Talk:X&Y

{{Talk header}}

{{Article history

|action1=PR

|action1date=01:07, 2 July 2006

|action1link=Wikipedia:Peer review/X&Y/archive1

|action1result=reviewed

|action1oldid=61480648

|action2=GAN

|action2date=05:31, 6 October 2008

|action2link=Talk:X&Y/GA1

|action2result=listed

|action2oldid=243345390

|action3=GTC

|action3date=20:53, 9 December 2008

|action3link=Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/X&Y

|action3result=promoted

|action3oldid=256845519

|action4=GTR

|action4date=13:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

|action4link=Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates/X&Y/archive1

|action4result=Demoted

|action5=GTC

|action5date=18:29, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

|action5link=Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/X&Y/archive2

|action5result=not promoted

|currentstatus=GA

|topic=music}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|1=

{{WikiProject Albums}}

{{WikiProject Alternative music|importance=High}}

{{WikiProject Coldplay|importance=high}}

}}

Album Cover Message

The article (currently) claims the album cover is encoded using ITA2. Reading in columns, from right to left, bottom to top, we get:

11101 (1D)

11011 (1B)

11000 (18)

10101 (15)

From what I can tell, in ITA2, that is:

X

FIGS

9

6

It could also read X9Y if FIGS was assumed to apply only to the next letter, but that isn't what the ITA2 article says. Reading from right to left gives "YO/". --Colin Barrett 14:07, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is this any help [http://wirez.wxcs.com/images/code2.gif decoder] Vanky 18:31, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Read this [http://www.coldplaying.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=496] --Madchester 00:45, 2005 May 7 (UTC)

According to the key in the liner notes, the art means 'X&Y' (this also reveals the pattern on the last page of the notes to be 'Make trade fair') 1Rabid Monkey 17:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Why does the article now only say it's the Bardot Code? It is clearly ITA2. Treva26 (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Bonus tracks

"Til Kingdom Come" is indeed a distinct track 13. I changed the tracklisting to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewT (talkcontribs) 15:49, June 5, 2005 (UTC)

:Then, unsigned editor, why does my copy (which I am importing into the Apple Music app at the time of writing this) not show it on the tracklist in the back cover? It stops after track 12, "Twisted Logic". --Fandelasketchup (talk) 15:57, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

::I doubt you're going to get a response from the editor who posted that, considering it was 15 years ago. The answer's in the article anyway. -- I need a name (talk) 16:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Latin American Artwork

Is there a higher quality image of the red Latin American tour edition cover of X&Y? The one we have as of now is not the best…

Reception

I understand that there were a few "C" grades for the album, but that doesn't warrant a "mixed to positive". First off, editors are meant to avoid terms like this, unless reliably sourced, and the source here is Metacritic. There are other sources available as well which quote generally positive reviews, and the two which I'm aware of which say mixed, were released before all reviews could be accounted for, so aren't accurate. Secondly, ranges liked mixed to positive are to be avoided, the reasons for which cab be found on many talk pages and discussions, which is my "generally positive" is used. It is even pointed out that reviews were inferior to their previous album, which supports the point that not all reviews were glowing. And most of the reviews on display aren't an average of "C", so it isn't inaccurate. And the reviews on display are only sample of all the collected reviews, which can be found on Metacritic. Thanks - Jak Fisher (talk)

Orphaned references in [[:X&Y]]

I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :X&Y's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "mc":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 23:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

{{Substituted comment|length=1294|lastedit=20080806042052|comment=Start class:

  • {{y}} A reasonably complete infobox
  • {{y}} A lead section giving an overview of the album
  • {{y}} A track listing
  • {{n}} Reference to at least primary personnel by name (must specify performers on the current album; a band navbox is insufficient)
  • {{y}} Categorisation at least by artist and year

C class:

  • {{n}} All the start class criteria
  • {{y}} A reasonably complete infobox, including cover art
  • {{y}} At least one section of prose (in addition to the lead section)
  • {{y}} A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs
  • {{n}} A "personnel" section listing performers, including guest musicians.

B class:

  • {{n}} All the C class criteria
  • {{y}} A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details
  • {{n}} A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians
  • {{n}} No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources.
  • {{y}} No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS

This article goes down from B all the way to a stub class due to it's lack of a personnel section! Add one to make this at least a Start! Andrzejbanas (talk) 04:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)}}

Substituted at 10:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)