Talk:Different Gear, Still Speeding

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reviews[edit]

It's a bit biased. What I'm saying is, reviews are "mainly positive" as long as you only post the "mainly positive reviews" on here. I'd say it's mixed.

The UK mags that have always backed Oasis, are positive, but it's got slated on other sites and magazines

There's always going to be some site somewhere that doesn't like something. But if most reputable sources give a positive review then reviews are generally positive. Most of the media undersold Morning Glory and oversold Be Here Now when they were released so it's not like their endorsements mean much anyway. 04:49, 26 February 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.112.210.188 (talk)

Lad mags don't really count as "the most reputable sources" though. Ignoring, say, The Guardian (3/5) and showing Loaded (5/5) has nothing to do with reputability (Guardian is far more reputable than Loaded) and everything to do with making it appear the album has been reviewed more positively than it actually has. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.119.27 (talk) 17:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say "the most reputable sources", I said "most reputable sources". A single score (3/5 in your example, which is a decent score) doesn't change much. Reviews are generally positive or they're not. So which is it? 05:21, 2 March 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.112.210.188 (talk)
They are generally positive, not saying they aren't (I'm not the person who wrote the first bit, I wrote the lad mags bit). I just thought The choice of reviews were suggesting most of the reviews were mostly 4 or 5 stars, which seemed disingenuous when review aggregators like metacritic have mostly reviews in the 3 star range. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.119.27 (talk) 12:41, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The only truly negative review I've seen is The Fly, which I've several times had to put back on the article after someone has removed it. Are there any other properly negative reviews you know of?

Drowned In Sound's review was relatively negative.

I do agree that the Reviews section and the article overall needs work, but I gave up doing so until the album was released because there were edit wars going on. Now that it's out I suppose I will do it at some point. -- Smurfy 19:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Release Date[edit]

I don't know what's going on, but I'm in Australia, and it's the 11 of March now, yet I've had the album for well over a week (I think I got it on 28th of February, actually). Don't know where you're getting your info, or if the chain store SunFlower music was skirting the rules, or what, but anyway I'm suggesting the sources for the release dates might be innaccurate, and you might want to get a corroberating source. 203.45.146.36 (talk) 11:50, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Virtually every review is inflated.[edit]

NME didn't give the album 9/10, rather 7/10 (see article's own reference http://www.nme.com/reviews/beady-eye/11874) Same story with Spin. Not 9/10, but 7/10 (http://www.spin.com/reviews/beady-eye-different-gear-still-speeding-dangerbird) All Music didn't give it 5 stars, rather 4 stars and no actual review (http://www.allmusic.com/album/r2135520) Q gave it 8/10, not the same as 5 stars (http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/2610/Beady-Eye-Different-Gear-Still-Speeding.aspx) Clash didn't give it 9/10, but 7/10. (http://www.clashmusic.com/reviews/beady-eye-different-gear-still-speeding) Uncut gave it a 6/10, not 10/10 (http://www.metacritic.com/music/different-gear-still-speeding/critic-reviews) The Fly gave out two stars (flys actually), not 5. (http://www.the-fly.co.uk/words/reviews/album-reviews/9296/album-review:-beady-eye) I've never heard of TMR. Reference takes you to a small blog, where the writer gives it a 3/10 (not 9/10). Yahoo is correct with 7/10, however. As is stands this is the only review which can be checked and verified. --Joewithajay (talk) 23:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to state the same issue. Someone fix that, please. 189.170.99.76 (talk) 04:41, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced Gold Certification[edit]

As far as I have seen from the admittedly small amount of research i've been doing, the album has sold around 130k mark rather than over a million, as the apparent gold certification would suggest. I am replacing the 'gold' sales figures with referenced information, unless someone can prove otherwise.--SUFC Boy 13:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Different Gear, Still Speeding. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 00:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Different Gear, Still Speeding. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 13:59, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Different_Gear,_Still_Speeding&oldid=1211171376"