Talk:Mylo Xyloto

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

Alternative music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Coldplay High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Coldplay, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Coldplay 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.ColdplayWikipedia:WikiProject ColdplayTemplate:WikiProject ColdplayColdplay articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Electronic music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Coldplay are a BRITISH band, not English

Coldplay are a British band and not an English band. The bass player for the band is from Scotland. Please change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LemonStay (talk • contribs) 17:16, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be deleted

This article should be deleted. It has few facts and the album is too early in develpoment for a Wikipedia page. Even the Oracle has said most of this info isn't true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starman15317 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How has this article not been blown away yet? The listing of LP5 should be removed from the Coldplay info box at the bottom of their pages as well.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Scotty insano (talk • contribs) 16:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Summerbrain

I belive that the band Summerbrain (you wouldn't of heard of them) were going to call the last track on their first album "The End of the Beginning" and the first track on their last album "The Beginning of the End", but after seeing this album tracklist, they have cancelled it. --77.99.231.37 (talk) 15:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"LP5"

So, anyone care to provide a reliable source for this album officially being titled LP5? A quick Google search provides no such results. Some other searches, however, inform me that Coldplay are ripping off the title from Radiohead, Massive Attack, the Sugababes and themselves. Funny how all these albums (you could call them an LP for short) are named for where they numerically fit in an artist's discography. But wait, it turns out that the Sugababes' LP7 and Coldplay's LP4 are actually called Sweet 7 and Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends respectively. Turns out these aren't actually titles but are instead fanmade nicknames used before the actual title is announced. With that in mind, I will be moving this article back to Coldplay's fifth studio album in a few days' time, unless anyone has any valid objections. -- I need a name (talk) 15:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LP5 refers to it being their 5th album. It's a temperary name. --76.120.189.73 (talk) 01:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's going to be called Major Minus, Chris said it would start with an M and it would be 2 words, they played a new song called Major Minus at Rock Am Ring. So I think it's safe to say this will be te title of the album, for now at least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.82.1.101 (talk) 08:54, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, no. That's entirely speculation on your part. Reverted. -- I need a name (talk) 08:57, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every Teardrop Is a Waterfall should have a seperate article

It has history, the song title was reported several times in the past. On top of this, there has already been a good deal of coverage and speculation on it in different articles. Plus it has artwork. Is that good enough for it to merit a seperate article? Cross Pollination (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There ought to be a section on the viral campaign behind this album

The band have been posting cryptic clues surrounding this album for months, stuff which includes videos, posts on twitter and the likes. I'm proposing a marketing section on the album which provides screenshots of said videos and information on the teasers that Coldplay have been releasing to promote the album, as well as the media coverage it's had from publications such as NME. What does everyone think to that? I'd be willing to help out with this section as much as possible, but I feel like it's all really notable stuff regarding the album and deserves to be on here. Cross Pollination (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

I will do what I can when I can, but where does one begin with a sentence such as this? "The new matierial were eventually gabbered by postponing dates...". Any clues will be much appreciated. Stephenjh (talk) 14:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Begins with an M, two words - so is it?

If the title begins with an M and is two words, might it be Major Minus which they've started doing live?--92.237.88.53 (talk) 18:05, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A source says maybe it is "Mylo Xyloto" -> "Begins with an M", "two words", "hard to spell". Kenrick Talk 14:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article is empty and meaningless

This article does not belong in Wikipedia. The poor English, which looks like the output of an automatic translator, is the least of its problems. Coldplay's fifth album does not yet exist, nobody outside the band knows anything worth mentioning about it, so this is just a huge amount of verbose and empty speculation. See WP:CBALL: Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumours. I'm no deletionist, but I think this article should be deleted. Rubywine (talk) 01:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cover art

The cover itself is taken from band's official site, but in fact image contains two covers. The first is the main cover. As one can notice, the second one is just a kind of box packaging with two letters cut out. You can see the main cover through it. So I guess the first is the real cover and the second may be for deluxe editions. --Floydgeo (talk) 13:54, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The second cover comes with the regular CD release. Therefore, owners of the CD can choose which cover to put in front. Also, the "alternate cover" image in this article seems identical to the main cover. The "MX" (over gray background) cover should be given as an 'alternate cover' instead. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.208.113.103 (talk) 20:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "MX" cover could be named as the 'alternate cover', but NOT the as the deluxe edition artwork. As it is not. --TingyueWains (Talk) 15:19, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cover art resize

On Coldplay's official website I found an extra image link which has a much bigger image of the 'Mylo Xyloto' cover art. I don't know if this will make the article image bigger, but I just thought that having this bigger image will make the article better. I am putting this on the discussion page because I am new to this and I have no idea how to change the article image. The link is http://www.coldplay.com/uploads/mx1600.jpg. Having a bigger picture is sometimes better, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TurboToaster4 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, using larger image may violate the guideline (WP:F) for non-free image (for example album cover) Kenrick Talk 14:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First Official Single?

According to MTV, the first official single is Paradise, not Every Teardrop. "After releasing a color-splashed video for the dance-y rock tune "Every Teardrop Is a Waterfall," the band will follow with the first official single, "Paradise," due out on September 12." --200.121.143.28 (talk) 02:33, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Just because "Teardrop" will be on the album doesn't mean it is a single from it (like with "Dance wiv Me" on Ready for the Weekend) or even a greatest hits album--TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 18:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 66.61.57.212, 20 August 2011

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

They spelled "later" wrong. =]

66.61.57.212 (talk) 18:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: "Latter" is also a word and is used properly in the context of the article. Topher385 (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be locked

Keeps getting edited without references, is somewhat poorly written. Many upcoming major releases have been locked in the past and this is probably the biggest music release this year as far as rock music goes. Cross Pollination (talk) 13:12, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

There is absolutely no relevance in posting metacritic score at this moment in time. Many reviews have yet to come in for this record. The Independent review is far too short to be a featured rating as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LemonStay (talk • contribs) 17:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plagarism Accusation Edit

"was digitally released in 2008 in American via iTunes, CDbaby, Amazon"

It should be release in America not American. Also, wouldn't it make more sense to say it was released in America in 2008 and not the other way around? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttarrier (talk • contribs) 12:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bias Reception Article

Opening with the statement "...received mixed reviews by critics", then only giving examples of positive reviews is about as bias as this kind of thing gets. If opinions are so mixed (which they are), the article should reflect all angles - not just the most glowing ones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.61.83 (talk) 07:51, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Performance

Why does someone keep removing the fact that their album hit the no.1 spot in all 35 iTunes album charts? I can't reference this to the iTunes page because the charts always change but I realised when they first released it and the band declared it on their own official twitter page on October 24th. I don't think this should be overlooked because I think it's quite a huge achievement. I will keep putting it back in everyday with the twitter reference until someone gives me a good reason not to include it. And whoever it is that keeps deleting it, stop because it's annoying, or give a reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brett north (talk • contribs) 14:10, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Number One in Argentina

http://adminlic.capif.org.ar/sis_resultados_rankings_web.aspx (Ranking semanal pop)--Luisrafael7 (talk) 17:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Influenced by The Wire

The quote about the album being influenced by The Wire is taken out of context from an interview done more than two years before the album was released. The article quotes chris martin as implying the album would be stripped back and raw and have a story like the Wire, not be based on or influenced by the wire.

FunkyJhero (talk) 22:04, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from , 2 November 2011

For purposes of balance, please could you add in some of the more positive reviews/star-ratings - there's currently nothing over 7 out of 10 / 3.5 out of 5. Please add some/all of the major publications below who all scored the album higher.

Q Magazine - 5 star http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/3804/Coldplay-Mylo-Xyloto.aspx Irish Times - 4 star http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/theticket/2011/1021/1224306152769.html Mojo - 4 star http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/3804/Coldplay-Mylo-Xyloto.aspx London Evening Standard - 4 star http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/music/article-24000787-cds-of-the-week-coldplay-tom-waits-and-justice.do Daily Telegraph - 4 star http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/cdreviews/8838871/Coldplay-Mylo-Xyloto-CD-review.html The Fly - 4 star http://www.the-fly.co.uk/words/reviews/album-reviews/10937/album-review:-coldplay Clash - 8/10 http://www.clashmusic.com/reviews/coldplay-mylo-xyloto

Thanks.

86.19.202.158 (talk) 10:14, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, see [1] - others may discuss it here; WP:BRD. Chzz ► 01:07, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ref error

Citation 63 on the current revision of the page has an error. —danhash (talk) 00:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Kenrick Talk 12:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Big problem

the cerfitications say sales however if you see List of music recording certifications most of figures in countries are still based on shipments. shipments are way different then sales - you can't say its sales that is false information 201.229.28.101 (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Review from Rolling Stone Brasil

A few days ago, I added a paragraph with the review from the Brazilian issue of Rolling Stone. However, an editor and a couple of IPs have been constantly removing it. Since the edit war is taking us to nowhere, I'm bringing the discussion here. They said the review is "unnecessary" and "not notable". Since it is a local version of one of the most important music publications of the world, I think the second reason is simply incorrect. As for the first, as long as I know, there is no limit for reviews. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I shouldn't feel discouraged to add this one just because there are already other reviews at the section. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 21:38, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, since nobody seems to have a problem with that, I'm adding that content back. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 17:08, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is already a Rolling Stone review in the section... and why a version from Brazil above all other international versions? There isn't a limit on the amount of review that can go in the prose, but the section is already jam packed with 2 large paragraphs of reviews already, why do we need another review? Common sense says to remove this one, since it is much less notable than the other reviews and there is already a Rolling Stone review cited... Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 21:10, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The nationality of the source is not really relevant, as long as it is reliable and the information is unable to be supported by English-language sources (per WP:IRS, WP:NOENG and MOS:ALBUM). Only British sources would be acceptable if it was a matter of countries. It is not just another review, it is adding a new opinion to the section (so far, it is the only one classifying the album as the worst ever released by Coldplay). I just want someone to point out a specific guideline or rule stating exactly why shouldn't I add that link. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 02:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you want to add a new opinion to the section, but really, any review not already in the article is going to offer a new opinion. We could continue adding reviews until we completely run out of them, but at some point, you have to say "Enough is enough" and that the prose adquately covers the album and how it was received. I just don't see why we need a 3rd paragraph on reviews, and a 2nd review from Rolling Stone. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:35, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see your point. In that case, I think only consensus will put an end to this discussion, but we need more input for that. I agree to remove the content if more users also oppose to it. Maybe if I raise this discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums more editors will have a say in the matter. Victão Lopes ^{I hear you...} 17:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to have that on the article, it's not notable at all and as said before there's alredy another Rolling Stone review. Rafa42 (talk • contributions) 22:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The only real problem I see is that it is a foreign language source. However, if the album provides a minority viewpoint that is not found anywhere else, I think that might warrant inclusion.--¿3family6 _contribs 22:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible meanings for the name Mylo Xyloto

I was messing about on the internet, and ended up looking up greek phrases, come to find out that "timber mill" comes out as "μύλος ξυλείας" or "mýlos xyleías" (Might not be conjugated though). What are your findings and thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.8.65 (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]