Talk:Vulnicura/Archive 1

Archive 1

Contested deletion

Extended content

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --32.218.103.43 (talk) 02:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC) it is an article about an album scheduled to be released in the near future on a major label This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... Björk just released information for her new album Vulnicura in the past hour. The post can be found here: https://www.facebook.com/bjork/photos/a.460989176459.255175.6747251459/10152971602801460/?type=1&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sglesby (talk • contribs) 02:32, 14 January 2015 (UTC) This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it's a new studio album by Bjork, announced on her Facebook page (as cited in the article). Bjork is a major artist. --Popcornduff (talk) 02:37, 14 January 2015 (UTC) This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because this is information about the upcoming release of an album by the notable singer Bjork. --2602:30A:C0FB:52C0:15C6:ADC5:CEC1:3F85 (talk) 02:59, 14 January 2015 (UTC) This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... it's attributed to Bjork. It's real news — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.37.11.208 (talk) 03:05, 14 January 2015 (UTC) This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... This will be the next album by Bjork a world renowned artist --Johanhilge (talk) 10:28, 14 January 2015 (UTC) This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because its subject matter, the upcoming album by Björk, is of huge importance in the worlds of pop culture and musical news. More information will likely be released soon, and as such that information can be added to this page instead of having to create an entirely new one. The album itself will be released in a matter of months, rendering the deletion of this page unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.21.135 (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2015 (UTC) This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --2A02:FE0:C010:A3D0:BC59:5A43:6A43:1278 (talk) 11:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC) It is about Björk's new album announced today! This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... this is the upcoming album from the internationally recognised multiartist Björk. There's no reason to not have this page published and existing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.226.250.14 (talk) 11:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Exhibit and book

Resolved

It is unclear to me why this article has details about the MoMA exhibit and book. How are these related to the album itself? Perhaps these should be mentioned briefly in the background section, but unless I am missing the connection to the album they should not have a dedicated section. There is an article for the book and it is possible there should also be an article about the MoMA exhibit. Thoughts? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I redirected Björk (exhibition) to "Björk" for now, but there may be enough information about the project for a separate article. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I wrote that section because the cover for the Archives book features the score and lyrics from "Black Lake", which is on the new album. So I think it will all be tied up. Anyway we don't have sources to claim this at least until March so maybe we should hide it for the time-being. What do you think? Fabrictii (talk) 17:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I did not notice the "Black Lake" connection. That detail is worth mentioning once a reliable source confirms, but I think generally this article should not include too much information about the exhibition or book. I think both of these deserve their own articles. If you google "bjork exhibition museum of modern art", there are many sources specifically about the exhibition. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Fabrictii: Since you wrote the section and are more familiar with the material, do you want to take a stab at moving the content over to Björk (exhibition) and Björk: Archives and deciding how to best incorporate these projects into the Background section of this article? If not, no problem. Just don't want to be stepping on toes! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Another Believer: I would love to. But I took my day off just to dedicate on this exciting announcement but I've got a lot of exams during January and February so I don't think it would be a good idea to spend all of this time on Wikipedia ahah! Hope I can cut me some quadrets of time to work on those articles. Exciting times ahead for us Björkphiles :) Fabrictii (talk) 19:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I moved some content to the exhibition article, which definitely needs more work, but at least all of the details are not included on the album article. Once the rest of the content from the section with the tag is move to either the exhibition or book article, perhaps we can just include a sentence like "The album is being released in conjunction with an exhibition about Bjork's career at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) and the book Bjork: Archives", or similar. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Surely, why not? This statement at least links the album with the MoMA project. But I'm sure the two will be tied together so we just need to wait, just look at how they will all be released during the same month ;) Fabrictii (talk) 19:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the exhibition and book stuff isn't relevant for the article. Popcornduff (talk) 21:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Resolved

Category:Albums produced by Björk?

Should we create the category Category:Albums produced by Björk? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Source for recording time frame

Resolved

The infobox currently uses a login-required forum source as an inline citation for the recording date. It is hard to tell if this source is reliable or accurate. Perhaps there is something more appropriate? If not, I think the dates should be removed. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 00:29, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

The source was replaced with a 'citation needed' tag by someone else, so I removed the claim altogether. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:33, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Tour

This article is quite long. Does it seem appropriate to fork the Tour content over to Vulnicura Tour? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 29 November 2015 (UTC)