Talk:Ultravox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
Ultravox (band) → Ultravox – {"The band is overwhelming more likely to be meant with the name than the software"} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page
[edit] Voting
- Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~
- Oppose - in these cases I just ask myself if the article is findable easily. It is, so where's the problem? Also, most band articles are followed by (band) wherever the band name has any other meaning, so it's not as if this article is suffering from being different in that respect. Graham 09:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
- Support - The guidelines at Wikipedia:Disambiguation state that a primary topic can be "indicated by a majority of links in existing articles" — WLH:Ultravox (band) vs WLH:Ultravox (software) reveals a no contest! On that basis, I'd follow the guidelines for primary topics and move this to Ultravox, adding a link to Ultravox (software) at the top. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lox (talk • contribs) 19:46, 13 January 2006.
- Support. per nom and comments by Lox. Skeezix1000 18:24, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
- Add any additional comments
- Comment This move was proposed by Dissident with the comment: "The band is overwhelming more likely to be meant with the name than the software, as is attested to by the What links here page of the latter" --Lox (t,c) 09:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
Moved. —Nightstallion (?) 09:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pictures/captions
I've moved the two pics recently added by Enigmaticland to what seems more logical spots; also slightly modified the captions to describe the one with John Foxx and Robin Simon as the 'final lineup' of the band's 'first incarnation'. The prev. caption stating it was the 'first lineup' is misleading since Steve Shears was in that lineup, not Simon - however if anyone thinks it can be rephrased better, give it a go. On a separate but related topic, the source(s) of those publicity photos should probably be added to the image files... Cheers, Ian Rose 00:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Compilations and reissues
Is it worth adding the plethora of compilations to the discography? I'd thought about doing so until I looked at Amazon and discovered that there were even more of them than I thought. Still, mustn't complain, at least the compilation and reissue situation's nowhere near as bad as it is with Hawkwind, where it's got so ludicrous that they don't even attempt to tackle the insane list of re-releases...
On second thoughts perhaps it's better just to stick to the "main" compilations and leave it at that.
-- Chris (blather • contribs) 
16:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- G'day Chris, I'd agree with you on all points above. The Hawkwind situation reminds me of what Douglas Adams once said about Science Fiction, namely that he thought he was a fan until he dug further and discovered a subculture and body of work broader and deeper than anything he'd imagined. However the situation isn't as bad with Ultravox and what we have here are the 'main' compilations so, as you say, let's not sweat every last one. Well done also spotting The Collection in the wrong spot. One thing though, singles should always be represented in double quotes, with italics reserved for albums; I know not every discography does that but it's the WP:SONG standard so should be changed back. Cheers, Ian Rose 00:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Sounds good - cheers again, Ian Rose 09:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
-
