Talk:Highway to Hell

Genre
As I stated on the AC/DC Main Page, Back in Black and For Those About to Rock's talk pages, heavy metal should be added back to their late 70s-early 80s albums as a 3rd genre. Main page states they were an influence on HM and the 70s perception of heavy metal was used interchangeably with hard rock, thus why Aerosmith, Deep Purple, Van Halen etc. all have HM on their pages. 108.81.33.59 (talk) 21:46, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Discussion is ongoing at the main article talk page - let's not have two discussions. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:50, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

"Walk All Over You" or "Walk All over You"?
OK, can anyone clarify on why in this case the word 'Over' is capitalized? I'm kind of confused. "Over" seems to be a tricky word regarding capitalization in song titles. Let's see, which of these are correct and incorrect?

"All over You"  "Move Over and Let Me Dance"   "Rock and Roll Over You"   "Wings over the Sea"   "Head over Heels"   "Love over Gold"   "It's Over Now"   "Roll Over Beethoven"   "Moon over Bourbon Street"   "All Over Now"   "Somewhere over the Rainbow"   "Let's Walk Over to the River"   "Turn That Heartbeat Over Again"   "Hardly Getting Over It"   "Look Over Yonder"

I would consider the above examples to be correct...are they? Chapa1985 (talk) 16:34, 13 December 2015 (UTC)


 * If you consider "Let's Walk Over to the River" to be correct, then surely you consider "Walk All Over You" to be correct, as in both cases "over" is part of the verb, like "move over", "get over", "look over", "turn over" and "roll over". The fact that another word splits the verb doesn't affect that. Bretonbanquet (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! So what about "All over You"? Is that correct or it should be capitalized? That's the most tricky case I would think.Chapa1985 (talk) 23:04, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That, I must say, I'm not sure about. I'd go with "All Over You" since "all over" in this case is some kind of compound phrase, as opposed to "over" being a simple preposition. Not 100% sure though. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:37, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

I told you it was tricky! I think I agree with you that it should stay capitalized. All the articles I've seen here with that title have 'over' in uppercase. Thanks for the reply!Chapa1985 (talk) 01:53, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have used the syntax from allmusic.com Cult of Green (talk) 04:16, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

The allmusic site doesn't seem to follow the rules very well. They write the 'a' in "Shake a Leg" in uppercase which is not correct. Yet at the same time they write "Given the Dog a Bone" with the 'a' in lowercase! They are obviously inconsistent and not a good source to follow! In fact I would not want to visit that page ever again. A look at just one album was enough...the song titles on allmusic's album pages must be an inconsistent disaster! Chapa1985 (talk) 15:51, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Cover art
If Discogs is anything to go by, the Australian cover continued to be used in Australia and New Zeland until the mid-90's. Since Australian versions are generally given precedence on here, the Australian cover should come first here as well. Esszet (talk) 23:12, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I disagree, there is nothing wrong with the image that is in the infobox. How do figure Since Australian versions are generally given precedence on here is true here on the English Wikipedia? -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 23:16, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * What? Australians speak English, Australia is a former British colony.  See Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap and Let There Be Rock; although I did just switch the covers around (see talk pages for reasons why), the Australian versions were given precedence in the track listing sections all along.  The Australian versions are thus generally given precedence here. Esszet (talk) 22:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The main cover art image should be of the cover with which most people are familiar. The Australian cover art is very obscure to non-Australians. It doesn't matter which was released first by a few days/months whatever. There was no consensus to change the cover art around. The track listings should be reversed as well, with the most familiar version first, if it matters that the cover art and track listings reflect each other (I'm not sure it does). Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And Discogs is absolutely not anything to go by – it is not even a reliable source. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:19, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I think artist’s intent should be the overriding principle here. The Australian versions were the ones they approved (or at least presumably approved of more), so they should be given precedence here.  I didn’t just switch them around without saying anything, I tried to start a discussion on the talk page for Dirty Deeds and I left a message on the talk page for Let There Be Rock to direct people to it, but no one said anything, so I switched them around.  I wouldn’t say the Australian covers are "very obscure" to non-Australians, either; you’ve definitely seen them if you’ve been on here before. Esszet (talk) 14:28, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * That's great, but we don't know anything about the artist's intent. There's nothing to say the band approved the Aussie covers. I imagine they weren't keen on the cover of Let there Be Rock featuring the fretting fingers of a guy from another band, for example. And when I say "very obscure to non-Australians", I mean before they look on Wikipedia. I'm talking about generally, seeing the covers in magazines, record shops, online etc - almost always the international, widely-recognised covers. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not just talking about the covers, I think it's safe to assume the Australian track listings were what they originally intended, and if the Australian track listings are going to come first, the Australian covers should as well. Keep in mind that this is Wikipedia, a lot of people have been on here before, and even if they haven't, they'll look at the infobox and say, "Oh, the Australian version has a different cover.  I didn't know that." Esszet (talk) 23:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with The main cover art image should be of the cover with which most people are familiar. The Australian cover art is very obscure to non-Australians.  -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 23:43, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Esszet, it's not safe to assume that at all – where are your sources for that? The record company generally influences track listings and often covers as well. By now, if the band preferred these covers, they'd be used. And if people didn't know there was a different cover in Australia, they don't need it to be at the top of the infobox to discover it. That does not make sense. Bretonbanquet (talk) 11:34, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

I don’t have sources, but since the international version of Dirty Deeds contains edited versions of several of the songs and even an edited version of one song from their previous (Australian) album, I can image the band wasn’t too happy with it. Likewise, there originally was no international version of Let There Be Rock, and even if the band did want Crabsody in Blue to be replaced, they wouldn’t have used an edited version of a song that had already been released on their previous album (even internationlly). Since record labels can influence covers and track listings against the artist’s wishes, it’s just as easy to say (probably even easier in light of what I just said) that the international versions were not what they intended, either. They might have been withdrawn from distribution in Australia itself for business reasons, who knows. In cases like this, it’s best to just use the original versions by default. And I still don’t see what the problem with putting them at the top of the infobox is, people will look at it, see that it’s captioned "Original Australian cover", and go "Oh, so that’s the original cover. I didn’t know that." Esszet (talk) 23:02, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The problem with it is that those covers are not the most recognised covers, nor the ones that were or are available anywhere in the world except Australia. You'll need a consensus for your changes, and currently you do not have one. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:23, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry for not responding sooner, but I don't think so, in no small part because AC/DC is in a unique position in this respect (i.e. the original versions of their albums have not become standard internationally), i don't think there is a consensus on here specifically for recognizability. The documentation for Template:Infobox album, in fact, says that the original cover should be used.  I've actually challenged that myself, and since Wikipedia rules are descriptive, not prescriptive, it doesn't really apply anyway.  Since the Australian track listings have come first for a long time now (Dirty Deeds and Let There Be Rock), consensus would in fact be needed to change that, so for the time being, the Australian covers should come first for the simple sake of consistency. Esszet (talk) 12:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Where is that sort of consistency required? It is a non-sequitur. You are the only person who wants to change the order of the album covers and you have zero support. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:08, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And with regard to the original covers - in the UK, US and everywhere else in the world, the current covers were the original covers. In the case of Highway to Hell, the Aussie version didn't even come first; they were released on the same day. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:50, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) What? That doesn't make sense at all, if the Aussie track listing comes first, the Aussie cover should as well; what you just said is in fact a non-sequitur.  Don't just assume I'm the only person who would want to do this, by the way, I'm sure other people would want to as well. b) the "original version of the international version" is irrelrvant for purposes of the guidelines given for Infobox album (and, as I've said, they're irrelevant anyway); as long as they're considered the same album, the original version is just that: the original version, in Auustralia or anywhere else. Esszet (talk) 22:55, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Why are the track listings and the covers related? In what sense should they go in the same order? If you're not the only person who wants to do this, where is everyone else? That really does matter, you know. And your last point - no, it's not irrelevant at all for anyone outside Australia. "The original version" as you claim the Australian version to be, was unavailable in 95% of the world, and is unavailable everywhere now. I don't call that irrelevant. What is relevant is that you have no consensus. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "Why are the track listings and covers related?" Really?  Did you really just say that?  If you're here to have a serious discussion, fine, but if you're just going to relentlessly advance a certain point of view, I'm not going to keep arguing with you.  My position has been made clear enough; if anyone else has anything to add, please do so. Esszet (talk) 20:36, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And, just to show you what I'm talking about when I say you're relentlessly advancing a certain point of view, I'm requesting a third opinion on this – am I missing something here? Am I being totally unreasonable? Esszet (talk) 20:49, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am actually questioning the relation because you haven't explained it at all. Just because one goes first, why should the other? Is "consistency" all you've got? If you don't want to answer simple questions and would rather ridicule another user, then maybe you should stop arguing after all. You are the sole proponent of this idea and you don't seem to understand consensus in any way. Am I relentlessly advancing a certain point of view? Err.. yes! The currently available, widely recognised covers should be at the top of the infobox, not the obscure, one-country, unavailable ones. Like they always have done before. It ain't broke, so why mess with it? Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * reason is simple WP:IDONTLIKEIT. What they should do is WP:JUSTDROPIT cuz it's not going to be changed. Happy editing, -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 22:12, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, Bretonbanquet, you're in for it now. On Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap (album), the Aussie cover came first from 20 February 2008 (diff) to 17 March 2013 (diff), when you changed it yourself – even though you made NUMEROUS edits in the meantime!  What is going on here, I really would like to know now. Esszet (talk) 23:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * You took me to ANI for this? I hope the dressing down you got there has taught you something. You have a hell of a lot to learn here. You think it's OK to go around calling another editor a liar with no basis whatsoever? You're lucky you didn't get blocked yourself. You bring up edit histories from 5-10 years ago, in which, as far as I can see, I edited entirely consistently with my current argument, and you claim it's some kind of revelation? I'm assuming you mean that because I said "always", when (I stand corrected) the truth is "the last five years", that makes me some kind of blockable liar. That is risible behaviour. Why not just correct me instead of running to teacher? The last five years with no disruption and apparently no discussion means no problem with the cover order from anyone since 2013 until you came along. I discussed instead of just reverting you. You have no support. You've been told to drop the stick, so do so and revert yourself with the album covers. Bretonbanquet (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Album cover
Why was album's international cover replaced by the Australian-only album cover as the primary image? This does not make any sense. Ded Meem (talk) 14:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Restored. Thanks, Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)