Talk:LFO (British band)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
?
[edit]A band so-called "HMO" according to music downloading services made a parody of LFO's Summer Girls called "Hummer Girls". Should we make an article about that parody song? --SuperDude 04:48, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
I just did a google-test on "Hummer Girls", and revealed 2,570 results. I believe it is eligible for making an article about. --SuperDude 05:01, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
You guys are in the wrong article. Summer Girls is a song by Lyte Funky Ones, not LFO. Junjk 15:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
Even though "Summer Girls" is by the other LFO, do you still think we should make an article about it's parody song? --SuperDude 19:38, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
Well, an article? Not really. Seems to me that if it's notable it's only notable in connection to the actual band. It probably ought to go in the article. Junjk 21:35, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
Weird simulation thing
[edit]I don't know what to call this... but since it's on the Warp website and titled "LFO", I think it belongs on this page somewhere. It's some sort of interactive lights/music Shockwave program. http://www.warprecords.com/dannybrown/ <---- mark bell wrote this wiki edit
- We don't have to mention everything. If it hasn't been covered by the press it probably shouldn't be here. --kingboyk 00:38, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
LFO sample
[edit]I did hear that a Speak & Spell was used for the "L-F-O" line in the track by LFO. Can anyone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LewisR (talk • contribs) 00:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I heard that too, and that they 'played' the machine on stage in their live performances, but no, I can't confirm it as a verifiable fact. Traveller palm (talk) 18:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Requested move
[edit]- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 02:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
– There are currently two bands called LFO with articles. Having one at group and the other at band is confusing and unhelpful for readers as the terms are synonymous. I propose moving them per nationality to band (I couldn't see a preferred term on MOS:MUSIC but if there is one please jump in and say as I equally support moves to LFO (British group) and LFO (American group)). Neither is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with views of 21659 [1] v 34526 [2] over the last 90 days, so neither should be titles as the primary band/group. Zarcadia (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support generally, but prefer LFO (UK band) and LFO (American band), which seem more in line with existing articles. See, for example, The Enemy (UK band), The Makers (American band), or Come (American band). There isn't a universally consistent scheme, though; there are exceptions, but it's worthwhile to move in the direction of consistency, per WP:CRITERIA. --BDD (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input, that's interesting though as surely UK band is the same as U.S. band, so shouldn't British be used as American is? I appreciate there are already articles using that formatting as you have already demonstrated but seems strange that different nationalities require different formatting, I don't see it as an engvar issue; maybe I'm getting too bogged down in semantics! Zarcadia (talk) 20:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Support - Straightforward (BDD, seems British used rather than UK in band categories... agree with consistency point though) In ictu oculi (talk) 04:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
- Definitely agree with British over UK. Zarcadia (talk) 14:35, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- Support. Either way (British or UK) would be fine, I think. — sparklism hey! 16:40, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
LFO new album rumours
[edit]Is it acceptable for Wikipedia to publish the following rumour?
LFO is releasing a new album called 'JivverDicker'.
Track list:
1. Look down my nose at you 2. Me and my friends think we're better than you 3. We are hippies 4. Narcissists 5. Psychotrist 6. Put down the kids 7. Put ourselves up 8. JivverDicker's Face 9. The Pompous Smell of Jivver Dicker's Eyes and Face
The rumour comes from Xltronic the site with the links to Warp Records and the staff of Warp Records regularly post messages at that site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Australia12345 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LFO (British band). 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/20071203203247/http://www.no-future.com/erutufon/showthread.php?t=5114 to http://www.no-future.com/erutufon/showthread.php?t=5114
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) 13:28, 29 November 2017 (UTC)