211:, when at the moment the issue is undecided and later on we as a community might decide the images are OK. If, on the other hand, the article gets Featured and we later decide that the images must go then go they must, automatically. I don't see any impediment to promoting the article in this state because it's Featured status won't make it immune from a future policy which says these images can't be used. So, what to do? I'd prefer to leave the images there until the issue is decided one way or another, because I feel the article is improved greatly by their presence; but if the only way to get this list Featured is to remove them I suppose I'll do it. It's been a long stated aim of
638:
section. Images have been restored (you couldn't see a version with images because it uses templates for the formatting). It just isn't the same without them, I agree with you. I'm happy with the article as it now stands; if it can't get
Featured as is and there are no actionable suggestions to make it so, I guess you are right I shall have to accept it and be content with Good Article status. All that said, the article should be judged on its merits not on how impressive the band were and how much of an impact their catalogue made or didn't make, and I still maintain that's it's one of the best discographies on Knowledge (XXG). It's the
312:. Apart from the covers I see the following issues: references are not properly formatted, title and scope of list do not coincide (the films and books are not part of the discography, a more proper name for the article would be "The KLF publications" or similar). The whole section of KLF communications should be moved to its own article with just the summary being left here. Purpose of the "additional communicators" section is not clear. --
556:. The first is a list of releases by the record label and the second is a list of guest contributors to albums. I think the problems with the name and the history behind the various sections and where they came from shows that the KLF project are having difficulty finding the correct home for this material. This article is currently a bit like a collection of stuff that didn't make it to
522:- many record labels or groups have official "releases" that weren't actually records). However I do think that the KLF kollaborators should be in their own page. Pages that are a list of "minor characters" are the encouraged practice - this list of KLF kollaborators can then have sub-headings and hence they can be wiki linked from other articles. My main problem with the move is that
621:
point, we'd have to be able to say that this was one of the very best discographies on
Knowledge (XXG) and can be held up as an example to others. In addition, it has to be unique on the Internet. Many web sites (official and fan) have very, very good discographies so that is a hard challenge. IMO, it really does need thumnail album/single covers.
232:". That is, unfortunately, what I think is going to happen. I cannot see the value of having the covers in the article, especially when the albums themselves are so prominently linked and have articles of their own. In addition, current Fair Use discussion makes me hesitant to promote lists with so many Fair Use images. --
616:
be a featured list? I should note that I haven't managed to find a version of this article with pictures of albums/singles on it, so can't comment on what that looked like. The current formatting won't win any prizes and there are many other discographies that I think are presented better. The track
497:
In what way are the images anti-fairuse? While the rename is more suitable (especially given the various names used) the removal of the images has left the article appearing to be poor quality and unfinished. While still comprehensive the overall effect is negative. I know we have to obey guidelines
169:
link, that's a helpful page. I see that the issue is undecided, and I firmly assert that our image use is fair both legally and morally. If it is later decided that this position is wrong, we can remove the images. I'm sure it need not be a barrier to our candidacy given that the position is unclear
620:
A discography could be a featured list, but to "Exemplify
Knowledge (XXG)'s very best work. Represent what Knowledge (XXG) offers that is unique on the Internet." it has got to be quite impressive. I really doubt the KLF have produced enough material for one to be impressed by any list. To win this
253:
Yes, I see. You know the ironic thing is that KLF is said by many to mean "Kopyrite
Liberation Front"; they've deleted their entire back catalogue and have no further commercial interest in it. I know that's not likely to change the minds of those who have fair use issues but it causes me a little
624:
In summary, I'd recommend you create small to medium sized articles covering cohesive KLF-related topics. If individually these aren't impressive enough to be featured, then you'll just have to accept that. I don't think combining them does the reader any favours. I would like to add that I think
399:
due to length issues. For a short while it was a standalone article, but we felt that the information on who besides
Drummond and Cauty appeared on their recordings was suitable material for the discography. Again, if we rename it to KLF Communications "additional communicators" makes more sense.
155:
Image source: the catalogue number and copyright owner of each scan is now given. I don't believe that who scanned it is material, AFAIK there is no copyright in the 2D, flat reproduction of another copyrighted work, i.e. the owner of the artwork holds a copyright but the scanner doesn't. In many
637:
Thanks for the comments. I see a consensus on the contributors issue; I've commented that section out and certainly it looks better without it. I'm not sure yet whether to split it back out to another article or dump it. I'm not a fan of short, context-free articles so I might quietly dump that
138:
Sorry, image fair use rationales and related points were something I meant to sort out before the nomination went live and totally forgot (we've unfortunately lost a WikiProject member, so there's been a delay between Peer Review and FLC). I will attend to it and report back. Other points: this
601:
The third section is a problem. As a non-fan, I'm really struggling to get excited about such a collection of bits and bobs. If each album/single's page mentioned who contributed to that product, isn't that enough? Sometimes having too much information means that the important stuff gets lost.
465:
has been discussed more informally before, and I'm the one that added it to that page. I think their fair use claim is questionable, in that they are not very informative in this context. Also, it adds considerably to the length of the page without adding a lot of encyclopedic value.
124:
because pictures do not conform to fair use policy. They do not provide the source, do not have fair use rationales, and some are high resolution (low resolution usually means under 300x300px). See also the whole discussion on
361:
Bill
Drummond & Jimmy Cauty discography. The meat of the list. This is all of the published music of Drummond and Cauty (The KLF); most of this work was on KLF Communications but see my point after this bulleted
215:
to get this article to
Featured List status and I believe we've done it, so if I have to make such a change I guess it's worth it. Help me please! Can the images stay for now or must I remove them? --
526:, because of the capital letter should only be used for the KLF's label/organisation - if you want to make a page that acts as a discography but contains non-record items then that should be at
21:
351:
The other sections - about their record label, publications and the additional performers on their works - do indeed increase the scope, and are intended to. Let's examine the sections:
41:, and could possibly be FL standard. I couldnt find any other music-related FLs to compare to but it meets the 5 FL criteria, and if not i'm sure any fixes could be quickly implemented.
254:
frustration :) Anyway: I hope to get some more comments on this issue, and will also when I have a moment try to reformat the article without the images save for the KLF Comms logo. --
358:
merit. Having it here introduces the reader very nicely to their collection of work, emphasises the independence of their activities, and defines the scope of the following lists.
336:
In what way are the references not properly formatted? Objections should be actionable, so I need to know what's wrong with them :) They're consistent and in the same format as
109:
590:). You could have both but I suspect that's overkill. I think most folk are more interested in the band than the record label. So you could create a stand-alone list (
378:
The KLF filmography. The films were works of KLF Communications. We might change the name of the article, then, or we could remove this and have a See also entry for
653:, the Apple articles are largely my work too :) :P P.P.S. With regards to formatting, it's not my stroing point. I'm a writer/editor/geek, not, alas, a designer :)
609:
You've written tons of stuff on The KLF. It is hard and painful, but I think you need to condese it to make it more accessible. Less is more and all that.
354:
KLF Communications. I think this is on-topic for a discography, and to split it out to another article would introduce a very short article of no great
203:
I count 8 different editors in the history of the Talk page, so it's not had great community involvement yet :) My problem is this: I don't want to
129:
if fair use images can be used in lists at all. Other stuff: more info on movies wanted. Referencesb and footnotes do not follow a single format.
173:
References: Excellent spot, thank you. I've tidied them; if any are still not satisfactory please inform me of which and I'll take another look.
549:
76:
Fair use images - with the exception of the KLF Communications logo - have been commented out pending a project-wide decision on the matter.
17:
617:
listings are particularly hard to read. The singles list doesn't contain track listings so would be more compact in a table format perhaps.
475:
Thanks. I see which way the wind is blowing on this, so for now I've removed the images. What do you think about renaming the article? --
646:
632:
538:
502:
492:
479:
470:
453:
439:
328:
304:
276:
267:
258:
248:
219:
198:
182:
147:
133:
116:
96:
82:
68:
385:
KLF Publications bibliography. Again, a KLF Communications piece, so we can rename the article or move this to a see also.
531:
194:, proposed policy directly affecting images in discographies (currently flat-out against). Something else to consider. –
594:) with just the KLF material. If there are a few releases by the label that don't fit here then they could go in the
553:
650:
583:
518:
and I don't think it matters if it has extra releases that are not records (I'm sure there is a precedent, e.g.
582:
The second section could be either of two things. It could be a list of releases made by the record label (See
61:
587:
514:
but I'm biased. On the renaming (and non-discography content) question, I think the article should be at
316:
236:
527:
300:- With the recent F.U. changes, this looks pretty nice and now properly supported by fair use claims.
325:
245:
462:
391:
Additional communicators. This was originally part of the main article, but it was chopped out when
191:
561:
432:
420:
31:
595:
572:
523:
485:
414:
55:
401:
166:
126:
301:
396:
212:
630:
613:
591:
519:
515:
321:
313:
241:
233:
51:
37:
KLF were a popular 1990s british electronica band. this article is spun off from the FA
263:
I'm not saying it's not up for discussion. Going to try to initiate that at MUSTARD. –
643:
576:
489:
476:
436:
379:
371:
273:
255:
216:
179:
144:
140:
113:
112:. I look forward to your comments and suggestions and thank you Zzzzz for the nom. --
79:
65:
108:, written by the same team and I believe to the same standard. The article has been
535:
467:
130:
579:. This could also include info on any products that weren't produced by the band.
428:
178:
Thank you, and I hope these points have been cleared up to your satisfaction. --
626:
499:
450:
366:
264:
195:
93:
42:
488:, so we can now see it under a new name and without the fair use images. --
375:
album, released by
Drummond & Cauty on their KLF Communications label.
449:
Well written and comprehensive. No way that this could be improved upon.
603:
565:
557:
423:. The only problem with that is that 3 of the Drummond/Cauty releases (
392:
337:
105:
38:
143:. Will look at the refs and footnotes and report back on that also. --
365:
Other KLF Communications releases. The work of The KLF spinoff band
139:
article does not purport to cover their celluloid work, which is in
498:
but The KLF having issues over kopyright? Don't make me laugh....
162:
Any images higher than 300x300 have been downsized and reuploaded.
642:
one to be listed as a GA, too. Thanks again for your comments. --
575:
could be a short stand-alone article on the record label. See
564:). You might expect to find this material as sections within
612:
So, if we remove the top and bottom, could a stand-alone
606:
that listed just the important/significant collaborators.
625:
your devotion to the topic is quite remarkable. Cheers,
586:) or it could be a lists of releases by the band (See
348:
because they are general references for the list data.
427:, an at best semi-official release; and the post-KLF
170:
and therefore down to editor discretion at this time.
552:, it is an article that contains two quite separate
602:Perhaps you could add a short section/paragraph to
272:Yes, indeed, and thank you for the heads up. --
104:(as main author). This is a companion piece to
400:Alternatively, we could split it back out to
8:
228:the article (removing the images) to get it
207:the article (removing the images) to get it
152:OK, I've attended to the points as follows:
419:, which might be a better description than
54:lead me to propose renaming the article
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates
568:- but that article is too big already.
407:Refs/footnotes/see also/external link
224:"My problem is this: I don't want to
7:
532:KLF communications and publications
28:
649:P.S. You don't need to show me
484:I've also renamed the article
435:) were on different labels. --
156:cases I myself am the scanner.
1:
461:The album cover guideline at
159:Fair use rationales provided.
425:Waiting For The Rights of Mu
333:Thank you for your comments.
647:12:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
633:11:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
539:10:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
503:13:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
493:10:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
480:10:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
471:01:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
454:21:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
440:12:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
413:We could call the article "
329:12:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
305:13:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
277:15:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
268:15:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
259:13:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
249:12:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
220:11:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
199:04:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
183:12:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
148:13:36, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
134:13:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
117:12:09, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
97:12:03, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
83:10:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
69:12:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
60:Please comment below or at
50:The points raised below by
672:
344:aren't referred to in the
651:Apple Records discography
584:Apple Records discography
62:Talk:The KLF discography
588:The Beatles discography
548:. This isn't really a
45:12:03, 13 August 2006
571:The first section of
433:Fuck the Millennium
421:The KLF discography
32:The KLF discography
22:The KLF discography
596:KLF Communications
573:KLF Communications
528:KLF communications
524:KLF Communications
486:KLF Communications
415:KLF Communications
56:KLF Communications
402:The KLF personnel
388:Chart performance
663:
319:
239:
671:
670:
666:
665:
664:
662:
661:
660:
614:KLF discography
592:KLF discography
550:standalone-list
520:Factory Records
516:KLF discography
317:
237:
165:Thanks for the
35:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
669:
667:
659:
658:
657:
656:
655:
654:
622:
618:
610:
607:
599:
580:
554:embedded lists
542:
541:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
482:
456:
444:
443:
442:
410:
409:
408:
405:
389:
386:
383:
376:
369:, and Cauty's
363:
359:
349:
334:
307:
295:
294:
293:
292:
291:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
282:
281:
280:
279:
176:
175:
174:
171:
163:
160:
157:
119:
99:
34:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
668:
652:
648:
645:
641:
636:
635:
634:
631:
628:
623:
619:
615:
611:
608:
605:
600:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
578:
577:Apple Records
574:
570:
569:
567:
563:
562:The KLF Vol 2
559:
555:
551:
547:
544:
543:
540:
537:
533:
529:
525:
521:
517:
513:
510:
504:
501:
496:
495:
494:
491:
487:
483:
481:
478:
474:
473:
472:
469:
464:
460:
457:
455:
452:
448:
445:
441:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
416:
411:
406:
403:
398:
394:
390:
387:
384:
381:
380:The KLF films
377:
374:
373:
368:
364:
360:
357:
353:
352:
350:
347:
343:
339:
335:
332:
331:
330:
327:
323:
320:
315:
311:
308:
306:
303:
299:
296:
278:
275:
271:
270:
269:
266:
262:
261:
260:
257:
252:
251:
250:
247:
243:
240:
235:
231:
227:
223:
222:
221:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
201:
200:
197:
193:
190:There's also
189:
186:
185:
184:
181:
177:
172:
168:
164:
161:
158:
154:
153:
151:
150:
149:
146:
142:
141:The KLF films
137:
136:
135:
132:
128:
123:
120:
118:
115:
111:
110:peer reviewed
107:
103:
100:
98:
95:
91:
88:
87:
86:
85:
84:
81:
77:
72:
71:
70:
67:
63:
59:
57:
53:
46:
44:
40:
33:
30:
23:
19:
639:
545:
511:
458:
446:
424:
412:
370:
355:
345:
341:
309:
297:
229:
225:
208:
204:
187:
121:
101:
92:as nomintor
89:
75:
74:
73:
49:
48:
47:
36:
429:K Cera Cera
302:Wickethewok
463:WP:MUSTARD
395:underwent
367:Disco 2000
356:standalone
342:references
192:WP:MUSTARD
52:Rune.welsh
534:. cheers
346:footnotes
226:downgrade
205:downgrade
644:kingboyk
598:article.
490:kingboyk
477:kingboyk
437:kingboyk
274:kingboyk
256:kingboyk
230:promoted
217:kingboyk
209:promoted
180:kingboyk
145:kingboyk
114:kingboyk
80:kingboyk
66:kingboyk
20: |
604:The KLF
566:The KLF
558:The KLF
536:Drstuey
512:support
468:Tuf-Kat
459:Comment
447:Support
393:The KLF
338:The KLF
298:Support
188:Comment
167:WP:FUIL
127:WP:FUIL
106:The KLF
102:Support
90:Support
39:The KLF
560:(i.e.
546:Oppose
340:. The
310:Oppose
213:WP:KLF
131:Renata
122:Oppose
627:Colin
500:Me677
451:Me677
372:Space
362:list.
322:Welsh
265:Unint
242:Welsh
196:Unint
94:Zzzzz
43:Zzzzz
16:<
640:only
431:and
326:ταλκ
246:ταλκ
64:. --
530:or
397:FAC
314:Run
234:Run
324:|
244:|
78:--
629:°
417:"
404:.
382:.
318:e
238:e
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.