Talk:Sufjan Stevens

Is Sufjan's music really sparse? Some of his songs are packed with so many vocals and instruments at once, I'd hardly say that's sparse.--Ben moss 22:12, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's conflict over whether the new album is Illinois or Come On! Feel The Illinoise!. I've seen both in various places, until I see something official, why don't we just leave it at Come On! Feel The Illinoise! since that's what's up here now.--Ben moss 17:12, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, especially since the last state album was more than just Michigan, and I have a feeling some of the places calling it Illinois may be doing so just based on the knowledge that it's about Illinois. Euphoria 18:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who changed it, but I'm changing it back. If you've seen the album cover, you know it's Come on! Feel the Illinoise!

I changed "Greetings from Michigan" to "Michigan" and "Come on feel the Illinoise" to "Illinois" because the label site lists them so. [1] and [2]. --Gika 10:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

For the record, I'm now of this same opinion. Euphoria 03:18, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The albums are: 'Michigan' and 'Illinois'

Let's set the record straight here. This is from Sufjan's Record Label, Asthmatic Kitty:

"What are the actual titles of Sufjan's two "state" albums, and why does each appear to have two different titles?

1. Michigan and Illinois.

2. We don't know."

-- unsigned edit

Please sign your Talk page edits. I'm not going to feel too bad about this. Note that Amazon is selling them as Greetings from Michigan: The Great Lakes State (the "s" is superfluous regardless) and Illinois, respectively. Pitchfork made the same mistake as Amazon [3]. The cover art for the album clearly encourages interpretation as the longer title, although the way the state name is set apart supports the idea that it's just a graphic treatment surrounding the album title.

Anyway, this seems to be a public confusion issue, so the article should address it. --Dhartung | Talk 02:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Next albums

Please check the history before reverting next time! I wrote "SF Weekly interview names next projects as Oregon and Rhode Island, sounds authoritative", referencing Art of the States, a July 13, 2005 interview, which says:

He also says that the next albums, Oregon and Rhode Island, "will have nothing to do with actual place names and histories. They'll be more abstract or more figurative."

I agree the 2004 source is more speculative, but that was over a year ago. Put the two together and they actually confirm each other, since the Junkmedia article turned out to be correct about Illinois, after all! No, I don't recommend just randomly throwing in speculation, but when we have a good attribution directly from the artist, I don't see why we can't include that (even given Stevens' playful approach to the project). Given the way he set this up as an album cycle (which could conceivably last his entire career, whether it reaches 50 or not), some speculation is inevitable; we'll be playing this game for a long time. In any case, it was my bad for not doing this as a proper reference. I'll fix that. --Dhartung | Talk 21:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While technically the speculation on Sufjan's next album still (arguably) falls under wikipedia is not a crystal ball, I agree with everything Dhartung said. Citing somewhat speculative content to a credible source and labeling the content as rumor, report, or the like in the article itself is fine, in my book. - Jersyko talk 22:12, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Heh. Well, I see that as mainly arguing against articles for future events. So there's no justification for creating Oregon (album) just yet ... but it certainly isn't a future event that this has been reported, and the music Wikipedia is full of references to future albums, e.g. X&Y hit the Coldplay article almost 7 months before release; and the article for X3 has been around since 2004, and the film won't be out for almost a year! Then we have future visits of Halley's Comet ... and of course there's this. Hey, just had to tweak you a bit. --Dhartung | Talk 08:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with you that those articles belong here and would vigorously argue with anyone that said they didn't. However, I think they fall under the first exception to the WP is not a crystal ball policy because they are all "well documented speculation." The speculation on Sufjan's next album is, well, not entirely well documented yet, so i would understand if someone argued that it didn't belong in the article (though I would disagree). But now i'm arguing a technical point that I don't even think applies (or maybe i just don't want it to apply) to what we have in the Sufjan article now anyway. - Jersyko talk 12:30, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion?

I'm sorry, I'm from west Michigan and I've never heard of this guy. I am not sure he deserves a Wiki-site for being some small regional act. Has he won any notable awards? Had any songs chart? -- added by User:66.72.215.225

He's extremely notable in indie circles. His most recent album, for example, was (might still be) in Amazon.com's top 10 or 20 in terms of online sales. Certainly not a small, regional act - I'm in Memphis, Tennessee and I know at least three other people here (I'm sure there are more) that are fans. Incidentally, 680,000 Google hits for "Sufjan Stevens." - Jersyko talk 19:27, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Please sign edits to Talk pages. Jersyko is correct; Sufjan Stevens may not be a mainstream artist, but he isn't a "small regional act". The Metacritic Best of 2005 has Illinois the top-rated album of the year, with 35 glowing reviews in professional media, including the Los Angeles Times, The Onion, Spin magazine, Billboard magazine, Entertainment Weekly, Rolling Stone, the New York Times, and the Guardian. Oh, yeah, and this outfit called Pitchfork mentioned it in passing, I think. It's a slam dunk that Illinois will be on many ten-best lists for the year. So with that resume, Stevens is definitely on the move; in a couple of years he might even be a midrange regional act!

As for charting, you may want to familiarize yourself with the indie music scene [4]. By definition nobody's on a major label (though many frequently graduate to one), and sales of 100,000 are "hits". There are no charts because it's not a single-oriented demographic and radio (in this age of Clear Channel) ignores them. Sites such as Last.fm, however, allow them to find an audience and demonstrated fanbase. --Dhartung | Talk 21:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

if the guy has been reviewed in reputable publications like Rolling Stone, he qualifies, however, someone ought to reference this is the article, anyone without a record deal can be an "indie" artist by definition, wiki can't have a page for all of them...jme

He has a record deal, with Asthmatic Kitty; he isn't self-published by any means. Recognize that we shouldn't have to assert notability in every article, just because you aren't well-read. --Dhartung | Talk 08:46, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In any event, you ought to give Sufjan a listen, you might enjoy his music. Not to belabor the point, but please see WP:MUSIC, which is a guideline (but not a policy) for deciding whether a musician should have an article. Stevens meets criteria 2, 4, 6, and maybe 3 (meeting only one of them is required). It has been suggested that every article must assert the notability of its subject (especially bands and musicians), but this suggestion has been rejected by community vote/consensus in the past, i believe. - Jersyko talk 13:59, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Notability, which is not a policy or guideline; Wikipedia:Importance, which is a proposed policy; and especially Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines, which is a policy. The text used in that article is

notability is required for a musical topic (such as a band) to deserve an article here

and not assertion of notability is required. Such assertions are only necessary if an apparent vanity article without easily discovered notability (many VfDs start with an assertion of non-notability, derived from a google search).--Dhartung | Talk 17:53, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Christmas eps

The first christmas ep is titled Noel! Songs for Christmas - Vol. I. The second one is Hark! Songs for Christmas - Vol. II. The third one is Ding! Dong! Songs for Christmas - Vol. III.

Will you please cite the source that is telling you this? A google search for "Noel! Songs for Christmas" doesn't reveal anything of note. Of course Google isn't definitive, but i'd like to see some evidence, please. - Jersyko talk 22:52, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

I don't have time to do an exhaustive google search just to prove it to you but I know someone that has a real copy of it. The MP3s that are floating around are tagged wrong. If you must have some kind of online reference for it I saw it mentioned here and here.

I've looked around, and I'm satisfied about Noel!, Hark!, and Ding! Dong! being the successive titles. I'm beginning to be disturbed by Sufjan's punctuation habits, though ... --Dhartung | Talk 04:12, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If people Google "Sufjan Stevens" "Christmas" they should be able to get a few places confirming it, including mp3s. But according to some sources it looks like they may have been 'released' last year. Could someone check this out in more detail than I have. It's 5am and I have no idea what I'm doing up and on here. --Jellypuzzle 04:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In my onw googling, I didn't find anything I would consider authoritative about any single one of the EPs, not even a half-nicely-organized fan discography. --Dhartung | Talk 07:02, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Two sites: [5] and [6]. Only the first link has files that work it seems. It also has a track list if you scroll down. As they seem to only be in scattered mp3 form and mentioned on a few message boards [7] is another with a nice track listing, ~~I think they're probably unreleased officially and will remain so~~ sorry, [8] reveals they were limited, not unreleased.. I'm not sure if that means we can provide a link to them as he may re-release them or continue to sell some on tour, in December not now, it being summer and all. --Jellypuzzle 07:38, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]