Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 11:30, 27 September 2010

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Animals (Pink Floyd album) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months

	Animals (Pink Floyd album) has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result December 14, 2009 Good article nominee Listed April 27, 2010 Featured topic candidate Not promoted
Current status: Good article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Progressive Rock High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Progressive Rock, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Progressive rock on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Progressive RockWikipedia:WikiProject Progressive RockTemplate:WikiProject Progressive RockProgressive rock High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Albums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Pink Floyd High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pink Floyd, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pink Floyd on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pink FloydWikipedia:WikiProject Pink FloydTemplate:WikiProject Pink FloydPink Floyd High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article was a past project collaboration. To-do list: Fair use Add fair use rationale to all images and sound samples (all except images already labeled free use). Re-size large images around to 300 pixels (all "fair use" images), other than album covers (already done). Articles Expand all articles to at least Start class. Some song stubs can't be expanded and should be redirected to the relevant album article. Use the "Interstellar Overdrive" article as an example when editing a song stub. Expand all of the Floyd's studio album articles to at least GA status. See COTM for monthly collabs. Project building Add WikiProject Pink Floyd banner {{WPFloyd}} to all appropriate Talk pages. Personally invite quality editors working on Pink Floyd articles to join the project. If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list. This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

Track times

I'm wondering where the track times in the article came from because I haven't found any source that matches up with them. After searching on Discogs, I came across a few scans with different times. We should find one hard source and cite it in the article. Most of the releases did not list the track times. The only vinyl I could find with track times was the German vinyl, so that's the times I would go with, but I wanted to get more input here.

–Dream out loud (talk) 01:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

They've probably been added from someone's CD-rip. I'll check my Vinyl, but I'm happy to go with whatever you suggest. Parrot of Doom 10:54, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Since you're one of the main contributors to the article and you think it's alright, I've gone ahead and changed the track times to that of the German vinyl. If there are any other original vinyls out there (from 1977) that have different track times, please me me know. –Dream out loud (talk) 05:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Parrot of Doom's obstruction

Parrot,

0. you do not own this article. Your actions are unacceptable.

• 1. You have given no reasoning about why the rejection of Pink Floyd by punk music is in any way relevant to the album. Please explain it to me?
• 2. Stop accusing me of deleting sourced material - I actually moved the punk section to the general Pink Floyd article where it is on topic (though overall not that important).
• 3. "Although for this new musical movement Waters' success might have counted against him, his concerns with inequality, prejudice, and the social-political attitudes of the day, were not far removed from those expressed by the new breed of rock bands." says more about this "new breed", is furthermore a overly lauding description of Roger Water. Again, it is not about the album.
• 4. "Animals is loosely based on George Orwell's political fable Animal Farm, where various castes in society are represented as animals" - that much is correct, even though the word "caste" is not the best way to put it. But the specifics are problematic:
  • a. "dogs as enforcers of the law" - that is correct for both the album and the book, though they are not actually enforcers "of the law" in either case. Simply enforcers would do.
  • b. "pigs as ruthless leaders" - true for the novel, but not entirely for the album, which describes them all "charade you are". Is Mary Whitehouse considered a "ruthless leader" by the lyrics? The ruthless ones in the album are the dogs.
  • c. "sheep as the mindless pawns" - the clearest mistake on that version's part: in the album, the sheep are the subjugated people which eventually rise up, but in Animal Farm, the sheep are the progandists of the pigs' regime, repeating their slogans ad nauseum.
• 5. With the specifics, it is not clear in every case, whether the attribution is taken from the album or the novel. (You can look up the novel's allegory at Animal Farm.) I no case do they fit both. The album's desciprition can do without any of these.
• 6. "the album is a critique of the worst aspects of capitalism" - is a violation of the NPOV policy. Please attribute this to someone, e.g. Roger Waters.
• 7. "and although both advocate a democratic socialist ideal" - does the novel advocate that?
• 8. And of course, the sheep would not rise up in the novel, as they are not the subjugated people.
• 9. Your reference to a single source will not do, as that would have to be attributed to that source. You simply portray it as matters of fact.
• 10. I changed the description of "Pigs" in accord with the article on that song - why restrict this to simply the "Mary Whitehouse" verse? And yes, "pro-censorship campaigner" is POV and (like her or not) misses her point entirely. Whatever does "one of the apocryphal pigs" mean? And never mind that Whitehouse is - in contrast to others - actually mentioned by name.
• 11. Your edits simply remove the actual context of the album in the situation Britain was in at the time.
• 12. Why you insist that the abbreviation should be thrown into the mix (when WP has no space problem and the full term is more accessible and better stylistically) is beyond me. Probably you just reject any change by me or by anyone but you.
• 13. And yes, "British" is the adjective referring to the UK.

Str1977 08:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

How about addressing the actual issues.

And how about not blanket reverting all the time - clear proof of your claim to WP:OWNership. Str1977

Always the first resort of those with the weakest argument, isn't it? Try discussing things rationally, without resorting to bullshit accusations. You might then find me a little more willing to accept your arbitrary, unsourced and unexplained changes, which appear to reflect your personal views more than they do the views of the authors referenced for this article. Parrot of Doom 09:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Pre-S: Answering, as you did within my lines (and at that inconsistently regarding the format, will soon make the discussion unreadable. I have there added numbers and moved your answer further down. Hope you at least have no problem with that.)

0. Frankly I have little or no time for people who roll out the "own" argument. Take it for granted that I'm well aware of Misplaced Pages's policies.

• 1. Its relevant enough for the sources used, its relevant therefore here. If you need it explaining, go and buy the books, as I did. You can read all about it there.
• 2. Yes, you moved it to the main article where it fits like a square peg in a round hole. It belongs here, not there.
• 3. It is about the album, since Animals is considered by some to be a reaction to the punk music popular at that time. It could perhaps use something like "in the opinion of author...", so I will check that later today.
• 4. a./b. That's your interpretation, the source used differs.
• c. See above reply.
• 5. I disagree.
• 6. That was once sourced, but has either been moved and the citation appears elsewhere, or has been changed beyond recognition. I will track it down.
• 7. See above.
• 10. I see nothing about Margaret Thatcher on pages 243-244 of Blake's book.
• 12. Because its inconsistent with other Floyd album articles.
• 13. And "British" is also inconsistent with the other Floyd album articles, which use UK. Parrot of Doom 09:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Str1977 08:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

So far, you are the one that seems obsessed with shouting out profanities. But maybe I should be grateful that you respond to issues at all.

0. If you are aware of them, why don't you act in accordance with them? The one's you seem to misunderstand is WP:OWN, and WP:NPOV. I will specify the latter further down.

• 1. Your "Its relevant enough for the sources" is seriously flawed. Neither of the sources cited in regarding the "punk issue" is about the Animals album - they are about Floyd in general. Do the sources somehow link the album with the "punk issue", e.g. that Floyd in this album somehow reacted to punk or that punk music specifically railed against this album? If there is a link, please make it clear and I would be happy to include it as it would be most interesting. However, if it simply that punk (and their anti-Floyd stance) and the album appeared at the same time, then the punk issue has no place in this article. The responsibility of justifying your edits rests with you, not with me or the books. Explain it to me!
• 2. How does it not fit into the Floyd article? I am not happy with the placing either (and wouldn't mind simply moving it to the Animals section - for strictly temporal reasons) but, as I said, if punks railed against Floyd, it is certainly more relevant to an article about the band. It belongs there, not here!
• 3. Thanks for a proper response on this.
  "It is about the album, since Animals is considered by some to be a reaction to the punk music popular at that time.
  That's what I am looking for. Can we verbalise this so that it can be put into the article?
  "It could perhaps use something like "in the opinion of author...", so I will check that later today."
  This passage and others as well (here is what I meant by your disregard thus far for NPOV. I will have a look at your suggestion.
• 4. It is not merely my interpretation. What I told you about the book is factual and you can look it up at Animal Farm or read the book itself. I give you that point "a" (Dogs) is merely wording and point "b" is arguable but point "c" is clearly wrong when it speaks about the novel. A possible solution would be to simply (and clearly) restrict this passage to the identification within the confines of the album, e.g. the album uses dogs to portray ..., pigs to portray ... and sheep to portray ... And that is all any book on the album or Floyd in general is qualified to do. A Floyd expert might be a lousy Orwell reader (or no Orwell reader at all).
• 5. Is "I disagree" supposed to be an argument? My point is not that the album article must not explain the allegory in detail but that it needn't do this. However, if it does, the information must be correct and must not included nonsense about the book.
• 6. "the album is a critique of the worst aspects of capitalism" - "That was once sourced, but has either been moved and the citation appears elsewhere, or has been changed beyond recognition. I will track it down."
  Thanks but sourcing it alone will not do. As the language "the worst aspects of capitalism" is inherently POV. The main problem is that we shouldn't cover Roger Waters' opinion as fact.
• 7. The article should be content to speak of the album alone.
• 8. This point is basically identical to "4.c." (Sheep) - all the more urgend that we get it right.
• 9. No response on your part.
• 10. I took the Thatcher information from the Pigs (Three Different Ones) article, which in turn sources to an Allmusic review. (That it is not on certain pages in a certain book is simply not enough. We're not here to replicate the Blake book, are we?) I did not make this up. My intention was that we shouldn't be merely addressing the third of the pigs.
  Which brings us to the points you ignore:
  What are "apocryphal pigs"?
  How is "pro-censorship campaigner" NPOV?
• 11. No response on your part.
• 12., 13. That other Floyd articles are lazy in that regard, is not an argument. UK is not an adjective. It is bad style.

Str1977 11:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Good articles without topic parameter
• All unassessed articles
• GA-Class Progressive rock articles
• High-importance Progressive rock articles
• GA-Class Album articles
• WikiProject Albums articles
• GA-Class Pink Floyd articles
• High-importance Pink Floyd articles
• WikiProject Pink Floyd articles