Talk:1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die

message: where is the list of albums???  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.229.135.101 (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  article incomplete - where is the list?

message: I'm not really certain that the list should be here, since this is an article about the book and not the list, but at least it's now a little easier to get through.  I should also note that the list takes up just 999 rows in Excel.  If it does belong here, perhaps it should be in tables and wikilinked. Davewho2 (talk) 15:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List 

message: It seems that some of the artists have their first name followed by their family name, while the others are family name, first name. Shouldn't they all be the same. As this is an article, I think they should all be in normal written order (first name followed by family name) rather than the latter way.Dizzydark (talk) 02:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Artists Names

message: I don't know how to work this into the article, but I think it helps to comprehend the scope of this list to imagine that if a person got it in their head to actually listen to all these titles, it would take a long time.  If you listened to just one album per week, then you it would take 19.3 years.  If you could listen to one album per day, it would only take 2.7 years.  I wonder if I can get all these titles from my library? -ErinHowarth (talk) 19:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm doing it too (back to front or whatever), but frankly, their taste in music is so bad and mainstream, I am saving a lot of time from skipping. --Echosmoke (talk) 12:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: How long would it take to hear 1001 albums?

message: *At least for the time being, I have deleted the list from the article (if, for no other reason, to err on the side of caution). It is probably a copyright infringement on behalf of the publishers. Also, I noticed that albums were still being added despite the fact that this came out in 2006, so it seems the list wasn't all that accurate anyway. Teemu08 (talk) 18:11, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: About the post-'06 albums, a revised edition of the book was released in Oct. 2008. And I don't know if it's correct to weigh in at an RFC you started yourself so I'm keeping out of the pro/con discussion for the time being. TheJazzDalek (talk) 18:49, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  That theft is (a) useful to you personally or (b) commonplace all over the web, does not make it any less theft.  This is not a 'form of education' in the sense that excludes copyright infringement, per the 'Academic Fair Use' clause in the copyright Title. 138.23.246.0 (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC: Is the list of albums appropriate? 

message: Who are the "Leading International Critics" that contributed to this book?
They are also claimed to be "well renowned music critics" in Tigermilk.
I only seem to come across mentions of this book on Wikipedia.
davewho2 05:07, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Leading International Critics" 

message: Is there a new version of the book that ends with Oracular Spectacular by MGMT? I have the 2008 version and it doesn't have it. The website doesn't have any info on any new versions, neither does the online list include Oracular Spectacular. --Wiz-Pro3 (talk) 14:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oracular Spectacular by MGMT? 

message: Many works of this type inspire reviews and other critical response -- book reviewers talking about whether the selection of contributors is varied or monotonous, distinctive or mundane; music reviewers discussing whether they believe the selections are overly ____-centric or have major oversights. If there are such third-party reviews of the book, they should be referenced within the article. As it is, with no context for whether the fields of criticism consider it a noteworthy book or a hunk of junk, it has the potential to come off as advertisement or promotion rather than a truly informative article. 
And if there is no such body of critical response to the book, how notable by Wikipedia standards could it be? Lawikitejana (talk) 23:29, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I added some critical response info.Timtempleton (talk) 18:36, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critiques/response to the book? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die. 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/20140110124836/http://1001beforeyoudie.com/ to http://1001beforeyoudie.com/
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) 06:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: With this edit, [],  added that the entries are roughly chronological.  
 The book is arranged roughly chronologically, starting with Frank Sinatra's In the Wee Small Hours
My understanding is that the entries are supposed to be chronological, and are based on the first release date of an album, which may not be the same date it was released in the US. Out of order entries may be typos, which would suggest removing the "roughly". For example, my edition shows the Girls Against Boys album Venus Luxure No. 1 Baby dated 1994, yet it was released in 1993.  On page 785, The Charlatans album Tellin' Stories came out in 1997, not 1996 as my edition shows.  Also, the 1999 Khaled album Kenza was placed within the 1998 section in the 2006 edition, but it was fixed and properly put in the 1999 section in the 2014 edition. I've notified the publisher of the ones that still need to be fixed.  Please provide the edition year of other albums that are not chronological, and let's discuss. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronological sorting of albums discussion 

message: There are extremely popular artists such as Nirvana that have more then three albums. So in my opinion it is petter to add a few that people will recognize then to add 40 the people are trying to remember. SupremeFishy (talk) 03:47, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  More popular artists 

message: How could you pick 6 Elvis Costello albums (3 EC and 3 EX and the attractions) without 1 Joe Jackson album. Lost credibility. 
But why? 24.130.28.23 (talk) 02:05, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  1001 albums