Talk:The Future Sound of London/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

POV

There were a couple of POV sentences I removed, but this article still suffers from an overabundance of weasel terms. This is only made worse as it doesn't have any references so the "critics" that are referred to (e.g.) can't even be investigated. siafu 13:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Article Naming

Shouldn't this article be named The Future Sound of London? That's the name used on albums and single covers, on the net etc... Oskar Liljeblad 21:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

External links

I removed 3 External Links the other day. Two of the links have already been reposted. Recently i have been browsing a lot of music related articles and have increasingly noticed the prescence of Disclogs and other more "shop like" external links on the varioius pages. For example, on this article (fsol), the external link to AMG provides no more information than is already contained in the article, and the site is blatantly a commerical, shop like website. This is obvioiusly link spam, i i would simply removed these type of links. Also, the disclogs link simply provides a massive list of releases by fsol. Now, although this information is very interesting, i don't agree disclogs should be permited to litter every music related article on wikipedia with links to thier site. At this point i know that disclogs has a very complete and informative discography, and if i am really interested i will go to their website. But i do not need links to their site in order to remeber this. IMHO, websites that blatantly spread hundreds of links to thier websties wherever they can should not be permited to do this. NoMass 23:28, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I readded the AMG link because I and many others on this site consider it a useful and reliable resource, in the same manner that imdb is for film. To my knowledge, no one connected with AMG has ever added those links (I certainly am not). Even if there is no additional factual information at AMG than is found in this article, the critical reviews on that site are typically substantial and often quoted. In fact, our standard infobox for album articles contains a link to these reviews (see Within the Realm of a Dying Sun for an example). There are furthermore pictures of the band at AMG that this article lacks. If you have a problem with AMG links in Wikipedia, I suggest you discuss it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Music or Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums to advocate for a project-wide change, rather than unilaterally removing them from random articles only. In the meantime, I am going to restore the link, because I believe AMG links are supported by community consensus. Please do not remove it unless you change that consensus. Postdlf 14:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
AMG and Discogs are both explicitly mentioned at Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Resources. Note also that "no more information than is already provided in the article" is not a reason for removing external links, because the external links provide Verifiability. -- Xtifr tälk 18:59, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Health

I just had to add this...the "rumours of mental illness" thing is just bugging me. According to their myspace page (there are three of them ???) one of the band members suffered ill health from leaking mercury fillings...and then recovered when a kind doctor REMOVED THEM. Hence the "hiatus" and "rumours" of mental illness. The text that says this no longer appears on the myspace pages but should be confirmed...as this "rumours" thing can be damaging. Anyway, someone edit this when there is confirmation (an interview?). DJBarney — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.29.70 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

New stuff

I will add more new pages for new albums and singles et cetera also will add some .ogg samples soon. Right now im working on Jesper Kyd and have been working alot on Elliot Goldenthal. :) ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 18:03, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

EDIT: Just went through all the singles and albums and added reflists and external links sections and added them to wikiprojects and assigned the relevent class and importance to each one now im gonna start adding info and refs proper to clean them up a bit. ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 20:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject?

This article and its subsequent album and single articles could make up an impressive bunch of articles, I think we should have some kind of Wikiproject for FSOL. Ive already done my bit and will continue but its a bit much trying to do almost all the big stuff myself, any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. P.S. Im going to create an FSOL template soon also. ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 03:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

EDIT; Also people, if we are going to add new releases to the releases bit on the page PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE put them in exact chronological order of release! Please, in the interest of the chronology at the bottom of every single and album page, thank you...ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 06:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Note to self (and anyone else who would like to help)...

Add section about their inspired independance from the mainstream, their own record labels, studios, licensing and generally managing all that stuff on there own. Definately worth commiting a few decent size paragraphs to.

Also finish off getting album articles to at least "start" status and then get to work on all those bloody singles! :)

P.S Really guys please check talk sections before making edits and ALWAYS provide proof ie references, even if you dont know hwo to put refs in an article just copy and paste the url of the website with the information to the talk page of whatever article it is and we can see it. thanks ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 19:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Awards??

Anyone know what awards the guys have won? like a list so i can stick it in the article? also im gonna add a quotes section. But it would be a good idea to have an awards section i think. :) ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 21:44, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

New Section

Will add another section possibly titled "Style & Experimentation" or something along those lines, under the "Independant spirit" section I just added, detailing their complex styles and consistant experimentation. I will use these interviews with him as references:

these are all (apart from the clashmusic one) interviews exclusively with Cobain and are all pretty good, although some are short. will get on this as soon as i am finished with other FSOL stuff. :) ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(Ταλκ) 15:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Group photo

Added with a photo with acceptable fair-use rationale! SamuraiFez (talk) 21:53, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

New Age?

Why are they classified under New Age Music category? What the hell? What's up with that? LebanonChild (talk) 09:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Something

Added Earthbeat to the list of albums. It was released by Jumpin & Pumpin in 1992, shortly after the release of Accelerator. Although it's marketed as being a compilation album by "various artists", it's basically a compilation of all of FSOL's older work under their multitude of pseudonyms. It was also released on a double LP.

Oddly enough, myself and a couple of friends had a similar concept album released by Jumpin & Pumpin a few years later. It was called Trance Trippin and appears to be by various artists, but the whole thing was our own work. J&P screwed up the credits on the inlay though, giving credit to some people who had no creative input on the album. We never really did any other commercial stuff, but did release a lot of white labels and things containing a lot more experiemtental stuff. --Sonance 07:13, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Although Amorphous Androgynous' latest album could be classified as psychedelic rock, their other work certainly isn't. Case in point is the first album "Tales of Ephidrina", as an example the song Liquid Insects which starts off with a sample from the film "The Predator" and then progresses with some pretty hard trance (for being 1993). Youtube it and you'll hear what I mean. (NB. Pardon the multiple edits, my browser is acting up)83.248.86.143 (talk) 23:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Did accelerator got re-released in CD form in 1999? Don't know if it's that important--vininim 10:42, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Recursive link

The link to the ep "Archived EP" is erroneously redirected here. If it doesn't have it's own separate page then it should be a "page does not exist" link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.54.162.208 (talk) 00:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Genre(s)

Someone has placed Lifeforms and Dead Cities exclusively in the ambient dub genre. Instead of attempting to think of how many genres are a better fit for those albums, I wanted to put the question to other editors. FSoL somewhat defies categorization, but I'd like to get specific. These albums are above all definitive electronic music. What else? Do you think ambient dub even applies directly enough to warrant listing? ☠Pixel Eater (talk) 15:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

There are elements of ambient dub, but it's definitely not the dominant style on either of those albums. I'd call them primarily ambient psy and electronica, with a bit industrial thrown into the mix. —Torchiest talkedits 15:53, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone has reverted my genre revision on The Future Sound of London. Theses are the genres I have put onto them: Electronica, ambient, IDM, acid house, big beat, trip hop, breakbeat, drum and bass, neo-psychedelia. I think these are right, don't you think? 86.143.29.41 (talk) 21:45, 22 April 2014 (BST)

Partiality/Neutrality/OR problems

Sentence fragments like

  • "Cobain and Dougans usually resist being typecast into any one particular genre"
  • "often involves extreme experimentation"
  • "their interests have covered a number of areas"
  • "The artists have been fairly enigmatic in the past but have become more candid with their fanbase in recent years"
  • "Sample of "Q" which was an early single released by the pair that was successful in clubs and was featured on the Earthbeat album"
  • "rumours of mental illness which turned out to be nothing more than exaggeration of Cobain's mercury poisoning from fillings in his teeth"

are obviously non-encyclopedic, but they also indicate a more severe problem -- they sound like they were written for a fan website by a fan of the band who has accumulated personal knowledge of the band's history and work. That's a problem for several reasons: one, it interferes with a straightforward presentation of verifiable information; two, its tone gives the impression of original research (learning a lot about a band you like and then making use of that knowledge to write an article without sourcing statements you feel are indisputable); three, many of the claims are not only sourced, but also unverifiable, in the sense that they constitute personal opinion; four, the page layout is considerably more chaotic and disorienting than it should be.

The end result is that the article's own statements are compromised in the reader's mind. For example, the reader walks away less certain about whether or not the mercury poisoning claim is accurate. The two sources are partial interviews that only say: "I eventually traced one aspect of it down to mercury poisoning from my fillings" -- which is hardly sufficient evidence to justify the encyclopedia statement. This isn't to say the poisoning claim is verifiable as false; it's just poorly sourced, and it's poorly sourced because whoever was working on this article was too partial to the band to recognize the severe and crippling stylistic faults that crept into their paragraphs.

This article's tone and voice don't meet the needs of encyclopedia readers; it belongs on a website that isn't purportedly impartial and verifiable. I've been referencing Wikipedia for introductory information on a handful of experimental electronic artists, with an interest in tracking down secondary sources and establishing a timeline. It's markedly the worst of the two or three dozen articles I've referenced so far, in terms of voice and tone and unverifiable claims.

For anyone seeking inspiration to overhaul this entire article and bring it in line with Wikipedia standards, I suggest taking a look at the article on Kraftwerk -- it contains a few unverifiable statements, but its tone and voice, and the organization of its information, are properly encyclopedic. For now, I'll mark the FSOL article as needing a rewrite in encyclopedic style -- I think the neutrality/OR problems will go away once the tone is attended to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SRevel (talk • contribs) 19:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. This article is on my (very long) list of things to fix. Feel free to rewrite parts and/or look for sources to support some of the more controversial claims. —Torchiest talkedits 19:08, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

British -> English techno group

I noticed one of the last edited was changing them from the category of 'British techno group' to 'English techno group' - how is this judged? I'm going to avoid discussion on the genre itself for the time being, and just mention the location. FSOL is comprised of two members, one of whom is Scottish, the other is English; as they recorded the bulk of their major label music in London, does this make them an 'English' group, or should the nationality of the members keep it at 'British'? If location is the overriding factor, then it should be noted that Cobain now lives in France, and a lot of their music is recorded at his home studio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rossbullfinch (talk • contribs) 12:14, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Future_Sound_of_London/Archive_1&oldid=1073302532"