Talk:Pet Shop Boys

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former featured article candidate Pet Shop Boys is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
January 20, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted

Imperial Phase[edit]

The phrase was deemed sufficiently important to make it the title of a sub-heading, but there is no explanation of the meaning in the section. Then the phrase is only mentioned when the phase ended. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkolak (talkcontribs) 12:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


I changed "famously homophobic" to "allegedly homophobic", as it's my understanding he denies homophobia and claims his use of the language should be considered the context of the area he grew up. Schrödinger

I'm quite certain that the list now includes every album the PSB have published. There are tons of singles, limited editions, collaborations and other similar stuff available, which might or might not need their own category.

What about Too Many People? Wasn't that a [hit] single? LockeShocke 04:51, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)
"Too many people" was an extra track on the "I wouldn't normally do this kind of thing" single release, never a single in its own right. bug boy

There is at least one tour DVD available, Montage. To my knowledge, PSB's not-so-highly-acclaimed film It Couldn't Happen Here is so far only available on VHS. Further information about these would be greatly appreciated. --Card

Were they formed early 80's? "West End Girls" was 85 (which I would count as mid 80s), but had they been kicking around as unknowns for long before they hit fame? quercus robur 00:02 Mar 19, 2003 (UTC)

It depends... West End Girls was released twice. If 85 was the year it was a hit, then they were around before. And I think you missed Very relentless in the album list. -- Tarquin 10:32 Mar 19, 2003 (UTC)

Dec 85 (or maybe first weeks of 86) was when it was a hit, I don't know much about PSB beyond that, I only know that because a girlfriend at the time bought it, and gave me the elbow around the same time! Cheers quercus robur
Very Relentless is a limited edition version of Very (it's a 2-disc set, the first cd being Very) and they were released at the same time, which is why I didn't include it in the main list. According to Literally, Neil and Chris met and started writing songs together in 1981. They first recorded "West End Girls" in 1983. Card 15:02 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC)

Unlike the other limited editions, the second CD Relentless contains all new material, which I think is enough to list Very Relentless separately. IMO, the other limited editions don't need to be listed here; they can be listed on a fan site. CyborgTosser

Some single releases were missing! I've added them and created a table to display the UK and US chart positions simultaneously. I've also created similar tables for the albums and videos. Jonks Sept 7 2005.


Hi all Psb fans.I am Naeem Qasai.I have placed all the PSB pics/.Kindly the wikieditor resize the latest pic of PSB.Keep watching PSb page regularly.They have a new album coming-being produced by Trevor Horn.Back To Mine was released recently but it contained songs by other artists..It was their first double cd since alternative....

Pet Shop Boys albums[edit]

"Please Release Very Introspective Nightlife" is a grammatically correct sentence whose every word is the name of a Pet Shop Boys album. Can any other band do that? — JIP | Talk 16:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

hmmm..... "Like a Prayer Virgin Madonna Music American Life Confessions On a True Blue Dancefloor Bedtime Evita Stories Ray Of Erotica Light Who's That Something To Remember Girl?" There's a nice ring to that, right?-- eo 17:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

2010-08-01 Does anybody have the sales figures of Pet Shop Boys albums and singles ? I heard on TV that they sold a total 50 millions albums, but exact figures would be interesting to show, for each album and singles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Capitalization of song titles[edit]

In light of the continuous back-and-forth switching between traditional capitalization and sentence-form capitalization for song titles on this page, I think we should set down more solid guidelines for what to do with them, especially since some of PSB's songs are on the list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable songs as being encyclopedic topics without articles thus far.

The problem is: if we institute the sentence-form capitalization everywhere — especially if we create articles for more PSB songs — how do we keep random people from changing them to the traditional capitalization? Some kind of template at the top of every PSB article?

Song titles in this article may not follow standard Wikipedia naming conventions because they are Pet Shop Boys songs; see [[some link to relevant information]].

In fact, there has been a recent discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#Caps in song titles as to whether to explicitly follow artist capitalization conventions in all cases. Also, consider the fact that even the PSB official website is inconsistent in capitalization of song titles; see the front page compared to the lyrics page. –Unint 23:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be a fruitless idea to attempt to format the song titles via PSB-style in any other WP article but this one. It'll be an endless back-and-forth. Perhaps the point in this article pertaining to how PSB prefer the titles to look can be brought to a more prominent part of the article? And speaking of that bulletpoint, do we even have a source for Tennant's explanation on how the titles should be written? -- eo 19:54, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
According to, it's from issue 24 of Literally: [1]
Google didn't turn up any other references, though, so what we have here is a reference to a single webpage which itself refers to an issue of a fanzine, which is unavailable to the general public. Even most fansites don't follow the convention. One might make a case for the album back covers or the lyrics page on the official site, but most people who see those out of context would probably dismiss it as a quirk. (If Neil Tennant cared very much about people following it, I presume he would have put the information somewhere more prominent.)
I personally don't think it would be a great loss if we delete that section and go back to traditional capitalization... but that still wouldn't stop fans from re-discovering the reference and reinstating everything. But, even though either way we might get people reverting the other way, far fewer people are likely to ever know about the existence of the PSB convention, much less edit it into articles. –Unint 20:48, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Well, what I have noticed is not so much people going through this article and re-capitalizing everything, but rather newer editors who may add one or two comments to the page and use standard capitalization (not seeing the Tennant comment), which of course then gets corrected to PSB capitalization by an editor more familiar with this article. I don't have a problem with using standard capitalization everywhere but here. I think at this point forcing standard style here or PSB style elsewhere is asking for trouble. -- eo 20:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay. By some fortuituous chance Miracles (song) happens to have completely unambiguous capitalization with all five song titles involved, but I'm done waffling with that. I've written Opportunities (Let's Make Lots of Money) with standarized capitalization, and I see someone else has done Being Boring in the meantime in the same manner. I've put the hatnote I proposed earlier on both pages, directing people here about the capitalization. Just a stopgap measure for now, but let's see if anyone notices... –Unint 16:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

This is the first article I've seen that this has been an issue. On all other PSB-related articles the lower-case standard has worked out fine. Surely we should follow what the artist wants for their titles (you wouldn't change the name of a group or album to fit Wikipedias standards, would you?). It's not just a matter of it being in their Literally magazine - it's in lower case on ALL their albums (except Fundamental for obvious reasons). Davidbod 19:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

By that measure, then, should there not be a wee template at the top of each article related to this topic, to say that in accordance with the artist's wishes, song titles take sentence case and should not be changed. Does that not rather solve the problem? LorD 19.36, 31 January 2007 (GMT)
I have no reason to think that the band are very stringent about it, especially given that it's not even consistent on their official site. –Unint 15:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
They don't have utter control of the content of their website; there is someone doing all the inputting of text for them. If it were Mark Farrow, then I daresay there would be the consistency expected and it would show that their preference is quite clearly sentence case. LorD 10:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Though Mark Farrow designed the Being Boring single artwork, using standard capitalization! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
It may just be me, but it seems that the spirit of pretty much all of MOS:TM is that no matter what the people "in charge" say, we should follow standard rules of English text capitalization, and I see no reason why song titles ought to be exempt from this policy. (My opinion is this: Capitalize middle-of-sentence-words if they're part of a song title; e.g. It's a Sin. I don't think the members of a single band should be able to change the rules of English even for one article in a reliable encyclopedia. I think Britannica would capitalize the song titles as "It's a Sin" and I think we should too, despite what a band or their fans may say.) (talk) 12:19, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

This is certainly an interesting topic of discussion; I've wondered about it for years. Neil Tennant seems to prefer using the "sentence capitalization" method, which seems to be a European thing (though I'm unsure how often it's done in English in the UK), but as others have mentioned, the capitalization of certain song titles can be inconsistent, especially when parentheses are involved. Just looking at Further Listening 1984-1986, track eleven on the back of the case and outer sleeve as well as in the credits section at the back of the booklet is listed as "Suburbia (The full horror)", yet in the comments section it's typed "Suburbia (The Full Horror)". But then you get to the website where it's just typed "Suburbia (the full horror)", ignoring any sense of capitalization for the parenthesized title—which is also done for "Opportunities (Let's make lots of money)", with the L being in lowercase.

I'd like to say that the artists' intentions should be preserved, but considering that the official printings are so inconsistent (e.g., "Hey, headmaster" is listed with a lowercase H for headmaster on Further Listening 1992-1994, whereas on Alternative it's listed with a capital H), I see no reason to stress one over the other—which I realize will cause for inconsistencies on Wikipedia, but I guess that's the way it's doomed to be. Maybe PSB themselves should pop up on Wikipedia and speak out, heh. Kriztoffer Swank (talk) 09:39, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I asked @petshopboys on Twitter if I could get a word from Neil Tennant on this matter, linking him to this discussion page, and I got the following responses on December 3rd: "Since the FL reissues in 2001 PSB song titles have been presented as speech without initial capitals, eg 'It's a sin'."; "No doubt there have been occasional inconsistencies due to graphic design issues."; "If the title includes a name or nickname ('I'm with Stupid', 'Luna Park') the name has an initial capital."; "'You only tell me you love me when you're drunk' looks more personal than 'You Only Tell Me You Love Me When You're Drunk'." Therefore, I feel inclined to say that the song titles should be presented in this manner. Kriztoffer Swank (talk) 12:20, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Addition of the band from beginning to present[edit]

Anyone else think that there could be a brief overview of the band during each era? Like their critical success, personal struggles, change in direction, etc in the Very era, Behaviour era, and so on. As it is, there's only information about them pre-Pet Shop Boys.

I would touch this up, but I'm not that familiar with the band's history, I'm afraid...

I have been meaning to do this, but I never have the time. One section for each "era" judged according to the release of a studio album - Please, Actually, Introspective, Behaviour, Very, Bilingual, Nightlife, Release and Fundamental. In 2001, PSB released special editions of their first 6 albums that kind of started this anyway, so I'd say maybe to follow their dates and then have Nightlife covering 1999-2001 (including Closer to Heaven), then Release being 2002-2005 and finally having Fundamental being the current stuff. Jonks 11:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Defining "eras" by album seems somewhat... arbitrary, to me. (See New Order for one instance where I think it doesn't work.) Some of these "album eras" will likely be imbalanced in terms of content; 2002-2005 or 1995-1997 seem like they're going to be light on material, for example. Also, how do you assign things in between? Is Battleship Potemkin, 2005, Release-era or Fundamental era (it being closer to the latter)?
I would like to advocate dividing things up by the nature of what was happening their career. For instance, Neil is always talking about their "imperial phase" or "imperial period", that 1985-1989 (1990?) period when they put out all their number-one hits, didn't go on tours, etc. That term needs to be elaborated upon here, at the very least — and it serves as a starting point, I guess. –Unint 04:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
I do actually agree that that way of dividing it seems overly long, but for now, until some content is added, I think it'll work. I'd also like to say that I really don't like the "Other Ventures" section, but hopefully some of the content can be rearranged into the biography sections. Jonks 15:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
The same is true, I think, for the trivia section. In addition, we need to eliminate the list format — it is, simply put, not prose. –Unint 00:04, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Alright, looks like you've gone through with that. Great job, too. I've just gone through and reworked some prose, added some links, deleted redundant links, etc. Also, removed some more thematically related material from "Trivia" to form the "Influence" section. (Perhaps the rest could be moved to the discography and individual song pages?) –Unint 22:12, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Ok, the trivia section is now also gone! I don't know if you think the whole biography titles work. The periods covered are a bit random, but I agreed with your comments about the "era" headings is a bit too long. I've also moved the discography link so that it follows the biography. Jonks 09:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


Okay, I've been writing about topics that inspired songs ("In the Night" made for some great, statistically improbable wikilinks), and I'm thinking that "Paninaro" will have to be covered soon. However, can anyone find actual, verifiable, non-PSB related information about the actual "Italian youth cult" of the title? This is just one of a few PSB-related topics where both Wikipedia and Google fall down completely... –Unint 19:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, figured it out. Tip for the future: search for "Paninari", the plural. –Unint 21:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


Checking here for the first time, and reading the sexuality page. I think there should be a mention to "In Denial" since the lyrics is about a depressed gay father who tries to hide it in fear of his daughter. To date, I think it is the most explicity of their lyrics about the subject Samuel Sol 05:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


corrected the grammatical structure of the sentence: "while recording with Madonna, she blurted out..." but if I am not mistaken, this quote needs to be cited. Indranee 02:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)


The article describes well the lyrics of Pet Shop Boys. But can someone comment on or find a comment on their accent? That is the accent I've picked up when learning English :) -Samulili 21:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

What about their home counties? (Northumberland, Lancashire) –Unint 01:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Neil Tennant is from North Shields, which makes him a Geordie, although his accent is pretty mild.Claret 21:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Geordie applies to North Shields? That's the first much of the entire northeast has heard of it...

"Mistakenly called The Pet Shop Boys"[edit]

It seems clear that the official name is Pet Shop Boys, but it seems a bit strong to say that any use of the definite article is wrong. After all, they released (covered!) a song called "We're the Pet Shop Boys," and when I saw them, Neil said, "I'm Neil Tennant, this is Chris Lowe, and we'll always be the Pet Shop Boys." I'll try a reword; tell me what you think. - Montréalais 05:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Even though this is kinda off topic can someone help the new list of best-selling remix albums worldwide with its structure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelvin Martinez (talkcontribs) 2006-12-01, 08:00:37

I believe (from memory when the duo appeared on Graham Norton's TV show a few years ago) that they no longer object too much to being called "The Pet Shop Boys", even though it was originally just "Pet Shop Boys". I think the article should perhaps say something like "sometimes referred to as The Pet Shop Boys" or "also unofficially called The Pet Shop Boys". Leevclarke 21:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to add that before all this in 1984 The Hurricanes (Tess) release the B-Side of "One More Chance" on ZYX Records called "Theme From The Pet Shop Boys"... It wasnt actually a Pet Shop Boys release, but rather one by their producer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Does it make any difference that the band refers to itself as "the Pet Shop Boys" consistently in the History section of their website? (as in, whenever it would be appropriate in normal english) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

FAC (Featured Article)[edit]

Would anyone like to put the Pet Shop Boys on the Main Page? To me, the idea doesn't sound so bad... we all know the Pet Shop Boys are great, huh?TheWerewolf 07:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality / Citation of sources[edit]

This is a very well written article, but it sometimes reads like a fan's review rather than a neutral encyclopedia entry. For example, in the opening paragraph, the line "Pet Shop Boys has remained successful outside the USA since then, however, because of the quality and imagination of its releases which continue to chart worldwide and to inspire a very active and devoted fan base" appears to be rather biased in that it takes a very positive tone without citing any sources (who says that their releases chart worldwide because of their "quality" and "imagination"?). I find this general tone and the lack of citations somewhat prevalent throughout the article. Does anybody else have any thoughts on this? Spicoli 07:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the original phrase "Pet Shop Boys has remained successful outside the USA since then." would make a more NPOV. I'll revert to this one but if you think there's a better line, just change it. Cristóbal 15:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
That's definitely a huge improvement. Unfortunately, however, the entire article seems to have a positive bias to it, as well as a significant lack of cited sources. I'd take a stab at fixing it myself, but I'm really more of a fan than an expert. Spicoli 09:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC)


Is the fact that they were once nominated, but didn't win, such an important fact that it deserves to be in the very first sentence? Surely a lot of acts are Grammy nominated? The fact that they're Britain's most successful musical duo ever might be much more important to recount. Davidbod 13:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Meh, I just see it as a descriptor. If you look at a lot of pages for, say, actors, you'll see "So-and-So is an Academy Award-nominated actor..." Personally I don't see any harm in leaving it there. - eo 17:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


I'm trying a new thing with the infobox photo. If this doesn't work out I guess we can put the old picture back. –Unint 23:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

new image[edit]

to whoever finally replaced that NASTY image which sat on this page for far too long - thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 04:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC).

Influenced Guns N' Roses!!???[edit]

Hmm, can't see how PSB influenced November Rain, when demos of November Rain exist around the Appetite seesion around '87, 3 years before October Symphony released! Should this silly bit just be removed from the page? Scchipli

Pet Shop Boys forums[edit]

I have tried to add to the list of PSB forums but received a message from a bot that the link was not allowed. Does anyone know why? It is certainly more relevant than the 'Fundamental' forum that is listed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BillyBudd07 (talkcontribs) 14:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC).

I guess thats because it is not an open forum. You have to register to get in. What have they got to hide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CYFH.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:CYFH.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 Wikipedia articles 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 Wikipedia: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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

External Links[edit]

I cleaned up the external links section, as per [Policies. I followed other great articles like AC\DC, Madonna, and completely removed the Fan Sites list and other bits.Samuel Sol 10:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I respect your actions, but in my opinion you removed too many links. I reconstructed a few links, because they are essential resources, rather than 'just' fan websites. I find the listing of the Pet Shop Boys newsgroup very dubious. There's hardly any activity, which is why I chose to mention the most active and biggest Pet Shop Boys discussion forum on internet. I think my edit still meets the [Policies, which say: "There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia." DVTB 08:52, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed mate. I may have removed too many links. I will proceed too and remove the usenet link, since it is barely used as you noted. Samuel Sol 10:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Reference for the reasons why Heart was not submitted to Madonna[edit]

The article says they were too shy to submit Heart to Madonna, which may be regarded as another way to state what they actually said in the booklet text to the Discography compilation album, namely, that they "didn't dare risk disappointment." So what remains to be done is to insert the album booklet as a note for reference, and to actually reference it where the claim is stated. (Something I don't know how to do.) -- 10:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I tried to fix this one, but I'm kind of a rookie at this myself. I just deleted the whole sentence and typed the quote directly from the liner notes of the CD, mentioning where I got the quote from (with a wiki-link). But I didn't add a footnote or a reference. I hope this is OK - if not, I hope a more experienced editor will fix it properly. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 06:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Name origin[edit]

So does anyone know why they chose this name? From a shop seen on the street? Or someone in their families worked in a pet shop? Or did they?... Or is it just random? There muse be a reason. Klow (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

They had friends who worked in a Pet Shop. Simple as that! Derekbd (talk) 22:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Merge in the "Biography"[edit]

Another article, Pet Shop Boys biography, has been marked with a merge tag for almost a year. The separation of content into these two articles seems non-standard and unhelpful. Every other band article I've seen has the bands history included within it. OK to have a separate article for the discography, but a separate article for the history just seems odd. Any objection to this merge? Hult041956 (talk) 22:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

None from me mate. Go for it. Samuel Sol (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Merge. I can't see any good reason to have the articles separate. And "Pet Shop Boys biography" appears to be a nonstandard Wikipedia article name. Do it and help clear that merge backlog. Ipoellet (talk) 21:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Merge - agreed. - eo (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:IanMcKellanvamp.JPG[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:IanMcKellanvamp.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 Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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) 23:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Sources Cited[edit]

I just updated the section on their recent record deal with Parlaphone. Someone who knows better might condense it a bit, but it's properly referenced now. Because the item is in the nature of a press release rather than an interview or article, I felt that reproducing the information constituted fair use, if I am incorrect, I won't be offended by being edited. ;)

Zola (talk) 00:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

"Being Boring" about AIDS? Kylie and Liza "gay"?[edit]

In the "sexuality" section: This article reads that "Being Boring." supposedly "dealt with the gay experience and the devastation wrought by the AIDS crisis;" However, the article about the song ( reads:

"The song is concerned with the idea of growing up and how people's perceptions and values change as they grow older. The title apparently materialised after someone in Japan accused the duo of being boring. The title is also derived from a Zelda Fitzgerald quotation, "she refused to be bored chiefly because she wasn't boring"." I have never heard of the song having anything to directly with the AIDS crisis, so perhaps this is a bit misleading.

Also, while Kylie Minogue and Liza Minnelli may both be very popular with gay people, I think listing them in a row under "many artists considered to be gay and bisexual icons" may be a bit misleading, as neither of them are gay, or even generally Perceived or Assumed to be. Everyone else listed there is admittedly or at least generally accepted/known as being gay or bisexual. Perhaps this could be a whole different "collaborations" section, which includes everyone that PSB have worked with and does not denote sexuality of the collaborators?

? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 12:37, 2 November 2008

An image on this page may be deleted[edit]

This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image File:A still from the Single Can You Forgive Her?.jpg, found on Pet Shop Boys, has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact this bot's operator. STBotI (talk) 14:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

external links (again)[edit]

OK what is the trouble with external links?

"Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product."

1) "links that attract visitors to a web site" - well that's any link by definition IMHO...? :) 2) Doesn't any link to artist's official website actually kind of sell their products? 3) If there are fan sites that provide other info than Wikipedia or the official site does (can), can they be listed? If not, why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:ELNO #11. Quaeler (talk) 17:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Fine, and the reason for discography unofficial link included is? (I don't mind that at all, I just would like to know the *real* rules - I mean, when a complete discography source can be linked, why not a complete lyrics source etc.) And, if the "Commentary" site author was in a PSB documentary, does that fulfill the "authority" request somehow? Thanks, Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
IMO, the linked discography does teeter the line of fansite — however, (again IMO), it's a rare breed of web site in that it's professionally done, robust in information, and without a hint of self-promotional agenda to it. If someone were to put up a large stink about it being a fansite not necessarily done by a noted authority, i would have a hard time defending it though. Similarly, were there to be a cry for other non-promotional fansites to be published, it seems like we'd have to delete the present one to avoid accommodating every wish. Any thoughts from other editors? Quaeler (talk) 17:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Album names[edit]

The Pet Shop Boys certainly have a unique scheme for naming their albums. Yes, Please Release Actually Very Introspective Nightlife is a grammatically correct English sentence, with every single word being the name of a Pet Shop Boys album. I don't think any other band in the world can accomplish this. JIP | Talk 20:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

That isn't a grammatically correct sentence, in English or any other language. (talk) 14:01, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
Actually, it is grammatically correct, but in very poor style, and it doesn't mean much. Thanks for that... Xcrivener (talk) 11:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Why does Wknight94 keep deleting the sexuality section?[edit]

Why does the user named of Wknight94 keep deleting the 'Sexuality' section for? He claims there are no sources for it, well Neil Tennant came out in Attitude magazine back in 1994 & the interview has been well documented on many PSB websites. If the user is going to delete the sexuality part of PSB, then why don't they do it on other every page on Wikipedia too! A lot of their songs have come from their own personal experiences of their lives, which of course does include their sexuality, such as Later Tonight (from their 1st album, Please) or the threat of AIDS, on It Couldn't Happen Here (from Actually). Neil states in the 1994 Attitude interview, PSB are part of 'gay culture' & have worked with a lot of gay icons, such as Kylie Minogue, Dusty Springfield, Derek Jarman & Boy George for example. It is a relevant section & should not be deleted! I've undone the revision once again & added some sources, as it's stupid to delete this part!...

No, it's stupid to have that section without sources. Now there are sources so it can stay. I linked to WP:BLP both times I removed it but you obviously didn't read it, or you would know why I deleted the section. I'll check the sources now and verify their accuracy. Oh yeah, and here are some exclamation points back at you... !!!!!!!!!!!!! Wknight94 talk 12:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Contents titles too long?[edit]

Does anyone else think that the titles should be shorter? other wikipages of bands have shorter titles. I was thinking that it could be changed to something like this? or maybe shorter

   * 1.1 Formation and early years (1981–1984)
   * 1.2 Please and remix album Disco (1984–1986)
   * 1.3 Actually and It Couldn't Happen Here (1987–1988)
   * 1.4 Introspective, Behaviour, Performance tour and Discography (1988–1992)
   * 1.5 Very, Disco 2, Discovery tour and the Alternative B-sides (1993–1995)
   * 1.6 Bilingual, Nightlife, Touring and the musical Closer to Heaven (1996–2001)
   * 1.7 Release, touring, Disco 3, PopArt, Back to Mine and Battleship Potemkin (2002–2005)
   * 1.8 Fundamental, touring, Disco 4, Catalogue, Concrete and Cubism (2006 - 2008)
   * 1.9 Yes, Brit Awards and Pandemonium Tour (2009 onwards)

--Orbitt (talk) 20:33, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree, good suggestion danno 22:26, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Pet Shop Boys Name - What WE Say Now - And What THEY Said In The 1980s[edit]

Regarding the assertion that the Pet Shop Boys chose their name because it sounded like "an English rap band", please can we have links to prove this, please? How many rap bands (from anywhere at all) were featured in the mainstream pop scene in the early 1980s in the UK? Sugarhill Gang? Grandmaster Flash And The Furious Five? Gary Byrd and the GB Experience? Those band names sound nothing like the Pet Shop Boys and there is nothing in the PSB's 1980s interviews to suggest this. They repeatedly state that the inspiration came from two friend of theirs who worked in a pet shop. Also, the band's original name "West End" - where does this info come from - I can find no evidence in the band's 1980s interviews?

(Solidsandie (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC))

The band they were referring to is the Peech Boys. Xcrivener (talk) 11:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

More Information on Chris Lowe's Sexuality[edit]

sorry for my bad English.this is more like copy+paste the interview to prove the imformation

there was an interview in German Language on

that said more about Chris Lowe's Sexuality on this paragraph

"LOWE: Als wir aufwuchsen, hatten andere in den frühen 70er Jahren schon den Boden bereitet, damit wir ein normales schwules Leben führen konnten. Es gab und gibt natürlich hin und wieder gewalttätige Übergriffe auf Schwule, auch habe ich in meiner Jugend einige willkürliche Polizeirazzien in Schwulen-Clubs erlebt, bei denen wir belästigt wurden, auch wenn Homosexualität schon legal war. Aber revolutionäre Energie brauchten wir nicht mehr aufzuwenden, um offen schwul zu sein." I don't understand German so I can't do the actual translation,but if I use google translator

"LOWE: When we were growing up, had another in the early 70s, already prepared the ground so we could live a normal gay life. There was and is, of course, occasionally violent attacks on gays, as I have experienced in my youth some arbitrary police raids on gay clubs, where we were harassed, even if homosexuality is already legal. But revolutionary energy we needed to spend no more to be openly gay. "

there were the other interviews but I can't find the actual source

-a more recent radio interview in which a call or email from a female fan expressing shall we say the desire to have Chris's children prompted the response from Chris - - You're barking up the wrong tree there, love."

-The Boston Herald Interviewe

HERALD: You were one of the first bands to address gay life in song CHRIS LOWE: Well, we’ve never hidden anything. There was never any pretense in what we do. We covered “Go West” by the Village People. We’ve never actually thought there was the need to be explicit about anything. We don’t like to be political and we don’t make political statements. Everything is in the music and you can get it if you want it. We’re just awkward bastards, really. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MicaFeresz (talkcontribs) 14:39, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Worldwide sales[edit]

I have amended the claim of 100 million records sold worldwide to 50 million, however it should be noted that even this lower figure is generous. The claim of 100 million units cited a press release from Warner Music Germany. As record companies tend to inflate the sales figures for their artists we use available certified units sold, applying an percentage increase to the lowest available claimed figures. Pet Shop Boys have certified figures of 13.5 million units sold worldwide and if we apply the percentage increase, a more realistic figure would be in the order of 30 million. I have cited from a recent BBC report which claims total worldwide sales of 50 million. Again, I am not confident this is correct but it is certainly more realistic than the previously quoted number of units sold. Pyrophylaciorum (talk) 17:40, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Original West End Girls release[edit]

The Musical History section "Formation and early years" has a referenced statement that is factually incorrect.

The original Bobby O version of West End Girls WAS released here in the UK and wasn't only available as an import. It was released by Epic in a "one off" deal. The single was released in April 1984 and reached 121 in the charts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


I don't understand why in the first sentence of the introduction, Pet Shop Boys are categorized under "electronic dance music." These label really does not apply to their music for the following reasons:

-Clearly, they were part of the original synth pop wave of the early to mid 80s. -They have much more in common with artist from the Synth Pop list than the EDM list. -EDM is a dance-oriented genre that encapsulates several styles of electronica. The Pet Shop Boys have stated on numerous occasions that they are a pop group in essence (see for instance, the liner notes to Alternative). -Throughout their career the have recorded several ballads and acoustic songs. Much more than purely instrumental synth-based dance tracks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Maybe a more up-to-date picture?[edit]

If we can find one that is free use. current one is over 6 years old now. Mr Morden76 (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Revised "Band dynamic" section[edit]

I have changed the title of this section to "Reputation" as this is a more accurate description. I also removed sections of content that were promotional in tone, subjective and unverifiable—the content read more like a music magazine feature rather than an encyclopedic article and presented opinions rather than verifiable facts.--Soulparadox (talk) 18:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with MCMLXXXIX Tour[edit]

No assertion of MCMLXXXIX Tour notability. Ross Hill (talk) 02:01, 5 Nov 2013 (UTC) 02:01, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Oppose - many tours have their own articles without specifically stating their significance. The fact that it was a worldwide tour by a notable artist makes it notable in itself. Oddbodz - (Talk) (Contribs) 20:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Pet Shop Boys self-titled song[edit]

this article references a song called simply "Pet Shop Boys" they recorded in the early 80s; i haven't been able to confirm the existence of this song anywhere, including here on wikipedia, or on the pet shop boys' official discography on their own website. can anyone confirm the existence of such a song? Nucas (talk) 12:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

It is the original West End Girls B-side - see the entry for the single here. Karst (talk) 12:57, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Pet Shop Boys song collaboration with French electronica musician Jean-Michel Jarre album track 'Brick England' released 6th May 2016[edit]

The article could be updated by the author/editor to include this collaboration. See: It is track 3. Jarre is known as an instrumentalist, however I had heard a sample of the track on YouTube, and it is a well crafted full song with Neil Tennant vocals. Best to enter a search, because video links may be subject to changes. The official channel is: If authorised then the track or a sample of it would be uploaded on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

The Economist references Pet Shop Boys[edit]

An article on homosexual lives around the world used section headers that were Pet Shop Boys song titles.

Might be useful to demonstrate their influence. Mdnahas (talk) 15:53, 14 July 2016 (UTC)