Talk:Citizen Erased/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Notable?
I'm not entirely sure this is notable. Fulfills absolutely no criteria at WP:MUSIC/SONG. I may tag it for deletion, any views?
- Oooooooh, all the OoS songs are notable, and especially this one. I replaced the stupid box and the stupid "1. REDIRECT". ^^ I think I'm going to do this with all the other OoS songs (excepting singles, obviously xD) SSBMboss 00:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I love Origin of Symmetry, but I'm really not sure that any of the non-single tracks deserve articles. — mæstrosync talk&contribs, 00:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see why it should be deleted, bands like Nirvana have individual song's for preety much every song they've ever written - whether they were smash hit singles like Smells like Teen Spirit or unreleased demo's from 1985 like the Fecal Matter songs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.211.72.182 (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think non-single songs should have articles, simply as they are not notable enough to have their own articles, unlike the songs from Dark Side of the Moon, which each have a seperate article, because the album is notable enough to have these. Origin of Symmetry was nowhere near as successful as DSotM, therefore does not need individual song articles. If you feel that individual songs need mentioning for a particular reason, feel free to mention them in the article. Keytar Shredder (talk) 11:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- And I quote "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable". It got to #122 in the UK singles chart without it actually being a single. It's a firm fan favourite, as is evidenced by a countdown done on Phoenix FM in 2008. -Frozenjakalope (talk) 03:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think non-single songs should have articles, simply as they are not notable enough to have their own articles, unlike the songs from Dark Side of the Moon, which each have a seperate article, because the album is notable enough to have these. Origin of Symmetry was nowhere near as successful as DSotM, therefore does not need individual song articles. If you feel that individual songs need mentioning for a particular reason, feel free to mention them in the article. Keytar Shredder (talk) 11:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
- I don't see why it should be deleted, bands like Nirvana have individual song's for preety much every song they've ever written - whether they were smash hit singles like Smells like Teen Spirit or unreleased demo's from 1985 like the Fecal Matter songs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.211.72.182 (talk) 00:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I love Origin of Symmetry, but I'm really not sure that any of the non-single tracks deserve articles. — mæstrosync talk&contribs, 00:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Terribly written
"Music part"? What the hell? Very amateur... someone who knows something about music theory/terminology should rewrite the whole article. 82.33.166.72 22:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- I ain't english, excuse me. I don't know how to say it differently. :( SSBMboss 00:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Museoriginofsymemtryalbumcover.jpg
The image Image:Museoriginofsymemtryalbumcover.jpg 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. --00:53, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Progressive metal?
Really? 80.41.130.193 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC).
Isn't this kind of Noise Rock? 83.253.167.142 (talk) 19:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- Progressive rock would be a better description of the song. Keytar Shredder : Talk To Me 12:39, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
post-rock
aye right 86.174.200.198 (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Strings version.
Sorry for my bad English.
Is it notable that there was another original version planned ? An strings edit. I don't know, if this source is reliable or if this information is even true, but maybe someone "museskilled" could check it out. cf. the note and the comments below the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXzHQehObiE. There is said: "A little track I made by combining the Studio version of Citizen Erased with the Strings Track that was not included in the final edit of the song." --84.59.196.10 (talk) 17:25, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Genre
I understand that the genres for this song and other muse songs were removed due to lack of citation. But honestly, I think it's kind of obvious that Citizen Erased is not alternative rock. Isn't there anything else we could list this as? It's listed as new prog on the wikipedia page for Progressive Rock (third wave section) and I don't see why we can't include that genre here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackson135baum (talk • contribs) 20:59, 4 July 2016 (UTC)