Talk:Top of the Pops (record series)

Not compilations

Just a note on the category of these albums - they appear to be compilations, but they're not. They were recorded as albums by a band, not compiled from elsewhere. So, I undid the category change which was inaccurate. 81.153.49.109 (talk) 20:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Top of the Poppers

I've started articles on several albums by them. I'm a huge fan of them but I'm going to try to make the articles as NPOV as possible since they are a "Love or Hate" type of band. I'll only create articles on their most notable albums such as the two which reached No. 1 and the "Best of" albums. Retro Agnostic (talk) 20:34, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this - good to have the two No.1 albums with their own pages. There was also a No.1 cover version album at the time called Hot Hits 6 (see List of number-one albums from the 1970s (UK). However, there is no such group as The Top of the Poppers, so that needs to be removed. There are no citations listed to say that this was a given name - so I'm guessing you've made up the name yourself - I've removed some, but you really need to remove the rest. Still, good idea for a page though and I've enjoyed reading it. --Tuzapicabit (talk) 12:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually "Top of the Poppers" was a name they used themselves, and is quite acceptable as a reference to the group. I don't have a ref to hand, but just do an Ebay search and you'll see albums by them, credited by that name.

Category (again)

Once again, I have removed "Category: compilation albums". These are NOT compilations. They are albums recorded in a studio by a band, not collected together from elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.4.100 (talk) 15:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Re-written

I have done a re-write and attempted to clean up the article and add some extra bits of info. I removed the "expand" and "cleanup" tags, but if it is felt that more work is required, these should be added back in. 217.43.81.99 (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Cover albums

Okay, seeing that these records appeared to be collections of cover songs recorded by a studio band, and not collections of songs from other albums, it would appear that none of these albums are compilation albums. Two other editors above have stated as such, and made changes. I did as well. However, upon reading the article more closely, I find this passage: In 1969 new volumes began appearing at generally regular intervals, with a new LP released every six to eight weeks. Volume numbers were not stated on the record sleeves, each edition simply called "Top of the Pops". So every couple of months, this company put out an album, and once a year they did a "best of" album. So those really are compilations.

I must point out that this argument could have been prevented if someone who knew this, and changed the albums to compilations, had actually given their reasons for doing so.

Also, I removed a bunch of cleanup tags. I'm not sure what the point was. -Freekee (talk) 02:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

1970s

"The cover designs are iconic". Are they? "Iconic", to me, means "widely recognised as representing something". I don't believe that many people even remember the Top of the Pops album covers, let alone consider them to be representative of anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.214.243 (talk) 17:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Not sure where your definition of "iconic" originated. I just did a Google search for a definition and found:

- executed according to a convention or tradition

- Having a conventional formulaic style

- made in a conventional style or pose

I don't think there's an issue, but if you can come up with something better to describe their distinctive appearance, go ahead.