Talk:They Might Be Giants: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:37, 21 June 2007 editPhil Boswell (talk \| contribs)Administrators40,506 edits {{WikiWorld\|Image:TMBG wikiworld.jpg}}← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 14:14, 18 November 2024 edit undoAilurophobic (talk \| contribs)19 edits →Update Photo: new sectionTag: New topic
(96 intermediate revisions by 65 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{~~oldpeerreview~~}}		{{Talk header}}
			{{American English}}
	{{WPBiography\|living=yes\|class=B\|priority=Mid\|musician-work-group=yes}}
			{{ArticleHistory
	{{Wikiproject Alternative music\|class=B\|importance=Mid}}
			\|action1=GAN
	{{failedGA}}
			\|action1date=3 April 2006
	{{DelistedGA\|18 February 2007}}
			\|action1link=Talk:They_Might_Be_Giants/Archive_1#Delisted_from_Wikipedia:Good_articles
	{{WikiWorld\|Image:TMBG wikiworld.jpg}}
			\|action1result=not listed
	== Superfueled Freaksickle ==
			\|action1oldid=46767754

			\|action2=PR
	This was never released. Should it really be listed with official albums in a section labeled "other RELEASES"? ] 23:06, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
			\|action2date=21:46, 5 December 2006
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/They Might Be Giants/archive1
			\|action2result=reviewed
			\|action2oldid=92310334

			\|action3=GAN
	Apparently they have a new album with songs from their podcasts.
			\|action3date=4:56, 3 January 2007
			\|action3link=Talk:They_Might_Be_Giants/Archive_1#Good_Article_Status
			\|action3result=listed
			\|action3oldid=98077687

			\|action4=GAR
	Is ] actually an album, or is it just a single? -] 06:36, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)
			\|action4date=18 February 2007
			\|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Good_article_review/Archive_14#They_Might_Be_Giants
			\|action4result=delisted
			\|action4oldid=108923910

			\|action5=GAN
	:According to and this here , it's an album. -- ] 20:15, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)
			\|action5date=02:14, 23 January 2012
			\|action5link=Talk:They Might Be Giants/GA1
			\|action5result=not listed
			\|action5oldid=471579406

			\|currentstatus=DGA
	I'm not sure if I'm living in an alternate universe, but what I first knew TMBG from, which isn't even mentioned here, are the songs "Particle Man" and "Istanbul, not Constantinople", both from '']'' and famously appearing on the '']'' ] show. This is what most people I've talked to know them from as well, and the "famous" stuff in this article I've never even heard of (admittedly, I'm not a die-hard fan)... --] 21:13, Jun 12, 2004 (UTC)
			\|topic=music

			}}
	:It seems impossible to say which songs a band is most well known for without some way to measure the statement. Also, why no mention of Dr. Worm being a biographical song about a wikipedia user?--] 20:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=B\|listas=They Might Be Giants\| blp=yes\|1=

			{{WikiProject Biography\|musician-priority=Mid\|musician-work-group=yes}}
	::I was a little puzzled by the best-known songs thing. If I had to guess at TMBG's best-knowns songs, I don't think "Don't Let's Start" would ever have made my list. "Ana Ng" is one of my favorite songs of theirs, but is it really one of their most famous? "Birdhouse" is the only one I've ever seen on a karaoke menu, for what that's worth. ] 22:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
			{{WikiProject Alternative music\|importance=Mid}}
	:::Ana Ng has a music video. Don't Let's Start really got them big originally. Not sure if they're the best-known songs nowadays, but they are some of their more notable ones anyhow. ] 03:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
			}}

			{{banner holder\|collapsed=yes\|

			{{WikiWorld\|Image:TMBG wikiworld.jpg}}
	I first came in contact with them when my older brothers friend let him borrow Apollo 18, but I agree most people I talk to know them initially from Tiny Toons. --] 02:07, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
			{{refideas\|1= }}

			}}
	Does anyone know where the TMBG Wiki went? ] 23:25, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
			== Jonathan Coulton ==

	The TMBG wiki is still online at http://www.tmbw.net

	Shouldn't the TMBG Users Guide be in the compilation section? There's nothing new on that album

	== The demo. ==

	I might be wrong, but wasn't the People review based on the demo tape and before the album was released by Bar/None? Perhaps the writer intended this, but the wording is ambiguous as to whether it was the tape or the being picked up by B/N that led to the People review. ] 00:19, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
	:Gigantic talks about how he reviewed just a tape that he found. They certainly didn't talk about like it was referred by a record company. ] 00:31, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
	::That's what I thought. Shall I make the change? ] 00:34, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

	== The TMBG Canon? ==

	Not sure why the notion of a canon is being invoked. What makes Long Tall Weekend non-canonical. And why does one children's album (No) get the privilege of being canonized while the other (Here Come the ABCs) doesn't? ] 00:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
	:I agree, although Long Tall Weekend is technically a compilation of outtakes from the ] sessions. I was thinking of doing a discography overhaul anyway, so I might do this at some point, unless the person whose idea it was to have the "canonical" section in the first place can convince me to keep it that way. --] 22:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
	::With regard to Long Tall Weekend: I don't think that the media on which an album is released should determine its canonicity. The earliest albums were originally only on LP and MC. Since John Henry albums have only been on CD, and the most recent have been CD and MP3. That LTW was only officially released on MP3 should not exclude it from a discography. Also the fact that it is a compilation of outtakes does not mean it is not an official release. So the band compiled unreleased material from several recording sessions - I believe Mink Car was similarly created. --] 10 March 2007

	== Tiny Toon Adventures? ==

	I'm fairly sure it was the Animaniacs that had Constantinople(Not Istanbul) and Particle Man. Animaniacs aired alongside Tiny Toon Adventures but was a seperate show and was substantially more appealing to the "off-kilter" wit. -- 24.185.218.57
	:You're mistaken. The TMBG vids aired on Tiny Toons in 1991. Animaniacs didn't debut until the fall of 1993. -- ] 23:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
	::Not to mention that the videos contain characters from Tiny Toons, and not from Animaniacs. --] 22:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

	==Canonical Albums==

	In a recent email, ] repeatedly refers to their upcoming album as their twelfth full length album. This would imply that they have eleven canonical albums (who would better decide whether an album is canonical than the band themselves?). Nine are listed on the Misplaced Pages page, and ten on the special album navigation stub. This means there is one more album they consider canonical that is not listed, most likely either ] or ]. My vote goes to the latter. -- 22:05, 18 November 2005 (PDT)
	:Concidering that the article for ] claims it to be Their ninth album, I'd also say that the missing album is ]. (with ] tenth, and ] eleventh) --] 23:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
	::Surely the obvious omission from the list is the third album, Don't Lets Start from 1989? --] 22:56, 09 December 2005 (UTC)
	:::Their third album was Flood; Don't Let's Start is a track from their first album ] 23:06, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
	::::Don't Let's Start is also a compilation album, which is what ] must have been referring to. --] 06:34, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
	:::::Ah, my mistake; either way, it's non-canon. ] 07:46, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
	::::::Indeed, DLS was a collection of songs. It surprises me that it's not on either list. It's easy for us UK based fans to get it mixed up with a proper album though - singles were hard to get hold of over here in the late 80s. :) --] 11:19, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

	==Delisted from ]==

	I removed this from the ] list, as it does not contain ]. ] 23:01, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

	:This sounds like good motivation to overhaul the whole biography. Which should happen anyway. {{unsigned\|Nathew\|23:04, 6 December 2005}}
	::Seconded; i'd help give it a good ol' overhaul. -- <span style="border:1px solid #ccc;background:#eee; padding:1px">]</span> <span style="font-size:80%;color:#999">(])</span> 07:25, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

	:::Yeah, this article is also just a POS. Accuracy is my problem with it. I'll work on it in the morning. —]] ] 09:21, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

	I've delisted this from GA nominations due to references. The only references listed come from their website (!) and are not formatted properly. '''<font color="8855DD">]</font><font color="#6666AA">]</font>''' 23:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
	:Formatting, gotcha! —]] 00:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

	::I've done a whole bunch of work on that. Is what I did what you meant? —]] 05:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

	If nobody objects by ... say ... Thursday, I'll add it back to the self noms page. —]] 19:51, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
	:You should convert the rest of the references into inline citations like I did for the first reference. I'll assist you if you need help, but I don't know what parts go with what reference. '''<font color="8855DD">]</font><font color="#6666AA">]</font>''' 01:34, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

	::Done! —]] 00:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

	:::If that's the only objection, I'm going to add it back tomorrow. —]] 16:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

	::::GA has changed recently, you should add the article to ] if you feel it is good. '''<font color="8855DD">]</font><font color="#6666AA">]</font>''' 17:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

	:::::That's exactly the page I meant. —]]

	::::::One of the images has a disputed (by me) copyright claim. So we'll see about me listing it again in 2 weeks. —]] 01:09, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

	I added it to the nominations page. Should the notice up above be changed, or left as is? —]] 23:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
	:Leave it, it will help editors evaluate the current article with regard to its reason for previous GA delisting. '''<font color="8855DD">]</font><font color="#6666AA">]</font>''' 01:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

	Trying to decide if this was actually a current nomination. In any case, I like this article, but it needs more ] particularly in the Early Years and Elektra sections. ]<sup>] ]</sup> 04:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
	:Was this article ever put up for nomination? If so, did it pass? It it didn't, why didn't it? ] 18:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

	::It was put up and is still there. —]] 21:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

	:::This article is now up to 13 references. —]] 16:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
	::::Whoops, didn't notice that it was removed on the third. —]] 05:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

	== Humor in the article ==

	I know TMBG inspires ironic humor, but Misplaced Pages articles are definitely not supposed to include clever wordplay and joking section headers. Resist the temptation... {{unsigned\|72.224.153.104}}

	:I don't see how "Kids, Politics, and Spines" would be inappropriate. also, you should probably link to the policy page that says that that stuff's a no-no like all the other wikilitists do, mr. IP address. -]

	::I feel a humorous and creatively written article can be good if it isn't a hinderance to the readibility and accuracy of the article.--] 20:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

	== They also created the music for the LAIKA short "Moongirl" ==

	They made all of the music for the short computer animated cartoon "Moongirl" by LAIKA Studios in mid 2005. A clip can be seen and heard at http://www.laika.com/entertainment/

	== They Might Be They Might Be Giants? ==

	The last edit, which added ''the Dunkin' Donuts music was not performed by TMBG but "by They Might Be They Might Be Giants"''
	Ive never heard of such allegations. Is there any source for this claim? ]
	:Nope, its rubbish. TMBW lists them as They Might Be Giants songs. -- <span style="border:1px solid #ccc;background:#eee; padding:1px">]]]</span> 17:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

	== inspirations to other bands ==

	Is there a source for the part about "and they've influenced a number of bands and artists, such as Primus, Presidents of the United States of America, and Beck."?--] 10:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

	==Triple J Hottest 100==
	Is it worth linking to ]? They came 13th with "Dr Worm", and that was where I first heard of them.
	They got 52nd with "Man It's So Loud in Here" for ].

	== Big ugly citation in header ==

	The citation included in the "discography" header looks pretty dumb (especially in the TOC). Does a discography really need a citation? Or, could it be moved somewhere less conspicuous? Just a thought. -] 01:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
	:I'm the one that put it there, and I never liked it either, but I felt it needed one just to say, "This isn't wrong. Here's the proof," because of the talk above about "canonical" albums and whatnot. If you can find a better spot for it, please move it. — <span style="font-family: Kristen ITC, Times New Roman;">]]</span> 21:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

	==Links to albums==

	On every album page, links to other albums are tiny. Could this be fixed? Thanks. ] 16:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

	==Should Theme Songs Get Their Own Sub-section?==

	Though metioned in the article (as are the albums were appropriate), I can count at least four TV theme songs written and/or played by TMBG:

	#The Wrong Coast
	#Amazing Vacation Homes
	#Malcolm in the Middle
	#The Daily Show

	and I think there's another one on adult swim I'm missing and too lazy to track down right now.
	::It is the Oblongs. see http://www.tmbw.net/index.php/TV_And_Movie_Themes for more. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 21:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->

	== They might be hill giants? ==

	http://angband.oook.cz/comic/strip.php?view=97 --] 08:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

	== Spider ==

			Should this article include something about Jonathan Coulton collaboration with They Might Be Giants? ] (]) 06:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
	Did George Takei say "I promise not to kill you." in spider?
			*Added to associated acts. Thanks for the suggestion.] (]) 12:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
	] 9/8/06 8:18 PM EST
	:Nope. ] — <span style="font-family: Kristen ITC, Times New Roman;">]]</span> 01:29, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

	== ~~Music~~ ~~video~~ ~~wikilinks~~ ==		== External links modified ==
	A lot of these need to be un-wikilinked. They just lead to ep's and not an article on the music video per se. ]

			Hello fellow Wikipedians,
	== Pic Changes ==

			I have just modified 3 external links on ]. Please take a moment to review ]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes:
	I'm not sure if there's a policy to put current pictures of bands in their articles or not, but, regardless, could somebody fill me in on why the picture in the infobox on this page (as well as in the infoboxes on Linnell's and Flansburg's pages) were replaces with the photos that they were? Not that I'm arguing about it (although I do think that it is more appropriate to include a more formal image), I'm just curious. -] 01:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901184346/http://docs.yahoo.com/docs/pr/release341.html to http://docs.yahoo.com/docs/pr/release341.html
	:Somebody did it awhile back sometime in the beginning of december. I personally liked the older images better as they were more clear. I think his/her rationale was that a picture taken in person of the subject was always to be preferred over a publicity shot (why that is, is beyond me but that's what I seem to remember). If no one objects with a valid point I suggest we switch it back. Or find a better image. ] 01:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
			*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100727170444/http://www2.grammy.com/Grammy_Awards/51st_show/list.aspx to http://grammy.com/grammy_awards/51st_show/list.aspx
	::Hi there, I was the one who changed the picture. As you'll see at ], copyrighted images shouldn't be used if there exists a free picture or a free picture could be created. —] 08:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
			*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aria.com.au/Issue612.pdf

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

			{{sourcecheck\|checked=false\|needhelp=}}
	==Good Article Status==

			Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 12:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
	Well done. I'm happy with the article progress with the last ] nomination and am happy to give this article GA status. -*- '''u:''']/]/t: 16:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

			== Lede ==
	ummm It's got a citation needed tag, external links in the middle of text, one sentence paragraphs, some references are just external links.... ] 02:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

			The article looks pretty good. I'm just wondering if the lede needs so much detail on awards received. Any other opinions? ] (]) 20:27, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
	:Good to hear that I'm not the only one with doubts. I don't believe this merits GA status. Although almost anyone can theoretically award GA status I feel that ]'s decision to do was wrong. I feel that we should put it back up for GA review, and ignore this incident. I think we need a stronger critical analysis of this article before we decide that it is officially GA. ] 04:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
	::Articles are constantly evolving and finding cites for present statements is common practice in articles of '''all''' qualities, including those that have obtained featured article status. Just because articles contain a "cite needed" tag doesn't make it inferior to an article that doesn't have such tags. A lot of comments are not properly cited in ], the absence of a cite needed tag, doesn't necessarily make those articles better than this one. Perhaps those actively involved in this article should strive to improve the points listed and maybe request another peer review, since the relevant benchmarks for all ] articles will inevitably increase. -*- '''u:''']/]/t: 22:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
	:::This article is being reviewed at ] for possible delisting of its Good article status. ] 23:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
	===Removed===
	Review the comments leading to this consensus ]. Article may be re-submitted in the future once the issues left by reviewers are sorted. ] (] • ]) 13:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

	== ~~Members~~ ==		== A stretch? ==

			i am fan of TMBG but this sentence is a huge stretch and an opinion: "The duo has been credited as vital in the creation of the prolific DIY music scene in Brooklyn in the mid-1980s" -- even if a writer from Rolling Stone thinks so, the entire idea of DIY music is DIY, musicians were DIY-ing it themselves way before and way after TMBG -- even in Brooklyn! ] (]) 21:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
	I remember at a concert a few years ago the Johns trying to make it clear to the audience that TMBG were no longer a duo with backup musicians, but a band with other full members (three more, I think, but I'm not entirely sure). Are the other guys no longer with the Johns, or are we just ignoring the idea that the band is more than just the Johns? <sub>└</sub> <sup>''']'''</sup> / <sub>''<font color="black">]</font>''</sub> <sup>┐</sup> 19:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
	:The promotional photographs that the band released circa 1994 for the release of John Henry depicted the band as a four-piece band. Press releases for that album also stated that TMBG "now tour as a rocking six-piece". Since then, aside from a few photographs taken to promote the big-band shows, all promotional shots show only John and John. The current line up of Dan, Danny and Marty have never been officially photographed. This seems to indicate they are still very much about the core duo.] 12:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

			:I personally think the fact it notes that they were influential at a specific time and location makes it a bit more applicable. ] (]) 08:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
	== Violent, drunken fans? ==

			==Quibble re Twisting==
	<blockquote>With their popularlity rising among children, the band announced on their website that anyone under the age of 16 is currently barred from TMBG concerts (except, of course, shows intended for a younger audience). Their stated reasons mention a number of elements uncharacteristic of their typical concerts (such as pot smoking and violent, drunken audience members.)</blockquote>
			I noticed looking at the TMBG singles chronology that "Twisting" is listed in the discography as the second single off of ''Flood'', but in other places "Istambul Not Constantinople" is listed as the second single. Looking at the TMBG wiki (https://tmbw.net/Twisting), I see that, according to that, "Twisting" never received a commercial single release, only promo and test releases (which would explain why it had no chart appearances).
			I don't usually meddle with these technical matters, so I'm not sure whether promo and test releases count as a "release as a single", but at the least someone might want to figure out whether "Twisting"'s single release(s) were before "Istambul..." and make our information on that point consistent.] (]) 17:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

			== Citation in History section ==
	This paragraph is poorly worded anyway and should probably go without some concrete references. ] 19:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

			I noticed that for a good 3-4 sections in History, there is little to no sources, I added a marker at the top of the history page, but it would be great to get an expert on Dial-a-Song or whatever working on that. ] (]) 20:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
	== ''The Edge'' ==

			== Johns picture dupe ==
	What's all this about TMBG releasing ''The Edge'' on iTunes a couple months before releasing the CD? If anyone knows about this, could you add it to the article (with proper references)? ] 08:59, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
	:I believe you are refering to their album ''The Else''. As far as I know it was scheduled to be on iTunes on May 15, then released mid June in stores (or was that July?). ] 16:23, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

			The same picture of the Johns from 2020 is used at the top and bottom of the articles. Is there a better pic that could be used for the start? ] (]) 20:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
	== Removal of "geek rock" ==

			== Update Photo ==
	I've removed the labels of "geek rock" off the page. Before anyone gets all up in arms, the reason that I did it, is because the band's position is that belong to the "alternative" and "college" rock genres (in addition to kids music). In addition, some people question whether geek rock is an official genre, or if it's just a made-up classification (not sure who decides these things). --] 14:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
	:I had an online article that I linked to on the "Geek Rock" page that listed TMBG as Geek Rock, but it went dead. Also, I understand that the band doesn't think that it belongs as a geek rock band, but all their fans do. -] 21:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
	::This is true. "Geek Rock" is not defined by the band via their "sound", it is defined by their fans who listen to the music and deem them acceptable for like-minded associates. Now, a band can specifically "target" that audience by several methods including anything from complex wordplay to "retro" references, the inclusion of anything computer or game related to outcast instruments (like the accordion!), but in the end it's the fans who categorize them as "geek rock". So perhaps the mention should be re-worded to state that their geek fans list them as geek rock (rock for geeks) instead of them classifying themselves as such. Oh, wait. This isn't the place to do that. Perhaps you should re-write the ] page to conform to this definition, then people will accept this idea and will no longer hold an inaccurate view of the term. The page is looking lonely as of late and I think you could get away with it if you improved the structure of the article. If they see you are making it better by adding stuff, making things clearer, fixing the layout, etc., they won't think you have any hidden agenda. Cheers! --] 21:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

			The photo is extremely outdated. They don't look like that anymore. I added a new photo and the edit was undone. I really do think there needs to be a new photo. ] (]) 14:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
	== Clock Radio ==
	I was surprised to find no reference to the service offered on the TMBG website. Is there a reason for this or has no one gotten around to writing about it? Another possibility is that I somehow missed it. --] 19:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:14, 18 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the They Might Be Giants article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

They Might Be Giants was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 3, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed
December 5, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
January 3, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
February 18, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
January 23, 2012	Good article nominee	Not listed
Current status: Delisted good article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance).

Alternative music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Other talk page banners

They Might Be Giants was featured in a WikiWorld cartoon. Click the image to the right for full size version.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

2015 Rolling Store article

Jonathan Coulton

Should this article include something about Jonathan Coulton collaboration with They Might Be Giants? Benjamin (talk) 06:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Added to associated acts. Thanks for the suggestion.Yogibeera (talk) 12:14, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on They Might Be Giants. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901184346/http://docs.yahoo.com/docs/pr/release341.html to http://docs.yahoo.com/docs/pr/release341.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100727170444/http://www2.grammy.com/Grammy_Awards/51st_show/list.aspx to http://grammy.com/grammy_awards/51st_show/list.aspx
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aria.com.au/Issue612.pdf

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) 12:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Lede

The article looks pretty good. I'm just wondering if the lede needs so much detail on awards received. Any other opinions? Ragity (talk) 20:27, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

A stretch?

i am fan of TMBG but this sentence is a huge stretch and an opinion: "The duo has been credited as vital in the creation of the prolific DIY music scene in Brooklyn in the mid-1980s" -- even if a writer from Rolling Stone thinks so, the entire idea of DIY music is DIY, musicians were DIY-ing it themselves way before and way after TMBG -- even in Brooklyn! 98.167.186.78 (talk) 21:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I personally think the fact it notes that they were influential at a specific time and location makes it a bit more applicable. Macdrown (talk) 08:32, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Quibble re Twisting

I noticed looking at the TMBG singles chronology that "Twisting" is listed in the discography as the second single off of Flood, but in other places "Istambul Not Constantinople" is listed as the second single. Looking at the TMBG wiki (https://tmbw.net/Twisting), I see that, according to that, "Twisting" never received a commercial single release, only promo and test releases (which would explain why it had no chart appearances). I don't usually meddle with these technical matters, so I'm not sure whether promo and test releases count as a "release as a single", but at the least someone might want to figure out whether "Twisting"'s single release(s) were before "Istambul..." and make our information on that point consistent.Brianyoumans (talk) 17:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Citation in History section

I noticed that for a good 3-4 sections in History, there is little to no sources, I added a marker at the top of the history page, but it would be great to get an expert on Dial-a-Song or whatever working on that. Adeeta (talk) 20:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Johns picture dupe

The same picture of the Johns from 2020 is used at the top and bottom of the articles. Is there a better pic that could be used for the start? Adeeta (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Update Photo

The photo is extremely outdated. They don't look like that anymore. I added a new photo and the edit was undone. I really do think there needs to be a new photo. Ailurophobic (talk) 14:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Categories: