Talk:Take Me to Church

Song Meaning

Im wondering if anyone could offer some input on what the song is talking about/means? It seems to have a lot of controversy around it. I think this could help with the Lyrical Interpretation section.

- Euphoria42 (talk) 03:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I do agree with the comment above, unless it comes out of his mouth in an interview what he means through this song then we will see his point of view. However I believe that people need to stop looking or googling meanings of songs because each and every song holds a different meaning and interpretation for every single human being. Just because he might have mention that it portrayed his homosexuality, it does not mean that is how we should see that song. If the meaning for the next person could be that they wanted to share their sins. It is honestly ridiculous that people keep believe wikipedia and all its continents in it because people should interpret a song based on their own ears not through a meaning that they read from someone else or what the artist really is portraying. Please do yourself a favor, when you listen to a song that you like please make your own meaningful interpretation for just you and don not base it off the criteria of someones blog or the real meaning of the artist singing it. Please do your own interpretations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.45.64.243 (talk) 02:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Hitchens or Greville

It sounds as if Hozier was probably actually paraphrasing Greville not Hitchens in "I was born sick ...", based on an interview in the Telegraph and Hitchens quoting Greville himself with this line. I cannot find a secondary source for this though, so I'll leave it unchanged for now.

Saying the line is a quote from Hitchens is obviously wrong even with the sources we have now. I changed it a little by saying it's inspired by Hitchens and paraphrases Greville, adding your link as source. Isn't that better? --Sboucher (talk) 12:27, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 9 February 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. Solid consensus that this is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in a WP:TWODABS situation. Cúchullain ^t/c 21:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

---

Take Me to Church (Hozier song) → Take Me to Church – WP:TWODABS. O'Connor's song is barely notable. --Relisted. Number 57 14:49, 18 February 2015 (UTC) © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 04:29, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose Take Me to Church (Sinéad O'Connor song) is a single by a major artist, there's no benefit to anyone to not following WP:SONGDAB in this case. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:12, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

  1) Artists poplarity is Wikipedia:NOTINHERITED to their songs; if O'Connor is notable, that's why Sinéad O'Connor exists. 2) WP:SONGDAB serves as an extention of WP:DISAMBIGUATION, not vice versa. WP:SONGDAB is used exclusively when there is ambiguity among multiple songs, not only two. 3) WP:TWODABS explains better why this is a WP:TWODABS situation, and why this Grammy-nominated "Take Me to Church" overrides the lack of notability of O'Connor's "Take Me to Church", which was conveniently released a year later. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 05:30, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose. Removing (Hozier song) from the URL increases ambiguity because it can refer to ANY title with the same name. Music fans being music fans will assume their favorite artist/song will be primary in any event. This is the real problem of trying apply WP:PRIMARYTOPIC to topics which, in the great scheme of Wikipedia, are not universally known. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC) _{Changed a couple of words. --Richhoncho (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2015 (UTC)} Note: the words changed by Richhoncho - "ANY song" to "ANY title" and "not extremely notable" to "not universally known" - were the words referred to by Tbhotch in the comment directly below. Dohn joe (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

@Dohn joe:. Thanks for clarifying my edit, I was delayed. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:52, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

• "increases ambiguity because it can refer to ANY song with the same name". Yes, we have Take Me to Church (Sinéad O'Connor song), Take Me to Church (Sinéad O'Connor song), and of course Take Me to Church (Sinéad O'Connor song), am I missing another Take Me to Church? If you want me to prove how you and IIO have no single idea what "PRIMARYTOPIC" means ([1][2]) and why RM doesn't revolve around you, I can prove it. Also, you really need to explain how a page with 100,000 views in a month is "not extremely notable". © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 13:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Straightforward WP:TWODABS situation. Dohn joe (talk) 14:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support. It's clear from the page views that this song is the primary topic and this is a classic TWODABS situation. The disambiguate everything crowd's opposes above are not based in any policy or guideline. -- Calidum 15:54, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
• Weak oppose, The title gains nothing by losing content. GregKaye 18:09, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

  But don't readers benefit when we send more of them to the page they're looking for? Dohn joe (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Dohn joe, and don't editors benefit when they get pings when their content is replied to. There are a variety of benefits involved here. Any Hozier related content would surely contain piped links such as [[Take Me to Church (Hozier song)|Take Me to Church]]... Anyone searching from outside Wikipedia would see results "Take Me to Church" for the disambiguation and also "Take Me to Church (Hozier song)". In categories we would have "Take Me to Church (Hozier song) which is a more useful title in that content. I don't get your point. GregKaye 18:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

User:GregKaye, sorry - I'm not a huge fan of pings. I assume that anyone who participates in a discussion watchlists it, especially in the near-term. I'll try to ping you from now on.

As for the point, the point of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC (and the point here) is that when there is a primarytopic, editors are more likely to link to it at the base name, and readers are more likely to go up to the search bar, type "take me to church" and hit enter, wanting this article. Right now, we are sending those readers to a dab page, when we have the ability to send them here instead. Especially in a WP:TWODABS situation.... Dohn joe (talk) 19:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Dohn joe My main contention remains that "Take Me to Church (Hozier song)" is a more informative and useful title. I think that it would be nice if the search engines might work in a way in which this title would appear higher on searches on Take Me to Church in the same way as it does on searches on Take Me to Church Hozier or if google would offer a facility for sub links in its listing. The Hozier song does not have monopoly on the title. Our system is not out of the ordinary and basically functions in a similar way to an index which, in itself, is informative. I think there are advantages either way. GregKaye 05:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

• Strong support - The purpose of disambiguation pages is to make navigation as easy as possible for readers. In this case we have a clear case of a primary topic, and the slim minority of those looking for a different page will be able to access it through the hatnote.--Yaksar (let's chat) 18:41, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose per In ictu oculi. The other song is performed by another major artist ... an artist that is probably well-known for some controversial actions, but well-known nonetheless. Also, if someone can make a rather valid claim that Take Me to Church (Sinéad O'Connor song) isn't notable enough to be equal in notability with a claim for a different primary topic, then nominate that article for WP:AFD; the criteria for establishing a song's notability to be a standalone article are quite strict, so to be able to establish notability on that criteria should be enough for it to be notable compared to other songs of the same name ... period. Steel1943 (talk) 01:07, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

  Not all notabilities are equal. There are lots of notable "Boston"s, but one of them is primary. That's what WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is built upon. So if there are two notable songs here, why wouldn't we want to follow WP:TWODABS and get most of our readers to the right page quicker? Dohn joe (talk) 15:43, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

• In fact, I went ahead and created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Take Me to Church (Sinéad O'Connor song); Sinéad O'Connor's song's article has now been nominated for deletion. If by chance that article gets deleted, then my vote for this move would default to "support per WP:PRECISE". Steel1943 (talk) 01:50, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

• Support, clear primary topic between the two, per WP:TWODABS. bd2412 T 19:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support per WP:TWODABS and WP:PTOPIC Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:22, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
• Move disambiguation page to Take Me to Church (disambiguation) and add a link indicating the 2001 song from the album To Be Frank -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 02:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support per nom. The Sinéad O'Connor song might be notable but the Hozier song is the primary topic. Delete the DAB page and use hatnotes per WP:TWODABS. —  AjaxSmack  15:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support - Hozier's song is far more notable. Unreal7 (talk) 23:37, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
• Support - it does seem from Googling like the Hozier song is primary over the Sinead song (which doesn't, and may never, have an article)  — Amakuru (talk) 16:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Take Me to Church. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://hitsdailydouble.com/news%26id%3D297039
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.amazon.de/Take-Me-Church-2-Track-Hozier/dp/B00P7370AI
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150113005101/http://www.fimi.it/5233 to http://www.fimi.it/5233
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120111062825/http://charts.org.nz/bestall.asp to http://charts.org.nz/bestall.asp
• Added archive https://archive.is/2013.06.15-111036/http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?content_selector=riaa-news-gold-and-platinum&news_month_filter=5&news_year_filter=2013&id=C19496E7-CEC0-C453-D8A1-BD80E56E610F to http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?content_selector=riaa-news-gold-and-platinum&news_month_filter=5&news_year_filter=2013&id=C19496E7-CEC0-C453-D8A1-BD80E56E610F
• Corrected formatting/usage for https://itunes.apple.com/ie/album/take-me-to-church-ep/id683214503
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allaccess.com/alternative/future-releases
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allaccess.com/hot-modern-ac/future-releases
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150226153027/http://www.radioairplay.fm/RadioDate/PublicDetails/92612/HOZIER-Take-Me-To-Church-Island-Records to http://www.radioairplay.fm/RadioDate/PublicDetails/92612/HOZIER-Take-Me-To-Church-Island-Records

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) 10:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Take Me to Church. 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/20150402095716/http://www.monitorlatino.com/mondayChartsConsult_History.aspx?year=2015&mes=3&semana=12&formato=4&pais=3 to http://www.monitorlatino.com/mondayChartsConsult_History.aspx?year=2015&mes=3&semana=12&formato=4&pais=3
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141009141410/http://www.tonlist.is/Music/ChartList.aspx?ID=267 to http://www.tonlist.is/Music/ChartList.aspx?ID=267

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) 17:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Ref for quotes

@Bettydaisies: you've added a ref tag with the name ":0", but given it no definition. Could you please fill that ref in, and also indicate whether that covers all the quotes you added directly after? Thanks! -- Fyrael (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The masked singer?

Should it be mentioned under “performances” that Bishop Briggs performed this song in the “Masked Singer” semi-finals in 2023? LatinJoe (talk) 22:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

13 September 2013 is flase release date

I have resaerched when this song was released. I used https://web.archive.org/ My conclusion is: this song released on 03 July 2013 proof - https://web.archive.org/web/20130716003347/http://hoziermusic.bandcamp.com/ also the same date on genius https://genius.com/albums/Hozier/Take-me-to-church-single

Therefore 13 September 2013 is flase date. May be we have to make some edits? Anyone agree? Derek Di My Mind (talk) 23:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC)