From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
To-do list for Talk:The KLF discography: |
edit · history · watch · refresh |
- How/why Bill and Jimmy established KLF Communications (good knowledge, contacts?)
- Strategies: looking at KLF Communications as a company, what was its style? (for example, its early low-key releases; info sheets and exclusive-to-subscribers stuff; promotion usually riding on the back of Jimmy and Bill's antics as The JAMs/The KLF.
|
At our featured list candidacy a very good point has been made about the relevance of some of the sections of this article to a discography. When writing down each section and why it's here my conclusion is that KLF Communications (or KLF Communications and Publications) would be a more fitting title. Comments? --kingboyk 12:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- erm, don't you think you were a bit presumptious moving the page? I mean you only suggested it a day ago, that's hardly long enough for comment. My comment is that there should be an article at discography (one reason is that WP:MUSTARD says there should be) and I don't think it matters if it has extra releases that are not records (I'm sure there is a precedent, e.g. Factory Records). I feel the KLF kommunicators should be in their own page, creating a list of minor characters is perfectly legit and what we're encouraged to do. Then the list of KLF kommunicators can have sub-headings and hence they can be wiki linked from other articles, and it seems that the presence of the list of KLF kommunicators is the major objection to the page (aside from the cover images).
- my main problem with the move is that KLF Communications, because of the capital letter should only be used for the KLF's label/organisation - if you want to make a page that acts as a discography but contains non record items then that should be at KLF communications. cheers Drstuey 12:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well I wrote it and have done most of the work, so I don't see any reason why I shouldn't be bold and move it, and I'm a little surprised at your tone! I wanted to see how people felt it looked with the new name, and seeing it with the new name is a good way of focussing minds. It's very easily moved back, after all. The capitalisation is intentional, being the name of the label. We'll have a discography entry in the relevant categories, by way of the redirect.
-
- So, you think the personnel stuff should be split back out. What about the article name? Would you mind putting your opinion about these two points into the Featured List review please? --kingboyk 12:52, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Is the Help track considered notable enough to receive a mention? I'd feel that way, although the rename to KLF Communications would get in the way. Possible "Selected Compilation appearances" may be suitable? Me677 13:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think we'll hold off on that suggestion until the FLC is out of the way and we know where we stand? I suppose it ought to be in there somewhere. --kingboyk 13:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- sorry if you thought there was a tone in my post, I said you were presumpious in a friendly way, honest. I have posted at the FAC discussion page. Yes I do think the kollaborators should be in their own page, but I didn't contribute to any discussions saying to include them in the discography did I? The name is difficult I admit, is there a precendent from any other groups? I think KLF communicators or KLF kollaborators from a KLF fan perspective, but they are not very encyclopedic. - Drstuey
- I'm leaning towards dumping the collaborators list altogether, but if you disagree I'll farm it out to a new article. Please let me know.
-
-
- WRT the name, I'm inclined to leave it here. KLF communications looks messy (as though we forgot to capitalise), and it's only slightly incorrect because of the late-years release of material on other labels - something that can be addressed by adding a note to the article. It seems to me to the best compromise name we have available. Convinced or not? :) --kingboyk 13:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
