Talk:Daft Punk

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daft Punk article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Daft Punk has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 7, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
October 4, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
May 5, 2013	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Current status: Good article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal 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).

France High‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France 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.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electronic music Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rave (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rave, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.RaveWikipedia:WikiProject RaveTemplate:WikiProject RaveRave

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 8 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 181 days may be automatically archived by .

New social posts year after disbandment.

Good day fellow Wikipedians and Daft Punk fans, as many of you may or may not be aware of at this current moment in time, official accounts of Daft Punk have very recently posted several images on various social platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. As a fan of the duo and an inexperienced Wikipedian, I come to the talk pages to ask whether this recent event is worthy enough to update the page to reflect the strange occurrence on the first anniversary of their separation. Thank you in advance. KnightCamelot (talk) 20:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem anything worthy to mention for now. For the duo, it might be as simple as sharing their material through the years or maybe leading to Musique Vol. 2? We can't speculate. – The Grid (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@The Grid: A revision has been made with the summary of "reunion announced". Would it be appropriate to revert the edit in following WP:CRYSTAL? TIA KnightCamelot (talk) 21:42, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reunion is confirmed.[1] Cheers. Lmharding (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Their reunion is purely speculative. Social media still says (1993-2021) Rpgoof (talk) 22:57, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah...the EDM.com article even says "return to social media". They have made no announcements of reuniting. – The Grid (talk) 14:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Grid is correct. Daft Punk is not reuniting and they only returned to release anniversary content. KnightCamelot (talk) 00:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Livestream vs Stream

I typed "livestreaming on twitch.tv" because I thought that that could somehow highlight the fact that Daft Punk did in fact reunite on 2nd February 2022, at 2:22 PM PT to stream their old event: the fact that they streamed an old event doesn't cancel the fact that they did so at that precise day and time. On top of that, the VOD (video on demand) is not available on their Twitch.tv channel where it was streamed (it's available on the Internet though, some other user recorded it and uploaded it), perhaps suggesting that it was meant to be a rare/unique event, and the fact that it was livestream was important and worth to type after all...? My two cents. Sorry btw, didn't mean to make a meal out of it. JohnnyCoal (talk) 16:17, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daft Punk as a spinoff group

There's been some disagreement as to whether the spinoff parameter should be used in the infobox. I checked over at Template:Infobox musical artist and it seems that the spinoff parameter has been the subject of some controversy over there as well. I would think that past_member_of would be more appropriate but that seems targeted to solo artists rather than groups. I've posted a new topic on the template's talk page to get more thoughts about the issue. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 23:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be "associated acts", which was exponentially more confusing than the parameter that exists now. We replaced it with spinoffs in May 2022. dannymusiceditor ^oops 00:17, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read the history and the subsequent discussions at the template talk page before posting this here. I've also seen that there still has been consequent confusion and I'm totally OK with raising yet another example on the template talk page if that helps to reduce any future confusion. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 00:19, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I saw this after making the revert. I always saw the usage of spinoff as confusing here. Darlin' was a 6-month group that made 3 songs. It's a minor detail compared to the 30 years of Daft Punk. The description of the band is covered entirely in the prose. It feels like using the spinoff field gives some importance that the band came from another group. This isn't the case, especially when the genres changed from rock to electronic. That would be like saying Skrillex is a spinoff from his previous rock group. – The Grid (talk) 17:33, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1995/1996 Tour

I'd like to discuss adding the 1995/1996 "unofficial" tour to the Concert tours section. There are found records of a few shows from this tour in the form of photographs and videos, but the sources are not always the most credible. If we decide that its worthwhile to add this tour to the site, should be call out only shows that we have record of? Or maybe it's best to simply state that a tour happened, but the specifics tour dates, venues, loactions, etc are a not well known? Open to thoughts. Joe from Chicago (talk) 00:59, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The correct way to handle this is to find third-party sources that documents these shows. We really even shouldn't call it an unofficial tour unless third-party sources state that. I know that these sources exist, because I read them myself in the mid-'90s, but they might require extra effort to track down these days. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 01:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Post break up information

I think the section about what they have done post break up might be something where we should not go into detail if it's only about one member. We have articles for Guy Manual and Thomas Bangalter for that detailed info. I can start to see a coatrack effect happening here and it's going to eventually give undue weight to the band's article as a whole. – The Grid (talk) 15:59, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]