Talk:Daniel Ek

Evertigo?

Can't find anything about it on google. Is this a mis-hearing of Advertigo? Crasshopper (talk) 22:48, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Spotify logo with text.svg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Spotify logo with text.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:53, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Surname

Did his family's surname used to be something else before it was Ek? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 04:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

It looks like the Swedish surname Ek is derived from the Swedish word for "oak." 173.88.246.138 (talk) 04:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

It appear to have been Ek all the time. Per W (talk) 16:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Foaming detected

The aroma of sentences such as "Ek realized that money was meaningless without a project he was passionate about" betray the promotional tone of the text. The hammer will be coming down soon unless objections are raised. -The Gnome (talk) 19:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Covid vaccine disinformation controversy

That Neil Young referenced Daniel Ek is not noteworthy to Ek's page. Article referenced to support Rogan's "misinformation" doesn't actually support the claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.219.158.52 (talk) 18:05, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2022

Remove the "Net Worth" section: it is not really possible for the media to determine someone's net worth, you can only end up with bad and vague guesstimates. As indicated by the existing "original research" tag, what's written there currently is sloppy original research based on Spotify's stock valuation, not even a proper guess at his net worth. Endwise (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

I completely agree. It is removed. FalconK (talk) 04:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Criticism Section Unwieldy

The criticism section gets too into detail about specific artists reactions, and exact reactions, unnecessarily so. It is also worded unclearly: phrases like

"Matt Tong, the former Bloc Party swore in response to his tweet"

or

" In an interview with Music Ally in 2020, Ek said: “...There is a narrative fallacy here, combined with the fact that, obviously, some artists that used to do well in the past may not do well in this future landscape, where you can’t record music once every three to four years and think that’s going to be enough,” said Ek "

Which includes "Ek said" twice for one quote.

It also includes a Tweet in mostly untranslated German

I think the section needs rewording and paring down to just the sources reporting on the artist backlash. ComtoDracula (talk) 01:01, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for raising the above points. My reference to Matt's tweet was to convey two things:

1. the strengtth of feeling regarding Daniel's comments are indeed strong

2. I think the original tweets should remain for social context

Feel free to reword it or rephrase but I purposely cited the tweets for a direct response to his remarks with reporting providing context around it.  

• I'll amend the mistakes/typos Greenpark79 (talk) 20:37, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

"Political Positions" section outdated: 2016?

The "Political Positions" section is written in the present tense in 2016, it talks about Ek "claims" and he will move out of Sweden if government policy changes are not made. What happened after 2016, in the intervening 9 years? did he move? thanks! 82.68.17.41 (talk) 11:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)