Talk:Fly Me to the Moon
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I'm in doubt about the time signature of this piece. Is that 3/4 or 4/4? It seems that nobody knows... -- Morpheu5
The sheet music is 3/4, but everyone seems to swing it. Kisch 17:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The timing for this piece is definitely 4/4. Orchardgirl,
In the "New Real Book 2" the time signature is 4/4, as many people sing it including a famous Frank Sinatra version with Count Basie "Sinatra at the Sands", but a note at the bottom says "originally in 3/4". --David Be (talk) 21:15, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
It seems that the singer CLAIR is a british indie songer/songwriter Claire Nicolson. The only source I sould find for this is this blurb about her on last.fm (which unfortunetly is a wiki itself). I sent an email message to Clair and will keep you updated. I hope this doesn't count as original research D: - Calicore 12:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- It is original research. That is allowed on talk pages, but you can't actually put it in the article. --GunnarRene 13:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it's Claire Littley , she's posted on various evangelion YT videos to this effect, not sure how factual that makes it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
I know eva had a lot of different rendition for this song, but does that mean that the eva section table underneath is necessary? I almost had the mistaken impression that the eva series had something to do with the song's creation. If there is going to be a section table underneath, shouldn't it be about the creators/music genre/or the person who made it a big hit, say Frank? I really don't see how this has anything officially to do with the series.
How come the article doesn't follow the mandatory Wikipedia policy WP:V and how-to WP:CITE? You will have to do that eventually and it is easier if you do it as you go along. Mattisse(talk) 12:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Too many artists
A lot of people have sung this song, and it seems like everyone who comes along to this page wants to add someone to the list. Besides Sinatra, I don't really have any idea if any of these versions are more or less significant than the others, so I hesitate to remove any of them just through the justification of saying "they fall under 'and others'". That said, that paragraph is looking ridiculous as it stands, and I dare anyone to say it in its entirety without drawing a breath half-way through. So, I suppose, we need to find an alternative. My proposals:
- Discuss each artist mentioned there, and delete any that are not sufficiently significant (by some kind of standard - verifiability would help, but is probably too lenient).
- Make it a list. Either in the article or as a new article. Unfortunately, I do see the risk of this being considered listcruft, unless there is something more to be added to the list besides just who has sung it.
After that, I'm out of ideas. Confusing Manifestation 13:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- I'd say drop it completely, except for the 2 most known alternative versions (Sinatra? ... ?). 126.96.36.199 23:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'd say make the list, wikipedia is supposed to be a source of knowledge and the look of the page shouldnt be a limitation for that purpose. My vote goes for option 2 --188.8.131.52 15:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Itmightaswellbeswing.jpg
The image Image:Itmightaswellbeswing.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
Please note : There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separate different versions of the same song. Please make known your opinions on the matter.--Richhoncho (talk) 12:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Edit: I read the discussion mentioned above, and changed my mind... (and posted there as well): covers should stay on main song article.--David Be (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
official change of title
Removal of most cover versions.
Another editor removed, that was reverted and I have removed again. The arguments for removal are they are unreferenced and therefore fail WP:NSONGS and WP:GNG. I would have no objection to the re-addition of some or all - subject to the criteria being met. Adding merely because there was a performance on a talent show, or an album track on a red-linked album isn't cutting the mustard. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Let us discuss the criteria for removal and inclusion before making the changes. This will enable anyone participating in the discussion to clearly see what we are talking about. The fact that some artists may not be fully referenced is a second order issue. The first issue to be addressed is what constitutes "notable". For example recent editors have left in the article a mention about someone called George Strait who I had never heard of so clearly he is not notable to me. The same could be said by other people about most of the artists who had been accumulated in the article. So here is an attempt to start a proper discussion about what criteria should be used to determine who is mentioned and who is not:
Are the earlier recordings more important, or not?
Only artists who have proved to be of enduring importance (and how is this determined)?
Popularity as measured by sales and chart success?
Different styles of music e.g. first instrumental, first non English version?
Subsequent uses of and references to a recording e.g. Frank Sinatra's version?
My view is that all of these criteria may be relevant in coming up with an article that will be generally supported.
If the number of cover artists is to be reduced drastically then it will be necessary to add some text which gives a general indication as to the amount of coverage that the song has had. It would be helpful of other people interested in this song could express there views as to what should be included in and excluded from the article. I suggest that a period of one month be allowed for this process of discussion.Panthus (talk) 10:12, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- Please read WP:Wikipedia:Five pillars, WP:NSONGS and WP:GNG and then we can have a discussion. Saying, "The fact that some artists may not be fully referenced is a second order issue." The first issue to be addressed is what constitutes "notable". is silly, notability is from secondary sources, if there are no secondary sources then the cover version cannot be notable. Additionally, we are discussing the notability of a performance of a song, not who has performed it! (see: WP:NOTINHERITED). As I said above, I have no objection to suitably referenced items being re-added. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 11:14, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for providing links to these guidelines which will be helpful to anyone who chooses to participate in this discussion. I note that in WP:NSONGS it is stated that one of the factors which suggests that a song be notable is that It "Has been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands, or groups." This article has accumulated a very long list of covers by various artists, many of them undeniably notable and many of them giving references to recording catalog numbers or links to wiki articles about the album. This standard of referencing appears to be at least comparable with that used for other songs e.g. Cry Me a River or Bye Bye Blackbird. For Fly Me To The Moon (FMTTM) it is appropriate to reduce the number of covering artists mentioned but this should be done only after some criteria have been agreed. The section "Appearance in film, television and other media" should be reduced to information which is appropriately referenced and which is non trivial. Panthus (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
- I suggest then, that we agree to revert your last edit and you can re-add those that meet the criteria. This seems a fair way to proceed, especially noting that above that there were already comments about too many cover versions added. If anybody wants a list of covers AMG is the place to go, not an encyclopedia. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
I think it important to note that the song has been widely covered and as you say AMG is one source of information. Second Hand songs is another useful resource. Do you think that these sources should be referenced in the article? I think that the article should list no more than 20 notable artist's covers and these should be selected to be broadly representative. Discussion of use in popular culture (TV, film, computer games etc) should made only where usage is significant (notable?) and well referenced. If you revert I will make selective additions and deletions in line with the criteria that have been discussed above.Panthus (talk) 00:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- I have reverted as per your agreement. Please feel free to re-add such recordings that are notable. You might also like to know the preferred method is as text, not as a list. Happy editing. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:02, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
I have prepared a complete revision of this article in my sandbox and intend to substitute it for the current article in a day or two. If you can find my sandbox please feel free to review and comment. The current Wikipedia article is mainly lists of covers and instances where the song has been used in popular culture. The recent pruning, while well intentioned, is unlikely to have long lasting effect and some regrowth has already occurred. My intent has been to improve the article by including more information about the song and by citing all sources of information. While examples of covers and usage are included I have tried to avoid lists.Panthus (talk) 13:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Absolutely great work. Sorry I have not responded earlier, a wikibreak and real life intervened. Thanks for your great work. Happy editing. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:36, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- Great! update, Panthus! I'll see what Reflinks can do with some of the cites. Best, Sam Sailor Sing 21:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)