Talk:Blade Runner (soundtrack)

message: Okay -- I'm working on cleaning up this article a little bit.  I've added images of the official sountrack releases.  It seemed a little peculuar to include images of a bootleg cover, but not the two official releases.
I've re-arranged some of the headings to be a little more logical.  The medium-based headings put insignificant bootleg releases at the top of the page, giving them priority over the official releases,  and made some information unclear.
There is still more work to do -- I'd like to move some of the information from the introduction into the relevent sections below, and move some of the tables around to improve aesthetics.  But before I move on, could someone demonstrate how to fix the problem with the "Original Releases" table running into the "Official Vangelis Score" heading? ~CS 22:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent, RoyBoy.  This is a much slicker looking article than it was a week ago. ~CS 23:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: May 2006 Cleanup

message: :Image:Brt25.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) 18:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.--maf (talk-cont) 22:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Brt25.jpg

message: Buyers of the Blade Runner soundtracks can be divided into two camps: fans of the movie, who mostly care about getting a complete and literal soundtrack of the movie, and fans of Vangelis, who mostly care about getting quality releases from the artist. (This is of course a rough depiction, many people range in between, myself being right in the middle.) The division can plainly be seen in reviews (on Amazon and similar web sites), where people bash the official soundtracks for lacking some pieces of music heard in the movie, while others defend Vangelis as an artist who cares about releasing music albums, and who does not dump random snippets of sounds on a disc to make a quick buck.
It appears to me that this article, with its emphasis on bootleg releases, with a certain impatience towards a complete release ("still not complete", "still some music heard in the film that is missing"), and a striking disdain for the third disc in the 25th Anniversary Trilogy, should be more neutral and balanced. In particular, compared to other articles about Vangelis releases, I find there is almost discussion of the music itself.
194.2.91.222 (talk) 14:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree,  the numerous tables and lists for the various bootlegs and missing cues illustrate nicely the obsessive-completist collector bias of the article. Ricadus (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Neutrality 

message: Currently, all the article says about it is "The third disc contains new material inspired by Blade Runner.". This is probably the tersest depiction of any work of Vangelis presently featured in Wikipedia. This is striking, since most Vangelis fans consider this disc could be a separate album. Made of only new music, in a style simultaneously modern and original, while still reminiscent of many previous works (The City, Direct, Voices, and Blade Runner of course), many consider it to be the most interesting release of the artist since the mid-90s.
Should that disc be discussed here (where "half" of the readership, as discussed above, actively dislike it), or should a separate article be written? Apparently, a separate article was once written for the Trilogy, which now redirects here. How to handle the case of a disc in a release which is strikingly different and separate from the others?
194.2.91.222 (talk) 15:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third Disc of the Trilogy 

message: The "Themes" album contained two original Blade Runner tracks. Memories of Green, while featured in the movie was from an earlier Vangelis album, See You Later (1980), which was neither rare, nor unavailable. Since the article implied that its appearance on Themes marked some kind of landmark appearance of previously unavailable material, this has been clarified.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akahige719 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes on November 2008 edit 

message: Until recently, I'd always assumed that most people were aware of the similarities between the Vangelis/Peter Skellern song and Bring Me Sunshine, the song which was made famous by British comedy duo Morecambe and Wise. I personally think accusations of plagiarism would be too strong, but the songs do bear a striking resemblance. After a big discussion among my social circle (including several self-confessed 'sci-fi geeks'), I was surprised to discover that only about one third of us were aware of such a debate. Of those that were, most thought that it was common knowledge that one was a 'blatant rip-off' (to quote one person) of the other. Is this something that others out there are aware of? If so, I feel that some mention of this controversy should appear on either this page or the one for Bring Me Sunshine. Dom Kaos (talk) 12:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just listened to Bring Me Sunshine and I found no similarity to One More Kiss, Dear. At all. The only thing I can see they have in common is someone singing to a lover. For anyone to say that the latter is a "blatant rip-off" of the former sounds like nonsense to me, to be perfectly honest. I am really puzzled by this comment. Rodrigo de Salvo Braz (talk) 00:59, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: And without reliable independent sources drawing such an alleged connection, there is nothing to say about it in our article, and no reason, per WP:NOT#FORUM, to continue discussing it here. An alleged "controversy" on old Internet forums is not of encyclopedic interest; it's not an encyclopedic-level controversy until multiple reliable sources address it in detail.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:43, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Similarities between "One More Kiss, Dear" and "Bring Me Sunshine"

message: This article represents everything that is wrong with Wikipedia. It is written by someone whose sole motivation is to empty the contents of his head. Please rewrite - but this time make a list of the 3, or 5, things your readers may like to know, then write about them in a way that can be followed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbowman (talk • contribs) 23:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Since different readers "like to know" different things, that qualifies as a bad idea. If you feel the article should not exist, then proceed accordingly. But as this article is spillover from the featured Blade Runner article, it seems fine on the grand scheme of things. Do you object to the track listings? - RoyBoy 22:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The majority of the text reads like a sales pitch for the bootlegger's version of the soundtrack. --Ricadus (talk) 01:56, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Arsing nonsense

message: The opening sentences need to be rewritten so that the opening link is not to the film.  It currently says:
:Blade Runner is the soundtrack album to the film of the same name directed by Ridley Scott. The soundtrack was composed by Vangelis.
This is bad writing and misleading linking. ---RepublicanJacobiteThe'FortyFive' 16:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentences 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Blade Runner (soundtrack). 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/20131029200702/http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/11110-blade-runner-trilogy-25th-anniversary/ to http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/11110-blade-runner-trilogy-25th-anniversary/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:52, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified