Talk:Of Montreal/Archive 1

Archive 1

POV

"perhaps the most overlooked" seems a little POV, and I'd like to see some references for the love of 60s music and The Beatles/Brian Wilson bit. I'll come back to clean up and expand this article when I'm a little less tired. Lemme put this link down here for a future reference: [1] I actually just got back from an Of Montreal show, it was great fun. --Andy M. 09:03, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

i edited it to make it clear that "I Felt Like Smashing my Head Through a Clear Glass Window" is a cover. Cometboy 17:01, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Nudie-ness?

Should we mention Kevin Barnes' ever-popular nude performances? Or is this trivial? There's 'In 2007, Kevin Barnes performed five songs nude during a performance in Las Vegas,' but there's more to it than that. 72.69.97.122 04:28, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Possibly it could be incorporated in a section that discusses their live shows, costume changes, georgie fruit, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.12.253.162 (talk) 01:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

It does seem to me that in the case of Georgie Fruit (as well as Ziggy Stardust for that matter) there should be a biography page. I was redirected to the Of Montreal page when trying to find more information on the alter ego on its own. Considering that Georgie Fruit is less a prop for Barnes as was the case with Bowie's use of an alter-ego, this split or splinter personality is more psychologically potent than any description of onstage antics will characterize. In practice, the melo-drama of the stage show will more likely marginalize the Georgie Fruit component of the Skeletal Lamping album. (Essentially, Barnes uses Fruit as a FOIL mechanism for illuminating and deconstructing his own personal demons.) --Mfg.tendo (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.145.220.226 (talk) 16:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

of Montreal or Of Montreal

I was always under the impression that the official title of the band is "of Montreal", with a lower case "O". Could anyone confirm this? -Deus Homoni 01:03, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The website has them with the capital O. I've never known them otherwise, either. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 03:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit split on their albums listed for sale.[2] --waffle iron 04:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit split on their actual albums, too. Between the fact that the actual article is going to be capitalized per mediawiki shortcomings and the website, I don't think it needs to be moved, but I won't argue much more in either direction. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 04:37, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

With the exception of the website ("Of Montreal") it is usually "of Montreal". Of the six CDs I own, it is printed as "of Montreal" on all but the Sunlandic Twins ("of montreal"). The Bird Who Continues to Eat the Rabbit's Flower" contains a handwritten note from Kevin, in which he writes "of Montreal". I think lowercase wins. --Icecreamfundae 05:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)icecreamfundae

I changed the "Of"s to "of"s. I think it's more correct, and I'm a big fan of accuracy.Icecreamfundae 05:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I agree that "of" is more accurate. --TM 06:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I notice the main article's name has been changed to the lower case spelling. I thought you couldn't begin article titles with lower case due to technical restrictions?--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 13:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

We can now. :) JonasRH 15:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I have changed it back to "Of", per WP:NC#Album titles and band names. --PEJL 12:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:NC#Album titles and band names, this is a unique case going against the standard, as discussed extensively above, therefore, I'm changing it back. --TM 17:02, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The discussion above does not seem to have occurred with knowledge of the policy, since it makes no mention of it. (That's why I changed it without discussing it first.) The Wikipedia policy for capitalization of band/album/song names is to normalize capitalization, for consistency. The policy unfortunately uses the wording "unless it is unique", which is often misunderstood, and in practice generally disregarded. From what I can tell that clause stems from an attempt to allow for alternate capitalization for classical music. In this case however, the clause doesn't apply, since the name "of Montreal" is in fact not unique, as evidenced by the fact that it is not consistently capitalized as such (as noted above). Therefore it should be changed to "Of Montreal". --PEJL 23:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I have therefore now changed it to "Of" again. --PEJL 09:22, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

They recently did an interview with Interface (AOL) and they said it should definintely be 'of,' not 'Of.' http://dl.aol.com/index.html?date=2007-05-25&ncid=AOLMUS00280000000001&video=5 71.171.203.223 05:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Nevertheless, we should follow our naming conventions. --PEJL 10:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Why? If the correct spelling is "of", why should we change it to one that is incorrect, thus consciously including wrong information into the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SoWhy (talk • contribs)

Because we have naming conventions that say to normalize capitalization. --PEJL 20:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Even when that means that the information in the article is wrong then? Is that the point of those conventions? --SoWhy ^Talk 12:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Names of bands, albums and songs are often capitalized differently in different circumstances. One could argue that there is no right or wrong capitalization in such cases. It was noted above that this is the case with this name as well. And even if it wasn't, we should follow our naming conventions (or lobby to change them). --PEJL 23:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually it is noted above, that the band themselves say it's "of" (last.fm corrected it as well). I don't see a need to change any guideline, it should be the core principle of this encyclopedia that it's information is as correct as possible... --SoWhy ^Talk 12:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of their statement that "of" is correct. I was referring to the fact that it was noted above that they have themselves used both variants (on different albums, for example). I don't see a need to change the guideline either, but unlike you think we should follow the guideline. --PEJL 12:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it is "unique" in the way the guideline specifies. The above statement is not correct either. If you check the above link, it has only once the upper-case "O" which might most likely be a typo. If you look at the covers of all their albums on WP you will notice that the only time the "O" is written in uppercase is when all letters are capitalized. I think "of Montreal" is the way it should be, the albums and the band themselves support this, and the article should reflect it... --SoWhy ^Talk 10:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It is unclear which statement it is that you mean isn't correct. Also, you just proved that this isn't unique. And even if it was, see above for my interpretation of what the statement about unique names is meant to achieve (and not achieve). I see no reason why this article should not follow the guideline (as it is commonly interpreted), when so many other articles with similar naming issues do follow it. I think the article could say something like "Of Montreal, often typeset of Montreal, is a ...", which is what articles with similar naming issues sometimes do (see for example Matchbox Twenty). --PEJL 12:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I haven't. I pointed out correctly that the upper-case "O" is a exception to the rule. One typo does not make it less unique. And yes, I read your interpretation but it is hardly right to say "I interpret unique this way..." and then say "oh, unique means..." and say what your interpretation is. I see no reason why your interpretation has to be the correct one just because other articles do it that way (see argumentum ad numerum). I think following the guideline with your interpretation leads to conflicts with WP:V because it deliberately spells something wrong although no single source claims that it is to spelled that way (yes, there are those who just do but they do not claim it to be correct. On the other hand, we have album covers (see Icecreamfundae's comment) and interviews of the band to tell us how to spell it correctly.) --SoWhy ^Talk 16:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I think one of the core differences between our points of view is that I think spelling and capitalization are different things. If one were to interpret the "unique" clause the way you do (which I admit is a more literal interpretation) most of the article names (and band names and track names and whatnot) that currently use normalized capitalization on Wikipedia would need to change. Besides being a huge change, this would also make things rather arbitrary. Even more arbitrary if one were to claim that certain differences shouldn't be considered because they're supposedly typos. (As noted, I don't think differences in capitalization are really differences in spelling, which wouldn't make this a typo at all. I also think it would be very unlikely that the band would unintentionally capitalize their own name in a way they didn't want, much less actually make a typo in their own name.) --PEJL 19:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I never said the band unintentionally capitalized it. I just said that above link to the Polyvinyl-store has it once with "O" but that's not something the band themselves set up, is it? If you'd check their own homepage and read some of the texts, you will notice it is spelled "of Montreal". My "typo"-claim was only for the Polyvinyl-link above, not any official releases. To say that my interpretation of "unique" is not to use because it would mean a huge amount of work is not a reason that I am wrong. And such changes can be made by bots with search+replace. I don't think that's much work to do if someone would want to. But that's not the point, we are talking only about of Montreal here and how this band's name is to be spelled. And that's why I think the interpreation of "unique" has to be conform with WP:V. That is, the article has to be named the way the band is spelled (on a side note, I would support spelling "matchbox twenty" correctly as well). --SoWhy ^Talk 10:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The point about it being a huge change was not that it was a large amount of work to do, but that it was a significant change from the way band/album/track names are currently capitalized, which should be discussed for articles in general, not just this article. As you say, you think it should be "matchbox twenty". Therefore I think it would be better if this discussion was moved to WT:NC. --PEJL 21:01, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The matchbox twenty remark was just to illustrate my point. My concern is this article and the ones associated with it... --SoWhy ^Talk 07:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

of Montreal's MySpace has the name written "of Montreal" several times. Can we please figure out if it follows the rules because it is apparent that the lowercase spelling is accurate.Seldomburn 03:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As for me, I am happy to see it corrected, that is, if PEJL does not interfere and start an edit war over it. I don't think we need that. My offer for discussion on the conventions' talk page was completely ignored and if noone wants to talk about the conventions which caused this problem in the first case, I'd say, we go with WP:IAR and correct it. I would just like to hear PEJL's statement before doing so, as to avoid aforementioned possible edit-war. --SoWhy ^Talk 08:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I have now added a note to that discussion. Please don't ignore the rules just because you disagree with them. --PEJL 11:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

First of, WP:IAR is made to ignore the rules. Second, I don't disagree with the rules. I disagree with your interpretation of a rule. --SoWhy ^Talk 20:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As I noted at WT:NC, this has been discussed numerous times previously, so it's not just my interpretation of the rule. I am only interested in upholding what in my experience is the common interpretation of the rule, in order to have some consistency in Wikipedia. If the situation were reversed and not normalizing capitalization was the norm on Wikipedia, I would be arguing for "of Montreal". --PEJL 20:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As I said before, the fact that it has been done like this all the time or that many people support it, does not make it right. You have yet to explain how this is consistent with WP:V... --SoWhy ^Talk 09:21, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Suppose a band (this band for example) said that their band name (or album name or track name or any other title) should be spelled in all caps: OF MONTREAL. Suppose it said that their band name should be boldfaced: Of Montreal. Suppose they dictated that it should always be printed in purple 24px boldfaced italic Arial: Of Montreal. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and the current consensus is to draw it at not messing with the spelling of titles, but to normalize their capitalization. No doubt some people prefer the line to be drawn somewhere else, such as you are proposing. But as long as we are drawing a line somewhere, we have chosen to disregard WP:V in this aspect. See also WP:MOS-TM which makes this point more clearly than WP:NC does. --PEJL 15:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but I rather reject your try to argue ad absurdum. There is a line to draw somewhere, that much is true. But we do not have all uppercase or 24px Arial (in pink) here but a single lower-case "o". My view is as much consistent with WP:MOS-TM and WP:NC as it is with WP:V. All your examples are not because those would be questions of style, not of capitalization. Style can (and should) be represented in the band's logo. --SoWhy ^Talk 09:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I was talking about the general case (only using this case as an example), responding to your question how using normalized capitalization could be consistent with WP:V. The point that WP:MOS-TM makes clear is that the official capitalization of the subject of an article should not always be mimicked on Wikipedia (see examples with Realtor and Adidas in WP:MOS-TM). As you admit that a line has to be drawn somewhere, do you accept that WP:V should be able to be disregarded in some cases? --PEJL 11:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but I think it should be used as often as possible. I think it should be adidas instead of Adidas like we have iPod and eBay instead of IPod and EBay. WP:V should be disregarded if the formatting is not possible as an article name, like different fonts and colors. But capitalization is possible and thus should be observed... --SoWhy ^Talk 16:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

So we have concluded that you disagree with WP:NC (as it is commonly interpreted) and WP:MOS-TM, and that WP:V is not absolute. There are various technical restrictions on article names (see WP:NCTR); the use of fonts and colors is similarly restricted for article names for obvious reasons. Wikipedia only lets the technical restrictions affect the article name, while the text in the article uses the "correct" name (see Gtk Sharp example linked from WP:NCTR). So drawing the line of what WP:V should apply to at what can technically be an article name is not an obvious choice. If we wanted to support fonts and colors for titles and trademarks, we could do so, everywhere except in the article name. We choose not to support fonts and colors (which you seem to agree on) and to normalize capitalization (which you disagree on). There is no fundamental difference between these, it's just a matter of where to draw the line. You are free to argue that the line in WP:NC and WP:MOS-TM should be moved. --PEJL 17:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

i believe the current discussion over here has some relevance in this case. --L!nus 22:28, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

again (just like in this case there is no consensus reached in this talk. refering to it in favour of the form Of Montreal is just wrong. --L!nus 12:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

The guideline applies until there is consensus to change it. --PEJL 15:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Barnes: "The 'o' should always be lower case". [link]

I changed the Of Montreal's in the body of the paragraph that do not begin sentences to of Montreal. It is clear that the lowercase o is the appropriate capitalization. Also, since they are mid-sentence it does not add any sort of confusion. The bell hooks talk page had/has a similar situation with regards to capitalization. A point from there that I found relevant was that in an actual, physical encyclopedia bell hooks is in lowercase, I imagine the same would be true for of Montreal had they an entry in an encyclopedia.

There is related information here. Frankly, the bell hooks page looks terrible. Capitalizing only the occurrences that begin a sentence will not be satisfactory for two reasons. First, it's inconsistent. Second, "of" is an incredibly common preposition that usually occurs in the middle of a sentence, often preceding a noun like, for instance, "Montreal." We can't expect all of the readers to be Of Montreal fans, and we should try to contribute as little as possible to their confusion. No confusion will result from capitalization of the "O," while confusion may result from not capitalizing it. Also, why does it matter what they do in a print encyclopedia? If they do something wrong or confusing, should we replicate it? Djk3 (talk) 12:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Capitalisation - Sorry to revive this yet again, but several pages (for example, blessthefall and iwrestledabearonce) are very frequently stylised without a capital letter first. When I tried to lowercase these titles, I was reverted. To avoid a edit war, I left it. But I don't see how "of Montreal" surpasses "blessthefall" or "iwrestledabearonce" in any way. Same goes for Brokencyde. Their name is marketed and stylized as "brokeNCYDE", and yet that capitalisation is not used. Per WP:MOSTM, I don't see how this page avoids the rule. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13 ^{other crap} 23:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

An official interview with Kevin Barnes states that the band prefers lowercase. The link to this interview is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbZBrCCT4Ww When referencing articles be sure to reference the article as it appeared in its original form (even if they made the "o" uppercase). Everything else, because of this reference, should be lowercase. The size of this debate has me thinking this topic should be addressed in the article in a single paragraph and referencing that interview. It's "of Montreal." The other bands you mentioned would probably need a good reference to make it stick, otherwise it's probably a lost cause. Leitmotiv (talk) 05:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you. --ҚЯĀŽΨÇÉV13' 23:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Was of Montreal formed in 1997?

Can anyone confirm that? I reckon it could be hard to determine when exactly the band Of Montreal was formed, but given that Cherry Peel was recorded from January to February 1997 ([3]), I thought that sounded a little queer. Any details would be appreciated. :) JonasRH 19:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, sorry, I found the answer myself ([4]). Bad research. :) It should've been included in this article anyway. Hm. :) JonasRH 22:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

of Montreal was formed in fall of 1996. I know, because bp told me.--Icecreamfundae 05:28, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

David Barnes' artwork for Of Montreal

Regarding The Gay Parade: "(...)it also featured artwork from Kevin's brother David Barnes, who would continue to do artwork for future albums." Is that right? I remember reading that the second Of Montreal album featured artwork by David Barnes, which would be The Bedside Drama (or The Bird Who Ate the Rabbit's Flower?). I dunno if there's any more truth in that, though. JonasRH 00:46, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I went by what Elephant 6.com had to say, and that was the first mention. I don't have all of OM's albums yet (sigh) and hadn't been able to check. If it's correct earlier, then please change it, but I just wanted to at least make sure David got a proper link. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 01:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

He continues to do all the artwork in the albums. In previous promotional material/official photos he has been listed as a band member, although he doesn't write, perform or tour with them. See the 'closer look' section of his website for details on recent album covers. [5] --waffle iron 04:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Who plays piano?

Who does all that crazy piano work on Coquelicot? PrettyMuchBryce 11:24, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I think Dottie was with them at that point. --badlydrawnjeff talk 19:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I just checked the album notes and Coquelicot did have Dottie on the keys. It was recorded during the "everyone lives in a big house together" stage of the band. It should be noted, though, that Kevin wrote and played "The Hopeless Opus."[6] --sigmafactor 21:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. So shes not in the band anymore is that why they never play these songs live anymore? PrettyMuchBryce 01:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Dottie is still in the band. I'm pretty sure Kevin Barnes controls the set lists, so you would have to ask him. --sigmafactor 01:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

they don't playthe songs anymore because a) Kevin claims they've forgotten a lot of them, and b) with the recent success, few people at the shows remember them. Before Satanic Panic came out they were playing them, so it's a new thing. --badlydrawnjeff talk 02:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

That is what I've gotten from Kevin when I've talked to him. Thankfully the band is playing a few songs from the pre-SPitA albums. I attribute it to the fact that songs that have personal lyrics are getting more time, as opposed to the concent album stage where the opposite was true. While I would love to hear a couple tracks off of the Gay Parade live, they would sound a bit out of place. --sigmafactor 02:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

That sucks. I think they should atleast play 'Hello from inside a shell' live. Its such an amazingly written song with such an original chord structure. Anyways thanks for answering my questions guys. I am going to order the sunlandic twins today. I hope I'm not disappointed. It's also cool to hear that Kevin is so accessible. I don't really know much about the band or how popular they are. I kind of assumed they were pretty big for some reason. PrettyMuchBryce 12:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Kevin is accessable because not many people recognize him before the shows. I've been to six concerts and no one goes up to him until after they see the band on stage. They tour so much they are getting a big following, though. They are also very big in Montreal, despite not being from there. --sigmafactor 15:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Kevin Barnes?

Why does Kevin Barnes redirect to of Montreal? Surely he is notable enough to have his own article.

Not per WP:MUSIC I think. And there isn't really much worth putting on that page that can't be mentioned in this article. --TM 22:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Timeline

It seems as though the timeline is out of order. I'm going to do my best to fix it (with supported research).Icecreamfundae 04:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Hissing Fauna Leak

The band's latest album, due out in 2007, has been leaked onto the closed BitTorrent site OiNK (http://oink.me.uk). Since it's a closed site, it's unverifiable. Is there any other way to include this information in the article? Yavoh 23:07, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but the album being leaked isn't too noteworthy, it's quite common these days. --TM 00:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Dying is pretty common too but I still see it in steve erwin's article. Leaking is notable.

Hardly notable, an album leaking is largely trivial in most circumstances; a death is not. A death makes a real difference in a person's life (i.e., it ends,) while leaking does not usually. One notable exception is Radiohead - Kid A, which leaked and gathered a lot of attention. This didn't.

I don't think the leak is significant enough to be included.--Icecreamfundae 06:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed a couple of lines

I removed the following from the article: "There has been some resistance to the title of this album. It has been incorrectly called "The Guy Parade" by numerous sellers, including at one point, but no longer, Apple's iTunes." Firstly because a Google search returns very few results, and those returned are mostly from Wikipedia (with mirrors) or comments from of Montreal-fans who have noticed Apple's misspelling. That makes me doubt there are "numerous" sellers calling it "The Guy Parade". Secondly because it isn't very relevant information IMHO (but you could try the album article). :-) JonasRH 09:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Thank you.--Icecreamfundae 06:33, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Blikkfang

Does anybody know anymore information about Blikkfang? I have looked it up and it seems to be some sort of place in Oslo but i cant read anything about it because it is all written in norwegian

Blikkfang is a Norwegian word used mostly in advertising. It refers the kind of ads, or possibly which part of the ads, which catches the viewers attention. A huge ad in a newspaper with a lot of air around some small, centered object would have a good blikkfang; the same would a naked person or lots of strong colours. I dunno if it's a place called that too. --JonasRH 06:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Blikkfang is Kevin Barnes' side project with the front man of MGMT Blikkfang on Purevolume I've read that it's also a town in Norway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.77.186 (talk) 23:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

The track "A Cloud Crashes"

This track is actually of Montreal's cover of the Japanese band ToastGirl's "Chopsticks," which appears on Toast Girl's album Chopsticks best[7]. This has been verified by several board members at the of Montreal board at e6townhall, and is mentioned on Optical Atlas, the elephant 6 blog [8]. 81.66.11.253 (talk) 01:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Lower Case Title

I greatly disapprove of the lower case title of this article. Since the "Of" is part of the band's name, it deserves capitalisation. It is incredibly irritating to see it like this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nick Kalivoda (talk • contribs) 20:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC).

Please see the discussion above concerning why lower case is used. --TM 20:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Reference in So Begins Our Alabee?

I've heard from several people that the "Alabee" in that song is Kevin Barnes' daughter, Alabee. Apparently the "bouyant cherub" and "mousy aesthete" stuff is about her. I've looked all over but I can't find a source, can anyone confirm this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beep Beep Honk Honk (talk • contribs) 02:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

• This mentions it. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Sexual Orientation of Kevin Barnes?

I don't care what he is, I'm just curious. It says he had the relationship with the woman from Montreal, but some of his songtitles suggest otherwise. (see "When a Man is in Love with a Man") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.226.107 (talk) 03:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnes is heterosexual and married to Nina Barnes.

After much debate, it has been agreed (at least on the of Montreal forum - which also includes members of the band, by the way) that, though heterosexual, Kevin Barnes is also Transgender. Rainbows In The Dark 17:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

References

Lineup Timeline & Album Credits

Sadly, I don't own any physical of Montreal album, so I'm not sure whether there are some album credits in the liner notes. The current and past members lists in the infobox are also somewhat confusing when you learn Kevin Barnes often records of Montreal albums all by himself. Could anyone edit/add this info? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.131.110.114 (talk) 03:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Reviving 'of'/'Of'

So the debate below above clearly demonstrates a difference of opinions on the interpretation of the Wikipedia guidelines, I would support the reproduction of bandnames as the band wishes them to be reproduced (as mentioned, of Montreal has been explicitly stated as being correct by the band themselves, see various links in the debate below) since saying the band's name is anything else is, quite simply, wrong. However, I will leave that to be battled out between those who know too much about wiki guidelines. Instead I think that if, for some reason, it is decided that Of Montreal should remain the article's title, then there should at least be a mention of the correct capitalisation in the article, with a reference to one of the videos in which the band clears up the issue (such as on The DL Show). That way wikipedia's (as I see them) anal and self-defeating guidelines can be followed, and people can still be shown the verifiable truth about how to spell the band's name. Now how about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.247.21 (talk) 15:31, 24 April 2008

There's some information relevant to this discussion here. I agree with that convention, that we shouldn't begin the name with a lowercase letter in the article. It can be confusing (especially with the lowercase word being "of"), and it doesn't mean anything different if we capitalize it. As for titling the page, I'm indifferent, so I suggest we just leave it as is. I agree that the "official" capitalization should be noted, so I added that with a link to the video. I changed the word "below" in your post to "above" after moving it to the bottom where it belongs. Have a good day! Djk3 (talk) 18:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Grammatical revisions needed.

I tried to post a clean-up template to address this problem, but it was removed so I will try to address it in the discussion forum. There seems to be either missing words or grammatical errors throughout the article. Specifically we have this sentence: "David Barnes joked that their fans would want to buy the album via MP3 download, but the version that comes with an amazing sandwich." Unfortunately, I'm not knowledgeable enough in the subject to make this correction myself, but it is very clear that this is not a proper sentence. --Arthur.science (talk) 08:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

And if it's a quote from the people themselves, there's little you can do about it, except omit the entire quotation. You may be able to use brackets [] to fill in the correct grammar, but I'd only recommend that if it's a minor fix. Leitmotiv (talk) 21:01, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

In the article this sentence is not quoted so I take it to be a paraphrasing. If it is a quote verbatim then quotations should be used so that it is understood where the grammatical errors came from. --Arthur.science (talk) 17:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

A group full of faggots.

Of Montreal (styled as of Montreal) is a group full of faggots. came up on my Google search? It this correct?Supahshadow (talk) 11:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Of course not. It just means that vandalisim was there for as long as it takes for google to bookmark the contents, which is pretty long. Hope this helps. Buggie111 (talk) 00:50, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

LOWERCASE "of" Montreal

Regardless of the possible good faith in which these edits are being made, I'm still getting tired of rectifying all of the "of" back to "Of" ~corrections~ people are making. Are we not humans!? Leave this behavior to the bots. 66.14.26.138 (talk) 19:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

edit: Forgot the interview source. 66.14.26.138 (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Of Montreal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080930234857/http://ofmontreal.net:80/blog/2008/09/27/we-will-only-propagate-exceptional-objects/ to http://ofmontreal.net/blog/2008/09/27/we-will-only-propagate-exceptional-objects/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Lowercase o in title?

This article should be named of Montreal, not Of Montreal... rationale: the band uses the lowercase o on literally everything they distribute. examples: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ce-2e2XWAAIOs5E.jpg http://www.ofmontreal.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/OM-website.jpg https://cps-static.rovicorp.com/3/JPG_400/MI0003/310/MI0003310519.jpg etc.

Phonesyfreakies (talk) 01:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Of Montreal. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321185403/http://jackriley.independentminds.livejournal.com/18598.html to http://jackriley.independentminds.livejournal.com/18598.html

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) 19:47, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Of Montreal. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120505134601/http://www.joyfulnoiserecordings.com/news/89 to http://www.joyfulnoiserecordings.com/news/89
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.insound.com/search/artistinfo.jsp?p_id=P++1038063

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) 05:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Of Montreal. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304063207/http://shorts.nthword.com/2012/02/of-montreals-paralytic-stalks-review.html to http://shorts.nthword.com/2012/02/of-montreals-paralytic-stalks-review.html

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) 13:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)