Jump to content

Talk:Blur (Blur album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleBlur (Blur album) 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
DateProcessResult
December 15, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
April 1, 2013Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

<^>v!!This album is connected!!v<^>

[edit]

Inconsistent with wiki entry on Blur (the band)

[edit]

It says in this article that Coxon was responsible for moving the band into lo-fi, but in the Band's article Albairn is credited: "By the end of 1996, Albarn's musical interests had changed from British pop to American alternative rock and lo-fi, influences which dominated[17]."

Who's right? Somebody clean this bugger up...72.78.152.5 07:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indie Rock

[edit]

Removed Indie Rock from the genre as this record was released on Virgin Records - 220.239.250.219 (talk) 01:02, 18 December 2007 (UTC) (ZEROpumpkins)[reply]

Stylorogue

[edit]

I notice this article says they were breaking away with tradition by not having a Stylorogue-designed cover. While technically true, the cover was designed by Yacht Associates, who I believe were a bunch of people who left Stylorouge to set up their own company - so maybe not such a clean break? --taras (talk) 22:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bit late now but finally addressed in article. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  11:23, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blur 21

[edit]

Isn't this box-set a completely different release, issued some 15 years after Blur was? Why is its tracklist included here?—indopug (talk) 19:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just a box set Indoplug, The bonus cd was included when the album's were re-issued (on cd and vinyl as well as digitally). FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  19:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Blur (Blur album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, I will take on this review. I will leave a few comments now, and add more tomorrow. FunkMonk (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be some comma issues with the following sentence: "Producer Stephen Street said lead singer-songwriter, Damon Albarn had started writing"
 Fixed I feel like it has been edited now to make much more sense that previously written. Any further comments on this passage? Touch Of Light (Talk / Contributions) 00:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rowntree and other band members need to be introduced with full names and roles in the article text as well, not only in the intro.
 Done FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  12:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "music" section excessively uses copyrighted quotes. Couldn't some of it be cut down and paraphrased? There are generally a lot of quotes throughout the article that could be paraphrased.
I have cut down the long ones and paraphrased in places. Does it look allright now? FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  18:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a particular reason why the Blur 21 Bonus Disc tracklist needs to be hidden?
I see it's something of a convention to hide bonus tracks in other articles, so it doesn't really matter here, seems to be optional FunkMonk (talk) 16:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do the image captions need to repeat text from the article at length?
 Fixed Seems to be allright now. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  12:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is a "raise-yer-mug singalong"?
Put that section in quotes for now making clear that its the reviewers words.FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  12:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following sentence has no source: "The album features the first song to appear on a studio album in which Coxon not only wrote the lyrics, but also sang lead vocal—"You're So Great"."
 Fixed FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  17:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for these comments, taking a look atm. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  19:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever the solution, it is imperative that this edit war is stopped before the article can pass. FunkMonk (talk) 17:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The edit war appears to have ended 12 days ago. What else is needed for this review to be wrapped up? BlueMoonset (talk) 17:54, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator hasn't notified me here every time something was fixed, I would appreciate if "done" or such was written after each fixed suggestion. FunkMonk (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the absence as I have been busy over the past few weeks. I will try and check the last points now. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  18:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Thanks a lot. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  13:33, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

christgau

[edit]

Robert Christgau of The Village Voice was less enthusiastic and cited only "Song 2" as a "choice cut", indicating "a good song on an album that isn't worth your time or money".


My reasons for wanting to remove this from the reviews section is because, unlike the other info in there, it is essentially only a general clarification of Christgaus rating and doesn't actually say why he thinks that (nothing else on the sourced page). For this reason I therefore do not see the difference between having this stated in prose and saying something like "x reviewer gave it 3 out of 5 stars" and nothing else. Regarding the point about confusing readers perhaps the clarification of what this symbol means could be expressed as a footnote or some other way. FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  18:48, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty self-explanatory; he thinks it's a bad album because "Song 2" is the only good song on it. It doesn't have to elaborate; his terse reviews and brevity is what his columns are known for. I don't see what harm one sentence does, which by the standards of the overquoted section is harmless. Why would anything like "x reviewer gave it..." be stated in prose if it's already in the template? Dan56 (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Britpop

[edit]

With this genre back in the infobox perhaps the Austin Chronicle review could be sourced here. It's quite obviously contradicted in many other accounts so I'd be surprised if I am or will be the only one to have removed/to remove 'Britpop' if there's no source.--TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Britpop is attributed to two sources in #Music--The Austin Chronicle and AllMusic, along with the two sources--Under the Radar and NME--which "contradict" it. Also, citations are usually avoided in the infobox for material already cited in the rest of the article (WP:INFOBOXREF) Dan56 (talk) 00:46, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Blur (Blur album). 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 17:22, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Blur (Blur album). 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) 22:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blur (Blur album). 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) 08:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blur (Blur album). 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) 14:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Blur_(Blur_album)&oldid=1211158253"