Talk:The King of Limbs

Alternative music Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Albums Unassessed

	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.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

"Newspaper album"

okay... WHAT IN FUCK IS A NEWSPAPER ALBUM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.116.138.97 (talk) 10:39, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WIRED says it possible refers to the large amount of artwork, http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-02/14/radiohead-king-of-limbs --194.36.2.230 (talk) 11:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is a reference to newsprint paper and its recycle-friendliness. Perhaps the artwork will be lignin and turn yellow in the sunlight. StevePrutz (talk) 17:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It refers to the layout of the physical album. Imagine a gatefold album -- two cardboard sleeves, opening at a fold -- but taller, with pages of artwork affixed to the inside, so that it seems like a newspaper or a magazine. 203.219.29.254 (talk) 01:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The phrase 'the king of limbs' also appears in the 23rd chapter of the Qur'an."

The only citation for this interesting factoid is to an NME.com article. Can't we get a citation to the supposed Qur'an passage itself? For the life of me I can't find it anywhere. For instance the phrase "king of limbs" does not seem to appear anywhere on this seemingly authoritative page. If no one can verify that the phrase actually appears there and provide a good link proving it, I think this should be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.0.234 (talk) 18:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, it appears to reference the advice of a Qur'an commentator named Ibn Kathir, who seems to have used the phrase in reference to the proper mindset one should take while praying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.0.234 (talk) 19:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IMO it seems extremely likely the band took the name from the tree and it had nothing to do with the Qu'ran. Would prefer to have some concrete indication of the link before it's included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.253.105 (talk) 19:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a disclaimer along the lines that nobody knows whether the band had this in mind; it seems premature to judge conclusively one way or another that the title has "nothing to do with the Qur'an." At this extremely early stage I think it's a given that any information about the source of the album's title is necessarily speculative. The truth is that we don't know; they may well have intended both references, or neither of them. There seem to be only two places where this phrase was found before the album's release was announced, so it seems relevant to the inevitable discussion as to the title's meaning. The article had inaccurately referenced the Qur'an itself; I changed that to an accurate, yet qualified reference to the commentary where the phrase was actually found. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.165.0.234 (talk) 19:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you ask me, the fact that you have to mention that 'it is unknown whether or to what extent Radiohead had such ideas in mind when they came up with the title of their album' makes its inclusion questionable. We have good reason to suspect the tree is relevant to the title but so far no reason to suspect the Qur'an has anything to do with it at all. IMO things are irrelevant until proven relevant (beyond reasonable doubt). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.253.105 (talk) 19:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason we have to suspect that the tree has anything to do with it is that it is apparently a few miles away from where a previous album was recorded. That's fairly speculative--it could be entirely coincidental. A reference to Muslim spirituality is, IMO, not any more speculative, especially considering that previous Radiohead releases have demonstrated that they have an interest in both controversial geopolitical matters (see Hail to the Thief) and transcendent spirituality (see In Rainbows). But for now, again I think the fact that the phrase in question was found somewhere--anywhere--is worthy of inclusion, because that's really all we have to go on. Also, NME brought it up with their mis-citation, so it would be nice to be able to put the lie to their assertion that the phrase is found anywhere in the Qur'an, and show how they might have come to that incorrect conclusion. 71.165.0.234 (talk) 19:57, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that all the album and website art released so far features densely knotted trees (see also the "These Are My Twisted Woods" artwork with These Are My Twisted Words) suggests a strong link to the 'king of limbs' oak tree. Perhaps if it was full of Islamic art instead you might have a point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.253.105 (talk) 20:12, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Such reasoning is speculation. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:58, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So maybe the solution is to delete the entire section? I don't see a principled reason to delete the Qur'an theory, and not the tree theory as well. They're both from the same source (NME), and the band hasn't verified either. I still think it's worth mentioning both as viable theories, as long as they're properly qualified (i.e. as being merely theories so far, just like the number of tracks on the release, or what a "newspaper album" is, or almost anything else about this release save for its title and price). Surely there are other speculative but justifiable theories about art on Wikipedia. 71.165.0.234 (talk) 00:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that all speculation about the album title is just that at the moment: speculation. But I maintain that as speculation goes the tree theory is plausible and the Qu'ran theory is weak. Either way, I'd be happy to see the entire section go, myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.253.105 (talk) 00:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We can't posit theories ourselves on Wikipedia. Stick to the quoted sources as quickly as possible without trying to craft interpretations. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:48, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it. Specifically, I deleted the Qu'ran discussion; NME sounds confident about the tree being the namesake, and tacks on the Qu'ran bit in what seems seems to be erroneous speculation following a Google search. If there's anything to the Qu'ran element, we'll hear more about it very soon. WWB (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eight Tracks?

The article says that the Japanese website for the album states there are eight tracks. I checked the source - the line on the site is that, if you take the download-only option, you get "8 tracks from the album 'The King Of Limbs'". This is clearly a different statement to the one made in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hcd199 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, the website lists "8 Tracks from the new album「THE KING OF LIMBS」" for the download and "CD(8Tracks)" for the newspaper edition. From this I believe it is safe to assume that the album will have 8 tracks. I have already made this change before and explained it in the revision but I guess I'll make it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.253.105 (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any changes you make need to be backed up with sources. At this point, it hasn't been officially announced, so there isn't much reliable sourcing out there. --Muboshgu (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then let's at least mention it says CD, too, not just download. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.253.105 (talk) 00:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]