Talk:Zeitgeist (The Smashing Pumpkins album)/Archive 1

message: it's just some guy saying zeitgeist. sounds like neither billy nor jimmy. what the fuck --Flvg94 23:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not supposed to be a quote from Billy or Jimmy or anything. That is a sound that was taken from the Zeitgeist article, just to give people the proper pronounciation of the word.  I threw it in there, but once the album nears the release date, I don't think it will be necessary. It's not enourmously difficult. -- Reaper  X 01:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: what the hell is up with the ogg?

message: They were already reunited in Zwan! This makes it, so far, as much of a Zwan reunion as it is a Smashing Pumpkins reunion...--h i s   s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 08:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree some mention of this should be added. Also we could add something about the current status of the "missing" members pherhaps? Like what other projects they are involved in right now that are of more importance than the Pumpkins. Matt "AgentA" 20:53, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The music Billy wrote in Zwan was completely different from the music he wrote as a member of the Smashing Pumpkins. Furthermore if people are curious about what D'arcy & James are up to they can go to their articles or the main SP article.69.218.199.100 08:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree. The difference now is that they are reuniting under the name "Smashing Pumpkins", so it's a reunion, while Zwan was simply a side-project/super-group. Brandt Luke Zorn 06:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, this SP will be playing old SP songs, not old Zwan songs.  I dont think Billy will ever play a Zwan song again.  --Werideatdusk33 20:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: If it's just Billy and Jimmy...

message: According to the article, the track listing is from a photo posted on Billy Corgan's personal MySpace page, but unsourced. I've gone to both Billy Corgan's page and the page for the Smashing Pumpkins, and I can't find said photo anywhere. I'm going to remove it for now, since the photo obviously isn't posted anywhere, but here it is if anyone can find the source photo:
Working titles
On Billy Corgan's personal myspace page, a photo of a whiteboard featuring the following song titles was posted. 
 thats the way
 orchid
 shades of doom
 c'mon lets go
 doomsday clock
 F# stomp (or FA stomp)
 god & country
 united states
 never lost
 death from above
 pomp + circumstance
 stellar
 gossamer
 ma belle
 from America with love
 tarantula
 scars
 bring the light
-
Upon some further research, I've tracked this down to a forum posting. This is the only result that came up for on Google for the first three song titles. Results
I think if it was actually posted on Billy Corgan's MySpace page it would be turning up in more places than a forum thread, but for now I'm willing to call this fake.
Billy Corgan has a personal myspace page that he uses himself.  (as opposed to the smashing pumpkins and official billy corgan myspace pages which are used for promotion and run by other people.)  He posted the picture of the whiteboard on that page.  The profile is set to private, so citing it as a source won't help with verification unless you are one of his friends.
:if we can't source it better it should stay out.  but it's pretty clearly Billy's handwriting. -Werideatdusk33 23:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Working Titles" 

message: TSP have announced that Zeitgeist will be released July 7, which is a Saturday, and I don't believe that albums are released on any day except Tuesdays. Anyone know any more? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.194.104.5 (talk • contribs) 
:This was included in a previous version. I don't know why it was removed, or if it should be put in the article again. Any opinions? -- Reaper  X 15:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There seems to be an edit war now over whether it is July 7 or July 10. Godlord2 has gone and cited the official site as the source of the release date for the 7th. I agree with this decision as I believe the official site should be more credible than the myspace page. That and it could be one of those wierd "official release on this date and released in stores on this date" things, as previously mentioned. -- Reaper  X 15:55, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date 

message: Let's see some sources for this... - ZEROpumpkins 02:33, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover 

message: please note that this is CONFIRMED as being authentic material by Frank Quinto's request that it be removed. IMO, this would also confirm the jeff/ginger sitation, but thats just me. Rhinowing 03:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be nice to have some references to it though...any ideas? Any sites write up on it? How did someone find this out? -- Reaper  X 18:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This is a great example of how conventional sourcing will have to be redefined in the Internet age.  The Pumpkins' myspace page, and Netphoria (along with the other SP message boards - Siva, ThePumpkins, etc) are all abuzz with information about this, but no news media have picked up on it, and the band has yet to release a statement.  For now, I think we could cite the actual threads (or, at least, those that have not been deleted) in the Netphoria message board (which is public), and leave it up, at least until its confirmed as either legit or fraudulent.  Due to the involvement of Frank Quinto and apparent involvement of the Chicago Police, this should stay up, at least for now.  --Werideatdusk33 21:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its been reported at Pitchfork, basically entailing everything that has happened link. I imagine that this would be a better citation for the article. Should the original netphoria posts remain? Aljohnston 08:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Multiple news articles about this now :contactmusic, Drownedinsound, NME, Rolling Stone. FMQB, Spin.  And on and On.  Put the Netphoria posts back up.  It is now proven with multiple articles that this happened.  Yearsago 18:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The MTV article is REALLY thorough, with new information, and more information about what happened on Netphoria. The link to the MTV story is already on the page of zeitgeist wikipedia.  Yearsago 20:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artwork leak 

message: Where did we get this "That's the way (My Love Is)" thing?  Is there a source for that parenthetical thing?  Does this mean its not a Led Zeppelin cover?  --Werideatdusk33 20:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, the source is here:  and three tracks - 3,4, and 8 - have slightly different titles.  Not sure which is "more" correct, we'll have to wait and see, but I added this source to the track list citations. --Werideatdusk33 05:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tracklist 

message: The new promo poster says the 10th: http://www.msopr.com/files/Smashing%20Pumpkins%20Admat.pdf
I know Billy wants it on a Saturday, but albums typically come out on Tuesdays. He might not be updating his website, but it looks like the record company is going ahead w/ a 7/10 release. --byelf2007 13 May 2007
"The Pumpkins have also changed Zeitgeist's release date to a Tuesday in alignment with industry standards. The record will now come out July 10 instead of July 7, but don't let those three extra days convince you to go stealing anything." - [Media] 84.68.9.72 16:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Their website link now says the 10th and I have changed the article accordingly. Aljohnston 10:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd add it, sounds resonable since thats the same deal with Ireland. I'm worried about flag clutter though, so don't be surprised if someone takes it down. -- Reaper  X 05:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coming out on the 10th? 

message: http://www.smashingpumpkins.com/images/zeitcover.png --byelf2007 16 May 2007
:That was quick. The MySpace bulletin was put up just over ten minutes ago. WesleyDodds 16:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Album Cover 

message: As they played on today's show in paris: Ginger Reyes on Bass and
Jeff Schroeder on Guitar.
Fco. 21:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lineup confirmed 

message: I added a fancy gallery section with all the different cover arts and versions.  The citations don't seem to be working properly - I'm not very familiar with gallery making.  Please, feel free to fix them!  -Werideatdusk33 18:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  "It is unclear whether the band or the record label chose to release the album in this manner." I looked at that section and it reminded me so much of how the newest Static-X album was released. There was an Itunes version, Best Buy version, and an Internet version, each with its own extra tracks. Then I wondered if this album was released by Reprise as well and sure enough it was. So there's your answer for that question. SmartSped 21:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, the bonus track is actually track 13, not 9. It is unlisted and there is no ID3 information about it, unlike the other tracks on the CD.  219.60.122.141 09:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate Covers/ Versions 

message: Several of the songs have had their own separate articles created.  However, apart from the single, upcoming single, and Doomsday Clock (appears on a soundtrack), none of the songs are yet notable.  The separate articles contained no real information, or worse, Original research.  Therefore, I've converted all (apart from the three I've just mentioned) into redirects back to this page.
Oli Filth 23:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yea, I don't think that is even necessary. Might as well delete them. -- Reaper  X 01:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate song articles 

message: Can we get more info on this, model it somewhat similar to the release history of Kid A? At least include the labels? -- Reaper  X 04:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Release date table

message: So a friend told me about "An open letter from Billy Corgan", in which Coragn apparently backlashed and chewed out all those giving negative reviews for Zeitgeist.
Fake? What exactly does it say? I don't know, I didn't have time to read it at the time. And when I did, the goddamn site was down, and it is the only place I can find the article. There's a chance it's legit though, because Rolling Stone made mention of it. Keep your ears perked guys, I have a feeling this is a notable shit disturber that will hit the fan. -- Reaper  X 06:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The official site says it's fake. Forget it, unless Corgan wants to retaliate. -- Reaper  X 06:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I only read the first few paragraphs, but it's a very obvious fake.  I would hope no one would believe this :) MrHate 10:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: An open letter from Billy Corgan

message: I propose moving this page to "Zeitgeist (Smashing Pumpkins album)". The band is credited on the album as "Smashing Pumpkins". It also sounds immensely better as well. Grim-Gym 04:32, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. I think that naming conventions for articles like this typically omit the "The" from a band's name anyway. --Brandt Luke Zorn 04:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Support.  Regardless of your stance on the laughable "Smashing Pumpkins"/"The Smashing Pumpkins" dispute, it would be ridiculous to title something "Sticky Fingers (the Rolling Stones album)", even though there's no dispute that it's "The Rolling Stones."  So, yeah.  Make it so.  --Werideatdusk33 06:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Oppose. In my experience disambiguators on album articles generally include the full artist name, including the "The". WP:ALBUM#Naming doesn't mention this case. I've brought this up at WT:ALBUM#Album dab should match artist article. --PEJL 07:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only real rationale for this move is that on this album, the band is called "Smashing Pumpkins"; sans the "The". As a result, the page title should reflect the name being used on the album. This page should be moved to reflect how the band is being credited. Grim-Gym 15:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that may seem reasonable, but referring to an artist using the same name throughout Wikipedia avoids inconsistencies and other problems. Note for example that the The Smashing Pumpkins article refers to the band using the definite article consistently, even for events in 2007. --PEJL 15:49, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is a case in which common sense should override policy. I acknowledge that the policy of using the same name throughout Wikipedia is an important one, and that in the vast majority of instances, this should be followed. Consider how unlikely it is that the absence of "The" will cause a problem. Yes, it is somewhat inconsistent, but that is because the band themselves are inconsistent with the name. I wish not to debate the actual validity of their name, and I think the band's article itself is fine the way it is; but this is a matter of an album, and the album's naming. If Gish, Siamese Dream or Pisces Iscariot needed to be moved, it would be appropriate to move them to (Smashing Pumpkins album), but if Mellon Collie, Adore or Machina required the like, it would be appropriate to include the "The". It's purely a matter of what the album is physically referred to on the record itself. The fact that by moving the page, we can bypass the anal-retentive quality that the current name has, is purely a bonus. Grim-Gym 17:53, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving the page to "(Zeitgeist (Smashing Pumpkins album))" 

message: :Image:Zeitgeist cover.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 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 05:02, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Zeitgeist cover.png

message: At this point, under the pluralised title 'Singles', only 'Tarantula' is included.  Shouldn't 'That's the Way (My Love Is)' also be included?  And since 'Bring the Light' is an unofficial single in South America, but still referenced on Wikipedia, and 'Doomsday Clock' has been registered by Wikipedia, they ought to have some kind of inclusion, shouldn't they?
Vaughn (non-user)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.164.132.179 (talk) 08:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeitgeist Singles 

message: "Superchrist" is not an outtake, but is one of the new songs debuted at the residencies.  It was not recorded or even written during the Zeitgeist sessions... should we take it out?  -Werideatdusk33 04:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be taken out.--Zahveed 17:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outtakes 

message: I apologize, I went ahead with these edits to the stuff about the Best Buy re-issue, without seeing the history of it. But IMO, this is a practical way to deal with it. Only the resequenced parts of the track listing are included, and the main information is included in the alternate versions section, with the rest of them. It doesn't deserve too much space. -- Reaper  X 23:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the temptation, but this is a misleading and confusing way to present the information.  The "Alternate Versions" section is about the multiple releases in July, and the bad publicity surrounding that move.  The Best Buy DVD version is a reissue, not an alternate version, because of its later release date.  Lumping it in with the July alternate versions flies in the face of the whole point of that section.  Moreover, in other wikipedia articles, reissues with different tracklists are given an entire section to display this.  The same should be here.  I believe the separate "Reissue" section should be restored, and the reissue be removed from the alternate versions section. -Werideatdusk33 00:08, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Buy re-issue 

message: Delete - I believe this should be deleted. Although it may have had some significance a while ago, it is not important now, and certainly doesn't have much to do with the music, leak and all. Hakeem (talk) 23:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely keep it. It illustrates the different versions well, and it has everything to do with the music since the track listings vary on alot of them. Not to mention it is well cited. -- Reaper  X 05:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: 100% Keep -- UKPhoenix79 (talk) 07:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Album Artwork Section 

message: As for the iTunes edition, is there a different cover? -- Reaper  X 22:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The iTunes deluxe edition cover is the same blue cover. --Brandt Luke Zorn (talk) 05:20, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I'll add the details beside that cover then. -- Reaper  X 05:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: iTunes Deluxe Edition

message: Substituted at 16:07, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment