Talk:Boston (album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boston (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

Archives: 1

Boston (album) was nominated as a Music good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (November 11, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

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

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

Release date

The source cited for the release date of July 25, classicrockreview.com, does not meet WP:RS, may mirror Wikipedia, and contains contradictory information. The blog contains the release date that appeared in Wikipedia (unreferenced) as of December 29, 2011 and it also contains contradictory information, giving the release date as August elsewhere in the blog. Two reliable sources indicate the release date was August 25, 1976. If there is a valid reason for stating the release date was July 25, please explain it here. Piriczki (talk) 23:39, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Too fanboy

As often happens with music articles on Wikipedia, especially regarding classic/hard rock and rap, this article is far too fanboy. There's too much hyperbole - "the perfectionist Scholz," "the album soared," "all eight of the songs on the album still receive regular airplay on classic rock radio to this day, across the country." Gosh! It must be really really super great, then. (Getting programmed continuously by classic rock radio is not something to brag about, by the way.) These weasel statements need to be removed or changed. It's obvious the album is popular - 17 million in sales verified by the RIAA is proof enough of that. But the tone of the article needs to conform better to Wikipedia standards. PJtP (talk) 14:06, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is late, but I recently revised the entire article, but I don't quite see the problem aside from "the album soared" - you're right, 17 million records sold tells us that and "soared" is much too fanboy-ish. "The perfectionist Scholz" is simply stating a fact that's been supported by about a trillion outside sources, it doesn't imply any weight for positive or negative. The fact that much of the album is played on classic rock radio isn't too fanboy-ish either, it's simply a fact that is notable enough to be mentioned. Just as we discuss how the album was initially criticized as "corporate rock," we cover that is considered differently today. It's all neutral. Thardin12 (talk) 19:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also can't believe that Bob Seger opened for them in DETROIT...SEGER'S HOMETOWN?! Seger was on the top of his game with Live Bullet and Night Moves out, and a band supporting their initial release is going to headline? Please provide the citation or link here and I'll admit that I'm wrong. I've searched and found no documentation other than Bob Seger headlining all over Michigan & the rest of the U.S. that year. Thank you in advance. FiggazWithAttitude (talk) 19:11, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@FiggazWithAttitude: I wouldn't hold your breath for an answer, this discussion is five years old. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:15, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Boston (album). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/boston/albums/album/300997/review/6068063/boston
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120407005219/http://www.radio3net.ro/dbartists/supersearch/Qm9zdG9u/Boston to http://www.radio3net.ro/dbartists/supersearch/Qm9zdG9u/Boston

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 10:38, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Boston (album). 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:

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) 21:11, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos and thanks on "Foreplay/Long Time" audio sample

To whoever added the sample from "Foreplay/Long Time," please accept at least one reader's kudos and thanks! Your comment "demonstrates the band's shifting emphasis between acoustic and electric guitars" points listeners as yet unfamiliar with the band Boston to one of the more exciting aspects of their music, which changed American pop/rock music in the 1970s. I got goose-bumps when I first heard that section and still do today. Again, thank you Aboudaqn (talk) 21:47, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How is this prog

I hate to be a genre warrior but come on. Other than Foreplay/Long Time there is nothing proggy on this album Henoryry (talk) 21:12, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]