# Talk:The Buddha of Suburbia (album)

Considering the album's tenuous relationship to the TV play (little more than the title track, and a few song titles and chord sequences) would it not make more sense to move this to The Buddha of Suburbia (album), with *(soundtrack) working as a redirect instead?
Tom Prankerd 17:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The bulk of this article is a lengthy quote from the UK album's liner notes.  We could probably use a brief excerpt as fair use, but not the amount that's quoted here.  -- Heath 66.32.1.24 01:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)


### Followup
Wikipedia:Copyrights advises, It is not the job of rank-and-file Wikipedians to police content for possible copyright infringement, but if you suspect one, you should at the very least bring up the issue on that page's talk page. Others can then examine the situation and take action if needed. The most helpful piece of information you can provide is a URL or other reference to what you believe may be the source of the text.  I did that on January 2, above.  
When that fails, the advice continues, If some of the content of a page really is an infringement, then the infringing content should be removed, and a note to that effect should be made on the talk page, along with the original source. If the author's permission is obtained later, the text can be restored.
If all of the content of a page is a suspected copyright infringement, then the page should be listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems and the content of the page replaced by the standard notice which you can find there. If, after a week, the page still appears to be a copyright infringement, then it may be deleted following the procedures on the votes page.  
Not quite all of the article is a suspected copyright infringement, but certainly the lion's share was, so I have listed the page accordingly.  -- Heath 68.118.23.158 21:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I have just removed the copyvio section.  If anyone wants to see the content and its source it's located at this url.  Otherwise we will rely on good sourcing and writing to rebuild this article's length. gren グレン ? 19:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

The Buddha of Suburbia (soundtrack) → The Buddha of Suburbia (album) — correct disambig per WP:ALBUM#Naming, see also #Move? —PEJL 18:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
This article has been renamed from The Buddha of Suburbia (soundtrack) to The Buddha of Suburbia (album) as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 18:44, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Even though someone keeps redirecting this album to the soundtrack section it should be correctly moved to the albums category where it belongs. Even the article itself states that it is NOT the soundtrack to Buddha of Suburbia TV play. Very inconstistent. See also: #Move? and #Requested move--Tel33 (talk) 08:31, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Absolutely right. But the first sentence would have to be rewritten. Perhaps it keeps getting designated as a soundtrack simply because of that first sentence. D.Holt (talk) 04:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

The first line reads:
"The Buddha of Suburbia is a 1993 soundtrack album"
The second paragraph states:
"The album is a soundtrack album"
The third paragraph says:
"The album has been classified as a soundtrack although the title track was the only song to be featured in the television programme"
Then we have the 'soundtrack' section:
"Although classified on the album cover as a soundtrack, this album is not the soundtrack Bowie wrote for the BBC dramatisation"
Will any consensus ever be reached, even within this article? It's rather unfortunate that text appeared on the first release of the record, or the album would be recognized for what it is: not a soundtrack, but a fully-fledged David Bowie studio album. At the very least, can any effort be made to clear up the contradicting statements within the article?59.102.46.83 (talk) 15:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Buddha of Suburbia (soundtrack). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160122044929/http://www.algonet.se/~bassman/articles/misc/bosln.html to http://www.algonet.se/~bassman/articles/misc/bosln.html
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: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:56, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Buddha of Suburbia (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Mujinga (talk · contribs) 08:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


### Overview
I'll take this one as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/January 2022. I vaguely remember the TV series Mujinga (talk) 08:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for an interesting read, the sources have certainly been consulted for this article. I'll put it on hold for seven days for the comments below to be addressed, please drop me a line when you are done or if something needs clarifying. Mujinga (talk) 09:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Mujinga Thanks for the quick review and the kind words! Responses below :-) – zmbro (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Nice one, this is basically a GA now, I just wouldn't mind a response on renaming the song article and on commas. The commas shouldn't hold up anything for too long though. Cheers Mujinga (talk) 17:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
I salute the attention to detail, making this a GA Mujinga (talk) 17:51, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


### Earwig copyvio check
earwig throws up nothing to worry about


### Pictures
ok


### Infobox
ok


### Lead
"It wasn't released" - It was not released
That Bowie said it was his fave album in 2003 is worth mentioning here
Both done


### Conception and recording
"While promoting his then-upcoming album Black Tie White Noise in February 1993, David Bowie spoke with British novelist Hanif Kureishi for Interview magazine, who sought permission to use some of Bowie's older material[b] for an upcoming adaptation of Kureishi's 1990 novel The Buddha of Suburbia.[8][9]" - suggest better as two sentences: While promoting his then-upcoming album Black Tie White Noise in February 1993, David Bowie spoke with British novelist Hanif Kureishi for Interview magazine. Kureishi sought permission to use some of Bowie's older material[b] for an upcoming adaptation of his 1990 novel The Buddha of Suburbia.[8][9]
Done
" Bowie agreed " - to the use of his material? Right now it sounds like he agreed that it reminded him of his youth
Clarified
"recalling that The Buddha of Suburbia "- should it be The Buddha of Suburbia the album or "The Buddha of Suburbia" the track?
Album


### Music and lyrics
I'm noting sometimes sentences end ." and sometimes ". so that should be made consistent, ". seems better to me, easily resolved by keyword search
I structured them per MOS:QWQ, so full quotes have quotes outside punctuation while shortened quotes have the opposite. – zmbro (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
ooh thanks for that, i might have advised someone else wrongly earlier today, eek
however i do think for example: "The album doesn't find Bowie diverging from anything he'd done before and feels like another middling entry in the midst of a decade where he would put out some of his most disappointing work," concluding "this record doesn't have much to offer to anyone who isn't a die-hard fan." should have the last full stop outside the apostrophe Mujinga (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Mujinga Fixed – zmbro (talk) 17:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Zmbro brilliant, do you mind checking any other instances of ." then we really are done Mujinga (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Mujinga All good now – zmbro (talk) 17:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Zmbro haha excellent then we are done and congrats on the good article Mujinga (talk) 17:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
"noted the precense"  presence?
I can never spell that goddamn word right lol – zmbro (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
(comment on quote) wow what a crazy quote from bowie! he had such weird working methods
He really did. Truly one of a kind – zmbro (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


### Songs
"The title track was written"	- may as well name it eg The title track "Buddha of Suburbia" was written
Done
This is a digression, but the wikipedia article on the song should be called 'Buddha of Suburbia (song)' not 'The Buddha of Suburbia (song)' right? If you agree, I'll change it. Mujinga (talk) 17:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
It's weird because on the album there is no 'the' but on the single's sleeve there is. So Idk who to believe. – zmbro (talk) 17:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Oho! Then I'll leave it alone Mujinga (talk) 17:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Yeah Pegg doesn't use 'the' but O'Leary does so it's very inconsistent – zmbro (talk) 17:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
"The title is an amalgamation of Hanif Kureishi" - anagram?
Yep my bad


### Release and reissues
"featuring a still frame from a BBC stage production of The Jungle Book overlaid by a map of Beckenham" if that is the image in the infobox, then the frame overlays the map
Whoops, fixed
"remained obscure again until" - suggest remove again
Done


### Critical reception
"Some reviewers labeled it" - since we are Br Eng, labeled is acceptable but labelled is more normal
Agreed
"believing it is "worth a listen" among Bowie's fans" - suggest cutting or rephrasing
Trimmed
"Bowie's others 1990s works" - Bowie's other 1990s works
Done
first mention of Perone so can be James E. Perone
Oops. When you do these sections out of order sometimes you miss these things. – zmbro (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
since The Rolling Stone Album Guide gave one star out of five it would be worth mentioning or quoting part of that review in the text
Unfortunately it's not giving me access to that at the moment. From what I recall looking at it months ago I don't think they mentioned much. – zmbro (talk) 16:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
fairplay thanks for the attempt Mujinga (talk) 17:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


### Last sections
Track listing ok, Personnel ok , Notes ok, Refs ok, Sources ok