Talk:Substance 1987

message: Should we move this to Substance 1987, its full name and hence avoid the messy page title as it is now?
:"Substance 1987" is not necessarily the title of the album - on the CD version anyway, it says just "Substance" on the CDs and the sides of the box. I think the front cover is just stating the year - I don't think it's meant to be part of the title. --Zilog Jones 23:27, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be so, but everybody who is 'in' to New Order refers to them as Substance and Substance 1987... Kiand 23:44, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: I've been bold and move the article. --Kiand 18:11, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: But the album is called Substance, not Substance 1987. So, er... SaltyWater 20:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm going to move the page to its correct title. SaltyWater 11:30, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What does the front of the CD case say? "New Order - Substance 1987". Not just "Substance". --Kiand 20:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it has 1987 on the front of the CD but it doesn't mean its called Substance 1987. SaltyWater 21:31, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We're talking about a band who rarely put -anything- on the front of a CD here. When theres a name, thats going to be the full name. Note that the fan-run discographies call it Substance 1987, also, including the definitive niagra.edu and NewOrderOnline ones. --Kiand 21:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Movement has a year on it, is that part of the title too? SaltyWater 21:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because its quite clearly seperated from the name due to being beside the record number (FACT/FACD/Whatever 50). But on Subtance, its positioned exactly as part of the name, as it is part of the name. --Kiand 21:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why isn't the date written on the spine then? SaltyWater 22:00, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question, its missing from most but not all spines. It is, however, on many of the cassete inlay sleeves. Saville design decision, no doubt. However, doesn't change the fact that Substance 1987 is the name of the album, as can be confirmed by the Warner-endorsed fansite --Kiand 22:05, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's very nice, but because it's officially endorsed doesn't mean everything on there is gospel. Anyone else care to comment? I note the article has been moved back to Substance 1987. SaltyWater 22:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because thats the name of the compilation, thats that. As goes "officially endorsed", it means something as its the only official website for the band that covers anything prior to WFTSC. They don't have an online catalogue, etc. All your reasonings as to why its not the name - lack of name on spine/back of sleeve, etc, are down to design issues, basically - the name on all non-Saville designed covers is "Substance 1987". Probably because thats its name. --Kiand 22:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No need to be so rude. SaltyWater 23:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how thats "rude". The album has a name, and that is Substance 1987. Its pretty much as simple as that. --Kiand 00:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: The album is called SUBSTANCE. Nothing more, nothing less. Those who are not familiar with the way label's designer Peter Saville works, tend to take the surface value as something official. First of all, Saville is all about design, not about how to properly present the title (or even the name of the band!). "Republic" has © in its title on the cover and that is the only place it appears there; that album is nevertheless officially refered to as "Republic". The same with "Movement" - the cover has the equally printed "FACT 50 1981" below the word "Movement". And yet the album is called simply "Movement". "Waiting for the Sirens' Call" has a big printed "NO" on the cover (and that's the entire design), which has again nothing to do with the title. AND FINALLY: I just looked at the official Warner New Order catalogue, supplied with "Get Ready": the album is listed there as "Substance", as well as on CD.
P.S. Here "1987" refers to the inner sleeve of the True Faith single that had come out earlier and which looks exactly the same with "Substance" being "True Faith" and "1987" being "1963" (!). It was only a sly reference, nothing more: he extrapolated the concept of single design into LP design. I just looked in the Peter Saville book, a collection of his design work, and it clearly shows "Substance" tagged as simply "Substance". That comes from the designer of the cover art! What else is needed in this case??? Klaus Bertow 11:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Substance VS Substance 1987

message: The paragraph explaining the confusion between these song titles seems to be clear enough as it is. The recent edit changed the tense, which personally I think was unnecessary; the decision to edit "Perfect Kiss" was made twenty years ago (as of 2007) and the current version of Substance in print still dates from this time, so "was" rather than "is" is more accurate. Also, the comments about the cassette format were misleading and vague: "...holds the most music...". In relation to what? And what length of tape? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RobShaz (talk • contribs) 15:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cries & Whispers / Mesh 

message: :Image:New Order - Substance 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 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) 21:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:New Order - Substance cover.png

message: The image :Image:New Order - Blue Monday excerpt.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:New Order - Blue Monday excerpt.ogg

message: On my CD, it says "Confusion Instrumental" not "Confused Instrumental". The CD was released by Qwest Records / Warner Bros. Records in the US in 1987. 202.8.226.193 (talk) 05:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Confusion Instrumental

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Substance 1987. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090926064331/http://www.cherryred.co.uk:80/books/indiehits/n.htm to http://www.cherryred.co.uk/books/indiehits/n.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Substance 1987. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/6626140/361_substance
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why is there no mention of Substance II in this entry when there is no side entry for it? Substance II was indeed released as a separate vinyl album from the original Substance (which is not called 1987, by the way). Only when the compilation was released on CD, they appeared together as one thing -- but there should be a mention that Substance II was its own thing before that, and there should be a picture with the black cover - 2804:14C:5B84:A788:36:546:40F1:5E5 (talk) 20:11, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Substance II

message: I recently tried to move Substance 1987 to "Substance (New Order album)". I suspect some sort of restriction is put in place as the title seems to have some contention. Allow me to submit my two cents:
The album is called 'Substance' according to the first vinyl pressing. Aside from the cover art, the album is never referred to "Substance 1987" on the back cover or center labels, all which read "New Order - Substance" (or "New Order - Substance - Fact 200/#" on the center label, with the # being replaced by the side (1-4)). The year 1987 is displayed in large type on the label, but it isn't part of the title and seems more like a decoration that references the album cover.
This is also true for subsequent vinyl releases, as well as cassette releases (the album is titled on the cassette itself as all-caps "SUBSTANCE"), CD releases, etc... The only releases that call the album "Substance 1987" are unofficial cassette releases, according to Discogs.
This is a German Rough Trade insert from a white-label 1987 pressing: https://img.discogs.com/2ncd1MbJKUrxaZAyCNBN9w4VgOg=/fit-in/431x600/filters:strip_icc():format(jpeg):mode_rgb():quality(90)/discogs-images/R-7958623-1455475480-2157.jpeg.jpg . Note the top, the title is simply Substance.
This album is not called "Substance 1987". The cover is misleading. For those who still believe the cover should be the final say on the album title, please see other examples, like Sufjan Stevens' album Illinois. The album cover seemingly calls the album "Sufjan Stevens Invites You To: Come On Feel the ILLINOISE" but the album is truly called "Illinois".  — Preceding unsigned comment added by D1119 (talk • contribs) 15:13, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Title II 

message: I have both cds personally, and after listening through, the version of Bizarre Love Triangle on the album is actually the extended dance mix, not the original 1986 version. This is also specified on the album's spotify listing. Shouldn't this be specified on the page sense it's a completely different mix? GingerPatties95 (talk) 15:40, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bizarre Love Triangle labelled incorrectly?