This template was considered for deletion on 2017 October 12. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

Rock music Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This template survived a discussion on TfD. See Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 February 13. - Splash ^talk 01:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC) reply

@ 28bytes, Koavf, FlightTime, and Jax 0677: Can you guys discuss this before continuing this senseless edit warring? All four of you should really know better than to just revert and say discuss it without you discussing it further. That being said, old band members are normally placed on the second row, despite their status in their band prior. See {{ Queen}}, {{ The Beatles}}, and {{ The Rolling Stones}} as just a few examples. Now, can this be discussed before continuing? Nihlus 14:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Thank you Nihlus for (re-)starting this discussion. I had already started a discussion at Talk:Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers which is a more visible location. Perhaps we can keep the discussion in one place? 28bytes ( talk) 14:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

It's been archived (perhaps a bit too quickly); nonetheless, I think it would be best to have to discussion on the template's talk page since it is about the template. Additionally, the discussion that was had obviously didn't so much since you and others were just edit warring on it today. Nihlus 14:55, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I've restored the discussion from the archive, since the archiving was premature. I hope you will read the discussion, as your comparison to bands like Queen, which carried on despite their singer's death, is more than a bit off-base, unless you've got some indication I haven't seen that Mike Campbell et al have announced they're going to do something similar. If so, please share your source. 28bytes ( talk) 15:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I don't care either way about Petty as that is a unique case. However, Stan Lynch and Howie Epstein should probably be in the second row. Nihlus 15:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

I agree on that point, since the band continued after their departure. 28bytes ( talk) 15:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

This is not difficult. Look at (e.g.--choosing randomly, altho they are template that I'm sure I've edited before) Template:Grateful Dead or Template:Led Zeppelin, the members of this defunct band are all listed in alphabetical order. Having some random order is not helpful, so I don't understand why others are insistent on imposing some unique sorting scheme. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 17:16, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

What makes you think listing "Tom Petty" as the first member of "Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers" is random? 28bytes ( talk) 17:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Those are not analogs to this, as those are not bands that are (some guy) and (his band). Closer example is Huey Lewis and the News where Huey Lewis is listed first. He dies, is there a band going around just called The News with Huey Lewis as a former member? No, don't be ridiculous. -- Spike Wilbury ( talk) 17:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

This is on its way to getting listed among the WP:LAMEest editing wars ever. (Right up there with T/the Beatles). Tom Petty formed this band, they have never recorded independently of Petty (though he has recorded independently of them) and it would be WP:CRYSTAL at this point to treat this band as if it they might continue to put out albums just as "The Heartbreakers," which they have not done so far. If they do so at some point, at that point they would basically be a different band altogether. Another comparison is Template:Bruce_Springsteen, where the E Street Band has a separate article, in part because they HAVE recorded with other musicians independent of Springsteen. (see E_Street_Band#Southside_Johnny.2C_Ronnie_Spector_and_Gary_U.S._Bonds) Montanabw ^(talk) 17:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Seems pretty straightforward that it should be this:

That goes in order of debut with the band on both levels, and puts the former members underneath the current ones. Obviously, this would change upon news about the bands future plans. There's no reason to jump the gun on moving Petty himself. Nihlus 20:44, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

That looks good to me, Nihlus. 28bytes ( talk) 21:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Agreed. -- Spike Wilbury ( talk) 22:19, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Agree. - FlightTime ( open channel) 22:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC) reply

Tom Petty is a former member of this band. The Band were created as a backing band for Ronnie Hawkins but I don't think anyone would suggest putting his name first. Even if we put Petty's first (sure, go for it), just do alphabetical order afterward. ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:12, 27 October 2017 (UTC) reply

No, the current order (with Campbell second and Tench third) makes more sense. That's the way they present themselves on their album notes, and that's the way the template's been forever. I see no benefit in changing it. 28bytes ( talk) 11:51, 27 October 2017 (UTC) reply