Talk:The Holy Bible (album)

message: I think one can move this article to The Holy Bible. It would be possible to add a line like "For the Christian book of worship, see Bible.
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.140.22.64 (talk) 09:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to "The Holy Bible" 

message: A cut-and-paste move was done on this article (and the talk page) on 18 February 2010 to copy it to The Holy Bible. This move created violations of the copyright licensing for our editors' contributions and has been reverted. If anyone wants this page moved to The Holy Bible, they should follow the instructions at WP:Requested moves to start a discussion. If the consensus is in favor of the move, an administrator will help make the move in a way that preserves the page histories. Thanks. --RL0919 (talk) 15:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cut-and-paste move

message: I do not know, what the Melody Maker wrote 1994, but the song is titled “4st 7lb” there is no plural s. There should be a “lb” or if the Melody Maker's spelling was “lbs” ther should be a sic! --Diwas (talk) 20:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  4st 7lb but not 4st 7lbs 

message: After noting recent genre changes (see section below) I can't help but notice that this phrase is still here. Sorry, but it really is problematic as currently phrased. It offers no context or even the vaguest attribution. N-HH talk/edits 12:48, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If that phrase has ever been in the article, it probably lasted about two minutes. Formerip (talk) 00:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sadly, no, it has lasted a lot longer than two minutes, and these sort of weasel phrases have been removed in the past and re-added by manic Manics fanboys (see what I did there?) who wish to assert forcefully that they are the "BEST BAND EVA!!". I think this page, a long with the other more popular Manics articles, need to be consistently monitored for this. Lachlan Foley (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Still POV/weasel problems with lead

message: The infobox recently acquired a whole set of extra genres here. I know these things are subjective and a little random at the best of times (let's leave aside whether there's even much point when it comes to micro-genres), but I'm not sure about some of the additions: it's not really a punk or gothic rock album as such, and post-punk as a genre is surely fairly time-specific? There may be elements of or nods to those styles/genres on the album but I think it's hard to argue that it falls within them outright. Even if one or two writers have noticed the links – and I'm not sure what the page of the Simon Price book cited says exactly – wouldn't it need something a bit more than that? Otherwise pretty much every album, for example, that features a lap steel guitar on one track suddenly becomes a "country" album. N-HH talk/edits 12:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: NME source notes the "goth music" elements. I also remember reading a book source in which this album was classified as gothic rock; however, I think that'd not be enough for classification. I also think that the hard rock classification is somewhat contradictory to what has been written about this album's style (considering that it is actually a shift from the band's previous hard rock sound). The best would be to keep it as solely "alternative rock", I guess.Myxomatosis57 (talk) 19:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox genres 

message: I doubt that the personnel section was actually adapted from the CD sleeve. Allmusic gives also credits Wire as composer. Does anyone have copy of the album/album sleeve to justify the actual credits? Myxomatosis57 (talk) 18:45, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to contradict, but the personnel section was actually adapted from the CD sleeve. It looks like AllMusic are not distinguishing between words and music and have just listed all band members as "composer". Formerip (talk) 22:04, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicky Wire composing credits 

message: It is my understanding that the Background section in articles, specifically album-related articles in this case, is to provide a summary of the events leading up to the creation of the album. Does this differ from other people's understanding? Lachlan Foley (talk) 23:32, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: And the Background section is present, it is divided in Sound and recording so it meets the definition of Background: a summary of the events leading up to the creation of the album. It is my opinion, I am very much open to hear other opinions in order to improve the article. User:Rhanas Sing! 23:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, but there is currently information on the album's recording included under this heading, whereas "leading up to the creation of the album", in my view, means prior to recording. On most articles I've contributed to there is generally a separate Recording heading. Lachlan Foley (talk) 23:53, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Disagree, I tend to include the recording in the  Background  section because the album is not finished after the recording, many changes can occur during the recording, and the recording leads up to the album itself. Other people can contribute to this discussion and decide, I made my point. User:Rhanas Sing! 00:01, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  At the moment, though, we have a section with only one sub-section, so the section could safely be retitled and the second-tier heading removed. I'd also note that, although the section-sub-section is titled "sound and recording", it doesn't actually talk about the "sound" of the record. It says a bit about music that influenced it and then talks about the recording process. So I would say just title the whole thing "recording". I don't agree that "background" should include the recording of the record. It would be about things leading up to the recording, some of which we have in the article, but not organised into a single section (although I'm not proposing it should be). Formerip (talk) 00:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background section 

message: I propose the merging of 4st 7lb into this article. The song lacks independent notability, and looking at that article's sources there is no reason why this track should have its own article and not any other non-single track, since the sources are all from articles about The Holy Bible and not the track in particular. 165.228.231.15 (talk) 12:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  4st 7lb merge