Talk:Washing Machine (album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Washing Machine (album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Washing Machine (album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 16, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed

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

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.

Rock music Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Album Title/Band Name

I remember hearing years ago that the band's original intention was to change their name to Washing Machine, and that the name of this album would be Sonic Youth; sort of a clever way to make that transition. I see no mention of this here or in the main Sonic Youth entry. Has this been discredited? If not, why is it not mentioned anywhere on this site? 206.15.76.98 23:20, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it's probably something they just said —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.110.223 (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Washing Machine (album)

This article had been copied to Washing Machine (album) without redirecting. I changed that article to redirect here and merged the changes that had been made. See Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page for why copy and paste moves are forbidden and Wikipedia:Wikiproject_Albums#Style for why this is the appropriate name for the article anyway. --PrologFan 22:00, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've sorted out the copy and paste move so that the article history is preserved. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 18:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, why isn't this article at Washing Machine? The disambiguation is totally unnecessary. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 19:33, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, the capitalization sets it apart, and there's no reason to have it here. I'll move it and provide a link to Washing machine. Sarge Baldy 01:58, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While I can understand the desire for the fans and groupies of this band wanting this article to command the attention that is received from a direct search hit, can you honestly believe that most typical people of the planet are thinking about some obscure musical group when searching for this phrase? No, this is an obscure topic compared with the washing machine appliance article, and this article should definitely be "demoted" to a page with "(album)" appended to it so that any capitalization variant of the phrase "washing machine" goes to the appliance article first. DMahalko 15:27, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't agree. Sonic Youth are very influential in rock music, so therefore indisputably notable, and it's not a WP policy to make search rules based on subjective judgements of what constitutes obscurity. If Sonic Youth are obscure, the whole of eg. modern / postmodern art, in fact any serious cultural topic at all is relatively obscure compared to something as quotidian as a washing machine. It's also very clear cut in the English language that capitalisation indicates a proper noun, not a noun. If people looking up washing machines are confused by this, they should learn the rules of English grammar before they start trying to read encyclopedias. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.105.200.84 (talk) 14:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Washing Machine → Washing Machine (Sonic Youth album) … Rationale: The only thing that differentiates the names of this album article and the article on the home appliance of the same name is that the album article is called Washing Machine, whereas the other is spelt with a small M in 'Machine'. I tried to make the move myself, but I found that I could not as the article Washing Machine (Sonic Youth album) already exists, but just redirects into 'Washing Machine'. … Please share your opinion at Talk:Washing Machine. RichardHarrold 12:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The title has a capital M, which I feel sufficiently distinguishes this from the device, because Wikipedia style policy requires that the M can only be capitalized in the article title if it is a proper name, and it is a proper name here. I consider the notice sufficient in guiding readers unaware of Wikipedia standards for article titles. Sarge Baldy 23:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The naming of this article breaks the standard for all other music album articles, which is to include the word (album) at minimum in the article title. Having two articles differ merely by the capitalization a single letter is confusing to people searching for the generally much more revelant appliance article. In terms of search priority this article is far less important than the appliance article -- the importance of the appliance article will carry on long after this album has faded from popularity. DMahalko 14:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The standard for album articles is not to always include "(album)", only to do so when necessary to disambiguate from another article. See WP:ALBUM#Naming. --PEJL 15:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And in this situation the disambiguation is necessary. Seriously, when most people search for the term Washing Machine it is going to be for the appliance and not some obscure music album. The what links here demonstrates this. It reveals a number of appliance related articles that already confuse this with the appliance topic. DMahalko 15:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not disagreeing with you (or agreeing with you for that matter), just pointing out that your statement that album articles should always use "(album)" is incorrect. As for the capitalization, see WP:CAPS#Page names that only differ by capitalization. --PEJL 15:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(I am still new to the wiki management process and was under the impression I had to make a deletion request for the redirect before making a move request for this. It appears the deletion of the redirect is automatic before the move for this would occur..)

It has now been five months since this was debated (above) and no one has been able to justify why this is not more appropriate as Washing Machine (album) and the washing machine article is not much more important as a direct search hit, and so I am making an official move request for this article. You can debate this on Wikipedia:Requested_moves#December_10.2C_2007.

DMahalko (talk) 22:36, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article has been moved/renamed by an admin. DMahalko (talk) 20:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instrumentation , etc

Could someone offer a section on the instrumentation, alternate tunings, set ups and personnel for this album? Robixsmash 20:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bonus 4 Track-Live France Inter

There is a version of the album that includes 4 live recordings from "France Inter." Perhaps something that mentions this should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.175.134.83 (talk) 06:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Album Cover

There's no mention in this article of the fact that -on the cover- the t-shirt of the boy to the left has been signed by Thalia Zedek ("T.Z. / Come") and Chris Brokaw ("Chris B. / Come") of Come, an alternative rock band from the 1990s. This can be seen clearly in high definition scans of the cover. See: http://images.coveralia.com/audio/s/Sonic_Youth-Washing_Machine-Frontal.jpg Oulipal (talk) 23:41, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This account of how the photo came to be acquired differs from the one Kim Gordon gives in her book, in which she says that she took the photo of herself. She also says the band did not have any way to contact the fans for permission to use their faces on the cover, and that's why the photo crops off the top part of their faces.216.13.162.126 (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clarified. Gordon's memoir seems more convincing. Thanks. --Niwi3 (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Washing Machine (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sparklism (talk · contribs) 14:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one on. At first glance, this already looks like an excellent article, with just a few tweaks required here & there. I'll post my review here shortly. — sparklism ^hey! 14:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"Unlike previous Sonic Youth albums, Washing Machine was recorded at Easley Studios in Memphis, Tennessee and produced by John Siket and the band." This requires a bit of clarity; were no previous SY albums a) recorded at Easley Studios in Memphis, b) produced by John Siket, c) produced by the band or d) produced by John Siket and the band? It might just be easier to drop the first five words, leaving "Washing Machine was recorded at....." if it becomes too unwieldy to rewrite.

Fixed --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"...including the 20-minute-long ballad "The Diamond Sea", which was seen as a challenge for a major label release." Why/how was this seen as a "challenge"? There had already been many other albums released on major labels with 20+ minute tracks on them. I see that this is sourced later in the article to the Stevie Chick book - what does the source actually say about this?

Actually now that I check the book, I'm not sure if the author means "The Diamond Sea" or "Elegy for All the Dead Rock Stars" from Psychic Hearts. What do you think? You can check it here --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I see what you mean! Ambiguous. I think he's referring to "The Diamond Sea", but it's hard to be sure. The more I think about it, the more I think we should omit this completely from the article, since a) we only have one source and b) that source is ambiguous. I just doesn't seem that important to me - what's your view on doing that? — sparklism ^hey! 19:52, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we should omit this because it is not very clear and it might be WP:OR. I added "which was described as a Neil Young-esque ballad" to make the lead a bit longer, though. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a source anywhere that says it was the longest SY song to date? I think that might be of more interest to the reader (especially in the lead) than "Neil Young-esque ballad" (which is perfectly fine for the body of the article). — sparklism ^hey! 05:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you exclude their SYRs, yes it is their longest track. I used this source as a reference, but noted that they have longer tracks in their SYR releases. --Niwi3 (talk) 18:14, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"The album features more open-ended pieces than its predecessors and contains some of the band's longest songs, including the 20-minute-long ballad "The Diamond Sea", which is considered the longest track on any Sonic Youth album, excluding Sonic Youth Recordings releases." We have the words 'longest', 'long' and 'longest' again in the same sentence. I think this whole thing should read something like "The album features more open-ended pieces than its predecessors and contains some of the band's longest songs, including the 20-minute ballad "The Diamond Sea", which is the lengthiest track to feature on any of Sonic Youth's studio albums." and drop the bit about SYR from the lead (as there are also longer b-sides etc). Then, further down the article, it is correct to mention the SYR thing. — sparklism ^hey! 19:05, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Fixed --Niwi3 (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great, though I've tweaked it slightly. — sparklism ^hey! 20:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Background and recording

"Moore and Gordon also gave birth to their first child, Coco." I'm pretty sure that only Kim Gordon gave birth - would it be better to say "Moore and Gordon also had their first child"?

Fixed --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Gordon credited the new place for its relaxed atmosphere" - is the new place the studio? Was it a new studio, or just new to the band?

She was meaning Memphis. Clarified --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"The song "The Diamond Sea" clocks in at 19:31 and runs approximately six minutes longer on the vinyl version of the album." Can we reformat the time for lucidity? (e.g. 'nineteen minutes and thirty-one seconds', 'nineteen and a half minutes' etc.) Also, 19:31 is on the CD version then, right?

Fixed --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A couple more points about the length of this...

Most of the discogs listings, this source and AllMusic have "The Diamond Sea" listed as 19:35, not 19:31. I was curious about this, so I dug my CD out (yes, I do own this album...) and put it in my computer - iTunes has it at 19:37 on my edition. I can't see 19:31 listed anywhere. In any case, I think we should say it is 19:35 since this is verifiable.

"...approximately six minutes longer on the vinyl version of the album." This isn't actually the case: see this image, which shows the label of the vinyl listing it at 19:36. The version that is six minutes longer is called "The Diamond Sea (LP Version-Alt. End)", running to 25:50, and was actually a track on the CD single. (Also, not the length of the radio edit seems to be 5:26, not 5:15.....)

All of this is very confusing! I'm sure we will get there eventually... — sparklism ^hey! 20:40, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... how weird. I own an old European CD version and the song clocks in at 19:31. In any case, I agree: we should list it as 19:35 since it is verifiable. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"...approximately six minutes longer on the vinyl version of the album" - this still needs to be addressed, see above. — sparklism ^hey! 04:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the part of "approximately six minutes longer on the vinyl version of the album." Also, according to this source, the radio edit version is actually 5:15. What should we do? I think track durations depend on localizations/releases. Discogs references should also be avoided, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources#Sources to avoid. --Niwi3 (talk) 18:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, discogs is a useful real-life reference but shouldn't be used here. This is no big deal really - we could say "five minutes", leave it out altogether, or leave it as it is. — sparklism ^hey! 19:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We could still mention the longer version here though. How about something like: "Due to its long duration, the song was edited down to five minutes for release as a single that also included an alternative twenty-five minute version as an additional track."? — sparklism ^hey! 19:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Niwi3 (talk) 19:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Music and lyrics

"Trouser Press remarked that the album contains references to The Shangri-Las and The Byrds" - are these musical references or something else (e.g. lyrics)?

They are musical references. Clarified --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"...its 19:31 minutes of duration..." feels a bit clumsy - perhaps this should be ..."its duration of 19:31 minutes..." (or 'nineteen and a half minutes' etc.)

Done --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"...clocking in at..." seems a little informal for a GA (and a similar thing exists in the 'Background and recording' section also)

Fixed --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"A radio edit version of the song clocking in at 5:15 was also released." How about "...and the song was edited down to five minutes and fifteen seconds for release as a single."

Sounds good. Replaced --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Artwork and release

We should wikilink the first instance of Polaroid

Wikilinked --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How does one get "..clearance via an MTV News bulletin"?

I have no idea as it is not explained in the source. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the source, I think what it means is that they managed to contact the fans via MTV News, and subsequently got the clearance. I think we should reword this, something along the lines of "The band managed to contact them via an MTV News bulletin and subsequently received permission to use their photo." — sparklism ^hey! 19:42, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reworded. Thanks for the suggestion --Niwi3 (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's no mention of release formats - vinyl, CD etc. There are 18 versions of the album listed on Discogs.

Added vinyl, CD, and cassette formats --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"In Europe, the record was also released with a bonus disc containing four live songs." I think this was a CD version released in Germany only. Is there any information available on the recording etc. of those live tracks?

You are right, it was only released in Germany. I also added info about the live tracks, according to this source. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I've simplified the text a little bit - hope that's OK. — sparklism ^hey! 19:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly fine. Thanks --Niwi3 (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

Should we wikilink Stephen Thomas Erlewine?

Wikilinked. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"...Ranaldo and Moore's guitar playing and change tactics with every track..." doesn't quite make sense

Replaced with "Ranaldo and Moore's guitar interplay" --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of accolades, the album also made the NME EOY list for 1995 [1] which could perhaps get a mention

Added. Thank you for the link --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing

"All music composed by Sonic Youth." should really be "All songs composed by Sonic Youth."

Fixed --Niwi3 (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The liner notes say "addditional lyrics on Skip Tracer by Leah Singer", so that also needs a mention in this section I think

It is already mentioned in the music and lyrics section, but I think it is fair to mention it again. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

Just a minor point: the CMJ cite journal reference does not mention the author, even though this is known (and the template should support it)

Fixed. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have another look when the nominator has had a chance to go through these points. Thanks — sparklism ^hey! 15:00, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review, really appreciated. I have addressed numerous issues you brought up. I will let you know when all is done. Cheers --Niwi3 (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have addressed all the issues. Please let me know if there is anything else that needs to be fixed. Thank you. --Niwi3 (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Getting really close now - keep up the great work! :) — sparklism ^hey! 20:47, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You too, nice review :) --Niwi3 (talk) 21:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's everything. Passing this, well done :) — sparklism ^hey! 20:24, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]