Talk:List of musical supergroups

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Rock music

	Rock music portal 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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Swing Mob#The 'Super Friends' Clique|Superfriends]] The anchor (#The 'Super Friends' Clique) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
[[Swing Mob#The 'Super Friends' Clique|<nowiki/>'Superfriends']] The anchor (#The 'Super Friends' Clique) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of musical supergroups. 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) 10:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of musical supergroups. 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) 20:58, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Beauty in Chaos

I think Beauty in Chaos is a candidate for inclusion: https://www.beautyinchaosmusic.com/about/ Centerone (talk) 22:36, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quality and Objectivity

With all due respect to those who created and have edited this page, I think it's an incredibly weak article, with little room for improvement. Most of the bands listed have no sources whatsoever to support the notion that they constitute a "supergroup". Instead, it appears that membership in any band, followed by membership in another band, equals supergroup status. To the extent supergroup could even be defined, I don't see that as being the criteria. Nonetheless, rather than attempting to create my own definition, which wouldn't be appropriate anyway, I am suggesting that any band for which there is not at least one quality source referring to the band as a "supergroup", should be deleted. This would be consistent with Wiki standards and hopefully unobjectionable to others. As of now, my plan is to wait a few days and see how others feel, then start to update the page. 13:52, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

It's a list, not a comprehensive article about supergroups, just a list of those that fit the definition, which is defined by the article about them. Do you have specific examples of ones that you feel don't fit? There is frequent activity on this list, so I believe most of them have had significant consideration as to whether they fit. No, I don't think there needs to be an article that specifically applies that label, I think they just need to fit the definition. Centerone (talk) 08:22, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree. Almost all after The Travelling Wilburys are no supergroups. I agree that all without a proper citation should be removed or this is just another list of personal opinions and preferences. bigar 19:50, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

On the very least, one should remove side projects and/or band continuations. Supergroups imply musicians coming together to form something brand new, not a bunch of existing bandmates having a second band. Not sure if the term "supergroup" is required in the sources, though that'd be the hard and fast rule. I think the spirit is one where it's clear (in the source) that all members are considered noteworthy on their own, not just having a list of their previous bands.

Finally, I'd be a bit wary of solo artist collaborations, particularly if they're one offs. That's not to say that categorically two-piece supergroups (where both members had solo careers) cannot exist, just that there should be a line between those and a mere collaboration. 181.115.110.18 (talk) 00:42, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's an incredibly subjective and dodgy page. A lot of these "super groups" are just people who were hardly notable anyway mixed with other people who are hardly notable. A bugbear of mine are ones where it is three members of a group joined by some random person from another well know group as a one off thing. However to clean this up would be so messy I've not got the time or the energy to do so as Wikipedia has become so full of tyrants over the past two or three years I think it's best just to leave it to go the way it's naturally going whilst individual editors who are tired of being bullied just try and produce quality stuff. Cls14 (talk) 22:37, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article about supergroups says it's only a supergroup if its members had successful careers before joining the supergroup. If a band is formed by three people who were previously in three separate bands that each had at least two platinum albums, then that might be significant. But this article is full of people who were never successful, before or after joining the alleged supergroups. It includes a bunch of people and groups who aren't even significant enough to have their own wikipedia article. - 2603:9000:E40B:7500:852E:B7D9:B92D:EFA9 (talk) 03:11, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm another one with doubts over the inclusion of a lot (possibly most) of the groups in this list. Without repeating all of the good points above, the opening sentence describes "music groups whose members are already successful as solo artists or as part of other groups or well known in other musical professions". Many of these groups appear to be comprised of relative journeymen musicians whose previous involvements are of doubtful "success". I would lean towards requiring a source that explicitly describes the group as a supergroup (a number of the group articles themselves don't mention the term or it appears to be the opinion of an editor rather than another source), otherwise it just seems we could rename the article to "list of bands that contain at least two members who were once in another band that has a wikipedia article". danno_uk 12:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The solution is easy, and it's the rule that I've tried to follow on this list: A source needs to describe the band as a supergroup. If you want to list the band, cite a source.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 14:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these supergroup links are extremely tenuous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.253.216 (talk) 21:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These Grey Men

I think that These Grey Men are probably potentially worthy for inclusion. https://www.alternativenation.net/system-of-a-down-rage-against-the-machine-members-announce-huge-album/?fbclid=IwAR1-WxirFNJgIxFU1AyrUCRXMGnX1YMDlk_RQZ2RRhfdsNsvP3ve1apXHVo Centerone (talk) 04:44, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

KPG - wrong year, wrong album name

KPG should be listed under 1976 not 1974. The band did not form until 1975, and it released both of its albums in 1976. Also, the band's second album was called "Motion" not "Movin' On" (the latter was from a different band named KGB). This band is, indeed, a "supergroup," and was referred as one in numerous newspaper articles written at the time (I don't know how to link to these since I accessed them via newspapers.com), including the LA Times from Feb 22 1976. Here are links to the Discogs pages for each album: https://www.discogs.com/KGB-Motion/release/1969755 https://www.discogs.com/KGB-KGB/master/172394 Chipschell (talk) 01:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC)Chipschell[reply]

Inconsistencies

This list is both wildly incomplete and over inclusive. One band + one new member does not make a super group, especially if they only perform once song or one concert. Also the http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/The_Jaded_Hearts_Club is listed as a Super Group but is not present in this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.114.171.109 (talk) 04:23, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article is a joke. Wouldn't try and fix it, someone will just shout over you and think they own the page Sirhissofloxley (talk) 22:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Supergroups

A Perfect Circle and Velvet Revolver should be listed. 2600:1700:6F50:3D50:18D5:BBDB:D58E:7227 (talk) 08:23, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Pornographers?

A glaring omission but they’re too great to slum with the Supergroup moniker, and I can’t bear the thought of adding them to this article’s Byzantine format. I think they’re a perfect candidate for a talk page. Alanrobts (talk) 03:48, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Timberland & Magoo?

Come on... that's a stretch 2601:447:C981:E300:6C6A:15D9:1242:A54 (talk) 00:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]