Talk:Star Wars (soundtrack)

Fair use rationale for Image:Star Wars 1977 release.jpg

Image:Star Wars 1977 release.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) 09:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Gustav Holst influence

There is no mention of Gustav Holst as being an influence for Williams. Yet, if you listen, the motiv of most of the song are directly taken from motiv from some of the Planets works of the same composer. Need clarifications. 09/01/01 - 16:00 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.58.142.130 (talk) 21:00, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

There is also a very big influence of the soundtrack of the movie Les Disparus de Saint-Agil. And if you look at the beginning you will see the same opening. Denis Colin (talk) 05:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Article name move

This article should be renamed some form of Star Wars (film) (soundtrack) to match the title of the recently moved film page Star Wars (film) per consensus at Talk:Star Wars (film)#Requested move. - Gothicfilm (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Cúchullain ^t/c 19:42, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

---

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope (soundtrack) → Star Wars (soundtrack) – "Star Wars" and "A New Hope" are one and the same title. AdamDeanHall (talk) 20:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC) *Oppose. "Star Wars" itself could be referring to the movie franchise as a whole, or even another movie in the series (since all films have "star wars" in their titles). "Episode IV: A New Hope" specifies from which movie the soundtrack is, so in my view, we should leave it be. Twyfan714 (talk) 18:02, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support. No one would mistake it for another film, but some might wonder about the franchise. The first sentence of the article should clear that up. It could also be called Star Wars (1977 film soundtrack) to make it completely clear to all. In any case the soundtrack article name should match as closely as possible the film article name. The subtitle "A New Hope" should not be used as it did not exist in 1977 when the original was released. - Gothicfilm (talk) 19:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

@Gothicfilm: That actually is a valid point. I agree that we should have something specifying that we are talking about the film and not the franchise itself. I also agree that "A New Hope" was not originally what the film was called, so the soundtrack shouldn't have that either. I would even take it one step further and maybe consider having the article titled "Star Wars (film soundtrack)". It's short and concise enough, without causing any confusion over whether it is referring to the franchise or not. With that in mind, I would say I support the move, just not having the title as general as just "Star Wars (soundtrack)". Twyfan714 (talk) 21:23, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I would be fine with Star Wars (film soundtrack) - it does more closely match the film article name. You might want to at least strike out your Oppose vote, if not change it. We can work out the final name later as necessary. The important thing is to lose the subtitle "A New Hope". - Gothicfilm (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Done! Glad we're in agreement! As long as we aren't too general or too specific, there shouldn't be any confusion. Twyfan714 (talk) 21:46, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support. The music from the rest of the franchise is very much derivative to this. A simpler title is appropriate. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 12:23, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Star Wars (soundtrack). 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/20080517124534/http://www.starwars.com/community/news/family/news20080513.html to http://www.starwars.com/community/news/family/news20080513.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 06:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Original 1977 release, info

I question the need for the information on the "stacking" methods of the discs "side" labeling, especially the incorrect assertion that any dialogue was heard on the album. (There was no dialogue.) Maybe someone just copy/pasted this bit from another article.

...allowing the listener to have over half an hour of uninterrupted music interspersed with key bits of dialog before they needed to flip the discs over." ◦◦derekbd◦◦my talk◦◦ 12:47, 12 October 2018 (UTC)