Talk:The Coup

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


Split[edit]

The members section of the article should in my opinion definatly be split into two seperate articles. I have strated a short article on Boots so if anyone fells up to it they can transfer the info from the Boot paragraph to that article and start a separete article for Pam the Funkstress. 

Roger Workman (talk) 14:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Picture change?[edit]

Does anyone know how to change the main picture on this page to one that DOESN'T make it look like they are terrorists?

-Someone who doesn't know how to change pictures on Wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ndubin (talk • contribs) 00:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Key Songs?[edit]

Is the "Key Songs" area really needed? Seems difficult to determine what "key songs" are, and no other aritst I have seen has a "key songs" section. IanMcGreene 04:13, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

they're so disgusting, why don't you delete it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.14.240.175 (talk • contribs) November 11 2005 03:26

Um. No. Mike Dillon 16:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Epitaph?[edit]

Are they on Epitaph Records now? They were on the Epitaph compilation Punk-O-Rama 10. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.168.14.42 (talk • contribs) September 12, 2005 06:57

Yes, they are on Epitaph. Mike Dillon 16:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Source for Fox News criticism?[edit]

Please provide a source for this (emphasis added):

The Coup's song '5 Million Ways to Kill a CEO', with lyrics such as throw a dollar in a vat of hot oil, when he jump in after it, watch him boil, has garnered intense criticism, specifically on the Fox News Channel.

Kent Wang 18:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marxist?[edit]

They are NOT Marxist. Whoever put that in obviously has nary a drop of political knowledge in their brain. However, they are highly witty and probably the best group of all time besides De La Soul, with Boots Riley being the greatest MC of all time. Boots has said he has no specific political position - HE'S NOT MARXIST, IDIOTS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.69.221 (talk • contribs) March 23 2006 23:41

Dude, chill out. You removed the word "Marxist" from the article at the same time you made this comment. No need to call people "idiots"... Mike Dillon 16:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boots is indeed a communist, and therefore a "Marxist". Check out the lyrics to Dig It. If that's not enough he was interviewed and had this to say:

Question: Define your political agenda.

Answer: I am a communist. I have been a communist/socialist since I was 14 years old. I think that people should have democratic control over the profits that they produce. It is not real democracy until you have that. And the plain and simple definition of communism is the people having democratic control over the profits that they create. When you first have a revolution, you are heading into socialism. People who were against communism have defined communism for us. People that are for communism and who have dedicated their lives and given their lives to giving people power, they are the ones that created the concept.

http://www.lyricsdownload.com/coup-the-boots-riley-on-communism-capitalism-and-patriotism-lyrics.html

It seems like he's talking about "communism" with a little "c", not "Communism" with a big "C" (i.e. Marxism-Leninism). I haven't seen any direct quotations where he says he's a Marxist, Leninist, or any other sort of official "Communist", but there are some lyrics that are pro-Maoist and otherwise complimentary toward Marxist Communism. I'd say on the whole that the Coup's sentiments are "communist anarchist"/"libertarian socialist" since they are generally anti-state and about direct democracy and cooperation. Mike Dillon 03:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In various songs Boots make reference to Mao, so Mike Dillon's above comment is correct and it seems proper to not suggest otherwise. -Zack
if you're so smart then listen to their lirycs and try and find a specific ideology in there. This is like saying democracy is communism because it redistributes *some* of the wealth to the poor. Just one or two ideas from an ideology doesn't put you in a box. If these guys have any specific political agenda it would be Anarcho-Democrat.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't think of any specific instance where Boots references Mao,but many where he references Mau-mau,not really the same thing. And while Boots may agree with many Marxist ideologies, I've never heard him refer to himself as a Marxist. Keep in mind, there was communism before there was Communism. 72.219.54.154 (talk) 20:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I changed this from 'marxist' to 'communist'. He's never referred to himself as a marxist, as far as I know (and contrary to one of the above comments, the two terms are not synonymous). Wetdogmeat (talk) 02:30, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prophetic Album Cover[edit]

The Album Cover of “Party Music” by the aptly named punk rock band “The Coup”. Party Music CD Design was printed in July and was scheduled for release “after Labor Day” during the week of 9/11/01 – immediately the album was pulled from store shelves on 9/12. (Notice the “Covert Labs” (i.e. CIA Issue) detonator, Soviet “Red Star” or “Red Shield” (Rothschild) logo and the “location” of the explosive charges. Notice also the smug smirk on the bomber’s face. JUST A HARMLESS COINCIDENCE??

Who made the design?

Others have noticed! http://www.boingboing.net/2001/09/15/weve_all_seen_the_bi.html The server-date of the picture is 15 Sept 2001: http://www.well.com/~doctorow/foreseeing_the_future.jpg

The World Trade Center was famously the site of a bombing in 1993 that attempted to bring the towers down, so more than one person had the idea of bombing it again--one facetiously, another in earnest--is really not so remarkable. It's not like The Coup put out an album with the Murrah building in Oklahoma City just before Tim McVeigh blew it up. The Coup uses a red star logo because Riley considers himself a communist. The location of the explosion on the album cover is well below where the actual planes hit. As for his "smug smirk"--what expression would you think would be less "coincidental" on the face of someone joking about blowing up a national landmark?
I'm not sure I understand what the logic behind this theory is--that the CIA/Soviets/Rothschilds wanted to let people know that they were behind the bombing, but then pulled the album from stores because they didn't want to make it too obvious? Nareek 11:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to point out the obvious, but that's a guitar tuner he's using as a 'detonator', and the red star is the band's logo.The location of explosions would have to be a coincidence, unless you believe that not only was an Oakland rap group in collusion with Saudi terrorists and gave away their secret plan with a prominent album cover....Sheriffjt (talk) 20:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

YEAR in music[edit]

WP:PIPE--which currently claims that the "YEAR in music|YEAR" style of link is disallowed--is not a policy, but a proposed policy. It refers for its justification for this rule to a number of discussions, none of which seem to reach a consensus against the "YEAR in x|x" format, as well as to the WP:MOS, which is an official guideline.

However, if you look at the WP:MOS for date style--I don't know how to link to it in wiki fashion, but you can find it here--you'll see that it actually supports the opposite policy:

Some editors believe that links to years are generally useful to establish context for the article. Others believe that links to years are rarely useful to the reader. Some advocate linking to a more specific article about that year, for example [[2006 in sports|2006]]. (emphasis added)

In sum, the supposed rule against the "YEAR in x|x" format bases its legitimacy on a guideline that says that some editors prefer the "YEAR in x|x" format. That doesn't seem like much of a basis. Given that linking to "YEAR in music" takes the reader to a more relevant page that is one click away from the "YEAR" page, and given that adding parenthetical links to "YEAR in music" is distracting and awkward, I will side with the "some" and revert this page back to the [[1992 in music|1992]] version. Nareek 02:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"They have set up a PayPal account on their MySpace page for donations." While I am a huge fan of The Coup I am forced to remove this line. It is totally inappropriate for wikipedia to solicit donations or provide a link for the purpose of doing so.

Lead image[edit]

Does it strike anyone else as inappropriate that the main image we have for this article is the abandoned album cover for Party Music? I understand that this obviously created a lot of controversy, but a casual visitor to the page would be quite shocked by it and might make the mistake of assuming that the Coup endorsed the 9/11 attacks (obviously if they read the article the issue would be cleared up for them).

I think we should keep the image in the article, but rather move it into the section on "history" and caption it with an explanation as to the history of the album cover. Ideally we would have a free image taken by a Wikipedian of the Coup in a live performance (or something similar) for the lead image, or barring that I would suggest we use the album cover for Genocide and Juice or, more likely, Steal This Album. Any thoughts?--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 04:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I just visited this page to read up on The Coup and saw that. It's an interesting anecdote in their history, but not worthy of a cover picture. Should be of Boots and Pam. Or if it has to be an album cover, it should at least be Steal This Album, which is their most critically acclaimed album. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.166.8 (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it shouldn't be that Party Music cover, but it shouldn't be a picture of Galactic; that's a totally different band. In fact, I think the Party Music cover is fitting. It's one of the main things they are known for. The September 11 Attacks were a Coup, though not caused by this band. There's lots of disinfo in the media, and there's a lot of stuff that is put out to seed the public. Anyway, I think at least the image should be one of the band or one of their album covers.Slipgrid (talk) 17:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Party Music Release Date[edit]

I have a problem with the line, "the album's planned release date was just after the events of the September 11, 2001 attacks, and the cover art was withdrawn hastily." Everyone knows that music is released on Tuesdays. This article, and many others say it was to be released in "early September." So, that's September 4, or September 11. We know it wasn't released on September 4, so it seems it was released on September 11, and pulled from the shelf. Does anyone else have more information on this? Can we change it to say early September 2001, quoting the Wired article? Why is it so hard to pin down the actual release date? Isn't it painfully obvious just from the cover art, if not by the date in the article?Slipgrid (talk) 17:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wired article you cite explains the situation, as does our article on the album. Wired said "the release date of the CD, entitled Party Music, got pushed back 2 months from early September to November." Apparently image of the cover art was all set to be printed on September 11th and the label literally stopped the presses. We should probably adjust this in the article using the Wired piece.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 18:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Snopes has good info, and links to some other good sources. I don't know how to use the citation template, otherwise I would add it in. http://www.snopes.com/rumors/thecoup.asp 74.66.27.121 (talk) 19:12, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Coup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Coup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:54, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Coup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Coup. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:53, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pam the Funkstress needs her own page![edit]

She was Prince's DJ. She's written up in Rolling Stone, Pitchfork, and Okayplayer among dozens of other news outlets after her passing at 51. Mad notable! sheridanford (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Coup&oldid=1206808673"