Talk:The Hazards of Love

Summer of my 21st Year[edit]

This may seem minor to some but I'd like to get this on the discussion page since my intended edit seems incorrect at first glance: The Rake is 20. Everyone starts from zero, the first year of life, and works up. On your first birthday you are in your second year, on your 10th the 11th, and so on.Levelistchampion (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right and wrong. He was 20 when he was married. He had Isaiah, Charlotte, [that wretched girl] Dawn, and [ugly] Myfawnwy [sp?] after his marriage, and at the time of his death Isaiah was old enough to put up a fight, so at least four years have passed since the beginning of the Rake's song and our story. Toa Zach (talk) 21:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plot Synopsis[edit]

Some of what's posted in this section seems like a listener's interpretation rather than an official story -- in particular, "The Hazards of Love 3 (Revenge!)". Nowhere is it explicitly stated that the dead children "bind and flog" him. A more appropriate interpretation of the line "Spare the rod, you'll spoil the child, but I prefer the lash" would be that it's simply Isaiah telling his father that he'd prefer to be beaten than burned. But it's still only an interpretation, so if there's an official source that states that the children beat the Rake, a link would be nice. I'll leave it alone for now, but if it's not official, I think it should be changed. -6_xB 18:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research[edit]

The plot synopsis is unsubstantiated. Despite it being a thorough analysis, per Wikipedia:No Original Research, it must be verifiable from a third-party source. Please cite the source for the synopsis. Thanks. pinotgris 15:58, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

→ Sadly, removed. pinotgris 00:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

→ Wouldn't this analysis fall under the discussion in Wikipedia:These_are_not_original_research#Works_of_fiction? Then all that would be needed is to cite the lyrics. Some work might still need to be done to remove "interpretative summaries", but I haven't read the whole summary so maybe not. --Stupergenius (talk) 18:18, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need an official release of lyrics, plus it isn't extremely explicit. It's mostly OR. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 05:46, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

→ Found a link to the lyrics from the artists' webpage if anyone wants to do any more work on a non-OR summary, if such a thing is possible. --Stupergenius (talk) 14:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Anything that can be observed by a reasonable person simply by reading the work itself, without interpretation, is not original research, but is reliance upon a primary source." -- Wikipedia:These_are_not_original_research#Works_of_fiction Surely a consensus on a non-interpretive summary of the story can be approximated. I propose a track-by-track listing of the basic story elements as they are revealed. I'll edit in a version of this proposal for review if no discussion picks up on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.6.146.60 (talk) 21:33, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post it here on the discussion page for, well, discussion first. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 20:33, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is the gist of that I'm getting at:

Prelude (3:04) -- Instrumental
"The Hazards of Love 1 (The Prettiest Whistles Won't Wrestle the Thistles Undone)" - 4:19 -- Margaret meets William while out riding in the forest. They fall in love.
"A Bower Scene" - 2:09 -- It is discovered that Margaret is with child. As her pregnancy advances, she returns to the forest.
"Won't Want for Love (Margaret in the Taiga)" - 4:07 -- Margaret searches for William, asking the forest itself for help.
"The Hazards of Love 2 (Wager All)" - 4:26 -- William and Margaret are reunited. William declares the depth of his love.
"The Queen's Approach" - 0:29 -- Instrumental

...

As you can see, the description of the story is at a high enough level to be free of interpretation. It is clear from the edits on the real page that people want to have something of the story on the page. I am hoping something like this would satisfy that urge and perhaps set an a path for future edits -- to improve the summaries yet similarly leave out what is not exceedingly obvious from the text itself. It may help prevent an interpreted version of the story from being edited in again, and it could be something better to revert to when someone comes along and "improves" the page.

What exactly is said is not as important to me as it is that something be said. It seems to be appropriate to recount the story. How to accomplish it is what I want to talk about. What is the feeling about the suggested format -- short, non-interpretive summaries tied directly to the tracks in which the events occur? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.190.35 (talk) 14:02, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they should be short, not horribly detailed, and note which tracks they're talking about as the summary progresses. All of the attempts that have been added have been extremely detailed, filling in their own details for things that aren't specified or are ambiguous. That is why a summary of the story has not yet been kept. Write up something simple that you think would be okay and post it here to discuss and make sure no one objects. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 04:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting artists[edit]

The supporting artists in the description seem to have been listed before album release. Many album articles on wikipedia show which artists contributed to each specific tracks. This information should be available to anyone who owns a physical copy of the album, as it is typically listed in the album jacket. Would anyone feel obliged to add this information? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rocconnick (talk • contribs) 19:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's actually PDF file downloadable on their site (it's linked to in the article still, I'm pretty sure) that gives that information. I'm personally too lazy to look through and edit the section in myself, but feel free to. Dfsghjkgfhdg (talk) 00:29, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on The Hazards of Love. 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:50, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]