This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Validation of article performed by WIKICHECK. February 8, 2006 5:43pm. WikiCheck 22:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

This article says almost nothing about the band; it's basically three lists. Can anyone expand this? I'm certainly no Journey expert. Also, is the list of singles necessary? Most band pages just list their albums, and mention a few singles in the text of the article (of which this page is certainly lacking). - R. fiend 08:04, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is noteworthy that some of their songs were used in Tron - 200.195.86.168

I don't think that the discography section, Journey_(band)#Discography, should list when someone "first appeared" and "last appeared". But, if it should, why only the two Steve's, Perry and Augeri? Rolie and Cain (besides the main man Schon) have also been very important pieces in the evolution of Journey (no album pun intended). Rolie (along with Schon) was instrumental (no music pun intended) in the band getting to a point where Perry and Cain where even invited to join the band. Cain's "sweet as sugar" lyrics (agriculture pun toward sugar cane "is" intended) are one of the main reasons the band was as commercially successful as it was. Cain, Schon, and Rolie are continually ignored for their contributions to the Journey (intended). Now I am not taking anything away from Perry, I love Steve, and he was a BIG cog in the wheel (in the sky) for the band to keep on turning, but these other guys need some "lovin'" too, okay they'll get no "touchin'" and "squeezin'" from me. But, Cain, Rolie, and Schon, and to a lesser degree even Valory, Smith & even Fleischman, did their integrul parts. Let me know if this issue will cause us to go our "separate ways", or is anyone else "feeling that way", "feeling that way, too?" Comments? WikiDon 22:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I recall hearing that one of Journey's more popular songs is written with three-beats-per-measure. Can anyone confirm this? If it's true is it something worth putting in the article, it's rather unusual. -anonymous. 13:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

THIS IS NOT "The Original Journey Lineup" It took Steve Perry FOUR years to get there. Can anyone tell when this photo was taken, I would guess Dec. of 1978, need HELP! When did Neal get rid of the HUGH FRO?

If I'm not mistaken that photo is from the "Separate Ways" video. I hope that helps. - R. fiend 22:42, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There actually was a full history of Journey in Wikipedia, it just wasn't in this article ... rather, it was spread out among the different album articles and the different member articles. Hence I've been pulling them into and integrating them with this article. I've done it through 1987 and Perry leaving, which is where I get off. Someone else can finish the job -- look in the Steve Perry and Arrival articles in particular for material.

I've now done this merging in. Wasted Time R 03:51, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

This article also had a good deal of extraneous material about the history of Santana and so forth. It's all been moved to the appropriate other articles. Wasted Time R 01:47, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

RE: "Extraneous Material" and Wasted Time R, you removed what I had written about the beginnings of the band, saying: "This article also had a good deal of extraneous material". But this tells how the band came about, if it was not for Rolie, Schon, and Herbie Herbert coming together in Santana there would be NO Journey. Then you turn around and put in stuff about "American Idol" "Clay Aiken" and "Kelly Clarkson". Now the former leads directly to the formation of the band, the latter has nothing to do with "THE BAND", talk about "extraneous material". Which is more important? The formation of the band is a LARGE chunk of its history. Randy Jackson was just hired to play one tour, and that was it. The history of the band should NOT revolve around hired guns just to get through a tour. It should revolve around memebers of the band that were critical to its life, Rolie, Schon, Herbert, Cain, Tickner, Valory, Prince, Dunbar, Fleischman, Smith, and of course Perry. There were three major incarnations to the band becoming the group we know today, the first was the initial formation, then the addition of Dunbar and Fleischman, and lastly the addition of Perry and Cain that propelled them to the peak of their success. For the most part everyone else after that were just hired guns to get through either studio sessions or tours (except for Augeri, who was a permentant replacement for Perry, but Cain and Schon run the show). Herbert formed the band for SCHON, it was Schon's band from the beginning, and Journey is Schon and Cain's band today. If it were not for Schon, there would in all likelihood be no Perry, and no Journey. Perry had tried for 10-years to break through in L.A., he had given up and headed back home, and if not for the demo tape that he left behind, that would come across Herbert's desk and ears, he even says he would probably have become a lounge singer in Stockton, Fresno and Sacramento. Without the addition of Perry and Cain (who doesn't get the credit he deservers!) the band would most likely not have become a meteor that it became. These are the main parts that paved the way for all others to hitch their ride to this entity. Life-long, die-hard Journey (like me) respect the beginnings of the band, and the essential pieces that came five (or so) years later to take them to the next level. Rolie was a major cornerstone piece to get the band started. And if not for Herbert, who knows what direction Schon would have went. Jackson is a very good bassist, no doubt about it, but in the history of entire life of band, they could have just as easily hired someone else for that tour. So, when it comes to "extraneous material", where the band came from, how it got together, and how it added Perry and Cain are what really count. If not for Schon, Herbert, Rolie, Perry and Cain, there would not have been all that CASH to do anything else. WikiDon 18:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't think I removed anything you wrote, I just moved some of it to Santana's history, and other asides (like "We Built This City") to the appropriate article. I've added an explicit "see Santana history" line in the front of the Beginnings section now. Wasted Time R 18:59, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

• • I knew that the "We Built This City" was a long stretch when I wrote it, I just did it for an FYI, a little added trivia for music history fans. But if it goes, then surely American Idol stuff should be jettisoned? WikiDon 19:03, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

A little trivia is ok, it just belonged in Jefferson Starship, not here.

The rest of your criticisms are unnecessary. Feel free to add more about the pre-Perry band, I have little familiarity with those records. Feel free to add more about Cain ... before I made my additions, there was nothing about him at all! I added that his songwriting and keyboards were a key part of their sound c. 1983 and that he wrote "Faithfully", one of their best-known tunes. If you want to elaborate on how Herbert found Perry, go ahead, I think I didn't touch your material on that.

Finally, re the Randy Jackson/AI material, this is interesting because to a whole younger generation, it's the hook by which they'll be interested in Journey. I agree that Jackson's role was of little significance at the time, but it is now, because people are singing Journey songs on the top-rated American TV show because of him, and they show film clips of Journey's 1986 tour because of him, and so forth. It's not a zero-sum game; you can add as much as you want to other eras of Journey without having to limit mentions of Jackson and AI. Wasted Time R 19:09, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

As a reality check, look at the article before I touched it: [1] A lot on the history of Santana and the formation of Journey, then next to nothing for 15 years, then some scattered material on the post-Perry years! Wasted Time R 19:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I had intended to write a complete history, at least until 1990, but I was going to do it in stages. I just had not got around to it, other fish to fry you know. My next segment was going to be the first three albums, then the Perry-Cain era. I just had to push it down the priority list. WikiDon 19:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

OK, that's fine, you're not pre-empted. You can still do your writing, modifying/expanding/replacing what I pulled together as you see fit. If you yank something that I think is important, I'll try to fit it back in into the context of what you did. In other words, the normal WP process. Wasted Time R 19:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

!!Hey there just to clear up something, "We built this City" was actually by Starship, not Jefferson Aeroplane as someone has stated above. I know it's the same band but we wouldn't want any 8th graders failing their research assignments now would we?

Journey has more of a rock sound then then Maroon 5 ever has and since the lady who is runs the Maroon 5 bord insist Maroon 5 is not soft rock. If Marron 5 is not soft rock then Journey who has far more of a rock edge to them is not soft rock. DLA75 20:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Long time Journey vocalist Steve Perry also cannot be ruled out for the position. Although Perry has stated numerous times that he would not return, he has been quoted repeatedly saying "never say never" in regards to returning to the band. [2] [3]

This information is heresay, as Steve Perry was reported to be writing songs with Nuno Bettencort.

AlltimeJourneyFan 16:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it has been reported that Perry is writing songs with Bettencort, but that does not mean that he is ruled out for the lead singing position with Journey. He has been quoted as saying "never say never," therfore he cannot be ruled out. He can write songs with anyone he chooses, but there is no evidence that writing songs with other musicians will stop a rejoin, if one is to occur.

I only look at this page every couple of years, but the last time I checked, there were a number of unofficial (read: not band- or artist-supported) sites listed under the "external links" heading, like The Journey Digest (disclosure: these included my own). I am assuming that this decision was made by a Wikipedia Admin or two, having decided that their inclusion might not conform with N.P.O.V. Although I would argue that such decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis, I can understand why a blanket removal might be most effective. Still, there are some "official" sites that are less neutral than some "unofficial" sites.

If the deletions have occurred not because of an admin decision but due to some actions by my fellow editors, then I might feel more free to replace them.

Thoughts?

Dave Golland 18:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The edit appears to have occurred on March 3 of this year; here is the information: 02:31, 3 March 2007 156.34.237.133 (Talk) (WP:EL/WP:MoS-L cleanup) This does not appear to be the result of a discussion.

Dave Golland 19:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

All but the official site links were removed a few days ago based on what appears to be a very quick attempt to comply with WP:EL. But further down that style page is the following: What Should be Linked. Note that #4 would have editors include "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." So without knowing the content of anything other than my site and the Digest, I've returned only those two to the page (since they each contain numerous reviews and interviews), and renamed the category. Other webmasters should feel free to add themselves to the list if they contain interviews and/or reviews (as long as their sites do not fall under the Restrictions on Linking category).

Dave Golland 15:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Add User:UBX/Journey with ${\displaystyle \wedge }$ to your userpages! PG Pirate 19:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed the following yesterday as speculation, and it was reinstated yesterday:

The brief tenure of Jeff Scott Soto as lead singer should bring to mind the equally brief tenure of Robert Fleischman in that position in 1977, out of which, of course, came the decision to hire Steve Perry. The band may be seeking to find the same formula thirty years later.

That's speculation and I would guess something like weasel words or something like that as well. It's not fact and doesn't belong, as far as I'm concerned. If someone disagrees, please provide a reason before just reinstating it. Thanks. Rmkf1982 ^Talk 17:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't simply reinstate it. I rewrote it and reinstated it, trying to make it slightly less speculative prima facie. That's because I agree with you that it needed work but not that the concept needed to be removed altogether.

"Should" is used not as something less than fact but as a linguistic tool designed to get the reader to compare this latest development with a prior development in the history of the band.

That the band may be seeking to find the same formula thirty years later is slightly speculative, but it is based on my knowledge of the band and its history (I am a professional historian who happens to be a fan of the band, and one of my interviews is cited in the text). In this case it is important that it is located at the end of the band's current history. Since the band continues to exist, it's history isn't finished, and this and the following paragraph are temporary--that is, they will likely be removed very quickly after the band makes a decision. In the meantime, I think it is useful to attempt to get the reader to think about the past and how it affects the present set of facts.

I will reinstate it now, but invisibly, in the hope that you and I can continue this discussion so that we can together find a way to convey what I would like to convey without violating the Wikipedia norms. Feel free to continue the discussion here or via e-mail, but if you continue it here I can't promise a fast response.

Dave Golland 14:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand exactly what you're trying to do and for the record, it's a really good article and from the history of the page it looks like you're responsible for the vast majority of the content. I had in fact assumed that the article was the result of a number of people whittling away at it for ages, so the fact that it seems to be largely a solo effort (without meaning to belittle anyone else who might have contributed) is certainly to your credit.

After I left my original comments above I had a look at your own site via the links on your user page and I appreciate and recognise that you are something of an expert on the band. However, I'm not sure where Wikipedia stands on refererncing / citing own works such as your interview. Again, I don't mean to imply that there's anything inaccurate or unworthy about the interview as a source, but there are the Wikipedia policies on Original Research etc. to think about. Where that fits in with referencing an interview, which, despite technically being original research, is also a published work, I don't know - there might be someone else reading this page with a better idea or better way of saying this.

In short, I know what you're trying to say with the couple of lines about a new lead singer, and I know why you're trying to say it. It's sort of talking about current or future events in the same way that for example, articles about upcoming seasons of 24 or something like that would be, so I suppose the concept of speculating on how something might turn out isn't such a bad thing after all. Your description above, of them being temporary paragraphs, sums it up in one. The hard part though is phrasing it in such a way that it doesn't just attract the attention of passing reader / editors who will remove it as speculation. Maybe it's as simple as slapping the template tag on it that says "this section discusses future events etc. etc. etc. that you see on other articles, reinstating the paragraph as is, and leaving it at that?

And once again, well done on the article. I was looking at your contributions page and you seem to have stuck to the Journey article but based on the quality of this one, and on your work as a historian, there's bound to be plenty more articles you could turn your hand to as successfully if you were interested? thanks Ronan Rmkf1982 ^Talk 18:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ronan--

Thanks for the compliments. I can't take credit for most of the content; I've just spent a few hours this summer doing some serious revisions. Before that I hadn't looked at the page in a year or two. I'm flattered that you think I should turn my hand to other entries; right now I'm working on my dissertation, so it's hard to find the time (although I used Wikipedia for some research recently and contemplated making a few minor edits on some of the entries I viewed, so you never know).

I'd like to avoid including a template. You'll see that I've done some cleanup work on the page in order to eliminate two templates already. Let's try a footnote. What do you think of this:

The brief tenure of Jeff Scott Soto as lead singer brings to mind [eliminating "should"] the equally brief tenure of Robert Fleischman in that position in 1977, out of which, of course, came the decision to hire Steve Perry. Fan speculation hints that the band may be seeking to find the same formula thirty years later.*

• This is a non-factual temporary statement, employed for illustrative purposes, and will be removed when the band makes a decision.

Dave Golland 15:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

You know what? I think the "fan speculation hints that the band may be seeking...." line is perfect, without the footnote. It states that fans are speculating, but doesn't make the article itself speculatory, if you get my drift. Especially if it referenced a site or article somewhere where such third-party speculation could be found. By saying "fan speculation" it's clear that it's not a guaranteed fact.

Good luck with the dissertation.

Rmkf1982 ^Talk 18:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I just removed two links to forums that contained long explanations for noncompliance with WP:EL from the "External Links" heading of this entry (pardon the run-on sentence). If you think they should remain, please respond here and explain why you disagree with the rule citation so we can discuss it. But first, please see the "Fan Sites/News Sites/Unofficial Sites" discussion above.

Dave Golland 22:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Today I removed an "In need of cleanup" tag. My feeling is that the problem is regular vandalism, not the general content of the page. Vandalism can be (and is) corrected on a case-by-case basis.

There is a large hidden section of band trivia that ought to be integrated into the rest of the page content, but as long as it's not visible, it doesn't affect the overall cleanliness of the content.

If you'd still like the page to be cleaned up, please explain where in particular it's needed.

Dave Golland 15:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Two editors are going back and forth about the active dates of the band (1. 1991? 2. 1995 or 6?) and two supposed former band members, Bolton and Walden.

I've made a revision (changed 1996 to 1995) but left the rest of the current page as is, so that we can discuss this in here, rather than going back and forth with competing revisions.

1. As far as I can tell, 1991 saw three members of Journey team up on stage for a few numbers; that does not make the band active for that year. If anyone has contrary information (or opinions), please state them here.

2. The band did reunite in 1995, not 1996. 1996 was when the resultant album was released. Unlike 1991, this was a formal reunion with five members participating and which resulted in an album and the continuation of activity.

3. I think Jon Cain was once a songwriter for Michael Bolton, but I don't think Bolton was ever in Journey. Walden's name sounds familiar, but ditto. If anyone has a citation or other reference showing that wither Bolton or Walden were in Journey, please discuss it here.

Dave Golland 23:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

In February 1987, once the Raised on Radio tour was completed, lead vocalist Steve Perry and drummer Mike Baird left Journey. They were replaced by lead vocalist Michael Bolton and drummer Michael Walden. Here is the source. ( http://www.journey-tribute.com/journey/resources/timeline/radio.html)

68.88.204.59 03:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi-- This source refers to a single appearance at the BAMmies--not even a full concert. I'm revising the entry.

Dave Golland 16:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

1. As far as I can tell, 1991 saw three members of Journey team up on stage for a few numbers; that does not make the band active for that year. If anyone has contrary information (or opinions), please state them here.

That is correct. They teamed up for a tribute to Bill Graham, held in San Francisco. Those members were Neal Schon, Steve Perry and Jonathan Cain.

3. I think Jon Cain was once a songwriter for Michael Bolton, but I don't think Bolton was ever in Journey. Walden's name sounds familiar, but ditto. If anyone has a citation or other reference showing that wither Bolton or Walden were in Journey, please discuss it here.

Both Jon Cain and Neal Schon performed on Michael Bolton's 1988 album "The Hunger". It's rumoured they considered Michael Bolton for the Journey lead singer position and Michael turned them down, but as far as I know there's no proof this even occurred.

thecrazycatlady 11/26/07

Jeremey Hunsicker didn't turn down the job as lead singer. You reference his blog as your source. If you read his entry on the blog, he blew up at Jonathan Cain telling him he may not be the right man for the job. The next day, he called him back, asking to remain in the running for the job. He admits this in the comments section of his blog titled "Blah Blah Blah" and even says there, he didn't walk away from the job. Therefore, it's not factual to say he withdrew himself from the running or turned down the job.

---

thecrazycatlady 11/26/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecrazycatlady ( talk • contribs) 01:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

As with most of the page, I didn't write the passage but I did edit it. I haven't looked at Hunsicker's blog since then (early October, I think). If you feel that the text should be updated or changed, please do so. I don't "own" or "supervise" this page, I've just been looking at it regularly since last summer when I put a few hours of work into overhauling it (mainly the history section). You have as much a right to update the page as I, and it seems like you know more about this area of the band's history then I do right now. So go for it! Dave Golland ( talk) 18:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

This entire page needs rewritten, the tone and style of the article is NOTHING like a wikipedia article which is suppose to be based on history and fact. I had to stop half way through, cmon people someone get to it and rewrite this deal from scratch. Unfortunatly I am not a good writer, but I know a LOT of you out there are!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.13.41.64 ( talk) 19:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know. There's a "magazine" box at the start of the history section and I've discussed it with the person who put it there. I overhauled the history last summer but I didn't know at the time what sort of style Wikipedia requires. I'm incredibly busy now but hopefully I'll be able to work at it in pieces over the next few months. Others may choose to help out as well. In the meantime, try reading it as is. The style is wrong but the information meets N.P.O.V. and is copious (if wordy). Dave Golland ( talk) 03:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

In the past couple of weeks I have begun a major rewrite of the section on the band's history, required to remove the "Magazine" box. I am going one sub-section at a time, from the latest to the earliest. As I go, I am preserving the previous text but making it invisible using html code. I'll delete these invisible sections from the code a few days after I finish the rewrite, but they'll still be accessible in the "history" tab at the top of the page. I may go back and access the "magazine" version and re-publish it in a more appropriate venue since it clearly has some value as a history of the band (just not as an encyclopedia entry).

In the process, there are aspects of the story that I am eliminating altogether. While I am trying to keep as much of the history as possible given the brevity required by encyclopedic standards, there may be items that I am eliminating that bear discussion here.

One story in particular that I just took out was the Kenny Sykaluk story. As a human being, I think it's a wonderful story, and as a fan, I think it's an important episode in that it highlights the humanity of the band members, but as a Wikipedia editor I cannot see how it merits inclusion, except perhaps on the page of an individual band member like Jonathan Cain. It clearly has a place in magazine articles on the band, and was entirely appropriate for the narrative presented in "Behind the Music," but not in an encyclopedia article on the band.

I could be wrong about much or all of this; I've been known to be wrong in the past. Interested parties should feel free to read the invisible text (you can see it when you click "edit" in any section) and re-insert portions as you feel necessary (but please bear in mind that you should rewrite those portions to conform with Wikipedia standards). You might also choose to make suggestions here and let me make the changes you'd like to see. But please bear in mind that I do not "own" this page; I've just taken a recent interest in it.

Dave Golland ( talk) 17:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

All done. Hope everyone enjoys it. Dave Golland ( talk) 04:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Can't say I do. The same kind of lengthy, "magazine"-style, non-"encyclopedic" treatment of musical artists that you deplore here is also present in the Mariah Carey, U2, Gwen Stefani, and Bob Dylan articles. I suggest you go there and start reducing them just as much as you reduced this one. What, they're all Featured Articles? Hmmm. Wasted Time R ( talk) 22:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

"Deplore" is a bit strong, since I personally prefer the magazine style. Someone who appeared to be a more experienced Wikipedia editor without any particular interest in Journey put a "magazine" tag on the page in late November or early December. We discussed it and I did the more comprehensive rewrite detailed above. Dave Golland ( talk) 03:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

"Magazine" tag removal or not, the current article is inadequate. It doesn't convey very well the nature of Journey's music or why it was so popular. It mostly just chronicles album releases and personnel changes. It doesn't talk about Perry's impact on rock vocals within the genre, it doesn't talk about Cain's growing impact as a songwriter, it doesn't talk about how Schon's guitar was used in arrangements, etc. If you compare it to other FA music articles, you'll see what I mean. I think you got some bad advice from whomever this "more experienced" editor is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wasted Time R ( talk • contribs) 03:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I do not pretend to have completed a perfect rewrite. If you think those items belong, why not put them in? Dave Golland ( talk) 03:43, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. I haven't worked on this article in a couple of years and Journey is kind of low on my priority list right now. Maybe someday ... I was more interested in correcting a misperception that you seemed to have. And I'm sorry for the snarky tone I started out with; it's been a long Wikipedia day. (Whatever you may think of the music articles here, don't ever, ever, ever start editing political articles!) Cheers. Wasted Time R ( talk) 03:50, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:StreetlightPeople.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I have added a pic [4] from the Augeri era to the page and licensed it for Wikipedia use. We can use it as the main pic if the Wiki Bot removes Image:StreetlightPeople.jpg, bit I'd prefer it if we had a pic of the band from their height of popularity, i.e. 1981-83. Does anyone own a photo (as in you took it yourself or have the copyright) of the band from that era?

Dave Golland ( talk) 21:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags Nhl4hamilton ( talk) 09:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

"To date, Journey have been used as and maintained as Team Zebra's very own rock band. Without the contributions of Journey to Team Zebra, vitally important decisions made during meetings with coffee and battenburg would not have been possible. Team Zebra consists of two legends Scott and Hassan. They are both exceptionally happy to hear that Journey will be in Dublin in June of 2008."

Is it just me or does this information seem unsupported? Out of Context? Just like its coming out of no place with no backing information? What is Team Zebra? I am pretty sure I might know who Scott and Hassan are in the context of the music industry, but am I sure? What does it mean to be Team Zebra's very own rock band?

Haplopeart ( talk) 21:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

That was vandalism and it looks like someone's already removed it. In future, add to the bottom of talk pages, not the top. Dave Golland ( talk) 03:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I flagged this as such due to the number of uncited subjective statements made in the History section. While it is still desirable in a biographical article to cite statements that events occurred, to make uncited claims as to the motivation behind these claims would fall under the auspice of WP:NOR. Also any actual figures (such as sales figures) should be cites as well.

Examples:

• Journey released their eponymous first album in 1975, and rhythm guitarist Tickner left the band before they cut their second album, Look into the Future (1976). Neither album sold much more than 100,000 copies - The fact that the word "much" is used here implies an esitmate on the part of the editor. A more accurate number should be used, and the source cited.

• Drummer Aynsley Dunbar did not get along with singer Steve Perry and did not approve of the new musical direction. - The fact that the band members did not get along must be cited as it a purely biographical statement about two living people that carries negative overtones.

• With Cain's replacement of Rolie's Hammond B-3 organ with his own synthesizers, the band was poised to redefine rock music for a new decade in which they would achieve their greatest musical success. - This statement is not presented in a neutral point of view and if the statement is a reiteration of another article, it must be cited.

• ...when they returned to Journey to record their 1986 album Raised on Radio, bass player Ross Valory and drummer Steve Smith were fired from the band for musical and professional differences. - Again, biographical statement with an interpretation of motivation. Must be cited or removed.

• In 1995 Steve Perry agreed to rejoin the band on the condition that they seek new management. - Again, biographical statement with an interpretation of motivation. Must be cited or removed.

These are just a few examples. While there is a lot of good information in this article, the lack of needed citation must be addressed (especially with biographical statements about living persons). LeilaniLad ( talk) 14:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I can cite the second and third ones using the Robyn Flans book. Editors, do you have other citations? Dave Golland ( talk) 16:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I've also cited the second and the fourth with my own interview of Steve Smith. Dave Golland ( talk) 16:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I've rewritten the line for the first item and cited the Wikipedia Journey discography. That's it for me today. Does anyone have a source for the fifth (Steve Perry returning only on condition of Herbie Herbert being fired)? Also, let's try to get a more comprehensive list of needed citations here. Editors? Dave Golland ( talk) 16:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added copious citations, placed several refs that say "citation needed," and removed the tag. Editors, the needed citations are all in the "break-up" section of the history. Dave Golland ( talk) 05:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not satisfied that induction into the Vocal Group Hall of Fame is important enough to merit mention in the introduction to the article. While the organization seems legitimate, the fact that there have been several hundred inductees in less than ten years of operation appears suspicious. More to the point, what are the standards for induction? Are there any noteworthy groups that haven't been inducted?

Are the members of Journey even aware that they have been inducted? The band posted no notice on their website in 2006 announcing their induction.

I suspect that the line was placed by someone advocating for the legitimacy of the Vocal Group Hall of Fame. If that is the case, Journey's page is not the place to do it.

Dave Golland ( talk) 03:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The website listed for Steve Perry is not an official site -- it is a fan site. He does not have an official site and the only official communication he has with fans is via Fan Asylum. http://www.fanasylum.com/steveperry/

65.119.34.1 ( talk) 20:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC) Michelle

Hi, I am brand new to this and need some guidance. Would like to be able to add verifiable information regarding musician Stevie Roseman and his contributions to the rock band Journey.

He played keyboards on the lone studio track "The Party's Over (Hopelessly In Love) from the 1981 album "Captured" reissued 10/03/06 on Columbia/Legacy CD #82876 85896 2. His credit listing in on insert page 15 line 8.

This same track also appears on the reissued 3 CD set called Journey Time3 Columbia #C3K 96419. His credit listing is on insert pages 11 thru 14.

How is this done correctly? I have additional data to hopefully improve the accuracy of information on one the worlds best know bands!

Thank you in advance,

alotofsunshine Alotofsunshine ( talk) 09:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

So far the Journey page doesn't list musicians who contributed only one song in the studio or joined the band on stage for one concert. The last time I recall this coming up was a few months ago when someone insisted that singer Michael Bolton was a former member of Journey. It turned out that Bolton did sing with two members of Journey at a tribute, but that did not make him a former member of the band.

The issue with Roseman is somewhat different in that as far as I can tell, no one is claiming that he is a former member. In that sense he is similar to the one or two studio players who worked with Journey on one or two tracks of the Raised on Radio album. I know the article includes Mike Baird, Bob Glaub, and Randy Jackson; perhaps the case could be made that Roseman contributed to Journey on that level, which in my opinion would be grounds for inclusion.

Stylistically, the way to add verifiable facts to a Wikipedia article is to be as concise as possible and to integrate the new text fully with the existing text.

I'm moving this conversation to the Journey discussion page. The article (along with everything else in Wikipedia) is collaborative; sounder minds than mine may have thoughts on this.

Dave Golland ( talk) 14:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

You can also include the information in the trivia section, which is currently invisible in the main article but can be found by clicking the "edit" tab." The entire trivia section should probably become its own Wikipedia article. Dave Golland ( talk) 14:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Was it Stevie Roseman or Tim Gorman who played keyboards for "The Party's Over"? Dave Golland ( talk) 02:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

THE PARTY"S OVER (HOPELESSLY IN LOVE)

Hi, from previous (with minor corrections) keys on "The Party's Over" (Hopelessly In Love) was Stevie Roseman. This 1981 album "Captured" was reissued 10/03/06 Columbia/Legacy CD #82876 85896 2. Keyboard player listed is Stevie Roseman. Credit listing in on insert page 15 lines 8 & 9.

This same track also appears on the recently reissued 3 CD set called Journey Time3 Columbia #C3K 96419. Keyboard player listed is Stevie Roseman. Credit listing is on insert pages 11 thru 14. The previous reference for keys on this track was flawed and amended. Alotofsunshine ( talk) 07:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've added the references you cite, added Roseman to the list of former members, edited the band's template, and edited the pages of the keyboardists he replaced and was replaced by (Rolie and Cain, respectively).

I recommend you edit Tim Gorman's page (if necessary) and create a page for Stevie Roseman. Dave Golland ( talk) 01:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Dave, thanks for your help. Could you possibly demonstrate how to edit that errored page and create a new one for Stevie as I do not feel comfortable with protocol yet. Stevie "Keys" Roseman has been involved in numerous musical projects dating back to the early 1970's but I don't have a clue how to begin to put this together. With a template I could begin to add content in the manner which Wikipedia expects this to happen. Thanks in advance. Alotofsunshine ( talk) 08:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I've edited Tim Gorman's page.

To create Stevie Roseman's page, simply enter his name in the search box on the left and click "go," then follow the instructions. Don't worry about getting it wrong; there are so many editors on Wikipedia that any formatting mistakes you make are bound to be corrected sooner rather than later. Just be sure to add as many references as possible. Dave Golland ( talk) 15:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The discrepancy between Steve Perry's Journey dates in the band page and the singer's page are due to the fact that Journey was inactive for some years while the singer was not. And so, during the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Journey page correctly lists Steve Perry as lead singer, because nobody else was and because he was the most recent (and would return as) lead singer. But from Steve Perry's perspective, he was not lead singer of any band during those years. Dave Golland ( talk) 15:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Journey84 started out editing this page about three weeks ago with good edits mainly pertaining to RIAA ratings and other statistical information. But for about a week, without writing anything on this talk page or even a brief edit summary, Journey84 has been repeatedly deleting the paragraph on Dave Marsh and re-inserting the Kenny Sykaluk story.

The Dave Marsh paragraph is NPOV and chronicles an important aspect of the band's history, i.e. the fact that the critics disliked Journey even (perhaps especially) when the band achieved its greatest success. I removed the Sykaluk story a year ago while re-writing the entire history to deal with a "magazine" tag (see "Stylistic rewrite in progress," above). If either of these substantive aspects of the entry are to be changed, they should be changed only after we have achieved some sort of consensus here on the talk page.

I think that Journey84 is, however, acting in good faith as a novice user who simply doesn't know about the importance of edit summaries and the talk page yet. In the meanwhile, I will revert.

Dave Golland ( talk) 01:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dave,

Yes, I have been deleting the Dave Marsh section of the article, because I thought it was a journey "basher" writing negative things again. I understand your intent now with the use of the article. Sorry about that.

Also, be aware that I have been trying to update Journey's album sales to 47 million. They have been recently updated by the riaa, beacause revelation has gone platinum. I also tried to put that revelation has gone platinum at the end of journey's history, but someone is deleting it also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Journey84 ( talk • contribs) 03:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Journey84!

I'm very glad you responded, and I'm glad to know that I was right--you are indeed acting in good faith. It's good to have another active editor on the entry.

I noticed the sales update. After Wiki libs reverted two or three of your edits yesterday, I guess I was getting a bit frustrated and wasn't careful to ensure that that change (and the one referring to platinum status) stayed in when I did my last revert last night.

I am eager to discuss the Sykaluk story with someone who wants to include it. I think it's actually a very important story in Journey's history (or at least in Jonathan Cain's history) and I only took it out because I felt it fell under the "magazine style" category (meaning it wasn't encyclopaedic). If you can make a good case here in the talk page for why it should be included in an encyclopaedia, then that should be adequate to put it back in.

Dave Golland ( talk) 14:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the warm invite! I too, think the Kenny sykaluk article is important in terms of the band's history. I understand your concern for the story not to be in a "magazine style". If you could think it over and maybe insert it in more of a encyclopedia format, that would be great. I will also think it over and see what I can do.

Journey84 ( talk) 23:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Great!

One thing we have to consider carefully is how to include the story using a neutral point of view (NPOV). Another is that it has to be sourced (which is easier because it was discussed in VH1's Behind the Music: Journey.) On NPOV, the danger is writing it like a fan (which I am, and presumably you are)--too gushing, too glorifying. "Here's Journey being heroic," that sort of thing.

I think the way to approach it might be in terms of its importance to the historical development of the band. And that's where I'm starting to regain my ambivalence about including it. Did it have anything to do with the breakup? with the decision to fire Smith and Valory? I'm not sure. It certainly says something positive about the character of the people involved, especially Jonathan. But that would tend to argue for its inclusion on their individual entries, not the band's entry.

So basically I'm currently stumped. Ideas please!

Dave Golland ( talk) 18:08, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering if anyone thinks its important and relevant to include that MTV did a documentary of the band during the raised on radio tour. They videotaped the band during their mountian aire festival concert in 86 and also did interviews with each member.

Journey84 ( talk) 05:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me! Dave Golland ( talk) 15:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello all,

I was wondering how you guys feel about adding a "Legacy" section towards the end of the article. We could include how Journey influenced rock/pop music overtime, bands they have influenced, and what they brought to popular music.

Let me know what you think and if you have any ideas.

Journey84 ( talk) 19:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a great idea! Consider putting it at the end of the "History" section, as a sub-section following "Lead Singer Replaced Again." Dave Golland ( talk) 15:42, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I have written some info on their legacy/influence on music and other artists. Its under the "Lead Singer Go ahead and delete info you dont think sounds good, add any information you think is important, and have fun!

4.68.248.136 ( talk) 19:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Well done! Dave Golland ( talk) 23:16, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Dave!

4.68.248.136 ( talk) 16:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't care much for the legacy section, which seems to rather gush and consists of only two references. One of the references is not fully cited — what is "Time 3 booklet"? Is it a reliable source? Who claims, for instance, that Journey "contributed to the success of MTV during its first few months of existence" and "made it acceptable for male rock singers to sing slow love songs"? I wonder how much of this is due to OR or to non-RS cites. Perhaps we could clear it up? Phiwum ( talk) 19:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Someone should elaborate on the references to the insert booklet from the Time (Cubed) album. Should also include a date (of release for the album). Dave Golland ( talk) 21:46, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Should the booklet count as a reliable source for information on the band's legacy? I have not seen the booklet, but it's promotional material, right? Even if it contains material written by an independent party, I'd have to wonder whether it is really a reliable source. Phiwum ( talk) 22:18, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Like any source used in history, it should be thoroughly interrogated, but can be cited for material that is factual (to the best of our knowledge). I've found much of it to be factual and some of it less so. It is indeed promotional, and therefore POV, but references can be POV as long as the editor citing them maintains NPOV. (If we eliminated POV references from Wikipedia there wouldn't be much left for many entries.)

I don't know who made the claim that Journey influenced MTV or made the ballad macho, but I don't think the Time (Cubed) booklet is a reliable source for that (and as I recall, it never mentioned those things). One of the most important things mentioned in the booklet (in my opinion) was the fact that Journey had a lead singer before Perry and after Rolie (Fleischman), a fact that had been omitted from the Robyn Flans book and had been basically ignored by the band's "official" histories since the release of Infinity.

It's no secret that I disapprove of much of Journey's promotional material (not to mention their current management). In October 2002 I published a point-by-point rebuttal to the abysmal band history put out that month by Azoff Management. My knowledge of the band's history is based on my site's original and republished collection of historical interviews and reviews. Wikipedia editors should feel free to cite them as needed.

Beyond that, we should all feel free to improve or clean up sections based on Wikipedia standards. I think Journey has a legacy that should be discussed following the standards of NPOV. Clearly, the section needs work.

Dave Golland ( talk) 06:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Seems to me that we are much in agreement, then, on what should be included in a legacy section and the appropriate use of promotional material as a source. I hope, then, that you or someone else will give the current section the attention it needs. Sorry, but I'm not qualified to do so. Phiwum ( talk) 13:56, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

...why do the wikilinks of band members keep getting removed except from the "band members" section? The point of wikilinks is to help users navigate between articles; a reader who comes upon a name for the first time wants to be able to click on it that first time; having to do a CTRL+F to find wikilinks defeats purpose of making wikilinks so easy to add in the first place. Wikipedia:Wikilink#General principles says "link only the first occurrence of an item" and Wikipedia:Wikilink#What generally should be linked says that "relevant connections to the subject of another article that will help readers to understand the current article more fully" should be linked. In my opinion, this edit satisfies both criteria; it is the first time the names are listed, and the names are relevant connections to the subject matter. Jazz Man 20:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC) (It should be noted that the reason I wikilinked Randy Jackson in the first place is because I saw his name when reading this article, and wanted to find a link to his article but couldn't.)

I agree. But I have been laboring under the assumption that in articles like this one (rock bands, sports teams, etc.), current and former members are only wikilinked in a dedicated section. At some point about a year ago someone cited a rule explaining this and I have since forgotten the source. I think it might have had to do with the infobox, which at one point listed former members as well as current members, and Wikilinked all of them.

Go ahead and add Wikilinks to the first mention of all current and former members. I won't undo them.

Dave Golland ( talk) 15:07, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll do that now. For me the best policy is ease of use; consistency comes second. Jazz Man 18:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello all,

I have been researching the worldwide album sales figures for Journey and 99.9% of the relevent websites cite their album sales around 75-80 million. I have been including those sales figures in the introduction, but 216.56.86.10 keeps changing the figures to 100-179 million for album sales. They are citing this website as a reference: http://www.livedaily.com/news/14364.html, which states nothing about Journey's album sales. Maybe someone can help me out and justify what they have found for worldwide album sales.

Journey84 ( talk) 18:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Your edits are more trustworthy by default because 216.56.86.10 is not a registered user. Keep undoing, but beware of the three-revert rule. Dave Golland ( talk) 14:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Any thoughts as to whether or not Don't Stop Believing should have the 'g' at the end or go with Don't Stop Believin'. I know the song was originally Don't Stop Believing, but over time the apostrophe has been used, even noted on the bands website. Thoughts?

Slypig ( talk) 18:22, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I vote for whatever the original album says. Dave Golland ( talk) 16:11, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Journey fits squarely into the hooky arena rock genre as spelled in the referenced article "Journey: A Profile of the Arena Rock Balladeers". According to that article they were only prog rock before 1977 when they shortened their songs and added Perry. Those two albums were not successful at all and are not indicative of their essential genre. Hard rock? They sound pretty squishy to me. Ghosts&empties ( talk)

Arena rock isn't a genre. The field is for genres only. There are currently 3 in the infobox that are valid and have been placed following discussion and consensus. If you wish to add another you must propose your change here and wait for approval. Sounding squishy is a personal opinion one in the extreme minority of opinions) Genres can only be determined through consensus. The Real Libs- speak politely 02:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Wiki Libs. The fusion era (prog rock) included three albums, and to date Journey has released fourteen original albums (and one EP). Three out of fourteen is statistically significant (about 21%). As for hard rock, that includes all three of the fusion albums plus nearly half of the songs on the remaining ten. Dave Golland ( talk) 13:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

A statistically significant fraction (about 95%) of the people who have ever heard a Journey song would disagree. Ghosts&empties ( talk) 22:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

What do you guys think of including glam metal as a genre? I usually consider Journey gam metal, but I don't listen to them very much so maybe they aren't at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.6.101 ( talk) 13:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

IMHO, Journey is neither glam nor metal. Dave Golland ( talk) 14:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

He's played more with Yazawa Eikichi than with Journey(I believe he's still touring with him) and on numerous other bands and artists' records and live. Considering he was a session musician here I don't see why it should redirect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.35.225 ( talk) 19:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand, which gig is more noteworthy? Anyway, it sounds like you're making the case for his having his own page again. No argument from me.... Dave Golland ( talk) 02:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Ross Muir's E-book, originally available at FabricationsHQ and now serialized in the Editorials section at The Journey Zone, relates the story of Steve Augeri's lip-syncing period with copious and technical references including band insiders. It is a relevant, documented part of the band's history that should not be whitewashed or covered up. Dave Golland ( talk) 14:00, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me, or...?

It is interesting that Steve Perry is a naturalized US Citizen of Portuguese lineage and Brazilian birth ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Perry_(musician)) though the Journey wiki (ref. #38) devotes a portion of the entry to the race and nationality of their new lead singer and not their first, best one. Much talk about 'racism' and Filipino Arnel Pineda and how he was discovered on YouTube ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnel_Pineda), and his Oprah appearance seems to take a skewed view of the facts. It is said that Journey is no longer just an 'American' band - they are a 'World' band. The Journey wiki does not even touch on Perry's origins; why not? But Pineda's origins are clearly mentioned. You have to read about Perry on his wiki entry to discover where he's from, and even then, it's vague as to how he came to the States. For me, it proves we have far to go to get over the fact that America STILL does not fully acknowledge its own native citizens, but serves to define differences between native-born Americans and everyone else. Who cares where Pineda is from? I don't. If others do, why don't they care as much where Perry is from? Though everyone is invited to partake in the American dream, not everyone is defined as an equal, with the only attribute of being able to dream qualifying one to partake. Do you think Neal Schon weighed the nationality attributes of Pineda before 'hiring' him? I'd be curious to know. For an area as multicultural as the San Francisco Bay Area, where Journey is from, where Perry grew up as a teen, where tens of thousands of Filipino Americans live, is it fair to say that a Filipino is more 'American' ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filipino_American#Dual_citizenship), than a Brazilian, or any other non-US country that we do not have territorial influence over? If being Filipino is better than being Brazilian, as far as America's opinion goes, Pineda's nationality would naturally be less significant than Perry's, not more. If the question of whether rock music fans are racist is the issue, let's talk about the origins of rock and roll, and squash it quickly.

American is a term, an adjective, to define citizenship and devotion to the flag and freedom and the principals and duty to preserve its existence, not race, not heritage. Whether the members of a band are American or not, to 'define' the band, is really irrelevant, unless they take up a rifle and stand a post to defend the flag. Can they still bring it? No, not without Steve Perry. Will I buy their album? I might. Will I buy their concert ticket? Certainly. That's all that matters, right?

Now, I've been a fan of Journey since I was born and knew the words to their songs in the seventies. I can pull karaoke with the best of them. I am from the SF Bay Area. I am an Iraqi War veteran and a college graduate who studied culture. So I feel I am able to weigh in, here. And if you wonder what my race is, and why this bothers me so much, because I am American, does it matter? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.85.246 ( talk) 05:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I think what sets the difference is not ethnic origin itself but as you've mentioned Perry is a naturalized US citizen(I guess he was already a US citizen by the time the joined the band); whereas in Pineda's case, he was directly 'plucked' out of the Philippines. The dude is not even fluent in English, he can speak some English but he has a thick accent(as compared to 1.5 and 2nd generation Americans) and is struggling with words during interviews. I think the reason why Journey released that statement in defense of Pineda is because of what I have stated above, he was flown from the Philippines to the US for an audition. And some people came out complaining that an Asian man straight from Asia is fronting one of America's legendary bands. That being said, Pineda is not an American citizen and he needs five years of residency before he could apply for it but I don't think he will. If I'm not mistaken he has work visa, not immigrant visa. So most likely, Pineda will remain a Philippine citizen. Something that makes the difference.

Edit: I've trawled the web and Pineda does not have any plan to immigrate to the US. He only comes to the US when working with Journey. Otherwise, he stays in the Philippines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.232.82 ( talk) 13:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

• Comment - You don't think this is something for WP:ECCN, I hope, 97.113.85.246? Boldly remove the contested material; discussion will follow... Doc9871 ( talk) 09:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

At Jethro Tull's wikipedia page we can see a very interesting Member History Timeline, which shows when each member entered and left the band, and when the albums were released - would be interesting seeing this here too! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.196.51.87 ( talk) 12:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

This entire section is in violation of the WP:TRIV guidelines for lists of trivia. Most of the section is unsourced and full of non-notable information, and therefore faces mass deletion unless rewritten to comply with wikipedia policy. magnius ( talk) 14:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the information should be sourced, but not that it is non-notable. The general consensus among most editors of this page is that these references in popular culture make a statement about how Journey is more than just a rock band but has become a "concept." A bit over a year ago I moved the basis for this section over from a dedicated page.

Let's encourage that it be sourced as much as possible, and perhaps the top of the section should explain what I just said.

Dave Golland ( talk) 12:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Evenn with sources, it is still an indiscriminate list of non-notable trivia that violates WP:TRIV. We really don't need a list of films and TV episodes that Journey songs have appeared in, so that will be the first casualty of a cull. It is enough to say that their songs have featured in many films and television shows, and offer a few of the more notable examples...but "Wheel in the Sky" was played on a recap segment of the sci-fi show Supernatural." is a completly unnecessary piece of filler that adds nothing but useless bulk to the article. We also don't need pointless information about the bands posters being seen in the background in films, or the fact that a snippet of a song can be heard on a car radio in an episode/film. The gameshows section is being culled right now, it's ridiculously unencyclopedic and non-notable. magnius ( talk) 12:27, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Dave Golland ( talk) 16:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree, as well. Why is it that almost every wikipedia page on rock bands is littered with references to 'The Simpsons' and 'Family Guy'? Is there someone out there who feels it is their duty to list every time a musician gets mentioned on the 'The Simpsons'? I find it odd that under the listing 'Television' there is no mention of Journey's 1979 performance on the television show 'The Midnight Special', yet here we have both 'The Simpsons' and 'Family Guy' references. This is useless and uninformative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bty86 ( talk • contribs) 06:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

After a year, it seems clear to me that drastic action is needed. When I first put it in, I thought the section was useful. Now I think it adds too much work to those of us who are serious about the page. We are constantly revising additional mentions of Journey in current TV shows. A brief paragraph at the end of the history stating that the music of Journey has been heard in countless television shows and movies and been the these song for sports teams (etc.) should suffice. Objections? Dave Golland ( talk) 16:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'm pulling the trigger. The regular users have had ample time to comment. Dave Golland ( talk) 14:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that the German Music Charts are not represented in the studio albums discography portion and I havent been able to figure out how to add a section for "German Music Charts" but if someone knows how to do that they can add that the album Revelation debuted in Germany at #35 in the studio albums section.

Thanks,

Journey84 ( talk) 21:03, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

What exactly were the "undercurrents of racism" that resulted in a supposed handful of Journey fans rejecting Pineda as a lead singer? This article doesn't say, and the cited source kind of handwaves over it as well, implying that there were a few offensive posts on random message boards. This mini-paragraph needs to be removed, improved, or at least given a "weasel words" tag, which I think I'll do. Thunderbunny ( talk) 06:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

For the "undercurrents", do a search on YouTube for any of the current Journey's videos featuring Arnel Pineda, and you'll see a handful of posters making racist comments about Pineda. It happens too consistently to be random -- there's a couple known YouTube accounts (NoSteveNoJourney is the most notorious) that appear making the same comments on almost all of Pineda's vids. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.118.3.225 ( talk) 04:39, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

...so some random guy, that could be a Journey fan or some bored teenager, signed up for a YouTube account under the name NoSteveNoJourney and obsessively posted the same or similar comments on a bunch of YouTube videos. Gee, that's so interesting. Seriously, you just basically rephrased what I said above, that the "racist" response to Pineda appears to be limited to a handful of anonymous Internetters that could be enumerated with two hands. That's one variation of Wikipedia's working definition of weasel words...turning "this one guy on this message board" into a phenomenon of encyclopedic significance. Thunderbunny ( talk) 07:24, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that the information on Steve Perry's debut is incorrect. I was at an outdoor concert in August of 1977 (Super Bowl of Rock Series - Soldier's Field) and Steve Perry was introduced as the new lead singer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.59.102.18 ( talk) 15:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Several band members have said that Perry was "tried out" during the Fleischman tour. Dave Golland ( talk) 04:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I believe these edits are in good faith, but there are some problems and so they must be discussed here.

1. Dunbar's firing: According to the Flans book, Dunbar was fired because of musical differences with Perry. If there is other information which would result in a change in the way the firing is described on the page, user must provide a reference; one cannot simply remove the Flans reference.

2. Removal of other references (discography, etc). Users should not remove any references unless they can provide a replacement. If the reference link is no longer valid, users should say so in the edit summary and the ref should be replaced with "ref needed."

3. Soto's firing: to say that it happened because the band was looking to return to the Perry-style sound may be true but without a reference is POV. Better to say that Pineda is closer to the Perry sound than Soto--but even that would require a reference.

That said, it's always great to have another committed contributor!

Dave Golland ( talk) 13:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Kudos to Discographer for the first substantive improvement to the page in months! I've made a few tweaks, but I can't seem to get it to read "Lead Vocals," etc., without the dot replacing the space between the two words. Anyone know how? Dave Golland ( talk) 18:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Dave! Thanks for what you done here, too. Best, -- Discographer ( talk) 18:44, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

The Template:Journey singles is a mere duplication of Journey discography#Singles and does not serve a useful purpose as a navigational box. A navbox serves as navigation not information. As a discography, it is redundant to an article that already exists. As a navbox, there are too many unlinked items and those song titles should be removed. I'll go ahead and do it, but I wanted to bring it to the attention of others here. -- Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars ( talk) 17:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Continuing my edit summary: "Non-American" is too vague, as "American" does not refer only to people from the United States, but also to people from Canada and Latin America. "Foreign national" is appropriate in my opinion because the band is identified as a band from the United States, therefore "foreign national" should refer to a citizen or subject of a nation other than the United States. Dave Golland ( talk) 00:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Removed jazz fusion since it is used in the wrong context here...probably based on a complete lack of knowledge as to what jazz fusion really is. A previous edit summary alluded to some cort of previous discussion and consensus however this edit summary turned out to be a lie as no consensus to add jazz fusion exists here. Members of the Jazz project should be invisted to attend such a conversation as they will help to educate those who obviously do not know what jazz fusion is. 198.164.219.128 ( talk) 23:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree 100%. Many editors are interested in "genre warring": there are warning templates at WP:WARN under "Frequent or mass changes to genres without consensus or reference" for the worst of them. Many editors try to exercise their uncited opinions of what bands fit into what genres, and it's always going to happen. No way is Journey jazz fusion, and this article about drummer Steve Smith (who did play jazz fusion outside of Journey) clearly shows that Journey was neither "jazz" nor "jazz fusion". Be prepared to watch the page, as oftentimes genre labeling can be troublesome. Doc talk 23:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, the first three albums may have had vaguely fusion-y undertones, but not enough to warrant a place in the genre field. 124.179.233.176 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC).

For one editor--especially an anonymous one--to refer to a statement as a "lie" is inflammatory, disruptive, and unwarranted. Until recently, the genres for the Journey page were set and rarely argued; I call that consensus. In any event, let's take a look at the way jazz fusion is defined on Wikipedia.

At the Jazz fusion page, the definition reads that jazz fusion "developed in the late 1960s from a mixture of elements of jazz such as its focus on improvisation with the rhythms and grooves of funk and R&B and the beats and heavily amplified electric instruments and electronic effects of rock. While the term 'jazz rock' is often used as a synonym for 'jazz fusion', it also refers to the music performed by late 1960s and 1970s-era rock bands when they added jazz elements to their music such as free-form improvisation." We also have the following line in the third paragraph: "Some progressive rock music is also labelled [sic] as fusion." Two points about this:

First, Wikipedia defines progressive rock as a sub-genre and jazz fusion as a genre. If Journey fits a sub-genre, the correct format for the Journey page genre list is the over-arching genre, not the specific sub-genre.

Second, Journey's original incarnation (from 1973 to 1976) would seem to meet the jazz fusion definition because it was, to paraphrase the quotation above, a 1970s-era rock band which added heavily amplified free-form improvisation--a jazz element. All four members of the band enjoyed long, heavily amplified, improvisations, from Schon on electric guitar to Rolie on the Hammond B-3 organ to Valory on bass to Dunbar on the drums.

To address Doc's point on Steve Smith, few would disagree that Journey with Steve Smith not jazz fusion. What we're talking about here are the years before Steve Smith joined the band--for that matter, before Steve Perry joined the band. The Journey most people remember--from Escape and Frontiers, with Perry, Schon, Cain, Valory, and Smith--is not what we're talking about.

I can (and will) revert the change one more time before running into the three-revert rule. But I would hope that the user(s) who disagree that Journey was originally jazz fusion (or as I would prefer it, even though it's not listed as a genre on Wikipedia, "rock-jazz fusion") would hold off on changing the genre list until this is fully discussed--preferably by more non-anonymous users. If, however, anonymous users continue to remove reference to jazz fusion from the Journey page, I would hope that some of the other longtime editors of the page would step in.

Thanks, Dave Golland ( talk) 16:54, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Agree with Dave. I will back him up on this. Best, -- Discographer ( talk) 20:09, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Hadn't thought of it like that: as long as we agree that the "classic" late '70's-mid '80's lineup was not "jazz fusion", I don't have a problem listing the original band as such. Personally for me the whole "genre" thing is a quagmire of opinions on virtually any band, and I usually steer clear of the issue. Cheers :> Doc talk 00:16, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Anybody who knows anything about early Journey (or) did a small amount of research would know that there 2nd. album was called "Next" hence (2nd. album !".I am trying to be kind here,but for those young up and coming players this is good information and i really don't see how it could have been over looked.These may not have been there top selling albums,but the music and the musician ship was unsurpassed buy many groups of this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.95.94 ( talk) 04:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

According to the first reliable source I look at, Look into the Future came out in 1976, while Next came out the following year, in 1977. [5] Now, their official website also indicates this chronology. [6] So, apparently the "Next" meant "next after Look into the Future". Cheers :> Doc talk 05:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I notice a stylistic shift between LITF and Next. The music is edgier, harder; there are more vocals; and Neal takes on lead vocals for the first time. It might have meant "We're not selling any albums; what shall we do NEXT?" ;-) Dave Golland ( talk) 17:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

There has been some discussion in the past of band member status for this page, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Journey_%28band%29/Archive_1#Stevie_Roseman_.2F_Tim_Gorman . I can't find the rest of that discussion, but I do remember that at some point a few years ago, we came to a consensus on these definitions:

Session player: someone who recorded with Journey but did not tour
Touring musician: someone who toured with Journey but did not record with them
Former band member: someone who recorded and toured with Journey

This way we avoid all sorts of POV issues, from Wikipedia editors' own opinions ("Arnel Pineda is not a member of the band because his contract may have a termination date") to the opinions of band members themselves (like Neal Schon, who behaves as if Steve Augeri was never a member of the band). We also wanted to avoid getting into specific definitions of the roles each former member played (i.e. "who was more important to Journey, George Tickner, Robert Fleischman, or Randy Jackson?") So it shouldn't matter what Randy Jackson says, nor should it matter what his fans and/or detractors say (as a judge on American Idol, I'm sure he's gained an awful lot of detractors; as one of the "Perry hires" following "Street Talk," there's always going to be a camp of Journey fans opposed to his membership status). The fact is he recorded with the band ("Raised on Radio") and toured with the band (truncated 1986 tour).

We can certainly continue to discuss this definition, but it shouldn't change because an anonymous Wikipedia user seems to have a beef with Randy Jackson.

Dave Golland ( talk) 13:39, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

The most recent edit by the anonymous user attempting to move RJ out of "former members" notes that "the band never considered him a member." This is what we call circular logic. We need to know who was in the band before we can say what "the band" considered. And "the band" is not a monolith; I have no doubt that Neal Schon considered RJ less than a full member; he apparently feels the same way about Steve Augeri and Jeff Scott Soto. By the same token, Steve Perry probably saw RJ as being as much a member as Jonathan Cain. And what is a "full member," anyway? When Ross Valory and Steve Smith were fired, that exposed the sham that, as the "Frontiers and Beyond" video put it, "Journey functions as a democracy." Journey had and has a manager, and had and has powerful personalities among its musicians. There has always been an interplay between these personalities over power within the band. In 1978, Herbie Herbert was able to fire Robert Fleischman because he had more power than Neal Schon and Gregg Rolie, and they were influenced by him. In 1986, Steve Perry was able to fire Steve Smith and Ross Valory because he had more power than Herbie and Neal. In 2007, Neal was able to fire Jeff Scott Soto because he has more power than any other members, and the manager (Irving Azoff) doesn't seem to be all that involved.

Changes to our definition can't be individual: if we redefine "member," the new definition must be standard and apply to everyone. One possible additional qualification for being a member would be contributing to the songwriting. But I'm not sure we can do that and still be consistent with the definition of "band." There are bands that don't do any of their own writing. And solo artists: is Meatloaf not a member of his own band, because all of his songs are written by Jim Steinman?

And, again, do we really want to get into categorizing which musicians were more important to the history and development of the band than others? How many categories of musicians should we have? "Wrote songs, toured, recorded, fired people;" "Wrote songs, toured, recorded, acquiesced to the firing of people?" To try to do so would be to ask for a really long POV edit war. And any definitive categorization along such lines would require statistical and psychological analyses of every person ever associated with the band, from Steve Perry down to the guy who strung wires for one show back in 1976. Any volunteers to do that? Anyone want to donate the money needed to do it under scientific conditions?

With that said, it seems to me that the best and simplest definition is the one we have (outlined in the previous post). If there is a Wikipedia standard for such matters as this, let's find out. How does Styx define former members? REO Speedwagon? The Allman Brothers?

Anyone whom has worked in the music industry, as I have and do, will know that a person hired to play on an album does not automatically become an official member of the band if said person is also hired to play with said band for live dates. In is commonly held that there are, indeed, several different levels of "officially" held member status (most of those levels indeed ONLY being known to band, management and label). But, further, the minimum level of official status to be held is commonly held within the industry to occur when said person is listed in the liner notes of an officially released (i.e. non-bootleg) album with person in question having his or her name in the same section and in the same font as the names/credits of the rest of the band members. (Another sign of official member status occurs when said person in question appears in a posed band photo within such a release's artwork, or indeed any type of picture in said publication if there is only one band photo and it is not posed, per se. An example being a performance or otherwise candidly taken photo.) Having said this, I do not believe that Jackson was an official member of the band known as Journey. And I have never met or talked to anyone whom believed the contrary. It is a shame that we can't have the Journey WP entry moderated by someone with such a knowledge of these facts. Journey is certainly worthy of that.

Dave Golland ( talk) 17:20, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

the transition resulted in what Marin Independent Journal writer Paul Liberatore called "an undercurrent of racism."

should be replaced with:

When he was hired over a singer from a Journey cover band, he also had to learn to deal with an undercurrent of racism among some Journey fans.

as per: http://www.marinij.com/ci_7826224?IADID=Search-www.marinij.com-www.marinij.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.33.126 ( talk) 00:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't see how that is a misquote. The phrase "an undercurrent of racism" appears in the quotation cited, and it is not out of context. It seems to me that the change you propose is stylistic. Dave Golland ( talk) 03:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

It looks like there is some sort of smear campaign happening against a person named Brian Camelio who was incorrectly identified as a former member of Journey (studio musician). From what I can tell, a number of blogs stated this and they are now trying to make it fact by posting it here. There is no evidence from any recording or tour that this is true and it seems to be misinformation being perpetuated a by number of bloggers so they do not have to admit they did not fact check their work or need some sort of sensationalism for their story. I have removed the reference that was posted and cited back to one of the blogs that misquoted it. Please keep an eye out for them trying to re-introduce this into this article. Jamesrand ( talk) 21:46, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

So the BBC News article would be wrong? Maybe, it would be a first step to write to the BBC and explain that. I have reinserted this, since this is verifiable. Note that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" (from Wikipedia:Verifiability). -- Edcolins ( talk) 09:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Good suggestion. I will write them now. Jamesrand ( talk) 03:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

While it's often said that one cannot prove a negative (i.e. "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"), it is more verifiable that Camelio was not a member of Journey than that he was. According to http://www.journeymusic.com/pages/bio , http://www.journey-tribute.com/journey/resources/faq/faq-s2.html , and http://www.journey-zone.com/Sections/Band/journey.htm, Camelio was not a former member of Journey. Both the Journey Wikipedia Page and Camelio's Wikipedia page use the same citation, a BBC source, which itself cites no references. (Longstanding readers of my Journey writing, please note that I am "holding my nose" while citing the "official" band bio from journeymusic.com.) Dave Golland ( talk) 19:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

• Time magazine says Brian Camelio was a "former member of Journey and Phish." [7]
• paidContent says he "worked with" Journey and Phish [8]
• NYconvergence says "he used to jam with" Journey and Phish [9]

I think we have independent confirmation from reliable sources that there was some relationship, but not what that relationship was.-- Nowa ( talk) 23:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I've GOT the Flans book, and nowhere does it state that Dunbar didn't get along with Steve Perry. That may have been the case, but attributing that to Robyn Flans' Journey book is wrong; Flans does state that Dunbar wasn't happy with the change & with stuff that the band *in general* were pulling, but Perry is not specifically mentioned. Full text & articles of the book are here: http://holyshrineofjourney.com/flans.html Zenfrodo ( talk) 19:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Excellent catch. Dave Golland ( talk) 19:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Not checking over the whole entry, but this stood out on first read: ", Don't Believing became a huge succes after the Sopranos and GLEE and a series of tours with the present line-up. And that leading to the top-selling catalog track in iTunes history on 2009. ^{[1] [2] [3]}"

The vandal can't even spell correctly!

Added: User "Wagino 20100516" please don't revert text *without checking the content*. You're reverting text that isn't even proper English were it spelled correctly (which it isn't). It's obvious vandalism, and you auto-revert and send me a msg saying *I'm* vandalizing the entry? I don't think so. Put a modicum of effort in, mate, and at least read the revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.163.20 ( talk) 08:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Well done. Dave Golland ( talk) 17:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The page currently has two pics of the band: one from the current era and one from the Augeri era. It would be great is someone has one from the Perry era that can become part of CreativeCommons. Anyone? Dave Golland ( talk) 13:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Santana	Frumious Bandersnatch	Journey	The Babys	Bad English	The Storm	Hardline	Abraxas Pool	Soul SirkUS
Gregg Rolie		Gregg Rolie			Gregg Rolie		Gregg Rolie
Neal Schon		Neal Schon		Neal Schon		Neal Schon	Neal Schon	Neal Schon
	Ross Valory	Ross Valory			Ross Valory
	George Tickner	George Tickner
		Aynsley Dunbar
		Robert Fleischman
		Steve Perry
		Steve Smith			Steve Smith
		Jonathan Cain	Jonathan Cain	Jonathan Cain
		Randy Jackson
		Steve Augeri
		Deen Castronovo		Deen Castronovo		Deen Castronovo		Deen Castronovo
		Arnel Pineda
		Stevie "Keys" Roseman (session musician)
		Larrie Londin (session musician)
		Bob Glaub (session musician)
		Prairie Prince (touring musician)
		Mike Baird (touring musician)
		Jeff Scott Soto (touring musician)						Jeff Scott Soto
		Herbie Herbert (band manager)
		Irving Azoff (band manager)
	David Denny
	Jack King
	Bobby Winkelman
			John Waite	John Waite
			Wally Stocker
			Michael Corby
			Tony Brock
			Ricky Phillips	Ricky Phillips
					Kevin Chalfant
					Josh Ramos
					Ron Wikso
						Todd Jensen
						Johnny Gioeli
						Joey Gioeli
Mike Carabello							Mike Carabello
José "Chepito" Areas							José "Chepito" Areas
Mike Shrieve							Mike Shrieve
Alphonso Johnson							Alphonso Johnson
								Marco Mendoza
								Virgil Donati

Best, -- Discographer ( talk) 18:18, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

That Arnel Pineda is in the infobox and Steve Perry is not is absurd. john k ( talk) 07:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree, but from what I can tell, it is the Wikipedia standard to list only current members in the infobox if the band is still active. Steve Perry was the lead singer of every one of the band's top 40 hits (unless one of the excellent tracks from Arrival got in, or "After All these Years" charted). So it would seem logical that he rate the infobox. But then that begs the question: by what standard do we determine who rates the infobox? If Steve Perry, why not Gregg Rolie also? What about Steve Smith? At some point there would have to be a cutoff, but who would decide where?

I was editing the E.R. page when that show ended three years ago, and as I recall, the current cast ( Angela Bassett, John Stamos, etc.) was in the infobox until the final episode aired, at which point the infobox reverted to the original cast ( George Clooney, Anthony Edwards, etc.). But even if that were to happen were Journey to break up today, the original members did not include Steve Perry. Looking at the current E.R. page, I see that every actor who made primary cast over the fifteen seasons is now listed; the same could presumably apply to Journey, which would include Perry.

Why not now? Some would reasonably argue that a five-member band which includes only two original members (three from their height of popularity), and not their longtime and clearly most-popular frontman, is no longer the same band. If you replace the head and legs, is it still the same person?

I must confess, I don't know anymore. Maybe the infobox should simply include all eight former members. What does everyone else think?

Dave Golland ( talk) 04:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

My view is that we exercise jugment in each individual case, and list the most important members, as revealed in reliable sources. The idea that NPOV only allows us to use the same rigid formula for every band seems deeply flawed to me. john k ( talk) 15:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I vote for all current and former members but not the touring or session musicians. This would include thirteen names. I also think the list should be in order of the date joined the band, with the original five alphabetical. Dave Golland ( talk) 21:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Also no managers. Dave Golland ( talk) 21:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

That would seem reasonable. john k ( talk) 03:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The page wouldn't let me remove "current," so I just listed the eight musicians who toured and recorded with Journey as "past members." Dave Golland ( talk) 13:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Arguing that the band is not the same anymore due to the presence of only two founding members doesn't hold weight as the band still has the same name, and what's more, the classic Journey lineup also only featured two original members. The Wikipedia rule is that current members of the band are featured in the current section by the order of which they joined (as is done), and that former members are listed in the former members section by the same criteria. There is no cut-off, if they're official members then they have a place in the current or former members sections (depending on whether they're an active member of the band or not). See Template:Infobox musical artist for additional reference. Burbridge92 ( talk) 10:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

We can and should continue to discuss this. I just read the template Burbridge92 linked in the post above and it doesn't define "official" past members. Comments continued in "Status of former members" below. Dave Golland ( talk) 20:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused about the status applied to certain band members in the members section lower down the page. Randy Jackson is given official status despite the article saying he was hired on a session basis for the album and continued to act on a stand-in basis during the tour. Prairie Prince and Jeff Scott Soto are listed as "touring musicians", yet the article clearly states that Soto "officially" replaced Augeri as vocalist and the Prince is more or less referred to as a founding member. The members section currently suggests that Journey were formed as a four-piece without an official drummer, but the written content of the article doesn't indicate the same. Remember, just because someone didn't perform on any studio recording doesn't mean they were never officially in the band. Burbridge92 ( talk) 10:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Burbridge92 makes some good points here, especially as pertains to the inconsistencies between the history and the past members list in the infobox. We've been omitting musicians who only recorded or only toured from the infobox, in my opinion, to keep the infobox from being overly long, and the infobox template doesn't prohibit us from doing that. It's clear that some musicians were more a part of Journey than others, and while there's no question that people like Gregg Rolie and Steve Perry were full members of Journey, it's been tough to find more objective criteria than

"Musicians who toured and recorded were full members, those who did one or the other were not."

Including Prairie Prince as a full member because he helped found the band has some logic, but he never recorded with the band. If we include Prince but not Mike Baird or Jeff Scott Soto, we're creating a longer definition:

"Musicians who toured and recorded were full members, and those who did one or the other were not, except for founding members."

But there may be less here than meets the eye. Was Prairie Prince really a founding member of Journey, or was he a session player brought in so that the band could start playing gigs while it decided what it's next move would be? I'm not sure. Sometimes finding a drummer is the most difficult part of forming a band, and in December 1973 Rolie, Schon, Valory and Tickner seem to have really just wanted to get out there and start performing again. Prince was already a member of The Tubes when Journey was founded; perhaps he figured he could play a few extra gigs with another local band and make some quick extra cash. Initially the Golden Gate Rhythm Section (the band that became Journey) was just intended to provide backup for other acts, after all. Perhaps it was when Rolie, Schon, Valory and Tickner decided to start songwriting and performing as an act in their own right than Prairie Prince realized he couldn't be in both bands and went back to just being in the Tubes. I'm not saying this was the case, but you'd have to agree it's a plausible scenario.

Then there is the question of the definition of "official." I've found "official" pronouncements from the band to be highly problematic over the years (see, for instance, "Op/Ed: The New Band Bio"). For more than a decade now, "official" appears to be whatever Neal Schon says it is. Now, I wouldn't argue that Neal's opinion is meaningless, but it shouldn't hold any more weight than any other evidence. So when journeymusic.com told us in December 2006 that Jeff Scott Soto was the band's "official" new lead singer, one must take such a pronouncement with a grain of salt. Soto has yet to be credited with any songwriting, did not appear on any recording, and was released by July 2007. The band's news release appears to be the only primary source claiming that this was "official." If we choose to include Jeff Scott Soto, that would change the definition to:

"Musicians who toured and recorded were full members, and those who did one or the other were not, except for musicians whose membership was 'official' according to the band press releases."

If we are to include Prairie Prince AND Jeff Scott Soto--assuming for the moment that Prince was indeed a founding member of the band--the definition would read like this:

"Musicians who toured and recorded were full members, and those who did one or the other were not, except for founding members and musicians whose membership was 'official' according to the band press releases."

This question of "official" is the same problem I have with statements to the effect that Randy Jackson wasn't an "official" member of Journey. Official or otherwise, he recorded and toured with the band. If we are to exclude Jackson on the grounds that Neal Schon says he wasn't in the band, or there have been news articles stating that he wasn't in the band, the definition would look like this:

"Musicians who toured and recorded were full members, except when longtime members say they were not; those who did one or the other were not, except for founding members and musicians whose membership was 'official' according to the band press releases."

The more we keep going, the more clunky the definition becomes, and the less tied to verifiable evidence. That's the beauty of the current definition: show us an album sleeve or a promotional flyer and we know exactly who recorded and who toured with Journey. The bottom line for me is that whatever rule we agree to use, there must be verifiable evidence clearly placing musicians on one side of the line or the other--inside or outside "full" membership. Short of simply including all musicians in the infobox (which we certainly could do), I haven't seen a verifiably reliable alternative to the current rule. That said, the history should be edited. Prairie Prince's brief membership should be described in a way that is more verifiable (i.e. "Rolie, Schon, Valory, and Tickner founded Journey, and enlisted The Tubes' drummer Prairie Prince to play with them," or something like that) and the "official" language should be removed from the brief discussion of the Jeff Scott Soto interlude.

Dave Golland ( talk) 21:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)