"

Everybody: you're wrong. Everyone here except Bretonbanquet has said that they think that the numbering should continue on side two. This isn't about what anyone thinks; it's about reliable sources - in this case, the label of a vinyl record. It is also about reality - and as usual, people here are trying to make Wikipedia into an alternative universe rather than an encyclopedia. So, in a nutshell, it doesn't really matter what any of you think. If you can produce a copy of this or any album where the numbering on side two is continued from side one, rather than beginning again from track one, by all means, it should be noted in the article, because that would be an accurate representation of how the record was presented to the public, as well as a reliable source. Problem solved. By arbitrarily deciding on a numbering system that is contrary to what actually exists in the real world, you are using original research, which some people here tend to frown upon. As far as the problem of younger people not understanding the numbering: even today's young people are capable of working out the logic behind something with two different ""sides"" being numbered differently. 

I also don't agree that the sides should be eliminated completely; an album article is supposed to reflect the reality of the initial release, which, for most of the best music ever recorded, is vinyl. It is our responsibility to convey that reality accurately, not to revise it.  •talk•   "