Talk:Kent (band)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Citations etc[edit]

"With five number-one singles,[2] 21 Swedish Grammy Awards, ten number-one albums,[3] and over 3 million record sales, Kent is considered the most popular rock/pop group within Sweden and throughout Scandinavia"

There's no source for the 21 Swedish Grammy Awards (I can only find 17), there's no source for 3 million record sales, and the whole section about Kent being considered the most popular rock/pop group within Sweden and throughout Scandinavia has no basis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.208.75.74 (talk) 13:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Singles and chart positions[edit]

I have inserted the singles table from the Swedish Kent page. I noticed that there were some differences compared to the old English version, regarding how high the singles reached on the hit list. Does anyone have a good source to double check this? Jake73 14:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would people stop changing the chart numbers. Such as for the Ingenting single which reached number one in Swedish charts, not two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.186.193 (talk) 02:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History before first album[edit]

It would be very nice if someone would like to write up a section about Kent's history before the debut album. - David Björklund (talk) 20:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.kent.nu/biografi.asp Here's a biography in Swedish from 1990 and forward. I don't have time to translate it right now. 130.243.248.165 16:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the History section, Jones & Giftet and havsaenglar are band names, and the White Concert is a concert. And all others are album titles. Maybe it's appropriate to distinguish among them? I suggest putting albums in the Discography section.
Chimin 07 (talk) 12:51, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Översättning?[edit]

Finns det verkligen något syfte med alla dessa jäkla översättningarna av låttitlarna? Det ser bara skräpigt och irriterande ut. Kents svenska låtar har svenska titlar och kents engelska låtar har engelska titlar. End of story liksom.-Slipzen 10:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Du har rätt, de var jävligt onödiga, det blir bättre såhär.

By the way, couldn't we get a better picture of the band somewhere?81.233.144.193 00:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On a related note - "Back to the Contemporary" is not a correct translation of "Tillbaka til samtiden". "Contemporary" is an adjective, the only way it can be used as a noun is to mean "someone from the same time". "Samtiden" is "the Present" in English. I've corrected this page and that of the album.

kent[edit]

The official way to spell the band's name is actually with a lower-case k, it's not just the logotype. I think we should consider correcting this. 130.242.103.123 19:42, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's your source? The name is capitalized on their official website. — Nivix talk 03:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Single Dates[edit]

I have been working on the singles as of late, setting up pages for almost all of them... and I noticed that someone took off the dates that they were released. This is vandalism, no? I will change it back within a week if nobody objects. (LAz17 18:54, 6 September 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

No, that's not vandalism. See Wikipedia:Vandalism. That said, I wouldn't object to restoring the dates. --PEJL 20:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we have made some progress on the organization of stuff, particularily with the creation of the discography template. I added an info box on several singles, kinda like the albums have, so that we have a picture of their cover and info. Perhaps it would be best to put the release date in the infobox instead of on the main Kent page? Anyways, the one problem is that I have ran out of cover images for the singles.(LAz17 18:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
As long as at least the release year remains in the artist article, it should be fine to mention the exact date only in the single articles. Regarding the track listings in the single articles, note that track names should be in quotes, not italicized, per WP:SONG#Formatting. --PEJL 18:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I mannaged to find pictures of almost every single, and I can probably scan two covers from the Du & Jag doden cd, in order to complete the single list. The only problem will be that we will not have all the covers of the english singles, and I can not find them online like I did with the others. Why is the cover of the B Sidor album gone? As for the track titles... I did not know that there was a rule, and I thought it looked nicer the way we currently have it. It doesn't seem to bothering people, but if you want to change them feel free to. (LAz17 02:09, 21 October 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
Hey, should I add the back covers of some singles? The back covers look quite nice and/or interesting in some cases. (LAz17 02:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
I doubt I'll be editing those articles, but please try to adhere to this guideline from now on. Back covers are not considered fair use. Front covers may be removed if they don't have a fair use rationale. See WP:FU. --PEJL 08:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the two different 747 singles should be separated. One is english, one is swedish, I have created two different infoboxs for them, so why put them together when they're clearly different? (LAz17 16:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)). All the English Kent singles have their corresponding Swedish singles... so if you want to put the two 747s together, then it is only fair to put the rest of the singles together... yet they are different and deserve to have their own pages. (LAz17 16:26, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Because singles are often released in different variants, and such variants generally share an article on Wikipedia. See WP:SONG. (Also because the article names didn't adhere to WP:SONG#Naming.) --PEJL 16:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These are not different variations, this is a totally different single. If they were different variations we would be combining all the english singles into the swedish ones. Clearly the infobox means that there should be separate pages. We should also take off the song stub from most of these singles, and replace them with a single stub instead. Hmm, if the naming is bad, then we can fix it up. (LAz17 16:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
Well we generally group such singles on Wikipedia, and I see no reason not to do so in this case. 747 (song) already covered both singles, and this seems quite appropriate, as this allows for a more focused coverage of the topic. It appears you've now split these articles into three articles, which is even worse. Please read WP:SONG. --PEJL 16:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you want them together, then there has to be two infoboxs on the same page, not just one. And the problem is that that would look ugly. So what should we do, throw all the english singles into their corresponding Swedish ones, or leave it how it is?(LAz17 16:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
No, there should be one infobox, with an {{Extra album cover 2}} template. There should be one article, not three, and that article should be named 747 (song), per WP:SONG#Naming. --PEJL 16:50, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They are not the same song. One is swedish and one is english, hence their difference. They may have the same title, but they're different songs, and hence, difference singles. If you still want to put them together, then go ahead, but also put together Music Non Stop and Musik Non Stop, as well as Saker Man Ser and Things She Said. While we're there we could throw More Than Hangesta Hill into the regular Hagnesta Hill article. (LAz17 16:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
It's a bit of an unusual case. It's not unusual to have single articles cover different versions of a song, but in most such cases the name of the song is the same. I agree that this is less optimal for the differently named singles. So I guess we could have two (but not three) articles for each single, as long as these follow WP:SONG. If so, the articles should be named 747 (English song) and 747 (Swedish song). --PEJL 17:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, sounds fair. I fixed english one, and I'll combine the other two later today. Do you happen to have the covers of Max500 and Den Doda Vinkeln? (LAz17 17:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
OK. --PEJL 23:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And no, sorry, I don't have any covers. --PEJL 23:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a problem... for there has been lots of editing on the last album... anonymous people have been having edit wars on the track naming, adding english translations and taking them off. (LAz17 16:31, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Translations should generally not be included in album track listings, per WP:ALBUM#Track listing. --PEJL 16:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What about the anonymous edit war? What can be done about that? (LAz17 17:39, 3 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
You could try talking to them, if they are on reasonably static IPs. --PEJL 23:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Du & jag döden and B-Sidor 95-00 both have have translations of songs... and it looks kinda nice... is it acceptable? (LAz17 20:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]
I think it would be better if we removed translations from all of the albums for compliance with WP:ALBUM#Track listing. That also appears to be the sentiment expressed above (try running the section #Översättning? above thru a translator like this). --PEJL 21:39, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PoV and lack of references[edit]

This article is full of unreferenced statements along the lines of 'fans thought this', 'most fans didn't like that', etc. Unless these can be supported by references they need removing. Currently the article reads like it was written by a Kent fan projecting their own views on to everyone else. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 12:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does the name Jocke in the section Jones & Giftet and Havsänglar (1990–1994) refer to Joakim Berg?
Chimin 07 (talk) 12:46, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kent - 747 (Swedish album version).ogg[edit]

Image:Kent - 747 (Swedish album version).ogg 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 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 05:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kent - Ingenting någonsin.ogg[edit]

Image:Kent - Ingenting någonsin.ogg 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 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 05:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kent logo.jpg[edit]

Image:Kent logo.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 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 05:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kent-b-sidor 95-00 a-1-.jpg[edit]

Image:Kent-b-sidor 95-00 a-1-.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 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 05:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Music Videos[edit]

The list of music videos was deleted... why? (LAz17 (talk) 01:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Kent.vapenammunition.albumart.jpg[edit]

Image:Kent.vapenammunition.albumart.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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:50, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative rock?![edit]

How can you call kent alternative rock? It is maby indie but not alternative! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.212.51.194 (talk) 09:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but SonyBMG is hardly an indie label. There are perhaps elements of the "indie" sound on some of their albums, but they are certainly not an indie group. --76.99.169.18 (talk) 14:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody can provide a valid source where an independent researcher or group of researchers has pinpointed the correct genre for Kent. So these are all speculations, and I am going to remove the content. It is compromising the integrity of Wikipedia.  — Adriaan (T★C) 15:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Kent - Dom andra.ogg[edit]

The image Image:Kent - Dom andra.ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Box 1991-2008 link in discography section[edit]

A red link to an unexisting page is the hotlink to "Kent Box 1991-2008" in the discography section. This seems unnecessary since an article actually do exist on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box_1991-2008. I'm sure many would be grateful if this was changed. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.49.181 (talk) 13:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of relative dates[edit]

It is a problem in this article that specific time frames in history are referred to by the names of the seasons. This is unencyclopaedic and, as the nationality of the original author cannot be verified, it is unclear what is meant thereby out of his or her perspective. It is therefore removed; if someone can provide specific dates, it would be appreciated, otherwise refrain from using subjective and relative descriptions.  — Adriaan (T★C) 18:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Style and lyrics[edit]

Kent is known, at least in Norway, as a band with fairly depressing lyrics. Maybe someone with a bit more knowlege of the band could describe their musical style? I've seen some descriptions regarding styles of single albums, but not the Kent sound as a whole. Maybe something to look into? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.90.232.221 (talk) 00:46, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genre[edit]

Progressive rock since when? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.73.141.185 (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They have definitely made a shift ion style over the years. In the 90s they were an 'indie rock band' (in the broader musical sense of "indie"), their recent albums have been more influenced by synth pop (they are known to be big fans of Depeche Mode) and electronic mbeats. Strausszek (talk) 08:57, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anglocentric intro[edit]

The intro looks disingenuously U.S.-centric:

"The band has had numerous Swedish radio hits since the breakthrough single "Kräm (så nära får ingen gå)", from their second studio album. They are the most popular rock group in Sweden, and describe themselves as "Sweden's biggest rock band", but are more or less unknown outside Scandinavia. Kent briefly attempted an international career with English versions of the albums Isola and Hagnesta Hill and an accompanying American tour for the former, but they gave up after failing to achieve the breakthrough they had hoped for."

This is both non-encyclopedic and a bit patronizing. You could find any number of bands that are hugely successful in their own country and neighbouring countries but which don't make a big breakthrough in the U.S. market, and most of them don't see America as their main target arena either. Hollywood and Billboard are not the ultimate arbiters of success anymore; even many groundbreaking UK bands (who have the advantage of established highways to success between Britain and America) and with a big following at home have failed to make any real mainstream impact in the US (The Smiths, Ultravox, Rainbow, Culture Club and New Order in the 1980s - New Order only became widely known in America from around 1990 onwards) or did so only for a few years and at the cost of giving up some of what made them special (e.g. Simple Minds). So the fact of not breaking in the US is less than noteworthy. Kent have had massive, consistent success (commercial and critical) in Scandinavia over the last fifteen years and have reached a listening audience across much of Europe; they should be described in terms of their success and originality within that field, not as a failed contender to become the new R.E.M., the new Def Leppard or whatever. Also, they're not mainly known as a radio hit band, but as a powerful live act. Strausszek (talk) 09:24, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kent (band). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kent_(band)&oldid=1203245267"