Talk:Kerplunk (album)

Reception

Reception section wasn't making sense and wasn't written too well, removed for now and will attempt to replace with references at a later date. Tbfoster (talk) 02:25, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

makes no sense

i removed the sentence "Billie Joe Armstrong said about the song "One of My Lies" that it was of a record no one has at Woodstock '94." from the album notes section as, aside from being worded very poorly it makes very little sense. especially when you consider the fact that the album was redorded in '91 so it would be kind of hard for a song off of it to be about an event that wouldn't take place for 3 years.69.211.149.52 18:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I think what it meant was that the song was on an album which nobody owned, which was said at Woodstock 94. It's not notable enough for the article anyway. -Joltman 10:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge

Discuss the merge of Dominated Love Slave and 2000 Light Years Away into Kerplunk here. --JoeBlowfromKokomo 21:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

680,000 = Platinum?

"As of June 2005, Kerplunk! has sold 680,000 units in the US, and is certified platinum."

I thought one million are required for platinum. -newkai | talk | contribs 11:06, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

680,000 units have been sold in the US.
worldwide sales have made it platinum. --JoeBlowfromKokomo 02:03, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Isn't Platinum status an RIAA certification though, representing only sales in America? Or is this "Platinum" status awarded from some separate international entity?Ringer7 04:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there's no such thing as "worldwide" platinum. Platinum status is based on individual countries sales rates by the appropriate music association body, ie Platinum in the UK is 300,000 for an album, 200,000 in Germany, 70,000 in Australia etc. I'm removing it since it's unsourced. 168.153.0.97 (talk) 02:04, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Exclamation Point in Title

I'm not sure that the exclamation point in the title is necessary, especially seeing as it is not included on Green Day's own website and they do include the exclamation point in the title of International Superhits!. The album cover itself doesn't even feature the exclamation point, only the back cover and a few other areas. I feel that, especially because the typeset of Nimrod and Warning have recently been changed, this must be fixed.Ringer7 04:38, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

That would be acceptable, only because the front and back cover are inconsistent. --PEJL 09:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

import the cd to itunes and come back--Greenday21 (talk) 23:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Greenday21

iTunes has a host of titular errors, they are not an authority.Ringer7 (talk) 23:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Pop Punk

I think the genre should be Pop Punk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.136.120.111 (talk) 04:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you. They fit to Pop Punk genre perfectly. At least make it one of the genres. It's an accurate description of the band and album. http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:kbfqxqugld0e Allmusic Guide which is a reliable enough source for many other artists says one of the genres should be "Punk-Pop", which would be the same as "Pop Punk". —Preceding unsigned comment added by KILLER BOB11694 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

No, they don't! Ok they do, but now, not then. Their music was raw and fast, and besides, very simple! It wasn't pop punk, it was something very close to classic, first-wave puink rock.Green Day's first pop punk album was Dookie. I'm waiting for someone to delete "pop punk", but i'm going to put "punk rock" in front of it anyway.--212.71.91.63 (talk) 10:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Billboard position

This album DID NOT reach #1 on the Billboard charts. It didn't even chart on Billboard at all. http://www.billboard.com/#/album/green-day/kerplunk/139584 The official Billboard website even says "This Album has never charted" on the album's page. Someone fix this, please. We don't want to lie, do we?

And I've taken the liberty of deleting the entire "chart box" as everything in it was exaggerated. It didn't reach #1 in the UK or US and the sales were greatly exaggerated.—Preceding unsigned comment added by KILLER BOB11694 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Singles from Kerplunk?

I don't really see a point for this, so i'm gonna remove it. --Chickenguy12 (talk) 04:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Fictional Story In The Booklet?

I bought a used copy of Kerplunk today, and I found a joke-ish fictional story about a girl killing her parents to go on tour with Green Day. It's not in copies of the booklet anymore, but we might want to add it to the article. </ref> Rocker10000 (talk) 16:42, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Release date

It says here that 17 January 1992 was the release date, but i have a discography book that says it was released December 1991? What should we do with this information - was this an limited edition initial release or something?--92.237.84.183 (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Review score unclear

Is this review giving the album a 6.2 or an 8.5? I can't tell from the text, and it seems to me like it would be the 6.2 because Kerplunk is listed before the other album's name just like 6.2 is listed before 8.5, but in the URL Kerplunk is listed second. The 8.5 in the ratings box here seems to have been here for some time. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kerplunk (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120225185749/http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/61449/week-ending-aug-8-2008-taylor-swift-returns/;_ylt=ArAeEgxOOW0tUjDN0w.P8IAPwiUv?page=2 to http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/61449/week-ending-aug-8-2008-taylor-swift-returns/;_ylt=ArAeEgxOOW0tUjDN0w.P8IAPwiUv?page=2#comments

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Kerplunk (album)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Article requirements: Y All the start class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details N At least one section of prose (excluding the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs N A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians Y Categorisation at least by artist and year Y A casual reader should learn something about the album.Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 20:31, 11 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 21:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)