This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Musicians This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance). Rock music Mid‑importance This article 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 90 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 5.

Anybody who knows anything about early Journey (or) did a small amount of research would know that there 2nd. album was called "Next" hence (2nd. album !".I am trying to be kind here,but for those young up and coming players this is good information and i really don't see how it could have been over looked.These may not have been there top selling albums,but the music and the musician ship was unsurpassed buy many groups of this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.95.94 (talk) 04:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to the first reliable source I look at, Look into the Future came out in 1976, while Next came out the following year, in 1977.[1] Now, their official website also indicates this chronology.[2] So, apparently the "Next" meant "next after Look into the Future". Cheers :> Doc talk 05:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I notice a stylistic shift between LITF and Next. The music is edgier, harder; there are more vocals; and Neal takes on lead vocals for the first time. It might have meant "We're not selling any albums; what shall we do NEXT?" ;-) Dave Golland (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There has been some discussion in the past of band member status for this page, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Journey_%28band%29/Archive_1#Stevie_Roseman_.2F_Tim_Gorman . I can't find the rest of that discussion, but I do remember that at some point a few years ago, we came to a consensus on these definitions:

Session player: someone who recorded with Journey but did not tour
Touring musician: someone who toured with Journey but did not record with them
Former band member: someone who recorded and toured with Journey

This way we avoid all sorts of POV issues, from Wikipedia editors' own opinions ("Arnel Pineda is not a member of the band because his contract may have a termination date") to the opinions of band members themselves (like Neal Schon, who behaves as if Steve Augeri was never a member of the band). We also wanted to avoid getting into specific definitions of the roles each former member played (i.e. "who was more important to Journey, George Tickner, Robert Fleischman, or Randy Jackson?") So it shouldn't matter what Randy Jackson says, nor should it matter what his fans and/or detractors say (as a judge on American Idol, I'm sure he's gained an awful lot of detractors; as one of the "Perry hires" following "Street Talk," there's always going to be a camp of Journey fans opposed to his membership status). The fact is he recorded with the band ("Raised on Radio") and toured with the band (truncated 1986 tour).

We can certainly continue to discuss this definition, but it shouldn't change because an anonymous Wikipedia user seems to have a beef with Randy Jackson.

Dave Golland (talk) 13:39, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent edit by the anonymous user attempting to move RJ out of "former members" notes that "the band never considered him a member." This is what we call circular logic. We need to know who was in the band before we can say what "the band" considered. And "the band" is not a monolith; I have no doubt that Neal Schon considered RJ less than a full member; he apparently feels the same way about Steve Augeri and Jeff Scott Soto. By the same token, Steve Perry probably saw RJ as being as much a member as Jonathan Cain. And what is a "full member," anyway? When Ross Valory and Steve Smith were fired, that exposed the sham that, as the "Frontiers and Beyond" video put it, "Journey functions as a democracy." Journey had and has a manager, and had and has powerful personalities among its musicians. There has always been an interplay between these personalities over power within the band. In 1978, Herbie Herbert was able to fire Robert Fleischman because he had more power than Neal Schon and Gregg Rolie, and they were influenced by him. In 1986, Steve Perry was able to fire Steve Smith and Ross Valory because he had more power than Herbie and Neal. In 2007, Neal was able to fire Jeff Scott Soto because he has more power than any other members, and the manager (Irving Azoff) doesn't seem to be all that involved.

Changes to our definition can't be individual: if we redefine "member," the new definition must be standard and apply to everyone. One possible additional qualification for being a member would be contributing to the songwriting. But I'm not sure we can do that and still be consistent with the definition of "band." There are bands that don't do any of their own writing. And solo artists: is Meatloaf not a member of his own band, because all of his songs are written by Jim Steinman?

And, again, do we really want to get into categorizing which musicians were more important to the history and development of the band than others? How many categories of musicians should we have? "Wrote songs, toured, recorded, fired people;" "Wrote songs, toured, recorded, acquiesced to the firing of people?" To try to do so would be to ask for a really long POV edit war. And any definitive categorization along such lines would require statistical and psychological analyses of every person ever associated with the band, from Steve Perry down to the guy who strung wires for one show back in 1976. Any volunteers to do that? Anyone want to donate the money needed to do it under scientific conditions?

With that said, it seems to me that the best and simplest definition is the one we have (outlined in the previous post). If there is a Wikipedia standard for such matters as this, let's find out. How does Styx define former members? REO Speedwagon? The Allman Brothers?

Dave Golland (talk) 17:20, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the transition resulted in what Marin Independent Journal writer Paul Liberatore called "an undercurrent of racism."

should be replaced with:

When he was hired over a singer from a Journey cover band, he also had to learn to deal with an undercurrent of racism among some Journey fans.

as per: http://www.marinij.com/ci_7826224?IADID=Search-www.marinij.com-www.marinij.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.149.33.126 (talk) 00:03, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I don't see how that is a misquote. The phrase "an undercurrent of racism" appears in the quotation cited, and it is not out of context. It seems to me that the change you propose is stylistic. Dave Golland (talk) 03:45, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like there is some sort of smear campaign happening against a person named Brian Camelio who was incorrectly identified as a former member of Journey (studio musician). From what I can tell, a number of blogs stated this and they are now trying to make it fact by posting it here. There is no evidence from any recording or tour that this is true and it seems to be misinformation being perpetuated a by number of bloggers so they do not have to admit they did not fact check their work or need some sort of sensationalism for their story. I have removed the reference that was posted and cited back to one of the blogs that misquoted it. Please keep an eye out for them trying to re-introduce this into this article. Jamesrand (talk) 21:46, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So the BBC News article would be wrong? Maybe, it would be a first step to write to the BBC and explain that. I have reinserted this, since this is verifiable. Note that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" (from Wikipedia:Verifiability). --Edcolins (talk) 09:03, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. I will write them now. Jamesrand (talk) 03:05, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While it's often said that one cannot prove a negative (i.e. "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"), it is more verifiable that Camelio was not a member of Journey than that he was. According to http://www.journeymusic.com/pages/bio , http://www.journey-tribute.com/journey/resources/faq/faq-s2.html , and http://www.journey-zone.com/Sections/Band/journey.htm, Camelio was not a former member of Journey. Both the Journey Wikipedia Page and Camelio's Wikipedia page use the same citation, a BBC source, which itself cites no references. (Longstanding readers of my Journey writing, please note that I am "holding my nose" while citing the "official" band bio from journeymusic.com.) Dave Golland (talk) 19:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Time magazine says Brian Camelio was a "former member of Journey and Phish." [3]
• paidContent says he "worked with" Journey and Phish [4]
• NYconvergence says "he used to jam with" Journey and Phish[5]

I think we have independent confirmation from reliable sources that there was some relationship, but not what that relationship was.--Nowa (talk) 23:08, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've GOT the Flans book, and nowhere does it state that Dunbar didn't get along with Steve Perry. That may have been the case, but attributing that to Robyn Flans' Journey book is wrong; Flans does state that Dunbar wasn't happy with the change & with stuff that the band *in general* were pulling, but Perry is not specifically mentioned. Full text & articles of the book are here: http://holyshrineofjourney.com/flans.html Zenfrodo (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent catch. Dave Golland (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not checking over the whole entry, but this stood out on first read: ", Don't Believing became a huge succes after the Sopranos and GLEE and a series of tours with the present line-up. And that leading to the top-selling catalog track in iTunes history on 2009. ^[1][2][3]"

The vandal can't even spell correctly!

Added: User "Wagino 20100516" please don't revert text *without checking the content*. You're reverting text that isn't even proper English were it spelled correctly (which it isn't). It's obvious vandalism, and you auto-revert and send me a msg saying *I'm* vandalizing the entry? I don't think so. Put a modicum of effort in, mate, and at least read the revision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.163.20 (talk) 08:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. Dave Golland (talk) 17:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That Arnel Pineda is in the infobox and Steve Perry is not is absurd. john k (talk) 07:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]