Talk:U.K. (band)

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Progressive Rock Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Progressive Rock, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Progressive rock 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.Progressive RockWikipedia:WikiProject Progressive RockTemplate:WikiProject Progressive RockProgressive rock articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance).

Authenticity check: A search reveals that the phrase "regarded by many" appears in the text. Is the phrase a symptom of a dubious statement? Could a source be quoted instead? Perhaps the "many" could be identified? Might text be edited to more genuinely reflect specific facts?

Wetman

Untitled

It's weasel wording.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 20:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UNCREDITED

If you follow that "DPRP" link near the bottom, you'll see that much of the language in this article is stolen wholesale from that site - i.e., PLAGIARIZED. Pretty lame. Use your own words, please. 2fs (talk) 06:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some mention should be given to different tone of the first album. The relentless downbeat darkness is such a contrast to most rock, certainly the rock supergroups. --166.84.254.33 (talk) 01:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bruford or UK, which was the first?

The article states, "Following two lengthy American tours (June-October 1978), first Holdsworth and then Bruford departed U.K. over musical differences, going on to form the jazz rock fusion group Bruford." However, the UK album was released in 1978, while Bill Bruford's website states that Bruford's first album, Feels Good to Me, was released in 1977. That would suggest that in time of Bruford's and Holdsworth's departure from U.K., the band Bruford would have been formed already. Anybody can straighten it out?--Krótki (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Bruford was started after he and Holdsworth left U.K.
I asked John Wetton on his message board if he can provide a photo of the band. I don't know when he'll respond. I could use a promo shot and say that I had no choice because they split up three decades ago. Sposato (talk) 00:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Feels Good to Me was released as a Bill Bruford solo album. Then he did U.K., then he formed Bruford as a distinct band. Bondegezou (talk) 09:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Odd time signatures?

7/4 may be an "odd" time signature in the world of mainstream pop but, as regards prog rock and jazz, it's almost normal! Anyone brought up on 70s prog will be perfectly at home with 7/4, 5/4, 9/8, 11/8 etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkRae (talk • contribs) 09:22, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Odd" as used here does not mean "unusual". It means that the "numerator" is an odd number (5, 7, 11, etc.)Carnamagos (talk) 17:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

UK or U.K.?

The article is called "UK (band)", but the text refers to them as "U.K.". Then there's the article about their first album called "U.K. (album)" which refers to the band as "UK". Does it have periods or not? We really need some consistency here. tk tk tk 01:55, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does. See branding. I've had the page moved. Regards, Rob984 (talk) 22:46, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on U.K. (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/20131112003703/http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_edge_eddie_jobson/ to http://mixonline.com/mag/audio_edge_eddie_jobson/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ukreunion.com/

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) 01:57, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]