Talk:Constellation Records (Canada)

Canada: Quebec / Montreal / Music Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Montreal (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

Record Labels Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Labels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of record labels 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.Record LabelsWikipedia:WikiProject Record LabelsTemplate:WikiProject Record Labelsrecord labels articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Constellation's current commercial activity

This article is awful. It reads like it was written by someone who is in an anti-establishment suicide cult. Not encyclopedic at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.37.149 (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that Constellation likes to advertise their anti-commercialism and whatnot. But that doesn't mean it's currently active and true. I edited this article to say that they used to hold a strong stance on that but things seem to have changed. The article was both misleading and untrue in stating that Constellation chooses to avoid having their albums sold at major dealers. Is it not true that you can buy any album by any constellation artist on Amazon.com? So why delete that sentence and try to cover up the truth. Loyalty to a record label is one thing, but loyalty to the truth is more important. You can decide to be ignore it for yourself, but don't cover it up for others.

Before you change the article back to exhalting the label's fierce anti-commercial stance, try searching for some of their music on Amazon, HMV, and probably any other major media retailer.

List of (non-independent) record labels?

Why is the "List of record labels" (not only independent) in the "See Also" section? Paulo Oliveira 08:50, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it? After all Constellation Records is a record label :p (and it is listed in both the list of record labels and in the list of independent record labels) warpozio 15:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That was my point: "in both"! If there is an independent record label list why should there be two lists? Paulo Oliveira 12:45, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant Yanqui U.X.O. section

I don't think the following section of this article is really relevant to Constellation Records:

The package of the Godspeed You! Black Emperor album Yanqui U.X.O. was especially noteworthy, containing an extensive chart which demonstrated the links between four major record labels—AOL Time-Warner, BMG, Sony, Vivendi Universal—and various arms manufacturers. The band later apologized for some extensions of the chart, conceding that some of their research had been inaccurate. This chart accompanied a photograph of falling bombs.

It ought to be either removed or worked into the Yanqui U.X.O. article. MF=R talk + cont 03:55, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, it is "relevant" to Constellation but specific information about one album of one band shouldn't be a part of the main article of the entire record label. I've added the information to the Yanqui U.X.O. article. MF=R talk + cont 04:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amen.