Talk:Songs for the Deaf

message: I just found this album today. The album was made in EU, the cover is black with red font/pitchfork, and other then the UK bonus tracks the Spanish version of Gonna Leave You is on the album rather then the English version. I dunno if this is a special edition of the album. Also, the vinyl is black.24.68.50.33 (talk) 00:24, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Songs For the Deaf EU vinyl

message: Who does lead vocals on "You Think I Ain't Worth A Dollar, But I Feel Like A Millionaire"? It sounds like the dude from Death From Above 1979. I know that Josh Homme did a mix of "Black History Month" for them, so I thought maybe this was what started their collaborations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.165.87.40 (talk • contribs) 
:It was none other than Nick Oliveri. ^^ ... see "Six Shooter" off Deaf or Rated R's "Quick and to the Pointless"  for comparison.. --Johnnyw 11:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And what a great song it is.  ::  RatedR Leg of Lamb 22:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Millionaire Vocals

message: Jesus Christ that is long. It should be shorted, honesty who cares about legal personal.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 222.153.227.123 (talk • contribs) .
:You are right, that is quite a list. I must have missed out on when that was done... Thx for pointing that out. --Johnnyw 10:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal

message: Can anyone tell what they are saying when the song goes very silent. I think its like backwards talking or something. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.188.116.199 (talk • contribs) .
:It sounds a little bit it's a sound snipped of a a sigh and then voice in reverse, doesn't it? Don't know what it supposed to say though or if it is intended to be something more than just gibberish. --Johnnyw talk 16:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reversed the bit and the final words sound very much like "We're ants." The couple of words before that - I can't even guess. --Johnnyw talk 17:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: God is in the radio

message: This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write.  This is how the article, as of June 14, 2007, compares against the  six good article criteria:
:1. Well written?: Generally good here.  I would still recommend that the article go through a solid copyediting.  It never hurts to read the article aloud to catch minor errors.  Here are a few things I noticed. In the first sentence "album" should not be wikilinked. A comma is needed after "magnum opus"  What does "mainstream success in the media" mean?  Record sales?  Reviews (b/c that's already the critics)? Positive coverage?  Appearances on late night shows?  I would recommend taking that out, or being more specific.  I would also add "available" to the end of the last sentence in the lead section.  Take out "as of June 6, 2007" as that will sound hopelessly dated in weeks.  That figure is not likely to change much, and can be adjusted if it does in the future.  If you think it does change often, just add as of 2007, to alert future editors to check it periodically.  Quotation marks should follow terminal punctuation (periods, commas, etc...)  That means "yada, yada, yada." The Yahoo quote should be removed, as it is a joke and not actual commentary on the quality of the album.  If it is kept, it should only be used to explain that Grohl is not typically a drummer.  There should be a comma after "great success"  The last three facts in the Variations section should be turned into prose.  The Artwork section should be turned into prose. There should be a comma after "musician Dave Catching"
:2. Factually accurate?: This statement:  should be removed because (1) It's kind of a wonky fact.  The deaf can "feel" most songs on the album (or any album) that have a strong enough beat if they use subwoofers, high volume, etc... (2) It's original research. The last sentence in Tracklisting needs a reference.
:3. Broad in coverage?: I almost failed the article for on this criteria, but I wanted to give you a chance to fix it - but you only have a week.  I think that, prior to the Critical reception section, you would benefit from having a section (or sections) on the album development. How did Grohl sign on? How did they choose a producer? What was their goal for the album?  Were there snafus that almost halted production?  Where did they record? All those kind of questions.  To see an article that is well done in this regard, see Enta Da Stage.  In the first sentence, you might want to mention briefly (in parenthesis) who Dave Grohl is (like "guitarist of Nirvana fame" or "lead guitarist for the Foo Fighters," or something like that)
:4. Neutral point of view?: I would say yes here.  Even though it is mostly glowing, it is substantiated with outside critics.
:5. Article stability? No edit wars.
:6. Images?: Great here.
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved.  After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again.  If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice.  Thank you for your work so far. 
— Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:24, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I second your opinion, especially regarding 3. Actually, I was quite surprised to see the QOTSA albums nomination, since I closely followed the articles after working on lots of QOTSA stuff a year ago. Not sure if I would be able to join on a ride to get this thing to GA though, since I have some other babies to look after right now, but hopefully, due to Era Vulgaris there will be sufficient Queens fans to fill in. And on a side note: Grohl was the drummer for Nirvana; I would say he's actually more acclaimed for his drumming skills than for his singing/guitar duties with Foo Fighters.--Johnnyw talk 15:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm also for this, though I'd be inclined to simply fail the review based on the fact that there's almost no background information rovided at all, the lead needs to be more expansive and there's some basci wikifying needed (here and there). The fact that it's on hold gives it a little bit of time, but this article needs some serious work before being GA level. --lincalinca 03:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I did my best to improve the article according to the hints, and  I have re-take descriptive grammar test for college credit tomorrow. I'm afraid I can't contribute anymore today, and tomorrow is the deadline for final statement about Good article. Does it have any chance now? Brokensoul talk 14:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say, relax, don't worry about the article. After passing the test (good luck :) work on the issues step by step. Rushing things would do no good for you and the article.. Maybe I'll join in next week, when I have time. Then, I'd resubmit the article. --Johnnyw talk 19:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Johnny's right. Real world first. This can wait. It'll happen before long, I'm sure. I would encourage enlisting more people who can be constructive and possibly one or two who can be completely objective too. --lincalinca 04:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination on hold

message: First I would like to apologize for not getting back.  I am working on a FAC as well as real life, and this slipped my mind.  I rarely put articles on hold, and I imagined someone else would do follow-up when the seven days were up, but I was clearly mistaken.  Again, apologies.
Second, I am really impressed by the real improvement in this article since I read it last.  The Overview and background section has grown and expanded, and gives nice insight into the article.  Overall, I see major improvement. However...I still have to fail it for the following reasons:
#The article still suffers from prose issues: parenthetical phrases that chop up sentences, run-on sentences, and sentences that cram in too much information are the biggest offenders. This is a perfect example: 
#Bulleted subheadings are bad.  Well written prose is always preferred over sparse lists, especially when a list is unnecessary.  This article abounds with lists, and I think there are even more than the last time.
#The songs from which the audio samples are taken are not discussed in the article, making their fair use claim tenuous.
#Inline references should appear after punctuation.
I think with more effort this will will reach GA status.  Best wishes!--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:21, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA hold follow-up

message: Hey, I've just done a partial assessment and there's just a few more things needed and then you'll be cooking in the GA kitchen.
• More imagery would really be appropriate, perhaps photos of the band including Grohl, live photos of the tour where Grohl played with them.
• The article indicates that Grohl only played with the band for 3 months and then left, but I saw him with them when I went to Big Day Out in 2003, Foo Fighters and QOTSA both played in the same day and he played for both, so there's either an error there or he came back. Either way, if he came back, it should be noted. If not and he never left, then the dates he was with the band need to be amended.
• There's no expert opinion section relating to the actual music of the album. You've got parts of it dotted throughout "critical reception" and "Album production and release." If this information can be encapsulated so as to depict the kind of music in its own section, that'd be good.
• Although AMG uses several terms to describe the music type, WP:ALBUMS suggests not to use quite so many. One or two is best and they should be basic types. I'd suggest Heavy Rock and Experimental Metal as the descriptors.
Once these things are done, the album should be all the way there. --lincalinca 04:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's odd, there are youtube vids of Big day out 2003 and it's Joey playing. And on the subject of opinions on the music, should it just all be placed together in say, 'Musical Styles'? red157 16:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I should clarify, Grohl was on drums but stepped down a few songs from the end because FF played right after. And yes, "Musical styles" is the appropriate name. --lincalinca 06:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, it's obvious that if they're around playing together, Grohl makes appearance on drums for QOTSA. Even though Lanegan wasn't official member of the band, when QOTSA and Mark Lanegan were around, they also played some songs together, so it should be noted that he was joining the band sporadically when they were playing at the same festivals here and there, that's all, no big conspiracy theory... Broken soul 09:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even so, it should be noted that he does, and threason it should be here in stead of on the band's article is because this album's creation is its antecedant. --lincalinca 10:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

text: But then again, Lanegan has played with QOTSA spontaneously a number of times and it seems this Big day performance was the only 'relapse' so to speak on Grohl's part... And what songs did Grohl play, as I'd have expected him to do 'A Song for the Deaf', but Joey play ed that. red157 20:06, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just an FYI - a musical styles section is not necessary for a GA (or any) article.  I did a quick search, and I don't believe any such subheading exists in Wikipedia.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 13:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

text: 'Musical Styles' specifically? Maybe not, but many GA articles have something alone those lines, obviously worded differently. If not, somebody renominate it as that is the only thing I see this article lacking. Red157 04:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Nom 

message: Does anyone know who sang this?  It sounds like Jack Black to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshuah Hounshell (talk • contribs) 12:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I know, Oliveri. Mondo Generator rather than Qotsa used to play it live infrequently. Skomorokh incite 13:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bloody Hammer 

message: Is there anything that can be done about this particular part of tracklisting? Every now and then some unregistered user comes along and deletes both A's, while the tracklist on the album's back cover clearly shows that they should be there. Can this be protected or something? -NineInchRuiner (talk) 09:35, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A" Song for the Dead/Deaf 

message: The article does not give any negative criticism. I'm proposing that "Release and reception" be split into two sections, "Release" and "Critical reception." Granted the album was generally a success, there should be some negative reviews added to the section to be more objective.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tea4all (talk • contribs) 05:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical reception 

message: The album Songs for the Deaf by Queens of the Stone Age should have one or more genres listed in the infobox to describe the album as a whole. What should we put in the genre parameter? 
*1: Rock music
*2: Hard rock
*3: Rock and roll
*4: Alternative rock
*5: Stoner rock
*6: Alternative metal
*7: Neo-psychedelia
*8: Heavy metal
Note that album genres, like every fact on Wikipedia, should be WP:Verifiable, referenced with reliable sources such as those found in the list hosted at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. The songs on this album have their own genres which vary quite a bit, but the album genre is not a collection of all the song genres. Rather, the album genre is its own entity, being about the album overall. Binksternet (talk) 00:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *Just stick in anything that you can find sourced. Since you stick with "hard rock" I agree to use it as the only genre. Whatever floats your boat man. TheHolyKiwi (talk) 11:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Songs for the Deaf is what musical genres? RFC 

message: *1 and 2, per argument made above at Talk:Songs for the Deaf#Genre. Reviewers have offered a number of genres but the most prevalent are the ones saying "rock" and "hard rock". A third choice is "heavy metal" but I don't think that that genre appears often enough to rank as highly as rock and hard rock. "Stoner rock" is specifically denied by two sources which say that the album is a break from the band's usual stoner rock. Binksternet (talk) 00:56, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *Just stick in anything that you can find sourced. Since you stick with "hard rock" I agree to use it as the only genre. Whatever floats your boat man. TheHolyKiwi (talk) 11:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Songs for the Deaf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071029144156/http://charts-surfer.de:80/musiksearch.php to http://www.charts-surfer.de/musiksearch.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Songs for the Deaf. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_news/plat_month_20080717.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:44, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Songs for the Deaf. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.stylusmagazine.com/reviews/queens-of-the-stone-age/songs-for-the-deaf.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070615063827/http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/12026142 to http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/12026142
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070610013736/http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/12046145 to http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/12046145
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=5621
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=5736
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nme.com/reviews/albums/oftheyear
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cria.ca/cert_db_search.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607203501/http://www.chartattack.com/charts/10042002-general-top-50 to http://www.chartattack.com/charts/10042002-general-top-50
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://nztop40.co.nz/chart/albums?chart=1233
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:37, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Songs for the Deaf. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020827172721/http://www.roadrun.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=4021 to http://www.roadrun.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=4021
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927195521/http://www.roadrun.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=4359 to http://www.roadrun.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=4359
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Universal music will be releasing a 2019 reissue as "Gatefold Anniversary Reissue" on 2 LPs. LP1 is the album in the edited/radio versions and on LPs the uncensored versions due to release 22 November 2019. Source Saemikneu (talk) 19:28, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  2019 Reissue 

message: Whenever I try to find sources to see if Dave or Gene played on millionaire or go with the flow there's basically nothing. I can't find anything for millionaire and I keep seeing sources going back and forth on who played on go with the flow. I can't find any citations for either song so does anybody have any idea? Susrage (talk) 02:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did Gene Trautmann really play on Millionaire and Go With The Flow