Talk:Fuck the Millennium

Expanding this article

I don't think we had a lot about in 2K/K2 Plant in our other articles - I've pasted in what usable stuff we had. I think it needs a tweak vis a vis sections, flow and the intro. Beyond that, though, if I recall correctly there is a sh*tload of stuff in the Library about the 2K comeback. Here would probably be as good a place as any to put it, even if it's about the Barbican appearance or the Pyramid rather than the single?

On that note, maybe 2K (band) should redirect here? (not a rhetorical question, still thinking abt it...) --kingboyk 19:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

That's right, there's a load of stuff in the Library. The Barbican appearance is relevant to the single. I too was wondering whether 2K should redirect here, and I think it should, because "Millennium" was the only 2K project. And K2 Plant Hire was at the same time, with "Millennium" ads placed by K2 Plant, so that incarnation could also redirect here. I personally don't think K2 belongs with K Foundation: the only obvious connection is that "K Sera Sera" was incorporated into the Barbican debacle. --Vinoir 00:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I put K2 into KF because it was "art", and 2K into KLF as music... I think if we actually move 2K and K2 Plant Hire, we should be looking at creating a new article... but for now let's see how we do with this one. --kingboyk 06:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, I see. The art/music divide seems reasonable to me. --Vinoir 07:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm liking the "Composition" section very much! Makes for a fine read. --kingboyk 19:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you want to redirect 2K (band) here or not? --kingboyk 15:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

(Decisively) "Yes!" :) --Vinoir 16:51, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm liking this man! I enjoyed reading it. For sure a worthy GA candidate when it's finished and stable. --kingboyk 18:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Great! Thanks muchly. Bit more to do on themes, promotion, 2K, the name (I'll either factor your footnote in or include in the main text), and a sample (I've got the CD single but it steadfastly refuses to become an OGG, either directly or via MP3 format - it'll get sorted though). Well done with the new categories by the way. --00:20, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Title

Surely "***K The Millennium" is the title? --Bonalaw 12:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hard to say really. The star star star K might mean something, or it might just be censorship to get the record into the high street stores. The lyrics say "Fuck" and that's how Amazon list it. I think it's 50/50, and since Wikipedia isn't censored let's not be coy - the song is all about fucking the millennium, after all :) --kingboyk 12:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm wavering on this... Blast First use both, but ***K makes some sense. What do you think, Vinoir? --kingboyk 12:51, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Bill refers to it as "Fuck" in "Now That's What I Call Disillusionment II", in 45, and merchandise of both "***K" and "Fuck" was available. On the other hand, the track listings are generally "***K", even though the uncensored tracks use the "Fuck" sample. Argh! This is a perfect example of how tricky it can be to categorise The KLF's stuff. My opinion is that although it's really a song with two titles, the track listing should win: "***K the Millennium" is probably the better place for the article.

I think that this particular "K" is well loaded, symbolically. For a start it's Kallisti and 1,000. But also, the conclusion of Illuminatus! equates Hagbard Celine with the Fifth Primus of "The Five". Interpreting this as K=5 gives you 2K=10 (as in 10th anniversary). They'd've realised this, I'm sure. They liked to load their numbers. When they dished out the Tenants Super for Xmas 1995, there were intended to be 6,250 cans (5^5 x 2). --Vinoir 14:03, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[Resorting to the tried and tested ignoramus approaching of mocking that which they do not understand.] Erm, whatever you say Teach' :P

I've put a reference placeholder into the intro. If you like it, can you uncomment and fill in the blanks? --kingboyk 13:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Themes

A couple of minor criticisms/debating points:

• I'm not sure how "subversive" the graffiti was this time. It may just have been taking the piss, to be frank - "which trademarks do we want to reference in our naff comeback?". Either way, don't stray into original theory :) - but there's no reason why we can't do it on the talk page so ponder this. I wonder what would have happened if FTM had got to number one and the press had gone mad for it? Do we think Bill wanted that? (I don't, I mostly believe him this time)...

Yes, it was definitely taking the piss and referring to past traits, so I see your point. --Vinoir 10:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Boats and seamanship. It actually runs deeper than that. There's a seafaring song on WKTJ? (I was listening to it last night). "Far below... a small boat sails... catching fish from the sea" (original White Room). Bill was a trawlerman in an earlier life wasn't he? The sea seems to run deep in his veins. I wouldn't be surprised if he's written about it somewhere. --kingboyk 05:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

That's right - I will be mentioning his trawlerman years. --Vinoir 10:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC) However, I think I'm right to say (do correct me otherwise) that the peril element was not brought in until "America". --Vinoir 15:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Unless you've seen this theorised in print somewhere, you're in danger of straying over the no original research theme. Wasn't the seafaring in "America?" kind of incidental? It's more of an Illuminatus/bigging-themselves-up kind of song I'd have thought.

Also, the use of the hymn is another Drummond favourite, see Juruselem on the Moors... --kingboyk 15:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't personally think that seafaring was incidental to "America", but I certainly don't want to imply that the hymn in FTM is a direct reference to it, so I've changed the prose around a bit. How does it look now? --Vinoir 11:19, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Much better. Perhaps need a little bit of editing for flow, which I'll look at later. My objections have been countered, though, thanks. We stick to facts or cited opinions. --kingboyk 11:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Discog

Because it proved unpopular in our last FAC, I removed the seperate References section. You might therefore want to add a citation - and quite possibly my note about the status of Lazlo's FAQ - as a footnote. I would have done it myself but I don't know for sure where you got the info from/I'm lazy. --kingboyk 10:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC) P.S. Loving this article now, should definitely aim for FA on this one.

Jobs to do from Peer Review

• "acid house oriented" -> a better way of expressing that the song was acid-house based but a bit of a mixture of styles

--kingboyk 15:37, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Good Article nomination has passed

Congratulations! The Good article nomination for Fuck the Millennium has passed. Many thanks to all who were involved in the creation of this article.--SomeStranger^(t|c) 14:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Excellent news! Thanks ever so much for taking the time to review it. --kingboyk 14:48, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I'm late but here is another peer review

As I promised, here is the review. Once again, really excellent job. You guys really set a standard that is impossible to beat!

As before, I have some small edits regarding spelling and grammar:

• (Comma after "continued"): It continued "Jimmy Cauty and Bill Drummond invite you to a 23 minute performance during which the next 840 days of our lives will be discussed"
  • comma now inserted --Vinoir 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• "K Cera Cera" -- Is it supposed to be “K” or “Que? (Maybe I'm stupid and its not the old Dinah Shore song)
  • no action necessary --Vinoir 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• In the Drummond Quote – is it Crapness or Crapiness? I would want to actually hear the comment to see if the original writer left the "i" out or if that is the way Drummond said it (It very well could be the way it was said)!
  • "crapness" was the word Drummond used. --Vinoir 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• Misspelling I think: The adverts were placed under the pseudonym K2 Plant Hire Ltd., who duly reported that 18,436 (89%) of respondants ... Probably should be Respondents. Is this a british vs US thing? I tried to check and could not find that brits spell it with an "a" either.
  • spelling now corrected --Vinoir 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• Another misspelling. The Comeback, drawing on the sad, pathetic nature of the whole thing, the desparation of all concerned to exploit whatever they can from the myth ... should be "desperation".
  • spelling now corrected. --Vinoir 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• Perhaps a nit: Near the end : "... one of Acid Brass' performance of "What Time Is Love?". The formats and track listings are tabulated below" Seems to me that it should say "an Acid Brass performance" OR "one of Acid Brass' performances".
  • ungrammatical prose reworded. All useful comments, cheers. --Vinoir 15:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

In addition to those minor comments, I also note that the work you guys have done, in toto, is like a small book! You have really given wikipedia a gift of all that time and effort, when you could have perhaps published it! However, there are repetitions between the articles. In particular the section called "themes" should probably be deleted from EACH of the entries and turned into its own page. (Perhaps a one sentence summary and a link would be appropriate). This would lighten each of the entries a bit plus it would make those themes more interesting, being on a page of their own. (I kinda wanna go read the illuminati trilogy now!) I also think that the interesting bits about K2 Plant Hire after describing the 89% response is probably unnecessary. It seems to water down the article. --Blue Tie 13:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Blue Tie. It's very hot here and I'm sweating like a pig :) so I'll just pick a few points for reply now. Myself and/or Vinoir will reply to/act upon the others later.

• K Cera Cera is correct. They love "K"s.
• Quotations are generally pasted in from the source (if online) without alteration, or typed in verbatim if from a book. This one is from a book I believe, and I imagine "crapness" is correct... but we'll check it.
• Writing a book: Yes, we've been a bit stupid haven't we? :) There's no published KLF biography, perhaps we should have written that instead. Well, never say never! :)
• The repetitions are generally deliberate. If we are to get the articles Featured, they need context, they need to stand alone. (When we started, we didn't go into such depth, as I assumed that people would follow the links. However, that doesn't seem to be what's required. We'll find out for sure when we get to Featured Article Candidacy and more experienced editors review our work, but I'm sure we have this right).
• Illuminatus is a fine read, but it's rather heavy going! It's also a bit dated in places. I found it worthy of my time, certainly.

More later and thanks again! --kingboyk 13:50, 12 June 2006 (UTC) P.S., Vinoir, note that we have a "todo" list now, so anything we want to act on can go there. I'm just too hot right now to look at the substantive issues!

Ah, Blue Tie, your interest, appraisal and insights are very much appreciated. Those grammatical points will be dealt with now. Regarding the "Themes" sections, these do indeed make a number of repeats, and this can be irksome to the reader who is working their way through the articles. I too think that this needs reassessment, but I'm not yet sure that there's a better way: we've found from past experience that each page should be fairly self-contained, which seems to imply that the provision of sometimes-repetitive "Origins" and "Themes" sections is necessary. And similarly, the "Themes" section in The KLF article may be trimmable, but I do believe that its rightful place is where it currently is, since the main article would be incomplete otherwise. But yes, it definitely requires thought. Regarding the activities of K2 Plant Hire, their exploits listed here relate to the millennium in one way or another.

Yes, my ambition has long been to make an objective documentary of these guys, but I don't suppose it'll ever happen, and besides, their copyright-free approach applies satisfyingly to Wikipedia. kingboyk, I'm liking these to-do lists.

Thanks so much for another detailed review. --Vinoir 13:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Peer review

The peer review has been concluded. When you're back Vinoir let's move this on to FAC. Let's also get some of the other articles promoted/dealt with, so we can move on to new things. (see Bill Drummond for some of my recent work). --kingboyk 08:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Illuminatus spoiler warning

I don't think that "the novel's final chapters reveal that the JAMs' leader is also one of The Five.[24]" is necessary in this article it is just fluff that adds weight, and if we get rid of that we can get rid of the spoiler warning too. - Drstuey 09:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind trimming out the bit you think is unneccessary? I'll then have a look at the edit and see if I agree or not :) I think you're right that we don't need to talk about "The Five" but I'm not sure how much you want trimmed and I quite like having the quote from the sleeve. --kingboyk 13:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I would hazard that for as long as FTM appears to be the closing chapter in The KLF's story, the closing twist of Illuminatus! is relevant. The sleeve remark is The JAMs' twist. --213.122.86.31 11:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

FAC

I have to say, I've just read this article from top to bottom and I think it's absolutely fantastic. If this doesn't get Featured it's a travesty. Vinoir, please come back! :( --kingboyk 22:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure it'll get the accolade, mate. Keep the faith and well done for your continued sterling efforts. :-) The "Mute" connection queried in the "To-Do" box probably stems from Youth. --213.122.86.31

Thanks, I think it will now too. Supports have begun to pileon and I don't see any reasonable actionable objections :) I'm quietly confident, shall we say. The question now of course is which one to nominate next - 1987 (What the Fuck Is Going On?), All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song), or Whitney Joins The JAMs. I think one of the first two, what do you think? --kingboyk 12:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC) P.S. Who are you? You're not Vinoir are ya? :)

Good good, that's the spirit. If I were you I'd be putting AYNIL up next, and then 1987. The Pyramid Blaster userbox idea is nice, by the way - spreads the word. All the best for now.  :-) --213.122.32.188 13:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)