Talk:The Final Frontier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Albums (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Metal (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of heavy metal 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.

Backing Vocals?[edit]

How do we know Steve and Adrian did back ups? It's not cited and seems more likely Bruce will have done his own. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:40, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

They've done backing vocals on most albums as far as I recall. Baron Ronan Doyle of Sealand (talk) 15:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

We have been waiting and waiting and waiting to hear a new Maiden song! Can't wait to hear one! Every Iron Maiden fan is being tortured as we speak because of the anticipation for a new track from the album Final Frontier. The members will be appearing on a radio show just 2 nights before the first night of the tour. Maybe they will play the single, whatever that may be.

Damn the Maiden crew really knows how to build anticipation. The tour begins in a few weeks and still no word of any album details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:56, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

This is it people... Iron Maiden is announcing something in just hours. The square image of the Final Frontier Eddie on the countdown page is a preview for the album artwork. It feels right for the single off of the album to be announced and released to the public via digital or streaming as well as play the new song on Rockline Radio at 8:30 PM tonight. If anybody reads this, please be ready for something big and remember where you heard it first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:26, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Release date for the album[edit]

How do we know the exact release date? When i checked Wikipedia first, it stated September 2010. The official website (as of March 4, 2010) says "late summer of this year" which is nowhere close to Sept. 2010. Has Iron Maiden changed the date? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Finemann (talkcontribs) 05:42, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

This right here says "late summer," and since it's a newer source, it can be assumed to be more accurate. C628 (talk) 11:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I think you'll find that September IS late summer. Isn't 20th September the last day of summer?

Iron Maiden's last studio album?[edit]

I read an interview with Steve Harris last year, where he said it has been his long term vision that the band would release 15 studio albums, then there would be no more. In the interview he said that this still holds true, but it is not inconceivable that they could release one or two studio EPs some time afterwards. I can't remember how old the interview was. Does anyone know if 'The Final Frontier' will be their last studio album? The word 'Final' in the title might give us a clue...

In Part 4 of this, Steve says they will probably do another album. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 13:53, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Considering the first track off of the new cd is Satellite 15... The Final Frontier, that may be saying that this 15th album is their last.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 
Yes, but that's just speculation. SimonKSK 13:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Rockline Radio[edit]

So as I've removed a bit supported by a Rockline Radio reference for the second time, I thought I should explain myself. While the stuff that's been added is certainly good and improves the article, the problem is that the reference is extremely impermanent, as the page referenced is a list of recent interviews; from what I've been able to find on their website, each interview remains for only two weeks before disappearing behind a paywall, meaning that first of all, the URL won't be of any use whatsoever, and someone would have to go out and buy the interview once that happened, and even then, since that appears to be a download, I'm not sure how that'd work as a reference...anyway, I'm strongly opposed to using that as a reference, regardless of what it may add to the article, since it just won't be there in less then two weeks. Whatever gets added needs to be permanently verifiable, and since it won't be, once the link goes down, keeping it in the article would seem to be crossing the line into original research—that is to say, it's essentially saying that "It was once true, so it is now. Trust me," which just doesn't work. C628 (talk) 14:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Promotion ?![edit]

Do the Iron Maiden's managers promote The Final Frontier?

They did not do listening session yet...if yes, when? are already present track by track? How will it sound?

And have been done interviews (recently) to the Band? when could I find them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Song Credits[edit]


Song Credits (take 2)[edit]

Please refrain from reverting the IP's addition of the song credits now that he's added a source. It looks likes a borderline reliable source, and I'd much rather talk about than edit-warring. Cheers, C628 (talk) 17:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I just noticed that. Looks like I reverted his first two edits just as he made the third with the source in it, thereby reverting that too. My apologies to you, though that little petulant outburst was just a tad unnecessary. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 17:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
The lyrics in the list of titles are not added. Like "El Dorado", Bruce Dickinson wrote the lyrics, not the music . —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:52, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
As well as the fact that Adrian says "I think" there, there are no references for any other songs to be found anywhere. For now it's best just to keep everything as music until a reliable source can provide the breakdown of who wrote what exactly. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 13:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
If anyone can get their hands on the liner notes of the album, it might have credits for the lyrics... C628 (talk) 16:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
You mean you, a Maiden fan, haven't bought it? I am shocked. It just gives general credits I fear. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 23:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Our local store was sold out yesterday, so I only got it a few hours ago and I didn't have it when I wrote that. All fixed now. :) But yes, I can't see anything we didn't already know. C628 (talk) 00:35, 18 August 2010 (UTC)


Hmm...looks like there's been just a few instances of various people adding the fact that the album has been leaked online, so I'm writing this to try to clarify the issue more than you can in edit summaries or talk page templates.
The fact the album has been leaked is in and of itself not notable, per this guideline, and that's exactly what happened here. So it leaked. That doesn't really matter, most albums leak before release nowadays, and by itself, in Wikipedia terms, it's a non-event, and stays out of the article. What makes it notable, and appropriate for inclusion, is one of two things happening: Either the leak is reported (widely reported, not just one or two mentions from music industry blogs or whatever) or Iron Maiden responds to it in some way, presumably a statement regarding the matter. Those are notable events, since they can get traced back to reliable sources; at the moment, all I've been able to find on it are the file-sharing sites offering the album for download or other brief mentions just stating that it happened, which isn't a consequence of the event, which would make it notable.
For an example of what's appropriate for inclusion in this particular matter, see Death Magnetic. Like The Final Frontier, it was leaked prior to release, but unlike TFF, there were events that happened as a direct result--Metallica (or at least band members) issued statements on it, which were reported by the media, a reviewer got in hot water over it, etc. Those were all consequences of the event, which were notable becuase they were widely reported, not just because they happened, which is the case with the leak itself.
To sum it up: A leak is not notable, and it stays out. Period. Something that happens because of the leak is notable, and it can go in. C628 (talk) 22:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

It HAS been leaked[edit]

Just so all of you know, the album HAS been leaked onto youtube...not giving links, but it's there. I have downloaded it.

Nice to know, but it's not going to be added to the article, if that's what you're asking. SimonKSK 22:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Song descriptions[edit]

The way these are worded is not very appropriate for Wikipedia...they quote from reviews without crediting, and such quotes include personal opinions. However, we'd need to figure out how to put the quotes back where they were... Andrewb1 (talk) 14:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Such quotes are credited in the article. Can you show me a quote where they are not? SimonKSK 22:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Release date[edit]

Why has the release date been changed to the 13th August? A quick search on Google brings up nothing that concurs with this. I mean, even their own website says the 16th, and that's definitely when it came out here. If it is a national thing, shouldn't it at least be mentioned that it came out on different dates? BabyLamb89 (talk) 18:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

The 13th is sourced in the article for the German release date, and the infobox is for the very first release date. BOVINEBOY2008 18:43, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
The 13th date is from a quote by Bruce Dickinson at a concert in Germany. C628 (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the answers ;) EDIT: I feel an idiot now; it says in the first line of the main article. My bad...BabyLamb89 (talk) 19:09, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
No worries, happens to all of us. C628 (talk) 23:41, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Credits (again)[edit]

Currently listening to an interview which features the band members talking about the composition of each song. It specifies lyrical credits for Bruce on El Dorado, Coming Home, and Starblind, as well as musical credits for others elsewhere. What do we think about working this info into the article? Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 02:39, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


I think this article might be elected good with a yellow star. It's quite well written, considering the album is very recent. Nico92400 (talk) 08:31, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Highly doubt it. Too many one-liners, WP:LEAD violations, way too many quotes, WP:CHART violations, and I don't feel like looking for more. Face-tongue.svg Could use more work, even for GA. But it's doable, of course. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:05, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
WP:SOFIXIT. C628 (talk) 22:36, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, because I have so much time to spare, even with my FAC and FL attempt (I only like El Dorado off of the album anyway, so there's no motivation). If you're going to cite a policy, do it when there's a need, and not where it's bordering a personal attack. Thanks. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 00:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
You had enough time to spare to comment on what you see as flaws within the article, which is entirely useless if you're going to leave your contribution at that. And no, that's not a personal attack, though only liking "El Dorado" is grounds for one... Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 01:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I've never really been a fan of Iron's new stuff... and I don't know about you, but using WP:SOFIXIT is provocative and insulting. I really don't know why it's a shortcut; simply saying WP:BOLD is much more civil. The way it's formulated makes it seem like he's trying to say "yeah, whatever; if there are problems, fix it, otherwise shut up." I was simply replying to Nico's comment for a FA run with this specific diff (I just remembered that "yellow stars" denote a good article at the fr wiki... my bad), which is obviously unrealistic (and I'm a contributor at fr wiki, their standards and article promotion processes are of a lower quality than en wiki), and I was pointing out why. Constructive criticism at its core. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I can appreciate that, but I can also appreciate C628's point. Personally, I don't see many flaws with this article, and I'm familiar with the policies you've mentioned above. I can see no major violations of these, nor minor to be honest. I'll take the liberty of assuming C628 is the same in this regard, and is merely asking you to at least highlight specifically what you see as a problem in the article. And, for the record, I don't see this as GA material at all yet, especially when the album's such a new thing. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 02:25, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, sorry if I was a little harsh; I'm a GA reviewer, so I suppose I'm a little used to reviewing pure-MoS-compliant articles (and there are not that many... too many people confuse GAN with Peer review). Alright then, a few quick things which stand out:
  • The reception section is just one big list. This should be converted to prose which flows a bit between reviewers (example from a recent GA: Octavarium (album)). I would have to say the same for the Overview section.
  • WP:CHART has some MoS recommendations for charting albums and singles.
  • In-line citations should be after punctuation, not before.
  • A bit of WP:OVERLINKing is present ("tour", "opening track", "music video", "digital download")
  • Per WP:LEAD, everything in the lead should be present in the article body. WP:LEADCITE also recommends not to reference claims in the lead if they are sourced later.
  • Songs section should either cut down on the {{Quote}} templates, either paraphrase and integrate them into the prose, or have some simply removed (recommend the second).
I'm a little tired, so I should get to bed. Again, GA is definitely doable, just not at its current state. Not trying to offend; just saying like it is. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I apologize if that was taken as offensive, it was not my intent, though I do see how it could interpreted as such. My point was pretty much what Imagi-King said--I would have appreciated it if you had either tried to help with what you see as flaws, or specifically mentioned them, rather than just saying something to the effect of "no, this is a bad article," and leaving, which was what I assumed you were doing. Drive-by stuff like that never fails to irritate me, and I responded more harshly than I ordinarily would, and should, have. Since you've subsequently given such suggestions, my points are completely unwarranted, an I both apologize for my response if it was offensive and thank you for your suggestions. C628 (talk) 13:35, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
as Eric Leb wrote, fr wiki standards and article promotion processes are of a lower quality than en wiki. As a fr wiki user my standards are not the same. This article in fr would be in talk for election of yellow star quality on fr. Nico92400 (talk) 08:02, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I know this discussion has been dead for a year, but I've edited the article according to the above suggestions by EricLeb01. Are there any more improvements that need to be made?--Nerdtrap (talk) 16:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


You're telling me that the album has not received any negative reviews? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I've read quite a few, and every one of them has been more positive than negative. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 02:01, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Well I'm not saying that there should be a purely-negative review on here, but at least include an excerpt of a flaw or at least a few "...although [critic] notes that..." to balance WP:WEIGHT. Even a universally acclaimed song or album has some sort of critic. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:13, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Until recently there was a quote that went something like "there's a fault to The Final Frontier: too much quality", and that's no joke. I see your point though, I'll have another look at some of the reviews tomorrow and see if there're any criticisms worth noting. I've been very involved in maintaining the reception section and as such have read all the reviews, from which I don't particularly remember any negative impressions, but I will take another look. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 02:30, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I've seen a couple negative reviews, but most seem to be by people who are deaf. One says this:
"At times dull, “The Final Frontier” treads a similar path to the bands previous album, with similar guitar solos and pacing, all wrapped up with Bruce Dickinson’s voice, which by the way is not what it was. He can still bang out a tune, but there’s definitely more sense that he’s straining."
Um what? The musical style has a lot of differences, not much similar anything (guitar solos, pacing or whatever). And Bruce is emoting in much the same style he did in such ancient songs as "Revelations" - so, yes, the review is negative, but the reviewer also (a) knows little about Maiden (even though he's reviewed them on multiple occasions), and (b) doesnt seem to have working ears (if he thinks this album sounds like the rest). Funny thing is, this is the same guy who has previously complained about them not playing the same things over and over again (ie: writing "copies" of their 1980's stuff) - yet this time, when he incorrectly draws such parallels, now he complains that (he thinks) what they wrote sounds like their old stuff. Not very professional when no matter what they do, he complains about it (whether it's what he said was missing last time or not) - especially when those messages (from him) are contradictory each time out. That simply smells of someone who wont give them a good review regardless of what they release and will continue to cite reasons for such, even if contrary to his earlier statements.
One other negative review was written by someone who seems to be primarily a pop/top10 reviewer/fan. And also not considered a pro by Wiki standards (hence removed as noted in the next section on this talk page).
Interestingly, the professional review sites/reviewers have all rated the album highly positively. Perhaps that's why (as noted in the next section of this talk page), only the professional sites/reviewers are permitted - because they actually give the music a few listens, and know their subject matter. Those reviewers have rated other things poorly (even some Maiden things), so perhaps the higly (entirely?) positive reviews by the pros has actually been earned?
RobertMfromLI | User Talk 03:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Reception True of the Album[edit]

In the page say: "The album has received unanimously positive reviews" That's not true, Metal Express ( RockUnited ( and ( got a little different opinion, 6.5, 6 and 5.5/10 respectively. Mostly reviews of the album are good but not all. In the page I put this but an user deleted this reviews and blocked me only because I not same opinion that this Iron Maiden fan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jars80 (talkcontribs) 18:45, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I am not an Iron Maiden fan and I've never even listened to their music. If you think that's why I blocked you, you have a serious problem. Enigmamsg 22:03, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
You blocked him for inserting a link to a review in the External Links section? How does that merit a block? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 23:28, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Well, they were in the reviews section...seems Wiki libs (talk · contribs) removed them once and twice. No idea why, but I'll drop a note at his talk page alerting him of this. My opinion is that there's no reason why the Metal Express and 411 reviews shouldn't stay in, but I can't seem to get a permanent link to the RockUnited review, so I'm not thrilled by that. And it doesn't seem like a particularly good block to me, based on what I can see. Just my two cents. C628 (talk) 01:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
He's had several warnings and he refused to stop. Pretty open-and-shut. His reaction that I was blocking because I'm on Iron Maiden fan removed any doubt there could be. Enigmamsg 04:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm seeing one warning...and given that he wasn't blatantly spamming, or deliberately being disruptive, it seems like a hasty block...but maybe that's why I'm not an admin. C628 (talk) 23:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Maybe. There were three prior warnings and he continued to spam. You need to look at his talk again. As I said, this was an open and shut case. Enigmamsg 15:36, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
<Shrug> Not worth arguing about. I disagree with the block, but I'm not the one who calls the shots, and since he's unblocked now it doesn't really matter. C628 (talk) 02:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Maybe. Either way, I stand by my block, and I think it's important to note that there were three warnings (by different editors), not merely one. Enigmamsg 01:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Its simple. only professional reviews from the sites listed here: WP:ALBUM/REVSIT are allowed. If someone wants to balance the reviews by finding negative ones... that is all fine and good... fill it up. But they have to come fro approved professional reviews. Non-notable sites like M_Express or RockUnited fail the test. A review from a nationally posted newspaper that is negative would be allowed. But non-pro reviews from fansites don't qualify. Hope that helps. Wiki libs (talk) 01:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...wasn't aware of that guideline. Yes, it did help. C628 (talk) 23:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

German chart history deleted : ([edit]

Why did somebody deleted my writing of the German chart history? I think I'm really getting sick of it! Why is the chart history of the USA written there and the one of Germany deleted? Germany is a very important music market, the most important one behind the UK and the USA and the album made No. 1, while in the USA it just made No. 4. I somehow feel that Germany is getting miss-treaded, because I noticed this many times before... May somebody answer to this? The sources weren't wrong, too and there were all given! -- (talk) 17:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

There's a simple sentence on the US charting, mentioning the noteworthy fact that it's Iron Maiden's highest ever position in the country. There is no need to mention who was knocked off the German chart in prose, that's covered in the box below. It's simply unnecessary, nothing against any particular country or editor. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 17:52, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Chart positions[edit]

The length of this section is beginning to become quite an eyesore and a waste of space. I've created a template for what I think might be a more convenient way of displaying the information:

Debut Position Countries
1 Austria; Brazil; Bulgaria; Canada; Chile; Croatia; Czech Republic; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Italy; Japan; Mexico; New Zealand; Norway; Portugal; Saudi Arabia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; UK
2 Australia; Netherlands
3 Ireland; Poland; Turkey
5 Singapore
6 Belgium[note 1]
  1. ^ Subsequently rose to number 2

Opinions appreciated. Baron Ronan Doyle (Sprechen mit mir) 12:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

You'll find no objections from me, the current one is pretty ugly IMO. C628 (talk) 21:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Very nice job!!! ROBERTMFROMLI TALK/CNTRB 02:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC)


Why isn't this album along with the 3 others listed as Progressive Metal as well, they clearly are? Why on Wikipedia are we so afraid of adding different genres that properly describe the music? We just keep it safe by listing such a vague genre, when in reality, saying this album is just heavy metal is quite innacurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by World wrestling federation ztj (talkcontribs) 17:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

As has been said before, although many of the songs on the album have progressive elements to them, it still doesn't count as a fully progressive album. Aside from the progressiveness, the album's style is still the same one they've always used, which means that, given the fact that they were one of the early pioneers of the genre, 'Heavy Metal' is suitable as a description.--Nerdtrap (talk) 22:26, 28 February 2011 (UTC)