Jump to content

Talk:Spacemen 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit]

Lots of bad links here. Spectrum (band) links to an Australian 60s/70s band, while the albums performance and recurring link to articles not about these albums. Mind if I fix them? --Mongreilf 09:14, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let's do it

I was just about to do the same thing. This is an important group of music and the articles should be accurate. --demonburrito 17:20, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spectrum fix

I have changed the Spectrum link from [Spectrum (band)] to [Spectrum (UK band)]. --demonburrito 17:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Album release dates

[edit]

It looks like the years cited as release dates are for the CD reissues, and not for the original release. 68.77.35.138 22:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)kirkesque[reply]

release dates need to be fixed Roland Sparkes (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have now fixed.Roland Sparkes (talk) 23:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other band members

[edit]

Have tried to incorporate details of other members, but to no avail. Any help?

'From the outset Spacemen 3, who play a nice brand of sex music, had a very defined set of aesthetic principles.' What the fuck is this flowery prose shite? 'Sex music'? It's not Melody Maker circa 1979 thanks. sort it out.

someone's removed that bit. thankfully.Roland Sparkes (talk) 17:13, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Spacemen3.jpg

[edit]

Image:Spacemen3.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Formation date query

[edit]

On the Peter Kember page it says Spacemen 3 was formed in 1985. Which one it the correct year? --Bjoorn (talk) 08:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

earliest incarnation was 1982 when P&J met and started band. Roland Sparkes (talk) 17:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

POV (2010-211)

[edit]

I added a couple of references, but believe the majority of fancruft presently contained therein is unsourceable. Please refer to Verifiability and Reliable sources, neither of which are currently present in this over the top, pseudo-rock journalistic, account. Frankly, it needs completely rewriting to achieve anything remotely encyclopedic in nature.

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is the POV issue resolved now?
Roland Sparkes (talk) 14:05, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The "Influence" section is still very promotional, and totally unsupported by any references:-
"appreciation of the band's output has grown significantly ..."
"Their style influenced the shoegazing movement and groups on both sides of the Atlantic."
"Many modern day artists have credited the band as an influence, including Primal Scream, MGMT, Mogwai, Arab Strap, Stereolab, Tortoise, The Flaming Lips, Yo La Tengo, Animal Collective, Hot Chip, Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, and Pavement."
Without anything to back any of these claims up, it still seems PoV to me.
Arjayay (talk) 14:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, noted. Thanks. I will attend to when I rewrite it. I will try to find some references to some of such remarks (not that I made them). Question - will the influnces and those influnecd by sections on the AMG article constitute an adequate reference? Roland Sparkes (talk) 15:10, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't like the idea - but I don't know of any policy precluding this. AMG is normally regarded as a Reliable Source, although such lists are clearly Tertiary sources, whereas we should be aiming for secondary sources.
AMG lists who influenced a band, rather than who they influenced, and the appearance of a band in AMGs "Similar Artists" list is not the same as "influenced by".
I have checked the AMG articles on all the bands in the above list, and only Mogwai and Black Rebel Motorcycle Club list Spacemen 3 as an influence - so 10 of the 12 need to have other sources found for them, or be removed.
Arjayay (talk) 15:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, thanks for your responses. 1). The Spacemen 3 biography book 'Dreamweapon' mentions various bands who influenced Spacemen 3, is that an adequate source? Better than AMG? Or cite both as a ref.? 2). Regarding bands that S3 influenced: I notice that if you look up certain bands on AMG they do list S3 as 'influenced by' even if they are not listed on the S3 page itself as 'followers' - presumably this would be okay?
  1. I'd use both references - presumably the lists are not identical in any case - so you may have to.
    IMHO the list is far too long in any case and could do with a major trim, but that's just my PoV.
  2. As stated above, the only 2 bands on the original "influenced by" list that AMG confirms are Mogwai and Black Rebel Motorcycle Club.
    AMG does not have a "Followers" list - only "Followed", but I note you have now added all of these to a list which was already probably too long. The list needs quality (especially of references) not quantity, the one (weak) AMG reference is not enough for such a long list.
    We don't aim to list every band that every other band influenced - imagine the list on The Beatles page.
    Arjayay (talk) 08:39, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added plenty of citations and sources for the 'musical influences' section of this article, which I have expanded and redrafted. And I have removed the POV box from that sdection. Roland Sparkes (talk) 19:15, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the {{Allmusic}} template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:

--CactusBot (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted
Arjayay (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Major Article Overhaul (September 2011)

[edit]

I intend to re-work and heavily expand this Wiki article/entry for Spacemen 3. In particular, I wish to expand the 'History' section and intend to add sub-sections, but I shall review the whole article.

If there are any parties who have a special interest in this re-write exercise, please post here and/or contact me directly (my email address is shown on my user page). Thanks.

When the revision work is completed, I should be very grateful for one or two users to peer review the revised entry. Any interestred parties, again please either post here or contact me directy. Thank you.

As at 12th September 2011, this article is having major alterations made to it, ongoing. I would therefore ask users not to make any amendments during this process. Thank you.

p.s. I have messaged users WesleyDodds and derekrbullamore

Roland Sparkes (talk) 13:17, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If that's what you're trying to do, you're degrading the article's quality in the process with malformed sections, the addition of irrelevant quotes (presumably from the band or its members) and extremely odd article structure that contravenes our manual of style. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 23:07, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your attention here, user Jeske Courino. : To the user who is undo-ing my chnages: Please can you stop reverting my temporary changes. This is simply work in progress. I have not finished my changes. Section headings clearly state they are currently undergoing major reconstruction. I note everything you have said.The structure etc is currently malformed and there are other probelsm, I know. Please allow me continue making revisons for the time being and cease making undos/reverts. Thankyou.Roland Sparkes (talk) 23:11, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just because it's undergoing heavy changes does not give you carte blanche to defy Wikipedia policy, especially the manual of style. That's why I've been reverting you. I would suggest you make the changes on a subpage in your userspace, where there's far less chance of a reader seeing a completely disorganized and messy article. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 23:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Let me suggest this: I make a undo. Then I immediately remove all the 'funny' bits. That way the legitimate changes to prose that I have made - that you have also undone - can be retained. Okay? Roland Sparkes (talk) 23:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can do that by editing your last revision to remove them, then saving. I won't object if you do so; my immediate concern is that the article doesn't look as bad as it did when I first reverted. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 23:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I shall proceed. Come back in an hour say, if you wish. If there are outstanding issues you have, we can discuss them here. Agreed?Roland Sparkes (talk) 23:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Works for me. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 23:53, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
UPDATE: Okay, I have finished putting the article back in a presentable format, removing my 'funny' work in progress bits. Please have a look at the article as it currently stands. I will avoid making any more chnages for the immediate short term until I hear from you. Please advise me if you have any issues with the article in its current form. Let me know. If the structure/headings of the article okay? Thanks.Roland Sparkes (talk) 23:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, everything looks very good. You're doing well. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 00:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added 'Further Reading'.Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:28, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have exapanded 'external links' section. Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added made corrections and additions to the two template box things at top and bottom of article.Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have corrected and revised the 'Discography' section. Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:30, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a section about record releases since S3 broke up. This info is noteworthy. Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:31, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the action section of text as a sub-headings under 'Discography section'. It seems the best place for it. Any one have any views on that?Roland Sparkes (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: members' activities since S3 broke up. Before I started revising the article, there was far too much content on this. It was not relevant to the article subject. Therefore, I have massively forshortened that information, adding it to the end of the 'History' section. In thsi process, I checked it was included in other wiki articles, adding info as necessary. Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:33, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have restructured some of the article. I have added some headings/sections. I will give sub-headings to the 'History' section.Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:35, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a 'See Also' section, including closely related bands.Roland Sparkes (talk) 00:40, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have revised and augmented the 'Influnces' section, and added 3 sources.Roland Sparkes (talk) 03:03, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: 'Musical style and influences' section - Today and yesterday I expanded and made various copyediting improvements, I also added numerous citations.

Roland Sparkes (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a 'instruments and equipment' section heading and added content.Roland Sparkes (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished re-doing this article. I should be grateful, please, if someone could give it a look over, and provide feeback on how it may need to be changed or could be improved. Also, can it's rating be re-assessed now? Many thanks.Roland Sparkes (talk) 12:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've spell-checked the article, and corrected typos etc.Roland Sparkes (talk) 18:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm tidying up some of the references. Roland Sparkes (talk) 18:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've quoted explicit page ref's for the Erik Morse sourceRoland Sparkes (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the section I added with explicit details of guitar equipment. I think it's too much detail and inconsistent with similar articlesRoland Sparkes (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited down the parts of the influences bit of the 'Musical style and influences' section. I've reduced bits that I feel in retrospect were probably too long and too detailed.Roland Sparkes (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've added info on additional musical personnel.Roland Sparkes (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've put song titles and singles titles in "quotation marks" rather than 'inverted commas'. This is consistent with 'featured article'-ranking band bios.Roland Sparkes (talk) 08:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've ensured the article's sections are in the correct order as per the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Had to move a few about slightly.Roland Sparkes (talk) 08:25, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've reduced the number of 'SEE ALSO's' and 'EXTERNAL LINKS'Roland Sparkes (talk) 10:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Taking Drugs -- unofficial?

[edit]

The article says the 1990 release of Taking Drugs to Make Music to Take Drugs was unofficial. Does anybody have any first-person confirmation of this? I can find a lot of sites repeating it, but it still appears to be mostly just a legend. Here's a thread discussing it, and what they're saying makes sense: Father Yod wasn't a bootleg label, it was sold through reputable channels, and was likely authorized by (only) Jason Pierce. Father Yod used the 'official bootleg' description on a couple other totally legit releases, notably Sonic Youth's "Hold That Tiger". (Do a google search for the album title and "official bootleg" and check the first few results.) —Torc. (Talk.) 13:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Spacemen 3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Spacemen_3&oldid=1195538157"