Talk:The Streets

Cyberspace and Reds

Is a mixtape. Not a studio album. I'm going to change it and if you have any reasons why I shouldn't it would be much more constructive to state them than to revert without explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.10.67 (talk) 15:31, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Last gig?

The article states "The bands last gig was at Reading Festival 2011". I saw The Streets playing yesterday, and they're playing today as well, at Parklife in Australia (www.parklife.com.au). Is the article wrong, or merely outdated? Theenigma1983 (talk) 08:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

beat records what happened?????

queiston? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.15.127 (talk) 08:28, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Untitled

The article doesn't mention Beats Stevie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.212.33.233 (talk) 23:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The article mentions "Late Night with David Letterman." Should this be "The Late Show?"

Presumably the single slated for release at the end of 2004 has been released by now - perhaps this page should be updated to reflect that? sheridan 07:41, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC)

Mike Skinner wrote a letter to KFC asking them to stop their cruel treatment of chickens. You can find a copy of the letter here (no it isnt, the link is dead)They call me Mister Tibbs (talk) 08:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

"He raps a lot about taking drugs, which makes him well hard." An anon added this sentence. I have no clue what it means, but because I know nothing about the subject I won't remove it. It should perhaps be clarified for the non-British, if it does make any sense to the British. Makemi 04:40, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

'hard' is a UK slang word for tough... roughly

i removed the disclaimer about incorrect information regarding his forthcoming album, as he has confirmed the title and this can be found on his website, so it is not speculation.. also it makes the comment regarding the Sun irrelevant, as its not just 'According to The Sun' anymore.

also there are many useless links such as '2001' 'teenager' etc etc. they are totally useless and unreltaed to the article, and this is something wikipedia as a whole suffers from and should be cleaned up. - feb 28th

also removed " but have in the main found popularity in the 'indie' scene. " as its not really accurate, the streets have found popularity accross various music 'scene's /genres

Link to song file

Links to song files do not belong here. This is an encyclopedia, not a file sharing base : ) Any conflicting opinions?

Agreed. SaltyWater 21:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Fit But You Know It/Busted link

The title appears to be a play on the lyric "you are so fit, and you know it", from Busted UK number one "You Said No" - the change from 'and' to 'but' implying that the self-assuredness of many beautiful women is a bad thing.

Nonsense. --Air 20:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. SaltyWater 21:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

i can't remember where, but i've definately heard this on TV.. posibly from skinner himself..

Why is it nonsense? I thought it was quite a clever and all-too-true lyric.--MartinUK (talk) 16:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Nonesense! because it is a well know old adage — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ur-loki (talk • contribs) 09:00, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Logo

What is his logo supposed to be? Looks like a brand of chapstick. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 22:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's a lighter, seeing as how it looks like a lighter. Skinmeister 23:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It's a Clipper lighter, it features on all his album covers. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 09:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Rachel Stevens

She was named by skinner as the subject of 'fit but u know it'; but i dont think she had anything to do with the 'When You Wasn't Famous' thing; i've heard it said but i think its just people getting the two mixed up. Skinner also did retract the statement regarding fit but u know it, saying that he only told a reporter (questioning him in a nightclub) flippantly in order to get rid of them. weather that was a get-out clause or not is up to your interpretation. Anyway, as tweedy was named, RS should be removed unless u can find a citation.~Bungalowbill

Alias

Maybe someone could mention Mike Skinners side projects Grafiti (with the Single What is the problem?) and The Beats (with the Single The Cigarette Beat). --TH-Foreigner 00:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

obviously in parts of that song you can hear its mike skinner but there's never been anything offical to admit its actually him —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.136.80.79 (talk) 13:43, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

World's longest music video?

Perhaps this "record" should be rephrased as "the world's longest music video according to MTV" Because, for example, Pink Floyd's The Wall is technically a music video and it's way longer than 25 minutes.--Lairor 12:45, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Accent

Surely these two sentences from the article cannot both be right? Which one is?

• "Despite having been raised in Birmingham, an area with a distinctive regional accent, he speaks with a strong London "cockney" accent."
• "Because of his accent, Skinner is identified with Birmingham, but he doesn't identify with it much himself."

Read the article, it explains where he's from and with which accent he speaks / sings. 81.246.93.2 09:29, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

But the wikipedia entry doesn't, it implies that Skinner is pretentious. As a Londoner I can assure you Skinner does not speak/sing with a 'strong London "cockney" accent'. His accent is a hybrid of Birmingham and South London, which given his personal history, is not exactly surprising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.4.202 (talk) 19:46, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Totally agree that its confusing, have you a link to the article btw They call me Mister Tibbs (talk) 09:04, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

All Got Our Runnins

No mention of Mikey's 2003 EP??? I think it at least deserves a sentence, some would say even an article.

http://www.prefixmag.com/reviews/cds/S/The-Streets/All-Got-Our-Runnins/209 http://www.knowtheledge.net/thestreets_runnins.htm http://www.popmatters.com/music/reviews/s/streets-allgotourrunnins.shtml http://www.atlanticrecords.com/thestreets/music/?id=atlrelease700466 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.25.179.111 (talk) 17:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:OriginalPirateMaterial.jpg

Image:OriginalPirateMaterial.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Streets-thehardestwaytomakeaneasyliving.jpg

Image:The Streets-thehardestwaytomakeaneasyliving.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:StreetsNME2006.jpg

Image:StreetsNME2006.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Tender

As demanded (not very wikipedian of you, please remember wp:civ) I have put this on

This edit is "not encyclopedic"? Would you care to define "encyclopedic"? Would you care to state the wiki policy that I have breached? I suggest that you can't. The fact is that "tender" is a proper and correct word to use here. M-W definition 1 and 2 of the word:

1 a: having a soft or yielding texture : easily broken, cut, or damaged : delicate, fragile <tender feet> b: easily chewed : succulent 2 a: physically weak : not able to endure hardship b: immature, young <children of tender age> c: incapable of resisting cold : not hardy <tender perennials>

Can you tell me of a child of 5 who does not conform to either definition of "tender"? Does this word add "POV"? Is it original research? (in fact, the whole sentence appears to be original research) Why are you inflicting your inherent biases against the word tender on this article?

Further to the above argument, I am going to add some contributions. I have been told that the word "tender" is not NPOV. I ask if there is anyone on this page who would argue that the age of 5 is anything that is the opposite of "tender", as defined in Merriam Webster. It would be difficult for you all to disagree with this, as it means "young".

I am also told that it is "original research" - the sentence paraphrases the original source - I just further paraphrase it further - the only other option is to copy it word for word, and this is copyright violation. In fact the sentence assumes that skinners parents bought him the keyboard, a fact not in evidence - this is the true original researchl.

Someone show me a specific wiki policy against the use of adjectives, and I will back down. 213.235.24.138 (talk) 16:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

First of all, you have violated one of Wikipedia's most important rules: WP:3RR.-Yamanbaiia (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I haven't violated the "three revert rule" - that needs to be done 3 times in 24 hours. Anyway, I added it in - you are the one doing the reverting. You will, everytime I add it, have reverted it more times than me, and will thus be breaching the "three revert rule" before I have.82.0.206.215 (talk) 17:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

For the record, "tender" was removed 4 times in less than 24 hours by three different editors: [1], [2], [3], [4] and again 5 hours later [5]Yamanbaiia (talk) 22:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Here is the why I keep removing it:

• It's original research because who said that he was tender? i know that, in theory, every 5 year old is "tender, loving, gentle and sweet", but maybe he was not, maybe he was a very twisted child, so, unless you have a source (?) that explicitly says that when he was 5 he was either tender, loving, gentle or sweet, it's OR.

Who said anything about "loving, gentle or sweet" - those are subjective terms. Tender means "young". The article said he was 5 - 5 is young. I am therefore paraphrasing. Paraphrasing is not only acceptable, it is neccesary on wiki to avoid copyright violations. Therefore, this is not "original research".

• It's definetely not neutral for two main reasons: not everyone considers 5 year olds to be tender, actually some of them can be quite nasty, besides there are loads of "children-haters" out there that would never describe a child as tender. The other reason is that, as ridiculous as it sounds, maybe a 3 year old will come and read the article and (for him) a 5 year old is strong and wise, but not tender. What if i considered all +80 to be "tender"? it wouldn't be appropiate for me to add that in an article would it? it's the same thing here, even if most -5 don't read Wikipedia. -Yamanbaiia (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Once again, "tender" means "young" - youth does not preclude nastyness. Children haters can hate children all they want, but they can't say that children are not young. Children, almost by definition, are "young". You are correct, your "3 year old child" argument is ridiculous. Your "80 year olds are tender" argument falls down in that 80 year olds are not young - they are old. I would expect to see an exceptional reliable source describe a 5 year old as "strong and wise" before allowing it to stay in wiki - wiki does not take into account the opinions of 3 years olds (none of whom have been published, so far as I know, and certainly not to the level that would be demanded of an encyclopedia). Similarly, I would expect university level material to be used as a source before describing an 80 year old as "tender". I would accept "tender" for children under 10 (maybe older...) "middle-aged" for people in their 40s and "pensionable" for those over 65. Those would be objective facts. I hope you see the difference. 82.0.206.215 (talk) 17:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Stop citing policies which you don't understand. I have in no way been uncivil to you. You have been reverted by several different editors, and haven't provided any good reason why Mike Skinner should be described as "tender." Why is it not encyclopedic? Have you ever read an encyclopedia which describes someone in a similar manner? There are at least tens of thousands of biographical articles on Wikipedia alone - do any of them use such language? If your edit is legitimate, others will back you up in this discussion. As the content is disputed, I implore you not to reinsert it until such a time when a consensus is reached. Also, I would suggest you create n account, to ease communication. faithless (^speak) 23:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I fully understand the policies. It seems you do not. If you can find me anything on any of them that rejects what I am saying, I will accept what you have to say. Please post the appropriate bits in here. You have threatened to have me banned, several times - not civil (this is my only post in this article - ever read "don't bite the newbies"?) Mike Skinner should be described as "tender" because he was (at the age of 5). I have read much of wiki, and can find numerous examples of commonly used objective adjectives (try saying that 10 times quickly after 3 beers....) being placed in articles. I have even found one which finds a famous actress to have "a tiny face". Tender means "young", and if an encyclopedia can't describe a young child as "young", then I suggest that it is doing Language a disservice. It's like Newspeak in Orwells 1984, trying to reduce the english language down to the absolute essentials, removing all extraneous words, but doing it to the point that it borders on facism. This is not the aim of any encyclopedia. There is nothing "unencyclopedic" about the word tender - you just don't like it. 82.0.206.215 (talk) 17:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

On my talk page you claimed to be "an experienced Wikipedian," yet here you say you are a newbie. You can't be both. If you tell me which you really are, I will treat you accordingly. Giving you an appropriate warning that your current path will lead to a block is the exact opposite of incivility. As for Mike Skinner being tender at the age of five: can you prove it? Remember, here at Wikipedia we are concerned with verifiability, not truth. Also, please read this section of the same policy. Wikipedia strives for brevity; extraneous words and phrases should be avoided when possible. I admit that you are right about one thing: I don't like it. I think it reads more like a press release or a biography than an encyclopedia entry. Was he tender at that age? Sure, probably (though tender has multiple meanings, including ticklish; does that mean that I am at the tender age of 24?). If your aim is to describe him as young, mission accomplished. A five year old is young; there is no need for superfluous words here. Likening your fellow editors to Big Brother can be construed as being uncivil. faithless (^speak) 19:48, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I am a "newbie" to this article, not to wikipedia. I can prove that Mike Skinner was tender at the age of 5 - tender means "young" and 5 is young. what more proof do you need? The content of the first section is partly verified by the article. I add in the word tender, which does not violate the verifiability policy. Other parts (such as his parents buying him the keyboard) are not verified by the source. As I say, what you like is not what forms wiki policy. You admit that he was tender, so what is the problem, apart from you not liking it? Many words that are used have multiple meanings - current, block, press to name just a few that you use. Wiki is littered with "superflous" words - once again, I state that this is the beauty of the English Language, and attempting to remove all such words (ie adjectives) is a form of thought control that borders on Orwellian. It is not a criticism of you but a comment on your misunderstanding of the policies of wiki (which can certainly be considered "wikilawyering" and remember that there is no policy on wiki which is 100% unbreakable...). If you construe this "constructive criticism" as being uncivil, then perhaps you need a break? It's only the internet - no need to take it so personally. 82.0.206.215 (talk) 21:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

It is you who continues to throw around charges of incivility, not me. However, accusing others of sockpuppetry (laughable, considering the accuser) and of being Orwellian is indeed violating WP:CIVIL. It's clear we don't agree; let's sit back and wait for others to chime in. So far, no one else thinks that it is appropriate to describe him in the way you have. If this changes, so be it, but until then it should stay as it is. faithless (^speak) 21:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The Anon is right, there's no WP:YOUCANTUSETENDER and sometimes it's ok to ignore all rules; but then again sometimes (like here) consensus has to be reached between the editors so as to stop the edit war, the accusations and the useless discussion; and right now is two against one. Tender just sounds awfull, and by the way, i would like to see the article of the "tiny face" actress, so i can remove that. Cheers. -Yamanbaiia (talk) 22:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I hate to get involved in an argument, but just for consensus' sake, I agree that "tender" isn't appropriate for the article. CherryFlavoredAntacid (talk) 23:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not a sock-puppet. I have two accounts - one at home and one at work. I make no secret of this (it has said so on both IP addresses talk pages since I have posted on this article...) Unfortunately, you are misunderstanding the meaning of the word "consensus", both in the wiki sense and in the true life sense. It means we get to a point where every-one has agreed that the out-come does not need changing, where we all agree to abide by it. This is normally reached by negotiation. It cannot be reached (in real life or in wiki) by way of a majority vote. Your vote is pointless. I do not agree to it (unless it goes my way) and don't have to to keep in line with wiki policy. This means you best do some negotiating. The usual place to start would be an alternative word. 213.235.24.138 (talk) 16:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for my poor choice of wording; I didn't mean to insinuate that you were acting against policy in any way by using different IPs, and will be more careful with my choice of wording in the future. You apparently edit from at least four different IP addresses; not that there is a problem with that. I implore you, as I'm sure others would, to create an account to make discussions easier. With all due respect, I fear that it is you who are misunderstanding the word "consensus." If you still feel strongly about this, I'd recommend getting an outside opinion. The current opinion is 3-1; this is "general agreement by most of those concerned," and therefore a consensus. I don't think that this is likely to change. Cheers, faithless (^speak) 20:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:PRACTICAL, specifically the section that states

"So in summary, wikipedia decision making is not based on formal vote counting. This means that polling alone is not considered a means of decision-making, and it is certainly not a binding vote, and you do not need to abide by polls per se. Polling is generally discouraged, except in specialized processes such as AFD."

Also http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Voting_is_evil

As someone who works in grasstoots organisations that exclusively use consensus for all decision making, I think I probably have a better idea of how it works than you all combined. General agreement is not total agreement, which is what is called for. In fact wiki only works by everyone concerned having agreement not to change the article, at which point, consensus is reached. You are in the negotiating stage of consensus building. So, with all due respect, I suggest that you look for an alternative to the word "tender" and we can get discussing. Otherwise you are circumventing the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, and this will create a flamewar, something I have tried my best to avoid. 213.235.24.138 (talk) 11:38, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Not only are you wrong, but you are being insulting and condescending. You shouldn't assume things, specifically about people you don't know. I would like to see what dictionary you have which defines consensus as a total agreement. Also, no one is voting here; please note that no one has expressed support for your position that an adjective is needed to show that a five year old is young. I have recommended that you seek dispute resolution, and this remains your best course of action. Please pursue this course of action rather than replying to this comment. We've discussed it to death at this point, and nothing positive is to be gained from our continued arguing. faithless (^speak) 18:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"Merriam Webster, Consensus 1, general agreement : unanimity 2, group solidarity in sentiment and belief".

I'm not sure what I have done to condescend you, or what I have assumed about you. I do know that you have formally withdrawn from the wiki consensus decision making process (which you don't seem to understand, or to even be willing to look into, but I guess that is your choice...) There was a vote - one which I am not bound by. I am therefore going to continue to add the word tender. If you don't like it, I suggest you re-engage in the consensus building process, or you go for dispute resolution. I have done everything that I can to get you to understand my position, and you have not budged an inch. You are now "refusing to talk to me". I have no problem with this, and thus have no dispute with you. I shall continue to add the word. Feel free to chat to me about it.

I have not "refused to talk to you," so please don't put words in my mouth. You said it yourself with that definition: consensus is general agreement. Three out of four people have decided that the word is inappropriate. There has been no vote, there has been a discussion. Three of us have said it does not belong, and you have not found a single editor who agrees with you that it does belong. I will recommend one last time that you seek another opinion. If I write that a prominent politician is a pedophile, and no one agrees with me, then it doesn't belong. Such decisions do not have to be unanimous. Please, one last time, if you refuse to drop the issue I urge you to seek an outside opinion. If you continue to add the word to the article without support (Wikipedia is a community project, you can't act unilaterally when everyone else disagrees with you), I will take it as vandalism and warn you appropriately, which may lead to a block. I do not wish for this to happen. Let's avoid going down that path. faithless (^speak) 21:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I}f you are refusing to discuss the issues or negotiate, this is "refsuing to talk" I have no problem with the word. I have advised you of your best course of action for the future, but you have chosen to ignore it. It's not vandalism.

Disagree: I don't think the word "tender" is appropriate here and does not make the article better. Consider my opinion for the consensus. --LeyteWolfer 20:20, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Agree: This is hardly the first or only article with the phrase "tender age." If we strike the phrase here, it seems appropriate to strike it in the other articles as well. Such a campaign to eliminate "tender age" from wikipedia would be little more than delightfully silly. The word "tender" in this article only really appears absurd because it's an absurd thing to fight for. When outsiders fight for absurd edits, editors naturally suspect shenanigans. Usually caution is the way to go in such situations, but here I worry your instincts are triggering a false alarm. To the average reader, "tender" works fine, and doesn't actually merit this much discussion. I say let the crowds have this one. In the alternative, you could build your bot to remove the phrase from other articles, articles on Nandivarman_II, where 12 years is tender, or Dhruva where again 5 years is tender, and dozens of others. That approach strikes me as a notable waste of time. Stumbled upon this argument, not particularly interested in the outcome, hope my two cents are helpful. --Thomas B♘talk 01:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I strongly agree with the use of "tender" in this context. Make this search on google: "tender age" site:wikipedia.org There are 725 results. The fact is that the phrase is a common, well-accepted and understood phrase, and it is highly relevant in the statement on the streets page as it lends relevance to the statement about the age at which he began as a musician. The literal statement is that he began at age five, the underlying meaning is that he was a musician from early childhood as opposed to the more common later starting age. The use of "tender" highlights the specific relevance of the raw fact. Anyway, I won't waste any more breath on faithless, as I'm sure he's very busy with 725 wikipedia pages to edit. GO FAITHLESS, GO! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.235.233.71 (talk) 03:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, two years later and you're still at this, huh? That's sad. faithless (^speak) 03:27, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I'm the OP, and I can categorically assure faithless that I am not talk - was just referencing this page in a discussion on bios of living persons, and thought I'd see where we had got to. Still, "consensus" seems to be building more toward my POV. Interesting, huh? 86.169.165.179 (talk) 18:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Agree: I'm amazed at the heat generated by this debate, over words now deleted presumably a reference to Skinner on keyboards at a tender age. This is a perfectly understandable and acceptable use of English, anyone objecting must be sadly literal to get over excited by its use. Zerowhite (talk) 04:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Another round

Today I was editing the article and I find the word 'tender' to be rather annoying. Why is being five years old considered 'tender'? I do believe it is inappropriate because it implies that being five years old and making music is something special - which of course would be crossing Wikipedia's guide on NPOV. It is like saying "When Skinner was only five years old, he already was making music" - that is downright POV. 'Tender age' might mean 'at a young age', but if you put 'tender' and 'playing keyboards' together it suggests it's something special, extraordinary even.

There is no valid reason to keep the word there. Saying other articles have the same phrase is of course no argument either (see [[WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). The argument that it is "an acceptable use of English" doesn't matter here either, because we use English to try be as encyclopedic as possible, and not to use everyday English. --Soetermans | drop me a line | what I'd do now? 17:50, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Frankly it's amazing that this nonsense has gone on for so long. This a clear, unambiguous addition of a point of view that does not feature in any cite provided. Calling his age "tender" is offering an opinion and is not neutral. It is suggesting that his age was remarkably young for what he was doing. Whether it was or not is matter of opinion and should not appear in an encyclopaedia.

If we were to permit additions like this then we should also permit contrary opinions. What if it was my opinion that five is actually quite a normal age to start to learn keyboards? How about we add "Skinner began using a keyboard at the usual age of five." Or what if I thought he was actually quite backward? "Skinner began using a keyboard at the advanced age of five." Or what if I thought that five was too young? "Skinner began using a keyboard at the premature age of five."

All point of view, all equally not acceptable. Can't believe this has to be explained. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 00:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

The addition of the word 'tender' came across my screen in Huggle this afternoon. I agree that it should not be in the article. Adding 'tender', to me, suggests a quality of 5yearoldness that I feel is not neutral. 5 years old is 5 years old. That's all that needs to be said. The reader can bring their own qualifiers to the fact. Anyway, putting my thoughts in because I was asked. Like another editor before me, I find it hard to believe that this word has been batted about in the article for years. :) Wikipelli ^Talk 05:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Agree: You can argue the semantics all you want but its the AGE that is tender not the person, surely a child should be taken care off, a child should not be left to look after itself, therefore "tender" for some one under any adult age in my opinoin would be tender regardless of the person.

I think it's quite amazing that it's been 11 years since this discussion started and still the issue continues...I reverted the IP again this morning. Robvanvee 06:46, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Computers and Blues release date

The provided citation is for a tweet posted to Mike Skinner's account in June 2009 that explicitly states that the album will be released in February 2010. This is originally what the text of the article said. However, it has since been updated to indicate Q3/Q4 2010 with no new citation or rationale. I haven't seen any authoritative indication that the album has been delayed to that timeframe. If someone has a reference, please incorporate it, because the article as it stands is inaccurate. Warrenm (talk) 16:49, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

"Classics"

This article makes reference to Reebok Classics. "classics" could also refer to classic dance/club tunes. when i say "put on some classics" i'm referring to music, not shoes. I know Mike is a fan of Reebok Classics but i'm pretty sure this could be a double meaning.

~~Alpaca37~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpaca37 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

"2000 - present"...

...yet the article states that he was rapping before then and that he made his first track at the age of 15 (which would be around 1993). Can an earlier date be put than 2000? FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  15:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Computers and Blues 2010: "Roof of your car"

I'm listening to it now! Must be unofficial, maybe a leek, but I know everything by The Streets, and this is new. Also comes in a new style, as hoped for. "On the roof of your car, at the stars" "Gaze up to the skies, truth, you've opened up my eyes"

Apparently, as I'm researching, the track, that will possibly be included on the new album, was released online by skinner himself: http://twitter.com/skinnermike

I love it!

this isn't where I heard it first, but, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmRfxlPktXg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.111.19.88 (talk) 10:28, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

1994–2000: Early years

that first bit's a load of nonsense. Johnny Drum Machine and Kevin Mark Trail were recruited as touring members long after the streets had first been incarnated. it started as a colaboration between skinner and a few other mates, one of whom was/is a part of a group called mouth almighty (crispy i think his name was?) skinner has posted a piece that he'd written about the formation of the streets and transition to just him and about the bitterness that was on their website when it started. although his musical history i'm sure goes back the the early/mid nineties i'm pretty sure the streets didnt materialise as an idea until 1999ish after skinner had lived in australia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.185.139 (talk) 17:55, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on The Streets. 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 https://web.archive.org/20131202234750/http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/6498/FIFA-2005-Soundtrack-Announced to http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/6498/FIFA-2005-Soundtrack-Announced
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120325152335/http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/mar/25/street-life-mike-skinner-memoir to http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/mar/25/street-life-mike-skinner-memoir
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130530040326/http://computersandblues.com/ to http://www.computersandblues.com/

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} 19:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Life is strange 2 (2018)

Their song on the "On the of a coin" was also features in the game life is strange 2!! 😍😍 2A02:3033:40B:F68A:D8EB:94C8:1C33:97E5 (talk) 09:18, 22 November 2023 (UTC)