Talk:Zola Jesus

Opera issue

Ok. It takes about 10 years to become an opera singer. Most opera singers enter a musical conservatory/school for their chosen career at around the age she currently is — early 20s. You have to learn how to read music, play an instrument, act, and of course, you have to rigorously train your voice. SO, does anyone mind explaining to me how the hell she could have been singing in operas at 10 years old? I doubt she popped out of the womb wearing a stage costume and singing an aria while the doctor conducted an orchestra of nurses, so she has to be lying. At 10 years old your voice is far from being fully developed and it is very fragile. No real voice teacher would give a kid that age operatic training and furthermore no professional opera company would hire a 10 year old for a singing role, nor would a musical conservatory accept a 10 year old for training. Contrary to popular belief opera is not an umbrella term for classical singing, as I suspect she thinks. An opera is a PLAY that is sung, and a 10 year old just isn't capable of starring in one. I can't stress that fact enough. An interviewer should call her out on her lies. 24.125.127.43 (talk)

SO, does anyone mind explaining to me how the hell she could have been singing in operas at 10 years old? Nobody will explain you this, because you've made it all up. I studied opera on and off for about 10 years. I wasn't in any operas, though, it was always really private and individual...I kept stopping because I was like, I’m not good enough, I suck, this is awful, and then I'd start again. That was as far as she went. -- Evermore2 (talk) 08:22, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

A twelve-year-old girl can sing opera and she prolly never studied for ten years for it. Anyone can sing opera. It only takes some serious vocals. Hell, I sing opera and I never studied for it! So "Operatakesyearsoftraining" is bull. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.11.186.97 (talk) 15:45, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Notability

Why are we not questioning the entire validity of a musical artist whose only cited sources are paid promotion through pseudo-mainstream record label nonsense? I guess in 2012, the record industry can BUY wikipedia entries now, even for 'artists' like this that no one listens to. - 75.70.221.14 (talk) 10:44, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hard to say - given that her persona is as much a art project as a musical career, it's very difficult to validate what's "record label nonsense", what's truth, and what's just her attempting to seem unusual in interviews. I mean, she's done a pretty fair job of convincing everyone that her name is, in fact, "Nika Danilova", when if you look at some older press releases, she's listed as "Nicky (or Nicole) Hummel." I don't know if she's legally changed it, or if "Hummel" is another older stage name, or what. It's all very odd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nulldevice (talk • contribs) 20:39, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I think this fact could be added somehow to the article, if it IS indeed a fact and can be sourced as such. None of the sources I used when writing the article has ever mentioned it. -- Evermore2 (talk) 13:27, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

I had to look deep to find it - there's an old SXSW preview in Austin360, an old last.fm page, and an interview with Peaking Lights from 2009 (they knew her from her early days). I'll see if I can find the specific links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.104.153 (talk) 19:47, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

well, here's one reference, her old last.fm bio - http://www.last.fm/music/Zola+Jesus/+wiki/diff?b=10&a=9 and the SXSW article previously mentioned - http://www.austin360.com/news/entertainment/music/sxsw-regional-preview-the-midwest-2/nRzcW/ and the peaking lights interview. http://rosequartz.blogspot.com/2009/07/interview-peaking-lights.html Nulldevice (talk) 14:33, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Also if you look at "Zola Jesus Inc", the sole officer is "Nicole Hummel." My guess is that's her legal/birth name, although it appears she goes by "Nika" colloquially (and used to go by "Nicky" in her college days) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.13.172.162 (talk) 18:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

References

Encyclopedic Quality

The statement, "She has received generally positive reviews and was regarded as one of the names to watch out for in 2011," is yet another example of why Wikipedia is many things, but an encyclopedia it ain't. Why would any encyclopedia include the suggestion that someone needs to be watched out for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.27.135.91 (talk) 22:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

• You probably meant "but the static, unchanging encyclopedia it ain't"? The suggestion in question (made by both Q and NME) was included at the time when it seemed relevant enough to warrant being mentioned in the lead. Now it doesn't, of course, so I remove it. --Evermore2 (talk) 13:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Zola Jesus discography

Support split - The discography section of this article takes up more than one third of the page, and should be split to a new article entitled Zola Jesus discography. --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:46, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Support--dashiellx (talk) 11:54, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Zola Jesus. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100503055042/http://feverray.com:80/2010/04/27/zola-jesus-to-support-fever-ray-on-2010-european-tour/ to http://feverray.com/2010/04/27/zola-jesus-to-support-fever-ray-on-2010-european-tour/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101220020108/http://www.nme.com:80/list/50-best-albums-of-2010/199283/article/199596 to http://www.nme.com/list/50-best-albums-of-2010/199283/article/199596
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110928210041/http://www.chronicart.com/webmag/article.php?id=1667 to http://www.chronicart.com/webmag/article.php?id=1667

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 23:33, 20 July 2016 (UTC)