From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
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)
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)
[edit] Prorec link
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)
[edit] Genre category
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)
- 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)
- 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)
