Talk:Guardians of the Galaxy (soundtrack)

Seperate into different articles?

Considering that Iron Man 2 has separate articles for its score and soundtrack, perhaps we should do the same to the film score and the Awesome Mix Vol 1? Richiekim (talk) 14:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I modeled this off of the page for The Avengers soundtrack. If either of these get enough coverage, maybe we should split. I don't think we are there yet though. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The Iron Man 2 articles should probably be merged. -Fandraltastic (talk) 14:36, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

About a year later, but I've merged the two Iron Man 2 articles. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Score track listing revealed

Film Music Reporter has just revealed the track listing to Tyler Bates' score here.Richiekim (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Order of the albums

It seems clear that the "Mix Tape" is the lead soundtrack, as the Tyler Bates score is only available in the deluxe version as disc 2 alongside the "mix tape". This should be reflected in the article. 24.149.45.52 (talk) 02:16, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Gambling Scene

Is that 'Numbers' by Kraftwerk being played in the gambling scene? Jerry (talk) 05:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

If you are asking to see if it should be added to the page, I am not sure. If you are just asking, please see WP:NOTFORUM. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:58, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

To clarify somewhat - There is music in that scene that is identified in neither Awesome Mix Vol 1 nor the Tyler Bates score. Where should it then be documented once it is identified? Jerry (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable source for any other music used, it can be added to a section headed "Additional music" such as on the Iron Man 3 (soundtrack) page. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:20, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Additional picture

this one should be added http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61XGrxy9TBL._SX300_.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.13.126.21 (talk) 00:19, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Songs from 80s

In February 2014, Gunn revealed that the film would incorporate songs from the 1970s and 1980s, such as "Hooked on a Feeling", on a mixtape in Quill's Walkman, which acts as a way for him to stay connected to the Earth, home and family he lost. In May 2014, Gunn added that using the songs from the 70s and 80s were "cultural reference points", saying, "It's striking the balance throughout the whole movie, through something that is very unique, but also something that is easily accessible to people at the same time.

I checked but I found all the songs are from the 60s and 70s. Bennylin (talk) 14:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

See Also: link to GotG 2

My aim in making this edit was to make it easier to navigate to the other film's score. I agree that the link to GotG2 is already in the article, yet it is buried in a block of text and not easily found: I ran into this when browsing on my phone. I have restored the link and would welcome a discussion as to why it is desirable to have the link only exist inside a paragraph in the middle of the article. — Safety Cap (talk) 17:36, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Three things. First, per WP:BRD, the status quo remains until after the discussion is had. Second, per MOS:SEEALSO: As a general rule, the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body, regardless of where they are in the body. Third, the link is quite easily visible in the section it is, being at the very end of a pretty small paragraph at the first Track listing section. I'll restore the status quo both here and on the sequel's soundtrack article and the discussion can continue. —El Millo (talk) 17:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying. If a rule impacts fitness for use, then it is acceptable—and necessary—to look for alternatives. If we look at the article on mobile (screen shot included), navigation is impaired.

Mobile View

Link to GotG2 Soundtrack options

Choice	Pro	Con
As-is: no 'See also' section, link in article	Strict adherence to MOS:SEEALSO and MOS:NAVLIST	Usability decrease; disorganized navigation; extra effort to navigate
Add 'See also' section and remove link in article	Strict adherence to MOS:SEEALSO and MOS:NAVLIST; Usability increase; organized navigation	First mention in full article is not a wikilink
Add 'See also' section and keep link in article	Usability increase, organized navigation	Minor exception to 'general rule' (one link)
No 'see also' section, remove link in article	None	Usability decrease, orphan, confusion
Add link to lead section, remove link from article	Surface visibility for increased usability, strict adherence to MOS:SEEALSO and MOS:NAVLIST	Potential clutter of lead

Which of the above options do you think offer the most usability? Did I miss some? — Safety Cap (talk) 18:23, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by Usability decrease; disorganized navigation; extra effort to navigate. This is just one of many many links in the article. If the argument is that the link isn't immediately visible in the mobile version without opening any of the sections, then it's a bad argument. The See also section is a place for topics related to the article but not mentioned in the body. Thus, you need to present why this link, and only this link, deserves to be both in the body of the article and in a See also section, while all the other links don't. —El Millo (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)