Talk:Savage Garden/Archive 1

Lowercase band title???
I think that this article be moved to "savage garden", since on most of their albums, their name is lowercase, except on Affirmation, where it is all caps. --Karrmann


 * Lowercase first letters on wikipedia article pages is an impossibility and media covers generally are not indicative of how a title is referred to in print. BabuBhatt 05:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * it was a album cover style decision, not something they insisted on in articles, like silverchair Sunhawk 15:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Inconsistencies
Greatly informative and loving entry! Some inconsistencies weren't immediately able to be clarified by me, and perhaps someone more familiar could take care of these entries needing correction or clarification: I only count six entries here for the Billboard Magazine 1999 year-end charts, please add seventh or change bullet heading claim of seven. Is BRMB a British award? Could spell out if esoteric, as with ASCAP, or reference in parens if familiar within the respective country, as with ARIA. If the 18th Annual ASCAP award is "Song of the Year (2001)," that final line should not be bulleted.

I've changed the heading previously called "REMIXES" to "EPS," but am not thrilled with that. Perhaps "INTERNATIONAL COLLECTIONS" or "LIMITED EDITION COLLECTIONS"? Any Savage Garden fan would know there were quite a few maxi CDs featuring several mixes each from their first album, and a couple single CDs featuring a remix or two from their second album. I was going to change the heading to "REMIX COLLECTIONS" or something along those lines, yet a previous contributor here chose to include The Future Of Earthly Delites, the only true album-length, all-remix collection, under the "ALBUMS" section. It seems to me that disc should be moved to join the "EPS" section, and perhaps that section be given a better name than I gave it, as moving the other EPs up to the album section confuses the claim that they've only had two albums. A section called "REMIXES" would ideally include the track titles that were remixed, and perhaps their position on Dance Maxi Singles or Club Play charts.

I question the appearance in two separate sections of the litany of countries and their respective sales awards. I find it the clearest read in the first inclusion, under "ACHIEVEMENTS," and would recommend its second appearance from the later "DISCOGRAPHY" section, be removed. I would suggest including the various gold and platinum awards for the singles be mentioned under "ACHIEVEMENTS" if that's where the albums' gold and platinum awards are mentioned.

Finally, I agree with BabuBhatt's assessment of the lowercase/uppercase issue. The all-lowercase usage seems more a logo as it appears only on the first album and its singles, while the second album and its singles feature the more common all-uppercase type. Additionally, all of the first album's song titles, on each and every album and single appearance during the period, is written in all-lowercase type, yet we aren't considering following that lead. (It should be all or nothing.) However, the song "Truly Madly Deeply" on several international versions of the original album, and its various single and EP appearances, is consistently written without punctuation, as is "Break Me Shake Me." I have deleted "TMD's" punctuation here to match "BMSM's" unpunctuated appearance, as I would argue that to punctualize these names is to disregard what seems clear to me to be intentional artistic license in the same manner that one does not correct the past decade's trend of purposely misspelled titles and names. 16 March 06 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.16.243 (talk • contribs)


 * Please add ~ at the end of your comments. This automatically adds a signature, so we can keep track of who's saying what. Cnwb 22:39, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * We definitely need a remixes section either here or on each article for each album, they shouldn't be left out. Sunhawk 15:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Lowercase band title??? revisited
I am curious about this captialization issue with regard to the band's name. Have either of the band members ever stated the all-lowercase name was their intention? If we're taking the printing style of the first album & singles as our only "official" indication of this, are we to also assume that this decision was reversed with the release of their second album, and their name was changed? Or was the all-caps usage on the second album and its singles the stylistic printing choice that went against the actual name and the wishes of the band? If the band changed their name from "savage garden" to "Savage Garden" or even to "SAVAGE GARDEN," would not the title of the article be what the band's name came to be and was most recently, much in the same way one doesn't call Farrah Fawcett "Farrah Fawcett-Majors" any longer, despite the fact that is the way she continues to be billed in the credits of her most famous, breakout role; and we don't refer to other bands by their early names? I guess what I'm getting at is, if it's the intention of the band that their name be spelled with all lower-case letters, one would think they'd have made a statement somewhere to this regard, which can be cited and the case closed. If that's the case, the name ought to be changed throughout this bio, not just the awkward way it is now, in the title heading, which - due to Wiki's own style choice - is obfuscated to be neither all-lowercase nor all-uppercase, and so has to be appended with a disclaimer. This is the sort of compromise that doesn't seem to work, and seems to be based on the hunch of fans rather than the intention of the artist. Abrazame 23:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

A visit to their overseas official website, [www.sonymusic.com/artists/SavageGarden/], finds not a single instance of the lower-cased usage except in photo reproductions of the CDs where that logo is used, and does not reference the lowercase/uppercase name issue in an artist timeline. Abrazame 23:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I was surprised to see that the band's name was supposedly uncapitalized. I always thought that it was Savage Garden. Hbackman 23:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Some examples of uppercasing the band's name:

A fan's Savage Garden page Amazon's Savage Garden page VH1's Savage Garden page MTV's Savage Garden page Rolling Stone's Savage Garden page

+ "about 13,100,000" more on Google. The band's name is uppercased, album art is not an indicater, etc. The page should be moved to Savage Garden. BabuBhatt 08:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay. How about we give it another 12-24 hours for anyone else to weigh in, and then one of us can perform the move? Hbackman 17:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I've transferred the article and the talk page to its correct location. BabuBhatt 17:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Homosexuality rumors
Umm, if we leave that section in this article, shouldn't a similar section be in every boyband article on Wikipedia?

I should note that I'm not opposed to the content of the section -- I'm among the rabid fangirls who would love to see them together ;) -- but I'm not sure that it's sufficiently significant to warrant a mention.

Hbackman 02:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree, they are just rumours that have never been proven either way and don't really have much bearing on the band. It had nothing to do with the music Sunhawk 15:49, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Since the lead singer was apparently married to his boyfriend in the UK last week, I believe that the "rumor" does have bearing. Specifically, when you are young and in the closet and hearing music that elicits strong emotions, seeing videos with the singer in question pursuing a woman leads to further confusion. I do not believe in outing people for sport, however misleading a devoted fan seems to me equally unfair. In any case, since I have only recently begun using this site, I need to figure out the proper way to enter the new "information".


 * We made our comments before he had confirmed it either way and I personally was following an old practice that came from years ago when Darren asked us to respect his privacy. Are you suggesting that people would seriously decide on Darren's sexuality based on a music video?  What if he had been pursuing a pony instead?  Including information about his partner is one thing (since Darren has done so himself) but to out him because some people can't tell fantasy from reality when it comes to television is a bit much, IMHO.  What business is it of ours who he sleeps with in real life?  It does nothing to stop people from fantasizing about Darren if they so desire because it changes nothing when it comes to their chances of dreams becoming reality.   People will mislead themselves about their love for Darren and the reality of that love, it is not the job of an encyclopedia to try to get them to stop, again IMHO.  Sunhawk 03:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, Darren's sexuality has very little to do with the band itself. Previously, we did not mention that he was married, or Daniel and his relationship, so why should we include that he recently came out now? I don't see how him coming out years after Savage Garden disbanded is worthy of mentioning any more than the fact that he was married to a woman for much of when the band was toegther. Sparkleyone 07:18, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * This was actually briefly touched on in an interview that Darren Hayes did with the Advocate . According to Hayes, Daniel Jones is "the straightest guy you'll ever meet. [...] I remember Daniel giving me that wonderful permission conversation. You know, 'If you were gay, that would be OK.'" ~a random Elizabeth

Released Singles Issue
I was wondering how exactly to fit in the singles "Tears of Pearls" and "Santa Monica" - "Tears of Pearls" had a video released but i can't seem to find any chart listing so I'm confused about how it should go into the chronology. "Santa Monica" doesn't have a video OR chart listing but it still was released as a single. Since we have "I Want You '98" listed due to its chart position, any ideas how to organize the singles? Just do it chronologically or seperate "Santa Monica" into...a different category? Feedback please! Sunhawk 16:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Santa Monica was Japanese, and the video used was one of the live performances for MTV Asia. I think that anything which had a physical CD single release should be included. Savage Garden were just one of those acts who tended to release different singles in different territories. It's interesting that the fact that Truly Madly Deeply as released everywhere but Australia was actually a remix is often overlooked. Sorry, I've not used Wikipedia before, but I thought this info and opinion might help. MA


 * Santa Monica had an official Japanese video? I've never heard of it, very interesting!  Are you refering to the TMD radio edit that was i believe what they used in the US?  Thanks for the input :) Sunhawk 03:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The Santa Monica video was the Hard Rock Live performance - it's included on the Japanese version of the Video Collection, which has the later US videos for TMD, TTMAB, IWY, BMSM and TOP as included on the video/DVD/VCD released elsewhere. The version of Truly Madly Deeply released internationally was originally known as the Night Radio Mix, and was one of the B Sides to the Australian single. The version on the Australian album, and the version released as a single (A Side) there is somewhat different - the track is very piano led. It's the same vocal recording though. I have a near-complete collection of Savage Garden CDs internationally amongst other things so will pop back to this talk page from time to time to see if I can help any further. MA.


 * Santa Monica was only released to radio in aus, and Tears of Pearls never came out here. Given that they weren't singles that were released everywhere, maybe we could have (japan only) or (us only) or what have you after the single name? Sparkleyone 02:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * That's a valid suggestion, but you know how the album infobox has a 'this single' 'previous single' 'next single' section, i was wondering which singles to include in the chain and where each single should go exactly Sunhawk 03:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Tricky. I would probably only put in the songs that were released more or less everywhere for the main singles, and only include these songs in the 'previous' and 'next' spots. Otherwise it could get really inconsistent, and you would have to include re-releases in the timeline as well, which could be awkward. Sparkleyone 06:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The problem with that is defining "more or less everywhere" whereas if we do the singles on a strictly "it was released this year" basis, that might prove less debatable. Sunhawk 14:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to agree. Even just thinking about the first album, tracks released more or less everywhere includes TMD, TTMAB, IWY - but then Break Me, Shake Me got released just about everywhere but the US and UK, but as these were probably thew bands #2 and #3 markets, does that mean it should be included or not? Plus all the other singles released in fewer territories, like Tears of Pearls, IWY '98 (which is an edit, not the orignal versiom), Santa Monica... then there's Universe and its gorgeous video, which was a proper release in the home country. Too complicated to decide which is more valid than the other. There's even a Violet CDR promo for South America, and All Around Me, which isn't even on the international album but did get a promo release in Australia. I would disregard these, as I say above, and simply include singles which had a physical CD single release which could be bought by the general public, regardless of the country. I should also say that I'm not convinced by the listing of Teras of earls as a US single on the debut album's page. I've never come across a promo CD of it and it didn't get a physical release. MA


 * Well you just missed out then because i own a copy of the Tears of Pearls promo (i would have to check to see where it was released so it may not be a US single per say but it DID get a physical release), and here's an ebay auction where you can buy your own copy http://cgi.ebay.ca/SAVAGE-GARDEN-TEARS-OF-PEARLS-1998_W0QQitemZ140007922709QQihZ004QQcategoryZ43634QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem Sunhawk 14:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Absolutely, that's why I said elsewhere that TOP was a single - but not, AFAIK, in the US, that's the distinction I tried to make, obviously badly! I own both sell-thru CDs (Maxi in jewel case and the card case version) of it, it was released in Europe, and the video was shown on MTV Europe (as it then was) fairly regularly for a time. MA


 * Ah, i understand your distinction. But since we don't have a US singles section, just a general Singles category, it would stand that we should include Tears of Pearls.  I agree that any single that had a publically-available CD should be included.  Incidently, the TOP video was shown in Canada pretty often, from what I recall. Sunhawk 19:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * It's on the debut album's page, I guess I should have made the point there rather than lumbering it in here with all my other babble! MA


 * LOL no worries, i get turned around real easy myself, hard to remember where you are sometimes! Sunhawk 01:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

'Remixes' section
I fear that this could really really get out of hand if we add every remix ever done and who by... we either need to be complete in the section or get rid of it IMO. Sparkleyone 07:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * i vote for complete: if it was released on a single or other official album, we should include it Sunhawk 13:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I vote for remove - the number of remixes is massive and complicated. There are many different edits of remixes, many of which were promo only (either to radio stations or DJs), some were never officially released and many are mis-named on various CD releases. It's a massive topic which I don't think can be done justice as part of this article. MA.

Trivia section
"A Thousand Words" does play during the third stage of the Windows XP installation. After installation, the music file is saved permanently as C:\windows\system32\oobe\images\title.wma --65.24.205.17 05:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I gave it a listen and while the chord progression at the start is definitely similiar, it's otherwise not "A Thousand Words" nor is it credited as such by Microsoft in the Properties of the file, it's just called Windows Welcome Music. If it was Savage Garden, they would be properly credited. Sunhawk 03:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Religious background?
Referring to the lyrics of "I Believe" (for purposes of argument, I'm keeping it to this song), does anybody know anything about Darren or Daniel being religious at all? The lyrics of the song suggest that that may be the case. In retrospect, however, and from reading other posts and threads, it seems that Darren is gay/homosexual if he "married" his boyfriend/partner. Feel free to reply/post other comments about this...

Chen Qui,

Ma Namea Borat, High Five!!!

Fozterchild 13:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think Darren and Daniel once mentioned that they both believe in god but that they don't go to church. I think they mentioned this in the Official Savage Garden Fanzine. Anyway, I fail to see what Darren's sexuality has to do with his religion. Who says you can't be gay and religious at the same time? By the way, the song Affirmation isn't about religion. It's a list of various things that Darren believes in. Aubergine Girl 16:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * He didn't "marry" his partner, he married his partner in an official and legally-recognized British ceremony. And I don't follow how you think people can be religious but not gay at the same time, that just sounds homophobic, really. Sunhawk 03:43, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunatly, it is "marry". They are tehcnically called civil partnerships in the UK, though effectively they have just photocopied the legislation about heterosexual marriages, since all the rights/procedures etc are the same. The naming difference I believe was a concession to the churches who were trying to put up a bit of a fuss. Homophobic, yes, but on the part of the government... and I'm sure it'll change within a few years given the generally widely accepting or non-plussed attitude of the British public. Gemnoire 14:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dananddarren.jpg
Image:Dananddarren.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 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.

— Save_Us   †  01:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Trulymadlycompletely.jpg
Image:Trulymadlycompletely.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 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) 02:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Other instrumentalists
Who are the guys who play bass and drums for the band? Should that be added somewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.129.123.248 (talk) 04:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

On the Verge of Something Wonderful
Didn't StarSailor cover that? Dagoth Ur, Mad God (talk) 02:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)