Talk:A Weekend in the City

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
Warning This is the talk page for discussing changes to the article A Weekend in the City. Please refrain from starting discussions that have little or nothing to do with the article. Thank you.

Contents

[edit] Record Label

Is the record label V2 or Vice? I got mine [Best Buy] and it said "Vice Records". I thought it was V2? The singles are released as V2. Which one is it? I am confused :(

Hm...puzzling. Bloc Party were originally under Wichita Records until they moved to Vice Records, but I can't remember them being on V2. Sorry. UncleMontezuma 08:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese Bonus Tracks

Are they confirmed as if they are, I will be getting an import from Japan, otherwise I will buy from Australia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mufffin man (talk • contribs).

That's just great. --Soetermans 09:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

So there goes iTunes again. Now thats another album where I cannot get the full track listing no matter which version of the album I buy :(

Buy the CD... UncleMontezuma 08:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Album Cover

That album cover is absolutley not real. I've seen that art various places on the web for last year or so. Not a Bloc Party album cover. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.152.146.79 (talk • contribs).

Online stores such as amazon seem to be using that as the album cover. Unless you can cite an official bloc party source to the contrary, we'll leave it as that Hippoking 21:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
The unsigned comment above was left by an anonymous user back on October 1. Methinks the cover is official now, no need to continue the discussion. --King Bee 21:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
It is almost certainly not the original photo that was being used, here is its original location: [[1]] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Protiek (talk • contribs) 17:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Leak

Should it be mentioned that the album has leaked? It is fairly common knowledge. A google search for "A Weekend in the City" mentions the leak on the first page. I've seen this added and removed a couple of times on the history, and I'd rather get a definitive decision. Other albums (which have since been released) such as Stadium Arcadium and Encore mention the leaks in their album. Hippoking 15:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I have reverted the changes. Since when was it up to an encyclopedia to decide what people shouldn't know. Freedom of thought and information and all that, we are here to tell a story, not serve company's financial interests by not publicizing a leak. By the logic of the person that removed the leak info, I should also blank the nuclear bomb page as it "may be best that people dont know this" Protiek 16:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
First, leaks are not a common occurrences. Leaks of albums like Stadium Arcadium and Encore made headlines, and as I mentioned earlier, both have their leaks mentioned in their article. Second, as Protiek said, we are here to give information, not be partisan to corporate interests. Third, if you want to make a change, look at the edit history. If it's just been done and undone a few times, it might be under contention, and it's worth reading the talk before editing it. Edit wars aren't cool. If you have a good reason to make a contested change, discuss it on the talk page. That's the whole point. Hippoking 16:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
"leaks are not a common occurrences" = completely false. Leaks always occur. This leak is not particularly special. You can not look me straight in the face and tell me that this leak made headlines in major newspapers. Therefore, I am removing the leak information. --Russ is the sex 22:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
...And album releases always occur too, so let's remove from all album articles the dates those albums were released. I have reinserted the business about the leak. --King Bee 15:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Every other album I can think of which has been leaked has it mentioned in their wikipedia article. Most albums do not hit peer to peer until release or a few days before. 3 months before is near unprecedented, and well worth a mention in an article. Running a Google test, the very first result is a discussion of the leak.
Also, when deleting content, it is NOT a minor edit. Minor edits are typos and minor grammatical faults. Quoted from here:

"A check to the minor edit box signifies that only superficial differences exist between the current and previous version: typo corrections, formatting and presentational changes, rearranging of text without modifying content, et cetera. A minor edit is a version that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute."

The fact that we are discussing this on the talk page pretty much denies it from being a minor edit, even ignoring the fact that it is content deletion. I will continue to re-edit this in, following the trend set by wikipedia articles on other leaked albums. Should you wish to continue this debate, we can create a case with the Mediation Cabal. Hippoking 16:04, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I've got agree that, although the leak may not have made the news outlets, a 3 month early album leak is notable and significant part of the history of the new album. Tnomad 01:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Just for the record, when i look at the wikipedia page for an unreleased album, I am generally looking for details of when/if it has been leaked. Yes, the information becomes less relevant after the album has been released, but in the case of leaked album which is as yet unreleased, especially in the case of a 3 month early leak, it's probably the most interesting thing on the page at this point in time. PunkOn 09:18, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Nice to know Wikipedia is being turned into a piracy resource. We're here to provide information to the best of our ability, and that's what we'll do, but I must say I frown on it's use simply to find out what can be pirated. Hippoking 18:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I think you might be going a bit too far there, Hippoking. It's not like we provide links to torrents or P2P downloads on wikipedia, so all someone like PunkOn is getting is news that the album is leaked. He's not getting any information as to where he might find it. After the new Bloc Party album leaked, the info was almost everywhere, so he couldn't have missed it; he didn't have to go to Wikipedia to find it. --King Bee 20:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two Editions?

Does anyone know if there will be a version which contains a DVD or something like that? --Jimmyjrg 01:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


Yes there is, I know because I have it. The album cover is red and the album came with A weekend In The City and a DVD disc containing "The making of a weekend in the city" and music videos for the prayer and I still remember. The normal album was for about £10 whilst the DVD edition was for £13. -Omaster

[edit] Reviews / Linkspam

The Tiny Mix Tapes review has been removed several times now, the last time with the edit summary "removed linkspam". Reading the wikipedia article on Tiny Mix Tapes, I cannot see why their review should not qualify for the respective section, even less how it could be regarded "linkspam". The latter is a term that might be applied to several other reviews that are mentioned in the infobox but do seem to stem from less professional review sites/sources (e.g. most of those that do not have their own article here). --a.bit 19:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] London?

Surely the city is Brighton, as he states in Waiting For The 7.18 - "Let's drive to Brighton on the weekend"? UncleMontezuma 08:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

i think that generally that bit is coincidental, since the band are from there. i think the area in question is London, but he again refers to the Weekend in an unrelated context - ie., driving from London to Brighton. --SteelersFan UK06 03:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
There are also references to London in that song, though: "The Northern Line is the loudest". And no one would call Brighton "the city." --Tothebarricades (talk) 20:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chart

just wondering, the page says that the album outsold Fall Out Boy's Infinity On High to get #2, would more relevant information not be the album which outsold it to number 1? --SteelersFan UK06 03:22, 26 June 2007 (UTC)