Talk:Remain in Light/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Remain in Light. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Crosseyed And Painless
"Crosseyed And Painless" was extremely popular for Talking Heads, it was a single, and it had a music video. It was played all over the radio, clubs, and I've even heard it in Starbucks once. Out of all of the Talking Heads songs available on any Rock Band game or downloadable content this is the only song on there that does not have a Wikipedia article (Keep in mind for Talking Heads, Harmonix only chose hits). Any Talking Heads fan or even plenty of people who aren't fans would consider this one of their 'hits' and it's almost annoying to see a song this popular without an article. Please leave feedback as soon as you can. --Mrmoustache14 (talk) 17:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
- What sort of feedback are you looking for? Be bold and write the article. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Alternative Rock?
How on Earth is this album even slightly Alternative rock? I'm deleting that from the genre section, if you have a legitimate reason to put it back please do so. --69.115.134.226 (talk) 14:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
Promo single
Shouldn't promo single "Crosseyed and Painless" be listed with the others, but labeled as "(promo")? --Mrmoustache14 (talk) 03:41, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Rating table
I added a rating table, but it was then removed again; reason given that it was unnecessary. I would argue that the rating table gives a good overview of the critical reception of an album for readers who do not wish to delve into a large section of prose. I would further say that most (over 70,000) album pages contain this template now and that an album page without one seems to be missing something. This, in fact, is why I added it, as I spent time looking for it. It certainly does not detract from the page. Could we review the issue please? I certainly don't want to start a revert war. Dennisthemonkeychild (talk) 11:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Dennis. I was under the impression that most Featured Articles about albums didn't have ratings tables, but looking at WP:Featured articles#Music, it looks like the majority do have them. So I'll revert myself. Sorry to have put you out. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
- No problem at all, thanks for looking into it.Dennisthemonkeychild (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Cover art attribution
I'm afraid that the material you backed out is in fact correct -- the (now) back-cover "airplanes" image was indeed produced by me, Joseph Kesselman, as part of a class project quite some time before the visit which produced the (now) front-cover "masks" image was even planned.
Don't believe me? Ask Bender yourself, or ask Negroponte for that matter.
You aren't going to find a written citation because they're afraid of raising the copyright issue. I'm willing to let bygones be bygones about the fact that this image was used without asking me, informing me, or crediting me -- the first I knew that it had been used was when the album appeared in stores -- and copyright was arguably fuzzy since the image was produced and stored on hardware belonging to the school. But dammit, I want it properly credited now... or, at the very least, I want the erroneous credits pulled.
I doubt I've saved the irritated e-mails about this, and I suspect you wouldn't accept them as a printed source. I may be able to dig out the source for the collage program.
I'd rather get this correction made without having to battle over it. Better for everyone.
74.104.150.94 (talk) 01:51, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
- Please read WP:Verifiability#Reliable sources:
- Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Source material must have been published, the definition of which for our purposes is "made available to the public in some form".[1] Unpublished materials are not considered reliable. Use sources that directly support the material presented in an article and are appropriate to the claims made. The appropriateness of any source depends on the context. The best sources have a professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal issues, evidence, and arguments. The greater the degree of scrutiny given to these issues, the more reliable the source. Be especially careful when sourcing content related to living people or medicine.
References
- ^ This includes material such as documents in publicly accessible archives, inscriptions on monuments, gravestones, etc., that are available for anyone to see.
- For further information, see WP:Identifying reliable sources. 107.10.236.42 (talk) 04:04, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
2002 Brog paper in The American Journal of Psychoanalysis
For those readers who do not have a Springer subscription, the complete 2002 paper by Michael J. Brog.""Living Turned Inside Out": The Musical Expression of Psychotic and Schizoid Experience in Talking Heads' Remain in Light", can be found here. Should this be added as a link, or is it copyvio? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2018 (UTC)