Talk:Life in Technicolor II

ii versus II

We should refer to it how the majority of the reliable music press refer to it. Allmusic uses II[1], the BBC uses II[2] and the NME uses both ii[3] and II[4]. That's 3 for II and 1 for ii. Unless more publications start to use ii we should use II for the time being. --JD554 (talk) 19:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

The most important thing is that Coldplay and the official Coldplay website only refer to it as ii. It is also printed on the official Prospekt's March CD as ii because that's its name - just like it's iTunes not ITunes.Officially Mr X (talk) 20:39, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

We're not discussing my it's iTunes and not ITunes (but you may wish to read MOS:TM about that), but the title to be used for this article. As I stated above, we should use how the majority of reliable sources refer to it. If you cannot show that the majority of reliable sources use ii and not II then the article should remain with it capitalised. --JD554 (talk) 21:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

1. http://www.coldplay.com/post.php and click on Prospekt 5.10.08

2. http://www.coldplay.com/newsdetail.php?id=232

3. http://media.www.jhunewsletter.com/media/storage/paper932/news/2008/12/04/ArtsEntertainment/New-Vibrations-3570938.shtml

4. http://web.nme.com/reviews/coldplay/9998

I remember when the BBC, part of this so-called "reliable music press", once referred to VLV as "Viva La Vida Or Death To All His Friends" LOL 58.7.105.226 (talk) 01:12, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Two references from the band's official website it irrelevant as we know they use ii because that is what is on the album. What we need to determine is how the majority of other reliable sources refer to it. Of the other two links you've provided, I already gave above. So far the majority use II so that is how it should remain in the article despite the fact you changed it against the majority of reliable sources. --JD554 (talk) 07:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

First of all, we don't go with what Coldplay say, Wikipedia is not based on their opinions or standards. Its based on Wikipedia's Manual of Style. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, The official site refers to it as ii, the back of the album also lists it as ii, and MusicBrainz also refers to it as ii ( http://musicbrainz.org/track/df254587-24f2-4b13-9a67-292acf1a2aca.html ) alvareo (talk) 02:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't matter what other websites refer to it, it has to comply with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:54, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, you're totally right, I'm very sorry.

Hmm, Wikipedia should really adopt the MusicBrainz rule, "When capitalizing song titles, album titles, or artist names, the appropriate grammatical rules for the language the text is written in should be applied unless it can be shown that that the artist wishes the capitalization to be grammatically incorrect, in which case the artist's version of the title or name is the correct one to use." (http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/CapitalizationStandard) alvareo (talk) 02:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

By the way, that Manual of Style refers to the article's title, which means we can put ii all over Wikipedia, doesn't it?-- ≤ ^alvareo [talk to me] ≥ 17:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Block quote

The issue at hand here is respect for the artist. ThinkBlue states on her personal page that she is a fan of Coldplay but shows an utter lack of respect for the fact that they have clearly titled this track Life in Technicolor ii. This is how they wish it to be known and because they created it this is their right, regardless of "reliable sources" or "Manuals of Style". The only source that matters in this case is the sleave of the official release (which I have at my house if you'd like to see it) where the song is clearly labeled Life in Technicolor ii. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.225.137.250 (talk) 17:29, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't like at all the way "ii" looks on the title, but it is just, that's how Coldplay uses it, and not even Wikipedia shall change that. You don't know if yet it has another meaning apart from Roman numerals. If you can take this then your Manual of Style needs a quick destruction. If you don't want to change this, simply delete the whole page. It's not ethical to post information about a song when you don't respect its original title.--Fluence (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

This is the first time (and I hope last time) an user's page makes me change my mind... at least partially. ThinkBlue is just thinking on what's best for Wikipedia. It's OK however the article's title is written, but I think a note here on the talk page saying something like this would be fine:

Correct title of this article is "Life in Technicolor ii" but due of WP:Manual of Style it shall be written "Life in Technicolor II". Please don't change title.

But still, adopting the guidelines from MusicBrainz would be best. I still think Coldplay opinions should actually matter on articls about their songs on any site. After all, they're the ones who created them. But ThinkBlue's point is also true. Plus, she likes blue ;)--Fluence (talk) 07:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Guys, the song title is Life in Technicolor ii. Not II. I'm sorry, but if thats the way its printed on the sleve of the album, the sleve of the single, and the official website then that's the OFFICIAL title. Calling it anything else is disrespectful and incorrect. For Wikipedia to change this because of some arbitrary set of rules is just plain wrong. :: ehmjay (talk) 15:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

A recent edit summary claimed that there was a "consensus" for the article remaining at "II". Reading this section, unless we are discriminating against unregistered editors, there is anything but. WP:MOS does not appear to suggest anything about using a different format for song titles, as really that is changing the title to something unintended. If robotically following the rules means that the article should use "II", then the rules should be clarified as using common sense an article about a song should be at the title of said song. WP rules aren't just made on a random whim. So to summarise, this article should be moved to "Life in Tecchnicolor ii". U-Mos (talk) 13:31, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree, there is absolutely NO REASON for the "ii" to be capitalized, EVER! The song title CLEARLY has them lowercase, everywhere in the world. This needs to be fixed. Kevinmon (talk) 18:36, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

"The Goldrush"

Back when Coldplay did that live gig for BBC Radio 1, "The Goldrush" was one of the songs they played live, an alternative title to the eventually released "Death Will Never Conquer" with Will Champion vocals. Is this b-side the same as that song? --^{SteelersFanUK06} ReplyOnMine! 17:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

No, it's different. Or at least it should be different, since they posted Death Will... for free download at their site, and now at the blog post for Life In Technicolor ii, they didn't say anything about name changes. ≤ ^alvareo {tha talk} ≥ 02:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Life in Technicolour II?

Since they're a British band, surely the color should have a "u"? --79.66.80.247 (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

The song title is spelled without a u. It would be wrong to add one. Besides the word technicolor doesn't include a u as it is a trademarked word originally coined in the US. --JD554 (talk) 18:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

And yet Wikipedia insists the ii be II, despite that being the incorrect title... strange how that works isn't it. :: ehmjay (talk) 05:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Roman numerals aren't copyrighted ;-) --JD554 (talk) 08:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

new edited video?

has anyone noticed that they guy filming the puppet show used to mouth-out a couple words (looked like "fuck yeah"), but now his lips don't move when they go to a shot of him? (youtube version) misterdan (talk) 19:59, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Incorrect reference (#5)

Okay, so I'm new to the whole wikipedia thing, so I apologize if this is not the appropriate place for this.

In the article the sentence, "The song was originally intended to be on Viva la Vida or Death and All His Friends, but was altered to the form that appears on the album as the band did not want to include a song that they considered to be their safety net and that would be an obvious single.[5]" uses reference #5 as citation. However, since I didn't quite understand the wording in the sentence, I went to the reference for clarification. The link provided doesn't say anything about how "Life in Technolcolor II" was original intended to be on Viva la Vida....

What is the appropriate way to clean this up?

Plexplex (talk) 22:15, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The name of instrument for earlier loop is misleading

Hi, the actual name of instrument is "santoor" . Its played mostly in north northeast india. The reference should I think be corrected. because those people playing it seem to be south asian. and hence its a Tabla+Santoor.

not whatever the other name is mentioned.

Please correct for clear and correct information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhil elite (talk • contribs) 03:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Life in Technicolor II. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100927173921/http://www2.grammy.com/GRAMMY_AWARDS/52ND_SHOW/list.aspx to http://www2.grammy.com/grammy_awards/52nd_show/list.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091030041438/http://www.promonews.tv/2009/09/30/uk-music-video-awards-2009-%E2%80%93-the-technical-achievement-award-nominations-in-full/ to http://www.promonews.tv/2009/09/30/uk-music-video-awards-2009-%E2%80%93-the-technical-achievement-award-nominations-in-full/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 14:30, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Life in Technicolor II. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929123432/http://www.emimusic.co.uk/capitolinternational/index.html?artist=1 to http://www.emimusic.co.uk/capitolinternational/index.html?artist=1

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 04:14, 21 May 2017 (UTC)