Talk:Q (magazine)/Archive 1

Bias
This whole article sounds a lot like it was written by the authors of the magazine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.225.55 (talk) 08:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Q Reviews
Graded out of 5 or 10? If 10, 1987: What The Fuck Is Going On? is incorrect and needs to be changed. (Review 3/5). --kingboyk 22:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * They're rated out of 5. - Wezzo 22:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Arrested Development - Season1 (2005) - Not being an avid fan of Arrested Development i don't want to remove this, but I didn't know they had an album of this title, let alone it receiving 5* David Humphreys SPEAK TO MEABOUTTHE THINGS I MESSED UP 16:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Silent Shout by The Knife wasn't given half a star, I happen to own that particular issue of Q Magazine and I can clearly see a whole star given to it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.79.135.142 (talk) 18:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Albums awarded 5 stars
Why has the albums awarded 5 stars part of the page been removed?? I thought this was an interesting feature especially considering the infrequency with which Q give 5*'s. The more recent ones awarded also illustrate the general decline of the magazine.DAylen

I agree. I've re-instated this section from its last incarnation six months ago. Paintwork


 * It's neither noteworthy nor self-evident that the magazine rarely gave reviews 5 stars, nor is there any reasonable way to verify that it's true or that the list is exhaustive. The general decline of the magazine's quality is plausible (no argument from me there), but whether there has been a decline, whether the list illustrates this point, and whether the list is generally interesting at all, are all matters of opinion. I don't feel such trivia belongs in the article, but don't feel so strongly about it to delete it myself. :)—mjb 23:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me that Q are somewhat notorious for their fussines in reviewing albums - or not even fussiness necessarily, everything they review seems to get 3 stars, with a few exceptions. I was going to ask if anyone could find a source that mentions that they're seen as being fussy or something. It is certainly rare for them to give 5 stars, and I think the list is quite interesting considering how short it is relative to how long the magazine has been around.Liquidcow 14:04, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

can someone put pyschocandy by jesus and mary chain into the list?

Please be aware that Q magazine can give albums 5 stars to a certain album now that they didn't originally give 5 stars in the very first review of the certain album e.g. (What's The Story) Mornin Glory by Oasis, which originally got 3 stars but in an Oasis interview two years ago all the albums were rated and (What's the Stroy) Morning Glory was given 5 stars

Just wondering, was Blur's The Great Escape really given 5 stars on its first review, because i didn't think it was, and somebody has added it to the list

The Strokes' Room On Fire was given 5 stars but it's been downgradfed to a 2-star sinve. Can somebody put ths in, wheneve I try it's deleted. (125.238.230.233 02:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC))

This is because the list is for original reviews of the albumsBoxyno1 15:57, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Muse's Origin of Symmetry has been put on the list, was this really given 5 stars? Boxyno1 (talk) 23:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Article Name

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Move. —Wknight94 (talk) 23:18, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Requested move
PageName → NewName – Q Magazine (in all caps without the parenthesis) is a Melbourne LGBT magazine. The name of the magazine here is just "Q" and nothing else.--Esprit15d 17:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Survey
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~
 * Support per nom. --Usgnus 00:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Discussion
Add any additional comments
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Note: The above "debate" doesn't automatically mean that Q Magazine should be occupied by the other magazine. One is a longstanding, influential national music magazine with a truckload of incoming links, the other is a one-line stub on a special interest single-city free magazine/paper with hardly any (if any) links. Indeed, there are many links for the British Q to Q Magazine:.

The dab I've put in place is the sensible option. Leave this article here, Q Magazine redirects here, and we have a dab header. --kingboyk 11:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Qlogo.png
Image:Qlogo.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, 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) 17:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Editors
Could we manage a list of former editors, and their periods of service? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

EMAP
Q was originally, and for a long time, published by EMAP. I believe that should be mentioned, once cited. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:27, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Anyone a collector?
With regard to this post, does anyone have these issues in their attic somewhere? Parrot of Doom (talk) 19:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)