Talk:Coldplay/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 1
| Archive 2


Someone needs to edit the first paragraph of the article. It needs to be cleaned up

Is it really necessary to have Chris Martins marriage information at Coldplay's page? Since the vocalist has his own page, I this it would be better to move information there. What do you think?

I'm going to add more sections to the Parachutes era... to differentiate it from the pre-Parachutes era. --Madchester 18:06, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)


I removed the bit on the ABC-Yellow promo cuz

A) It's covered separately in the Yellow page

B) It's already covered in the text: "The band allows their music to be used in film, television, and promotional spots such as the movie trailer to Peter Pan. However, Coldplay has been adamant against their use in actual product endorsement." --Madchester 17:27, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)


How about a new pic of Coldplay on the frontpage, since some of them have cut or grown their hair? http://www.seattlewireless.net/images/uploaded/9118.1115377773.jpg for example, or maybe someone has a better one :) - Jurgen

You could just replace the current image, with the one with the boys on the cover of Inside Entertainment at the bottom of the page... or any other pic that Wikipedia allows I guess. --Madchester 13:01, 2005 May 6 (UTC)
Are pictures allowed that come from the seattlewireless server for example? I found this pic http://www.coldplay.de/coldplay5.jpg and I want to resize it and then upload it to that server... Is that allowed? - Jurgen
I updated the photo with the one u provided; I've seen in a lot of promotional material, and labelled it as such. --Madchester 03:58, 2005 May 10 (UTC)


hey, i found a website that is plagiarizing from this article

http://www.coldplaying.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=566&page=1

Contents

Will Champion

Will Champion (born 31 July 1978) is the drummer of the band Coldplay.

Champion was born in Southampton, Hampshire, United Kingdom where his father, Timothy Champion, is professor of archaeology at the University of Southampton. As a youth, his musical influences included Tom Waits and traditional Irish folk music. He grew up playing guitar, but also had experience on the piano, bass, and tin whistle. Before joining Coldplay, he performed in a band called Fat Hamster.

For More information please see Will Champion

Phil Harvey

I believe Phil's not the band's manager anymore. He's still good mates with the band, however... --Madchester 11:50, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)


Sales figures and discography layout

How should we lay out the discography for chart figures? Do we actually need the placings for AUS and CAN, cuz they add to much clutter the essential information in the discography. Look at the discography for bands like Radiohead, U2, and Muse and you can see that the contributors aren't simply stuffing as much info as they can into the article. It's informative and compact, and it's fat has been trimmed off.

I would recommend including the verified and referenced AUS and CAN chart figures into the infoboxes of the respective albums, singles and EPs to make the information on the Coldplay article more presentable.

Also should we be putting the months of release, or full date of release for singles and EPs as well?

Add your personal input and please discuss before making any further changes. We should come to a group consensus so that the discography is more usable and presentable for readers. --Madchester 21:50, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)


Please refrain from making ANY edits to the discography right now. We need to come to a consensus on what should and shouldn't be included in this section, regarding charting numbers, countries to include, record labels, etc. There's simply too much clutter in the article and it makes the section a poor read at the moment. --Madchester 20:27, 2005 Jun 26 (UTC)


While I hate to make changes unilaterally, I moved all the CAN adn AUS charting positions to their respective singles infoboxes. There was simply too much information being presented in the discography, and it was making it completely unpresentable/unreadable.

I've asked for feedback numerous times, so plz give any comments/suggestions on the changes before proceeding any further. --Madchester June 28, 2005 20:08 (UTC)

Are any of these pictures allowed? http://notontelevision.com/coldplay/coldplay%20hartford%20concert%20pit%20ticket%20view%2008%2004%202005%201st%20American%20Show%20of%20tour/index.html

I readded the Canadian and Australian positions. Four positions from around the world don't make an article look cluttered. And in case you did not know, these four countries are the most major of the musical markets (with Japan in fifth). Remember, this is an encyclopedia. If someone was looking for these positions but they weren't displayed because of "cluttered-ness", then they'd find that ridiculous. I know I most certainly would. --Winnermario 20:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Refer to articles like Kylie Minogue or Oasis to see the amt. of clutter that something as simple as album positions can take up. Contrast that with U2's discography or RHCP who have discographies that are clean, clear, and to the point. Both these bands have a large international audience, but there's no need to list specific album positions for each country outside the Big Two.
And an encyclopedia doesn't need to contain all information. I'm looking at the Ticketmaster article, and it doesn't give me actual concert listings... likewise, the Caesar salad article only contains the ingredients, not the actual instructions on how to make a salad. An encylopedia like Wikipedia simply needs to contain the most important points on a subject - specific details can be directed through the external links. For example, the Caesar salad article contains external links on several recipes. Likewise, the Coldplay article doesn't need to include every detail; specifics like non US, UK album positions can be externally linked to a known resource like Billboard or the band's official site. --Madchester 21:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
I don't think that Canada and Australia have that much of a prominence as Japan on the music industry has a whole, at least how you, Winnermario, have stated. I believe Japan has the 2nd largest market, although maybe not for these types of recordings. In any case, would a seperate article containing chart info from the main countries, like USA, UK, Japan, Canada, Sweden, Portugal, New Zealand, be of interest to you (or anyone) while also leaving the US and UK on the main article? On the other hand, I should add that leaving the Canadian and Australian positions on the main article for Coldplay does not clutter it. Drdr1989 00:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

"(Clocks), the group's biggest single to date"

To any other editors, make sure that this comment by a certain user doesn't slip through again. Not only is it against Wikipedia's POV policy, but it is also not verifiable as a fact. Looking at sales positions, you can easily argue that Yellow was more if not as popular as Clocks at that point of the band's history. The Scientist charted moderately, but it was easily the crowd favorite during the A Rush of Blood To The Head tour. Simply stating the popular singles from AROBTTH is sufficent enough, there's no point in making a questionable and opinionated claim. --Madchester 22:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Somehow I knew this would be reverted... In light of what you said I guess it makes no difference really if the "claim" is put on or off. I suppose if you look at all charts, fan reaction, and how successful it did in other countries than the U.S. anyone can make a debate as to which song was the biggest (and no it was not me who originally made that claim). Mine still uses facts based on its positions and length (weeks on) on several of the biggest charts in the U.S. (some not shown) and the fact that they picked up the most prestigious honor - Record Of The Year - at the 2003 Grammies. Also, don't forget that the single "Yellow", unlike "Clocks" was released as an EP before Parachutes which I think "boosted" its position in the U.K. - correct me if I'm wrong. Drdr1989 02:35, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
"biggest single to date" is very ambiguous b/c it is both misleading and unverifiable. You can evaluate that claim with so many different criteria: critical response, number of awards earned, airplay, hits on Google, use in movies or television, fan polls, crowd response at concerts, and good old sales position or figures. By what criteria is that claim being made? When the result isn't universally acknowleged, we really shouldn't make comments indicating what our personal biases perceive to be the "biggest single" or what not. --Madchester 14:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
<<By what criteria is that claim being made?>> Quantifiable, yet prestigious factors (charts, no. of movies involved, awards, Google/ Yahoo! hits) more than qualitative (fan reaction or, ummm, personal opinion). <<When the result isn't universally acknowleged, we really shouldn't make comments indicating what our personal biases perceive to be the "biggest single" or what not.>> This is correct. Be careful, though, how you define "universally acknowleged". When a song makes a big enough dent successwise in some parts of the "universe" that should be considered "successful" throughout the "universe" generally even if other parts if it aren't acknowledged. Now THAT's a fact. ;) I still believe that "Clocks" did have the biggest "dent" out of all of Coldplay's hits, but my survival in this universe does not depend on putting this fact on the article, so...again...leave it off. Drdr1989 16:02, 15 September 2005 (UTC)


"post-Britpop" vs. Brit Rock

post-Britpop or second wave Britpop is the new British music movement of the past 5 yrs or so. The original Britpop phase ended around 97 or 98.

The term is commonly used in the press to describe bands like Coldplay, Keane, Franz Ferdinand), etc.

I've heard of the term "Britrock", but it's a very generic term that has never been well defined like the two phases of the Britpop movement. And it's never really entered the mainstream.

--Madchester 03:03, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

These are terms that journalists use. The rest of us call it music. Adambisset 14:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Fan site links

How about not deleting links to other fan sites? There shouldn't be a monopoly on Coldplay sites. By not listing other fan sites you are not giving the whole story.

There's already links to four separate fan sites, that have been referenced in the article. Note that Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files; there shouldn't be links that are not relevant to the article's content
Both you (66.213.13.50) and another IP address (68.76.102.121) have been inserting links to Coldplay News, a site that has been online for less than a week (since November 30). Wikipedia doesn't advocate the insertion of external link spamming to promote your personal websites or endevaours. Thanks.--Madchester 22:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Why not more? Why limit yourself? It is relevant to this topic.

Once again, Wikipedia's not a repository for external links, and it's not free webspace to advertise personal websites, especially one's that have only been online for less than a week. --Madchester 01:19, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
1) I understand your intention to get your site "out there", but some people are under the illusion that Wikipedia is the ultimate source for site promotion. While a site could be posted here if it adds enough to the article, there are so many "fancruft" sites on the internet, and potentially thousand other Coldplay sites in particular. Remember how back in the day e-mail was originally used to promote stuff? Then it just got out of hand and became denoted as spam? Well potentially if we just let promoters just add their sites here as they please, wikipedia is going to be an excessive source of "linkspam". So we're trying to nip it in the bud in preventing a overflow of these sites by trying to prevent an existence of them to begin with, just adding sites in the manner above. 2) Repeatedly adding your site after it has been taken off four times just makes you look like a spammer rather than someone who is trying to offer some unique sources for Coldplay fans to visit. If you really want to add your site here, instead of just adding your link, make a case for it here, and then maybe someone else may put on. Drdr1989 19:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)