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).

Validation of article performed by WIKICHECK. February 8, 2006 5:43pm. WikiCheck 22:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article says almost nothing about the band; it's basically three lists. Can anyone expand this? I'm certainly no Journey expert. Also, is the list of singles necessary? Most band pages just list their albums, and mention a few singles in the text of the article (of which this page is certainly lacking). -R. fiend 08:04, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is noteworthy that some of their songs were used in Tron - 200.195.86.168

I don't think that the discography section, Journey_(band)#Discography, should list when someone "first appeared" and "last appeared". But, if it should, why only the two Steve's, Perry and Augeri? Rolie and Cain (besides the main man Schon) have also been very important pieces in the evolution of Journey (no album pun intended). Rolie (along with Schon) was instrumental (no music pun intended) in the band getting to a point where Perry and Cain where even invited to join the band. Cain's "sweet as sugar" lyrics (agriculture pun toward sugar cane "is" intended) are one of the main reasons the band was as commercially successful as it was. Cain, Schon, and Rolie are continually ignored for their contributions to the Journey (intended). Now I am not taking anything away from Perry, I love Steve, and he was a BIG cog in the wheel (in the sky) for the band to keep on turning, but these other guys need some "lovin'" too, okay they'll get no "touchin'" and "squeezin'" from me. But, Cain, Rolie, and Schon, and to a lesser degree even Valory, Smith & even Fleischman, did their integrul parts. Let me know if this issue will cause us to go our "separate ways", or is anyone else "feeling that way", "feeling that way, too?" Comments? WikiDon 22:38, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I recall hearing that one of Journey's more popular songs is written with three-beats-per-measure. Can anyone confirm this? If it's true is it something worth putting in the article, it's rather unusual. -anonymous. 13:46, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

THIS IS NOT "The Original Journey Lineup" It took Steve Perry FOUR years to get there. Can anyone tell when this photo was taken, I would guess Dec. of 1978, need HELP! When did Neal get rid of the HUGH FRO?

If I'm not mistaken that photo is from the "Separate Ways" video. I hope that helps. -R. fiend 22:42, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There actually was a full history of Journey in Wikipedia, it just wasn't in this article ... rather, it was spread out among the different album articles and the different member articles. Hence I've been pulling them into and integrating them with this article. I've done it through 1987 and Perry leaving, which is where I get off. Someone else can finish the job -- look in the Steve Perry and Arrival articles in particular for material.

I've now done this merging in. Wasted Time R 03:51, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article also had a good deal of extraneous material about the history of Santana and so forth. It's all been moved to the appropriate other articles. Wasted Time R 01:47, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "Extraneous Material" and Wasted Time R, you removed what I had written about the beginnings of the band, saying: "This article also had a good deal of extraneous material". But this tells how the band came about, if it was not for Rolie, Schon, and Herbie Herbert coming together in Santana there would be NO Journey. Then you turn around and put in stuff about "American Idol" "Clay Aiken" and "Kelly Clarkson". Now the former leads directly to the formation of the band, the latter has nothing to do with "THE BAND", talk about "extraneous material". Which is more important? The formation of the band is a LARGE chunk of its history. Randy Jackson was just hired to play one tour, and that was it. The history of the band should NOT revolve around hired guns just to get through a tour. It should revolve around memebers of the band that were critical to its life, Rolie, Schon, Herbert, Cain, Tickner, Valory, Prince, Dunbar, Fleischman, Smith, and of course Perry. There were three major incarnations to the band becoming the group we know today, the first was the initial formation, then the addition of Dunbar and Fleischman, and lastly the addition of Perry and Cain that propelled them to the peak of their success. For the most part everyone else after that were just hired guns to get through either studio sessions or tours (except for Augeri, who was a permentant replacement for Perry, but Cain and Schon run the show). Herbert formed the band for SCHON, it was Schon's band from the beginning, and Journey is Schon and Cain's band today. If it were not for Schon, there would in all likelihood be no Perry, and no Journey. Perry had tried for 10-years to break through in L.A., he had given up and headed back home, and if not for the demo tape that he left behind, that would come across Herbert's desk and ears, he even says he would probably have become a lounge singer in Stockton, Fresno and Sacramento. Without the addition of Perry and Cain (who doesn't get the credit he deservers!) the band would most likely not have become a meteor that it became. These are the main parts that paved the way for all others to hitch their ride to this entity. Life-long, die-hard Journey (like me) respect the beginnings of the band, and the essential pieces that came five (or so) years later to take them to the next level. Rolie was a major cornerstone piece to get the band started. And if not for Herbert, who knows what direction Schon would have went. Jackson is a very good bassist, no doubt about it, but in the history of entire life of band, they could have just as easily hired someone else for that tour. So, when it comes to "extraneous material", where the band came from, how it got together, and how it added Perry and Cain are what really count. If not for Schon, Herbert, Rolie, Perry and Cain, there would not have been all that CASH to do anything else. WikiDon 18:36, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't think I removed anything you wrote, I just moved some of it to Santana's history, and other asides (like "We Built This City") to the appropriate article. I've added an explicit "see Santana history" line in the front of the Beginnings section now. Wasted Time R 18:59, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • I knew that the "We Built This City" was a long stretch when I wrote it, I just did it for an FYI, a little added trivia for music history fans. But if it goes, then surely American Idol stuff should be jettisoned? WikiDon 19:03, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A little trivia is ok, it just belonged in Jefferson Starship, not here.

The rest of your criticisms are unnecessary. Feel free to add more about the pre-Perry band, I have little familiarity with those records. Feel free to add more about Cain ... before I made my additions, there was nothing about him at all! I added that his songwriting and keyboards were a key part of their sound c. 1983 and that he wrote "Faithfully", one of their best-known tunes. If you want to elaborate on how Herbert found Perry, go ahead, I think I didn't touch your material on that.

Finally, re the Randy Jackson/AI material, this is interesting because to a whole younger generation, it's the hook by which they'll be interested in Journey. I agree that Jackson's role was of little significance at the time, but it is now, because people are singing Journey songs on the top-rated American TV show because of him, and they show film clips of Journey's 1986 tour because of him, and so forth. It's not a zero-sum game; you can add as much as you want to other eras of Journey without having to limit mentions of Jackson and AI. Wasted Time R 19:09, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As a reality check, look at the article before I touched it: [1] A lot on the history of Santana and the formation of Journey, then next to nothing for 15 years, then some scattered material on the post-Perry years! Wasted Time R 19:14, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I had intended to write a complete history, at least until 1990, but I was going to do it in stages. I just had not got around to it, other fish to fry you know. My next segment was going to be the first three albums, then the Perry-Cain era. I just had to push it down the priority list. WikiDon 19:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that's fine, you're not pre-empted. You can still do your writing, modifying/expanding/replacing what I pulled together as you see fit. If you yank something that I think is important, I'll try to fit it back in into the context of what you did. In other words, the normal WP process. Wasted Time R 19:46, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

!!Hey there just to clear up something, "We built this City" was actually by Starship, not Jefferson Aeroplane as someone has stated above. I know it's the same band but we wouldn't want any 8th graders failing their research assignments now would we?

>>>>the band admitted to using prerecorded vocal tracks to "augment the live performance" but the superimposed recordings proved otherwise.

The band never admitted this. In an interview in a UK publication, both Ross Valory and Neal Schon denied it. Neal admitted that Deen Castronovo sang along with Steve Augeri.

thecrazycatlady 11/26/07

Should something be said about the use of "Don't Stop Believin" at the end of the Sopranos series finale? There were several news articles about it, as well as comments from Steve Perry himself. I have even noticed that the song has spiked into the top 10 downloaded songs on iTunes, as well as increased use as a ringtone. Is this more of a trivial cultural phenomenon than an actual encyclopedic entry?

Journey has more of a rock sound then then Maroon 5 ever has and since the lady who is runs the Maroon 5 bord insist Maroon 5 is not soft rock. If Marron 5 is not soft rock then Journey who has far more of a rock edge to them is not soft rock. DLA75 20:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Long time Journey vocalist Steve Perry also cannot be ruled out for the position. Although Perry has stated numerous times that he would not return, he has been quoted repeatedly saying "never say never" in regards to returning to the band.[2][3]

This information is heresay, as Steve Perry was reported to be writing songs with Nuno Bettencort.

AlltimeJourneyFan 16:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC) Yes, it has been reported that Perry is writing songs with Bettencort, but that does not mean that he is ruled out for the lead singing position with Journey. He has been quoted as saying "never say never," therfore he cannot be ruled out. He can write songs with anyone he chooses, but there is no evidence that writing songs with other musicians will stop a rejoin, if one is to occur.[reply]

I only look at this page every couple of years, but the last time I checked, there were a number of unofficial (read: not band- or artist-supported) sites listed under the "external links" heading, like The Journey Digest (disclosure: these included my own). I am assuming that this decision was made by a Wikipedia Admin or two, having decided that their inclusion might not conform with N.P.O.V. Although I would argue that such decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis, I can understand why a blanket removal might be most effective. Still, there are some "official" sites that are less neutral than some "unofficial" sites.

If the deletions have occurred not because of an admin decision but due to some actions by my fellow editors, then I might feel more free to replace them.

Thoughts?

Dave Golland 18:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edit appears to have occurred on March 3 of this year; here is the information: 02:31, 3 March 2007 156.34.237.133 (Talk) (WP:EL/WP:MoS-L cleanup) This does not appear to be the result of a discussion.

Dave Golland 19:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All but the official site links were removed a few days ago based on what appears to be a very quick attempt to comply with WP:EL. But further down that style page is the following: What Should be Linked. Note that #4 would have editors include "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews." So without knowing the content of anything other than my site and the Digest, I've returned only those two to the page (since they each contain numerous reviews and interviews), and renamed the category. Other webmasters should feel free to add themselves to the list if they contain interviews and/or reviews (as long as their sites do not fall under the Restrictions on Linking category).

Dave Golland 15:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Add User:UBX/Journey with to your userpages! PGPirate 19:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the following yesterday as speculation, and it was reinstated yesterday:

The brief tenure of Jeff Scott Soto as lead singer should bring to mind the equally brief tenure of Robert Fleischman in that position in 1977, out of which, of course, came the decision to hire Steve Perry. The band may be seeking to find the same formula thirty years later.

That's speculation and I would guess something like weasel words or something like that as well. It's not fact and doesn't belong, as far as I'm concerned. If someone disagrees, please provide a reason before just reinstating it. Thanks. Rmkf1982 ^Talk 17:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't simply reinstate it. I rewrote it and reinstated it, trying to make it slightly less speculative prima facie. That's because I agree with you that it needed work but not that the concept needed to be removed altogether.

"Should" is used not as something less than fact but as a linguistic tool designed to get the reader to compare this latest development with a prior development in the history of the band.

That the band may be seeking to find the same formula thirty years later is slightly speculative, but it is based on my knowledge of the band and its history (I am a professional historian who happens to be a fan of the band, and one of my interviews is cited in the text). In this case it is important that it is located at the end of the band's current history. Since the band continues to exist, it's history isn't finished, and this and the following paragraph are temporary--that is, they will likely be removed very quickly after the band makes a decision. In the meantime, I think it is useful to attempt to get the reader to think about the past and how it affects the present set of facts.

I will reinstate it now, but invisibly, in the hope that you and I can continue this discussion so that we can together find a way to convey what I would like to convey without violating the Wikipedia norms. Feel free to continue the discussion here or via e-mail, but if you continue it here I can't promise a fast response.

Dave Golland 14:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand exactly what you're trying to do and for the record, it's a really good article and from the history of the page it looks like you're responsible for the vast majority of the content. I had in fact assumed that the article was the result of a number of people whittling away at it for ages, so the fact that it seems to be largely a solo effort (without meaning to belittle anyone else who might have contributed) is certainly to your credit.

After I left my original comments above I had a look at your own site via the links on your user page and I appreciate and recognise that you are something of an expert on the band. However, I'm not sure where Wikipedia stands on refererncing / citing own works such as your interview. Again, I don't mean to imply that there's anything inaccurate or unworthy about the interview as a source, but there are the Wikipedia policies on Original Research etc. to think about. Where that fits in with referencing an interview, which, despite technically being original research, is also a published work, I don't know - there might be someone else reading this page with a better idea or better way of saying this.

In short, I know what you're trying to say with the couple of lines about a new lead singer, and I know why you're trying to say it. It's sort of talking about current or future events in the same way that for example, articles about upcoming seasons of 24 or something like that would be, so I suppose the concept of speculating on how something might turn out isn't such a bad thing after all. Your description above, of them being temporary paragraphs, sums it up in one. The hard part though is phrasing it in such a way that it doesn't just attract the attention of passing reader / editors who will remove it as speculation. Maybe it's as simple as slapping the template tag on it that says "this section discusses future events etc. etc. etc. that you see on other articles, reinstating the paragraph as is, and leaving it at that?

And once again, well done on the article. I was looking at your contributions page and you seem to have stuck to the Journey article but based on the quality of this one, and on your work as a historian, there's bound to be plenty more articles you could turn your hand to as successfully if you were interested?

thanks

Ronan

Rmkf1982 ^Talk 18:13, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ronan--

Thanks for the compliments. I can't take credit for most of the content; I've just spent a few hours this summer doing some serious revisions. Before that I hadn't looked at the page in a year or two. I'm flattered that you think I should turn my hand to other entries; right now I'm working on my dissertation, so it's hard to find the time (although I used Wikipedia for some research recently and contemplated making a few minor edits on some of the entries I viewed, so you never know).

I'd like to avoid including a template. You'll see that I've done some cleanup work on the page in order to eliminate two templates already. Let's try a footnote. What do you think of this:

The brief tenure of Jeff Scott Soto as lead singer brings to mind [eliminating "should"] the equally brief tenure of Robert Fleischman in that position in 1977, out of which, of course, came the decision to hire Steve Perry. Fan speculation hints that the band may be seeking to find the same formula thirty years later.*

• This is a non-factual temporary statement, employed for illustrative purposes, and will be removed when the band makes a decision.

Dave Golland 15:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? I think the "fan speculation hints that the band may be seeking...." line is perfect, without the footnote. It states that fans are speculating, but doesn't make the article itself speculatory, if you get my drift. Especially if it referenced a site or article somewhere where such third-party speculation could be found. By saying "fan speculation" it's clear that it's not a guaranteed fact.

Good luck with the dissertation.

Rmkf1982 ^Talk 18:13, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed two links to forums that contained long explanations for noncompliance with WP:EL from the "External Links" heading of this entry (pardon the run-on sentence). If you think they should remain, please respond here and explain why you disagree with the rule citation so we can discuss it. But first, please see the "Fan Sites/News Sites/Unofficial Sites" discussion above.

Dave Golland 22:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Today I removed an "In need of cleanup" tag. My feeling is that the problem is regular vandalism, not the general content of the page. Vandalism can be (and is) corrected on a case-by-case basis.

There is a large hidden section of band trivia that ought to be integrated into the rest of the page content, but as long as it's not visible, it doesn't affect the overall cleanliness of the content.

If you'd still like the page to be cleaned up, please explain where in particular it's needed.

Dave Golland 15:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremey Hunsicker didn't turn down the job as lead singer. You reference his blog as your source. If you read his entry on the blog, he blew up at Jonathan Cain telling him he may not be the right man for the job. The next day, he called him back, asking to remain in the running for the job. He admits this in the comments section of his blog titled "Blah Blah Blah" and even says there, he didn't walk away from the job. Therefore, it's not factual to say he withdrew himself from the running or turned down the job.

thecrazycatlady 11/26/07

>>>1. As far as I can tell, 1991 saw three members of Journey team up on stage for a few numbers; that does not make the band active for that year. If anyone has contrary information (or opinions), please state them here.

That is correct. They teamed up for a tribute to Bill Graham, held in San Francisco. Those members were Neal Schon, Steve Perry and Jonathan Cain.

>>>3. I think Jon Cain was once a songwriter for Michael Bolton, but I don't think Bolton was ever in Journey. Walden's name sounds familiar, but ditto. If anyone has a citation or other reference showing that wither Bolton or Walden were in Journey, please discuss it here.

Both Jon Cain and Neal Schon performed on Michael Bolton's 1988 album "The Hunger". It's rumoured they considered Michael Bolton for the Journey lead singer position and Michael turned them down, but as far as I know there's no proof this even occurred.

thecrazycatlady 11/26/07