From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLinkin Park has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 10, 2007 Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 20, 2007 Good article nomineeListed
January 7, 2008 Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article


Semi-protected edit request on 13 June, 2021

In the genres section, Rap Rock is listed as one, but I believe that Rap Metal should be added to the list as they are mentioned in the Rap Metal page. Also they already have Nu Metal listed so why not Rap Metal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImPhanty ( talk • contribs) 03:27, 14 June 2021 (UTC) reply

We are not going to include rap metal. There are already six genres listed. Rap rock is one of them. That covers it. Rap metal is mentioned in the musical style section of Linkin Park's article. Bowling is life ( talk) 04:04, 14 June 2021 (UTC) reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:49, 29 June 2021 (UTC) reply

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 08:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC) reply

Add Hard Rock to Linkin Park's genre

I think that it's fair to add hard rock to Linkin Park's genre, because that is definitely a genre in which the band has dabbled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngadBhogal ( talk • contribs) 18:26, 17 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Hard rock

Linkin Park, especially in its early days, definitely has hard rock roots and vibes to it. I think that we should include it here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngadBhogal ( talk • contribs) 19:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Do you have a reliable sources that identifies 'hard rock' as one of Linkin Park's genres during their earlier years? I'd argue it's a vague/loose genre and not one of the band's definitive genres. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  22:00, 17 August 2021 (UTC) reply
@ StarScream1007: It's sourced and mentioned in the musical style section. However, I don't think it needs to be in the infobox. We have enough genres listed and at least hard rock is mentioned later in the article. Bowling is life ( talk) 02:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 10 September 2021

The third paragraph of "2015–2017: One More Light and Bennington's death" states that Toni (Chris Cornell's daughter) was Bennington's goddaughter. I can't find any references of any sort to support that statement- rather, all relevant articles related to the tribute state, quote, "Bennington was the godfather to Toni's younger brother, Christopher Nicholas" [Example source, https://time.com/4887615/toni-cornell-chris-cornell-tribute/]. Similarly, I can find general references about Bennington stating a similar association.

I propose the following change: Toni (who was also Bennington's goddaughter) appeared with OneRepublic to perform "Hallelujah" as a tribute to Bennington and her father. --- > Toni appeared with OneRepublic to perform "Hallelujah" as a tribute to Bennington (who was the godfather to her younger brother, Christopher) and her father. Wispered ( talk) 16:40, 10 September 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Wispered: On Chester Bennington's article there is also a source stating that "The Associated Press reported that Bennington was godfather of Cornell's son, Chris." Nothing more. Your idea of change is correct; let's see other opinions. Oroborvs ( talk) 17:28, 10 September 2021 (UTC) reply
I'd agree with @ Oroborvs: and @ Wispered:. The sources provided in Chester's article along with sources yielded from a quick search only verify that Chester is the godfather of Christopher Nicholas. This change seems appropriate. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  18:20, 10 September 2021 (UTC) reply
 Done —  LauritzT ( talk) 12:59, 12 September 2021 (UTC) reply

Phoenix

Can occasional keyboards be added to his duties? Initially singularity omega ( talk) 10:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Define occasional? Has he been formally credited for keyboards on any album? If it's a couple of studio tracks or live performances, then probably not. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  17:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Shinoda's announcement

Mike Shinoda has just announced that there's no new music and no tours planned for the near future. Should we change "is" to "was" and change the "Years active" back to what it was before? (Remove the (hiatus) part and that's it) Tkgaynor ( talk) 04:24, 24 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Tkgaynor, unless there's any change to the situation, they're on hiatus and the lead/infobox should reflect this. They're inactive, sure, but they haven't broken up, so we don't need to treat it as such. 4TheWynne (talk • contribs) 05:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC) reply

Wanted to get a consensus before I even thought of doing anything, so thanks for answering! Tkgaynor ( talk) 07:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC) reply

It should show them as on hiatus/inactive since 2017 in all parts of the article. Sergecross73 msg me 12:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC) reply
I have updated the timeline to reflect that. At least, that's how it's done on Wikipedia when a band goes on hiatus, right? Seelentau ( talk) 18:29, 29 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Orphaned references in Linkin Park

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Linkin Park's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Richards":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 18:54, 2 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 10 December 2022 

136.167.248.117 (
talk) 07:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
reply

In the third paragraph of the "Legacy and Influence" section, it is said that Linkin Park has third and sixth most timeless songs on Spotify. I think that this is very subjective, and the public playlist that it refers to is simply a random playlist called "The Most Timeless Songs of All Time", uploaded by Jason Kottke, a playlist with only 644 followers. Compare that to more influential playlists with millions of followers, and I would deduce that Mr. Kottke is simply trying to promote his playlist through Wikipedia.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. In addition, what you have mentioned above is supported by source from Design & Trend (ref number 262 to be precise) and not some random playlist you mentioned nor did the source mentioned such playlist. Please discuss this further on this talk page before opening another edit request. — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝) 07:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Add 'Pop' to the genre list

As much as I hate to say it, One More Light as a few songs that are definitely more pop than their earlier stuff. 'Battle Symphony' is one of the songs 82.3.235.223 ( talk) 17:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC) reply

You're not wrong per se, but usually on Wikipedia, once we have more specific genre (" pop rock") we don't add the more vague ones ("pop"). We similarly wouldn't add "heavy metal" or "rock" because we already have things like " nu metal" and " alternative rock" on there. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC) reply
correct Connorj2341 ( talk) 13:29, 6 September 2023 (UTC) reply

Years Active

Should "hiatus" be removed from the years active section of the infobox and 2023 be added since they just released "Lost"? GamerKlim9716 ( talk) 00:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply

No, it's a 20 year old recording that got spruced up and released. Sergecross73 msg me 00:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply
I agree, should still be considered hiatus from making new music (need this to be explicit otherwise releases from the labels such as anniversary releases, etc could mean that they are still active) 240B:10:2981:DB00:6827:A508:4F6D:CA15 ( talk) 16:24, 22 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2023

There should be a change in the "Years Active" section from 1996-2017 to "1996-present (with limited activity)". Since they are slowly re-releasing unheard songs and are making reissues of past albums (Hybrid Theory and Meteora). DPartner432005 ( talk) 17:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC) reply

 Not done: See above. SkyWarrior 17:10, 24 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Band formation

I just wanted to mention, and there's a good chance I'm wrong, the description of Mike forming the band with Rob and Brad is wrong. I've read elsewhere that Mike and Mark formed it and the others joined on after that, though that might be wrong. I just figured I'd mention that. Vincinel ( talk) 02:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

We need to write Wikipedia according to what reliable sources say, so to make any changes, we'd need some new sources. Sergecross73 msg me 13:22, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply
I'd agree with Sergecross. There are multiple reliable sources that Say Mike, Rob, and Brad founded LP. [1] [2] [3] --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  14:00, 22 June 2023 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2023

Remove "Not to be confused with Lincoln Park." Change "1996–2000: early years" to "1996–2000: Early Years". Change "2004–2006: side projects" to "2004–2006: Side Projects". Change "2017–present: hiatus and 20th-anniversary reissues" to "2017–present: Hiatus and 20th-Anniversary Reissues". Change "Musical style and influences" to "Musical Style and Influences". Change "Legacy and influence" to "Legacy and Influence". Kbzamb ( talk) 07:39, 3 August 2023 (UTC) reply

 Not done - Many of these are not errors - on Wikipedia section titles, only the first word is capitalized if they aren't titles of releases. So things like "Legacy and influence" are correctly capitalized. Sergecross73 msg me 10:50, 3 August 2023 (UTC) reply
Change "1996-2000: early years" to 1996-2000: Early years. Change 2004-2006: side projects to 2004-2006: Side projects. Change "2017-present" to 2017-Present. These first words of section titles need to be capitalized. Kbzamb ( talk) 17:29, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply
No. As @ Sergecross73: pointed out, the first word should only be capitalized if it's proper noun or title. Please see MOS:SECTIONCAPS for Manual of Style information. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  17:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 5 August 2023

Replace images, especially the first one. The picture has to be clear. Replace the picture with one where you can see each band member. Kbzamb ( talk) 17:15, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

We are limited to images that have an open or free license. We cannot use images are are protected by copyrights or prohibited from commercial/derivative usage. It's near impossible to make a fair-use claim for a non-free image that contains the entire band since there are already free alternatives readily available. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  17:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2023 

5.24.101.221 (
talk) 17:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC) linkin park are over after chester bennington has died
reply
Linkin Park has not officially disbanded. The last official update was they are not working on any new material or touring and thus in a hiatus. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  17:32, 27 October 2023 (UTC) reply

The recent lawsuit by a former bassist over recordings before Hybrid Theory

A former bassist has filed a lawsuit against Mike Shinoda, Joe Hahn, Rob Bourdon, Brad Delson, Machine Shop Records and Warner Bros. Records claiming unpaid royalties for songs that were re-released on the Hybrid Theory 20 Year box set. 75.90.152.222 ( talk) 18:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC) reply

We'll need reliable sources reporting on it before it can be added to the article. Sergecross73 msg me 19:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC) reply
It appears the story checks out [4]/ However, I'm not sure if this belongs in this article or the Hybrid Theory article. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  21:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC) reply

Note discouraging change from "is" to "was"

It has been six years since Linkin Park has released music, and frontman Mike Shinoda has stated that they have no plans to reunite or release more music. At what point should the band’s fate be switched from the present to the past tense? SaltieChips ( talk) 02:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC) reply

The last official comment from the band was they have no no tours or new music in the pipeline. It should be switched to "was" when the band makes an official announcement. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  02:55, 30 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Fort Minor as Spin Off?

I noticed Fort Minor was added a spin off band in the Infobox of this article. I believe it's more of a side project than spin-off. The only main member of the project in Mike Shinoda. Joe Hahn from Linkin Park also appears in Fort Minor, but on one track. I'd be more inclined to consider them a spinoff if they had more Linkin Park band members in the project, akin to Zwan or Jefferson Starship. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  23:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC) reply

I agree with your point, but I feel like I see it done wrong so frequently that it's difficult to identify when it is appropriate... Sergecross73 msg me 00:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Arbitrary invented criteria about numbers of band members is useless. Ultimately, we're gonna need reliable sources explicitly describing these acts as spin-offs, or else it's just one editor's subjective opinion against another, which are exercises in original research. Left guide ( talk) 13:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I think that's kind of what they're getting at though - you'd probably be hard pressed to find reliable sources that describe essentially a side project as a "spinoff". Sergecross73 msg me 15:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Prior to May 2022, Infobox Musician would use the "Associated Acts" parameter, which actually had clear criteria/documentation in the template that dictated what bands were considered "associated acts", ie the number of shared members, joint-albums, or multiple collaborations. [5] This was was all changed in May 2022 after a discussion that resulted in the associated acts parameter being removed and replaced with spin offs/spin offs of. [6] Unlike the Associated Acts parameter, no formal documentation or criteria was ever created to determine what is actually considered a spinoff. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  01:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I actually agree with the removal of the 'associated acts' parameter since that term doesn't seem widely-used by reliable sources; it opens the door to coatracking and needless disputes as evidenced by the template talk RfC you linked. For example, I Google-searched for sources directly stating that Jay-Z is an "associated act" of Linkin Park, and I could not find any. So how would that be handled for less black-and-white situations? Even if there's a local "consensus" about its requirements at the template talk, such requirements are still rooted in WP:OR and WP:SYNTH since it's a vague subjective term. "Side project" and "spin-off" seem to be widely-used by reliable sources, so those make for appropriate infobox parameters. We don't need formal documentation or criteria for spin-offs because like virtually everything else on Wikipedia, reliable sources are what determine what is actually considered a spin-off. Left guide ( talk) 03:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Reliability of sources

Does this count as a reliable source? The end of the 9th paragraph says Matranga also contributed to tracks for the Deftones and Linkin Park hip-hop spinoff, Fort Minor. The publication looks like an independent local magazine, with the bottom of this page showing an editorial staff. As for Dead by Sunrise, I found this from The Telegraph which is paywalled, but shows the following quote on Google preview: Dead By Sunrise. A spin-off project that operated alongside Linkin Park, Dead By Sunrise was formed by Bennington in 2005 as a harder, more ... Are these sources reliable? Left guide ( talk) 21:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC) pinging involved editors @ Дисмод, GaterJuv, Bowling is life, Sergecross73, and StarScream1007: reply

@ Left guide: Yeah those look like reliable sources. Bowling is life ( talk) 22:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Yeah, I still don't think it's a particularly common sentiment...but technically it seems like those sources would probably suffice. Sergecross73 msg me 22:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC) reply
I'd agree with Serge, these meet the criteria for WP:RS, but I don't think it's a popular opinion that Dead by Sunrise or Fort Minor are spin offs on Linkin Park. --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  01:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Wikipedia simply follows what reliable sources say, not common sentiment or popular opinion. Left guide ( talk) 03:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Not necessarily true. WP:UNDUE says articles should not focus on uncommon opinions or aspects of a topic compared to those that are more popular or well-supported. A further quote for the section, "If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, it does not belong on Wikipedia, regardless of whether it is true, or you can prove it, except perhaps in some ancillary article." I know undue weight is geared towards removing fringe theories or unpopular beliefs, and does not necessarily apply to infobox templates. Can we find more reliable sources that say Dead by Sunrise and Fort Minor are spin-offs? Thanks, --  StarScream1007   ►Talk  14:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Eh, no, not quite - that's really only part of it. Reliable sources are merely the bare minimum to be considered for inclusion. We're still not required or compelled to include every single thing there's a source for. Things like WP:UNDUE or WP:FRINGE could still apply here, and things like WP:NOT and WP:INDISCRIMINATE, while not relevant here, can apply in other situations. Sergecross73 msg me 16:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC) reply
Both of you make very valid points; I hadn't thought of this issue from the due weight angle. It's admittedly a bit difficult to find additional reliable sources that describe these acts as spin-offs, so maybe it's not a mainstream view. Technically it would satisfy WP:V and WP:RS which there seems to be agreement on here, but not necessarily WP:NPOV policy. On that note, I'm going to remove the remnants from the infobox. I appreciate the ongoing input. Left guide ( talk) 02:09, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2024

Linkin Park is an American nu-metal band from Agoura Hills, California. 2409:40E0:48:5CE:ACA1:6DF9:FB1:9299 ( talk) 15:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. - FlightTime ( open channel) 15:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Linkin_Park&oldid=1219741664"