This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Industrial, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Industrial music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Boots (KMFDM single) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RFC bot 05:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Alright, I'll bring this up here, to keep the debates here and on Talk:Help Us—Save Us—Take Us Away separate: I think that the mix titles on these remixes should reflect the most current information we have. This would be the titles as listed on the Extra releases. The Extra booklets say "These tracks were originally released on the Money [or whatever song] CD single...", which would indicate that the band considers these to be the exact same mixes/versions/songs/whatever. Just as a spelling error might be corrected in a future re-release/compilation of that title, so might punctuation errors/things included to look cool, like dashes, be corrected/changed/updated. The dashes in the titles do not appear to be considered officially correct, and so I think these pages should reflect those changes. To avoid some WP:3RR and WP:WAR issues, let's hash it out here, and go with consensus. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 00:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I think they should match whatever the track listings for the releases said, since there are a lot of confusing discrepancies all over the place. Check out the website discography listing for Brute. On the single page, the first track is called the "Nihil Mix", but on the Extra 3 page, it's called the "Single Mix" and is a minute shorter. I don't think we should retroactively change track listings on old releases to match what we think are the same tracks on new releases, as that slips into WP:OR a bit. —Torchiesttalk/contribs 02:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I'll start by saying that KMFDM's Discography section is not 100% accurate and was not put together by the band. Please use the actual albums for information. I have been going off of the albums themselves (Wax Trax! / TVT releases). I put the dashes because that is how it is on the 1992 release of the album, not the Extra release. The album described on the page, as it stands, is the 1992 Wax Trax! release. It is important to be true to the 1992 information (or at least create a new section for the Extra release information). The mixes on many of the singles are slightly different and slightly different in length. I gave the example of Brute (Original Album-Mix). On the single, it contains the extra sound at the end for the transition to the song Trust, however on Extra, this sound is removed. I understand that the Extra album states that these tracks are found on the single, but a lot have been remastered and changed (albeit slightly). If we are talking about the 1992 release, we should write it how it appears on the album in 1992, not a new mix/edit of the song. People need to know that there is a difference between the original releases of these singles and the Extra releases. Thank you for considering. Incredibly Obese Black Man (talk) 02:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I agree. This really aren't the exact same songs, since they've all been remastered. Also, saying the song originally appeared on a previous release doesn't say anything about it being the exact same song, just that the original recording was on such and such release. Also, we can't necessarily trust the re-releases to correct typos etc. Remember Dogman? —Torchiesttalk/contribs 12:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to add, however, that I really don't think it's that important either way. When I changed the slashes to m-dashes a few months ago, it was because that's how I'd always seen them, and I checked the KMFDM site for quick confirmation. I didn't think something like that actually be controversial or disputable. Same thing here: does it really matter if there's a dash or not in the mix name? I really think we should focus more on adding new content to the articles, instead of arguing over punctuation. This is the same reason I try to avoid getting into edit warring over genres. —Torchiesttalk/contribs 14:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Alright, I'll leave them be. I still don't think they belong (they look bad, are inconsistent with conventional naming practices for remixes, and were probably only ever there to look "cool"), but will leave them in the interest of moving forward with article improvement. I see your point with getting into WP:OR, it's a bit of a grey area here (what I quoted was a direct quote from the Extra booklet, which is a little better than the blatant WP:OR of IOBM's "I gave the example of Brute (Original Album-Mix). On the single, it contains the extra sound at the end for the transition to the song Trust, however on Extra, this sound is removed."). If another editor comes along changing them back to spaces, though, I will support that change, and we can take it to a larger group of editors to hash it out then if need-be. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I don't mean to drag this on any further, but I just want to make it clear that the dashes are half of what we are talking about. The other half being the track lengths. The tracks lengths are different between the original and Extra releases. Put the Extra track lengths on the Extra album page, and the 1992 track lengths on the original release page. We are all collectors and understand that there is a difference. To generalize would be to provide false information. Incredibly Obese Black Man (talk) 23:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)