Jump to content

Talk:The Endless River

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 108.85.149.233 (talk) at 04:29, 24 September 2014 (→‎November 11, 2014). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Maintained

Sources?

AFAIK there's no source for Jackson being co-producer of the album, also Youth is only mentioned by an unverified Twitter account and not even directly. There's lots of speculation floating around, incl. the possible but unsourced tracklist. Can't we just wait for the official statement coming in the next few hours? 91.58.168.135 (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Few hours are over. ;-) 91.58.168.135 (talk) 17:44, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed

Pink Floyd confirmed the announcement on twitter: https://twitter.com/pinkfloyd/status/486195646203195392 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.79.142.249 (talk) 17:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Record label(s)

The record label does not appear to have been announced. It's certainly not cited in the article, and what is there fails WP:SYNTHESIS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:52, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This issue was brought up with RazorEyeEdits, who I believe was the one originally asserting this in the article. jhsounds (talk) 19:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Funny how you say that it isn't sourced in the article, even though there's an entire paragraph, with sources, on Pink Floyd's label history post-The Division Bell and during the EMI sale. PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 19:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Technically the sources just talk about Pink Floyd moving to a different label, not that the new album will be on it. I believe that is where the repeated question of synthesis comes in. You've argued that this is "common sense" but it would be much better if an outside source connected the dots, rather than a wiki editor doing so. jhsounds (talk) 19:24, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I honestly think a Parlophone band is going to release their albums under Parlophone. I mean, I honestly have never heard of an artist releasing an album under a completely different label to the one they're currently under. That's just how the music industry works. PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 19:29, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you do honestly think that. That's not what Wikipedia requires for verifiability. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you notice the link to WP:SYNTHESIS in my first comment in this section? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Given the promotional image of its summer Campaign clearly listed Parlophone, it will be surely going to release under it, though in accordance with the guideline, one image does not hold value. --G(x) (talk) 07:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-release reception

Mike Portnoy Quote

The line "Mike Portnoy, best known as the former drummer and founding member of progressive metal and rock band Dream Theater, took to social media to state his opposition to The Endless River being released under the Pink Floyd name without Waters. He stated that it was "disrespectful to Roger and everything he built for all those years"" So what? Who cares what some other guy thinks and how is this worthy of inclusion? Is he a noted music critic, or someone who just happens to have access to "social media". Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 13:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that undue importance is being given to this persons opinion given the lack of solid information about the album. Roger Waters has stated several times that he is no interested in being involved, so Mike's opinion is of little worth in my eyes. Chillum 13:16, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Those are pretty opinionated statements. This is an encyclopedia, don't forget. We're not here to prove what's right or wrong, we're here to document. After all, one could also say "who cares about the opinions of some random music critic that nobody cares about?". Mike Portnoy is a big figure in the music industry, being a member of Dream Theater of course, and his quote is pretty useful in helping to document the reaction to the album. Alot of people share his opinion, it's not like he's the only person who thinks Roger Waters should've been on this album. PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 21:31, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with Lugnuts and Chillum, and have again removed this material. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:23, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That isn't exactly an argument, outside of essentially telling me "the first two people are right in my opinion, therefore, I'm going to revert your edits". PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 10:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've been told there was consensus here. Where exactly is it? I've put forward my argument, but it doesn't seem like anybody's listening. All I've gotten is a reply that essentially said my opinion doesn't count for some reason. I've tried to reinstate the material again, with a second reference to verify the notability of Pontry's comments, three weeks after I last posted in this discussion and I've been reverted again with a poor explanation saying that there was consensus. What's going on here? PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 12:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)I've just reverted yet another attempt by User:RazorEyeEdits (aka PhilipTerryGraham) to include this quote. Please don't add it again, unless there is demonstrable consensus here to do so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See above; more specifically, there is no consensus for your addition. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have not seen anybody offer any evidence that this source is a reliable source on the subject of an unreleased Pink Floyd album. Social media is rarely a reliable source, and a secondary source covering social media is not much better unless it takes the same position itself rather than just reporting on the social media. A policy based argument has been for forward and has not been refuted.

I find RazorEyeEdits trivializing people's opinion as "the first two people are right in my opinion, therefore, I'm going to revert your edits" to be a bit dismissive. We have made an argument and it has not been refuted.

The content should remain out of the article until there is a consensus to include it now that a policy based concern has been made about the source. Chillum 16:07, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whole section

I think it sucks that Bob Klose isn't on the new disk,do I get my own section?71.47.189.1 (talk) 03:53, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The pre-release section of the reception subheading is meant to document the reaction to the album before its release. It just happens that a lot of the negative reaction to the album's announcement was because of the fact Roger Waters had no involvement with it and that the album was being released under the Pink Floyd name nonetheless. If there was a significant negative reaction to the absence of Bob Klose, it would be documented. However, there is no significant negative response. Therefore, it wouldn't be true to document that people reacted negatively to the album because Bob Klose wasn't involved. PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 04:02, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

its just lame bro,i got over Waters absence 25 years ago.he is coming out with a new solo album so maybe it should have a section where people get upset about it because he chose to do that instead of working on the new Floyd disk.like I said..its just lame to document him NOT being there.71.47.189.1 (talk) 02:57, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CQuote

Per its documentation, {{Cquote}} is for pull quotes, and should not be used in ariticle bodies, as it is here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I've removed Cquote at your request, and have substituted it for Template:Quote instead. However, I don't exactly understand why it can't be used in articles. The design of the template is just alot more appealing than any other quote templates, especially the boxed ones! PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 10:21, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Backing Vocals "Sarah Brown"?

I'm reading the article and I thought read "Sarah Brown". "Sarah"? Is Sarah or Sam Brown? I think is Sam. Yes. Must be "Sam" or Samantha. Or has she got some sister singer? Maybe. But I think the Floyd's backing vocalist is Sam. "Stop", do you remember?

Who is Sarah?

Thanks! DIGESOC (talk) 09:56, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! I found a singer called "Sarah Brown". She maybe a backing vocal for Pink Floyd. Sam is most known. But "Sarah"? Then, Sam was not on recording sessions. Sorry!!! DIGESOC (talk) 10:47, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disbanded

We now have repeated insertions of a statement, not supported by the given reference, and certainly not supported by sources in general, that "Pink Floyd uneventfully disbanded". This should be removed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:55, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have just removed a further set of uncited references to the band's supposed dissolution. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:34, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misquote

There is a misquote on Footnote # 22: Ostroff, Joshua (7 July 2014). "Dark Side Of Pink Floyd's 'New' Album". The Huffington Post. AOL (Time Warner). Retrieved 11 July 2014.

In the paraphrase the author incorrectly refers to the "Three" as Gilmour, Mason and Wright. In the original article the writer was referring to the fact that in his opinion the three Pink Floyd albums that did not include Waters, Gilmour, Mason and Wright were not as good along with the individual members' solo albums. The "Three" the author of the original article was referring to were "The Final Cut, "A Momentary Lapse of Reason" and "The Division Bell". The page for "The Endless River" should be changed to reflect that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cc27miller (talk • contribs) 01:39, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I've edited the sentence so that it would reflect the referenced article better. Thanks for pointing the misquote out. PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 12:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On double vinyl

It seems that The Endless River will be released as a double vinyl record. This should be added. See: http://www.neptunepinkfloyd.co.uk/photos-of-pink-floyds-new-album-the-endless-river-on-vinyl 162.156.25.153 (talk) 16:55, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

November 11, 2014

The Billboard is giving November 11, 2014 as the release date http://www.billboard.com/photos/6229383/fall-2014-album-preview-new-music-72-must-hear-releases?i=529920 162.156.25.153 (talk) 16:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard's Fall album preview is not reliable, because they got some dates wrong. In the same 2014 fall album preview, they had listed Nicki Minaj's The Pinkprint as having a November 28 release date, when, however, there was no release date determined. Just because a source has a big name like Billboard attached to it, doesn't immediately make it a reliable source. Just sayin' PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 01:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The release date in Europe is November 10, 2014. It seems that November 11, 2014 is indeed correct for North America. It will be 1 CD, 2LP, and limited CD + DVD or CD + Blu-ray release. See: https://www.jpc.de/s/pink+floyd+endles 24.84.24.60 (talk) 22:14, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
According to Amazon.com, it will be released in the states on November 10th 2014, not the 11th--108.85.149.233 (talk) 04:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody with a Times subscription? - Source Request

The Times has published an interesting article on The Endless River that seems to hold a lot of valuable information about the album. The article is entitled "Pink Floyd launch artwork for The Endless River, their first album in 20 years". The problem is, it requires a subscription to The Times to be able to read. Is it possible that any editor here has a Times subscription so that they can access the article and copy + paste it somehow? PhilipTerryGraham ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 21:06, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You could try posting this at WP:RX as well. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:25, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Endless_River&oldid=626855037"