Talk:REO Speedwagon

Untitled

When editing, REO Speedwagon, their management and employees are advised to review Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View Policy.(NPOV) --REO157

One obvious error : "In My Dreams" peaked at #19 on The Billboard Hot 100.

NOTE - Someone should do a fact check on this article... For example the statement "Cronin recorded one album with the band, 1972's R.E.O./T.W.O., but left the band soon after, ...." does not match with the credits for 1980's High Infidelity. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure this needs fixing.

Dear "No Expert": Please read the ENTIRE paragraph, and you'll note no "fixing" is required. The facts perfectly match Hi Infidelity's credits: "Cronin recorded one album with the band,1972's R.E.O./T.W.O., but left the band soon after, over missed rehearsals and creative disagreements. Ridin' the Storm Out was the band's third release with as many singers; this time Mike Murphy took the microphone. Murphy stayed on for two more albums before Cronin returned to the fold in 1976."" ~~

REO157,

I have noticed the following problems with your version of the article on REO Speedwagon:

NPOV Problems -Your version claims that the group's lineup changes were a "stinging blow" to fans, which is obviously your personal opinion and not factual information -You insinuate that the group's recent tours have not been successful, which is not true -You have repeatedly removed information about the new album that the band is currently working on -You purposely omit important information regarding the band's recent releases. Specifically, you state "the band re-recorded many of the same songs from 1977's Live: You Get What You Play For, and distributed this live concert under four separate titles including 2000's Arch Allies." This seems to be an attempt on your part to mislead fans. Only a few of the songs in this live release are the same as the ones from the 1977 album, and these are all new versions. In addition, each of the four separate releases is different from the others.

Other Problems -Your version has three separate sections that all list album information. This is very confusing, so I combined them into one section. However, you have reverted it back to your version multiple times. -You have repeatedly restored superfluous interwiki year links which were removed by an administrator.

To sum this all up, while none of the information in your article is false, much of it is misleading and there is a very obvious bias against the current incarnation of the band. This failure to "paint the whole picture" is a blatant violation of Wikipedia's NPOV Policy.

Due to the problems described above, I have made several attempts to clean up the article and make it more neutral. However, you have continued to revert to your version. In addition, I have made at least three attempts to reason with you, but you have ignored them and continued to revert the article. Unfortunately, you leave me with no choice but to request mediation if this problem continues.

Regards, KeepOnRollin

KeepOnRollin Edits

Dear new Wikipedian "Keep On Rollin": Although the input of uber-fans is appreciated to hype various bands and new their releases, please stick to the facts.

Perceived NPOV issues:

-I didn't author the phraseology "stinging blow" to describe the band's line-up changes. That was authored by long-time Wikipedian author and editor TRWeiss, and is accurate. The "Speedwagon" wikipedia entry is a composite of various editors over the course of several years, and reflects a consensus of public perception.

-The band's marginal "touring success" has been the brunt of jokes by various late-night comedians and others. Ironically, the band itself publicly acknowledged its touring failures on VH1's "Behind the Music" and admitted their situation was so desperate, they were forced to open for obscure puppet shows in South America.

-The band claims to have been working on a "new album" since its last release in 1996, and nothing has yet come to fruitition. In fact, the procrastination of the band has led the lead singer to joke he's the "Axl Rose" of rock.

-The band does not have any "new releases." In 2000, they re-recorded most songs from 1977's "Live: You Get What You Play For," and released 4 different versions of that concert under various titles including "Arch Allies," "Extended Versions," "Live Plus," "Live Plus 3," etc. These recordings are all from the exact same concert held in St. Louis in 2000. It is misleading to hype each of these albums as "new releases" or that they significantly deviate one from another.

-The band has released more compilation albums than original albums. It is not "misleading" or "confusing" to identify compilations accurately in the discography.

-Internal Interwiki links and external links are not "superfluous." In fact, your attempts to delete them have been repeatedly restored by administrators and editors.

Again, when editing, REO Speedwagon, their management and employees are advised to review Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View Policy.(NPOV)--REO157

REO157,

Thank you for your reply.

The phrase "stinging blow", no matter who authored it, is a matter of opinion and does not belong in this article. As you said, we need to stick to the facts. It may be a fact that the lineup changes were indeed a stinging blow to some fans, but certainly not all fans.

The evidence to which you refer regarding the bands tours is one isolated incident. I am sure you are well aware that some of the bands recent tours have been highly successful, such as the 2003 arena tour, while others have not been as successful. My most recent edit of this article acknowledges this, while your version insinuates that all of the recent tours were not successful.

It is true that the band has promised new material for ages, but they have recently claimed that a new album is currently being recorded and is soon to be released, although a release date has yet to be announced. When I added this information to the article, you repeatedly removed it.

You and I both know that the track listings of "Live: You Get What You Play For" and the 2000 live album are significantly different. In addition, your statement that the four different releases of this concert do not significantly deviate from one another is a lie. The "Arch Allies" release is a double feature which also includes a concert by STYX, while the version that REO Speedwagon released on their own, "Live Plus", includes several songs that were not included on "Arch Allies". I as well as several other users have attempted to add this information to the article, but once again, you repeatedly removed it.

Your definition of compilations is far different from mine. Many of the releases that you identify as compilations are made up of material that had not previously been released, which, in my opinion, means that they are not compilations. I know that in some cases the songs had been previously released, but the recordings were new. Even most of the compilations with previously released material included at least one previously unreleased track. There is obviously a fine line between the terms "compilation" and "new release", and I don't see why we must make such a big deal out of differentiating between the two.

I have not attempted to delete any interwiki links. On the contrary, yesterday I painstakingly restored several interwiki links that were deleted by other users. Several interwiki year links were removed by an administrator, KillerChihuahua, because they were irrelevant to this article. However, you repeatedly restored them. As for the external links, I removed some of them because they are not directly affiliated with the band in any way, and they are all owned by the same person. As I'm sure you are aware, that person has filed numerous frivolous lawsuits against the band and therefore it is not surprising that all of those websites have the same biased agenda as your version of this article. Thank you. --KeepOnRollin

KeepOnRollin:

-You complain the phrase "stinging blow" used by other Wikipedia editors is biased, but refuse to acknowledge your own hyped phrases describing the band's "international stardom" "selling out venues all over the United States." REO Speedwagon are not "international stars" nor are their concerts sell-outs. Likewise, blaming the band's commercial failures over the past 20 years on "lack of promotion" is equally preposterous. Your preoccupation with inflating the band's commercial success makes your motives appear less than genuine.

-The band has been promising new material almost 10 years. Wikipedia isn't the proper venue to launch commercials about products that don't exist.

-Anyone can look up the track listings to "Live: You Get What You Play For" and compare them with "Live: Plus" and note they are essentially the same. Likewise, each of the 4 separately-titled releases from REO's 2000 St. Louis concert are nothing more than a marketing ploy to sell the exact same concert recording with different packaging. This topic is not worthy of debate.

-It is confusing and misleading to list previously released recordings merely repackaged with new art work with original albums. If you don't understand what a "compilation" album is, perhaps you should look it up. Compilation Album

-Your attempts to delete Interwiki links and external links were repeatedly restored by Quidam65, RexNL, Bhadani, Wayward and many other administrators and editors. You were repeatedly warned Wikipedia is not a place to vandalise or remove perfectly legit information. --REO157

REO157,

The phrase "international stardom" refers to the peak of the band's success in the early 1980s, but I am more than willing to remove that phrase if it is such a problem. As for the issue of whether or not concerts are selling out, all of the concerts I have attended in recent years were sellouts or very close to sellouts, but I know that you have probably been to more concerts than I have so I'll take your word for it and change the wording. I do not see what is so preposterous about blaming the band's marginal success on lack of promotion. The band's more recent (I'm talking last 15 years or so) releases were not as well-promoted as some of their earlier work. Nevertheless, I must admit that no single factor is to blame, so I will change the article accordingly.

As I already stated, although the band has promised new material for some time, this is the first time they have stated that they are currently recording an album, and I will take that statement at face value until I hear anything to the contrary. My latest edit states that "In 2006, REO Speedwagon is recording a new album, but a release date has yet to be announced." This is hardly a commercial about a product that doesn't exist.

A simple internet search easily reveals that "Live: You Get What You Play For" and "Arch Allies" only have three songs in common. In addition, they contain different recordings of those songs. These albums are far from "essentially the same". In addition, the "Live Plus" release includes extra songs, while "Extended Versions" contains a bonus video. I agree that this topic is not worthy of debate, especially since it is difficult to debate anything if you fail to acknowledge the facts.

Many of the albums you list as compilations are not "previously released recordings merely repackaged with new art work". I am not familiar with all of these compilations, but I know that at least five of them contain material that had not previously been released. I would also appreciate if you would help me understand why you have a separate section for album chart data. Why not just put that information in the discography section as has already been done for the singles?

You have accused me numerous times of purposely deleting interwiki links, but you have yet to produce any evidence of this. As I stated in a previous message, I recently restored several interwiki links that were deleted by other users. Perhaps I missed a few, but I certainly did not delete any on purpose. I have also already explained why I deleted certain external links. You have still not explained why you restored the interwiki year links that the administrator KillerChihuahua deleted. --KeepOnRollin

KeepOnRollin:

Again, your preoccupation with over-exaggerating the band's success and blaming the band's commercial failures over the past two decades on "lack of promotion" makes your motives appear less than genuine. REO might sell out your local bar and grill, but poor concert attendance and sagging ticket sales have been the hallmark of this band since the late 1980's.

Since the commercial failure of REO's 1996 album, the band claims they've been working on new material. Under your theory, the Wikipedia entry should announce: "In 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and now 2006, REO Speedwagon has claimed to be recording a new album, but a release date has yet to be announced." Your obsession and preoccupation with hyping a "new album" by this band is comical.

Listing "Arch Allies," "Live," "Live Plus 3" and "Extended Versions" as original recordings when all 4 albums were recorded from one St. Louis concert is misleading. Clearly, the separate packaging was nothing more than a marketing ploy to sell more albums of the exact same recording.

You acknowledge unfamiliarity with REO's compilation releases. Obviously you should familiarize yourself with those releases before attempting to extensively edit a band's discography. It confuses and misleads readers when re-packaged previously released studio recordings are listed as original albums.

Both you and your sock puppets have been warned repeatedly about deleting interwiki and external links. Link deletion warning Here are excerpts:

Please do not delete sections of text or valid links from Wikipedia articles. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. RexNL 16:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

And for this you may be blocked, if you do that with bad intention. --Bhadani 17:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

According to your edits, you are not correcting information, but rather removing it. 1 2. The above says you are welcome to edit, but it doesn't say you are welcome to vandalise. As per WP:WIN Wikipedia is not a place to vandalise or remove perfectly legit information. --Winter 22:34, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia is not a place to vandalise or remove perfectly legit information. Despite repeatedly warnings over the same attempted edits, you have insisted on violating Wikipedia policy. --REO157

REO157,

What is this "preoccupation with over-exaggerating the band's success" that you speak of? I have already changed phrases like "international stardom" and "lack of promotion" at your suggestion. I can tell you that in recent years I have personally seen REO Speedwagon sell out venues with capacities in the thousands, but I also removed the phrase "selling out" because as you indicated, not all of their concerts are sellouts.

As I've told you twice already, the band has only recently claimed to be recording a new album, and I don't see why you have a problem with me adding that simple fact to this article.

Your repetition of your previous arguments regarding the 2000 live recording is still not convincing me of anything, but I suppose we can list them as compilations if you so insist.

As for me and my "sock puppets", all I can say is PROVE IT! I hate to burst your bubble, but the administrative warnings you cite are from January while I did not start editing this article until March. Furthermore, the vandal editor's IP address traces to the University of Texas at Galveston. I have never been to Texas and I am not associated with anyone there. --KeepOnRollin

KeepOnRollin, Edits which vandalize Wikipedia by removing legitimate sources originate from these IP addresses User:129.109.204.92, User:69.123.183.136, User:128.226.226.179 and User:71.38.150.18 which exactly mirror your edits, and mysteriously have no other edits in their contribution histories. Their histories are linked here:

[[1]]

[[2]]

[[3]]

[[4]]

REO157 01:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

REO157,

The edits by those users certainly do not "exactly mirror" mine. Most of those edits were simple reverts or obvious vandalism (i.e. repeated removal of the entire body of the article). Most of my edits were attempts to come to a reasonable compromise between the two versions of this article that exist. Your continued vandalism and refusal to discuss it leaves me no choice but to contact Wikipedia regarding your antics. KeepOnRollin

=== Characteristics of sock puppets ===

• Not surprisingly, sock puppet accounts usually show much greater familiarity with Wikipedia and its editing process than most newcomers. They are more likely to ...immediately join in edit wars, or participate vocally in procedures like Articles for deletion or Requests for adminship as part of their first few edits. They are also more likely to be brand new or a single purpose account when looking at their contributions summary. WP:Sock REO157 13:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

REO157,

That's all well and good but you still have yet to provide any concrete evidence that those IP addresses, which trace back to several different states, have anything to do with me. It is interesting that you start accusing me of being a sock puppet only after you ran out of other arguments. --KeepOnRollin

KeepOnRollin, Every single edit by each of those IP addresses was either blatant vandalism (removing the entire article) or perfectly mirror changes and/or deletions you previously proposed to this category. Since your vandalism attempts under various IPs were unsuccessful, you've now finally registered and re-appeared under the name "KeepOnRollin." You're not fooling anyone. Wikipedia is not the place to grossly inflate a band's popularity, deceive the public about the content of the band's releases or hype "new" material that's been in the works for over a decade. It is also not the place to delete legitimate links in an attempt to carry out a personal vendetta against a particular webmaster. REO157 17:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

REO157, that is simply not true. However, since you have ignored the evidence I have provided and ignored my recent requests to discuss the article's content with you, it is impossible to continue this discussion. KeepOnRollin

KeepOnRollin: Not only is it true, but you haven't provided any evidence to the contrary. It's futile to endlessly debate the same tired points you've already conceded. You've already admitted to exaggerating the popularity of this band and their commercial success. You've admitted your unfamiliar with the band's compilations and releases. You've admitted you deleted wikipedia links because you've got some vendetta against various webmasters who don't share your views. Frankly, instead of editing for Wikipedia, have you considered full-time PR work as a member of REO's paid staff?

If you want to make changes in the article, you need to justify YOUR changes, which you simply haven't done. Overhauling an article utilizing numerous sock puppets, then demanding that Wikipedians defend the entire history of modifications the community has collectively made won't earn you respect as a contributor. REO157 18:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I might add that the name of the new album HAS BEEN CHANGED AND THE RELEASE DATE IS SET FOR 4/03/2007. The new name of the album is "FIND YOUR OWN WAY HOME". For conformation, please visit [5] ~Lespaulrokker

Why does REO's web site continually get put below "REO FANS" web site, "speedwagon.info," and Gary's "official" web site? Why has Gary's site repeatedly been put higher than Kevin's web site? Is it because Gary is an original member? If so, why is Neal's web site not up there? Rmerik 22:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Current Status

I do feel there is a negative bias in some parts of this article. I don't know who is doing it. They may think they are being fair.

Obvioulsly, REO is not as big as we were in the Eighties, but our career is not in ruins. We chose to finance the last CD ourselves, since our management has promotion and distribution departments. Every band wants its own record label.

We were set for a major arena tour in 2007 with Boston, but then came the tragic death of Brad Delp. The Def Leppard tour this year involves nearly twenty shows, not just a "handful." Some of these extra buzzwords do seem to create a false impression.

Implying that the Arch Allies project is a recycled version of the original live album is not accurate at all. Our biggest hits did not exist during the first live album, and the 2000 version includes a ten-camera video.

It is true that we play a lot of casinos and fairs whenever major tours don't pan out. We know our fans like these intimate showrooms and family-friendly grandstands.

I know Wikipedia is not supposed to be a promotion tool, but an overly negative tone, based on inaccurate information, is harmful to the band and its fans.

ND —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nealdoughty (talk • contribs) 19:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

History

In the history section, it says: In 1971, GM gave the band rights to the name and logo. Where did this information come from? This statement is incorrect, as GM never had any connection to or ownership of REO Motor Car Company. REO was owned by White Motor Corporation from May, 1957 until August, 1971. It was then sold to F. L. Cappaert, who owned it until the 1975 bankruptcy.

Starlite64 (talk) 23:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Starlite64,

Thanks for the details. I remember Epic telling us they could not release the first album without clearing the name. They may have started their search with GM. I do remember seeing a letter from someone, giving us permission to use the name and logo for any musical purpose, along with related merchandise. Perhaps the trademark had been abandoned, I don't remember. I do know the band now owns it and has the paperwork. I only bring this up because some detractors of the group have accused us of stealing the name. Nealdoughty (talk) 01:05, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

WHO is Jake "Alby" Mooney? What did he play and when was he in the group. I don't remember such a person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nealdoughty (talk • contribs) 21:40, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably just someone inserting nonsense into the page. He made a few other nonsensical edits to other articles. --Mwalimu59 (talk) 22:09, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Neal, wasn’t Mel White an original member of the band, or did he at least not play an important enough roll in the bands formation to warrant a mention on the article ? Or, am I overstating his importance and significance  ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.147.58.133 (talk) 01:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't really remember Mel White, of course this was all a long time ago. Nealdoughty (talk) 01:55, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I did a minor edit to the page (changed caps on 'Reo to REO' but I noticed that was not logged in because it recorded just an IP address 204.152.235.217, which is a company of 8,000 to 10,000 employees (a shared IP). Sorry, I will make sure to log in before making any other changes. I thought something was strange when I could not find the 'minor edit' checkbox.Quebec99 (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Members

Why doesn't this article have a Members section? As it is, it's extraordinarily difficult to tell who played what and when without poring through the entire text of the article. Chubbles (talk) 17:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

If you think it would improve the article, you don't have to wait for someone else to do it. By all means, feel free to create the section yourself and add it to the article. --mwalimu59 (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm rewriting the lede

I'm rewriting the lede and it will be in a state of flux for a bit. Please bear with me. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 22:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'm done, I think. Hopefully, this gives a better perspective on the band's history as well as its current status. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hard times

Can we think of a more neutral title for this section besides "hard times"? Perhaps "Waning popularity" or "Declining popularity" or something? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 03:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Minor point - dating tour w/ Styx?

"Current" header in article has text reading "last year" in reference to a tour REO did (something regarding a cruise ship, Styx, Boston, members of Toto). Unfortunately "last year" has no meaning since the reader has no idea of when this reference was added. I don't know the actual year of the tour; would someone who knows please fill it in?

Tigger-ibby (talk) 08:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

You make a good point. That is why terms like "Currently" and "last year" are frowned on in favor of something like "As of October 2009". --mwalimu59 (talk) 16:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100808161408/http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=100890339&blogId=509425779 to http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=100890339&blogId=509425779

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

1911 Fire Truck?

From the linked article, the Speed Wagon wasn't introduced until 1915, and only some of them were fire trucks - unlike the delivery van in the illustration, for instance. This has passed into urban myth, but has anyone a reliable source? Ian Dalziel (talk) 19:37, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

"Psychedelic" rock?

I removed "Psychedelic" from the list of genres.[6] I'm hard-pressed to think of any songs that are psychedelic, but perhaps I'm forgetting some? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 09:18, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Cobra Kai reference

Season 1, episode 9 of the Netflix series Cobra Kai (titled "Different but Same", see Cobra_Kai#Season_1_(2018) has the two main characters bonding over an REO Speedwagon song that comes on the radio. Just noting in case any of the page editors think it's worth highlighting a recent pop culture reference.