Talk:Jesu (band)

Disagree with capitalization points

If the J is NEVER supposed to be capitalized, why does Justin's own blog list the band as Jesu, with a capital J? JohnBWatt 12:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, curses. didn't notice that :)

Feel free to edit me to death... Skewer 06:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Even if Broadrick always writes it with a lowercase J, it should still be an uppercase J here. This is an encyclopedia and names of bands are proper nouns, hence they take an initial capital. Wikipedia is under no obligation to duplicate what is essentially a design/typesetting decision by the artist. --Richardrj 09:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Like I said, feel free to edit me to death.

Yes, this is an encyclopaedia, and names are proper nouns, but a "product identity" should be preserved as it appears on the product (here the band is the product).

Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Article_titles_with_lowercase_initial_letters . You will find a-ha, a1 (band), angela (band), blink-182... just on the first page. If I invented a device called the "skewer", under the company "skewer industries", the name & logo I choose would be legally immovable without some trouble - an art department is not permitted to restyle a specified logo, which seems (to me) to be what the recurrent "jesu" text is.

This whole debate seems quite trivial, especially given the other lower-case bands out there. Can we leave things as they are or have some editing from those who think it is not worth conforming to the band's actual name? Thanks :) Skewer 11:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

If we were to use that logic on Broadrick's previous band, the entry would be listed as GODFLESH since every album had the entire logo capitalized. JohnBWatt 12:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree it's a trivial debate - but hey, I like trivia :)

I'm not gonna edit it, because I respect your views. But my personal view is that Wikipedia articles should refer to names, not product identities. And yes, that would apply to A-ha, Blink 182, Bell Hooks and all the rest. Following its recent redesign, the logo of the Guardian is now "theguardian". Are you saying that that is how the paper should be referred to here? --Richardrj 12:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Well I don't know what to do about this. I figure a precedent has been set by other lowercase bands, and I only stuck to the "j" because I have seen many talk pages fill up with fans debating, for example, whether "The Smashing Pumpkins" should actually have the "The" (on some releases it does, on others it doesn't, much like The Cure's "Wish" album, on which the band is just called "Cure").

Since jesu is always the same on the CDs I'm not going to capitalise it, but I don't own this page, and probably won't revert any J edits that people make. If I was mentioning the band in an email I'd probably call them Jesu, out of habit (back to the names thing), so I'm clearly an indecisive mess :) Skewer 11:34, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I remember that Robert Smith officially changed the band's name from The Cure to Cure, when "Wish" came out. By the next album it had changed back. All in all, for the purpose of their Wikipedia entry, it doesn't pay to get so technical. It's the same band. The same goes for Jesu, I believe. Even if it was Broadrick's intention to keep it in lowercase, it's still a style choice which shouldn't apply here. I just didn't want to change it on you without some kind of consensus on it. JohnBWatt 19:24, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Admittedly, there does seem to be a consensus here that lower case names should be allowed to stand. I'm not gonna lose any sleep over it, although personally I think it is wrong, wrong, wrong :) --Richardrj 20:28, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think a better idea would be to fix the capitalization issues but, if the points given can be proven, make a reference to the style choice of not using capitalization. Personally, I can't recall any such interviews or quotes from Broadrick where he specifically states reasons for why the name is spelled that way. JohnBWatt 20:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, at the Hydra Head News Blog almost nothing is capitalised. This doesn't help at all... :) Skewer 14:40, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Just a note to let you know that I am in favour of switching to capitalised "Jesu", given that it's how it appears in Broadrick's own blog. Also I could see no reference that the name "should" always be all-lowercase, nor that it's done to "remove the inherent religion". As somebody already noted, it looks more like a design choice, like all-uppercase GODFLESH. I would edit myself, but I don't know enough about the band. PizzaMargherita 14:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:JesuHeartache.jpg

Image:JesuHeartache.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:JesuAlbum.jpg

Image:JesuAlbum.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I have added the required infobox to these two images but have not added the "source" section. I encourage people to edit/improve them. Will.law June 2007 (UTC)

Make sure you delete the giant pink template so it won't get deleted. = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 15:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I figure I should get something in the source section first... Will.law 00:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use criteria

The use of images not in compliance with our fair-use criteria or our policy on nonfree content is not appropriate, and the images have been removed. Please do not restore them. — Moe ε 10:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

TRL

That's a record label, not a band, and shouldn't go in the associated acts section of the infobox. = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 15:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Er, but it isn't in the associated acts section; it's in the Label(s) section! Inflammator 12:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Dammit! Sorry, I really should pay more attention to these things. It's just that most articles don't have that long of a list, so naturally I thought... = ∫_t^c 5th Eye 12:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

It's all good. :) Inflammator 12:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

7 string guitars

Article states Justin is using 7 string guitars on tour and on the Silver EP. Any references??? That would be quite a departure for him, as most interviews I've read states he's been using his same black 6 string, strat knock off since Godflesh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nihilistic Misanthrope (talk • contribs) 08:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a 7 string to me.. http://www.amoeba.com/video-player/jesu.html (about 28 seconds in is a pretty clear shot) User:DaveJones —Preceding comment was added at 23:50, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Article name

Why is this article named Jesu (band) when Jesu simply redirects here? If Jesu isn't a disambiguation, this article should simply be named that. --darolew 05:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Studio album or compilation?

It's debatable over whether Pale Sketches is considered a "Studio Album." When released, it was referred to as the third studio album, even thought it's a compilation of previously unreleased material. It should be noted that Broadrick has stated that, while Infinity is a studio album, it is NOT the new Jesu album. I'm not going to argue with moving Pale Sketches to a "Compilations" section and don't even necessarily disagree, but at the same time, I guess there should be some consensus as to how to group the categories because, as it stands now, Pale Sketches can be considered a compilation album AND a studio album. JohnBWatt (talk) 00:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Brutal Assault 2010

Don't know where this would fit but thought I would add it to the notes. Jesu played Brutal Assault in the Czech republic, 2010, to an extremely positive audience reaction. BA is not as widely publicised nor as big as Wacken, but it is a highly respected metal festival worldwide nonetheless. 110.174.169.36 (talk) 06:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Quote - April 13, 2010 (Archival reasons)

"N.B: I've received some rather concerned messages on Twitter regarding the jesu and Pale Sketcher split ; the split concept is not as polarized as is being assumed, nor is it intended to be. All electronics are NOT being removed from jesu, it is just that new songs will not be 'electronica' oriented / driven, like the 'Why Are We Not Perfect' EP and the jesu / Envy split EP, for example. Songs for jesu LP 3 for Caldo Verde, some of which are still in the writing process, have many layers of keyboards / synthesizers, etc, but the guitar is the 'lead' instrument. Pale Sketcher exists so I can take the jesu 'electronica' sound further, something I've wished to do for some time, the jesu sound will not be as bare as some have imagined due to this 'sound split'." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.60.132.21 (talk) 18:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Heart Ache / Dethroned changes

While I don't really have any issue with the changes concerning the Heart Ache re-release information, there are definitely some inaccuracies that need to be addressed. If we're going to refer to it as its own release, the actual title on the re-release's cover is Heart Ache & Dethroned, not Heart Ache/Dethroned. I'd change it now but want to address it here before chancing an edit war over it. Second, it is not a compilation. A re-release? Yes. A double EP? Yes. A compilation? No. Pale Sketches is a compilation of various material recorded over several years and compiled on to one album. Two EP packaged together is not a compilation. Lastly, despite being referred to as a separate release within the article, it really does not need its own article. Right off the bat, it's an obvious candidate to be merged with the existing Heart Ache article. NJZombie (talk) 02:55, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Jesu (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 08:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)