Talk:Duke (album)

Fair use rationale for Image:Duke80.jpg

Image:Duke80.jpg 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 Wikipedia articles 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 Wikipedia: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 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 03:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Bring Out Your Dead WT citation

Can the author provide a citation for the association of the working title "Bring Out Your Dead" to be for "Man of Our Times"? I find none anywhere but here, and additionally have a source indicating that it is the WT for "Evidence of Autumn"... the b-side test pressing of "Turn it on Again" is titled "Bring Out Your Dead" and plays "Evidence of Autumn."

http://www.backstageauctions.com/catalog/auction_item.php?unid=10682&catunid=458&prodpa=0

Mpoloukhine (talk) 21:34, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I've edited it to reflect the source info for now as there is no source to substantiate the previous info. If the author has a source or clearer evidence, let that engender a discussion on the topic.

Mpoloukhine (talk) 22:37, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

American Psycho

I don't know if this is bad or not, but the first bit of the article after the ToC is just a paraphrase of what Patrick Bateman says in American Psycho before he has sex with some prostitutes to the tune of "Sussudio".

98.118.70.249 (talk) 00:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Man of our Times

The article says that "Man of our Times" is about "emotional turmoil". I'm curious: What does everyone else think this song is about? It sounds like an upbeat song to me (musically and lyrically). I think its about how everyone in society is doing something wrong and has wrong values, but this Man of our Times is really a hero and how we should be more like him. Let me know what you think it's about. -67.235.30.29 (talk) 20:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, regarding the "emotional turmoil" quip, it also says "Alone Tonight is about emotional turmoil. I do agree with that. -67.235.30.29 (talk) 20:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Neo-Progressive Rock?

Hello, I have erased "Neo-Progressive" from the "genre" section, because in 1980, it just didn't exist "neo-progressive", it was just the last act of the progressive rock of the 1970's, and the transition to "adult" rock of the 1980's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.140.206.171 (talk) 07:39, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Quack!

The "duck" on the sleeve note credits has perplexed me for ages. According to this site, it's a duck call being fed into a synth, but anyone could have written that (and got it wrong, or got confused). Does anyone have a more reliable source? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:22, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

166.177.122.8 (talk · contribs), why are you removing "duck" from the credits (with no edit summary or conversation here so I can't tell what your rationale is) when longstanding convention prefers to report directly what's on the sleeve notes, in order to stop "my layout of the credits is better than yours" arguments. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:04, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

There is no such convention, longstanding or otherwise. See WP: WikiProject Albums/Album article style guide for guidelines on the best way to do personnel credits for albums.--Martin IIIa (talk) 22:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

That only tells you about formatting, nothing about what to actually list. My experience (eg: from a lot of the Beatles and Pink Floyd album articles at least) is that everyone has their "favourite" way of listing instruments (The Dark Side of the Moon has had many reverts back and forth), and generally nothing except the sleeve notes is actually verifiable as being correct. Nobody died because a sleeve note listed "percussion" instead of "drums". Now, if somebody has got a source that shows what a "Duck" is, great, let's have it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

You said "layout", which means formatting, not content. Incidentally, it's odd that you reference the Beatles albums, since the articles on their recordings make more use of non-sleeve-note sources for their credits than any other articles on Wikipedia. Anyway, the trouble with just blindly listing whatever the sleeve notes say is that sleeve notes sometimes contain errors, confusing terminology (e.g. harmonica credited as "harp"), and worse, outright jokes. That's why on Airborne (Curved Air album) we have Stewart Copeland credited for playing drums, even though the sleeve notes credit him as playing "heavy artillery", not drums. Sometimes you have to use your common sense.

In this particular case I think keeping the "duck" credit is correct. I've heard the bit about it being a duck call fed into a synth myself, and though unfortunately I can't remember the source, I remember it being a trustworthy one (in the conventional sense, not necessarily reliable by WP standards). Moreover, it doesn't seem like the sort of thing someone would make up. However, if we don't come up with a reliable source to explain within the article what "duck" refers to, you can bet there will be more editors removing it from the credits under the assumption that it's a joke - and the worst part is, we can't say they're really wrong to do so.--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Ritchie333 and Martin IIIa:It looks like someone else removed "duck" from the credits, possibly assuming that it was a joke. Also, (and I'm not trying to be irrelevant) I have this album on CD and not on ANY of the tracks do I hear any "duck-like" sounds or anything that sounds even REMOTELY like a duck, despite listing "duck" on the sleeve notes. But then again, if a duck call were fed into a synth I don't think it would really sound very "duck-like." I don't know this for certain, I'm just being a know-it-all who's heard other sounds fed into a synth that don't sound the way they would when heard on their own. Original research on my part.--Kevjgav (talk) 10:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Duke (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140625075145/http://www.bpi.co.uk/certified-awards.aspx to http://www.bpi.co.uk/certified-awards.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Duke (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150831030409/http://thegenesisarchive.co.uk/duke-tour-guildford-civic-hall/ to http://thegenesisarchive.co.uk/duke-tour-guildford-civic-hall/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Duke album tour

SO, I am trying to get a tour Wikipedia page made for the Duke album, and I am needing some help with it. Was the tour notable? comment added by Genesis8792 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)