Talk:Vapor Trails

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconAlbums Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

149.166.112.178 added "Tom's review" in April 2004. Who is Tom? I have to wonder if this has been copied from another website without permission? RedWolf 20:02, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

A page on about.com (http://experts.about.com/e/v/va/vapor_trails.htm) seems to be a straight copy-paste from here. Not even a good copy-paste job. I'm confident that this Wikipedia article is the original. SandyFace 23:43, 29 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wrote myself a section about the tarot cards in the booklet of the album.201.19.193.202 13:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Prorec link[edit]

It's been down for a long time and Rip Rowan's article on the problems with "Vapor Trails" is a great analysis. Fortunately, there's a cached version of the page:

http://web.archive.org/web/20060423231848/http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/8A133F52D0FD71AB86256C2E005DAF1C

--Alvabass 17:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC) ∑∭∮⊉∞ i don't understand what you all are saying here. Rush is as much a prog rock band as they ever were, and as for being hard rocck, yes to that too.. who says a group can't enjoy mutilple genres??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.60.158.36 (talk) 12:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Genre category[edit]

I am opening up this discussion in the hopes that consensus can be reached on this topic - I'd like to avoid any heated editing "oscillations" since they are counterproductive and altogether frustrating. It is essentially a violation of WP:NOR to insist upon changing the info box to reflect your opinion on what genre Vapor Trails falls under, especially with the only reason given being "time signature changes". Many rock songs display irregular or shifting time signatures - it's a rather indefensible reason. Rush has not belonged to the progressive rock genre for some time now. Wisdom89 23:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hard rock covers it well enough. Any other genres added are just superfluity....or just plain false(like Prog metal). As mentioned...Rush hasn't been "prog" for many years. 156.34.232.31 23:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I support it being Hard Rock. In fact, I seem to remember articles about the change in producers to someone who could give a more 'hard' sound, and a less 'prog' sound. ThuranX 01:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:RUSH onelittlevictory.jpg[edit]

The image Image:RUSH onelittlevictory.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011[edit]

Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the {{Allmusic}} template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:

--CactusBot (talk) 19:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

(Please see existing discussion at Talk:Vapor Trails Remixed.) Ubcule (talk) 23:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC) I have merged the page based on unanimous consensus. FrodoBaggins (blackhat999) (talk) 21:12, 11 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Vapor Trails. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

  • Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/articles/8A133F52D0FD71AB86256C2E005DAF1C

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: 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 05:53, 31 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Vapor Trails. 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: 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) 04:03, 9 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vapor_Trails&oldid=858897751"