Talk:Outside the Wall (song)

message: :Image:TheWallAlbum.png 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) 08:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:TheWallAlbum.png

message: Gilmour's voice has suddenly got very high hasn't it?!  NH 79.121.143.143 (talk) 21:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The backing vocals on the studio version seem inhumanly high to me, as if recorded at a lower tape speed.  --63.25.31.85 (talk) 20:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  David Gilmour - Backing Vocals 

message: Hi. I believe that all articles about individual songs should include, where applicable, the song's key and its time signature. No problem, if it weren't for that inconvienient thing about citing sources. My sources disagree.
See, the sheet-music book for The Wall notates "Outside the Wall" in 6/8 time, but the book for The Final Cut notates "Southampton Dock" in 3/4.
Yes, of course, they go together seamlessly, in the film version. There's no difference. It's really kind of arbitrary, whether you decide one beat is an eighth note (and count 6/8), or a quarter note (and count 3/4). It's like they're saying "Southampton Dock" is roughly twice as fast as "Outside the Wall".
(There is no transcription specifically of the film version. However, I did once see a transcription of "When The Tigers Broke Free".)
Sigh . . .  I hate sheet-music books. Not the guitar magazines, those transcriptionists are great, but these "Piano/Voice/Guitar Chords" books? Suh-HUUUCK! For example, they notated most of of "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" in 3/4, and I'm pretty sure that's inappropriate, at best. Phil Rose called it 6/4, and I think a guitar magazine called it 12/8. I don't know.
I don't want to put the time signature into the article until I see some other opinions, get some kinda consensus going. Otherwise I'm just arbitrarily saying "THIS book is WRONG, and THAT book is RIGHT."
:--Ben Culture (talk) 23:57, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time signature? 

message: What I am talking about is the film version. What the respective section says is nothing about what happens when the song has it's time in the movie. Feel free to comment below.98.246.84.7 (talk) 01:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is ridiculous