Talk:Siouxsie Sioux

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Siouxsie Sioux article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Contents 1 Discussion 2 Surname 3 Sid Vicious 4 Nazi Controversy 5 Image:Siouxsie-sioux-van-oakland-np.jpg 6 Why we can't use the album cover in the infobox

[edit] Discussion

They might have started out as a punk band, but they soon became goth IMHO - Steeev 22:55, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

This page needs to be cleaned up, the beginning sounds too much like the beginning of Siouxise and the Banshees: The Authorized Biography. Zombieliving 23:45, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Surname

Can someone sort out the whole Dallion/Ballion thing once and for all, with a properly cited source? Please? --Stormie 10:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

It's Ballion. She allowed 'Dallion' to be the misunderstanding because of shame about her home life and not wanting fans to come around and have tea with Mrs. Ballion (her mother)--the fans would come by the family home, and her mother would invite them in and share all kinds of stories embarrassing to an increasingly-popular local singer and club personality. 'Dallion' even appears in the credits of an early movie; whether it was an intentional or unintentional mis-print, Sioux used that to somewhat legitimise the belief that 'Dallion' was correct. In the past, Siouxsie herself has claimed her name to be 'Dallion', allowing the misunderstanding to exist without correction. Her *authorised* biography (see Amazon link, Ballion/Dallion is mentioned in a comment) now clears up the issue: she herself admits that her surname is actually 'Ballion'.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1860743757/104-9448522-5445527?v=glance&n=283155

http://www.vamp.org/Siouxsie/Text/guardian.html

http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Siouxsie_Sioux

http://www.untiedundone.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=525&sid=55c6530a09b0db5059b6901cf976e8e4

http://siouxsie-sioux.biography.ms/

http://www.rocklibrary.com/Library/Entity.aspx?id=afe82f27-a632-4cd5-ac10-00b1b2019ada

http://www.chartwatch.co.uk/TopTen/writers/wri3703.htm

...so can we please fix her name?

[edit] Sid Vicious

Sid left the Banshees to join/form "The Flowers of Romance" - which is where he started using his famous nom de plume - with various people who later appeared in The Slits and The Raincoats (from memory). This band did not gig (as far as I am aware), so I have not edited the article as there is little point. I have edited the Pirroni bit as Adam and the Ants released records in the period between Marco leaving the Banshees and joining Mr Ant.

I also agree that the early period of the article duplicates much of Siouxsie & the Banshees article.LessHeard vanU 12:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually if you search google images (sid vicious on drums) there are quite a few pictures of them playing a gig at the 100 punk club

[edit] Nazi Controversy

It would be great if someone could add a discussion of the controversy she faced for wearing swastica-adorned clothing... her critics, her defenses, and what came of that issue —Preceding unsigned comment added by Randomtext279 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, and it's not enough to just say in the article that donning Nazi garb simply "was not a political statement", and it doesn't prove anything to point to anti-Nazi, pro-Israel songs she later wrote "to stop controversy". She may not have written them to stop controversy, and even if she did, it doesn't necessarily affect the original intent of the swastikas. Citations are absolutely needed for these claims. Please find an interview or something where this topic was brought up and official statements were made! —mjb (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Siouxsie-sioux-van-oakland-np.jpg

User:212.234.92.35 has removed this image as being "too awful". I disagree - it's not a great image but I think it is very far from being so awful that it's better to have nothing at all (as an aside, it is GFDL licensed). Rather than getting into a revert war, I seek the opinions of others. Is it worth having? --Stormie 03:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Awful is subjective- I don't see anything wrong with this image. Actually, I think she looks quite nice in it, fairly typical per the Banshees 1980s heyday, if only a bit tired after a show or something. It does a perfectly good job of illustrating what the singer looks like. It's possible the IP in question was a vandal anyway. So, to make a long story short, I'm placing the image back in. The Parsnip! 22:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

No, while I disagree with User:212.234.92.35 on this, he's definitely no vandal, he's a long-time anonymous contributor. But I agree with you on the image: it illustrates very clearly Siouxsie's distinctive look, with the big hair and thick eyeliner, and I think serves the article well. --Stormie 03:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

there's no problem with records sleeves 'cse every artist page has got a discography page with albums & singles reproducing the pictures of the sleeves. if you start this policy here, I'm afraid you'd have to erase all the discography pictures pages on the wikipedia site. User:212.234.92.35 18 july 2007

Actually there is a big problem with using album cover images to illustrate other articles, the many and varied uses of "fair use" (i.e. copyrighted and not freely usable) images is one of the major copyright issues that has been debated on Wikipedia this year. Have a read of Wikipedia:Non-free content (and the many many screenfuls of argument on Wikipedia talk:Non-free content) - basically, using album cover images on list/discography pages is not considered an acceptable use of non-free content, and they are being cleaned up (slowly). Indeed there is a strong body of opinion that you should not even use album cover images on the article about the album, unless it contains content specifically discussing the artwork in question. --Stormie 04:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

that 86 picture was also made by someone and one hasn't got the copyright of the author. one needs a glamourous picture & that 86 picture is not. the goth awful porcelaine years look is 1983-1987. (note : the "tinderbox" LP is not the heyday of her career, it's considered by the critics to be the opposite). that 86 picture also shows her smiling & she never did it for promotion. so, that 86 picture doesn't represent her in a proper way.

important : universal tolerates the use of the record sleeves when it's made for promotion & so far, the record sleeves are paid by the artist. so a beautiful picture is better than a bad picture. User:212.234.92.35 20 july

No, one does not need a "glamorous" picture. That picture is not "bad", except in your own opinion. I happen to think she looks quite lovely in it. Using a non-free image to indicate what an artist looks like is not acceptable if that artist is living. Album art is fine and dandy on articles about the album in question, or next to a paragraph in the artist's article ABOUT the album in question, but it can't be placed in an Infobox. The Parsnip! 20:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

"that 86 picture was also made by someone and one hasn't got the copyright of the author" - hmm, actually, User:Andwhatsnext that uploaded the picture asserts that she took the photo herself and releases it under the GFDL. As for Universal tolerating the use of sleeve images, unfortunately, Wikipedia policies with regards to non-free content are rather stricter than the laws regarding such things (although as I said, the exact boundaries are currently under heavy debate). --Stormie 23:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why we can't use the album cover in the infobox

This is already policy, and nothing new being started here. You can see it in examples 16 and 17 here, WP:NONFREE#Examples_of_unacceptable_use. Wikipedia has a strong preference for free rather than copyrighted images, because under direction from the Foundation we are a part of, we try to make the articles as freely reusable as possible, not just here but on other websites. Copyrighted pictures cannot always be used on other sites, so whenever there is another picture that will do we use that one. As a band that is still active (sort of), anyone who wants to get a totally free picture can take a photo of them at a concert or a publicity event, and more than likely there are some out there already. Therefore, instead of using the record album cover photo we should look for a free image. Most artists do not have album covers as their main picture, and that is allowable only under specific circumstances. Artist discographies are usually lower in the page, and they can and are being erased under the policy. That's the reason in a nutshell. The Parsnip! 23:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)