Talk:Pink Moon

message: :Image:Pink Moon (remastered).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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To better identify a record and the release history of a record, label and sleeve images are necessary. But I will not "fight" against a bot. --Reinhard P. Braun 05:26, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pink Moon (remastered).jpg

message: fixed a title in tracklist. track 9 is called "Ride", not "Free Ride".
coincidental or not, allmusic.com also makes the same mistake on their page for the album.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.158.103 (talk) 16:49, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All references on the CD inlay (including handwritten lyrics) have it as "Free Ride". Lfh (talk) 23:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I own the original version of this record on vinyl.  It's called "Ride". zellin t / c' 05:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: At Esprit's page for the original pressing, they have some (small) images of the labels and the gatefold sleeve. The Side 2 label shows the title as "Ride", but the section of the sleeve with the lyrics shows the title as "Free Ride" (it's just about possible to tell – beneath the first chunk of text in the third column). Given that Drake's own handwritten lyrics refer to the song as "Free Ride", it's likely that the omission of "Free" on the label was a mistake by the record company. Bryter Music, "The official website of the Estate of Nick Drake", lists the title as "Free Ride" here. –CapitalLetterBeginning (talk) 18:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps there's no "right" answer.  I'll just add a brief footnote. Lfh (talk) 11:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Free Ride" versus "Ride" 

message: :Image:Pink Moon (remastered).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 ensure 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) 14:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pink Moon (remastered).jpg

message: Why are wireless bollinger reviews being added to albums?  is this to advertise their website?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.167.131.204 (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wireless Bollinger

message: This review is on all 3 Nick Drake album wiki pages, probably incorrectly.
Alternative Press (March 2001, p.88) - "With a voice paradoxically feather-light and grave, [one] of the most beautiful and melancholy albums ever recorded."  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.146.32.9 (talk) 00:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review on all albums 

message: This article needs a massive overhaul, but holy mother of god, that sound. Nothing else in the world sounds like this. Plenty try to copy, and none come close.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.107.42.216 (talk) 07:04, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outstanding 

message: I deleted the at&t bit of information in the Album Information section. Unless there is a reference specifically citing the commercial, I do not think any type of advertisement should have a place in this article. His music is far too beautiful to muddy up with information about mindless commercials. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.107.42.216 (talk) 07:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  At&t Why 

message: I summarized 
: /* Track listing */  rem self-lk Pink Moon 
re my edit to the accompanying article. If and when the Rdr at Pink Moon (song) is overwrit (as an article on the song), the premature lk (annoying at best, and for some users mystifying) should be restored.--Jerzy•t 07:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-link via Rdr that i rem'd 

message: Propose to make the following edits...if no one objects. 
Add correct John Wood (music producer) link. 
Remove link to plastic bag - this seems silly. 
Remove link to filmed - again, not contributing and silly. 
Remove broken link to VW "Milky Way" video at the bottom. 
Correct Link to VW Cabriolet, that actually leads to VW Golf. 
Add chronology of "Five Leaves Left" to box on the right.  Pugsly8000 (talk) 15:11, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sound fair to me. Go ahead, no need to ask permission :) --Soren84 (talk) 21:22, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Series of proposed small fixes 

message: I would like to add this ogg file that comes from https://archive.org/details/opensource_audio. 
 Considering it is open source, it is my understanding that a fair-use rationale is not needed. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I don't want a bot taking it out a week later. I think it is an important 2:41 minute interview with John Wood (the only other person in the studio those two recording nights) specifically about Nick and the recording of Pink Moon. It is an excerpt from a 55 minute BBC Radio2 documentary from 2005 narrated by Brad Pitt. The documentary link is https://archive.org/details/BbcRadio2-LostBoyInSearchOfNickDrake.  Could I get feedback from other Wikipedians as to their opinion on this? Can I get a consensus to add this media file and/or advice on whether or not I should add a fair use rationale. For clarity, I want to add the 2:41 minute ogg below, not the whole 55 minute documentary. If I get a consensus, I'll add it! Thank you so much! Pugsly8000 (talk) 13:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Addition of Media File 

message: I would like to propose this addition to the page. Remove the one sentence in "Background & Recording" about cover art and add this new section. Please provide me with feedback and opinions as to whether this should be added. I find it important, but others may not. If I get a consensus, I will add it. Thank you so much! Pugsly8000 (talk) 14:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Addition of Cover Art and Packaging Section 

message: I am wondering if there is a way for the John Wood link to look neater and be easier to read than, "John Wood (Music Producer)"? When I went in and tested removing the "music producer" verbiage it then defaults to a wiki page with a list of John Wood's. How can I have it say "John Wood" and have it link to the correct page? 
Thanks!
--Elisunshine01 (talk) 21:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Wood link 

message: I have been working on an edit and expansion of the Background and Recording sections to be completed and added sometime in the next ten days. I plan to split the sections (Background AND Recording), and add additional information to both (supported, of course). Are there any questions, concerns or input? Would it be helpful to present my proposed edits here first for those interested? 
Thanks! --Elisunshine01 (talk) 02:42, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background and Recording EDIT suggestions 

message: I have been working on an edit to the Reception and Legacy section. I anyone is interested it is in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pugsly8000/sandbox#Reception_and_Legacy
I appreciate your feedback! Pugsly8000 (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: VERY nice work :-D The article would benefit a lot from what you wrote. The picture of the paper ad works fine too. Fantastic work! --Soren84 (talk) 22:58, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: THANK YOU Soren84. I appreciate your feedback. Pugsly8000 (talk) 02:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception and Legacy Edit suggestions 

message: Considering ongoing edits which have improved page, I would like to see a better intro. I will begin drafting in my sandbox today (11/13/2013), and I am looking forward to feedback and suggestions. --Elisunshine01 (talk) 18:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I will help! Let me know when you have a draft and I'll take a look. Good Work! Pugsly8000 (talk) 21:35, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Introduction 

message: I think this article is ready for a B class bump. Additionally, I think it should be listed as high importance. It is included on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All Time list along with Drake's previous albums, Bryter Layter and Five Leaves Left which rated in the "High" importance category, when Pink Moon is arguably Drake's most important work for several reasons (it was his last studio album before he died, the song "Pink Moon" was made famous in the VW commercial, etc.). I made the request for B class and Importance review here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Assessment--Elisunshine01 (talk) 08:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request made for B class and high importance assessment.  

message: The Sputnikmusic album review used in the albums rating review box is a user-generated review and should therefore be discarded per the WikiProject Albums style guide. This was already mentioned in the peer review (diff). I've checked the other reviews from that website and none of them are staff reviews, so these shouldn't be used either. I'm going to remove this one now. Thanks — sparklism  hey!
:That's fair enough - I was never entirely happy that the majority of reviews were from minor websites rather than established music papers/websites. There must be reviews from the time of the CD reissues in 1990 and 2000 that can be used, although I won't be able to check until June at the earliest. Ideally I think it might be a good idea to split the contemporary and legacy reviews into separate paragraphs to highlight how critical opinion of the album has altered over time - I'm somewhat annoyed that someone has decided to remove the ratings for the two 1971 reviews from the infobox without any explanation and these appear to be his/her only edits on Wikipedia. Richard3120 (talk) 14:45, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: ...in which case I suggest you reinstate them. I agree with your points about the legacy/contemporary reviews too, and there simply has to be more coverage than we've currently got. There's a GA-status article lurking in here somewhere. — sparklism  hey! 15:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to... ;-) I left a polite request on the editor's talk page asking why they had made the edits, and generously decided to give them a week to reply before I reverted back. Perhaps I'm being over-generous but I'd rather avoid an edit war if I can. Richard3120 (talk) 15:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: By the way, I agree with you about GA status – it's mainly thanks to the work of Pugsly8000 and Elisunshine01 that the article has been greatly improved in the last six months or so, and they noted that WikiProject Albums intends to get all the albums on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Albums of All Time (of which this is one) up to GA status. The difficulty with this album is that only two people were involved in its recording (the principal one of whom has been dead for nearly 40 years), there were only two critical reviews written at the time, and no interviews with the artist, so most of the information has to come from legacy reviews and the three major biographies of Drake. In short, there's not a wealth of information out there. Richard3120 (talk) 15:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you Rihard3120 and Sparklism for all your tuning and edits to this important artist's final album. I have been busy and not able to watch this as closely as I would like. However, I commit now to checking it daily. Perhaps for the best really, I'm not sure I would have responded well to the random removal of some reviews that Richard3120 noticed. : )   Pugsly8000 (talk) 01:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

text: Looking again at this, I see Sputnikmusic has a different review for Pink Moon which is tagged as "EMERITUS". Since Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources states that for Sputnikmusic "", do other contributors consider this to be a review that we could use for the article? Thanks. — sparklism  hey! 13:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sputnikmusic review