Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The KLF/Additional Communicators

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is part of WikiProject The KLF, an attempt to improve and expand coverage of The KLF and related topics. Talk to us. KLF-related Articles in need of attention.

[edit] Screencap

It would be great to have a screencap from one of The KLF's single promo videos, depicting several of the Children of the Revolution. Unfortunately I am currently unable to provide one... :-) --Vinoir 12:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Try to be a bit more subtle next time! :P Which video did you have in mind? --kingboyk 13:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Hehe! I wasn't directing the request solely at you, though, but to any passing KLF enthusiast. :) I don't have a particular video in mind, and I'm not even convinced that the article needs a piccy. It would be a mildly-informative adornment. --Vinoir 14:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we have one we could use in one of the singles articles. I'll have a look now. I might need some help with the caption. --kingboyk 14:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

This is the best we have at the moment: . I could probably knock something better up, once we've decided what to do with the article. --kingboyk 14:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Cool, good stuff. I'll see if I can find out who they are. --Vinoir 16:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Any news or further thoughts on this? --kingboyk 16:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Haven't been able to determine who they are. I personally think that if the prose is staying at The KLF discography for now, then the picture is unnecessary in that context. --Vinoir 16:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template

should a link to this article be included in the klf template? Zzzzz 12:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

i took the liberty of adding it there (and removing the section from the klf article). this is to satisfy a FAC comment. Zzzzz 13:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

oops didnt see the "personnel" link was already in there, sorry! Zzzzz 13:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Vinoir had already added it at the bottom (edit conflict, you now already know that :)). If we want it at the top, next to Bill & Jimmy, I think we should use a piped link, something like "Additional personnel", so not to give any impression that The KLF were anything other than those 2 men. --kingboyk 13:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it better at the top? I think that if it's at the top of the template, it dilutes the more accurate message of The KLF being the labour of love of just two men. I personally think that it would sit better elsewhere (maybe under the name "The Children of the Revolution", although Tammy, Glenn et al were not aforementioned "Children"). --Vinoir 14:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Change it back then. As I stated in my edit summary it was a "try this for size" edit :) --kingboyk 14:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't get it looking "right" ("Personnel" is not the right name, and "Children of the Revolution" stretches the box too much for me), so I'll leave it as is for now. :) --Vinoir 16:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

At the very least we must change the article name, as it sends out an incorrect message. "The KLF additional communicators", "The KLF collaborators", "The KLF - additional communicators", "Musicians who worked with The KLF", "Artists who worked with The KLF" - any of these but not "The KLF personnel"! --kingboyk 12:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Not sure about this article

I'm not sure it was wise to fork this out. If I take that as a given, I'm not sure about the name nor about it being hidden away in the KLF template. I can live with it, I'm just not 100% convinced. --kingboyk 13:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

it was forked to bring The KLF article down to size. A small summary section with a "main article" tag pointing to this one (with any name that might be better) would also be ok. Zzzzz 13:51, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm now of the opinion that this article is difficult. Creating this article was a reactionary move on my part to Zzzzz's trimming of the The KLF. Although I like the formatting/style changes within that article, this "personnel" offshoot now strikes me as a contrivance dictated (presumably?) by browser limitations. I'm not sure these additional contributors collectively merit what is essentially an out-of-context article. Also, the title is definitely misleading, sorry about that. "The Children of the Revolution" might well be a better name. The FAC took me by surprise too! --Vinoir 14:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Definitely lacks context. It could go into the discography, but it would be a bit out of place there too. If we trimmed a few lines here and there is it assuredly too much for the main article? --kingboyk 14:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure it could belong in the discography. The information relates to performers on the recordings listed, and is gathered from sleevenotes and labels. --Vinoir 13:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

A bit tenuous, but anyway... I've done a merge, see what you think. --kingboyk 13:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it's okay. I've tinkered with it a little. I know it seems a bit out of place at first, but in my mind it's a worthy venue for the section. I mean, each single/album article will have a "personnel/additional contributors" section, and The KLF discography, giving an overview of all releases, seems an appropriate place to put the overview of all major additional contributors. Have I convinced you yet? :-) --Vinoir 15:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

No. Next question? :P It's fine where it is, it's better than in a badly named article or in the trash. --kingboyk 16:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, the very best place for it is in The KLF, but it seems that it's not to be. --Vinoir 16:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

(ker-ching!) If it's really not suitable material for the discography, there are two other options to consider: cut it right down to a few lines, and put it in The KLF (I don't think a slimline version would be worth a section there though); or, we could scrap it - I haven't any great personal attachment to it, and the contribution details will be available in the various single and album articles. What we would then be without is the "where they are now" info and the Wanda Dee story. Given the general level of detail we are at with the KLF articles, I'd say those bits are not excessive (they provide context), but nor are they vital. --Vinoir 16:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Let's leave it where it is for now. It's growing on me, as it's added some substance to that article. Let's get the FA candidacy out of the way and revisit this issue later, yeah? --kingboyk 16:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Okey-dokey. --Vinoir 16:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The latest on this is that the reviewers at the discography's featured list candidacy didn't like it there. I removed it from that article and placed it in project space until we can decide what to do with it. I think it's useful information. The question remains what to do with it though?

• Leave it here
• Put it back into The KLF
• Rename it something like List of The KLF's creative associates (because "List of x" seems to be the naming convention).

--kingboyk 13:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)