Talk:Homogenic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHomogenic has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 15, 2009Good article nomineeListed

Third album[edit]

I'm not sure how to tackle this one. I was going by her more official discography, but it seems like two other Bjork albums were released including one when she was 12 simply called Björk (which was only released in Iceland and is only available now through bootlegs) and Gling-Gló which is credited to her and a backing jazz band. So should this technically be her fifth album? Or do we count those other obscurities? Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We should stick to the official count by which this album is the 3rd (the proof - click on the album cover there). It's a major opinion supported by the label, artist and strong majority of music publications from 1997. Everything else is a variety of minor/alternative opinions which can be mentioned but only in addition to primary opinion. Some of alternative numberings count her juvenilia album from 1977, some include Gling-Gló, some include both. Please check Post album talk page for more discussion. Shimenawa (talk) 22:48, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AV Club year of review[edit]

I've reverted back the AV Club's review. I know the date of publication of the review is 2002, but in the review, they claim Bjork's Telegram (released in 1997) was also from "that year". I've browsed through other reviews on the site and many old reviews are dated from 2002 on that exact date. I assume these are reviews from earlier that only got re-uploaded to the website on that date or are updated to that date due to some server update. I'm going to make it back to 1997 due to the evidence that's in the text. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Homogenic is "alternative rock"? ...Really?[edit]

I am curious...why is one of the genres listed for this album "alternative rock"? It would be a slightly stretch to perhaps characterize it as "alternative" in a broad sort of way (characterizing Björk herself as alternative does make some sense), but "alternative rock" to me suggests rock music that brings in a bigger range of influences than a more traditional rock group (such as, say, Queen, the Rolling Stones, or Bruce Springsteen). Compare those bands to some of the most popular bands tagged "alternative rock" on Last.fm: Muse, the Smashing Pumpkins, Red Hot Chili Peppers, and R.E.M. Despite vast differences between these bands, they all share some common elements: prominent use of electric guitar/bass, a clear (but not exclusive) preference for live drums, as well as the frequent appearance of some common influences (blues, R&B, punk for the more recent bands).

Björk's Homogenic, on the other hand, has none of the typical traits of alternative rock. There are no electric guitars on the album, the drums are almost entirely (but not exclusively) electronic in nature, and draws no influence from punk rock (being an album largely created in the studio as opposed to ~4-5 rock musicians jamming out in a practice space before recording). Further, the one link that I got from following the reference on the term "alternative rock" on the album's page (from EntertainmentWeekly.com, retrieved in 2009) only mentions the album's connection to that genre twice. The first isn't even referencing Homogenic; rather, it is part of a paragraph discussing Björk's rise to popularity in the alternative rock band the Sugarcubes. The second reference is in the context of Homogenic's place alongside other prominent figures of alternative music (R.E.M. and U2, specifically). Nowhere in this review does it make any direct link between the genre of alternative rock and the music of Homogenic.

To conclude, it makes little sense to label "Homogenic" as being an "alternative rock" album. Björk can surely be considered an alternative artist, but I would argue that the only reason she is ever mentioned as being "alternative rock" is due to her work with the Sugarcubes. The vast majority of Björk's music could be classified as electronic (and all of it could be pretty easily classified as "experimental"), but aligning it with any kind of rock music, especially alternative rock, makes no sense to me. The phrase should be removed from Homogenic's page. I think something like "experimental" or some other genre would be a much better fit.

65.131.53.237 (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We can't use last.fm as a source for genre as all the information there is user submitted. We can really remove it, but don't just shove in other genres to suggest. Per WP:OR, WP:RS, and WP:SUBJECTIVE, we need sources to find genres. We can't just decide them on our own. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:03, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, that makes sense. Since you said just removing the alt rock tag would be more doable than adding any new ones, can we go ahead and remove the "alternative rock" tag from Homogenic's page? Especially given that the source for justifying its inclusion is pretty weak in linking Homogenic's music to alternative rock. Electronic and trip-hop do a great job describing the music of Homogenic by themselves.

65.131.53.237 (talk) 20:20, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No I agree it's a bit weak. I think groups like Portishead and Bjork got lumped into "alternative" sometimes just because of their audience and the fact the music is song based opposed to lyric-less dance music. The Bjork albums have "Alternative Dance" on them, but Homogenic isn't really a "dance music" album either. I'm comfortable with removing it. Just make sure it doesn't destroy any other Entertainment Weekly sources in the article. :)Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Extending opening article!?[edit]

I having been looking at other albums on here and I believe that we need to expand the opening article for the album. It lacks it's brief/overall critical aspect, commercial response, legacy aspect and production/composition. I had extended it before, but unfortunately, it was removed. Any thoughts of this?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.72.7.47 (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Homogenic. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Homogenic. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:46, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Homogenic. 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:

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) 13:22, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Homogenic. 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:

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) 08:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Homogenic. 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:

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) 17:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Homogenic. 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:

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) 08:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References in the infobox[edit]

Blueberry72, discuss here and stop edit warring. DanWarpp (talk) 16:50, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

If MetroLyrics is such a bad source then it should not be linked here:

Many of them say "< !-- Licensed lyrics provider -- >". https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homogenic&type=revision&diff=936289785&oldid=936192119 --User123o987name (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted again -- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homogenic&diff=next&oldid=936289785 "please discuss in talk before making any major changes to the infobox" -- @Ellokk: what is there to discuss? I don't get it; I made that change since this is an Icelandic singer who made an English language album. Apparently, we are not supposed to point out that the album is English language if the artist is from a country where the official language is English. That rule or suggestion is dumb, but it does not apply here. Official language of iceland=Icelandic. --User123o987name (talk) 22:32, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The majority of Björk's albums are in English, the language template is used in albums where there is ambiguity regarding the language, which is not the case here. QuestFour (talk) 15:25, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Homogenic&oldid=1211202476"