Talk:Time Out (album)

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.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents

[edit] <^>v!!This album is connected!!v<^>

[edit] RfC: line

Having seen (and liked) on various articles the use of a horizontal line to divide off disambiguation messages I've been adding them to articles for some time (I asked about adding it to the dab template, but was told that, because some editors use two or more instances of the template on one article it would look odd; no-one objected to the line being added manually). User:Reisio has been deleting it, with the edit summary: "rv to 07:43, 2005 October 4 Reisio - haven't seen an hr used like that in any article before - it is abnormal". In an exchange on User Talk pages (see User talk:Reisio#Time Out (album) User talk:Mel Etitis#Time Out (album), Reision has moved to demanding not that the line be present on other articles, but that it have been placed there by editors other than me.

Could other editors say whether or not they object to the line (here and on other articles), and why? Thankyou. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:02, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I tend to prefer the horizontal line as well, because it is a visual cue that the dab statement is not part of the topic being discussed. This is especially useful when the dab is at the top, as is the usual practice. But I've seen it done with and without the line in many articles, so anyone claiming that one or the other is not typical is mistaken. In a quick perusal of Wikipedia:Disambiguation and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages), which might be expected to comment on this, I didn't notice any comment on the dab header at all. I'm sure it's been discussed somewhere, but I don't know where at the moment. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 21:17, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
They're already offset from the article by indentation and italics. ¦ Reisio 21:31, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
It's quite simple in my eyes - if this is the only article that has it, then it's abnormal and disrupts consistency between articles. If User:Mel Etitis is the only person (or even one of a handful of people) adding these rules, then it's still abnormal because the vast majority is not using them. Hit up the Random article link a bunch of times and you will shortly come across an article with a disambig notice and it will more than likely not have a rule underneath it; I still have not come across another one with such a rule.
Whether or not the majority should change their habits and start using them and not use the current predominant method of not using them is another matter which should probably be discussed on an MoS talk page. ¦ Reisio 21:27, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
If you're going to have a dablink you should use one of the templates shown at Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Templates for disambiguation links. The purpose of these templates is to standardize the appearance of such links so you don't have to argue on article talk pages. However, this article title is not ambiguous and doesn't need a dablink at all. No one's going to get to this page unless they expect to read about the album. —Wahoofive (talk) 21:39, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Indentation and italics are overloaded with uses (dab statements, quotations, special text formatting. In most articles, horizontal lines have only two uses: dab statements and as section heading underlining (Monobook skin only). A horizontal line for a leading dab statement is therefore unambiguous and provides useful vertical visual separation. Also, repeatedly hitting "Random page" hardly provides any meaningful statistical basis for current practice. (See Birthday paradox for a hint a how surprising such random selection can be. I once calculated an 88% probability for coming across the same article twice in 1,000 tries in a 500,000-article Wikipedia, which doesn't give one a good feeling for random-sample testing.) Unfortunately, Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Templates for disambiguation links is, well, ambiguous on the subject. One might extrapolate an avoidance of horizontal lines because none is shown in the templated examples, although the examples themselves (the sole purpose of the section) would not be clarified if they had been included. The alternative form of placing the dab message at the bottom with a wiki-HR suggests the HR might not be used at the top, but it's all maddeningly unstated. In any case, it is frequent practice, and I stand by my justifications above. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:39, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
My vote: Omit horizontal bar. --Arcadian 01:37, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Blue Rondo a la Turk

I'm wondering if the diacritic actually belongs here. The album has no such diacritic, using "Blue Rondo A La Turk" and the liner notes have it as "Á". --howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 18:10, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

The original album does in fact use "à" (to left) in the liner notes. Whatever lackey they had retype it for the CD messed up and used "Á" (to right, and capitalized). If you look at the first page of the CD booklet, you will see a facsimile of the original liner notes including the "à". The actual phrase, of course, is also "à la". ¦ Reisio 20:01, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Aha, I see. That's a good eye for detail you've got there. --howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 21:49, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
I actually checked the record (vinyl) album, but remembered the facsimile in the CD booklet when I thought of how boring it'd be to scan the cover. :p ¦ Reisio 22:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mozart material in Blue Rondo?

There seem to be a misunderstanding in the current article, which credits "material from Mozart in 'Blue Rondo à la Turk')". AFAIK, there wasn't anything more than alluding to Mozart's title and style, and I can't hear any actual Mozart material in this track. At least, not from his "Rondo Alla Turca" in the Piano Sonata No. 11. What is the source or rationale for this credit? Else I'll amend it accordingly. -- 62.147.39.22 12:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kathy's Waltz inspired McCartney?

This track in parts appears to bear a strong resemblance to Paul McCartney's All My Loving, which came out about four years later. Anyone have any further comment on this? 193.122.47.162 09:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Time out album cover.jpg

Image:Time out album cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

I have replaced the previous, untemplated fair-use statement for the above image with the templated version given at WP:NFURG. However, the image includes no source information; e.g., "digital picture of CD taken by User:X" or copy of http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/c2/a0/e84feb6709a01b614d091110.L.jpg resized by User:Y". (I am not claiming either of these as sources, nor am I suggesting that copying an Amazon image is legally acceptable. The point is that the actual source must be cited.) Without a specific source, the image may still be deleted. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strange Meadow Lark time signature

The article states that "'Strange Meadow Lark' is too flexible to be pinned down to a particular time signature, though there are hints of waltz time." Obviously the extended piano intro to the song is quite loose, but then it goes into a definite time signature when the rest of the band comes in. It sounds to me to be 4/4, but it could be 6/8 with a 2 feel, given the strong use of triplet patterns in the melody, and I can't say for sure. What I do know is that there's a time signature of some sort there, so someone with a better ear than me ought to be able to figure it out. Anyone? --Barefootmatt 07:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)