Jump to content

Talk:Chuck (Sum 41 album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

length

[edit]

The album is 37 minutes 54 seconds long. I'm not smart enough to figure out how to put that in the albumbox. --Fermatprime 02:56, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Moron?>

[edit]

At what point does Moron begin because I've listened to the cd and have never heard the song. Or is it even on the Canadian vesion?DarkAvenger280 07:19, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

parental advisory

[edit]

Does this Sum 41 Album have a Parental Advisory, Explicit Content on it?

CoolChris 19:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pop Punk

[edit]

Pop punk?! WTF?? Have you listened to this album? I think it must be alternative rock/metal.

Is it not more hardcore punk kinda thing? It's definetly not pop punk though.86.153.34.221 (talk) 20:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All that holds no weight unless you find some sources saying the album is any of those genres. Timmeh! 21:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look at allmusic and Rolling Stone if your wondering why pop punk is back up there considering no one put up an arguement angainst my genre list 121.219.52.4 (talk) 02:01, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It mentions on two occasions in the Allmusic review of the album that it is hardcore — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Sources found for alt metal and alt rock lets use sourced genres

174.227.196.130 (talk) 15:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No let's use consensus and if you havce sources please share them here for discussion to avoid genre warring. Flat Out let's discuss it 10:28, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I removed pop punk from it's genre list because that seems to be the general consensus. A lot of Sum41's music is pop punk but this album is just not "poppy" enough to warrant the label — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrainPower3 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thrash Metal!?!?!?!WtF

[edit]

who was the moron who put thras metal in the generes!!!!!!!!!?????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.165.184.51 (talk) 03:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

         Listen to the end of 88, thats thrash  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.118.130.125 (talk) 14:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genre - this is getting rediculus!

[edit]

how come every time Alt Metal is there someone has to add Post-Grunge? and are you seriously saying there is no Punk at all in this album?? Lets list the reviews, I sear this is the only way to right these things:

allmusic - Pop Punk, Punk Revival, Hardcore, Metal

IGN - Metal, Punk (No Reason)

Rolling Stone - Metal, Pop Punk or("Equal parts Metallica metal riffery, Blink-182 pop hooks and Social Distortion meathead appeal")

The Guardian - Punk Rock, Metal

Personal opinion aside from this list it appears that the genres should be Heavy Metal (or Alt Metal if you must) and Pop Punk. Alt Rock and Post Grunge aren't mentioned in these reviews and should be removed. Duck610 (talk) 02:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I think it should be heavy metal and punk rock. Pesonally i think the album is also hardcore punk but there's no sources that agree with me there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.227.68 (talk) 18:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that I agree with you, I think melodic hardcore and punk rock are much more apparent than pop punk. However sources say Pop Punk and therefore it must be added. However right or wrong someones opinion is, on wikipedia personal oppinion means nothing. Ducky610 (talk) 02:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why does melodic hardcore and alternative metal keep getting removed when I add it with this source? http://www.herbmusic.net/album/8597-sum-41-chuck Realpunkmusic (talk) 22:38, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That looks like a user-generated source to me, hence unreliable. Kokoro20 (talk) 06:38, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Writers

[edit]

None of the songs say who the original writers were. Were the all written by the whole band? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.100.116.213 (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It says that all songs were written by Sum 41. No source though... DanielDPeterson (talk) 10:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noots redirect

[edit]

I don't understand why the search Noots redirects here when the word doesn't appear in the article or in the album. Sdmitch16 (talk) 22:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been 8 months, so I'm not sure anyone's concerned anymore, but for future reference, in case anyone else looks into this like I did, I thought I'd point out that "Noots" is one of the bonus track's names. Its in the article, but doesn't show up in your typical "control + f" search because the bonus track part of the track list is collapsed. Its debatable how useful of a redirect it really is, but usually "song to album" redirects are considered okay, so I don't think it especially needs to be deleted. Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chuck (album). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 24 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chuck (Sum 41 album). 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:57, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chuck_(Sum_41_album)&oldid=1215910464"