What Time Is Love? was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 14, 2006 Good article nominee Listed February 14, 2010 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

The KLF (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject The KLF, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.The KLFWikipedia:WikiProject The KLFTemplate:WikiProject The KLFThe KLF 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

Noooo.... way too "busy" don't you think? :) --kingboyk 17:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty heavy, isn't it? Give it its own page then? --Vinoir 17:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, lets try. I can always delete it if we don't like it. Stand by (the JAMS) and prepare for takeoff! --kingboyk 17:21, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, what do you think? Do you prefer it split or combined? --kingboyk 17:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll assume you prefer it this way, since you're currently relinking to point to the new article :-) I'll remove "inuse" from this one now then, and just tweak The WTIL Story before throwing it back at ya for you to do your thang with it. I love teamwork! --kingboyk 17:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, This is what Wikiworld is about. The article's looking good to me. Never knew about that "major edit in progress" banner either, that's a useful bit of kit. --Vinoir 17:50, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think "America" would be essential as a clip, and one or other of the different single mixes? --kingboyk 07:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic. It's really handy that we seem to think the same way about the evolution of these articles. "America" and "Pure Trance 1" seem essential to me, and to be honest, I can rationalise in my mind why "Trancentral" should be there too. The KLF were, after all, masters of recycling: all three versions are very different, yet there is a natural evolution. I don't think that it would be OTT to include portions of all three. --Vinoir 10:53, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts, three would just be overkill. I'm worried about the amount of samples. --Vinoir 12:17, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you haven't read it yet, please read the rationale for the GA failure of Justified and Ancient on Talk:Justified and Ancient since all the reasons for that failure apply here as well. I know I must seem like a spoilsport turning down all three of you GA Nominees, but I really do feel like it doesn't match up with the status of other Good Articles or follow its criteria. I suggest looking at other song articles that have been labeled Good Articles and use them as a model for these songs. Thunderforge 20:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of your excellent tracklisting tables, Vinoir. --kingboyk 11:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I have tried this and it's not so easy, because the discography is just so huge for "What Time Is Love?", even ignoring all the peripheral versions. I think the table only works if, on a standard screen, one can see the whole table and all of the key. I'll have another go at it on Monday (the next major editing day for me), I have an idea of what to do.

The article also needs some kind of consolidating "Themes" section, I think, to bring it all back at the end, and a "Composition" section is also needed, containing things currently written in "Pure Trance 1". It's not too much of a problem and will be done on Monday. --Vinoir 15:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tracklistings done, along with some rearranging of existing prose. I experimented with creating and previewing separate sections for "Composition", but it was too fragmented: the musical evolution seems best discussed in the relevant single subsections. --Vinoir 02:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked to re-review this article and see if it was up to par with the new logic where GA is going (nothing much has changed though). After reading it, it still is GA material and (oldidied the GA tag with the reviewed version of the tag). There is just one thing you could look into and it would be :

• Giving a note on The descriptive use of the word "trance" is notable in this context, since the trance music genre was at this time unestablished. would help the readers since both this article and the Trance music article don't have a citation to go with their claim that it was KLF that brought trance music to a genre. Lincher 11:48, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lincher. I see that trance music has a section on The KLF (Trance_music#Trance_begins_as_a_genre) which I think I'm right in saying neither myself or Vinoir have ever touched :) Of course, that doesn't count as a citation but at least it suggests that our claim isn't too wild :) Sadly I can't pull a reference out of thin air but I fully agree with you that it needs a citation. I'll add it to the do list. Thanks for the suggestion. --kingboyk 12:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, here's some original research (which I think is born out by writings in the Manual) the KLF never invented anything, but they were masters at recognising an underground trend just as it was about to become more well-known and then they copied it and became part of the rise of that trend. I don't think they invented the genre but they were part of its establishment. I have no idea where there might be a reference for their importance in the establishment of trance though. - Drstuey 10:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, such a cynic! The KLF invented everything ;) Seriously, I take your point, and let's keep looking for a reference :) BTW, do you have any of the material listed on the todo list for 1987? --kingboyk 12:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Especially for you": http://www.libraryofmu.org/display-resource.php?id=35 - Drstuey 23:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aha! I knew you'd posted about this somewhere... Well, I've thanked you already but - thanks! :) --kingboyk 20:15, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The assertion remained uncited so I have now removed it. kingboyk (talk) 13:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted this because of the standard of writing/sourcing, but I've heard the claim before and it and Drummond's reaction should probably be in the article:

It appears the main riff is taken from Andrew Lloyd Webbers 1973 soundtrack to Jesus Christ Superstar, namely a small section in the track "Judas' Death". Whether coincidental or intentional, Drummond is quoted as saying that Webber probably got it from Mozart, and he in turn from cavemen. Interview here...http://cardhouse.com/x07/klf.htm

--kingboyk 14:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:The KLF- What Time Is Love? (pure trance original).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 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) 10:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]