Difference between revisions of "Talk:The Resistance (album)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
What does it mean by USB? | What does it mean by USB? | ||
i dont get it =/ | i dont get it =/ | ||
whats USB? | |||
Revision as of 21:20, 5 August 2009
I think it's time this when from went from being a running commentary on the album to being a proper article now that official announcements are being made. ۞ 15:19, 22 May 2009 (BST)
- how about splitting it into 2 articles like Fourth album theory and Black Holes and Revelations (album)? --Wilfio 18:53, 22 May 2009 (BST)
- Not sure about that since fourth album theory was basically a seperate entity, and this page was meant to transform into the final one...there's a few bits of irrelevent info that no one will want to read in a year's time, but a lot can be rearranged into a description of the recording and writing process. Like, ever single instance the 15-minute song was mentioned, it won't matter a year after the album was released...a lot of this can be reduced to single sentences with multiple references, or maybe just moved to the talk page or hidden in-article...like if someone really wanted to know when the third time a band member mentioned "electronic songs" on the album there's the history, it doesn't really warrant its own article ۞ 18:58, 22 May 2009 (BST)
- Personally i find the way that information is slowly leaked and speculation as to possible inclusions to be really interesting and really enjoyed reading Fourth album theory after BHaR came out as i didnt follow muse as closely then as i do now. Then again there were more clues last time such as the setlist anagrams and cryptic forum posts. Anyone else got an opinion on this? --Wilfio 19:58, 22 May 2009 (BST)
- Not sure about that since fourth album theory was basically a seperate entity, and this page was meant to transform into the final one...there's a few bits of irrelevent info that no one will want to read in a year's time, but a lot can be rearranged into a description of the recording and writing process. Like, ever single instance the 15-minute song was mentioned, it won't matter a year after the album was released...a lot of this can be reduced to single sentences with multiple references, or maybe just moved to the talk page or hidden in-article...like if someone really wanted to know when the third time a band member mentioned "electronic songs" on the album there's the history, it doesn't really warrant its own article ۞ 18:58, 22 May 2009 (BST)
- I agree that it should be now condensed. Some of the running commentary info isn't needed anymore Such as speculation that the album won't be an album, we no know that it will be. I say we have a 'History' or 'Production' Section which includes this info, with less specificity & detail --Musername 20:44, 22 May 2009 (GMT)
Old time line
This was removed from the original article as a speculative time line when it because redundant as all details has been confirmed.
Possible time-line of the album
| Date | Progress |
|---|---|
| March/April/May 2008 | Album in planning stage, some songs written[1][2] |
| June/July/August 2008 | New songs rehearsed.[3] |
| September/October 2008 | Studio rehearsals begin.[3] |
| November 2008 | Recording begins.[4] |
| June 2009 | Album production and mixing completed. |
| September 2009 | Fifth album released,[3] touring expected.[4] |
Leaks
Information obtained to leaks is not be added to Musewiki, lyrics for new songs for example. These can be added on the day of the first release date of The Resistance, or once the album is debuted in some other form. Niall 19:27, 17 June 2009 (BST)
- Even information which would in no way whatsoever point to said leaks? Such as lyrics, descriptions etc...? Seems a tad unnecessary. --Tene 20:39, 17 June 2009 (BST)
What does it mean by USB? i dont get it =/
whats USB?
- ↑ Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedml20080331 - ↑ 60 Seconds With Muse’s Christopher Wolstenholme (2008-04-06). The Times. Retrieved from thetimes.co.za.
- ↑ a b c Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs namedml20080622 - ↑ a b Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; no text was provided for refs nameddom20081028