Talk:Thom Yorke/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Microphone

Not sure if it is of any interest to you here, but on the technical side Thom Yorke mostly uses a Shure Beta 87 microphone on stage. I have no citations for this, I just happen to own one myself and have noted him using it 99% of the time on live recordings. I have not altered the main page to mention this, but thought any of the main contributors may find it useful to add somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.28.23.117 (talk) 11:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Is Thom Yorke married?

I've seen conflicting information on the internet. --71.178.13.61 (talk) 01:48, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

No - Thom is not married. [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srosenbz (talk • contribs) 03:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

No, but he has a son and daughter with his longtime girlfriend Rachel Owens.

Misc. Personal section is not relevant

I propose to remove this section. I mean whats the point when all the most relevant information there is already in the main article. And the 'Wicked Child' line I thought was "Radidate his light"? And one shouldn't be making assertions about what a song means unless the author has explictily said so. Its also ok if its a questioning assertion (i.e. "This MIGHT suggest..." instead of presupposing it as fact. Apart from that, the article is good. Much better than it was this time last year.--Richj1209 22:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

If everybody is fine with this, I shall delete it tomorrow, so speak now or forever hold your peace...--Richj1209 20:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Done.--Richj1209 18:20, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

4th June Copyedit; please peer review

I've done a basic but expansive copyedit of this article. As such I have removed the Copyedit Needed tag - I'd say now it isn't! It should read better at least; the flow in places felt strange, as it kept leaping back to points already established. I feel it contains less arguably-irrelevant information now. (An encyclopaedia entry it may be, but only in regards to Yorke, not Radiohead) And importantly: Most if not all the information directly pertains to Yorke himself. I'd prefer it if that aspect was kept solidly in mind for future edits.

Please feel free to modify it without running it by me; there are some instances where I am unable to track down a source for a nontheless known fact, I've marked these with the usual citation needed disclaimer. This was a broad copyedit, not a massive rewrite, and not a reassessment of sources or where they are needed.

Another point to bear in mind for the future: I removed a few chunks in this article, basically about Radiohead as a whole or Andy Yorke. The problem is, Radiohead's article has the required depth if someone wishes to be told everything about them; if it is not about Thom or doesn't pertain to him in a notable way it doesn't really need to feature here, so don't be afraid to redirect people to other, more expansive articles instead.

The Radiohead section basically revolves around how Thom works in, with, and around that band, and his role in it. Please keep in mind that if a user wants to read about Radiohead, they will read about Radiohead; this article's extent is Yorke's role within it and not the band's actions as a whole. That said it wasn't too bad.


Other things: just minor arrangements, rather than editing. I'm sure it won't please everybody, heh, but I think it's a start. Maul away ;) - ToneLa

"His singing voice has been compared with those of Jeff Buckley and Matthew Bellamy. "

Given Yorke's singing style was established years before Bellamy's was even heard, is his mention necessary? There are many singers you could compare Yorke to, and I think someone who preceded Radiohead would be more relevant. I've seen Bellamy compared to Yorke, yes, but never actually heard someone say "Thom Yorke sounds like Matthew Bellamy". Whereas with Buckley, Buckley came first and indeed inspired Thom, so citing someone who openly admits to using Thom as inspiration just doesn't sit right. It's like saying Jeff Buckley's singing voice is compared to Yorke's; it's not a vice-versa context, comparison is not always two ways. If you decide to keep Bellamy in this, please use the phrase "his voice / singing style is seen as similar to that of " . . . - ToneLa

Vandalism. Skinnyweed 03:31, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

While I'm at it, Thom is possibly an auditory synaesthetic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synaesthesia for description) - I remember this from some old Q? interview circa 1997, and it intrigued me greatly, though I can't verify it. He also alluded to it himself on the official RH message board around HTTT time. Perhaps better left out for now, but if anyone stumbles across any more allusions, it may be worth considering entry. - ToneLa

I think the list of Thom's musical influences needs to be updated...Jimi Hendrix?? I've never heard him mention that one. I think people from the atease message boards should take a look around here... -passionisafashion

I actually believe Thom Yorke to be a much greater musician than lyricist. Yes, his lyrics are often evocative of "urban-existentialism", alienation and such. But I've never seen a convincing published argument for the case of Thom Yorke as one of the finest lyricists of pop music. There are much better lyricists and this strikes me as a very fanish thing to say.

Dan D

It's a shame that just about all wikipedia articles on rock/pop musicians have to be so fanish. Here's some examples from this article: "While the early success of hit-single 'Creep' led to the band being written off as a one-hit wonder, a succession of increasingly complex albums has led to Radiohead becoming one of the world's most respected bands" (emphasis mine) Also: "He is considered by many to be one of the finest lyricists in popular music." Well, you know what? He is also "considered by many" to SUCK!

Weasel words, nothing more than weasel words. Nothing more than one person's opinion disguised as the general world consensus. Look: I'm a fan, alright? I love the man's music as much as anyone if not more than. But my fan grovelling has no place in an encyclopedia article and nor does anyone elses. It makes me sick how music fans can't write a proper NPOV article. One of these days I might take a torch to the weasel words in this article.--Me, 65.100.56.163 21:27, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree, i think there are some serious NPOV issues with this article. Claims such as 'worlds most respected bands' and 'finest lyricists in popular music' need to go, unless they are quoted out of magazine articles or something. Compared to the Radiohead page, this one is pretty poorly done. goodsmonth 03:08, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Not to claim that the excess praise on the page shouldn't be neutralized, it annoys me too, but I think "Life in a Glass House" for one is a pretty impressive set of pop lyrics, even apart from its music. Whatever it means, and even if it means nothing. The Radiohead page has its own problems. In some ways this is more effective than that. All you have to do with a page like this that captures the essence of its subject is correct factual innaccuracies and bring it strictly into NPOV rules, which admittedly are extremely important but shouldn't be too hard. With a page like that which is so dully written and formulaic it's clearly within NPOV, more drastic measures would be needed to improve it to the point where it informs someone with no knowledge of its subject in a way they won't forget five seconds after finishing.

Calling them one of the worlds most respected bands is not fannish, it's objectively true by nearly all standards. They are well known to be a musician's and critic's favorite, and those are usually the people who are refered to when the word "respected" is used in music. "Popular" is used when talking about the general population - they are popular but I don't know that I'd count them among the world's MOST popular.--Terminal157 19:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
Taste being a matter of subjective appreciation for a particular art form, and "respect" being an impossibe notion to operationally define or quantify, I think that any and all aesthetic judgments of Yorke or Radiohead should be excised. Non-neutrality is fine on a fansite, they have no place in an encyclopedia. But if anyone is particularly bothered by POV-issues, why complain about it ad infinitum on discussion pages? Edit the damn article, already! Fishhead64 19:52, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi there, I've done some major re-editing on the article, writing some more, clarifying a bit here, moving a sentence there. I think it flows more as an article and gives the reader a clearer perspective of Yorke the musician, that is what he is best known for, after all! Hopefully all the NPOV issues have been resolved, although, it is of course up to anyone to point out any errors or suggestions for further improvement.--Richj1209 20:52, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Photo Choice

The '2000s, older self' photo is inaccurate of Yorke's present-day appearance. The photo is unique in showing him in uncharacteristically old-man clothes with a tired expression. Was this a deliberate choice to match the caption or the authors' ideas of his maturation as an artist? Thom Yorke often looks as young in modern photographs as he did in the The Bends era. This is sacrificing accuracy for an editiorial effect.

He's only 10 or 11 years older than he was when Pablo Honey came out, for the love of God. It's 2005 right now--Thom Yorke will turn 37 next month. He's hardly eligible for Medicare yet. The "older self" thing might be apt if we were talking about someone who'd been famous for decades, someone you could clearly see the progression of age. Someone like Leonard Cohen. But we have not seen Thom Yorke age significantly since 1994. Someone fetch me a torch...65.100.56.163 21:38, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Can we please change the picture of him to something more modern. His hair is waay longer now.--Drawingshadows (talk) 05:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

A note on genre

"Genre labels being loaded as well as approximate terms, it should be noted that the idea of Radiohead being in the progressive rock (prog) tradition is solely from the perspective of some listeners." (more follows, including a quote of Thom's views on prog rock.)

What is the meaning of this section? First of all--the article is about Thom Yorke, not Radiohead. Second of all--where in the article does it say Radiohead is a prog rock band? (Hint: nowhere. Hence, this is a non-issue). Third--"loaded" is a "loaded" word. This is your opinion. This is about as POV as it gets. Fourth--all this section is really saying is, Radiohead is not prog and Thom Yorke does not like prog. Thom has views on all kinds of things--what is special about prog rock in particular that deserves mention?

Today is September 15. I will wait a week for a convincing reason to keep this section. If, by the end of that week, no case has been made, I will remove the "note on genre" section. Frankly, it is at odds with what wikipedia is all about. 65.100.56.163 21:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Agree. Looks like you forgot to get around to it... removed goodsmonth 04:55, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Political significance of Hail to the Thief

I can't be fecked to look for references right now, but HTTT really has nothing to do with George W. Bush or 9/11. Come on, people. Thom Yorke doesn't smack you over the head with the "meaning" of his lyrics like that. He's a bit more subtle than that, you know? Another change I'm going to make to this article, if I ever get around to it. 65.100.56.163 21:27, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Couldn't find any good quotes, execept for the one on the wiki Hail to the Thief page. (While i agree with you totally) you have to admit, a lot of people interpret that as the message behind the title of the album, so I've tried to fix it to show that.... and have possibly failed. Somewhat better that it was before anyway. goodsmonth 03:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Bit much of a coincidence. I have to believe that the title was somehow influenced by the election, however indirect.

Every member of the band that has commented on this has said several times that the title is not a reference to the GWB's election. I'm just going to strengthen the bit that says the band denies it.--Terminal157 20:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't suspect HTTT represents a sole political stance although I see the theme of anti-corporate dominance throughout. I think the record is a general attack on the endorsement of unconscious ignorance and the associated superficial values promoted by negligent, yet exploitative, management of consumerism. The title reminds me of the much used term of ideology as theft. I think the single Go To Sleep represents the cultural cleansing by corporate monopoly of the remains of true independent pre-subsidiary business and a revolutionary response to that attitude. The video for the track says it all to me; buildings are torn down to be replaced by something else. NM 14/04/06

Tom Jones?

I have no idea where this came up. Why is Tom Jones listed as having worked with Thom? This is strange. Does anyone have any proof? If not, then I shall get rid of it. --Richj1209 01:40, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

TV Appearances

Added Notable TV appearances. Not a complete list, source material IMDB. laurens.whipple 23:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

"Critics opinions"

Somebody added a section about 'critic's assessments on Yorke. I removed that section because it was largely irrelevant and basically there to give a one-sided view of his/Radiohead's work and himself, drawing on the traditional, negative stereotypes and opinions (his eye, preteniousness, etc). As such, I treated that edit as a case of vandalism. The same with this assertion that Yorke was born in Fife. Thats wrong, and changed back to the correct data. Thom did live in Scotland as a child briefly, but was not born there!--Richj1209 02:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

References section

Add more html refs to this section. Skinnyweed 19:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Fill in citations. Skinnyweed 19:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

What more editing? 24.12.236.93 01:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)Seth

Leaky torrents?

The album was leaked onto the Internet in its entirety using torrent files on 30 May 2006.

Is this meant to imply that someone was running a torrent tracker and a seed on some computer in the record company? BitTorrent is just one way of distributing transfer load, there's hardly a need for reinforcing the RIAA's line of thought that it's primarily a tool for breaking copyright laws. By now the same leaked tracks have probably been spread using at least FTP, CD-R discs and several file sharing networks, and without reference there's no telling that one of these methods wasn't in fact the point of origin. --Lorkki 11:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thom's droopy eye

I changed a bit about his eye - Thom doesn't have a lazy eye. If you don't believe me, just read the wikipedia article that was previously linked to from here (making the error a bit embarassing). A visible lazy eye is an eye that points off in another direction from the healthy eye, clearly not what Thom has. Thom has a drooping eyelid caused by a partial muscle paralysis around the eye. This is called Ptosis. The "botched" quote is a direct quote from Thom, though I don't have a citation unfortunately. I'm sure someone can find one. --24.190.122.122 07:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

True, and I've read that quote too... can't think where. Nikevs 15:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Grammy

I don't think he should be included in Grammy winners unless he wins one with his solo work. --Macarion 00:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hehe, maybe we can make a category for geniuses.

Radiohead section - too long

Hi. It seems to me that the Radiohead section of this article is far too long. Surely what is needed is a brief paragraph, with the remainder in the main article. This page is after Thom as an individual after all, and therefore detailed information on the band, album release data etc. is irrelevant. What do others think? Hongshi 11:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Biased... again.

Err, it seems to me that the line "His singing voice has been directly compared, and indeed partially attributed to, that of Jeff Buckley, although it is not as accomplished in range, sustain or pitch, and is thinner..." might be slightly biased. The article isn't a comparison of Thom and Jeff-- it's a page about Thom. And even if it were true (starting to sound biased myself), the majority of people reading this page are probably Radiohead fans, and won't want to read anything... uhh, "mean" about Thom. --JSF99 18:23, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

This is nonsense anyway as Thom has a superior range to Jeff Buckley. Thom's lowest note is an E2 which Buckley has never came anywhere NEAR. Thom's highest known chest note is an F5 (possibly F#5) which Buckley has probably gone slightly higher than, but since Thom has a good bass range, he's got the greater overall chest range. As for falsetto, Thom has sustained an E6, rising to a very stratchy F#6. I believe Jeff has hit a very strained D#6. So Thom has the higher falsetto. It's all on Yourtube. Beef jerky66 (talk) 13:10, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Short-lived "Height" section

Somebody added a "Height" section today, which was very brief and just said that Thom Yorke was a "small man." heh, it even said "Tom" instead of "Thom" for part of today.

Anyway, I don't really see the point of mentioning that Thom Yorke is short, unless he was like a midget or something or if there had been some controversy, and in any case it was unsourced, so I deleted it. I think that is straightforward, but I like to back up any major changes on the talk page. If anyone feels the Height thing is actually important, discuss it here before you revert please. Thanks! --Jaysweet 22:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA

I'm failing this article for GA. The article is underreferenced, especially the Musical approach section. The album cover does not have a fair use rationale for this article and doesn't meet WP:NONFREE how it's used anyway. The EP cover doesn't have a rationale at all. ShadowHalo 05:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Addition to musical approach

should Rabbit In Your Headlights by UNKLE be added to the list of songs at the beginning? it seems like a fairly hard song to sing and he has to sustain some hard notes during it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.235.28 (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

A Scanner Darkly

Thom Yorke did the soundtrack for a Scanner Darkly. Can this be added? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.179.244 (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

It should not be added as it is inaccurate. Thom contributed at least one track to the film ["Black Swan" is played over the closing credits], but he by no means "did" the soundtrack. Most of it was done by a band called "Tin Hat Trio"ROG 19 20:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Addition to "Live collaborations"

I attended a Radiohead concert at UBC Thunderbird Stadium in Vancouver. I believe REM had performed the night before, and Michael Stripe joined in on singing Karma Police. I actually managed to find an MP3 as well, and I would add it to the list, but I'm not sure of the year. Anyone?

- Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.134.149 (talk) 07:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Citation

I found a good citation for the small "Band Aid 20" section, showing that he played on it and also the music video, with him.

http://www.last.fm/music/Band+Aid+20

I don't know how to do citations, so could someone please do this for me? --RaphaelBriand (talk) 23:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

"Rap-like delivery"

I question the appropriate-ness of the term "rap-like delivery" for the 2003 songs Myxomatosis and A Wolf At The Door. Several music criticism sites, notably Pitchfork Media, described the delivery as scat-like, which seems more appropriate. 24.108.194.53 (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thom Yorke youtube playlist (excluding radiohead clips)

Bipolar disorder categorization

Perhaps this should be reconsidered. Has Yorke ever outright said that he's been diagnosed with bipolar disorder? It's been rumored before but I've never seen a definitive source. He has mentioned suffering from depression and hypomania, which is (as far as I know, without being an expert on the subject) a specific symptom of bipolar disorder. That was documented in a 2003 article in Mojo magazine. The citation on the List of people affected by bipolar disorder is from a website which doesn't source its information, and also only mentions hypomania, not bipolar disorder. I do think that talking about something as specific as hypomania strongly implies that he's familiar with mood disorders, possibly due to a diagnosis, but as far as I can tell that's not exactly the same as expressly saying he's been diagnosed. Like I said before, I'm hardly an expert on the subject so maybe someone who is could clarify this - or even better, maybe someone could provide a good citation. 76.116.8.117 (talk) 15:12, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Criticism

I was formatting the references for this section in the article, and after reading through the material that is present, I thought that I should point out a potential issue. It seems like the "Criticism" section is just a list of all the spats that other individuals have had with/against Yorke. Most of the paragraph simply lists off that fellow musicians have called him an "idiot", “miserable twat" and so forth. It seems to be more like something from those celebrity gossip shows than information worthy of being mentioned in an encycolpedia. Any thoughts? TheTwoRoads (talk) 19:43, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

LOL, Miley Cyrus thinks he's mean? I've never heard anything so funny. It's because Radiohead didn't want to meet her at the Grammys, right? I heard she loves the band though, so I'm not sure if she's really all that "critical" of Thom, just maybe a little hurt.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.104.82 (talk) 14:16, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Of course it's relevant. Best not to simply brush things under the carpet becasue you don't like them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brendan Heron (talk • contribs) 01:55, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Being unflattering doesn't automatically make it relevant. That doesn't even make sense - how does "bad" automatically equate to something that deserves to be included here? I was actually going to comment on the very same section, and also suggest that it should be removed, so I'm glad other people already noticed. As the original poster said, it reads like celebrity gossip, and besides that, it's not entirely accurate either. I could easily provide twice as many quotes from musicians and other people who say that Yorke is a very nice person (check out some of the things said by people who have actually worked with him or toured with Radiohead, such as Liars or Grizzly Bear or Björk, if you're curious). You could go back and forth with proving it one way or another forever, but ultimately whether or not Yorke's a nice guy seems really irrelevant to an encyclopedia entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.116.5.213 (talk) 01:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I disagree. Let's not have this become a fanzine, like most Wiki's to do with Radiohead across the Internet. Best to accept the criticism as well as the praise. EdgarBacon (talk) 01:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
If we do keep the section in the article, I'm going to expand a few of the points for clarity. The "Activism" section is quite thourough, so why not this section? TheTwoRoads (talk) 04:17, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
I feel a sentence like "Kelly Jones, the lead singer of the Welsh band Stereophonics, branded Thom Yorke as a 'miserable twat'." is not criticism, just abuse. If Jones had expanded this to say why he was a miserable twat, and how that affected his work etc, then that would be fine. 78.145.172.71 (talk) 08:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
This line is hilarious and completely non relevant. How does one get "branded" a "miserable twat"?? I mean, is that a category and qualitatively different than a dingle-berry or a penis wrinkle or a fart knocker?? Should we link "miserable twat" to a list of those who have been "branded"? I'm guessing, though I haven't looked, that under "criticism" on the Obama page it does not say David Allan Coe has branded President Obama a 'nigger.' No, it really doesn't belong.24.58.63.18 (talk) 20:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I think this section should be removed, but until it is, could somebody delete the word 'consistently' please? Keating says he met Yorke once. I mean really, in what universe do Radiohead regularly meet up with the likes of Boyzone or Westlife or whoever they are? It was a one-off. 88.111.182.238 (talk) 10:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it's perfectly reasonable to keep the content of this section, given that numerous reliable sources have described Yorke's various celebrity beefs. However, it could be presented in a much more neutral way. I've edited the Kelly Jones & Ronan Keating statements to reflect what the sources actually say.
I think it would be much better to move this content to a new, larger section about Yorke's relationship with celebrities and the media. Yorke himself has made several comments about how he dislikes celebrity culture and the pop media, and his disenchantment with the "sexy, sassy MTV eye-candy lifestyle". There have also been several responses by Yorke/Radiohead to the celebrity beefs.[2] The reader would gain far more by seeing the context, rather than just a list of names Yorke has been called by assorted celebrities. I think the new section needs to contain both sides: Yorke's statements about his disdain for celebrity culture/media and the statements by people who were pissed off by him. Papa November (talk) 09:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I too want that entire section deleted. It is categorically nothing more than gossip, belongs in some rag, lost somewhere in a stack of gossip rags in some random beauty salon in a dirty, run-down part of middle America. That's probably excessive but still, it's GOSSIP, it's here-say and there's nothing encyclopaedic about it. Please, can we have a vote for deletion? I VOTE DELETE!LactoseIntolerant (talk) 20:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Collaborations

What about Yorke's collaboration with the band Drugstore on 'El President', from the band's album 'White Magic for Lovers'...? And perhaps a reference to Thom's vocals on the Pink Floyd-cover 'Wish You Were Here' together with Sparklehorse? 85.159.97.3 (talk) 10:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Add current activities: The Age of Stupid, supporting 350.org

global live premier of The Age of Stupid, where Thom Yorke of Radiohead is expected to perform live. Among special guests are Kofi Annan, Gillian Anderson and Pete Postlethwaite, supporting 350.org. 99.27.174.205 (talk) 21:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Thom Yorke's Range?

In the vocal characteristics section, it says "Without use of falsetto, his range on record spans E2-C5, but he has been known to sing as high as Gb5 in performances". This suggests that he can sing a Gb5 in real voice. This is the Gb an octave and a half above middle C. I am skeptical of this, because most operatic tenors can't sing that high. I know he is a good singer, and I don't doubt he can sing the C mentioned in the first half of the sentence, and there's a chance he can sing the Gb6 subsequently mentioned in falsetto, but I highly doubt he can sing the Gb5 in real voice. Inquiry should be made into the reliability of this citation. 64.231.111.128 (talk) 03:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

The citation for the C5 is also wrong. Yorke sings a B4 in "You" in Pablo Honey, but it is probably in falsetto. I am sure that Yorke cannot sing a C5 in his modal voice but I haven't gone through every one of his songs and live performances. Anyway, a cursory listen to "You" reveals that the highest note he hits in that song is a B4 not a C5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.229.64 (talk) 11:08, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

This file: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thom_yorke_range.ogg should be used to modify the main page. It provides clear evidence that his range is at least from E2 to A5, including falsetto. I cannot edit the page as it is semi-protected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.229.64 (talk) 11:27, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thom E. Yorke

Rather surprised that both this article and the Radiohead discography articles omit the fact that he used to be known as Thom E. Yorke, in the early phase of Radiohead 24.69.71.254 (talk) 06:40, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Feeling Pulled Apart By Horses Please

can anyone edit and put the link to the "Feeling Pulled Apart By Horses / The Hollow Earth" in the Discography Section please?

That section of the Thom Yorke article is used as a brief list of main releases, and the 12" single is already mentioned in a seperate article, Thom Yorke discography.TheTwoRoads (talk) 06:38, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thom Yorke is not actively a vegan

Following the "Songs for Haiti" benefit concert Thom Yorke shared a slice of pizza with Skyelyn Jessica Peterson. This pizza had cheese on it. Thom Yorke is not a vegan. His proclamation of veganism should be removed from this wikipedia entry. That is all. I'm not bitter; I'm just let down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robcheif (talk • contribs) 01:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

And how do you know it was animal based cheese and not plant based [vegan] cheese?--Sugarcubez (talk) 12:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Have you got a reference in a reliable source for that (i.e. text that explicitly says he is no longer a vegan)? We can't put in any of our own original research. Papa November (talk) 08:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Sadly understandable, I suppose. Time to go e-mail the man himself and get him to publically defame himself in a reliable, citable source. Wish me luck! Thanks for the link, btw. Robcheif (talk) 02:03, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
A personal email isn't really good enough, I'm afraid... it's still original research. Ideally, nothing should appear in Wikipedia before it has been published elsewhere. If you really feel passionately about this, you'd be better off trying to persuade the editor of a magazine to include the information in one of their articles. Basically, once information has appeared in print somewhere else, Wikipedia can go ahead and "inherit" it. Papa November (talk) 13:34, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Well in this interview he says he's a vegetarian and "lives on cheese" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeT2yQiETFo

Anarchist?

I have read that Yorke has stated that he is influenced by Noam Chomsky, so does that mean he's an anarchist? sbrianhicks (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:26, 23 March 2010 (UTC).

Not necessarily; being influenced by Chomsky doesn't automatically make him an anarchist any more than it automatically makes him a generative grammarian.76.105.5.83 (talk) 03:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Senteces from rachel-owen.co.uk

In the "Personal life" section, the article states that Rachel Owen "studied fine art printmaking at Exeter and painting at the Accademia di Belle Arti, Florence. She completed a PhD at the University of London researching the illustrations to Dante's Divine Comedy". This is phrased identically to the reference ([3]). Should it either be put in quotation marks prefaced with "According to her website", or rephrased slightly? I'm a new user, so I cannot make the change myself. Thanks, Aqx (talk) 21:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

added hip-hop to genres

Since Yorke has produced instrumentals for hip-hop tracks. not quite sure how to cite it but he's produced the songs Uzi Weighs A Ton by Jay Electronica and Gazillion Ear by MF Doom along with others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.252.43 (talk) 04:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I can't find any info on this, you should provide sources because if true, it should added to the genre box and the main article. InHaze (talk) 15:42, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
He is not trip-hop, please! Snoop God (talk) 12:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, I don't think he'd take to being limited as you have done, but regardless, if he has produced and released hip-hop/trip-hop songs, then I see no reason to not have that in the article and info box. This is supposed to an entry on Thom Yorke, not on what you think Thom Yorke is. InHaze (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
You will need references from reputable sources. Good luck with that! Snoop God (talk) 21:03, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
he has produced remixes for these songs http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/gazzillion-ear-remixes-ep/id344059908 and i'm sure you can find the others.. He has collaborated with U.N.K.L.E which everyone knows-they are certainly trip hop. He has done some DJ sets including Hip-hop too, however, is not really enough to say he is a trip-hop or hip-hop artist. His solo work is more a combination of electronic and acoustic genres with a large song/vocal element and though trip-hop can include this, the individual elements and signature sounds aren't there; idm with vocals, singer-songwriter mix would be more accurate but still not that accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.68.166 (talk) 18:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Hearing Damage

Ok, so I know that they are shitty movies and I was as shocked as the next person to find that Thom made a song to go on the soundtrack...but why is it not mentioned anywhere that Thom's (brilliant) song "Hearing Damage" was on the new moon soundtrack?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Twilight_Saga:_New_Moon_(soundtrack) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrotherEstapol (talk • contribs) 10:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

We should dedicate a section to Thom's gear

Such as guitars, amps, pedals and such. therewillbehotcake (talk) 08:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Would love this, but it'd be hard to find out what instruments he uses, as most of them don't have visible brand names and/or look very similar to every other product from the same manufacturer. He did use a Prophet '08 PE Keyboard Synthesizer for Staircase (from the basement) though. --89.27.111.45 (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
I think it's possible and interesting even if it's not completely exhaustive or precise at the beginning, people would regularly add what they find. Fansites like Radiohead.fr have a nice list of what Thom Yorke uses. We might not have the production year of every single guitar but, still, we can have a try. 194.250.98.243 (talk) 11:37, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Vegan or vegetarian?

Would it be possible for someone with a better insight or more reliable sources (e.g. direct quotes/interviews rather than a bio made by someone else than Thom) to confirm whether Thom is a vegan or a vegetarian? MTV's bio (no quote) states he's a vegan, but in the document 'Eat This', Thom Yorke says: "I started going out with this girl and I wanted to impress her so I pretended I'd been vegetarian all along..." (Source: http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/NEWS/news_veggie/ALL/791// )

IMDB states he's a vegetarian as well, rather than a vegan. (Source: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0948810/bio ) --89.27.111.45 (talk) 14:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

When Zane Lowe on a bbc radio 1 interview asked Thom and Ed what Their favourite cheese was, Thom said he liked the gooey ones like Gorgonzola, so i guess he's just a vegetarian not a vegan. 31.120.17.199 (talk) 18:26, 28 February 2013 (UTC) This was during the In Rainbows promotion.

Text and voice versions can be found here: http://citizeninsane.eu/t2007-11-20BBCRadio1.htm - Yorke's first response, when asked about cheese, is: "I have to, I'm a vegetarian so I live on Cheese." with no trace of sarcasm.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Thom Yorke. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Thom Yorke. 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, 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: 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) 02:51, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Frequent vandalism

There has been frequent vandalism recently, with updates especially to Thom's age, year of birth, years active, etc, mostly from unregistered users. Time to protect? - Mistakenformatt (talk) 19:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes please. Popcornduff (talk) 02:57, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Thom Yorke. 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) 22:36, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Thom Yorke. 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) 07:06, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Removed 'crak' vandalism

I have removed a page vandalism from the last section of personal life that said Thom had a 'crack cocaine' addiction.

Hail to the thief once and for all

In a recent interviewabout the eraser, Thom admitted that it was in refernce to the US election and as such I have quoted him. The interview can be found on YouTube and is from a German TV program called FastForward. Thanks Here's the link [4]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Thom_Yorke/Archive_1&oldid=1029190234"