Talk:Metropolis Pt. 2: Scenes from a Memory

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



CNN News Report?[edit]

At the end of "Finally Free" when Nicolas has walked inside and the tv is on, I believe the news report is on CNN (I recognize the voice) about JFK Jr dying since it mentions Washington, a "member of American nobility," and " yet another tradegy in a long string of misfortunes." Since the CD was released in 2000 and JFK Jr died in 1999, it is possible that his death occured around the time of the CD's recording. I haven't visited any fan websites to see if this is true, but if anyone else agrees with my hypothesis I think it should be included in the track summaries. --22:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

It is ... I heard this somewhere also. I think it was on the commentaries of the Scene from NY DVD --Pinnecco 15:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also think it was in the DVD commentaries. They included the news report to tell the listeners that Nicholas' story happened in a recent past. Can anyone confirm this? --Paraiba 13:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think i might be a nod to the album Operation Mindcrime, by Queensrÿche, anyone else think this? Or have i just been listening to too much of them? --Nicpic10 18:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comma?[edit]

A minor quibble: there is no comma in the name Metropolis Pt. 2: Scenes from a Memory. Is there any way that can be changed? It just makes it somewhat annoying when trying to link to the page. --Durga2112 14:37, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I guess that's like how Ytse Jam is spelled with an accented e (Ytsé Jam) in the WDADU booklet, but noone pays any attention to it! plattopus (talk) 14:03, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

The Dance of Eternity[edit]

The article says that The Dance of Eternity "can possibly represent when Victoria and Edward make love", but it seems to me more likely that it refers to Julian and Victoria being together in death, especially since Julian fell onto Victoria and died with her.

The Story[edit]

Why isn't the story here? Is it on another page that I missed? I'd think that any fan listening to SFAM who isn't quite sure who "the Sleeper" is or what happens at the end of the album would consult Wikipedia, only to find...nothing. Anyone have a plan to write a synopsis? - user:defunkt 23:57, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'd say the only reason it isn't here is because: 1) Noone has had the time to actually write it, and 2) There's so much debate about the story, that anyone contributing to this article would probably have to read a whole bunch of peoples' opinions in order to stay NPOV. Although having said that, yes I do plan at some stage in the future to provide a synopsis, but haven't got around to it. -- plattopusis this thing on? 03:19, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
Okay great, I'm looking forward to it. I didn't know that there was a debate about the story, so at least mentioning it and some of the contested points would be interesting to read. What I interpreted the story as seemed to line up with what the guys explain on the commentary of the SFAM DVD, but they obviously don't go over every detail. Great job on all the DT stuff, though. These pages are all really rad. - user:defunkt 19:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well, it's not so much debate on the major points of the story (because, as you say, they're pretty clearly explained on the DVD), but it's more speculation about what wasn't explained. Although, there are a few people who still debate just "who" was reincarnated as "whom", have a look at the analysis of the story on DTFAQ.com (which currently has 58 comments, by far the most of any content on the FAQ) for an example of the kind of differences. It'll be a BIG task to do justice to all these theories. -- plattopusis this thing on? 17:40, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
Would this help? Maybe a brief summary of Mike Portnoy's own post on his website FAQ can be used. If we quote if from his site, http://www.mikeportnoy.com/about/mpfaq/showquestion.asp?menu=about&faq=1&fldAuto=404, that should avoid POV issues on our part, right? 198.203.175.175
Thanks much for the story, I've been really looking forward to reading it.
I'm sort of confused at the ending... where do we get that the Hypnotherapist is Ed's reincarnated soul, and has killed Nicholas?

So the story section appears to have been copied from [1]. Do we have permission of the original author to use it on wikipedia? --asqueella 01:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • It does seem to be a rip off (or maybe dtfaq copied wikipedia), but the current language is inadequate for wikipedia -- too much use of first person and constructions like "next we read". I remember editing this text on wikipedia some time ago. If it is actually the same on DT FAQ, then DT FAQ (re)borrowed from wikipedia without atribution. In the next few days I'll work on this text so it will be better, a bit shorter, and different fomr the DT FAQ one. Fbergo (talk) 00:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Full title[edit]

Hey, does anyone else think that the title of this article should be "Metropolis Pt. 2: Scenes from a Memory" I know that on the CD spine only the title "Scenes from a Memory" is shown, and that on the front of the album "Scenes from a Memory" is in bold while "Metropolis Pt. 2" is not... So my question is, does anyone else think the article should be changed to reflect the full album title? Just a thought. (Drlecter491 08:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Story Ending?[edit]

At the end of the story should it really be stated that the hypno kills Nicholas? No one really knows if he does or not...just a thought since nothing ever comes out and says it happens that way...

Actually in Metropolis 2000, the face of The Miracle is clearly shown when the hypno kills Nicholas.

What? That makes no sense. The hypnotherapist has a very calm voice, not that of a killer.. My interpretation is: Nicholas is still in a trance, while we witness the Miracle coming home from the murder, blood still on his hands. To calm his nerves he pours a glass of whisky (he was a whisky-drinker, right?) and sits down, listening to the news of his own actions. The whole scene is abrupted by the voice of the hypnotherapist, waking Nicholas from his trance. Nicholas wasn't only Victoria - he was the killer/Miracle as well. He lets out a scream as he realizes the terrible fact. The static is supposed to be your own audio player, symbolically throwing you into confusion. Of course, this must have been fairly hard to arrange for the concert, so the story had to be changed somewhat to fit a theatrical version. May I be right? Portnoy talks about the story fooling you. You don't realize what's really going on until the end. The hypnotherapist being the miracle is just too silly for an album as fantastic as this one. :) Portnoy's quote: "throughout the entire album, you're led down one path toward solving the mystery (Nicholas is Victoria), but at the end it sort of twists into some different places, and you can find some clues at the end of the album that lead you to believe something else (Nicholas is the killer)". This way, the story gets a kind of a "sixth sense"-ending. The Metropolis 2000-version might have been symbolical. Through leading Nicholas to realize this, he kills his soul. Deep enough? :D Bjern 15:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The hypnotherapist is definitely the Miracle, who is definitely the killer. The Miracle kills Victoria, as stated on the record and as shown on the DVD. The Miracle tells Victoria to "Open your eyes", pointedly in the same way as the hypnotherapist tells Nicholas to "Open your eyes". No real debate here. Docta247 17:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No debate? I always thought that before the hypnotherapist says "Open your eyes", a rope could be heard, as if hinting that Nicholas, after discovering what happened, and being unable to live with these memories, commits suicide, but is then waken by the hypnotherapist, as if his suicide was only part of the trance. Maybe The Miracle commited suicide after killing Victoria and The Sleeper, and Nicholas was actually him all along? HDAce (talk) 21:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the DVD, and in the commentary for it, it is shown that the hypnotherapist kills Nicholas. Offski (talk) 22:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Miracle would have been at least 21 in 1928, and if you add 71 years to that, you would have a much older man than the voice of the hypnotherapist. If the killer is the hypnotherapist, as show in Metropolis 2000, he would have to have the soul of the Miracle inside of him(not unlike Nicholas and Victoria). Though I cannot be sure. Drock1307 (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's how I always thought of it. The hypnotherapist, who shares the soul of the killer, kills Nicolas, who shares the soul of Victoria. 142.177.144.200 (talk) 04:39, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stage Play[edit]

Shouldn't the stage pla adaptation be mentioned? It was sone by a theater company in London called "the BATS"71.214.177.214 21:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't get hold of any information regarding this. 54UV1K 17:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I found a list of plays performed at The BATS in Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex. It shows that they performed Scenes From a Memory in 2005. [2] Perhaps there can be a small section added about this stage play. Thesleeper38 08:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Music[edit]

There is a lot of talk about the story of this album, but there doesn't seem to be any mention of the actual music going on ("Shrink and Grow" from Fatal Tragedy, anyone?). I think a part should added about this--142.167.93.68 15:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Rock Opera" Category[edit]

There is a "rock opera" category listing. It has the likes of 2112 and Operation: Mindcrime there. Should we include SfaM on it? Will someone make that link, please? InnocuousFox 06:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Dream Theater - Metropolis Pt. 2- Scenes from a Memory.jpg[edit]

Image:Dream Theater - Metropolis Pt. 2- Scenes from a Memory.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 insure 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 19:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Old Man[edit]

When Nicholas meets The Old Man outside Victoria's house, Nicholas states that he "felt that [he] could trust him"; could it be possible that The Old Man is the reincarnation of Julian (The Sleeper)? He does seem to know some info about Victoria's murder, pointing a possible clue at this. Although it doesn't specifically state how much older The Old Man is to Nicholas, but there was a 70-odd year gap between Victoria being murdered and Nicholas going into regression (remember the album was released in 1999/2000, and the CNN report at the end of Scene Nine suggests this takes place around that time also)
Note that the final line sung in Scene Nine was "We'll meet again my friend / Someday soon", possibly referring to Victoria/Nicholas and Julian/The Old Man (and maybe Ed/The Hypno. also?); it's improbable that it could be between Victoria and Nicholas, as they share the same soul; although in Scene Eight, Victoria appears in front of Nicholas, telling him to move on, but Nicholas was still under regression, so this may just be a memory of Victoria's, with Nicholas interpreting this as something else.
Your thoughts on this?
~~NaN 11:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is beyond the scope of a Wikipedia article. Leave it on the forums. Clearlyfakeusername (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Falling Into Infinity Demo[edit]

As we know, Their previous album Falling into Infinity was to contain a 20-odd minute track, entitled "Metropolis Pt 2", but this was cut out.
But looking at some other tracklist I found on the internet (OK, you got me, it was a torrent site) shows a track entitled "Metropolis Pt 2 Demo (Bonus Track).mp3" at the bottom; did certain copies of this CD have the Demo track on?
~~NaN 16:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you were looking at the track listing of the "Falling Into Infinity Sessions", an official DT bootleg available from Ytse Jam records. It had an early version of that song on it. Ledzeppelin19 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 06:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest albums of all time..... or not?[edit]

"The album was ranked number 95 on the October 2006 issue of Guitar World magazine's list of the greatest 100 guitar albums of all time" ~ First paragraph

When following the link, it leads to some forum, but is actually a dead link. Suggest removal of this statement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.54.56.253 (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria's age???[edit]

This has confused me for ages. Just how old was Victoria when she died??? --JemHadar359 (talk) 01:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is ambiguous, but I would guess a "young girl" would be no older than 25 or 26; probably between 15 and 20. But that's just my guess. Clearlyfakeusername (talk) 19:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Act II, Scenes 6–9[edit]

If this concept album is in two acts, then scenes 6–9 actually are: "Act II, Scenes 1–4". –pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is normally correct convention, but the album labels them differently. Clearlyfakeusername (talk) 19:43, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Prog metal or rock first[edit]

A genre dispute seems to have arisen over whether this album is more progressive metal than progressive rock. From the looks of it, progressive metal remained first and foremost for years per invisible consensus. Granted, this is pure opinion, but to me the overwhelmingly obvious metal tracks are 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 12 – many of which are long (5, 6, 8, 11), and a lone vocal/acoustic track. So I gotta know, how this primarily a progressive rock album? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, this was much more of a heavy prog-rock album, more similar to bands like Rush or Kansas, than a prog-metal album. It showcased more major-key harmonics and melodies, and all in all just seemed a lot mellower/upbeat and less aggressive than, say, Train of Thought or Black Clouds. Plus, about half the songs on the album are no doubt prog-rock (essentially the ones you missed off your list of prog metal tracks). As well as that, I think track 12 is, again, leaning further towards heavy prog-rock. Also, parts of Dance of Eternity and Beyond This Life are pure-prog, eg the keyboard solos/breaks, and some of the guitar sequences, and the bridge section and acoustic parts in the latter. Furthermore, the whole concept of this being a concept album containing tracks ranging from 1 - 12 minutes in length screams prog-rock. Finally, prog-rock has both a visible and an invisible consensus, whereas prog-metal only has an invisible one, and generally visible sources are a bit safer. The album was compared to albums such as Rush's 2112 and Yes's Close to the Edge on Rolling Stones' list of top prog-rock albums. In conclusion, I think this is more a heavy prog-rock album than pure prog-metal. 86.172.245.83 (talk) 23:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the Allmusic review for the album says "There was a point where they tried to straighten out their sound somewhat, as they flirted with straight-ahead, laid-back metal on 1997's Falling into Infinity, but with its 1999 studio sequel, Scenes from a Memory, Dream Theater delves straight into old-fashioned prog rock." It is essentially talking about the contrast between Falling Intro Infinity, a definite prog-metal album, and SFAM. 86.172.245.83 (talk) 23:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plot[edit]

I really don't see why the plot should be removed. Movie pages have plot summaries, without being removed for being "original research", I honestly don't see any reason why a concept album shouldn't. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 20:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also the members of the band have openly discussed the plot to at least some extent so it can hardly be called purely original, although I will agree it needs better sourcing 67.197.62.138 (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with having a detailed plot on this article, as it smacks of WP:OR. Sure, have a blurb with a reliable source, but not a long essay. However, I do think clarification should be put forth here as to why film articles are allowed to have plots, but not concept albums. So rather then edit warring, let's leave the plot out of the article for now and discuss the issues here. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why movies can have a plot while this can't. We also have plot summaries for opera's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tale_of_Tsar_Saltan_%28Rimsky-Korsakov%29, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27incoronazione_di_Poppea, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orfeo_ed_Euridice, and the Wikipedia pages for almost every other opera in existence). All of those have a synopsis, one is a featured article and another is a good article. Only one refrence is cited among all three of them (on act one of Orfeo ed Euridice, no source is cited for the other acts). I can't think of a good reason to call this page original research while they aren't. I fail to see any reason a classical opera should be allowed to have a synopsis and a rock opera shouldn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.197.62.138 (talk) 04:00, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To add a little bit more, I went to the opera portal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Opera), every one of the featured articles concerning a specific opera has a synopsis section. Sourcing is rare, usually only happening in the case of historical context (Like here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tosca where sourcing is only present in the "Historical context" section). 67.197.62.138 (talk) 04:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A good argument put forth. Users Binksternet and Indopug really need to get in here to discuss this, because he/she does have a point. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 04:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
First thing: if people are going to argue that other articles have plot sections then they will also have to argue for the 2,700 words of plot which were in here for far too long. Other plot sections have guidelines for length, for instance WP:FILMPLOT which says the plot section should not be longer than 700 words. So this plot section is about four times too large.
Second thing is that plots are usually discussed in published film reviews and book reviews. Please show me that this album's storyline is discussed in published sources. If we can find a few such sources then I would be amenable to seeing a sub-700-word plot written for it. Certainly not the ungainly behemoth I just re-removed. Binksternet (talk) 05:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with you completely there on the length. Most operas have a paragraph per act, this album has two acts and thus should have about two paragraphs. I don't think a song-by-song breakdown is necessary. I found a few links that may prove helpful (http://faq.dtnorway.com/question?questionid=1032, Which is a forum of fans discussing the plot. More info can be found here http://members.gaponline.de/d.mueller/Home/doc/ResearchPaper.pdf, an English paper done about the album. The final part from the original removed text (Then we hear static noise, which fades to black. The album recording leaves things unclear as to what happens, but it's revealed on the live DVD that the Hypnotherapist, Edward's reincarnation, has killed Nicholas and has completed the cycle yet again. This could be further interpreted in relation to Victoria, whose goal might've been to forewarn Nicholas of a murderous cycle, rather than to ease his uncertainty about the afterlife.), is directly mentioned on the Live DVD, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolis_2000:_Scenes_from_New_York. A full version of this is on you tube, although I don't know Wikipedia's policy on linking this. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 05:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And to add one last thing, I would like to reemphasize my point that most of the featured articles on the opera portal contain no external sources in the article, although I do understand the difference between citing sources in the article and making sure that people are discussing the plot outside Wikipedia. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, after going back through the opera portal, I would like to retract the statement I made above about one paragraph per act. While this is common, several featured articles go over. They simply follow the standard Wikipedia rules for plot summaries, except with additional sub-headers for each act. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 05:42, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Binksternet. There wouldn't be a problem if this were a two/three-paragraph summary, but this is clearly not the case here. There's also the fact that there's a lot more interpretation in parsing the plot of an album than that of a film. If you want to compare this article with something, compare like-for-like: American Idiot#Story.
Lastly, neither source the IP offered--the fan forum and the unpublished paper--meet our standards of reliability.—indopug (talk) 11:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to find professional reviews because he did mention film reviews, but what's weird is that I can only find user reviews. This is odd considering that it made it to #73 on the billboard top 200 and was voted the best prog metal album of all time. Despite this, the AllMusic review linked in the article is the only professional one I can find. I was simply making the point that the plot of the album is discussed extensively outside of Wikipedia. As I previously mentioned, I wasn't intending to use them as actual sources.
And again I agree on the length thing. I'm busy now but when I get a chance I will attempt create a sub 700 words version, unless somebody with more experience would prefer to do it instead. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 15:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is there nothing official from the band regarding the story, like on their website or archived somewhere? I don't have the liner notes at hand right now; maybe there's something in those? Mac Dreamstate (talk) 15:45, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mike Portnoy discusses it briefly on his website (http://www.mikeportnoy.com/aboutmike/faq/answers/6.aspx) although he doesn't go into full detail. Also as I previously mentioned the live DVD Metropolis 2000: Scenes from New York has band commentary which discusses the plot. And like you I don't have the liner notes with me, but I recall it having something, several websites which post song lyrics seem to say that it tells which of the characters is speaking at the time (Mike also says this on his website). Again I'm having trouble finding stuff, I can't find online a single interview with the band from around when this album came out, which is weird because it was very popular and critically acclaimed. Either it somehow hasn't been posted to the internet or my Google skills are failing me. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, after extensive searching I was able to find reviews where they go into detail about the plot (http://www.popmatters.com/tools/full/189508/ and http://www.live-metal.net/revisited-dreamtheater-scenesfromamemory.html). I also found an extensive amount of user reviews that discuss the plot, although those obviously aren't usable. After what Binksternet said I would defiantly think that there is enough to justify writing a short plot synopsis 67.197.62.138 (talk) 19:28, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, those two are good sources, establishing that publications have paid attention to this album's synopsis/plot/storyline. Binksternet (talk) 19:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. As I previously mentioned, I'm willing to write the synopsis, however there are other people in this talk page with significantly more editing experience than me and I'm not 100% sure how to proceed. I was going to do about two paragraphs, one for each act, and not do the song-by-song breakdown included in the previous version. Should I go for it?67.197.62.138 (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, should we cite these sources? The features articles on the opera portal mostly didn't, but what about for the ending which isn't mentioned until the live DVD67.197.62.138 (talk) 19:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me now. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. Binksternet (talk) 21:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well done IP. I removed the characters and the sub-sectioning because I didn't find them useful and felt they got in the way of a well-written summary.—indopug (talk) 11:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Genres, take #2[edit]

This pains me, every time. Is there genuinely nothing out there, in terms of professional reviews or even a quip from the band itself, that says this album is progressive metal as well as rock? I've never seen such a glaring omission from an album article—I don't mean to genre-warrior here, but it just looks thoroughly wrong without it labelled as such. When I think progressive rock, I automatically think Rush, Yes and Genesis. This album sounds heavy as shit for the most part. There must be something better out there than All(WaysWrong)Music. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 12:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Every music vendor/streaming service I can find lists it as metal (iTunes, Amazon, Last.fm, .etc) as does one of the reviews I linked to above (http://www.popmatters.com/tools/full/189508/). The other one heavily implies it (by nature of reviewing it on a website dedicated to metal) but isn't explicit enough to be used as a source. Also it is listed in the Encyclopaedia Metallum, (http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Dream_Theater/Metropolis_Pt._2%3A_Scenes_from_a_Memory/1374). I don't know about Wikipedia's policy but the metal community generally regards that as a reliable source.
Also, AllMusic is used as both of the two sources calling the album progressive rock, and defines the album as progressive metal as well. If it's reliable enough to call the album progressive rock, why isn't it reliable enough to call it progressive metal? Because if we can't list it as Progressive metal using Allmusic as a source we would have to remove progressive rock from it's genera as well, or find a new source. 67.197.62.138 (talk) 19:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently the genres listed on the AllMusic sidebar (on the left of the page) are not what we use on WP to list genres anymore. *shrug* I don't know when that happened, but I keep hearing about it. Nonetheless, it seems to be this line within the prose of the review which sets progressive rock in stone: "Dream Theater delves straight into old-fashioned prog rock." I mean jeez.. I respect Erlewine's reviews otherwise, but he is an absolute idiot for not even once mentioning the outright heaviness of most of the album, save for a few softer Pink Floyd'esque moments. Really makes me wish I was a professional reviewer just so that I could put it straight. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well there is this one I linked earlier (http://www.popmatters.com/tools/full/189508/) which explicitly states "Progressive metal" in the prose. And I also found one more (http://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/11194/Dream-Theater-Metropolis-Pt.-2-Scenes-from-a-Memory/) that explicitly states that it's metal in the prose. Plus does Wikipedia have an official listing of weather or not the Encyclopaedia Metallum is usable? Also not sure if spirit-of-metal counts but it is states there too (http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/album-groupe-Dream_Theater-nom_album-Metropolis_Pt.2_Scenes_from_a_Memory-l-en.html). And last but not least, not a review but an overview of progressive metal as a whole (http://noisefull.com/articles/absolute-guide-progressive-metal) which mentions it.
And I'm guessing if we can't use the sidebar on AllMusic than we probably can't use the genres listed on almost every single music vendor in existence. Do you think this is enough? 67.197.62.138 (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Sputnikmusic review is not a staff one, so it definitely cannot be used. Not sure about Spirit of Metal, which is not listed on WP:ALBUM/SOURCE. Likewise for Noisefull, even though it looks good to me, but unsure if it passes WP:RS. PopMatters is listed at WP:ALBUM/SOURCE, so perhaps it and Noisefull could be used? Give it a day or so before adding them, if no other users object. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, added it before you posted this. Anyways WP:Be bold, but we'll see if anybody objects. If they're specifically stated on WP:ALBUM/SOURCE, I can't see where somebody could 67.197.62.138 (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right on with being bold. I hope it sticks this time. Not labelling this album as metal is a Fatal Tragedy (/melodramatics). Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning genre tags, every single page on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Progressive_metal_albums is an album. If we aren't supposed to put that on album pages then it would appear as though the whole category would need to be deleated 67.197.62.138 (talk) 21:41, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I always forget how the genre category thing works, but this article explains it: Album article style guide#Genre. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 21:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Synopsis improvement[edit]

In Synopsis > Act I there is the sentence "(last name given during video introduction during 2019 tour)". The lastname Page was known before that. For instance, it appears in the "Metropolis 2000: Scenes From New York" VHS/DVD projected onto the background stage screen during the song "Through Her Eyes" during LaBrie's singing of "In loving memory of our child; So innocent, eyes open wide". The way that this sentence is written gives the idea that the band added just in 2019 new information to the "Metropolis Pt. 2: Scenes from a Memory" canon which is not true.Bernardo Lopes (talk) 13:42, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural references section?[edit]

It seems to me I’ve seen something like a Cultural References section in other wiki articles, detailing when the subject of the article has been referred to in other media (such as when The Simpsons parodied Poe’s The Raven).

Turns out DT is thanked for this album at the end of this novel: The Grave Below https://www.amazon.com/dp/1735735019/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_6iIxFb8H9CKX9

So do folks feel such things merit a section at the end of the article?

Since neither the book nor the author have articles, they may not be notable enough to be worth a mention here. While I don't personally agree with this, the community of editors have shown a tendency to keep sections such as "Cultural references" or "Cover versions" as short as possible, usually focusing only on notable events presented in prose instead of a list format. PS: Please, sign your comments by adding for tildes (~~~~) at the end of them. Victor Lopes Fala!•C 18:16, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Metropolis_Pt._2:_Scenes_from_a_Memory&oldid=1211266496"