Talk:The Raincoats

message: ...and this article needs to reflect it. Please note that Wiki policy is that individuals should be referred to, initially, by forename and surname and then surname only in any one section/paragraph. I know, why don't I do it? Well, if you have a lot of patience I will have a go - but I have already committed myself to a few other articles and will not have time in the near future. Anyone reading this, please spend a few moments tidying up the article. Ta. LessHeard vanU 21:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done the surname bit. There is a bit of solo text where the collaboraters with Gina Birch are only indicated by a first name (I assume). The surname/full name of the artist is needed. Earlier in the text two different Shelleys are mentioned; Steve and Peter. Peter Shelley is the singer with Buzzcocks, and since this wasn't mentioned it is likely the reference should be to Steve - whose background is given. Since I don't know too much about this band I am unwilling to change it. Perhaps someone who knows can do the honours...? Dammit, despite my best intentions I am going to have to put this article on my watchlist!LessHeard vanU 22:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (Especially to 82.25.179.185) Whatever the Raincoats policy may be, this is an encyclopedia and to keep articles in you have to follow their policy. This band is far too important to be struck out over a dispute over presentation. If anyone feels the need to discuss this then I do have a chat page. However, a look at Wikipedia:Policy may be useful.LessHeard vanU 20:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Raincoats were an important band... 

message: I have to stick my nose in (sorry) and say that I agree with LessHeard vanU about sticking to style. (BTW, things in black and white tend to be read in a different way than if a person were actually speaking to you in the pub, so please give him the benefit of the doubt). He supports this page but he also sticks to the right way of doing things that Wikipedia asks users to conform to - it can only help in the long run...
I have also contributed heavily to a page about a band that I was in, and I have tried to find as many references as I can. This means that my own 'facts' can be corroborated by outside sources. That said, I will now look for The Raincoats on YouTube... :) --andreasegde 16:06, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Damn, Andrew, that was over a year ago! ;~) Paul Evans never nicked my name! 16:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I forgot to look at the dates! Well, better late than... or whatever they say. :)) --andreasegde 17:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

text: No problem, past history for me. I just pointed Andreasegde to the article for the template at the top, for use in "his own" article. If you want to delete this entire section then please do. LessHeard vanU 12:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A little fresh air...

message: Ana and Gina are the two main members. So who's the third person on the cover of the Kitchen Tapes? And who's the third person at the beginging of the Don't Be Mean video? Are they the same person?
:Likely Vicky Aspinall, though Shirley O is best to confirm. Generally, the earlier recording version of the Raincoats were Ana, Gina, Vicky and "a drummer, plus guests" after Palm Olive left.
Vicky Aspinall (1978 to 1984) and Palmolive (1978 to 1979) were both band members and played on the first album and Vicky continued to play, as you say, as the third main member until the release of Moving in 1984. Ingrid Weiss joined the band on drums for a year from autumn 1979 to autumn 1980 and following her departure a variety of guest drummers played on all three following studio albums. Vicky is in the centre of the photograph on the Kitchen Tapes. Anne Wood is featured on the Don't be mean video along with Ana and Gina and played violin on their last studio album Looking in the shadows. She has played with The Raincoats in all their live performances since March 1994.  (Shirley O 14:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Third main member

message: There's an article No Bondage by Leonie Cooper in The Guardian's G2 pages 14 to17 from 8 August 2007 discussing Helen Reddington's new book The Lost Women of Rock music: Female Musicians of the Punk Era, which discusses The Raincoats and there's a link to The Guardian Unlimited: http://books.guardian.co.uk/departments/artsandentertainment/story/0,,2143791,00.html
Can someone add this link to the notes section? Shirley O 18:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. LessHeard vanU 19:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: :Image:Raincoats Kitchen Tapes.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 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 00:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Raincoats Kitchen Tapes.jpg

message: I've just uploaded an image The Raincoats.1.jpg which is a publicity photograph from our press kit and I'm a little concerned that I completed the necessary information correctly. I think the Categories should be: Publicity photograph/ photograph with no terms/- can someone check this for me?Shirley O (talk) 03:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not very familiar with licensing images, so I have requested help at  asking if anyone who can help would respond here. LessHeard vanU (talk) 08:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Shirley O. I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags to see if that helps. If it doesn't, place a  template on your talkpage asking for help with images. LessHeard vanU (talk) 10:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image: The Raincoats.1.jpg

message: :Image:Raincoatscover.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 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) 04:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Raincoatscover.jpg

message: I was turned on to the music of The Raincoats after a college friend returned from a student exchange program in the United Kingdom to the United States. This was in 1978 and my friend had become a feminist punk rock enthusiast.
We were listening, on the one hand, to what was labeled as "punk":  a vast spectrum of all kinds and styles of musical genres for the most part just jammed into that definition, including the anarchistic "style" of the Sex Pistols, the commercialistic Devo and, on the other side of punk/alternative's spectrum, The Talking Heads' 1977 and in 1979 was tne first time we heard the U.K. release of The Raincoats covering Lola by the Kinks.
So, here's my question: can The Raincoats really be considered post-punk?  --leahtwosaints (talk) 06:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmmm... categorisation? Let's say that they were punk in that they refused to conform to pre-conceived ideas of what punk quickly became known as, but since they didn't conform to the perception of amphetamine fueled guitar thrashpop then they weren't. I'd happily just call them "alternative", but then a lot of people would think that they were R.E.M. I once heard them referred to as Jazz Punk, but that might have been a wind up. The point is, if someone like you looks for a Raincoats article and finds this then it really doesn't matter what category they get lumped under. Oh, and the major contributor to this article is the bands manager - so if she is happy then... LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are The Raincoats really only "Post Punk"? 

message: In case anyone is watching or coming across this article; User:Shirley O is the (former) manager of The Raincoats, and is otherwise still involved with the principle members. If she says that da Silva spells her surname, when without first name, with a lowercase "d" at the start of a sentence then that is how it needs to be presented; just like we do with various other artists who use names that are not the ones registered at birth - we present the artist as they do publicly. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  da Silva and not Da Silva 

message: I suspect the uploader of  is unjustified in his claim of PD. Creative commons is not a valid source, and I doubt the blog noted is the author. I know the author of the blog, and am going to check up. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Image added today