Harry Potter and the Order of the Phonix(Special Edition Soundtrack)

[mcdaid72000 0]

Hey everybody. I know it has been a while since I posted a topic, but I haven't had anything to talk about until now. Dose anybody know where I can order the Special Edition Soundtrack to Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix online? And does anybody know about Wikipedia.org and if it is a reliable source of information. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

[Henry B 49]

Wikipedia isn't reliable.

[Morlock 9]

What is the special edition? Is that like the pointless second CD on the first few HP scores?

[Henry B 49]

It's a bunch of fancy packaging. The CD itself is identical.

[GoodMusician 53]

Wikipedia is about as reliable as walking down the street and asking people about quantum mechanics.

As far as a special edition, it is probably like what was said... those useless second discs that had nothing worth much on them.

[Richard Penna 2,082]

I'd give Wiki a little more credit than that, but I wouldn't use it to make an important decision.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

It's good for immediate, casual "research" or info, but obviously not anything important.

Ray Barnsbury

[John Crichton 4]

I certainly wouldn't cite Wiki if I was working on a major research paper. Or a minor one. Or a short essay. Or a news article.

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

You'd rather cite one of the established encyclopedias? Like those that list different people as the inventor of the telephone in their different international releases?

Wikipedia isn't fully reliable. As far as details are concerned, I'd certainly advise to get backup confirmation. But generally, and for more "common" topics, they're pretty solid (and comparable to big players like the Encyclopedia Britannica, according to studies). The better articles list sources for their claims, so they should be easy to verify.

[indy4 152]

Hey everybody. I know it has been a while since I posted a topic, but I haven't had anything to talk about until now. Dose anybody know where I can order the Special Edition Soundtrack to Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix online? And does anybody know about Wikipedia.org and if it is a reliable source of information. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

I am a huge fan of OotP, it is my second favorite Potter score. I bought the OST, then I heard about the Special Edition. I knew that it had no extra music, but on the official website, it was supposed to have a 20 page booklet about the making of the score, along with some fancy packaging. I bought it for the booklet. It arrived, and the packaging was nice, but the booklet had the EXCACT same words as the one from the OST, they were just spaced bigger, therefore taking up more room. It is a good soundtrack to buy if you don't have the OST, but otherwise, I really wouldn't bother, unless you're interested in fancy packaging.

If you're still interested, here it is at the Warner Bros. Store:

http://warnerbrosrecordsstore.com/store/or...BR&msgCode=

Here it is at Amazon (ignore the picture, it is of the OST):

http://www.amazon.com/Soundtrack-Harry-Pot...1253&sr=8-3

I got mine on eBay for about $20, so you may want to check there, too.

[Koray Savas 2,095]

Wikipedia isn't 100%, but it sure helps to get homework done. A lot of it is reliable despite most people's belief. If a particular article doesn't have the proper documentation it tells you.

[Morlock 9]

I've actually heard that it's not good for homework, because so often, everyone in the class has the exact same (occaisionaly erroneous) stuff.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Most professors probably wouldn't accept it as a source.

Ray Barnsbury

[mcdaid72000 0]

Hey everybody. I know it has been a while since I posted a topic, but I haven't had anything to talk about until now. Dose anybody know where I can order the Special Edition Soundtrack to Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix online? And does anybody know about Wikipedia.org and if it is a reliable source of information. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

I am a huge fan of OotP, it is my second favorite Potter score. I bought the OST, then I heard about the Special Edition. I knew that it had no extra music, but on the official website, it was supposed to have a 20 page booklet about the making of the score, along with some fancy packaging. I bought it for the booklet. It arrived, and the packaging was nice, but the booklet had the EXCACT same words as the one from the OST, they were just spaced bigger, therefore taking up more room. It is a good soundtrack to buy if you don't have the OST, but otherwise, I really wouldn't bother, unless you're interested in fancy packaging.

If you're still interested, here it is at the Warner Bros. Store:

http://warnerbrosrecordsstore.com/store/or...BR&msgCode=

Here it is at Amazon (ignore the picture, it is of the OST):

http://www.amazon.com/Soundtrack-Harry-Pot...1253&sr=8-3

I got mine on eBay for about $20, so you may want to check there, too.

Thank you Indy4 for the information. At this link Order of the Phoenix Info provided by Wikipedia.org searched Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix(Soundtrack) it has one extra track call "Boys Will Be Boys" by "The Ordinary Boys". That's if you want to rely on Wikipedia's information which it seems like everybody on this board does not like Wikipedia which is fine. I still do not know what to think of the site myself. Use to people could post whatever they wanted without having an account with them which would make me speculate the information, but now you have to have an account with them before you can start editing on the site. Yeah you could probably put whatever you want on it, but doesn't the webserver guy check if it is correct information or not? I have not created an account with them. I did do one free edit and it was accurate. I published the release date of Myst IV: Revelation for PC/Xbox. I got the information from Amazon.com(I Think). But I did post accurate information. I might not post any more on this board just watch the discussions. Where's Miguel? I want to know what he thinks about Wikipedia.

[Richard Penna 2,082]

My project supervisor for my Masters accepted it as a reasonable source for a few minor things in my dissertation. I personally think there is a lot of reliable information on there, but as I said, it's not the place to base important decisions on.

[John Crichton 4]

Most professors probably wouldn't accept it as a source.

Ray Barnsbury

Pretty much none of my college professors would accept any internet citations other than reputable news organizations or government sites.

[indy4 152]

Hey everybody. I know it has been a while since I posted a topic, but I haven't had anything to talk about until now. Dose anybody know where I can order the Special Edition Soundtrack to Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix online? And does anybody know about Wikipedia.org and if it is a reliable source of information. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks

I am a huge fan of OotP, it is my second favorite Potter score. I bought the OST, then I heard about the Special Edition. I knew that it had no extra music, but on the official website, it was supposed to have a 20 page booklet about the making of the score, along with some fancy packaging. I bought it for the booklet. It arrived, and the packaging was nice, but the booklet had the EXCACT same words as the one from the OST, they were just spaced bigger, therefore taking up more room. It is a good soundtrack to buy if you don't have the OST, but otherwise, I really wouldn't bother, unless you're interested in fancy packaging.

If you're still interested, here it is at the Warner Bros. Store:

http://warnerbrosrecordsstore.com/store/or...BR&msgCode=

Here it is at Amazon (ignore the picture, it is of the OST):

http://www.amazon.com/Soundtrack-Harry-Pot...1253&sr=8-3

I got mine on eBay for about $20, so you may want to check there, too.

Thank you Indy4 for the information. At this link Order of the Phoenix Info provided by Wikipedia.org searched Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix(Soundtrack) it has one extra track call "Boys Will Be Boys" by "The Ordinary Boys". That's if you want to rely on Wikipedia's information which it seems like everybody on this board does not like Wikipedia which is fine.

I find this very funny. The Boys Will Be Boys thing is just so random! I wonder where anybody got that, it seems like a very strange rumor! This is defenetly one case where Wiki is wrong - I doubled checked my CD, and it only had 18 tracks.

I've never even heard of the Ordinary Boys. Wiki says they're an English band, but then again, it's Wiki. The only place in OotP I think they may be in is when it cuts from Potter's detention w/ Umbridge to a big crate of "Weasley's Wizard Weezes."

[Koray Savas 2,095]

If teachers don't accept it as a source, Wiki has sources right there on the page, and those work out nicely.

I wrote a 3-page astronomy paper on Galilao, and without Wiki that A would probably be a C.

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

Pretty much none of my college professors would accept any internet citations other than reputable news organizations or government sites.

I certainly trust Wikipedia more than a government site. And it's also more reliable than plenty of (perhaps not so reputable) news organizations.

If the article lists sources, you can use them to verify the information, and if it checks out ok, that article is as solid as any scientific paper (and more so than some).

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

So amateurs are more reliable? Is that what you are saying?

[Richard Penna 2,082]

Out of the 30 or so sources I listen for my project, probably 2/3 of 3/4 of them were Internet based. Partly, it just wasn't the kind of project where reading lots of books would really help, but also I just seem to be good at online research, using google etc.

[BurgaFlippinMan 7]

It's a bunch of fancy packaging. The CD itself is identical.

i've seen it in stores here..and i must say its pretty cool

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

So amateurs are more reliable? Is that what you are saying?

A large collective of mostly dependent amateurs is more reliable than a small group of biased people with an agenda, I'd say.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

Perhaps, but would you not think that an encyclopedia maintained by a staff of paid professionals is generally more reliable then an amateur one like Wikipedia?

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

Steef, I see you're a Herzog fan. Very nice.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

I can't say I've ever seen one of his films, but I liked the quote.

[Strilo 0]

Perhaps, but would you not think that an encyclopedia maintained by a staff of paid professionals is generally more reliable then an amateur one like Wikipedia?

You'd think that right? But wasn't there a study done somewhere that compared Wikipedia with something like Encyclopedia Britannica and found they both contain about the same amount of accuracy? Also it's important to remember that it's likely many of the so called "amateurs" on Wikipedia are actually professionals in those subjects in their "real life."

[indy4 152]

Did you find this study on Wikipedia?

[Strilo 0]

Clever. No I heard about it in a University course.

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

Perhaps, but would you not think that an encyclopedia maintained by a staff of paid professionals is generally more reliable then an amateur one like Wikipedia?

A bit, perhaps. But how many of us here do have a complete edition of one of the top encyclopedias at home? I only have a 15 part Brockhaus, and that doesn't seem much more reliable than Wikipedia. Or if it is, that's just because a) the articles are very short and b) there's hardly anything in it.

Wikipedia's greatest strength is that it contains articles on nearly everything. Obviously, those that are maintained by only a handful of people are far less reliable than the big ones (which, as has been said above, apparently rival the big players), but as long as you keep that in your mind, it's still very useful. I certainly wouldn't cite WP for something as obscure as a John Williams paper without validation. But at least it gives a general overview and useful links for further research - whereas my Brockhaus doesn't even know who John Williams is.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,251]

I see your point. But for a real, professional encyclopedia, the person making the entry can be held accountable for the information he is given.

This is not really the case at Wiki. I could join up and write that John Williams said in an interview that he thinks Zimmer is a great composer. And it would turn up there.

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

True. The advantages of a good Wikipedia article are a) many people editing and correcting the article and b) that the majority of these people don't have an agenda. In the long run (perhaps the laws of large numbers applies here directly), that should remove incorrect statements from the article.

The fewer people contribute to an article, the poorer it will generally be in quality. The good thing is that the official (?) WP personell seem to generally do a good job of categorising articles and adding notifications about missing citations etc. For example, a colleague of mine added an article about his work project. Within 10 minutes, the article was deleted because it was (rightfully, I think) considered advertisement.

In your example, if the article is somewhat regularly frequented (and I'm not sure the JW article is), someone would probably quickly add a "citation needed" annotation to that claim.

And, as I said, the really big encyclopedias are very expensive. If I had a Britannica edition at home, I'd certainly check that at least along with WP, or perhaps exclusively. But compared to my run of the mill Brockhaus, WP is very useful.