Talk:Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy)

Third Uncle

The text describing the Bauhaus cover version includes this statement: "…unlike Eno's version, it features a guitar solo, performed by Daniel Ash." I'm not sure if this is supposed to mean:

1. Eno's version does not have a guitar solo, which it most certainly does, or
2. Eno's version does not have a guitar solo by Daniel Ash, which probably goes without saying but isn't particularly relevant.

In either case I'm removing the assertion. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:31, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Eno Taking Tiger Mountain.jpg

Image:Eno Taking Tiger Mountain.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) 07:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:33, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

---

Taking Tiger Mountain By Strategy (album) → Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) — Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy) is the correct album title. Moving the article to this title would also eliminate the need to use the "(album)" parenthetical. — Pele Merengue (talk) 23:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC) - Move proposal completed by —Andrewa (talk) 02:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Unsure. I have completed this move request in order to allow others to comment.

Certainly that's the way the title appeared on the original album cover. But, Amazon.com lists the album name without the brackets, and the 2003 remake cover describes it as Brian Eno's Taking Tiger Mountain by Strategy, again no brackets. So the common name may well be without the brackets. Another consideration is that having the brackets may violate the policy of a reasonable minimum of ambiguity (WP:NC), in that the title with brackets looks like a disambiguated page for something called Taking Tiger Mountain. Andrewa (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

My reasoning for requesting the move is simply based on the fact that it is the official album title. It's also formatted this way on the digipack spine, inside cover, and back cover of the 2004 "Original Masters" CD reissue. If you search Amazon.com, you'll find that there are several entries for the album, some with the brackets and some without. What the 2003 remake does probably shouldn't be seriously taken into consideration seeing as it's an unofficial fan-made tribute to the original album (and even you were to use it as a source, you would notice that the title also appears at the top of that web page as Taking Tiger Mountain (by Strategy)). Allmusic's entry for the album uses the brackets, as does Pitchfork's review entry and Robert Christgau's review entry. I'd also argue that the title Taking Tiger Mountain is more common than Taking Tiger Mountain By Strategy when used colloquially, but the name most often used as the official title is Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy). I doubt the parenthesis would really throw anybody off into thinking the article was a disambiguated page when the title is also formatted this way as the title at the beginning of the article and in the infobox. Pele Merengue (talk) 10:50, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Support returning article to where it was to start with. Original move was unnecessary since opera was not going to exactly the same location. Google books and Google scholar prefer the title as suggested the majority of the time. Links in infobox to reviews also use the suggested title. Parentheses also serve to disambiguate without specific "(album)" disambiguation. Cross porpoises (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

E.G. vs Island

What is the more correct way to refer to who released this album label wise? My vinyl copy from 1974 says "Produced by Eno for E.G. Records" while the bottom of the album says "Manufactured and Distributed by Island Records Inc. Los Angeles California 90046". The side of the album also says (C) Island Records 1974". So is it EG or Island? My record is strongly hinting towards Island so I'm going to switch it back to that for now! Respond again before changing! Andrzejbanas (talk) 09:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Any number of used vinyl sites, as well as enoweb, show the album as released by both labels in 74. My E.G. copy is U.S.; perhaps your Island copy was released elsewhere. Also, E.G. was distributed by other labels (JEM in U.S.) I don't think distributors merit mention. Cloonmore (talk) 02:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

That's true, but as I'm trying to get this article up to good status I don't know how reliable that deal is! It's not that E.G. isn't correct, it's that Island I think is more correct. The book I cite often British Singles and Charts labels eno's first album as by Island Records. The second one sadly didn't chart so I can't pin point which came first. But I can't find any information why it wasn't fully released by Island or any change point. Does your copy say Island on it at all anywhere? I'd double check mine but I just lent it out to a friend. Whups! Either way. Let's try to figure this one out before going into mindless edit wars! :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 05:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's try to figure this one out before going into mindless edit wars!

Seems a little late for that. (1) If you concede EG is correct, on what basis do you keep deleting it? A non-authoritative book on "British" charts? The album's original outer sleeve liner notes twice reference EG Records; my copy has no ref to Island whatsoever; and it's US 1974. It appears obvious that the disc was released on different labels in US and UK. What's your source for claiming that WP:ALB limits citation to one label only? (2) BTW, pls explain your tracklist template rationale. Your edit note was baffling. P.S. You're not the only one trying to get this article up to snuff. Making changes and insisting on the rightness of your position until someone disproves it (e.g., Xgau & Creem) isn't the most productive way to go about it. Cloonmore (talk) 01:43, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey now don't get so upset! Firstly. WP:Albums says:

• Label: Only the record label that the album was originally released on should be specified. Where significantly different versions have been released (featuring alternate track listings) e.g. in the U.S. vs UK, the later release date and/or record label should be mentioned in the article, for example in a Release history section. Drop words like "Records" from the end of the label's name (e.g. use Universal rather than Universal Records)."

• I did that in the section as stated! Honestly, if you care so much about the track list, then be my guest and revert it back. Tables on wikipedia are used when you have three or more areas for information. We do not counting numbers, with the guest songwriters with Manzanera. I don't know how to explain this further! I also noticed when you edit you make the page not agree with the Release section at the bottom of the page. You're just changing the infobox which isn't very constructive. My print of the album says printed in Canada, so until we see the version of of the original UK sleeve. We've reached a stalemate. (Mine has Island records all over it.) It's not my decision, it's my research I've done. All edits done since my make over the article haven't been cited, and since I'm trying to boost this into a GA eventually, I'd appreciate more citations to be followed up with. Instead of original research. Let's work together to figure out what stupid label this album was released on in the UK originally so we can sweep this whole stupid arguement under the rug! :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I found this old ad for Taking Tiger Mountain, here, I'd like to note that at the bottom of the ad it has the big "Island records" logo. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Dump

Moving this information here for now. I'll re-implement in later.

==Covers==
* In 1982 British gothic rock band Bauhaus covered  "Third Uncle" on their third album The Sky's Gone Out.
* In 2004 the entire album was covered by Caroleen Beatty and Doug Hilsinger as Brian Eno's Taking Tiger Mountain By Strategy, using the first of the postcards for which the album was named as cover art. This version runs ten minutes longer than the original version.

References

The True Wheel

Hello, Information relating to the song "The True Wheel" was added recently without a page number. A full copy of the book by Tamm is available here. On searching through I can not find any information regarding "The True Wheel" being influenced by Reich's method. Eno was certainly influenced by Reich which is mentioned in the book, but not this song specifically. I've removed this information per WP:OR. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:53, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well for instance on page 22, in a chapter where Tamm discusses in general Reich's influence on Eno, Eno is quoted as saying "Reich sort of abandoned that system as a way of working, which is rather fortunate

because that meant I could carry on with it [laughs]. And Music for Airports is one of the products of that." By "that system", they are referring to Reich's method of "phase shifts", which is termed Phasing on wikipedia. So Tamm's book specifically mentions Music for Airports as one (of several) pieces where Eno used phasing. I am not sure how to proceed here. I know that "The True Wheel" is an excellent example of Reiching phasing, because I can hear it with my ears :) I do not need to read it in Tamm to know that. It seems very odd to me that we cannot point this out in the article, I do not see how it is original "research", because I did not need to do any "research" to discover this, it is blindingly obvious to anyone who knows what phasing is. To give another example: if a musical article discussed who played a guitar solo on a song, or discussed the style of the guitar solo, do we need to provide a reliable verifiable source that there *is* a guitar solo in the track before we can add that to wikipedia? I think most readers would be of the opinion that they do not need to prove there is a guitar solo there because they can clearly hear it is there, one does not need to research this, one merely needs to first know of the concept of a "guitar solo". Do you see what I mean?--feline1 (talk) 17:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

It's original research because you can "hear it in your ears". And we can't cite "your ears" as a source. I'd love to cite what songs sound like they are influenced by Silver Apples, but I can't find anything to back me up, even if Allmusic does say for example that Eno was influenced by the group. Shame huh?Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

OK... but following that reasoning to it's logical conclusion, in a wikipedia article on a song or album, I could not write that a song featured a "guitar solo" unless I could find a verifiable article saying that it had a guitar solo? Would you agree? Or would you draw the line before that? What about me claiming that a song featured some "singing" - would this be original research unless I could find a verifiable source attesting that the song contained singing? --feline1 (talk) 18:44, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

No you could cite the album saying "this song has singing" by listening to it. You can't cite a song saying "this song has influences of [musician name here]" by listening to it. That is against WP:OR. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

OK so even you would not say I have to find a verifiable source that technique of "singing" had taken place :) So where would you draw the line? Why can I not say that the technique of phasing was employed? It plainly has been, and that is WP:NOT cos it's very rare in pop music. I agree I cannot prove Eno consciously put it in that song by direct inspiration from Reich, but as we have Eno verbatim saying he did consciously borrow the technique from Reich and used it in "Music For Airports and others" it stretches plausibility to imagine he did not consciously use it in The True Wheel, surely?--feline1 (talk) 19:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, this information fits better on the Brian Eno article itself under his own influences or style. If the citation says "and others" you can NOT suggest what the others are on your own without a source. Personally, I agree with you that it is probably the case, but if you can't find anyone else stating this, we can't write it here. That's how wikipedia tumbles I'm afraid. I'm not an expert on the original research thing, so if you have any serious questions, ask an administrator. In the meantime, I'd reccomend not making this minor addiction to the article. Cheers. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, but I am not disputing with you that our article can assert that Eno consciously borrowed from Steve Reich in composing The True Wheel. What I am asking you is: can the article assert that "The True Wheel" uses the music technique of phasing? You contend that an article can assert, for example, that a song uses and contains "singing", without the need for a reference. I wonder can it likewise assert that the song contains a "guitar solo"? What I am probing for, using some reductio ad absurdum, is where do we draw the line between techniques that are so "obvious" that they don't need a reference, and those that do. I had a similar situation once on a Daft Punk single article (Robot Rock), where an editor did not wish the article to assert that the song showcased a synth riff using oscillator sync. It was self-evident to anyone with ears that it did, but understandably, we did not have a verifiable source on the matter. Nonetheless, the same editor was happy for the article to assert that the song did have a "riff", without a reference. And so it goes...--feline1 (talk) 11:46, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Not everyone can hear one type of phasing or oscillator sync from other things. That's not as obvious as someone having a deep voice by hearing it. If you have questions dealing where you want have to cite things, bring it up in WP:Music, as it obviously goes beyond this article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:14, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Not everyone can tell these things, no. But that is precisely why they might want to look them up and learn about them in an encyclopaedia. Good articles will be assisted by input from experts, and if they contained no such expert material, their content would stuggle to be notable.--feline1 (talk) 15:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles do not have to be edited by experts. Anyone can edit wikipedia. The most important thing is they cite their sources. And as stated above, your own ear is not a source. If you do not enjoy these rules, I suggest approaching editing on another site such as a fan wiki. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

You still haven't bit the bullet and declared what criterea you'd use to decide whether something was so "self-evident" that it did not require citation.--feline1 (talk) 18:32, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Fine you can not hear "influence" in music as it's not something set in stone like the the key the music is played or whether a song contains singing or not. I might as well claim on some page that "oh this song must be influenced by the beach boys because the group said they like them and I hear the harmonies similar to the beach boys". I'd have no proof that it was the group saying this, unless I have them saying or writing or something that they themselves are influenced or not. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:21, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Forget about influence for the moment: I'm talking about factual, objective aspects of the musical form used in a piece, and whether or not they occur there can be asserted in an article without a reference. You've just given us another good example: the key a piece might be in. Can we say "The True Wheel is in the key of F# major", or do we need to cite a music scholar writing that? I want to be able to say something like "The True Wheel employs the musical technique that musicologists have termed phasing". The sentence doesn't even have to mention Steve Reich. It clearly, self-evidently employ phasing, because you can hear the drums playing in a 4/4 time signature, and you can hear various guitar riffs playing at different metrical lengths and metrical off-sets from that. All you need to be able to deduce this is to be able to count in integers to up to 8, and to know the definition of phasing. To me, it's like saying "On the cover of the album, Eno has blonde hair" - I can see it is blonde, I don't think that's WP:OR.

If you want to say that phrase, it doesn't really make sense in the article. It's nearly trivial in a "so what?" fashion. You'd still need a cite for it as it's not specific. Look at other well written GA and FA articles to see how they handle descriptions for songs and citations or bring it up further there. And what you are saying to me isn't obvious and it doesn't employ on the album enough as a whole. I'm not an expert on this subject either, so If you really have questions about it, refer to WP:Albums or WP:Music as I've suggested you several times before. To you it may be obvious, but I think being blonde is far more obvious then phasing as this is still something that's not so familiar to me.Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:04, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Taking Tiger Mountain (By Strategy)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Article requirements: Y All the start class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details Y At least one section of prose (excluding the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians Y Categorisation at least by artist and year Y A casual reader should learn something about the album. Andrzejbanas (talk) 08:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 08:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 07:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Note typewriter sound

https://soundblab.com/reviews/albums/classic-albums/19108-brian-eno-taking-tiger-mountain-by-strategy

“China My China” he deploys the sound of typewriter keys as a percussion instrument.

Jidanni (talk) 05:01, 6 December 2020 (UTC)