarlane |first1=Ian |author-link1=Ian McFarlane |title=[[Encyclopedia of Australian Rock and Pop]] |chapter=Encyclopedia entry for 'AC/DC' |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20040419092226/http://www.whammo.com.au/encyclopedia.asp?articleid=9 |chapter-url=http://www.whammo.com.au/encyclopedia.asp?articleid=9 |year=1999 |publisher=[[Allen & Unwin]] |location=[[St Leonards, New South Wales|St Leonards, NSW]] |archive-date=19 August 2004 |isbn=1-86508-072-1 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
      2. <ref name="Holmgren">{{Cite web |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20031206234245/http://hem.passagen.se/honga/database/a/acdc.html |url=http://hem.passagen.se/honga/database/a/acdc.html |title=AC/DC |publisher=[[Australian Rock Database]] |last1=Holmgren |first1=Magnus |archive-date=6 December 2003 |access-date=21 September 2023 |url-status=dead }}</ref>
    2. Cannot check this ref but assume good faith. Some of this information is also found in McFarlane ref above. By the way, if [2] is used as a ref, why is it also in Further reading?
    3. Fix title: use Sentence case, i.e. of not Of. Source contradicts content: Angus first wears school boy uniform in April 1974 not at earlier NYE gig. Previously deleted guises were trialled between 31 December 1973 and April 1974. Note: Margaret Young had married before the families left Scotland, her married name was Margaret Horsburgh.
    4. Assume good faith on unchecked source.
    2. Add |first=Patrick |last=Donovan |url-access=subscription Italicise Tracker in title (refers to a film). wL The Age.
    3. Fix title.
    4. Assume good faith on unchecked source.
    5. Assume good faith on unchecked source. Page range is rather long for easy checking by other editors.
    6. Assume good faith on unchecked source. Page number(s)?
    • At that time, Scott was working for Lovegrove in Adelaide doing odd jobs including "driving visiting bands around town".<ref name="Nimmervoll">{{cite web |archive-url=https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20120726200808/http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/14231/20120727-0512/www.howlspace.com.au/en/acdc/acdc.htm | url =http://www.howlspace.com.au/en/acdc/acdc.htm |title=AC/DC |last1=Nimmervoll |first1=Ed |author-link1=Ed Nimmervoll |website=Howlspace – The Living History of Our Music |archive-date=27 July 2012 |access-date=21 September 2023 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Note: according to Nimmervoll, Scott started as AC/DC's drummer.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
    • Do I have to copyedit from "Scott's appointment coincided with him working as a chauffeur for the band at the time until an audition promoted him to lead singer." to that with the ref? — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 09:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
      You could leave article's content as is and just plop this ref after the existing ref. Or read the ref's content and see what would best summarise Nimmervoll's description of how Scott met AC/DC members. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 12:10, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
    2. Content supported.
    3. If this is a book where are its ISBN and page number(s)? It could be liner notes for Bonfire box set, which requires a Cite AV media notes template.
    4. Cannot see author's name. Adjacent sentence requires re-wording: Content supports selling at least 3 million copies in US by 2005 (not in that year alone).
    5. Fix title (italicise album name).
    6. Fix title.
    7. Fix title. Supply work or website. Does not completely verify incident.
    8. Update dates. Verifies incident and dropping from tour.
    9. wL author. Assume good faith on unchecked source.
    10. Source not reliable for all content (written by subject). Try a review e.g.<ref name="Johnston">{{cite web |url=http://www.mumslounge.com.au/entertainment/book-reviews/1325-review-dirty-deeds,-my-life-inside-outside-of-ac-dc,-mark-evans.html?tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page= |title=Review: ''Dirty Deeds, My Life Inside/Outside of AC/DC'', Mark Evans |first=Mandi |last=Johnston |website=Mums Lounge |date=19 November 2012 |via=[[National Library of Australia]] |archive-url=https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20130411033037/http://www.mumslounge.com.au/entertainment/book-reviews/1325-review-dirty-deeds,-my-life-inside-outside-of-ac-dc,-mark-evans.html?tmpl=component&print=1&layout=default&page= |archive-date=11 April 2013 |access-date=21 September 2023 }}</ref>
    11. Assume good faith on unchecked source.
    12. Fix title. Assume good faith on unchecked source.
    13. Fix title.
    14. Content not quite supported. According to this interview, Van Halen states "Powerage and Highway to Hell are probably my two favorite records by them — Powerage even more so than Highway to Hell. There’s something about that record." Adjust article content: "notes this to be his second favourite AC/DC record, after Powerage." The ref needs to be altered, overwrite |publisher=vhnd.com with |via=vhnd.com |work=Spinner.com This reflects that it was originally published on Spinner.com but found on vhnd.com (Van Halen's News Desk). Alternatively replace this with the original article, which was archived here and provides author as Steve Baltin.
    15. Content verified.
    16. Fix title.
    17. This ref quotes Fink, update dates. Adj ref order.
    18. Fix title. wL The Guardian.
    19. Fix title.
    20. Fix title. Fix page range.
    21. Fix title. Add author.
    22. Fix title, including converting inner quotation marks to single quotes. Add author.
    23. Content verified.
    24. Content verified.
    25. Fix title.
    26. wL Rolling Stone. Add author-link=David Fricke
    27. Only two US single positions in article. At a how is this more significant than higher placed ones? At b their highest charting US single but not mentioned in main text.
    28. Content not verified: neither "physical confrontation" nor "fired" are supported, here.
    29. Fix title.
    30. Content verified.
    31. Title incorrect. Content verified.
    32. Content verified.
    33. Change |work= to |publisher= Add (ARIA). In the main text insert "inaugural" ahead of Hall of Fame.
    34. Fix title.
    35. Replace this with the original at VWMusic here, written by Andrew Daly on 21 December 2021. This ref includes Wright's reason for leaving.
    36. Content verified. Re-word text: "number 1 single" > "number-one single". They have five number-one singles on this component chart but only two are mentioned in the article. By comparison, why is a No. 31 is mentioned?
    37. Fix title: "AC/DC – 'Thunderstruck'". Their highest charting and biggest selling single in Australia.
    38. Fix title.
    39. Fix title.
    40. Fix title. Add |agency=[[Associated Press]]
    41. Fix title. Adjust time before stopping to 26 minutes. Modify archive-url to view all (and adjust url, likewise), which contains further usable content.
    42. Fix title. Fix view all for urls.
    43. Fix title. wL work. Adjust main text: start of sentence.
    44. Content not verified. Explain how insertcredit.com is an independent reliable source and not User-generated content.
    45. Fix title.
    46. wL author.
    47. Content verified.
    48. Fix title.
    49. Content not verified. archive-url does not work. url leads to discography list: no indication of remasters or expanded booklets, rare photos etc.
    50. Content verified. May be used to support previous sentence.
    51. Content verified.
    52. Fix title. Content not verified: source has "country's largest-ever rock concert" not North America's. Another source required for that claim.
    53. Fix title. For all The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald refs add |url-access=subscription Even though they allow a limited number of free views prior to asking for subscriptions. Another reason for having archive-urls.
    54. Fix title. Also note previous comment.
    55. Fix title. Note: Reuters are an agency. See [48] above for similar code required. In this case the work is Billboard.
    56. Content verified.
    57. Fix title.
    58. Re-word & fix title.
    59. Fix title.
    60. Australian release date not seen here. Another source required.
    61. Content verified. Note: associated text has over-linked term.
    62. Ref needed for "number 1 on 29 countries". As for [70] content verified. However the ref itself is limited to top 50 positions since mid-1989. Although authorised by ARIA it is published by Hung Medien and written by Steffen Hung for Australian Charts Portal. This ref needs to be re-written. As for 51 to 100 positions they are available at other authorised sources but such positions are not likely to be used in this article.
    63. Fix title. This is the last time I will point out title problems. Generally the wrong case is used for terms, italics are missing on albums or song names are not given single quotes. I expect them all to be fixed even if I haven't pointed them out.
    64. Content verified. Related text: delete "from the new album" as redundant (established in previous sentence); modify "to be in the video" > "to be filmed" or similar.
    65. No indication of 20-month tour. Only ≈ 2 months (24 dates) listed. As for the ref itself agency is Associated Press, work is Billboard, via is The Hollywood Reporter and author is Mitchell Peters. Another ref is required for tour length.
    66. Content verified.
    67. Not independent but as it is supported by previous source, keep in article.
    68. Content verified. Related text: "Johnson" not "Brian Johnson". All of these should have been picked up by now.
    69. Author is News Reporter (I've seen refs with Staff Writer, Admin or other generic terms)
    70. Author is Staff Writers (ha!) Related text: italicise BRW (correctly spelled out in full).
    71. Not independent. Can be kept if independent source found to verify.
    72. Content verified.
    73. See [79].
    74. Press release: not independent. Same problem as previous.
    75. Content verified.
    76. Content verified.
    77. US edition, so use Guardian US instead.
    78. Content verified.
    79. Content verified. Fix author format by replacing author with first1, last1, first2, last2. Note: The Sydney Herald Sun not Sydney Herald Sun (avoid redirect). Don't forget subscription per ref [5].
      1. Sentence after this ref tab has a direct quote from Johnson, this must have a citation. Its content is not found in next ref either. I'd put a {{Citation needed}} there if I wasn't doing this review.
    80. Fix work.
    81. Content verified.
    82. Content verified.
    83. Check author name and work. I don't see Korina Lopez of USA Today.
    84. Content verified.
    85. Content verified.
    86. Content verified.
    87. Add |location=New Zealand
    88. Add author: |first=Jon |last=Donnison
    89. Add location per [95].
    90. Add author: use Michael Hann.
    91. Use US version of Guardian.
    92. Content verified.
    93. Not independent, provide another source to corroborate.
    94. Broken url. Cannot be checked. The site is pay per view or subscription required. No archived link? Replace with Rolling Stone (Australia) article, archived here or similar.
    95. Wrong author.
    96. Add author.
    97. Content verified.
    98. Check spelling of author's name.
    99. Content verified.
    100. Content verified.
    101. Provide |editor=Gunnar Stavrum
    102. Content verified. Not confirmation that AC/DC were recording nor that the hiatus was over.
    103. Content verified.
    104. Add author first name. Confirms hiatus is over. Note: specifies delays due to COVID-19 outbreaks.
    105. Content verified.
    106. Content verified.
    107. How is this site reliable? Content added by User:Brownypaul87, source written by Paul "Browny" Brown, who works for Wall of Sound. Almost all edits by that user at WP added Wall of Sound quotes. Probably WP:PROMOTION. See my discussion with this user here.
    108. Content verified. Confirms COVID-19 delayed their reunion plans.
    109. Note: specifies that Rudd to be replaced by Laug (don't know if its only for that concert?)
    110. Content verified.
    111. Content verified.
    112. Content verified.
    113. Content verified, however pop ref tabs after any direct quotes, not just at end of ¶.
    114. Assume good faith on unchecked source. Page number(s), ref tab after each direct quote.
    115. Content verified.
    116. Content verified.
    117. Magazine or website? Page number(s) for former or url for latter. Direct quote not checked.
    118. Content verified.
    119. Content verified.
    120. Content verified.
    121. Add author (Revolver staff or staff writer).
    122. Add author.
    123. Add author.
    124. Site not reliable, see ref [115].
    125. Content verified.
    126. Content verified.
    127. Same as ref [131] leads to article about Offspring rather than on the Living End. You'll need to fix up both urls.
    128. Content verified.
    129. Slash not unbiased. In related text, de-link his band.
    130. Expand |title=Episode 403 – Nick Cave Add |url-access=subscription Replace |publisher=WTF With Marc Maron with |work=WTF with Marc Maron I don't have a subscription: assume good faith on unchecked source.
    131. Place another ref tab for each direct quote. Book not accessed: assume good faith on unchecked source.
    132. Place another tab for each quote.
    133. Cannot access source: assume good faith on unchecked source. Likely US edition?
    134. Assume good faith on unchecked source.
    135. For newspaper use Guardian Australia instead.
    136. US version.
    137. We have too many ref tabs at the end of ¶. Consider moving some tabs to previous sentences or dropping any that are redundant. As for ref [145]: Content verified.
    138. See [145]. Content verified.
    139. See [145]. Content verified.
    140. See [145]. Content verified.
    141. See [145]. Content verified.
    142. Content verified.
    143. Content verified.
    144. Content verified.
    145. Content verified.
    146. Content verified.
    147. Content verified.
    148. Content verified. Consider re-writing related text: "During his acceptance speech, Johnson quoted Scott's lyrics from their 1977 song" (De-link both Johnson, "Let There Be Rock")
    149. Content verified.
    150. Content verified.
    151. Content verified.
    152. Content verified.
    153. Content verified.
    154. Content verified.
    155. Content verified.
    156. Content verified.
    157. Content verified.
    158. Content verified.
    159. Content not verified. Archived copy is from 2021, live site was accessed in 2008. Related text cannot be determined for 2023. Furthermore Pink Floyd and AC/DC both have 75 million sales. AC/DC are listed higher due to alphabetical order (check rest of list, whenever two artists have same total they are shown alphabetically). Update archive-url, update all dates. You may have to change Related text.
    160. Similar problem to previous, update archive-url and dates.
    161. Content verified.
    162. Content verified.

    More to follow.

    More work needed on this criterion, you have one week from time stamp.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:36, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Criterion 3

  1. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:  ; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  .
  • The article largely focuses on the US market with some UK information presented. Their early years in Australia have little reference to which artists they were influenced by, their commercial success or impact on local acts. Likewise little is described of their reception in continental Europe.
  • Further concision of content would improve the article by narrowing its focus.
  • No mention of the development of their pub rock sound from early 1974 to late 1970s as well as their performance styles.
More work needed at this Criterion.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 11:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)12:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)20:17, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Criterion 4

  1. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  .

Acceptable at this criterion.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 12:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Criterion 5

  1. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute :  .

Acceptable at this criterion.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 12:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Criterion 6

  1. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content  ; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions  .
  • Positions of main text photos is erratic. Better to spread them apart more evenly.
  • Why no close shots of Bon Scott (statue notwithstanding) or Malcolm Young?
  • Captions are inconsistent. Members names should be wikilinked 1st time in captions (outside of infobox) but not again later. Where possible location should be given.
  • Axl Rose with AC/DC but this is not indicated in relevant photo.
  • Although not compulsory, consider adding sound files of their songs. Perhaps one with Scott and another with Johnson on lead vocals.

More to follow.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 10:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

More work needed at this criterion, you have one week from time stamp. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:37, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Final comments and verdict

Hi shaidar cuebiyar, I'm sorry to ask you this, but can you please make this GAN a   Fail, as I can't get most of the stuff done unfortunately. And if you can, you can be able to fix the other stuff on the article, then I'll probably start another nomination, and I'll credit you in the notes. Does that sound more than fair? — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 10:07, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

It's your choice. I hope you stick with it. Best of fortune in the future. By the way 50 years of AC/DC by November. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 12:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove heavy metal as one of their genres

Latest comment: 11 months ago5 comments5 people in discussion

AC/DC are not a heavy metal band. Their riffs are extremely rock, and their solos are just blues pentatonic. They lack the darkness, speed, and heaviness other blues based heavy metal bands had (like Black Sabbath.) Catiscool300 (talk) 17:02, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

This is a subject that has discussed already, and there are references that support that "heavy metal" as its genre among others. HorrorLover555 (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
HorrorLover555 Agree. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:47, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
Genre warriors are among the most irritating editors. I know the band don't like the term "heavy metal", but that's because they were heavy metal before it was really a thing. You won't find many heavy metal fans who don't like AC/DC. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 18:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

The article is currently a Good Article Candidate and there is no consensus for removal of heavy metal from their genres. As indicated by HorrorLover55 this has been discussed previously (check the archive above or its index). There has been long-standing consensus to leave it in.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 13:00, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

High Voltage 74 & 76

Latest comment: 11 months ago6 comments5 people in discussion

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi, I recently moved High Voltage (1976 album) into a compilations section of the AC/DC discography, and my edits were reversed and I was referred to the archive talk page which discussed this matter. I'm pleased I was referred to this history, I wasn't aware there was such conjecture about this, over a decade ago.

For what it worth, I agree with Hoponpop69. The 1976 album "compiles" songs from two Australian studio album. The band did not go into a studio and record anything for this, hence, IMO (and like Hoponpop69), it is a compilation album. That’s the definition of a compilation. (I am not saying it's a "greatest hits", but a compilation). NB: I have no issue with the two articles (one for the original/Australian studio album (74) and one for the compilation/international album (76).) I understand the argument from a decade ago, saying the 76 version a new album for audiences outside Australia, but that's not the definition of what a studio album is. So in saying that, I understand this has been discussed and the conversation got a little personal, so I am keen to avoid that, but wondering if this topic could be revisited? and if so, please consider these points as to why I’d be categorising 1976 album as a compilation. Thoughts? Tobyjamesaus (talk) 23:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I don't really think that it needs to change into a compilation album, as it has been a studio album for North America, as it has been settled by consensus long ago, and there are enough reliable sources to show that it counts officially as a studio album. HorrorLover555 (talk) 04:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
It's tricky as both points of view are technically correct. The OP's point that nothing new was recorded is true, and in that literal respect the '76 album is a compilation. But (as he points out) that's only a meaningful description in Australia and New Zealand. Everywhere else, this was a new album. Imports of High Voltage '74 and TNT were incredibly rare (in the UK at least), and High Voltage '76 was the first exposure this music really had in the rest of the world, and most of it was barely 12 months old. So it's a collection of then-current material you couldn't realistically buy before. To my mind, the term "compilation" is better suited to either Greatest Hits collections, or packages of outtakes, demos, b-sides and whatnot. High Voltage '76 was more a "repackaging" for the international market than a true compilation. Bretonbanquet (talk) 13:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
@Tobyjamesaus: Besides arguments for it being a compilation album, there's also a case for High Voltage (1976) being a re-issue of T.N.T. with two tracks from High Voltage (1975 [not '74]) added in and the album re-titled. Similar re-issues have occurred for other artists breaking out of their local markets into a wider "international" scene (e.g. Face to Face by the Angels/Angel City). However, neither "compilation" nor "re-issue" is how High Voltage (1976) was described in the majority of independent reliable sources. Since it is generally referred to as a studio album we should leave it in the Discography list of this article and in the Studio albums section of AC/DC discography (i.e. status quo).shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Agreed. HorrorLover555 (talk) 04:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
Agreed! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 23:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

bandmate or "band mate"

Latest comment: 11 months ago9 comments2 people in discussion

I assume good faith that Australian English apparently insists there be a space in this word, but since it keeps going back and forth on the correction, I suggest the following:

  1. Showing an Australian dictionary/reference as a source on the talk page that definitively shows there must be a space. Perhaps have a banner that shows this.
  2. Marking "band mate" with {{Not a typo}} so it won't be "corrected" by spell-checking tools any longer.

Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 22:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  1. Ian McFarlane's Encyclopedia of Australian Rock and Pop (an Australian reference used in this article) has on-line entries for numerous Australian artists. He uses "band mate/band mates" in his articles on "Buffalo", "Neil Finn", "Harem Scarem" and "Underground Lovers". I could find no instance of his using "bandmate/bandmates" in his encyclopaedia.
    1. Consider: Moore, Bruce (1998), The Australian Concise Oxford Dictionary (3rd ed.), Oxford University Press, p. 826, ISBN 978-0-19-551771-2 has definitions for mate and at 3c it shows: "(in comb.) a fellow member or joint occupant of (team-mate; room-mate)".shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:31, 6 December 2023 (UTC)07:33, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
    Thanks. I just realized I had access to the "Australian Oxford Dictionary (2 ed.)" (2004) via the Wikipedia Library. For mate under definition 3., it says "each of a pair, especially of birds. ■ (colloq.) a partner in marriage. ■ in comb. a fellow member or joint occupant of: teammate | room-mate." No space in those or in Moore's work. Also, I'm not sure McFarlane's is a definitive book on spelling/grammar. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 04:53, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
    For anyone's verification, here is the Wikipedia Library access link to 'mate' in the dictionary and the book is ISBN 9780195517965. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 05:01, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
You asked for an "Australian dictionary/reference", which I understood to mean Australian dictionary or Australian reference. You're right that McFarlane is not a definitive spelling/grammar book but rather provides examples of Australian English usage by a reference in the field of music. From your citing AOD (2nd), I gather that you are saying the article should use bandmate or band-mate? I'd prefer band-mate if band mate cannot be used.–shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for slow response and also for not being more clear as what I was looking for in a dictionary/reference (I meant a straight-up spelling/grammar reference rather than any reference book) before. Anyway, the RegExTypoFix rule will also correct band-mate to bandmate. But if you want to enclose that spelling within {{not a typo}} (like is being done now), any correction will be avoided. Since the version without a hyphen seems to be globally predominant, I doubt the rule will be changed, but you can always ask about it at WT:AWB/T (we've changed rules after discussion before). Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 06:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Unless a better ref than AOD is supplied I suppose it should be left as "bandmate" then.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:49, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

@StefenTower:: I was wrong. I've just returned from a local library where they have:

Butler, Susan, ed. (2017), Macquarie Dictionary (Seventh ed.), Macquarie Dictionary Publishers, ISBN 978-1-74261-981-1, on p. 928 you'll find:

-mate a suffix indicating a person who shares in the specified way with another as flatmate, roommate, workmate, teammate.

Consequently "bandmate" is acceptable by the authoritative source on Australian English ("Nationally and internationally regarded as the standard reference on Australian English.")[1]

References

  1. ^ "Reference". University of Melbourne. Archived from the original on 2015-01-03.

Hope this is definitive enough. I will change this article to suit this reference.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for following up and fixing in the article. It's good we have a recent dictionary to go by. Perhaps this is a spelling that has evolved as including the hyphen seemed to be a prior convention. Stefen Towers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 17:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 10 months ago24 comments2 people in discussion
Passed.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:AC/DC/GA4. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: RetroCosmos (talk · contribs) 04:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)


I will be adding to this over the next few days. I will only mention items I have an issue with. Thus, this review may seem negative - it is not intended to be.

The following Good Articles will be considered as they are similar in subject matter:

Thank you for your assessments. I will attend to start on these later today.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Well written

Keep in mind I have no degree in English, so I am open to being challenged on any of these points.

  • article relies on many brackets to deliver information that could integrated into the sentence (except for headings and subheadings which are fine as is) -> article relies on many brackets to deliver information that could be integrated into the sentence, except for headings and brackets which are fine as is
Reduced, generally replaced by parenthetical dashes or commas with rewording where necessary.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:04, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Fat Lip vocalist Allan Fryer, ex-Rick Wakeman vocalist Gary Pickford-Hopkins,[57] and the Easybeats' singer Stevie Wright were touted by the press as possible replacements.[2][58] Various other candidates were considered: ex-Moxy member Buzz Shearman, who was unable to join due to voice issues,[59] Slade vocalist Noddy Holder,[60] and ex-Back Street Crawler vocalist Terry Slesser.[61]
    • This structure is confusing, it seems to conflate "touted by the press" and "considered". Were the press touts considered by the band? Or were the other candidates just considered by the press? RetroCosmos (talk) 04:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    added "by the group" for the "considered" bit.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
  • The group performed with the Rolling Stones and Rush at Molson Canadian Rocks for Toronto on 30 July 2003. The concert, with an audience of half-a-million, assisted the city to overcome negative publicity from the effects of a 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak.
    • I was going to suggest that this should be attributed to the CBC article, but it looks like the concert was specifically a benefit event for the SARS outbreak in Toronto, according to the linked Wiki page. Sentence may benefit from being rewritten to better reflect this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RetroCosmos (talk • contribs) 13:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
I've had a go at this re-writing three or so sentences: hopefully it reads better.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 18:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Verifiable with no original research

  • would benefit from having online sources for certain pivotal claims. many casual readers are not able to access these sources, so it would be helpful for them if there was an online source. this is not an attack on the quality of sources and is overall not fatal to GA designation from me
  • I understand the above may be difficult since much of the article relies on Elliot 2008. it would be a "nice to have" if the source was made accessible on the web. again, not fatal
I've added new on-line references and added ref tabs to fix both of these. However, I have kept all Elliot tabs for those readers who like books.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
  • first few adjectives in the criticism section should be individually cited, or at the very least at wholesale at the end of the sentence
I've tackled this, it should be okay, now.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  • all sources are offline, i'll agf - will spot check online sources on a later date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RetroCosmos (talk • contribs) 08:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
    For this spot check I will be checking some online sources with an emphasis on sentences supported by only one source.
    • 9: Long dead website Howlspace. Is well written and relatively consistent with the other parts of this article that are supported by offline sources (again, AGF) that I am not particularly disturbed as to its legitimacy. A different spelling of Tony Currenti's name (Kerrante) gives me a bit of pause, though I suspect this is a result of spelling out a name for the first time before the age of information.
Nimmervoll, the author died in 2014. Nimmervoll had been a reporter and editor of Go-Set (1966–1974) and Juke Magazine (1975–1992). He started HowlSpace in 2000 and some his biographies/histories of Australasian artists were used by AllMusic. As for the spelling of Currenti it seems phonetic.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 03:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    • 41: Blabbermouth.net I accept this as an appropriate source and supports the sentence citing it. However, it is an oral recollection of events from Malcolm Young. Whether this would benefit from attribution I leave up to the writer.
    • 80: Critic is a writer from Rolling Stone, seems appropriate.
    • 253: The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame confirms that AC/DC was inducted in 2003, but not the specific day. Yahoo Music (255) confirms it as 10 Mar. This is a minor and will not affect the GA.
    The offline sources pass my (highly unscientific) sniff test. RetroCosmos (talk) 15:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage

I've worked the suggested link in, which deals with a wider moral panic about rock music subverting youth – AC/DC are listed for sexual lyrics of a song.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 18:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  • Clack - left with some confusion. I am asking this more as a reader than a reviewer, though it's a bit relevant from the perspective of the review as well. This article says he was fired. On this article the sources regarding this are all offline. His Wikipedia article says fired but its source does not mention the cause of separation. I performed a (admittedly basic) search of the internet and I was not able to find mentionings of a firing. In interviews he says they "split" and cited low pay and royalties, but I recognize this may be biased. I ask that you clarify this with your available sources and review the Currenti and Bailey firings as well. The other "firing"s seem solid to me. RetroCosmos (talk) 15:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
    I'll keep looking for more on the Clack and Bailey firings. As for Currenti, he was a session musician, according to interviews he declined membership of the band (see here). shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    Bailey and Clack with both fired (unspecified reasons) according to Kimball (ref [2]). shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Neutral

Stable

  • one or two reversions within the last 50 edits but nothing that says "edit war" to me

Illustrated

  • would benefit from a musical sample, but this is not fatal

Final note

I have had a look over at the FA delisting and it seems to me that the issues have been either removed from the article or rewritten in light of criticism. I am aware the criteria for a GA are lower than a FA, but that work has been done to resolve FA criticism is a green flag to me. The Clack issue gives me a bit of pause but I will assume good faith as sources also say that the brothers had high standards and my interpretation of this is that a firing is on par for the course, and offline sources are linked on sentences mentioning the firings.

I find that revision 1192341588 meets the good article criteria. I ask the nominators to double check the firings. RetroCosmos (talk) 16:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your valiant effort in reviewing this article. I appreciate your achievement and time required.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 03:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Heavy metal?

Latest comment: 9 months ago17 comments6 people in discussion

People are saying there's a consensus to include heavy metal as a genre, where is that discussion? --FMSky (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Heavy metal sources

(Man, I need to get better at the edit summary thing)

@FMSky I was referring to this discussion here. There was also a lot of discussion about them as a "metal" act in this section as well. Carlinal (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

From 2007?????? --FMSky (talk) 19:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Its obviously so incredibly nonsensical to list a bluesy hard rock band as heavy metal when one of the main characteristics of heavy metal is that it doesnt have any blues influences anymore --FMSky (talk) 19:17, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
I do find it unfortunate that there hasn't been any re-discussion of this in the last 5 years but I'm certain info in the genre section of this article can provide some justification; since Back in Black they've departed further from blues rock and songs like "Hells Bells" and "Big Gun" aren't anything like with "The Jack" or "Down Payment Blues". That's the best I can come up with I'm afraid. Carlinal (talk) 19:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Anyone with any knowledge of the history of heavy metal knows that it evolved from "bluesy hard rock" bands. Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, and even Black Sabbath all showed a pronounced blues influence in their work, as did other early metal bands such as Budgie, Uriah Heep and Blue Oyster Cult. I'm fully aware that most of these pioneering bands didn't/don't like the term "Heavy Metal". That doesn't mean AC/DC weren't a huge influence on both NWOBHM and American glam metal. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
What even is your point? I dont deny that they incluenced heavy metal, but that doesnt make them heavy metal themselves, especially since ACDC never abandoned their bluesy rock sound --FMSky (talk) 23:42, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Several sources describe them as heavy metal, so that's good enough. Consensus is long established and genre arguments are boring. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 23:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
  • I agree with MaxBrowne2's sentiment "genre arguments are boring." Arguments about AC/DC's genres have occurred since their inception over 50 years ago. Historical sources for "heavy metal" as the fourth of their four main genres:
    • Melody Maker's writer back in 1976 states "AC/DC was 'the biggest heavy-metal event in Australia since the death of Ned Kelly'... 'not many British bands of the reckless high-speed energy that AC/DC display...'"[1]
    • "AC/DC are not one of those heavy metal outfits who have to turn up the sound to disguise their faults. Their music has rhythm and body to it... simple as it is. But at the Odeon gig the volume was at times too overpowering." Ian Cross (1978).[2]
    • Garry Raffaele reviewed Judas Priest's Sad Wings of Destiny in 1981 and disparages their calculated HM style, "Now take AC-DC for instance. That's heavy metal but with an abandon, a cut-the-rope passion."[3]
    • Boston Globe's Steve Morse (1982), considers For Those About to Rock, "[it's] designed to expand the band's image as a 'heavy metal' band (a term Young hates), has more chest beating lyrics than usual"[4] shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 07:27, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
    Thank you for these sources. I forgot to mention this yesterday but there's also the fact that when RetroCosmos reviewed this article for a GAN there was no mention or problem with the heavy metal link. So why is this a problem now? Carlinal (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Found two other sources:
The concert reviewers were most likely just journalists rather than experts on heavy metal music and what heavy metal is or isn't, but that's not important. Every now and then another WP:GENREWARRIOR comes along and takes exception to AC/DC being described as heavy metal, but this "controversy" is well covered in the "genre" section under "musical style". We can include the description "heavy metal" in the lead and infobox without fear of violating NPOV. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 20:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Agreed.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
I agree as well. HorrorLover555 (talk) 00:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Agreed! — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 01:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more. Carlinal (talk) 22:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Off-line source:

  1. Glenn A. Baker (1984) writes "although AC/DC were the leaders of the mid-Seventies new wave of heavy metal, their hard-rock sound borrowed more from the blues tradition of [Berry] and [Diddley] than it did from Deep Purple or Black Sabbath. The band dealt exclusively in power, but mercifully eschewed the HM clichés of sword-and-sorcery and exaggerated stage poses. A sense of humour, so lacking in other HM outfits, was the very essence of AC/DC's motivation and modus operandi."[7] Here Baker directly states AC/DC's genres as "hard-rock" and "heavy metal" based on "blues" music. This specifically contradicts FMSky's point "incredibly nonsensical to list a bluesy hard rock band as heavy metal". Furthermore, according to Baker, not only did they "influence" heavy metal they were "leaders" of the new wave of heavy metal in mid-70s.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Mixed Reaction to AC/DC London Show". The Canberra Times. Vol. 51, no. 14, 533. Australian Associated Press (AAP). 13 November 1976. p. 18. Retrieved 5 February 2024 – via National Library of Australia.
  2. ^ Cross, Ian (14 December 1978). "Tiny Angus Is Cult Figure". The Canberra Times. Vol. 53, no. 15, 789. p. 24. Retrieved 5 February 2024 – via National Library of Australia.
  3. ^ Raffaele, Garry (30 November 1981). "Great Tackiness". The Canberra Times. Vol. 56, no. 16, 866. p. 10. Retrieved 5 February 2024 – via National Library of Australia.
  4. ^ Morse, Steve (6 January 1982). "AC-DC, the Biggest Seller". The Canberra Times. Vol. 56, no. 16, 902. p. 11. Retrieved 5 February 2024 – via National Library of Australia.
  5. ^ Tucker, Ken (16 November 1983). "AC-DC: Heavy metal with skill". The Windsor Star. p. C17. Retrieved 5 February 2024.
  6. ^ Siberok, Martin (15 September 1986). "AC/DC heavy metal KOs fans at Forum; Grand Funk flunks". Montreal, Quebec: The Montreal Gazette. p. D-7. Retrieved 5 February 2024.
  7. ^ Baker, Glenn A. (1984). Michael Heatley (ed.). "High Voltage: The Positive Charge of AC/DC". The History of Rock. 10. London: Orbis Publishing: 2227.

Removal of former members subsections

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

PunkRockFan86 have recently removed the former touring musicians and touring members two times, but have been reverted back the way it was. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 08:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Should a timeline (from the band members article) be added too? Carlinal (talk) 19:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
The timeline is already in the list of members article, so I don't see the point in having it on the band's main article. HorrorLover555 (talk) 21:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
As HorrorLover555 said – I really don't see a point in having it there. I do get other articles (e.g. Nirvana and Metallica) does have a timeline on them, but it doesn't have seperate articles about the members. — VAUGHAN J. (TALK) 23:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Vanda & Young credits in infoboxes

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm questioning why every song and album that was produced by Vanda & Young is credited to the two separately (i.e. Harry Vanda • George Young). Not only do both original copies of and reissues credit them as "Vanda and Young", wouldn't that refer to them as a joint duo and not as two co-producers? Carlinal (talk) 03:54, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Nationality of Band

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Half the band are British, but they're an "Australian Band? They've had one British member from day 1, and two British members since 1980. This isn't recent — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.161.143.72 (talk • contribs) 09:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Australia is full of immigrants. The band was created in Australia by people living in Australia. Where they were born counts for little. HiLo48 (talk) 09:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Please read this discussion here. That has been discussed multiple times, and there is a general consensus that the band is to be listed as Australian. HorrorLover555 (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

1st concert in the Americas

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi HorrorLover555

As per comment added to your individual talk page several hours ago; I note you edited the 'the Americas' to be 'North America'. Since 'the Americas' is more encompassing, that seems the more sensible wording. Can you advising please your thoughts behind your suggestion of 'North America'? Your contribution is welcomed and appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonjofan (talk • contribs) 02:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

As I had stated in my response on my talk page, I changed the Americas to North America, because it would make a lot more sense to note when they first performed on North American soil, as the first show was in Austin. HorrorLover555 (talk) 05:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Bonjofan: It makes a lot more sense to say "North America" instead of "the Americas", since HorrorLover555 said on his talk page that it would make a lot more sense to note when they first performed on North American soil, as the first show was in Austin, [Texas]. — VAUGHAN J. (t · c) 06:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:AC/DC/Archive_8&oldid=1220526622"