Talk:Snakes & Arrows

Source

here's one source for the info. I haven't worked on this article before, but watch the Rush article, and saw this link added. Hope this helps kill the Crystal ball thing, I'll try to add cites later, but I need dinner now. anyways, :http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003523620 ThuranX 01:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

We also need a source for those chart positions for "Far Cry". What chart is it referring to? What proof do we have that it reached that number? As it is, it's very vague and makes little sense. The Myst 09:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Snakes and Arrows

This title is being reported all over the Rush community and it seems to be legit. --Kudzu1 20:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

It may be legit - but no official announcement has been made as of yet - Wikipedia is not to be used for spreading speculation and rumors. Wisdom89 20:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it's legit. It sounds like one of Alex's jokey working titles ( Davehard 16:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC) )

It was just announced on Rush.com... It is legit. Codackussell 01:24, 15 February 2007

I requested a page move ( because I MADE the page first, to hold it's place... ThuranX 01:57, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I moved it.Codackussell 02:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

To the wrong place, move it back for the admin move. the title is with an Ampersand, not an 'and'. ThuranX 02:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

snakes and barrels

does this have anything whatsoever to do with that or visa-versa? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.60.106.216 (talk • contribs) 00:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

Doubtful. Snakes & arrows is a cultural reference unto itself, at least from the game of the same name (which evolved into Chutes (Snakes) & Ladders). However, there's no point in speculating on the origin of the name in the article; the origin should only be discussed when there's a reliable source for the origin of the name. —C.Fred (talk) 01:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Far Cry

An editor madea page for Far Cry (song). I have turned it into a redirect. all the info there was already here, and comprised of a single paragraph, and the generic rush album template info. Until there is sufficient critical review and such to create an in depth article regarding the song's technical structure, lyrical meaning, and public reception, there's no point in making it it's own page. ThuranX 02:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

There needs to be a Far Cry disambiguation page, in my opinion. Even if the Rush link will lead back here.

A few days ago, I asked onthe Far Cry talk page for content to be added. It hasn't. Since the article wasn't more than a single line ' it's asong from S&A', and an infobox, I've returned it to a redirect, pending some substance. I'm not much of a dletionist/reductionist, but one wan line and an infobox isn't much of an article. THere should be some play numbers and reviews by now that we can cite, so let's get some of that in there. Thanks .ThuranX 04:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Release Dates

Are these release dates worldwide or canada/us only? Music shops here in the UK don't seem to have any info on the single...

Good question. So far the article is written from the information available from Rush's official website, so what is here is what's known already. When international release dates are known, I agree that they should be included here. -- ManfrenjenStJohn 00:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Further to my previous comment, local stores around me (in Dundee) have started listing the release as 1st of May, so it looks lieka fairly world-wide solid date

Snakes & Arrows tracklist released.

1. Far Cry
2. Armor and Sword
3. Workin' Them Angels
4. The Larger Bowl
5. Spindrift
6. The Main Monkey Business
7. The Way The Wind Blows
8. Hope
9. Faithless
10. Bravest Face
11. Good News First
12. Malignant Narcissism
13. We Hold On

This is the tracklist included in the sales sheet for Snakes & Arrows put out by Anthem. -- Rusher 19:54, 08 March 2007 (UTC)

Geddy Quote

I added several sections today, incorporating a lot of what was already here, along with new information that was released today (and some other stuff that has been floating around -- with good cites of course).

Most importantly, If anyone wants to improve the way I cited the Geddy quote, I invite you to do so. ManfrenjenStJohn 23:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Album Chronology

I feel that the number of the album is incorrectly stated. As far as I know, this is Rush's 19th studio-recorded album. Unless a certain album failed to fall under the category of 'studio', I don't understand why S&A is being listed as 18th. Thanks to anyone who can fill me in. The bottom of the Rush.net homepage flashes the text "Rush: 19", "May 1, 2007", and "Snakes & Arrows" along with the roman numeral for 19 (XIX). DuTheXanadu 18:13, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The issue is that there's an EP in the mix, so S&A is the 18th full-length album, as stated in the intro. As worded, it's correct. —C.Fred (talk) 00:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand now, thank you. I guess it was a question of terminology, and not number of albums recorded. Thanks again for clearing that up. DuTheXanadu 06:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops sorry, i was editing to 19 back from 18. Can someone tell me what EP means? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jfhidakatsu (talk • contribs) 18:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

From the article thereon: "Extended play (EP) is the name typically given to vinyl records or CDs which contain more than one single, but are too short to qualify as albums" (emphasis added). —C.Fred (talk) 19:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.227.186.61 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC).

To all who wrote above: Thank you, I think we've reached consensus. Cheers! -- ManfrenjenStJohn 02:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

rush.net, an official rush page, lists this as the nineteenth album... that's all there is to it. RUSH says it's 19, wikipedia says it's 19. Jhiner 01:50, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

This is Rush's nineteenth album. It says so on Rush.net. Why does it still say 18???? 72.84.49.80 05:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Jhiner 05:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

What about saying (nineteenth overall) after "eighteenth full-length" ??? Jhiner 05:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems like we're straining at gnats here. The MVI states that Snakes & Arrows is "Rush's nineteenth studio album." What's the concern about "full-length"? If they're calling it 19, let's call it 19. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dio AC (talk • contribs) 23:05, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

For internal consistency. See conversation below. For Wikipedia purposes, the EP doesn't count. —C.Fred (talk) 03:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

For Wikipedia purposes EPs don't count? Is that official Wikipedia dogma? If it's wrong, it's wrong. Whether you want to decide a 40 minute album doesn't qualify, don't really change the fact that S&A is Rush's 19 STUDIO album. Such a bizzare distinction, imo. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.231.255.53 (talk) 11:10, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

Feedback is an EP, not an album. It's all covers, no original tracks, and is 27 minutes long. Why would anyone consider that an album? 99.192.102.25 (talk) 16:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Lookback at the last two studio recordings

Here are the intro sentences for their articles as they stand right now:

• "Vapor Trails is the seventeenth studio album...."
• "Feedback is a studio EP...."

It follows that Feedback is outside the studio album count for Wikipedia purposes, and internal consistency says to number S&A as the 18th album with the clarifier of full-length studio albums. —C.Fred (talk) 03:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Cfred - Thank you for the clarification. This has got to be the single most misconstrued fact regarding the album. : ) -- ManfrenjenStJohn 03:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Album Art

I found some scans of the single cover for "Far Cry" can this be used in the picture section? http://www.rushisaband.com/display.php?id=859 Another Kind 13:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

First, there shouldn't be a "picture section." Especially with fair-use images, pictures need to be illustrating salient points of the article. Normally I would say that means put it in the Far Cry (song) article, except there isn't one yet. So, if we're discussing the release of the single, then the use of the cover art may be justified. —C.Fred (talk) 13:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, don't forget the giant "Do not upload images found on websites or on an image search engine" warning on the image upload page. It looks like whoever uploaded the cover had it promptly deleted for a mislicense/copyvio. —C.Fred (talk) 13:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I see, if there is a Fry Cry page made, this picture cannot be used, even with permission from the picture taker/scanner? --Another Kind 13:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. The underlying copyright would be that held by the record label over the cover illustration. —C.Fred (talk) 17:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

We really aren't sure right now what the exact cover art is. Either it's the Leela game board art up on the Wiki page as of this time, it's the "desert highway" art up there until it was replaced a few days ago, or it hasn't been revealed yet. The band has yet to officially announce one design or another. Lot of speculation about that in the fan circles... --Kudzu1 09:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

ISTR a SCOTUS case that says thumbnails and reduced images for illustration or linking are protected free speech. Frankly, as a writer, I (and my publishers) will let anyone use the cover art with name on it for just about anything except resale. It's called "Free advertising." But off the soapbox, to the best of my knowledge illustrative sized images are protected.Mzmadmike 06:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

You're right of course but that doesn't mean that the "Free content Police" won't come knocking. They're on the warpath big-time at the moment over two things:-

1) They want individual Fair use rationales for every non-free image. i.e. a Rush album cver used in several places needs a rationale that mentions/justifies each usage. I can sort of understand this but I get a bit angry about some "editors" interpreting their job as purely one of deletion rather than trying to fix the rationales themselves. I fail to see why a well written bot couldn't create an acceptable rationale for an album cover - but that's me...

2) They don't consider album cover images to be fair use in lists or galleries (including discographies). Now if I were a band I'd be logged into wikipedia creating an illustrated discography if it didn't exist because as you say it's free publicity - but not while the "Free content Police" have a working net-connection... Megamanic 06:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

far cry.

this song is the number 5 most played song on hjy. also you con here it on the rush wed sight.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.145.64.181 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

DVD-Album Format

Is there a credible source for this? Ldkronos 19:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

it has been widely publicized, but i added a reference anyways. ...Patrick (talk, contributions) 03:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Malignant Narcissism Leak

I added that this track was leaked today. Bliks 00:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Who has reported the leak? —C.Fred (talk) 00:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Rushisaband Blog Post This is the blog post that I got the information from. I don't think there are any other sources except forums and other blogs that have it posted. I will not add the link incase you are not allowed to use blogs as citation.

If you are unable to use blogs then remove the line untill there is on official source. Bliks 15:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC) Sorry I forgot to sign it before.

Album Leaked?

I heard the full album was leaked, but the only source I have is [1] and that's a blog, so I'm not sure how reliable it is, anyone have other sources? Kagrenak 03:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I know where the album was first found, and it wasn't the peer-to-peer networks. I did a search for the album an hour after it was first released (using ScrapeTorrent), and the only thing that came back was 2 leaked tracks, not a full album as the Wiki stated.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.68.131.208 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

What's more relevant, rather than what your search turned up, is what the reliable sources have to say about it. As far as blogs, I'm not sure they quite qualify, but they could do as a temporary source until something better is found. —C.Fred (talk) 00:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I know for a fact that the album was indeed leaked, I've seen it first hand, though I know without a valid source, my input is almost null. Do a search of a major torrent tracker and you should find it.69.235.131.141 06:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks fer the corrections!!! I don't know about searches, all my sources are reliable though.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.68.131.208 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC).

Not an MP3 leak but somebody stuffed up between the USA & Australia because my record shop got his order of two copies (one for him & one for me) on Monday. I went in Thursday as normal & was amazed to find it waiting. Listening to it now. 2 minutes through "The Main Monkey Business" & first impression is it's the best Rush album since at least Counterparts (which I like a lot). Everyone's on the top of their game - you're going to love it. Megamanic 01:54, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Was the early release continent-wide, or is your dealer just going to lose his new release privileges when the label finds out? —C.Fred (talk) 02:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

All I know is they arrived in a normal shipment on Monday and there was no restriction applied by the record company. As far as the dealer goes how was he supposed to know not to sell it (apart from looking at the US copy of the sales sheet that I printed out for him a couple of weeks back)? It seems to be a record company mistake. My copy's got the FBI anti piracy warning on it so as far as I can tell it's an American copy.Megamanic 03:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Post-Release Updating?

The "Reviews" section and some of the other stuff can be snipped, I think... Kudzu1 23:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I've gone and snipped a lot of the excess reviews and added the Pop Matters review. Jasonn 22:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Question about Notes

Isn't the title of Peart's essay actually The Game of Snakes and Arrows rather than A Prize Every Time? I'm looking at it now, and the latter seems like more of a subtitle--and it only says Prize Every Time. --The Fwanksta May 19, 2007, 22:16.

I've decided to go ahead and change it. --The Fwanksta May 23, 2007, 18:13.

Hard rock

I added hard rock to the genre list. So far all of the songs on the album that have their own articles have their genre as "Hard rock". Sittingonfence 22:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC) I do not how to do citations, but All Music Guide calls it "Hard Rock" and the reviews by Dave Ling and Pete Freensta, while not calling it hard rock, say that it has a heavy ("very heavy in places" -Dave Ling) sound to it, returning to their "proggy roots" (All of these early albums, exempt of "Hemispheres" and "A Farewell to Kings" have progressive rock and hard rock on their gerne lists). Sufficient? Sittingonfence 01:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Works for me, from what you've said. For sake of throughness, can you add the website address, the URL, to this section fo the talk page? that will create a place for others to see that we aren't just guessing, but have reasonable grounds? ThuranX 03:33, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&token=&sql=10:hpfqxzu5ldde

http://www.daveling.co.uk/diarymarch07.htm

http://www.getreadytorock.com/reviews2007/rush.htm

Sittingonfence 14:10, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Does "arena rock" really work for the album? I'm going to remove it for now. Zanders5k 18:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I always thought it was a misnomer and that Hard Rock and Progressive Rock sufficed. Even the latter is a stretch. Wisdom89 20:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Ben Mink

Ben Mink is credited for two songs: not only "Faithless" but also for "We Hold On". If you listen to the guitar solo, you'll hear a violin melody on the background.--MarceloNunesPOA (talk) 18:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, he isn't credited on We Hold On. This has been removed. Listening to the guitar solo and thinking one hears a violin melody is original research. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 23:45, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

tour?

should the two tours to support the album be mentioned? ThuranX (talk) 05:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Progressive rock?

Where is the consensus discussion or source that describes Snakes & Arrows as "Progressive rock"? If this is referring to the established consensus on the main Rush article that the band was indeed progressive at in the late 70's and early 80's, then this is probably an inappropriate label for the album. Comments or thoughts? Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 18:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Without getting into my personal views on this (as that would be OR), where are reliable sources for any genre? Unfortunately (for our purposes here on Wikipedia), Rush's music is notoriously difficult to pin a label on, and I don't know of any reliable music sources that even attempt to define Rush anymore. Of course, if there are, I'd love to have a look at them and see what is being said. In the meantime, I'll see what I can do to find something definitive one way or the other. If you do have something I don't know about, please post a link. Mønster av Arktisk Vinter Kvelden (talk) 06:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

This discussion seemed to peter out but Wisdom89 is correct. Rush ceased to incorporate prog to a mentionable level post 1980-ish. And for this album it need-not-apply at all. All those in favour of rm'ing it? All opposed? Wiki libs (talk) 05:12, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Snakes & Arrows. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080130063217/http://www.nowtoronto.com:80/issues/2007-05-10/music_discs5.php to http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2007-05-10/music_discs5.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:49, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Snakes & Arrows/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 A relatively complete infobox Y Cover art in the infobox Y A lead section giving an overview of the album Y At least one section of informative prose other than lead Y A track listing (for "start" class), containing track lengths & composers (for "B" class) A list of personnel (specific band members (for "start" class), guest musicians and technical (for "B" class) Y Categorisation at least by artist and year

Last edited at 13:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 06:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Snakes & Arrows. 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/20100325203600/http://www.cria.ca/gold/0907_g.php to http://www.cria.ca/gold/0907_g.php
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.rush.com/thegameofsnakesandarrows/Rush.Essay4.S%26A.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080822110411/http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/News.htm to http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/News.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 16:33, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Wording

Regarding this passage "Lifeson had met guitarist David Gilmour during his tour stop in Toronto" - not really clear here who was stopping in Toronto, Lifeson or Gilmour. We're leaving it to the reader to assume that Lifeson lives in Toronto, but you know what happens when you assume...

Suggest something such as "Lifeson had met guitarist David Gilmour during Gilmour's tour stop in Toronto" FiggazWithAttitude (talk) 20:11, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Looks good to me. - FlightTime Phone (open channel) 20:13, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks mate! Change made. FiggazWithAttitude (talk) 13:23, 23 August 2019 (UTC)