Talk:Coldplay/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

Comment - Chris Martins marriage

Someone needs to edit the first paragraph of the article. It needs to be cleaned up

Is it really necessary to have Chris Martins marriage information at Coldplay's page? Since the vocalist has his own page, I this it would be better to move information there. What do you think?

I'm going to add more sections to the Parachutes era... to differentiate it from the pre-Parachutes era. --Madchester 18:06, 2005 Mar 23 (UTC)

Comment - ABC-Yellow promo

I removed the bit on the ABC-Yellow promo cuz

A) It's covered separately in the Yellow page

B) It's already covered in the text: "The band allows their music to be used in film, television, and promotional spots such as the movie trailer to Peter Pan. However, Coldplay has been adamant against their use in actual product endorsement." --Madchester 17:27, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)

Comment - new pic of Coldplay

How about a new pic of Coldplay on the frontpage, since some of them have cut or grown their hair? http://www.seattlewireless.net/images/uploaded/9118.1115377773.jpg for example, or maybe someone has a better one :) - Jurgen

You could just replace the current image, with the one with the boys on the cover of Inside Entertainment at the bottom of the page... or any other pic that Wikipedia allows I guess. --Madchester 13:01, 2005 May 6 (UTC)
Are pictures allowed that come from the seattlewireless server for example? I found this pic http://www.coldplay.de/coldplay5.jpg and I want to resize it and then upload it to that server... Is that allowed? - Jurgen
I updated the photo with the one u provided; I've seen in a lot of promotional material, and labelled it as such. --Madchester 03:58, 2005 May 10 (UTC)

Comment - plagiarizing

hey, i found a website that is plagiarizing from this article

http://www.coldplaying.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=566&page=1

Will Champion

Will Champion (born 31 July 1978) is the drummer of the band Coldplay.

Champion was born in Southampton, Hampshire, United Kingdom where his father, Timothy Champion, is professor of archaeology at the University of Southampton. As a youth, his musical influences included Tom Waits and traditional Irish folk music. He grew up playing guitar, but also had experience on the piano, bass, and tin whistle. Before joining Coldplay, he performed in a band called Fat Hamster.

For More information please see Will Champion

Phil Harvey

I believe Phil's not the band's manager anymore. He's still good mates with the band, however... --Madchester 11:50, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)


Sales figures and discography layout

How should we lay out the discography for chart figures? Do we actually need the placings for AUS and CAN, cuz they add to much clutter the essential information in the discography. Look at the discography for bands like Radiohead, U2, and Muse and you can see that the contributors aren't simply stuffing as much info as they can into the article. It's informative and compact, and it's fat has been trimmed off.

I would recommend including the verified and referenced AUS and CAN chart figures into the infoboxes of the respective albums, singles and EPs to make the information on the Coldplay article more presentable.

Also should we be putting the months of release, or full date of release for singles and EPs as well?

Add your personal input and please discuss before making any further changes. We should come to a group consensus so that the discography is more usable and presentable for readers. --Madchester 21:50, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)

Comment - discography

Please refrain from making ANY edits to the discography right now. We need to come to a consensus on what should and shouldn't be included in this section, regarding charting numbers, countries to include, record labels, etc. There's simply too much clutter in the article and it makes the section a poor read at the moment. --Madchester 20:27, 2005 Jun 26 (UTC)

Comment - CAN adn AUS charting positions

While I hate to make changes unilaterally, I moved all the CAN adn AUS charting positions to their respective singles infoboxes. There was simply too much information being presented in the discography, and it was making it completely unpresentable/unreadable.

I've asked for feedback numerous times, so plz give any comments/suggestions on the changes before proceeding any further. --Madchester June 28, 2005 20:08 (UTC)

pictures allowed?

Are any of these pictures allowed? http://notontelevision.com/coldplay/coldplay%20hartford%20concert%20pit%20ticket%20view%2008%2004%202005%201st%20American%20Show%20of%20tour/index.html

Comment - Canadian and Australian positions

I readded the Canadian and Australian positions. Four positions from around the world don't make an article look cluttered. And in case you did not know, these four countries are the most major of the musical markets (with Japan in fifth). Remember, this is an encyclopedia. If someone was looking for these positions but they weren't displayed because of "cluttered-ness", then they'd find that ridiculous. I know I most certainly would. --Winnermario 20:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Refer to articles like Kylie Minogue or Oasis to see the amt. of clutter that something as simple as album positions can take up. Contrast that with U2's discography or RHCP who have discographies that are clean, clear, and to the point. Both these bands have a large international audience, but there's no need to list specific album positions for each country outside the Big Two.
And an encyclopedia doesn't need to contain all information. I'm looking at the Ticketmaster article, and it doesn't give me actual concert listings... likewise, the Caesar salad article only contains the ingredients, not the actual instructions on how to make a salad. An encylopedia like Wikipedia simply needs to contain the most important points on a subject - specific details can be directed through the external links. For example, the Caesar salad article contains external links on several recipes. Likewise, the Coldplay article doesn't need to include every detail; specifics like non US, UK album positions can be externally linked to a known resource like Billboard or the band's official site. --Madchester 21:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
I don't think that Canada and Australia have that much of a prominence as Japan on the music industry has a whole, at least how you, Winnermario, have stated. I believe Japan has the 2nd largest market, although maybe not for these types of recordings. In any case, would a seperate article containing chart info from the main countries, like USA, UK, Japan, Canada, Sweden, Portugal, New Zealand, be of interest to you (or anyone) while also leaving the US and UK on the main article? On the other hand, I should add that leaving the Canadian and Australian positions on the main article for Coldplay does not clutter it. Drdr1989 00:13, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

"(Clocks), the group's biggest single to date"

To any other editors, make sure that this comment by a certain user doesn't slip through again. Not only is it against Wikipedia's POV policy, but it is also not verifiable as a fact. Looking at sales positions, you can easily argue that Yellow was more if not as popular as Clocks at that point of the band's history. The Scientist charted moderately, but it was easily the crowd favorite during the A Rush of Blood To The Head tour. Simply stating the popular singles from AROBTTH is sufficent enough, there's no point in making a questionable and opinionated claim. --Madchester 22:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Somehow I knew this would be reverted... In light of what you said I guess it makes no difference really if the "claim" is put on or off. I suppose if you look at all charts, fan reaction, and how successful it did in other countries than the U.S. anyone can make a debate as to which song was the biggest (and no it was not me who originally made that claim). Mine still uses facts based on its positions and length (weeks on) on several of the biggest charts in the U.S. (some not shown) and the fact that they picked up the most prestigious honor - Record Of The Year - at the 2003 Grammies. Also, don't forget that the single "Yellow", unlike "Clocks" was released as an EP before Parachutes which I think "boosted" its position in the U.K. - correct me if I'm wrong. Drdr1989 02:35, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
"biggest single to date" is very ambiguous b/c it is both misleading and unverifiable. You can evaluate that claim with so many different criteria: critical response, number of awards earned, airplay, hits on Google, use in movies or television, fan polls, crowd response at concerts, and good old sales position or figures. By what criteria is that claim being made? When the result isn't universally acknowleged, we really shouldn't make comments indicating what our personal biases perceive to be the "biggest single" or what not. --Madchester 14:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
<<By what criteria is that claim being made?>> Quantifiable, yet prestigious factors (charts, no. of movies involved, awards, Google/ Yahoo! hits) more than qualitative (fan reaction or, ummm, personal opinion). <<When the result isn't universally acknowleged, we really shouldn't make comments indicating what our personal biases perceive to be the "biggest single" or what not.>> This is correct. Be careful, though, how you define "universally acknowleged". When a song makes a big enough dent successwise in some parts of the "universe" that should be considered "successful" throughout the "universe" generally even if other parts if it aren't acknowledged. Now THAT's a fact. ;) I still believe that "Clocks" did have the biggest "dent" out of all of Coldplay's hits, but my survival in this universe does not depend on putting this fact on the article, so...again...leave it off. Drdr1989 16:02, 15 September 2005 (UTC)


"post-Britpop" vs. Brit Rock

post-Britpop or second wave Britpop is the new British music movement of the past 5 yrs or so. The original Britpop phase ended around 97 or 98.

The term is commonly used in the press to describe bands like Coldplay, Keane, Franz Ferdinand), etc.

I've heard of the term "Britrock", but it's a very generic term that has never been well defined like the two phases of the Britpop movement. And it's never really entered the mainstream.

--Madchester 03:03, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

These are terms that journalists use. The rest of us call it music. Adambisset 14:22, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Fan site links

How about not deleting links to other fan sites? There shouldn't be a monopoly on Coldplay sites. By not listing other fan sites you are not giving the whole story.

There's already links to four separate fan sites, that have been referenced in the article. Note that Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files; there shouldn't be links that are not relevant to the article's content
Both you (66.213.13.50) and another IP address (68.76.102.121) have been inserting links to Coldplay News, a site that has been online for less than a week (since November 30). Wikipedia doesn't advocate the insertion of external link spamming to promote your personal websites or endevaours. Thanks.--Madchester 22:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Why not more? Why limit yourself? It is relevant to this topic.

Once again, Wikipedia's not a repository for external links, and it's not free webspace to advertise personal websites, especially one's that have only been online for less than a week. --Madchester 01:19, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
1) I understand your intention to get your site "out there", but some people are under the illusion that Wikipedia is the ultimate source for site promotion. While a site could be posted here if it adds enough to the article, there are so many "fancruft" sites on the internet, and potentially thousand other Coldplay sites in particular. Remember how back in the day e-mail was originally used to promote stuff? Then it just got out of hand and became denoted as spam? Well potentially if we just let promoters just add their sites here as they please, wikipedia is going to be an excessive source of "linkspam". So we're trying to nip it in the bud in preventing a overflow of these sites by trying to prevent an existence of them to begin with, just adding sites in the manner above. 2) Repeatedly adding your site after it has been taken off four times just makes you look like a spammer rather than someone who is trying to offer some unique sources for Coldplay fans to visit. If you really want to add your site here, instead of just adding your link, make a case for it here, and then maybe someone else may put on. Drdr1989 19:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)


"Til Kingdom Come" and "Neighborhood #4"

I'm putting this message near the bottom because it is not extremely important. However, has anyone heard Coldplay's "Til Kingdom Come" and The Arcade Fires' "Neighborhood #4 (7 Kettles)"? These two songs seem awkwardly similar in style and maybe if someone else has noticed, we should mention it?? --Anthony5429 02:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm almost positive that Coldplay wrote that song for the Arcade Fire and gave it to them. I think it'd be more important putting it on the Arcade Fire page?--Mondayrocks 17:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Come on, they're both folk songs... that's the only similarity. With this policy we should mention things like that for all folk songs, blues songs, rock'n'roll songs, classical pieces and so on. --Joanberenguer 13:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

although im a big fan of coldplay, a lot of their songs are very similar...comparing X&Y to rush of blood, its in a very similar format. Square One vs. In my Place, Fix you vs. Amsterdam, daylight vs. twisted logic, warning sign vs. see you soon and most importantly.... CLOCKS VS. SPEED OF SOUND!!!! its exactly the same chord progression but in a different key. i mean, come on, its not like they're the foo fighters (who can get away with it cause they're not nearly as popular). at least they're on different albums...

Is/Are

Being British, Coldplay 'is' grates with me. I know on Wikipedia we are not pedantic about the different versions of English, but it would seem more natural that the British English 'Coldplay are' was used as they are all British. Bevo74 08:09, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Wikipedia's policy is that since this is a British topic, the article should be in British English. Feel free to edit away.--Esprit15d 17:01, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Being British as well as literate, I would propose that the use of is/are is dependent upon the structure of the sentence--whether or not the group is being referred to as a single unit, or collectively. For example, it is grammatically correct to say 'Coldplay is the greatest band ever, in my opinion'; conversely, it would be more correct to state that 'Coldplay are in the studio once again'. This is/are confusion is common, and grates with pedants on both sides of the pond. Others choose to just get on with reading the damned sentence and cope.  :-)

I personally don't get the American thing here. Which sentence makes more sense?

a) Coldplay? I saw them play the other day. OR b) Coldplay? I saw it play the other day.

Surely this is a no-brainer? Vanky 15:26, 18 February 2006 (UTC)


Of couse it's a no-brainer.. I saw the band the other day. --Madchester 19:21, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

My favorite band are Coldplay? No. --Macarion 00:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That's irrelevant, seeing as 'Coldplay' is the object there, not the subject. "Coldplay are my favourite band" would certainly be acceptable and, seeing as I'm a Brit, preferable to "Coldplay is my favourite band" for me. Well quite 20:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Tin whistle

An anonymous IP user added a line to Tin whistle under "well-known performers" indicating that the drummer from Coldplay also plays tin whistle. While this is true and he's certainly well-known, I can't find any listing indicating that Coldplay (or anyone else, for that matter) has actually recorded him playing the instrument, so I reverted the change. However, I'm (cough) hardly an expert on the band, so if someone can correct me I'll put it back. Thanks! --Craig Stuntz 14:19, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

The fact is the before becoming the band's drummer, Champion played 4 or 5 other instruments. He didn't take up drumming before joining the band. --Madchester 19:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Er, right; that's obvious from the article. I was asking if Coldplay has recorded him playing the tin whistle. My guess is no, but I wanted to be sure. --Craig Stuntz 19:26, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Make Trade Fair user template

Just a heads up; I've created a Make Trade Fair userbox template. (Template:User Make Trade Fair)

I've also created one for the Make Poverty History/ONE Campaign. (User:1ne/Userboxes/User MPH-ONE).

Enjoy!

--Madchester 22:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


"See also"

I think the two "see also" sections make the page look ugly, because why not just have "influences listed in order" and "similar artists" to become titles instead? Well, I will change it to show everyone what I mean, because I really think it will be a lot better, and show a good example for non-member users. Darkroom Danny 09:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Kraftwerk

I have to start by saying that I find Coldplay unutterably dull (hence don't have much of a stake in this article), but have to respond to another editor's comment that Coldplay were "In no way influenced by Kraftwerk, but merely sampled them". Its clear to me that 'Speak' hasn't sampled 'Computer Love', its pinched the synthesiser hook and played it on a guitar (I always wondered why against my better instincts I actually liked 'Speak', it wasn't til it was pointed out to me that it uses the riff from Computer Love, which I've always liked, that i realised why). Also i'm sure I saw Chris martin on telly on the Jonathon Ross show or suchlike acknowledging that he 'borrowed' the riff from Computer Love, and that he had Kraftwerk's permission to do so. So to me that counts as 'influenced by' (you can't get much more 'influenced' than pinching someone elses tune note for note...) quercus robur 23:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Why do you keep calling it "Speak"? It's "Talk." Macarion 00:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Heh heh... Macarion didn't actually address the issue but nitpicked. Kudos Macarion!

Moving hoax?

I have to question why the Grauniard April fools day hoax section was moved to the Chris Martin page as the "Talk to David" song was allegedly the product of the whole band, not just CM. The whole hoax thing should at least be acknowledged in the main Coldpaly article, even if the detail belongs on the CM page, IMHO quercus robur 23:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

'Madchester' is persistently removing the gfollowing text from the article;
On April 1 2006 the UK Guardian journalist "Olaf Priol" claimed that Chris Martin had decided to publicly support the UK Conservative party leader David Cameron due to his disillusionment with current New Labour prime minister Tony Blair [1], even going so far as to produce a fake song, "Talk to David", that could be downloaded via the Guardian website [2]. despite being an obvious hoax, the Labour Party's Media Monitoring Unit were concerned enough to circulate the story throughout "most of the government" [3].
Apparently its not 'significant', however, this made page three of one of biggest newspapers in the UK as well as a by-line on the front page, hence I feel it is appropriate for inclusion. However I was accused by Madchester of being a 'vandal' when I questioned his edits. I would appreciate a nuetral party deciding whether the April Fools hoax is worthy of inclusion, I would also appreciate an apology from Madchester for his alegations of 'vandalism'. quercus robur 16:14, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Let's examine the Coldplay article:

  • Details on Coldplay's contribution to Live 8: 1 sentence, less than 10 words.
  • Details on an April Fool's hoax, due to an author name-dropping Chris Martin: 1 paragragh (shown above)

Why should the Coldplay article devote an entire paragraph to some one-off April Fool's joke when,

  • A) It only refers to one member of the band
  • B) Chris Martin's involvement is in name only. The author could have chosen any other artist (Thom Yorke, Robbie Williams, Madonna, etc.) and the hoax would still have been published.

Just because a story has been published in "one of the biggest newspapers in the UK" doesn't justify its inclusion in Wikipedia. There are regular front page newspaper articles on lottery winners, but these persons are generally non-notable, per WP:BIO. While this hoax is verifiable, it does not warrant its inclusion in Wikipedia, per WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and WP:Importance.

--Madchester 00:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


Well I disagree. It wasn't some tabloid story about 'a lottery winner' but the front page of a respected broadsheet about Chris Martin who is lead singer of Coldplay, not about Thom Yorke or whoever, the joke being of course Chris Martins leanings towards leftist liberal political causes such as Make Trade Fair etc. The hoaxers went so far as to whip up a fake song attributed to Coldplay, that they put online, and which really put the wind up New Labour's spin machine, to the extent that a briefing alerting government ministers to the story was circulated. Thus its not 'an indiscriminate item of information', but places Coldplay within a cultural context, complete with external reference links to the song and newspaper articles in question. Currently however I note that all mention of the hoax has been erradicated apart from in the external links section.
As there is obviously a dispute here as to whether this item should be included, it should be thrown open for consensus to decide, not for you to simply revert my contributions in such a high handed manner. I suggest this matter be thrown open to consesus and the results be respected by both parties.
More seriously though, you have placed a 'vandalism' notice on my talk page which is totally out of order. You have not addressed this matter, and I expect you to do so by publically retracting your comments regarding my being a 'vandal' and inserting 'nonsense' into articles. quercus robur 16:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
I don't have any strong opinions on whether the hoax is all that notable (and, in fact, I've heard very little of Coldplay's music), but I do have to agree that the controversial edits weren't vandalism and didn't have to be announced via a test template. Good-faith efforts to improve the encyclopedia aren't vandalism, even if people disagree. --Elkman - (talk) 16:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Coldplay/Archive_1&oldid=1219089224"