Talk:Lateralus (song)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tool, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ToolWikipedia:WikiProject ToolTemplate:WikiProject ToolTool

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Progressive Rock Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 May 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Untitled

It seems to me like a lot of this article is opinion and speculation, and therefore is not really worth covering.

But, what's the real meaning of the word "Lateralus"?

Perhaps inspired by the rectus capitis lateralis muscle. Lateral thinking, get a backbone, and all that. –Pomte 01:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Summum

The article says, "The line 'As below so above and beyond, I imagine' is a quote from one of the Seven Aphorisms of Summum...." It is not, in fact. Here's a link to Summum's own web page stating the aphorisms in full: http://www.summum.us/philosophy/principles.shtml

As you can see, "...and beyond, I imagine" is not part of their aphorisms. That leaves us with "As below, so above", which goes back much further than Summum[[1]], a mystical philosophy that was made up in the 1970s, apparently. (Here's Wikipedia's coverage of the use of the aphorism in Hermeticism[[2]], for example.)

Basically, then, it looks like the reference to Summum is a completely pointless (and deceptive) plug for someone's pet philosophy. 71.215.84.21 (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

time signatures

can we include something about the time signatures used in this song (987 in the chorus, use of 5/4 in the rest of the song, etc.)? Deutschebag17 06:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced material

I copied this comment and my response from my talk page, so others can comment. Dicklyon 00:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your recent changes to the song Lateralus. You stated you couldn't find sources.. Let's look at the changes.

"The Fibonacci sequence shares a relationship with the golden ratio. The golden ratio is used to describe spirals, which are mentioned several times later in the lyrics." You could not find a source that the Fibonacci sequence shares a relationship with the golden ratio? You can't find lyrics on Tool's own website showing that "spirals" are mentioned several times? Hmm

The problem with this one is the middle bit "The golden ratio is used to describe spirals;" it's simply not true except for one very particular spiral. Therefore, the connection of the sprial lyrics to fibonacci is OK, there being a Fibonacci spiral (assuming you find a source that analyzed this song that way), but connecting golden ratio is a stretch not supported by the sources. Dicklyon 00:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then change it to say "The golden ratio is used to describe a particular spiral", don't delete it. Wikidan829 01:32, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Keenan first begins singing 1 minute and 37 seconds into the song, which equates to 1.617 minutes. The golden ratio is approximately 1.618." We can't source the 1:37 part, but it is indeed true, I'm sure Wikipedia isn't the ONLY place that mentions it. You couldn't find a source that states the golden ratio is approx 1.618?

The finding of the relationship between the song and golden ratio is what is unsourced. It doesn't matter if you can verify that coincidence. What matters is whether that analysis of the song is sourced, versus your (or some unnamed editor's) original research. Dicklyon 00:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"The time signatures of the chorus change from 9/8 to 8/8 to 7/8, symbolizing a spiral. 987 is also a Fibonacci number." Same as the second line.

There no source for connecting the time signal to the spiral or the fibonacci number. Is there? Dicklyon 00:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, it's time signature(more reason why you shouldn't be touching this), and the article I'm using as a source states this: "The core of it is lateral thinking. And the human element of the spiral, the lateral." Carey helpfully adds, "It was originally titled 9-8-7. For the time signatures. Then it turned out that 987 was the 17th step of the Fibonacci sequence (in which each integer is equal to the sum of the preceding two). So that was cool."

Leave it alone, I'll find your sources. Wikidan829 22:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert comment said some things just are, we don't need sources. That's incorrect. When you clean it up to what's sourcable, put it back. For now, it's out. I did look for sources, by the way, and found a couple of forum discussions, nothing like a reliable source. Dicklyon 00:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do believe I told you on your talk page (if you didn't check) that I'm working on sources, leave the freaking article alone so I can add them without someone dicking around with it. Some people have jobs and can't sit on Wikipedia all day working on this stuff. Why not make yourself useful and try changing the article or putting in things like "citation needed" instead of just REMOVING chunks. This information is readily available. Wikidan829 01:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From WP:V: "Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor." Relax and think of what Tool would say about this. The information can wait, and if anyone actually comes here looking for the song's meaning over the next couple of days, which are hugely theorized on various other places, they're probably not going to lose sleep over it. –Pomte 01:52, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. However I let Dick know that I was getting his references and he reverts it again. He can challenge it in the talk page, but unless it's blatantly wrong like "Lateralus is about how much Maynard likes Dicks' mom", it should not be removed unless thoroughly discussed. No patience! Wikidan829 01:55, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dick, I clarified the article to specific "golden spiral" instead of "all spirals", as you requested. Good catch.

I left the "song starts at 1m37s" alone. This is merely a statement that can be proven by anyone who has access to the song. There is no myth or opinion here. I cannot source it without causing a copyright infringement, anyone who would even care about this article already has the song anyway. The next statement, that the Golden Ratio is approx. 1.618 is correct. It is completely left up to the reader to decide if it was done intentionally or not. Regardless, the information should be there to point it out for their observation. This is clearly NPOV.

As far as the "time signal" (another reason you shouldn't be touching this), I think you meant "time signature", which is a very well known music term. I added a reference to an interview with the band. This is sufficient evidence to use what is in the article.

Thanks for sourcing the signature bit, and sorry about my signal typo. I took out the mention of golden ratio and 1.617, since these are still unsourced and unverifiable. The reason I care is that this stuff keeps spilling over to the golden ratio article, a famous accreter of unsourced junk, so I thought I'd try to preempt that by taking it out of where it's coming from. I expect you'll report back if you find any analysis of these Tools in terms of the golden ratio, and if it's a reliable source we'll be happy to have it in the other article, too. By the way, you need to study up on wp:v and wp:or. Dicklyon 03:08, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and you also need to bone up on WP:CIV and WP:AGF. No need to make profanities of my name. We're all just trying to do a good job here. Dicklyon 03:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to thank El hombre for helping me find some of these. Wikidan829 02:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he was good. Even admitted, on your talk, "I don't know if it will work as a source for the specific material on Lateralus (song) that was removed but it could be used elsewhere." I think we converged on something I can live with now, but if any mention of golden ratio comes back, it will need a reliable source. Dicklyon 14:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dahliav (talk) 21:11, 1 October 2011 (UTC) I'm pretty new at editing. ---- I dont know how important this page is either. I found it on reddit and am interested in colors. Given that Tool is in the psychedelic community if this color stuff is mentioned then what I added is relevant. BUT I have some questions about editing in general and I dont know where to post them. --> Above all do not make an error is what I am thinkig bout now. --- here's my questions -- I was and am still looking to learn how to do an external link by wikipedia standards. I just edited http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Lateralus_%28song%29&action=edit&section=2 and I took a very long time doing it to do it right. I so respect those who have done this before me. It's been well over an hour so far. I didnt want to error. --- I didnt do the external links in the correct style (yet) because I didnt want to get caught up in FORMAT and make a substance error in the process. Now that I saved it I want to get the links in the right way. I know that Wikipedia doesnt want my personal opinion but wants to see that what I write is part of the general noosphere. OK you have my comment. I'm still looking for the right way to do it. I see this right now (Cite your sources: Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).) but when I look in the text of the source of the article I didnt see that used.[reply]

thanks. all help appreciated.

I have gone ahead and removed a bit included in brackets about "erroneous math here." Not only does such a statement in the main article clog it up, and not only was it horribly out of place in the main article rather than the talk page; it's also wrong. The article specifically states 97 seconds *approximates* the golden ratio, not that it pinpoints it. What's more, 1.617 is off from 1.618 by one one-thousandth. Really? Someone wants to ignore the fact that 97 seconds is still the closest integer approximation because it's off by 4% of one second? This is furthermore not even mentioning that if you're bringing centiseconds into it, then the singing doesn't necessarily even begin at exactly 9,700 centiseconds. 69.113.227.58 (talk) 18:44, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if this is not the correct place, but before simply removing the questionable part I would like to ask for feedback: In the Interpretation part when referring to the order of the mentioned colors, there is an anekdotal LSD trip stated. The only source given is a tablature, that simply claims that the order follows an LSD-trip by Alex Grey without giving any source. I think its very questionable to take this as a proper source. Additionally it contradicts an explanation given by Maynard Keenan that provides a useful source. As well the idea, the order colours appear in an LSD-trip their artist once might have had, might be used as origin for a major aspect of a relevant part of Tool lyrics seem absolutely ridiculous to me. Any ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.133.102.193 (talk) 14:40, 15 February 2021 (UTC) Edit: Couldn´t find any valid source for a connection to Alex Grey or an LSD-trip as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.133.102.193 (talk) 14:42, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fibonacci and verse rhythm

This one is more for Mr Lyon. Not beating a dead horse, but would like to make sure this is completely covered. You removed the reference to the song starting at 1 minute 37 seconds(and some change), which is about 1.617, for what reason?

Also, the fact that their rhythm of the verse, which is obviously intentional considering the context that the song was written in(as indicated by interviews), is unsourced, does it make it original research? Why is this more valid than stating when Maynard starts singing? Wikidan829 16:15, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note

Please be aware of WP:NOR (no original research) and in particular WP:SYN (synthesis) when putting together articles like this one - Wikipedia should be a summary of what independent sources say about the subject. Note that I don't think it's actually been breached in the present article but just a hazard that needs to be kept in mind. Orderinchaos 17:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics

I think we are pressing our luck with a copyvio on the lyrics even though they are part of the Fib sequence. the_undertow ^talk 07:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:L4T3R4LUS.JPG

Image:L4T3R4LUS.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead source link

For the record, the first reference (http://www.cdicarlo.com/paper_04maynard.htm) is dead. I've left it up so someone may be able to explore that site and find the source that it's trying to link to. --Evan ¤ Seeds 20:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lateralus (song). 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:

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) 21:38, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correct title?

Looking at the CD sleeve, the song title actually reads "Lateralis" (Latin for "lateral"), not Lateralus. I didn't upload a photo of the sleeve for copyright reasons, but could someone please verify if that's only me? Benjamin Landorff (talk) 19:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See the article referring to "Lateralus" the album - I cite: "On the first presses of US CD, "Lateralus" is misspelled "Lateralis" on the tracklist of the outer packaging." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.133.102.193 (talk) 14:32, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]