Talk:Violent Femmes (album)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Name Dropper

Okay, whoever wrote that second paragraph was totally name-dropping. There's no need to name like every band that were before the Violent Femmes, and surely no need to mention a the most popular CD from each band. Someone please fix up.

Van Morrison's Astral Weeks removed

Okay, I love Violent Femmes and I love Astral Weeks. But I'm damned if I can hear ANY connection between them. In fact, I can't see how two albums could be more different. I suppose they both have a folk influence, although it is a very different kind of folk and much significant in Violent Femmes. Don't millions of albums have a folk influence? I suppose they both have the theme of redemption through pain, although this is explored very differently and is much more significant in Astral Weeks. Doesn't pretty much every good cultural product have this theme to some extent?

So I cannot lie, Astral Weeks went bye bye, bye bye bye bye.

Requested move

"The" Violent Femmes? This page needs to be moved, since its title erroneously includes the word "the." Neither the band name nor the album name includes the word. This can be seen on the band's own website: vfemmes.com. I went to move the page, but found that there is already a page with this name, that redirects to the current one. Apparently it has already been moved in the wrong direction. If it were the band's name (Wik page) in question, I probably wouldn't make an issue out of it, since everyone pretty much says "the Violent Femmes" anyway, but for the album title, it is clear that "the" is not part of it.

Since there is a page that already exists with this name, it would need an admin to move.

Freekee 01:30, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

• Support Freekee 02:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
• Support. – Axman (☏) 07:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

I deleted Violent Femmes (album) as it had no useful history. If the move is agreed, anyone can now do it. (If not, please recreate the redirect.) Rd232 ^talk 16:47, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. As far as I can tell, we'll need admin to do that. Freekee 17:17, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

• Moved on 25 October 2005 by Freekee. —Slicing (talk) 01:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Only indie album to go platinum?

At the end of the introductory paragraph is this sentence: "To this day, Violent Femmes remains the only independently released album to attain platinum sales status."

That doesn't sound right. The Offspring's 1994 album "Smash" was released on Epitaph Records, which was an independent label at the time (and still is today if I'm not mistaken), and went multiplatinum within the first year after its release.

I won't edit or delete that sentence, though -- I'll wait for someone to come along and clarify that sentence and explain what I'm missing.

I don't think you're missing anything. I think it should be removed, unless some concrete proof can be provided. The problem is that even if the fact is true in some context (and I don't think it is), defining an indie label is difficult in itself.

Record companies and music publishers that are not under the control of the Big Four are generally considered to be independent, even if they are large corporations with complex structures. Some prefer to use the term indie label to refer to only those independent labels that adhere to an arbitrary, ill-defined criteria of corporate structure and size, and some consider an indie label to be almost any label that releases non-mainstream music, regardless of its corporate structure. [from World music market]

I think we should stick to more quantifiable statistics, perhaps relating to chart position. -Freekee 01:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

This is certanly not right. The Panic! at the Disco album as also gone platinum along with many, many other indie records.Doc Strange 12:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

As has, if you remember, Smash by The Offspring Doc Strange 15:03, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Gone Daddy Gone "proper credit"?

I'm curious about how the band gave "proper credit" to Willie Dixon's "I Just Want To Make Love To You" on their debut album. I admit I don't have the original vinyl, but I do have the compact disc, as well as the Rhino reissue, and neither mention anything except the songs being written by Gordon Gano. Does the vinyl release contain something that the compact disc releases didn't recreate? If so, I wouldn't mind seeing it, such as a scan or something. Lvillealumni 07:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Billboard 200?

The article says that it is the only album ever to go platinum without going on the billboard 200, but it also says it debuted at 171 on the billboard 200. BurningZeppelin 06:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

1982 or 1983

I notice this is listed on http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/1983_in_music in the releases list, yet clearly states this is a 1982 album. So... what year is it? --68.248.146.133 (talk) 23:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

There's a bit of dispute about that. It was recorded in summer of 1982, so most people assume it's a 1982 release. The liner notes of the 2002 special edition state it was released in January 1983, but some have called that into question. I prefer to believe those liner notes, but am tired of fighting about it. Fix it how you wish. -Freekee (talk) 00:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this album was released in 1982. The album itself says it was recorded and completed in July 1982 and released that year, Rate Your Music says it was released on November 30, 1982 (without the songs "Ugly" and "Gimme the Car", which were actually recorded in 1983) and some reviewers might say they listened to it in 1982, so apparently 1982 is the more accurate release date. (EDIT: Instead of continuing to argue over the release date, fixed up the article, noting that 1982 was the date of its original pressing and 1983 was the re-release version) OttoBR (talk) 00:56, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of that. However, I don't believe that "Ugly" and "Gimme the Car" were ever released on vinyl as part of Violent Femmes. They were added as CD bonus tracks. You seem to have used Rate Your Music as your source for that fact, but they are not acceptable, as they have no professional editorial content - user-only. -Freekee (talk) 02:32, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

If you click on the RYM link, you'll see that "Ugly" and "Gimme the Car" are not listed on the vinyl. According to liner notes on the CD's re-release, they were recorded in 1983, a year after the release of this record, so it's impossible that it could have been on the original vinyl. OttoBR (talk) 02:44, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Correct, they were not on the original vinyl. To be clear, they were never on a vinyl version of the album. But the opening sentence of the article implies that they were. Violent Femmes is the debut album by Violent Femmes, released on November 30, 1982, and again one year later (with two extra tracks "Ugly" and "Gimme the Car"). -Freekee (talk) 05:15, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't mean to be so harsh or whatever, but the release date should definitely be changed back to 1983. I've owned a copy of this CD for years, and I've always assumed the year printed on the disc (1983) is more accurate than the year (1982) printed on the back cover and booklet. It may have been recorded and completed in the summer of 1982, but it could be possible that the release date was pushed back or something. Another reason why this album could have been released in 1983 is the CD bonus tracks "Ugly" and "Gimme the Car", which were recorded that year. Also, Discogs, Allmusic (as well as their biography on that website) and Rate Your Music all agree that this album was released in 1983. 76.191.133.247 (talk) 23:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Never mind, I changed the release date back myself. 76.191.133.247 (talk) 23:31, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

If anyone cares, i have an orginal vinyl copy - and it says 1983 on it as release date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.86.191.19 (talk) 14:11, 20 April 2012 (UTC)