Talk:Culture in Bristol

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

LGBT[edit]

2010 celebrated the first large scale Pride Festival in Bristol, worth noting here in the events section. Other more long running prides have their own pages but for Bristols culture this was a notable, going to be annual, event. www.pridebristol.com --79.75.33.199 (talk) 20:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rhoticity of Bristol dialect[edit]

Is anybody familiar enough with Bristol to tell if the speech of younger Bristolians is rhotic, too? The chapter on the Bristol dialect makes it seem that only older people have rhotic accents.Unoffensive text or character 15:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-- Younger people in Bristol are variably rhotic, though degree of rhoticity is (as you'd expect) highly associated with socio-economic class - middle class younger speakers may be completely non-rhotic. --Tzirtzi (talk) 20:13, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have altered the text from "unique for an urban area" to "unique for a large city". There are other smaller urban areas with rhotic accents, such as Corby, Blackburn and Wigan. Epa101 (talk) 15:17, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sport[edit]

In many city articles sport is seperated from culture. If we were to get more info it would it be viable to form its own atricle

Music[edit]

"Bristol is also home to bands and artists as diverse as Up, Bustle and Out, Gravenhurst, Termites, Ivory Springer, Big Joan, Madnomad, Kid carpet, Geisha, SJ Esau, Mooz, Soeza, Rose Kemp, Onedice and Hunting Lodge - although most of these bands have a very limited audience."

If they have a very limited audience, are they notable enough to be in a Wikipedia entry? I live in Bristol and have an interest in local music, but I still have only heard of a few of these bands. I fear that this kind of writing can rapidly expand to encompass everybody who wants their band mentioned on Wikipedia. There needs to be some significant demonstration of notability, surely?


I also feel it is meaningless information: "as diverse as ..." assumes familiarity, whereas most of these bands aren't notable even to a Bristolian.

I am going to remove from this list those bands that do not have their own Wikipedia entries.Blibbka 13:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Continued from above:

"Bristol's musical pioneering spirit continues as the home to one of the largest and most diverse DIY music communities in the UK" Citation?

"Other highly influential cult acts include Wall Planner, Pricktaster, Snakes on a Plane and November's Ashes In The Rain." Reference to demonstrate influence?Blibbka 13:42, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Notability wise, I must say, the fact that you've not heard of them doesn't seem a good reason to ditch them. You obviously aren't involved in that part of Bristol music. Here's some evidence - Ivory Springer toured internationally and got several gig picks in the Guardian mag before they split, Big Joan were profiled in Loose Lips Sink Ships - a national publication and their members ran "Choke", one of the biggest alternative clubnights in Bristol for several years, Geisha are signed to Crucial Blast, a US record label, they have also been interviewed in Loose Lips Sink Ships and several French music magazines - Alec Empire of Atari Teenage Riot is a big fan. Rose Kemp is signed to One Little Indian - Bjork's record label, Hunting Lodge are signed to US label Yosada, they were picked in the top ten of Radio 1's Festive 50 a couple of years ago, they've toured the UK and Europe, played sessions on London's Resonance FM and received reviews in Plan B magazine. SJ Esau is signed to Anticon records, and has released records on Twisted Nerve, he constantly tours Europe and has fans across the world. Gravenhurst is singed to Warp records (aphex twin etc.), his music appears in several films, he regularly tours Europe, the UK and the US and his videos get shown on MTV. If you've never even heard of these bands even though you live in Bristol, then I'd argue that you're perhaps not qualified to be moderating this article. Dan Bennett 19/03/2008


Can whoever removed the detail I added previously justify themselves here? I've reinstated it as I think it's fairly obvious that anyone interested in bristol's music scene would benefit from the information listed. I've explained the notability above. Any more detailed justification within the article itself would make it too lengthy and lower the quality of the article, but the names of bands and promoters is important information to anyone wanting to get involved in Bristol's music scene. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.85.114 (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was not the first to revert your changes, but I have done so now for the following reasons:

  1. Informal tone: Wikipedia articles, and other encyclopedic content, should be written in a formal tone. Standards for formal tone vary depending upon the subject matter, but should follow the style used by reliable sources, while remaining understandable to the educated layman. Formal tone does not mean the article should be written using unintelligible argot, doublespeak, legalese, or jargon; it means that the English language should be used in a businesslike manner.
  2. Neutral point of view/Cite your sources/No original research: "one time massively popular", "making names", "healthy and broad" -- these are all vague, subjective, and impossible to demonstrate. If somebody was "massively popular" there should be some simple fact (sales, revenue, attendance?) that can be used in its place. "Healthy and broad"? By whose standards? What does it even mean for a music scene to be "healthy and broad"? A quantitative and objective replacement can surely be found.

Incidently, Wikipedia is not trying to be a resource for people "wanting to get involved in Bristol's music scene." It is very much within Wikipedia's remit to describe any notable aspects of music in Bristol in a disinterested style.

This is not about being "qualified" to edit articles. You can be a Professor in the subject and we'll still be asking you to cite your sources and write good prose. Joe D (t) 20:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Fair point. I have amended my text to read more neutrally and formally and included references. I only raised the issue of "qualification" to edit articles since the previous editor removed bands such as Gravenhurst because he'd not heard of them, when in fact, these bands are releasing records commercially, and play gigs regularly. I understand and agree with your point though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.85.114 (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't remove the article because I had not heard of the bands - just that there was no evidence of their notability - because someone has heard of them does not make them notable. The addition with citations looks better but it would be worth adding evidence of notability to all of the bands - some of these bands are not notable in the UK or even in Bristol despite being on labels. I will admit to having heard of very of them and I am very aware of Bristol music but that is also not a measurement of their notability.

Of course, this raises the usual debate of how notable is notable but which one of the many acts listed are the most prominent member of the scene? If an independent and objective observer was to make a judgement, which one would it be? I would suggest, therefore, some editing of the list using measurements such as chart position, radio play, touring, etc.

I have made some edits based on some research but would the article could probably do with further amendments. WNLA (talk) 09:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point regarding notability, but wikipedia requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Arguably notable record label in different countries constitute this to a degree, as does radio play in a different city. If you're looking for a page in the Observer Music Monthly then it's true most of these bands can't claim that, but one of the characteristics of the bristol scene is the proliferation of significant bands who are influential in subcultures but perhaps don't make a major impact on the national press. Within national Dubstep circles, for example, Peverelist and a lot of other producers related to Gloucester rd's Rooted Records and the Tectonic label are getting a lot of attention, but you won't see them mentioned in the Guardian. Notability is always notability to a particular audience. I'll ask people with better perspective on the individual bands to help compile more sources for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.85.114 (talk) 10:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What you in effect saying, 208.49.85.114, is that "bands who are influential in subcultures but perhaps don't make a major impact on the national press." should have diffrent notability criteria than every other band article in Wikipedia. Sorry, that won't wash, all need to meet the criteria of Wikipedia:Notability (music). Take a look at that to understand what the criteria are. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Graffiti[edit]

There's a (non-free) photo of one of Cheo's works on Panoramio. -- Trevj (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Culture of Bristol. 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) 10:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Culture of Bristol. 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) 11:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Culture of Bristol. 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) 09:57, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Culture_in_Bristol&oldid=1198782277"