Talk:T'Pau (band)

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

Tim Burgess[edit]

Is Tim Burgess from T'Pau the same person as Tim Burgess from The Charlatans? pomegranate 13:45, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

No! T'Pau (the band) was formed by the amalgamation of two Shropshire based bands... "The Dealer" and "Under The Sun".

The Dealer was a pop-based covers band fronted by Carol. I saw them play at a 6th form ball at New College in Wellington in 1979.

Under the Sun was a prog-rock based band based in Wellington (I have a limited run album which I bought off Paul Jackson (T'Pau bass) in 1978 when we were both in the same Business Studies class at TCAT.

Any word on if this band derived its name from the Star Trek: TOS character "T'Pau", the Vulcan high priestess who oversaw the divorce of Spock and T'Pring?

Yes, it's mentioned in the opening paragraph. I don't think any of them were huge Star Trek fans, though - I think they just stumbled across the name and liked it. --Bonalaw 11:06, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Carol has said in interviews that she had the telly on and the above mentioned episode was on had liked the name T'Pau (but this may be just what she tells people when they ask ... "Why did you call the band T'Pau?" --Jaster 13:58, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is now a birthplace conflict for Carol Decker listed in the T'Pau article and the Carol Decker article.--cmulgrew (talk) 09:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:56, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

T'Pau (band) → T'Pau — The band has an article in its own right. The Star Trek character does not, she is part of a longer article on Star Trek characters. She is not that important a character, I think she only appeared in one episode of the original series, and might be half-forgotten by all except serious fans if she had not had a band named after her. It is beside the point that the band was named after the character, we have several cases of films based on books where it has been decided that the film is now the primary meaning. Where we have only 2 meanings of a name, the margin of notability does not have to be very much to decided that one is the primary meaning. PatGallacher (talk) 11:17, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose; I agree that the margin of notability does not have to be very much, but I believe it's on the other side. Powers T 13:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The notabilty of the Star Trek franchise is not the issue here. The character is a minor one without a seperate article, hence I agree with the nom that priority should be given to the band. Since the heyday of the band was some 20 years ago and they are still reasonably well known, I don't think that Anthony Appleyard has much of a point with his above comment. PC78 (talk) 15:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose more books Gbooks appear to be about the Star Trek character than the band. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 06:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • While I hate to pick apart an argument that agrees with me, I don't think fiction is the best measure of notability. Powers T 12:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - The Star Trek character is quite notable. I have never even heard of the band. --Alpha Quadrant talk 17:28, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011[edit]

Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the {{Allmusic}} template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:

--CactusBot (talk) 11:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on T'Pau (band). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on T'Pau (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) 06:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 June 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. No agreement on the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here – some said it was the band, others said it was the character, still others said there was WP:NOPRIMARY at all. Clickstreams seem to suggest no primary; pageviews seem to suggest the band is primary. No side appears to have a sufficiently decisive argument to achieve consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:10, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– Primary topic, the Star Trek character does not have her own article, could be dealt with by a hatnote or disambiguation page. PatGallacher (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 10:56, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: pages with content, such as T'Pau, are ineligible to be proposed titles in move requests unless they, too, are dispositioned. "T'Pau → T'Pau (disambiguation)" was added to this request to meet that requirement. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 01:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply WP:DPT actually states "There are no absolute rules for determining whether a primary topic exists and what it is". Clickstreams etc. are by no means decisive. I suggest that it is significant that the Vulcan matriarch does not have her own article, just a short entry in a list of Star Trek character. PatGallacher (talk) 13:10, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course there are no absolute rules, but they show that a lot of people already aren't apparently interested reading about the band, so the onus is on you to present a rationale on why it's better for them to start having to click a hatnote instead of the status quo. Why is the average English reader significantly more likely to be better served by reading about the band before they read about the character? How is the long-term significance of the band substantially greater than that of the character? What if the character gets a standalone article, does anything change and why? --Joy (talk) 14:23, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Might be important that editors do not (like I did at first) confuse T'Pau with T'Pol. The former was in only one Enterprise episode while the latter was an Enterprise regular. Sheesh, what a "my bad"! Anyway, agree that the band is PTOPIC hands down, no contest: page views. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 14:27, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE (please mention me on reply) 02:43, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose the character is far more notable than the band. "does not have her own article" is irrelevant. In ictu oculi (talk) 14:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose the nominator says why this is wrong. The primary topic is a different topic, just because it isn't an article in and of itself does not mean it is not the primary topic. Subtopics can and do exist as primary topics -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 04:48, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Both are pretty notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose as there is no apparent strong dominance of one topic or the other. Per WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, "The fact that an article has a different title is not a factor in determining whether a topic is primary." —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:49, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:T%27Pau_(band)&oldid=1208111190"