Talk:Simple Plan (album)

Canada: Music Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

Albums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Release Dates[edit]

I found a release date for Australia and its Febuary 9th 2008 and it also has the single release date as January 12th 2008 i rang warner music group and that is what they are saying

http://www.heraldsunhit.com.au/product/when_im_gone_1668610_173082.html (218.215.3.77 (talk) 00:56, 19 December 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

That's for the physical copy of When I'm Gone. That is not the album. — Ian Lee (Talk) 02:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yeah i now January 12th is the physical copy of the single. But Febuary 9th is the album release date in Australia. I rang the record company here in Australia and they confirmed that Febuary 9th was the albums release date. That article also did contain the albums release date as Febuary 2nd but that is incorrect because on the record company scheudle they have it as the 9th.(218.215.3.77 (talk) 04:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Well in that case, that is original research. — Ian Lee (Talk) 22:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OR and possibly a bit unreliable, to boot. I would suggest sticking with the published article until we have a published correction, if we do.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey i have seen signs in stores advertising Febuary 2nd 2008 for the album release date so im going to add it to the page Secret Angel98 (talk) 11:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC) http://www.sanity.com.au/product/product.asp?sku=2103876[reply]

Would people stop putting the date it was allegedly leaked? First it is OR, second it is wrong, and third, who cares once the CD is out?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added a glaringly obvious comment to the beginning of the article to help prevent edits of that nature. — Ian Lee (Talk) 23:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the release date in Australia is February 16 2008 http://www.warnermusic.com.au/product,w_prod,7567899565AU (218.215.19.17 (talk) 10:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

here is another website confirming the 16th http://www.sanity.com.au/product/product.asp?sku=2104983 218.215.61.141 (talk) 06:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SP's official site begs to differ Blog entry w/ release dates Tombell12 (talk) 11:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

that was before it got changed to the 16th thats is what there aussie record label is saying218.215.18.240 (talk) 23:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Old Talk Page[edit]

Does anyone know how the old talk page for the Simple Plan album article could be merged with this one so there's only 1? Since the name of the page got moved it won't let me move the old one to this address. ╦ﺇ₥₥€Ԋ(^talk/_contribs) 20:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Your Love Is a Lie" or "Love Is a Lie"[edit]

First of all, I don't see any sources for the latter. And secondly, how is it unreliable if the band frontman said it himself? It couldn't get anymore reliable than that. Tim meh ^contribs 04:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also on the official Invasion Crew website, they name it the first way. Tim meh ^contribs 04:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This magazine is what I'm reffering to. It's new, and it is much more likely that the name was changed, then they got it wrong. — Ian Lee (Talk) 22:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's also a possibility that the magazine just got the track listing from AP.net since that's the first place it was posted. I would go with the official one, especially since its named with the "Your" in a post from just yesterday. And if the name was recently changed, why did AP.net, who posted the track list months ago have it without "Your" if it was recently changed. The song is also about a girl, not about love in general. AP.net also has a recent post about the video of them playing it live and the title there is "Your Love Is a Lie [Video]. I think we should put the "your" there and leave it and change it when the album comes out if it shows differently. Tim meh ^contribs 23:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, go ahead. — Ian Lee (Talk) 01:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese bonus tracks[edit]

Can anyone confirm these as true? A source should be added for the info recently added. Tim meh ! 20:35, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got it here.[1]. And if you run translate.google.com (Japanese to English) on this page[2] it shows track 13 as Running Out of Time.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got a copy of the Japanese edition. It is 12) Running Out of Time and 13) When I'm Gone (acoustic). I can easily post a picture of it if there's any question.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lengths of tracks, inclusion of name[edit]

If we are going to go with this source [3] as the track lengths, we should go entirely with it. (by the way, those links to listen don't work, I tried it) I changed the track length for When I'm Gone from 3:42 to 3:47 as per source. Judging by the When I'm Gone article, the track length for the physical single is 3:49. I suggest we keep it at 3:47 until we get the physical CD into hot little hands, then change as needed. I'm staying clear of OR, by the way.

I am also very uncomfortable about including the full name of the person who is supposedly the subject of "I Can Wait Forever," and I've deleted a full name twice. Even if she is, unless a band member used her full name in an interview, we should not include it. A gf is not the subject of this article and her name is not notable or encyclopedic.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even though Pierre gave her full name on the thank you page of the liner notes, still don't think we need it here. It doesn't mention the song anyway.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Simple Plan album cover.jpg[edit]

Image:Simple Plan album cover.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 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 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 05:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Sp3 final.jpg[edit]

Image:Sp3 final.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 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 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 05:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Charts[edit]

Can soome one make a chart table? I tried but it didnt work for me :)

its number 5 on the Aussie Pop Itunes Chart —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.215.0.90 (talk) 11:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need a chart table if it's only on one chart in Australia? Tim meh ! 00:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There'll be other charts. CD is out only a week or two, results start dribbling in from around the World . . . look at the When I'm Gone article.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AbsolutePunk as album review source[edit]

Poe Joe says AbsolutePunk is not a good reviewer, but why doesn't he remove reviews like strangeglue and thepunksite.com? Joe, do you really think these are any different than AbsolutePunk? Also, WP:ALBUM says "Professional reviews may include only reviews written by professional music journalists or DJs, or found within any online or print publication having a (paid or volunteer) editorial and writing staff (which excludes personal blogs)." AbsolutePunk satisfies this statement. Now can you please give me a reason for removing it? Tim meh ! 01:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have the impression that Absolute Punk is a forum site where ANYONE can post their reviews. In fact, certain albums I've found on there have 3+ reviews on them. If you prove me wrong, put it back, but as far as I know, it's an independent review site. — Poe Joe _{(formerly Ian Lee)} (Talk) 23:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can post their reviews there, however the reviewer in this case is one of the staff members: AbsolutePunk#Staff. Tim meh ! 00:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then I appear to be wrong. Sorries. — Poe Joe _{(formerly Ian Lee)} (Talk) 22:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Simple Plan (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:

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) 01:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]