Jump to content

Talk:"Heroes" (David Bowie album)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

The album title is "Heroes" (incl. quotation marks)

The album is actually named "Heroes", although it is often miswritten. Shouldn't this be moved and a redirect put up?

--Directorstratton 09:36, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

Note that it's not normal Wikipedia policy to have quotation marks in an article title. Bearcat 02:08, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

True, but in this case, the title really is "Heroes" and not Heroes. --Moochocoogle 03:29, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've tended to refer to the song as "Heroes" in the t--Jim68000 14:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)ext simply because ""Heroes""really doesn't look good... while I agree the placing of the article is fine, I think the text noting the use of the quotation marks makes the point clearly, and just using the one set for most of the article looks better :)

Tom Prankerd 20:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Where is the proof that the quotation marks are part of the album title? Albums by The Smiths and Morrissey have used quotation marks for the album title on the front cover, but they aren't included.

So what? So Smiths fans are less knowledgeable than Bowie fans? I dunno! The quotes are there in the title and intended to be "ironic" - Bowie no doubt discussed this in the NME at the time or whatever but in 2006 its just common knowledge. Why should anyone have to "prove" what's there printed in black and white? If a song had an exclamation mark in the title, would we have to prove that?--feline1 13:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Besides that, there's another clue: if you look at the track listing on the CD (see here) you'll see that "Heroes" is the only track that has quotation marks. This suggests that the title is really supposed to be that way. --SugarKane 00:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, since album titles are often in quotation marks on covers, and songs are often written in quotation marks elsewhere, I thought maybe some people had made a mistake. Would that mean the song should be written ""Heroes""? Maybe so, but that's kind of pretentious. And I like "Heroes." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.146.221.50 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 26 April 2006

Someone had just moved the article, with the reason that the quotation marks should be omitted. I have moved it back. This discussion has gone on for a long time, but I will note that the article now cites a reference that the quotation marks are part of the title. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I just want to point out that the most common way of quoting a quotation would be to alternate between ' and " , thereby making the current album reference: ' "Heroes" ' (WITH the spaces between ' and " ). 80.202.103.132 (talk) 22:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Frippertronics

The introduction mentions the album's critical success, "due in part to its innovative Frippertronics." Does this album actually include Frippertronics? It does include guitar work by Robert Fripp, but nothing on the album (to my ears) sounds like the usual results of Frippertronics. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 00:44, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, actually no, I don't think there's any of Fripp using that tape-delay system, and if producer Tony Visconti had gotten him to use it on the album, it could scarcely have been called "an innovative use of Frippertronics", more "cultural magpie Bowie paying Fripp to grace his album with a technique he'd developed over half a decade earlier".--feline1 07:30, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Ummm - I think you meant to say "technique he and Eno ripped off - er, appropriated - from Terry Riley over half a decade earlier"... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.138.235.243 (talk) 07:56, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've removed the reference from the article. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:39, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

The song "Heroes" definitely includes a Fripp delay playing over the thing, but I'm no longer sure if this qualifies as Frippertronics or some other system entirely. Kramden 18:15, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I think you're completely wrong, sorry ;-) There was a feature in http://www.soundonsound.com last year where Tony Visconti detailed how that track was recorded. He said Eno got Fripp to set up his guitar in the live room, cranked up loud, with loads of different speakers in it, so it was feeding back continuously. Fripp then altered the pitch of the notes by walking to different parts of the room, where the different standing waves would make it feed back on different notes! Gee, those crazy guys! But anyways, no revox tape delay at all. LOL--feline1 13:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Which guitarist?

Are we missing a guitarist here? The personnel listing for Low has Fripp, but the personnel listing for Blackout has Adrian Belew playing the lead. My memory is that Belew didn't play on any Bowie records until Lodger (when presumably the real Robert Fripp was busy) - can someone with a decent reference sort out the confusion. --Jim68000 14:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Jim, your memory is correct, it's your eyes that are failing you ;-). "Heroes" indeed had Fripp (I presume you mean 'The personnel listing for "Heroes" has Fripp', not 'The personnel listing for Low has Fripp'). If you have another look at "Blackout" you may discern that the personnel listing - like the infobox - refers to the live single version released in Japan that was originally from the album Stage, which did feature Belew. Personally I don't think we really needed that much detail for a non-UK single release by a UK artist but, anyway, that's where your confusion lies... Cheers, Ian Rose 15:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Why Reversion of 01 Sept 2006

"Sic is a Latin word meaning "thus", "so", or "just as that". In writing, it is italicized and placed within square brackets — [sic] — to indicate that an incorrect or unusual spelling, phrase, or other preceding quoted material is a verbatim reproduction of the quoted original and is not a transcription error.

This may be used either to show that an uncommon or archaic usage is reported faithfully (for instance, quoting the U.S. Constitution, "The House of Representatives shall chuse [sic] their Speaker...") or to highlight an error, often for the purpose of ridicule or irony (for instance, "Dan Quayle famously changed a student's spelling to 'potatoe' [sic]"), or otherwise, to quote accurately whilst maintaining the reputation of the person or organisation quoting its source."

Sic is just another way to say "the quotation marks are part of the title" without having to say all that. I'm sorry about the tracks, i didn't know. I'll just replace the [Sic] and keep everything else the way it was. Ok? dposse 18:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I understand you rpoint... but why make a fuss? Track listings must have quotes around song names. Fantailfan 22:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Unless the quotes are on the CD case, i don't think it's needed here. However, if you don't see anything wrong with the quotes, i'm not going to fight about it. dposse 23:19, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps there is a misunderstanding. "Heroes" is preciously in quotes, both in the album title and in the song. In addition, all songs have double quotes per WikiProject:Album standards, so both ""Heroes"" and "Heroes" (album) are correct. Fantailfan 23:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Guys, I think we can knock this on the head. Dposse, I also see your point about [sic] but I agree with Fantailfan that in this context it's being too clever. Whether the quotes are on the CD case or not is immaterial, they're part of Bowie's design and that fact can be sourced. Their use here has been subject to discussion before (see top) and the wording used previously came out of that discussion (Fantailfan, to be exact, the phrasing wasn't actually mine but I had no problem with it). I propose we say "(the quotation marks are part of the title, for reasons of irony)" to explain the situation, which is similar to how I put it in the "Heroes" song article - and I'll do that unless there are violent objections. Cheers, Ian Rose 23:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[Sic] does that without using all those words. I don't see why we can't just use it instead of saying "the quotation marks are part of the title". It's like "cannot" and "can't". They are both the same, but one is just a contraction of the other. dposse 05:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Because, in the context of this article, [sic] is POV. You don't see it in contemporary writing except as a snarky comment. If you are a scholar and writing articles or books, it is appropriate. Otherwise, avoid. Fantailfan 12:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Are you joking? It's used throughout wikipedia! It has no point of view. dposse 17:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
As I say, in this context it does. Fantailfan 19:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
I just want to point out that the most common way of quoting a quotation would be to alternate between ' and " , thereby making the current album reference: ' "Heroes" ' (WITH the spaces between ' and " ). There is no (or rather, a few) right or wrong here. So, this COULD be given as:
3. ' "Heroes" ' (Bowie, Brian Eno) – 6:07 (with single quotation marks used before the double despite double quotation marks being used in all the other song quotations). Still, this is all semantics (or whatever), and in the final analyzis it does not matter the least bit :-) Vithar Alderland (talk) 22:59, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Mixed in Berlin?

I recently interviewed Tony Visconti and he actually claims it was mixed in Berlin. But I rather got the impression that he confuses this with the mixing of "Low", which was actually mixed not at Hansa by the Wall, where Heroes was recorded, but at another Hansa-Studio in Berlin. Heroes definetely says on the back "Mixed at Mountain Studios Montreux" (where the next album "Lodger" was recorded later). 84.131.74.234 12:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

By george, I think you're right. The "Heroes" credits indeed say "Mixed at Mountain Studios Montreux" and I don't recall any major references disputing this. My error, I'll modify the intro. As for Visconti's recollections, I tend to agree that it seems confused with Low. Thanks/cheers, Ian Rose 01:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Intro

The intro is far too long for this article. It would be much better if several more detailed sections were written. The intro could then be abridged. See WP:LS for details. Thanks - Alex valavanis 10:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not all intro at the moment, it's just the total article wasn't really long enough to break up till recently. I'm planning the 'sectioning' of all the 70s Bowie album articles as we speak anyway, along the lines of Scary Monsters. Cheers, Ian Rose 11:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Good stuff - it'll look great when it's done :) - Alex valavanis 01:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Sure, I'd also come to the conclusion it'd improve the look now that they've grown from when I first did most of them; I'll get to this one after some of the others. In the meantime I'd prefer to remove the Intro tag as I don't think it's really reflective of the situation, but I don't have an issue leaving the Sections tag as a reminder. Cheers, Ian Rose 06:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Job done! - Alex valavanis 09:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Production credits

Please can a knowledgeable person add details to the Personnel section? Production details should be there according to WP:ALBUM B-class guidelines. Thanks Papa November 23:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

G'day mate, after double-checking the B-class example at WP:Album Assessments (London Calling) in case something had changed, I can't see anything obvious missing from "Heroes" - can you be more specific? Cheers, Ian Rose 23:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah, it seems London Calling is missing them too! Nevermind is quite a good example, I think. Even just adding producers, engineers, graphic artists etc to the list would be good. Have a look at Surfer Rosa#Personnel for a simple FA example. Papa November 00:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

"More Robust"

It's getting to the point where I have to make sure I have a sick-bag handy before I click on an "album" link in WikiPedia.

The latest sick-making statement: '"Heroes" is similar in sound to Low but more robust.'

Could someone PLEASE explain to me what it means to be "similar in sound but more robust?" I wish that the WikiPedia powers-that-be would absolutely FORBID anyone found guilty of such silliness to post anything on any music topic whatsoever.

Once again folks: These are NOT "album reviews," but a source of FACTS about the albums in question. STICK TO FACTS, please, and leave off with the silly, twittery little reviews. B. Polhemus (talk) 20:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello B.
  • (a) you make some good points.
  • (2) Wikipedia is, for better or worse, editable by anyone, so
  • (iii) please offer substitute language, wording, sourced quotes from published reviews, books, etc., rather than merely blasting away. When I blasted the "Ziggy" entry I at least offered some replacement verbiage and actual information (which I have yet to finish). Thank you. Fantailfan (talk) 21:34, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Heh, I think that expression goes back to the very earliest version of the article. It never worried me like it seems to B. but by all means improve it. My suggestion is just simplify to something like '"Heroes" developed the sound on Low.' Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Updated this link in the article.— HipLibrarianship talk 02:04, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Seems the "Guide" content is no longer on the Blender site, so I removed the link to the album review.— HipLibrarianship talk 02:05, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. It's unfortunately bureaucratic, but the user may have more success just proposing one aspect of this change. --BDD (talk) 21:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

"Heroes" → Heroes (David Bowie album) – This is not the primary topic of "Heroes", the song Heroes (David Bowie song) is a better option for primarity than the album. Per MOS:TM [ yellow tail ], this uses superfluous characters, and is also generally not used when referring to the album in general. Checking google, the quotes are generally missing, and most of the David Bowie hits are the song. [1]; WP:OFFICIALNAME and WP:UCN. Therefore this article should be "Heroes (David Bowie album)" and "Heroes" should redirect to the disambiguation page Heroes. -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Comment - this is explained in the lead, doesn't need to be in title. Yes " " occurs in some books, but generally in books which give " " to all album and song titles. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:16, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: The Wikipedia policy at WP:TITLEFORMAT actually cites this title as an example of when punctuation should be included in a title. I suggest discussing at WT:AT if you disagree. —Frungi (talk) 03:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - I use quote marks to make phrases or titles with more than one word exactly searched. I don't use quote marks to find this album. --George Ho (talk) 17:10, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Begrudgingly Oppose I personally don't understand why quotation marks would be treated any differently than other forms of punctuation that might be unacceptable under MOS:TM. I don't agree with it and see a disconnect between WP:TITLEFORMAT and MOS:TM in this matter. Nonetheless the exception exists and if a change it sought it should first be addressed at WP:AT.--Labattblueboy (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: This move proposes two changes—the removal of the quotation marks that are part of the title, and disambiguating it as the album—of which one violates policy and the other had not previously been discussed. I absolutely oppose the former until and unless that policy is changed with consensus. I have no opinion on the latter point of whether the album or song is primary; if that’s the main point of the move, I would like to see this RM canceled and a new one started that only handles this issue. —Frungi (talk) 03:20, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: So long as people can still find the article for searching for it without quotes, I don't see why this is a problem. The name of the song & album have always been surrounded in quotes, a deliberate choice by the artist. Removing the quotes would change the intent of the name. 87Fan (talk) 16:08, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • The quotation marks should remain as they are integral to the meaning of the title. ""Heroes"" should not redirect anywhere but to the album as the unusual characters in the title are highly specific to the album. No opposition to the increased precision as many in this world are unfamiliar with the album. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:03, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

If this title shouldn’t have quotation marks, fix the policy first

I’ve seen this article’s title brought up in unrelated discussions as an example of a title with improper punctuation/styling (the quotation marks). Just dropping by to say that if this needs to be changed, you should probably propose a change to WP:TITLEFORMAT, which cites this title’s quotation marks as proper punctuation. —Frungi (talk) 05:50, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:"Heroes" (David Bowie album)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
Article requirements:

Green tickY Categorisation: at least by artist & year (start +)

Green tickY Infobox: relatively complete (start +)
Green tickY Cover? (C or B)
Green tickY Completed, with most technical details? (B)

Green tickY Track listing: song titles (start +)
Green tickY Track lengths and authors? (C or B)

Green tickY Personnel: primary performers mentioned by name (start+)
Green tickY Personnel section? (C or B)
Green tickY All musicians? (C or B)
Green tickY Technical personnel? (B)

Green tickY Sections: lead section providing based overview (start+)
Green tickY Lead comply with WP:LEAD? (length and scope) (B)
Green tickY Other section(s) of useful prose? (C or B)
Green tickY No obvious extraneous information (such as "trivia") (B)
Green tickY No obvious information omitted (B)

Green tickYOther issues: No obvious issues with sourcing; no significant issues hampering readablity; overall complies with tone & content guidelines. (B)

--Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC). Substituted at 14:04, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:%22Heroes%22_(David_Bowie_album)/Archive_1&oldid=718094278"