Talk:Echoes, Silence, Patience & Grace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Echoes, Silence, Patience & Grace article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
This album, single, or related media article, is part of the Rock music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to rock music, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

Contents

[edit] Album leak inclusion

This is an article designed to inform encyclopedic information about the album. The fact that the album was leaked to the internet is a no brainer, but to note this sort of information where no public response is made by the band, producers or other notable sources is considered original research and based on the nature of information, original research about that sort of thing is potentially libelous, which is one of the few actual rules of wikipedia, otherwise wp is predominatly driven by guidelines, not rules. The article is subject to the wikiproject WP:ALBUM, which clearly states that leaked album information is unacceptable except in extreme circumstances (such as with Linkin Park's new album or RHCP's new one, because both bands publicly responded, which the Foos haven't, nor anybody on their management side). --lincalinca 02:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

 It has been identified that this article has had information about a music download of the album leak added to it. In accordance with the WikiProject Albums guidelines, such a date is non-notable information and has been removed. See WP:ALBUM#Leak for further information.

lincalinca 03:42, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Foos-ESPG.jpg

Image:Foos-ESPG.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:25, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Foos-ESPG.jpg

Image:Foos-ESPG.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cheer Up, Boys?

Why is it that one day it says that "Cheer Up Boys" will be the next single and there is even an article for it and the next day there is no mention of it being a single at all and the article is deleted, even though the fact it has a cover means that it will be released as a single soon if it hasn't been already? Sherlock32 (talk) 22:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Every indication is that the single has been cancelled. All of the major retailers (Amazon.co.uk, etc) have taken it down. Normally, I would say, "We need a source for this," but we were using exactly the same sites to claim that it was being released in the first place.
The existence of a cover doesn't mean that a single is definitely being released, and is also not enough to justify the existence of an article. (If the single was never released, we lose fair use justification for posting the artwork anyway.) If you read the last version of the single's article before it was merged to this one, all it said was that it was apparently scheduled for release and then apparently cancelled. There wasn't anything about the song itself. Bad sources and no content equals no reason for a separate article. -- ChrisB (talk) 00:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the clearing this up for me. Sherlock32 (talk) 01:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I've noticed that the article for this song keeps getting reverted. I think it deserves its own articel. I will list the points to my arguement:

  1. It has unique artwork
  2. It was or possibly will be a single
  3. It was deleted, making it interesting
  4. The song itself deserves some looking into

I think we need to keep the article up, even if it was deleted, it was still a single. We have articles for plenty of deleted singles, why not this one!--Gen. Quon (talk) 02:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)