Talk:Black Ice (album)

"Percussion"??

Phil Rudd is apparently playing percussion. Is this just another way of saying drums, or is he actually playing that instrument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.55.137.184 (talk) 01:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Percussion = cymbals etc - he's always played drums and percussion. Bretonbanquet (talk) 11:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

According to this, a percussion instrument is any object which produces a sound by being hit with an implement, shaken, rubbed, scraped, or by any other action which sets the object into vibration. Therefore, a drum is considered a percussion instrument, but a percussion instrument isn't necessarily a drum. Percussion instruments include drums, xylophones, cymbals, and even the piano.

"black ice"

should this article be renamed to "black ice" since the band announced the name of the new album? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.201.142.33 (talk) 22:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no official confirmation. Where has the band announced the name of the album? Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

If we can keep the discussion here, rather than just reverting each other all the time, that would be good. Undercover.com / bravewords etc are not reliable sources. They do not give any of their own sources for the information regarding the title of the album. None. Therefore it is not reliable. There is no official, or even semi-official, information about the album title. If the article was moved to Black Ice (album), it would get deleted for being unsourced. So let's just wait, if we possibly can, until there's an official report from the band or the record company. This is an encyclopedia not a rumour mill. Bretonbanquet (talk) 11:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it has been confirmed that it will be titled black ice. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comeondontshootme (talk • contribs) 16:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you actually read the above comment? Undercover.com is not a primary source - we are waiting for official confirmation. And please sign your comments, thanks. Bretonbanquet (talk) 16:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It has also been confirmed by Ultimate guitar that the title is in fact "Black Ice".link

SlayerXT (talk) 19:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Ultimate-Guitar.com is just using what these rumor sites are saying, as news. As it has already been said, AC/DC's 15th album, has not been given an official name from the band nor the record company. Until ACDC.com or ACDCROCKS.com specifically says "Black Ice" to be released October 27, 2008, it's all pure speculation. These sources are unreliable and should not be taken for truth. BBFootBallr54 (talk) 18:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

It says it at acdc's website. --> My name is No Name-->

"Lyrics"

Malcolm And Angus Young wrote all the lyrics and music for this album, on AC/DC's website AC/DC.com you can see it here (click on the tracks):http://www.acdc.com/history/. So Brian Johnson does't wrote anything for this album! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexpert77 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

so brian writing lyrics for this album was an unsourced rumor? --66.201.142.21 (talk) 15:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I think so —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lexpert77 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Why hasn't Johnson written anything for AC/DC since the 80s? He apparently wrote the lyrics (or contributed to them at least) throughout the 80s, but hasn't received a co-write since then. What caused the change? Darwin's Bulldog (talk) 16:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Probably because the Young brothers decided to keep the band more under their control, and keep all the songwriting royalties for themselves. The result, of course, is an album with three songs with "Rock 'n' Roll" in the title. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 15:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Black Ice cover

What happend to the cover? If it does get put back on there than what cover will be used sence there are 4 different covers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Westvoja (talk • contribs) 13:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

There's no fair use rationale for that image, and I'm guessing there won't be until the album comes out. If there are 4 covers, we can probably put them all on. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Bretonbanquet is incorrect. There was a valid fair use rationale provided, but the image was uploaded to Commons, which does not host any fair use images. That's why the image was deleted over there.

If someone uploads it directly to Wikipedia and provides the same fair use rationale, it would be fine. We don't have to wait until the album comes out. — Satori Son 12:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Well don't I just stand corrected? Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea where you stand or sit or whatever. I do know that answering a question you don't know the answer to is thoroughly unhelpful. — Satori Son 21:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You seem to make being unpleasant and supersilious a priority, right from the off. Just because I was incorrect, it does not mean that I didn't think I was right. How incredibly officious and arrogant a comment that was, but nothing I wouldn't expect from you. You will be aware that the fair use rationale does not state any information about the owner of the image, by the way. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You're right, the fair use rationale is still missing the ownership info. I already stated that below. Hopefully, no one will stick a {{No copyright holder}} tag on it before we can fix it. — Satori Son 18:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing this is an unreliable source, but i thought it was worth a mention, this unofficial AC/DC news blog posted up 3 different covers. Then it was reported on here and here. kiac (talk) 13:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

The current image is not the cover, the red one is. Or is that the US cover? I was in a music store yesterday and the album advertising everywhere was all red. kiac (talk) 07:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Just realized, this image will be deleted AS WELL. It has no explanation of fair use. kiac (talk) 07:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I've added a valid fair use rationale, but it still needs info on the copyright holder. Anyone know the name and address of the business entity that holds the copyrights to the band's album cover art? — Satori Son 21:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

It'd be the record label? kiac (talk) 05:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Why the fuck is there a UN flag by the release dates? DukePatton (talk) 02:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Changed to Europe. Should have the USA flag as well. Even though i don't think flags are meant to be used in the template. kiac (talk) 05:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Alright now somebody put the damn U.N. flag back up there. I don't know what the hell there trying to prove exactly but it's starting to piss me off. Someone definately needs to remove that and than add the canadian and U.S. release dates. I'd do it if I knew how. DukePatton (talk) 23:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

• The album cover on the bottom with the blue lettering is labeled as the vinyl/deluxe hardcover version of the cover. The vinyl edition has red lettering, not the blue. Can someone fix that so it is correct?

Reference from Amazon is telling me otherwise. Can you please get me a source saying this. kiac (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I see what you're saying. I preordered the LP and have it, and it comes with the red lettering. One indie shop that I checked also showed the blue lettering, but it was a graphic, not the actual image of the real album. I then went to eBay and currently found these next few albums for sale and they had the actual photo of the album, and not a screenshot. Maybe they are releasing the album in blue lettering now? I don't even see the LP on the band's website anymore. I also see that the colors for the CD are currently limited to two right now (at least on the band's website) as well. It's hard to say what the deal is. However, regarding the LP, here are the two eBay items referenced and you'll see the actual album, with the red lettering, as I have it. I found none containing the blue lettering.

• eBay item: AC/DC - BLACK ICE **BRAND NEW 180 GRAM DOUBLE LP VINYL!
• eBay item: AC/DC "Black Ice" 180 Gm Vinyl 12" 2LP NEW w/ New 7"

Thanks. 67.224.23.92 (talk) 18:06, 29 October 2008 (UTC)anonymous

Well, I finally got around to reading the fine print on the CD label. Copyright for the album art is owned by Leidseplein Presse B.V. I'll update the image pages. — Satori Son 19:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

War Machine single

I can't add "War Machine" as the second single under "Rock 'n Roll Train" in the single part of the taxobox. Every time I do add it it doesn't appear, as though I never editied it. How do I get it to stop doing that?

First you need to be able to prove it's going to be a single, which might be hard. "Rock n Roll Train" apparently wasn't a single, so I doubt the next song will be either, unless Satori Son knows better of course. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

No, I don’t know, either. — Satori Son 18:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I happen to have the Rock N Roll Train 7" single, and War Machine is the b-side. I noticed the WM article was deleted because there was no official source that it was a single itself, right? --66.201.142.94 (talk) 13:59, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

No, War Machine was NOT a single, it was released as the B-side of Rock N' Roll Train. Rock N' Roll Train WAS released as a single, but War Machine was not, so please do not re-post it was single--Comeondontshootme (talk) 16:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

History narrative and other suggestions for expansion/improvement

Just a few observations following a drive-by edit.

• The narrative of the album history is missing a lot of pertinent information: i.e when/where the album was first announced, when the title was confirmed to be Black Ice, etc.
• Although the article makes the blanket statement that Aussies will get the album on the 18th and the rest of the world on the 20th (which is sourced), the infobox claims a wide spread of release dates, including Germany getting the album on the 17th (none of which are sourced). When sourced, all of the release dates could probably be worked into the "Album history" section as a cohesive paragraph
• You should probably look at using sources other than the AC/DC official website where possible (although you are doing pretty well so far at a little under half of all sources used), because the site may not meet the "third-party"/independant criteria of WP:Reliable sources "Articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources" statement.

-- saberwyn 10:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I especially agree with the last point. There's really no excuse for using their website, just about every news site in the world has/will post articles on AC/DC, one of the biggest rock bands of all time, they get massive exposure, all you have to do is search - save yourself the trouble of re-adding a different source for the same info. Just my 2 cents. kiac (talk) 16:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

change the top section thing

The thing where it says "this is an article about a scheduled or upcoming album" can that be changed? Since it's out today, and it sounds great —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mamaluigibob (talk • contribs) 02:19, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Removed :) kiac (talk) 13:44, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

The album was released yesterday in Australia and I agree, it sounds great. I bought a copy first thing in the morning and believe it or not there are better songs on the album than rocknroll train. The best would have to be Money made, probably the best song they have ever made, better than back in black. It should be released as a single. Adam (talk) 19:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, the genre is missing--189.202.57.47 (talk) 01:06, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Genres have been removed from all music-related articles on wikipedia. See here (beware, it's like reading a novel). kiac (talk) 01:43, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

not on billboard

the album was released, and yet when the new billboard chart came out today Black Ice was not listed, and the website's artist discography does not even list the album. Anyone know why it hasn't been listed yet? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.220.90.98 (talk) 14:16, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The album was just released. Albums don't appear on the chart until after a week. It will appear on the Billboard online chart this Thursday (10/30/2008). Darwin's Bulldog (talk) 16:20, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

available on LP

Maybe this is a minor thing, but this album is also available on 180 gram vinyl through their website, and the indie stores also get to sell the LP version in the US. The LP comes with the red lettered cover and is a double LP in a gatefold package. Could something be added to the article regarding this? I have the LP, ordered through the website, and it states all songs by Young and Young. Nothing on here about Brian Johnson on any of the songs. The sleeves for both the records have different red and black artwork. I also understand that they have pressed 7" vinyl singles with Rock N' Roll Train on side A and War Machine on Side B, and that the 7" also comes in a special sleeve with it's own unique artwork and is also sold exclusively through some of the indie record shops. The 7" is not available on the website like the LP is. 67.224.23.92 (talk) 19:30, 27 October 2008 (UTC)anonymous

citation needed for it being the longest AC/DC album yet

At the top of the page, it says that it's 'AC/DC's longest studio album to date', and then some genius has added a 'citation needed' just afterwards... Any reason for this? I mean - there's articles about all other AC/DC albums on wiki, it's MOST UMLIKELY that anyone would find it amusing to out up incorrect album lengths... who got the funny idea that we need an outside source to state the obvious (now, I didn't ACTUALLY check every album, but if, as I guess, none of them are longer than BI, then it's OBVIOUS that BI is the longest and if one of them is, the opposite is OBVIOUS). I mean, I respect verifiability etc., but we all know that not every sentence on wikipedia needs to have a source, why does that one?

It was me. I was more alluding to the fact that its a trivial piece of information that wasn't really required there. So i tagged it more so i can remove it at a later date if i choose to write a proper lead section. kiac (talk) 01:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• I actually agree with the above person who raises the question in that I don't think it's necessary to have a citation for something like that. If a citation is needed for that, then a citation is needed for virtually every sentence in every article. I also don't find it to be a trivial piece of information. It's a piece of information that anyone can observe, but the fact that it is the band's longest studio album to date is something that noticeably distinguishes the album from all others that the band has produced. It's something that noticeably makes the Black Ice album unique (it's also something that has brought the album some criticism, as some find the album too long and watered down). If someone wants to move it to a different section, fine, but as the article is written, I think it's something worthy of being kept in the lead. Harry Yelreh (talk) 05:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Well i've just re-written the lead and decided it was worthy of inclusion without a citation. Technically everything should have references, because we're not the ones providing the information, it's supposed to be from reliable 3 third party sources. Something as minor and observant as this though should be fine. Hope the new lead provides a better insight. kiac (talk) 14:10, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

• I guess even as someone who has contributed to featured articles, I need to brush up on the Wikipedia guidelines then. But even if technically everything should have references, realistically and stylistically, no, not EVERYTHING should. There are some pieces of information that are obviously self-evident and yet also worthy of note, and this is one of them. We don't need a citation just for this being their longest album any more than we need a citation just for saying that it's their fifteenth album. I think it reads well as you've re-written it. Harry Yelreh (talk) 04:27, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Track spelling

The AC/DC website (http://www.acdc.com/history) has the songs spelled one particular way, with each word's first letter capitalized, and the use of N instead of 'n (except for the first track). But the track titles on this article keep getting changed to different spellings (and capitalizations). The official website has the tracks listed as:

1. Rock 'n' Roll Train
2. Skies On Fire
3. Big Jack
4. Anything Goes
5. War Machine
6. Smash N Grab
7. Spoilin' For A Fight
8. Wheels
9. Decibel
10. Stormy May Day
11. She Likes Rock N Roll
12. Money Made
13. Rock N Roll Dream
14. Rocking All The Way
15. Black Ice

Should we not follow the same spelling the band uses? Are song titles not considered proper nouns? If this is the case, should we not change every purposely misspelled word in every song title on Wikipedia?

I for one think that we should use the same spelling that the band does. Any comments for or against? - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Forget what the website says - there's no guessing who inserted the titles on the website or whether they're correct or not. We should just go with whatever is written on the album itself. Also, regardless of how titles are spelled by the band, titles like "Spoilin' For A Fight" are always shown grammatically on wikipedia with regard to capitalisation, in this case "Spoilin' for a Fight". Similarly the 't' of "the" is never capitalised. Misspellings such as "Spoilin'" are left as they are. As for the 'n' of "rock 'n' roll", I have no idea, but a capital 'N' looks ridiculous, nd AC/DC have never used one before in their many "rock 'n' roll" titles. Does the website really show a small 'n' in track 1, and a capital 'N' in the others? If so, it's further proof of its unreliability. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:17, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Here's the MOS WP:ALBUMCAPS Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I think the N should be done like this 'n'. Incidicating the missing letter on either side. The titles definitely need to be spelt the same way, just the capitalization needs to be done properly. Refer to my talk page for more of this conversation. kiac (talk) 01:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

chart performance

This reference [2] states that the album has debuted at no 1 in over 29 countries one of them being Japan. Should all these countries be listed in the chart performance table _||_Adam (talk) 02:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

The countries in that article can be, yes. I was getting around to it, i'll do it now. kiac (talk) 03:09, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done kiac (talk) 03:17, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for that. I should have chipped in but I am at work at the moment. Cheers_||_Adam (talk) 03:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

reff 44 usa chart position

Reference 44 isn't really a reference for the albums chart position in the US. It looks more like an Amazon sight selling AC/DC merchandise. Shouldn't this be removed _||_Adam (talk) 07:53, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

"Reception" ?

The section "Reception" doesn't really say much, except that Brian Johnson thinks it's the best one they've done and a repetition of information, most of which a little higher on the same page, regarding album sales. Seeing as how quite a few reviews are in already, maybe someone should re-write this section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.127.243 (talk) 18:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

November 8, 2008...

Uh, why is it listed as being on the Billboard chart at number one for November 8th, when A) the date the charts came out with it on top was October 30, and B) as of this writing, it's not even November 8th yet?

Alternate Covers

There's three different covers for the CD, gold white and red. I'm sure these should be mentioned in the infobox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyriani (talk • contribs) 22:10, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed here by Lyriani. — Satori Son 18:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

big jack the single

there is no official source of the single. however, i read this in the forum on ac/dc's official site. they said they would release this next month, along with anything goes in the u.k. --Doctoracdc72 (talk) 18:59, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Critical Reception?

We do have a "Reception" line where its mentioned that the album is up for a Grammy, but what about critics response? I don't see any of that, and I think it'd be relevant to the article Scryer_360 (talk) 05:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

That's why i added the Expand Template about 3 months ago, seems no one has gotten around to it, including myself. k-i-a-c (hitmeup - the past) 14:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Supporting tour?

What's up with the highlighted sentence in the following paragraph?
"The Black Ice World Tour started on October 28, 2008 in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania and will continue through 2009. The North American phase of the tour ended in Nashville, Tennessee on January 31, 2009. The Answer, a band from Northern Ireland, was at least through the North American tour."
I think it is missing a part to make it intelligible. Since I don't know anything about the tour, I cannot fix it myself, though. --89.244.98.160 (talk) 15:24, 29 July 2009 (UTC)