Talk:AC/DC/Archive 4

message: I've requested a peer review a few days ago, but I'm very busy right now, so I made a to-do list to improve the article. No-Bullet 03:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: To do

message: Could someone tell me when and where they ever said that? Until proven otherwise, I removed this from the article. Roda 18:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motörhead influenced by AC/DC? 

message: where did you get Angus' quote? are you sure this new album will be the last one for the band? are they going to split? i know the members are gettin' old and all, but, why is this new album the last one for the band? please respond. Jailbreaker22 16:58, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That quote has been here a long time ago, sourced with the marshall pdf. I heard it something like that, so i left it. Now, i couldn't find a reliable source, so i deleted it. No-Bullet 19:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  last album and tour 

message: Well, about a week ago, Daniel Bryant told me in my user talk page that the ac/dc article could be a FA, and i was thinking in nominate it. What do you think?? No-Bullet 19:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I've no problems with it being nominated...but I'm not entirely sure if it's ready for FA status, it needs some expansion, especially in the Brian Johnson era section. The Influences section could also do with some work. But if other people think it might be ready, I say go ahead with it. HK51 21:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, then please help me to expand those sections. Thanks =) No-Bullet 00:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The influences section only named bands, so i've moved it to List of tributes to AC/DC in popular culture. No-Bullet 01:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I'll do my best to find a few new things. Oh, do you know how to cite something from a DVD documentary as a reference? HK51 18:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could cite it with the ref tags like a normal reference. No-Bullet 17:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Fixed. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 04:05, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: FA?

message: Just out of pure curiosity, has there EVER been an official biography of AC/DC on either DVD or Book? Ive found countless unofficial ones and i know that AC/DC has an official biographer, but ive never found an officially sanctioned bio. Ferdiaob 01:37, 06 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Official Biography

message: I think we should remove that section for both articles, it just lists bands from Musicmatch and AMG. What do you think? Cheers. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 18:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: True. I'd be happier if we could find sources which show each of these band's actually saying AC/DC influenced them, if not, just cut it. ĤĶ51→Łalk 22:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Having said the above, it would be good if we could maybe find some sources showing a few bands saying they've been influenced by AC/DC, and also if we could even find out who influenced AC/DC themselves (I'd always heard Little Richard was an influence). This would make a great addition to the article imo, but not until we find sources! ĤĶ51→Łalk 22:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any of the unofficial biographies will include quotes from Angus about Chuck Berry etc, plus Malcolm's Rolling Stones influence etc.  Maybe start there.  I would but I haven't got the books with me. Bretonbanquet 22:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Influences

message: Did we not agree a few months ago to use the "Classic" line-up in this section? I.e. the one with Bon Scott? It seems the most relevant to me. The Dave Evans line-up was of little impact whatsoever. ĤĶ51→Łalk 22:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I don't know why people think that lineup is so important. The classic formation is also more suitable for that section. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 23:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who says the "classic" line-up included Mark Evans and not Cliff Williams?  It seems hard to justify, and "classic" is a POV word... Bretonbanquet 16:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I certainly don't see the point in having the original Dave Evans line-up there - they might have been the first but they're hardly vital to the story.  Isn't there a timeline of line-ups somewhere?  If so, then the only line-up you need to have separately is the current one.  A lot of people would argue that it's the "classic" line-up anyway, the line-up that recorded "Back In Black".  I just don't see any great relevance in plucking another line-up from the 70s and putting it in a separate section, just because they recorded the best music according to most of us. Bretonbanquet 18:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Members

message: Since Orane mentioned in the FA nomination that the lead section does not meet the criteria. I think we should rewrite the section, so I've been trying this in my sandbox (User:No-Bullet/Sandbox). What do you think? No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 23:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me, great job, makes a welcome improvement on the old lead. Add it in as soon as you can. ĤĶ51→Łalk 23:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, but I still think it need some work, my english is far from perfect and it needs expanding the Johnson part. Cheers. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 04:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Cleaned up the grammar and stuff just then. I agree about expanding the Johnson part of it - I'll see what i can do later on. ĤĶ51→Łalk 19:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Expanded the lead, I still think it needs a little more work, but tell me what you think. Oh, don't you think we should move the stuff about them being ranked #4 in VH1's 100 Greatest Acts of Hard Rock and about them being the second highest earning entertainers in Australia to the "Recent events" section? ĤĶ51→Łalk 20:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right, the last paragraph with the sales and everything should be moved, I'm not sure what to do with the VH1 ranking, do what you think it's better :). Cheers. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 01:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I moved the VH1 ranking further on down the lead and the second highest earners thing into "Recent events". In the Recent events section, I have also removed the Helen of Troy musical section as it is more to do with Brian Johnson and not the band as a whole (it's covered in his article) and also the section about the Family Jewels DVD - I don't see a reason why it deserves a special mention, all of the info on it is covered in its article. This ok? ĤĶ51→Łalk 02:53, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 16:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The band isn't called a heavy metal band in the lead, they're called a pioneer of heavy metal music. For example, I wouldn't call Led Zeppelin themselves a metal band, but they sure did inspire a lot of modern heavy metal groups, as did AC/DC. ĤĶ51→Łalk 14:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead Section

message: where in the world did you find this upcoming dvd? you need to cite this or it will be removed. Jailbreaker22 23:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Might be a bootleg - the same editor added a bootleg album which I've already deleted - I didn't notice he'd added the DVD as well. Bretonbanquet 00:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  rough and tough dvd 

message: I've just requested a peer review for the former FLC List of tributes to AC/DC in popular culture and I'd be grateful if anyone here could give any feedback on it. Its peer review sub-page is located here: Wikipedia:Peer review/List of tributes to AC/DC in popular culture/archive1. Thanks. ĤĶ51→Łalk 11:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: List of tributes to AC/DC in popular culture

message: Well only one of the members, the rest are either English or Scottish. Please make that clearer. 82.34.1.182 15:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Australian?

message: Is this sentence, "The track selection of this album was heavily weighted towards the more recent T.N.T. and included only two songs from their first LP, Little Lover and She's Got Balls", supposed to mean:
* "included only two songs from their first LP, Little Lover, and She's Got Balls" OR
* "included only two songs from their first LPs, Little Lover and She's Got Balls" ???
Random Passer-by 17:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi :o) the album included only two songs from their first LP (which was called High Voltage) - those two songs were Little Lover and She's Got Balls. Bretonbanquet 18:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah! A perfect explanation. I was wrong on both interpretations. Good thing you're here to correct me. Thank you. Random Passer-by 18:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My pleasure - thanks for your input :o) Bretonbanquet 18:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy editor in need of clarification

message: I've been copy editing AC/DC and in my opinion the following sentence is half meaningless rock-journalese and detracts from the encyclopedic tone of an otherwise excellent article but I haven't removed it (so interested editors can discuss this among themselves):
*"The previous albums gave some ground to unheard elements, like backing vocals, but still feature the AC/DC minimalism signature; loud, simple, pounding riffs and grooving backbeats.< ref name="AMG" / >" (I have no idea what the first half of this sentence means and if "elements" are "unheard" then how are they on an album ??? !!!)
:The sentence should be "some ground to previously unheard elements". Anyway, I added that to the sound sample, so remove it if you want. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 22:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What I find slightly odd is the idea that this was the first album with backing vocals on it.  Has no-one heard the previous albums? Bretonbanquet 22:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Bonfire book says that, I'll quote you the paragraph: "The unleashing of Highway To Hell in 1979 however was a whole new shipping container of nitro glycerine. The savagery of the guitars on Let There Be Rock and Powerage gave some ground to previously unheard of elements like background vocals albeit, it suitably AC/DC type background vocals." No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 00:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've re-worded the paragraph. I hope it meets with your approval. I think this citation might need to be slightly more specific though: < ref name="Bonfire"></ref >. Is it from a booklet released in the box set Bonfire? Or a news article or press release about Bonfire? Random Passer-by 13:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, it's wrong. Powerage had backing vocals, and so did some songs on Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap, like "Love At First Feel".  "Bad Boy Boogie" from Let There Be Rock etc.  Highway to Hell might have polished the backing vocals up a bit, but it wasn't a new idea. Bretonbanquet 01:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you all for the response, especially No-Bullet. I'd rather fix it than replace it, if fixing it's possible, because the second half of the sentence is so descriptive but, either way, it can wait until (my) tomorrow. Please keep discussing it as I'd love to hear further constructive suggestions. Random Passer-by 01:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My internet service provider was DNSed today so I've had no internet access but I will keep my word and come back to this article as soon as possible. I also left a note for the League of Copyeditors requesting a second copy editor to have a look at the article. Random Passer-by 01:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, no problem :) No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 05:55, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Continued Success (1977&ndash;1978) - a suggestion for discussion

message: "goings-on" in the following sentence probably ought to be replaced with something more descriptive (suggestions welcome): "A music concept video with the same name, Fly on the Wall, featured the band at a bar, playing five of the album's ten songs, with various additional goings-on including an animated fly." (My apologies that I didn't sign this yesterday). Random Passer-by 01:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Departure of Rudd (1983)

message: While I've been copy editing, IP 138.130.161.241 changed "Sydney" to "Adelaide" in the History section. It's the only contribution from that IP. I'm drawing it to your attention because I don't know if it's a correction by an anonymous editor or vandalism (most of the google hits say they moved to Sydney) and I don't want it to be missed because all my minor edits push it off the article's first history page. I've reverted it for now. Random Passer-by 10:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Did the Young family move to Adelaide or Sydney in 1963?

message: I'm done. I've left a note at the League of Copy editors and another editor should eventually proofread my work. In the meantime the regular editors should check to ensure I haven't accidentally altered the meaning of the article while I was copy editing. If you make further changes, or if specific changes are requested during the article's FAC, and you want me back then please feel free to leave a note on my talk page in addition to the League of Copy editors. Good luck with achieving featured article status and in the future. Random Passer-by 14:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy edit

message: Grammar was correct the first time.
AC/DC is a band.  AC/DC are members of a band.  Not AC/DC are a band.
Jerry lavoie 16:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:MoS matching spelling/grammar to match that rules used in the subject's country of origin. "AC/DC is" would only be correct in the United States. Since the band is Australian the gr./sp. rules "AC/DC are" is correct. Anger22  (Talk 2 22) 16:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  It does not matter that the band is Australian.  The name of the band (singular) is AC/DC.  You can substitute the name with the word 'band' in any sentence, and the rules of plurality are the same.  The band is old = AC/DC is old.  This is k nown as a discretionary plural, as described in English_plural, as incorporated in WP:Mos by reference.  In this case, it would be equally correct to use 'is' or 'are', so the original editor's format should not be changed. Jerry lavoie 20:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to follow up. The proper Wiki-guideline for that is WP:ENGVAR. Basically, match article language to the subjects origin. Anger22  (Talk 2 22) 21:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Plurality