Jump to content

Talk:Mirror to the Sky

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

23rd studio album?

[edit]

There's really no logical way to arrive at a total of 23 studio albums. I'm guessing that they've included "Keys to Ascension" and "Keys to Ascension 2" in the count, but those are both primarily live albums with a few new studio tracks thrown in.

Having said that, the studio tracks were later compiled into a single release called "KeyStudio", which I would argue is indeed a studio album (I mean, it's right there in the title. so...) But that still only makes "Mirror to the Sky" the 22nd album, not the 23rd.

So basically, either you can ignore the "Keys" material, which makes "Mirror" the 21st, or you can count "KeysStudio", which makes "Mirror" the 22nd. But there's no possible way it could be the 23rd. Trowbridge (talk) 17:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keystudio is a compilation of tracks recorded in different sessions at different times. I think it would be silly to count it. KtA2 has as much studio material as live material; it’s got a whole album’s worth of studio material. I think it would be silly not to count it.
Whatever I or you feel, there are too many projects that don’t quite fit that it’s not obvious how to count them, so WP:CALC applies. That is, we have to follow what reliable sources say rather than trying to come up with a number ourselves. So, what do sources say? Bondegezou (talk) 18:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say you're right. I would say 21nd. There's no reason why you should call Keys studio albums. 2A02:A44E:B7A7:1:E131:1E81:AEAA:B488 (talk) 11:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested merge from

[edit]

An article has been created at Mirror to the Sky (song). I can't see much utility for such a standalone page. Why don't we merge it into this article? There are only 2 short paragraphs of unique content there and they would work fine here. Bondegezou (talk) 09:35, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know I'm the author of the proposed merged article, but seems to be a fairly notable (and noted) song to critics due to its length and stand-out regressive style. Would propose we keep separate and expand where possible. Psywave (talk) 21:49, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t see enough content to justify two articles. I think it makes more sense to have all the material on this article, for the album. If at some future date there is enough to warrant splitting off the song, that can be done. But we currently have two small articles, which is silly. Bondegezou (talk) 12:43, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Closing, with no merge, given that the discussion is stale, there was no support, and song article has since undergone expansion (see June edits). Klbrain (talk) 09:05, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]