Jump to content

Talk:X&Y/Archive 1

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

Why are reviews being removed?

Why are reviews being removed due to no wiki page not order of addition? I don't understand why they should be removed if there isn't a wiki page, it doesn't make the review any less interesting. Ifibabe (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


I'd like to include a link to share an unmixed version of "Talk" but I'd rather not considering the C+D orders that other sites have been getting. --Madchester 01:09, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)

Why was this removed?

The album has bonus track, track 14 "How you see the world" on the Japanese pressings of the album. It also features the alternate album art. Here is the source.

http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/music/pid/6965754/a/X+&+Y.htm

Using The Sun as a source

The Sun's recognized globally; for the tabloid that it is. First they posted a X&Y tracklist that was off from the official one and now they claim the cover is part of a contest? OK.... --Madchester 14:36, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)

Okay, where does it say that AMG gave it 4 out of 5 stars

I've been doing the Wikiproject Album articles and I'm quite familar with Allmusic.com. When I click on the link provided by on the X&Y infobox, it doesn't say All Music Guide has reviewed the album. In fact according to the discography of Coldplay, the X&Y star rating is blank. I'm not stoned or anything. I'm not retarded. shhh... --Chill Pill Bill 05:27, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Stephen Thomas Elderwine gave it four stars. He opened his review with how Coldplay took Radiohead's mantle as the next biggest band in the world, after the latter went into "arcane art rock". He spent most of the article stating how Coldplay goes for the introspective.. which is the thing holding them back from being the "Biggest Band in the World", held by U2.

I'm not to blame, if you can't read the article. Check out what some Coldplay msgboards have to say about this (and other) recent reviews. --Madchester 06:33, 2005 May 30 (UTC)

Isn't this cd copy protected in some places?

I'm not sure if it is or not. Irdepesca572 17:04, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, yes... [1] Europe/UK and North America for sure.--Madchester 16:55, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

Then shouldn't we include that information? :) Irdepesca572 17:04, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You made the suggestion... you can expand on it! :-) --Madchester 17:05, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

Ok, will do :D Irdepesca572 17:15, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User 69.157.XXX.XX and general opinions of the album

Please watch for this user, b/c he continually tries to prove "his case" about the album, without providing any references to the appropriate sources. And he's adding POV comments; in his opinion, the album received "warm" reviews, when most of the critical opinion has been enthusiastic, save your usual suspects like Pitchfork Media who slams everyone not named Radiohead or The Arcade Fire.

I would recommend not adding any fan or critical opinion about the album until the dust has settled from all the media hoopla from X&Y's week of release, and the hype leading up to it. It's foolish to base the general response of the album simply based on some first impressions. I would give it a few weeks for the music to settle in, before including a fair statement about the album's acceptance, et al. Likewise, the sample size is too small to draw any immediate conclusions at the moment.--Madchester 15:28, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

Madchester and the blocking of objective material

Please be aware that this article should be written on the facts (there has been criticism levelled at this album and "Speed of Sound"). With respected magazines such as Rolling Stone, Mojo and All Music all touching on these issues, the point is proven. Taking legitimate material off the site because it puts your favorite band in a bad light is absolutely a "slanted" POV. 18:36, 2005 Jun 9

Please avoid ad hominem in your opinion; no personal attacks are allowed. And for my 2 cents worth, Coldplay's far from being my favorite band.
Like I said above, it would be best to refrain from any generalized opinion of the album in the article, since it has only been released for less than a week. It's unreasonable to make a swift conclusion on the critical (and fan) response of the album based on a small handful of reviews. I would prefer to include this section in a few months time, after there's more sales figures, further reviews, and perhaps award nomination or snubs. I would wait until Fall, to see whether the album is still a hot-seller, and whether it gets noms for awards like the Mercury Music Prize or inclusion on some end-of-year best of lists.
Albums like A Rush Of Blood To The Head and Achtung Baby all received lukewarm repsonses from fans and critics alike for diverging from their respective band's past output. However, over time, both albums have earned their place as important milestones in each band's discography.
Therefore, it's unreasonable to pass such a swift verdict on the album. First impressions can be very misleading. And we want to ensure that the article maintains an NPOV tone.

--Madchester 23:07, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

You consider my remarks a "personal attack"?...... LOL.

I suggest you read some general guidelines from the Community Portal :-) --Madchester 23:58, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

Hello,

This is my first time to add anything to Wikipedia, but regarding the "similarity" between "Clocks" and "Speed of Sound," any similarity is purely superficial. Speed of Sound was the first Coldpay song I ever heard, thanks to a friend showing me the video. I was very impressed and began to look for more from them. I saw that Clocks was a hit, and read about people complaining that Speed of Sound was a ripoff. So I listened to Clocks. At first hearing it did sound similar. However, after listening to them back and forth a couple of times, it was easy to determine that they really are nothing alike.

The opening piano lines are completely different and in different keys. The vocal lines again are completely different as well. After examining the TABs for both songs and playing through the chords and melody lines on my keyboard, the case is shut. The songs are very different, melodically and harmonically. The only thing similar is that its the same band performing them.

I read the Rolling Stones review, and it is merely the impression of one man, a man that gained some noteriety for criticizing whites as rock enthusiasts for not embracing the music of minorities. It is his opinion in the case of "Rolling Stone" that Speed of Sound is an average song and is too similar to Clocks. I would say the opposite. We are all critics, and we all have our biases. As someone who loves The Doors as much as I love Coldplay and Led Zeppelin, X&Y is a thoroughly appealing album in the spirit of Coldplay.

Signed:70.112.209.226 09:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)Sinfoniahorn

Sales figures

Sales figures are generally misleading... like the Billboard Hot 100, which combines singles sales, airplay and downloads altogether. Likewise, UK album sales charts tend to honour awards like platinum, gold, etc... depending on the number of units shipped to stores, not necessarily sold. Like Robbie Williams' Escapology earned like 5X platinum, b/c retailers overstocked their inventory of the disc, in reality it wasn't much of a true bestseller

Just some food for thought. --Madchester 17:00, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

And about Oasis' first week UK numbers for BHN. Their album went on sale on a thursday (Aug 21 1997) and the 696,000 figure is for sales from that Thursday to Sunday, when the charts are updated for each week. In its actual first week of release, the official numbers are in excess of 810,000, so in reality they still outsold Coldplay's first week sales by a 2:1 margin. Coldplay, of course, so X&Y on Monday, which is the regular day of release for albums in the UK.

Just another reason why chart figures are misleading at best.--Madchester 17:00, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

"Move" vs. "shift"

For future reference to other users:

Move = "To be disposed of by sale"
Shift = "To move or transfer from one place or position to another."

The former is more appropriate in the context of the article when talking about sales. --Madchester 11:43, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)

Definitely. —Hollow Wilerding . . . talk 23:23, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

References broken links

The links for References 3 and 4 are broken. I've left them as I don't have a different reference to use, but this should be kept in mind. –Dvandersluis 17:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Spurious information on song structure.

I object to the section which states: "X&Y (track 6) structurally consists of the first two verses..." Many songs (i.e. millions of songs) can be described in the same way. What is being described is not unique to the song whatsoever. The author could have said "The song X&Y consists of lyrics sung to a melody over a variation of musical chords performed upon instruments by human beings." This section should be removed simply because it's patently useless. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mruss (talk • contribs) 19:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The only reason it's there is because someone made a seperate article for it and it was decided it should be merged here. I'm all for getting rid of it. -- I need a name (talk) 20:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. I'm removing it. Please discuss if anyone disagrees --Iliaskarim (talk) 16:47, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Until

So is it 'Til Kingdom Come or Till Kingdom Come? 'til kingdom come

Singles

I've redirected once more "What if" per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/What If (Coldplay song). Also White Shadows is an unsourced article about a limited released single, so it should probably be merged here as well into a section on full and limited single releases.--Tikiwont (talk) 07:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

And once more. I've now moved the whole text here. It will need improving in the above sense.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC) --Tikiwont (talk) 09:30, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced

"The blocks are supposed to represent the title of the album, X&Y, in Baudot code, a 5-bit alphanumeric cipher used by telegraphs. However, one 'dot' is missing in the third column meaning that the title actually represents "X9Y" or "X96" depending on whether you read the "Figures" instruction to apply for the next character only or the rest of the message (the official ITA2 standard uses the latter case). The colours are just for aesthetics and have no specific meaning."

Thank you. --Efe (talk) 08:58, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

"According to lead singer Chris Martin, the title X&Y is based on the ups and downs of his everyday life: "My whole day is a mixture of optimism and pessimism in its most extreme forms. And that's what X&Y is to me. It's two sides. I like the fact they’re very strong letters, very clear."[1]"

Unverifiable. --Efe (talk) 09:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

"The album was known as the best-selling digital album of all time until being passed on sales by The Fray's How to Save a Life in late 2007. How to Save a Life has since been passed by Coldplay's fourth album Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends which was released in 2008."

Another one. --Efe (talk) 09:26, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:X&Y/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Lead
  • Needs expanding for the same reasons as A Rush of Blood to the Head.
    • Added some info. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
      • Perhaps still slightly on the short side. But don't put anything in for the sake of doing so, because it's nearly about right. Peanut4 (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
        • Which part or topic you want me to add? I think its fine now? --Efe (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Background
  • "In March 2004, Coldplay announced some details in working the album." Which album? Remember the main body of the article must be self-contained.
  • "Initial plans were to stay out of the public's eye throughout the year." Public's eye or public eye?
  • "This plan, however, was not due to the pressure their second album, A Rush of Blood to the Head, has created but they were trying "to make the best thing that anyone has ever heard"." I think this should be "had created" not "has created".
  • "Prior to the release, Zero Theory was one of the many widely-rumored titles to the album." What was the reason it was called X&Y? Did anything come of the name Zero Theory?
    • People speculated that X&Y's title was Zero Theory. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
      • I'm still unsure as to the relevance of this sentence. It says many. Is there any reason to single out Zero Theory? The article doesn't explain why this was a significant rumour or name? Or why the band eventually decided on X&Y? Peanut4 (talk) 19:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
        • Hidden for now. It breaks the prose. Finding more info about the changes of the album's title. --Efe (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Recording
  • "In fact, the released album is the third version which the band had produced during their late sessions, and some even have considered it as their fifth album." "In fact" is redundant. The article should be facts.
  • "Sixty songs were written during these sessions, but 52 of which were ditched." Either "but 52 of these ..." of "of which, 52 ..."
  • "During this month, the band was into the final weeks of the production and had put finishing touches of the tracks." There's something missing to the final clause "and had ..." of this sentence.
  • "As soon as proper deadline was imposed onto the band, they became more productive than previous sessions." Either "a proper deadline" or "proper deadlines were".
  • "Martin added that the reason why they end up late was they" Should this be "ended up late?"
Critical reaction
  • Compliment is used three times in as many sentences. Can you come up with some alternatives?
Commercial performance
  • 8x platinum, etc. should be eight-times platinum.
  • "X&Y went as the second best-selling album in the United States, under American rapper 50 Cent's second album The Massacre," What do you mean by under? Shouldn't it be really behind?

A bit to do, but I'll put it on hold. Peanut4 (talk) 22:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think we're done. --Efe (talk) 13:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Good work, and the improvements during the GA process have been great. The lead will need to be expanded over time especially if you get more info. And hopefully you can get more info about the origins of the album name. Otherwise I would either get a peer review or ask for independent assistance to see what more could be done to try and go for an WP:FAC. A lot of good work has been done recently on some Coldplay articles. I would be great if you could get them all up towards FAC and perhaps even an FTC. Well done, all the best with this article. Peanut4 (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Peanut. Blue and I are collaborating, actually. --Efe (talk) 05:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.nme.com/news/111874.htm

The Album Art is not 100% correct

The official CD has "Coldplay X&Y" on the left side, and also includes extra detail in the background. Shouldn't this be corrected? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaDude (talk • contribs) 23:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Genres

  • Please don't change genre's without some sort of source. Also, going on "wonder" isn't a good reason. Deserted Cities 18:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Judging from most of your edits, as a rule of thumb, Guitarherochristopher, things you are wondering are usually wrong or can't be verified and thus, should not be added to Wikipedia. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:X%26Y/Archive_1&oldid=1174200803"