Talk:Let's Dance (David Bowie album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLet's Dance (David Bowie album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starLet's Dance (David Bowie album) is part of the David Bowie studio albums series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 10, 2021Good article nomineeListed
August 8, 2022Good topic candidatePromoted
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 14, 2023, and April 14, 2024.
Current status: Good article

Did Nile Rodgers co-write the song Let's Dance?[edit]

The article gives Rodgers a co-writing credit for the album's title track. I can find no other sources that support this and my own copies of the album and single show Bowie as sole author. This article also contradicts the article for the song itself. Please can a source be cited to support this claim or else can the article be corrected? Thanks. Note: I have removed the writing credit for now; if the credit can be supported then feel free to put it back in! 194.168.186.198 (talk) 09:03, 26 August 2015 (UTC) Zacabi contribs) 14:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Release Date[edit]

Article lists an uncited April release date. But--once again--a check of contemporaneous sources[1] shows that the album was already on the U.S. charts for the week *ending* March 26, 1983. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alainsane (talk • contribs) 00:23, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://books.google.com/books?id=oSQEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PT23&dq=%22David%20Bowie%22%20%22Let's%20Dance%22&pg=PT23#v=onepage&q&f=false

GOCE copyedit request[edit]

Hey Zmbro, some questions like before:

  • Quote box in §Recording: Not really a copyedit issue, but the documentation for {{quote box}} strongly advises using the template in articles. The Manual of Style suggests using {{blockquote}} instead. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmmm I never actually knew about that. I've been using that template on quite a few articles now. – zmbro (talk) 22:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. GA or FA reviewers may have an issue with it, but that's beyond me. This is probably the first or second article I've seen that uses it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • [...] he failed to hire them initially due to the two's past drug use [...] Bowie wanted to hire them but couldn't or refused to hire them because of their drug use? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to Pegg, this info came from a quote from Rodgers' memoir: "They'd become less punctual during the last few Chic records. Tony and Nard were so unreliable from drugging, and I was afraid they'd be late for a recording session where David was watching every penny like a hawk." Based on this, Rodgers was the one who wanted to hire them but was wary to due their past drug use. – zmbro (talk) 22:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. Whoops, I glossed over Rodger being the subject. I've changed the wording a bit but it should be clear that while Rodgers didn't want to hire them at first, he did so in the end. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Due to their arrival time, Thompson and Edwards' contributions were limiting, appearing on only three tracks and one track, "Without You", respectively. I suggest removing the mention of "Without You" here as it's already being talked about in the next sentence. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Valid point. Removed. – zmbro (talk) 22:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bowie however felt Vaughan was different, telling him "he's got a whole other thing going on." Double checking, the quoted material is a full sentence? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just checked and yes it was. Added a comma to specify. – zmbro (talk) 22:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The opening track, "Modern Love", is an uptempo pop song featuring a call-and-response structure, which was inspired by Little Richard [...] Links and references removed. Did Little Richard inspire the song, or just the call-and-response structure? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per O'Leary just the call-and-response structure. – zmbro (talk) 22:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • [...] his dismissal was attributed to his alcohol and drug use, his request that his band Double Trouble be the supporting act being denied by Bowie, and Vaughan was supposedly "furious" that Bowie mimed to his guitar solo in the "Let's Dance" music video. Already edited. I'm planning to edit the last point so that it fits the same as the first two. Did Vaughn ever make it public that he hated Bowie miming his guitar solo? I think it'd be better if there was something concrete that is attributed to his dismissal rather than being supposedly "furious". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to Pegg, Vaughan told Double Trouble's bassist that he was "furious" over the music video thing but none of Bowie's biographers seem to specify whether or not Vaughan went public with the info. I also don't own any of Vaughan's biographies so I can't verify if he actually did. There was apparently lots of things that went down. Buckley and Pegg discuss Vaughan's drug use, payment disputes, and the "Let's Dance" video as being reasons for Vaughan's firing. Bowie and his entourage have appear to tell different stories compared to Vaughan so I've tried to interpret what they have said the best I can. – zmbro (talk) 22:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. It could be worth mentioning that there are conflicting accounts, but that's more of a GAC/FAC thing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • [...] which documented two shows performed on 11 and 12 September 1983 in Vancouver. Only mentioned once, but I think this is supposed to be Vancouver, Canada? Wikilink might be preferred. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. Wikilinked. The Canadian city is definitely more popular than its American counterpart, but you never know. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • One reviewer called it "Bowie at his best". Not a copyedit issue, but it might be better to name the reviewer like the others (David Fricke?). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done. Believe it was written that way before I started expanding initially. – zmbro (talk) 22:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closer to December, Visconti called [Bowie's personal assistant] Coco, who said: Editorial marks in original. They're outside of any quoted material here; was it added by accident? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please forgive me but what do you mean by editorial marks exactly? :\ – zmbro (talk) 22:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm referring to the square brackets around Bowie's personal assistant]. Normally they'd go in quotes when quoted material is changed (usually for tense reasons) or additional text is added into the quote that wasn't there (usually for clarification). The reason why I'm asking is because they've been placed outside of quotation marks, so you could just do Visconti called Bowie's personal assistant, Coco, who said [...] without the square brackets. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ohhh I see what you mean now. Fixed! – zmbro (talk) 01:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to your answers. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tenryuu Thanks for the ce! Replies are above. :-) – zmbro (talk) 22:27, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Zmbro: Alright, everything looks good, and I've replied to the last remaining question. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tenryuu Done. Thanks again! – zmbro (talk) 01:08, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Zmbro: If there's nothing else, I'll consider the request complete. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:07, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Let's Dance (David Bowie album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 05:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, this is broadly solid work. The thing that pops out to me on my first reading is the discussion of "Criminal World" under #Side two -- I have some content quibbles with the description of O'Leary's take here. I recall him having quite strong words on the song and how it reflected on Bowie's changing attitude towards [bi]sexuality in the 80s, particularly regarding the lyrical changes from the Metro original, and the summary of his take here doesn't touch on those. While there's the issue of due weight for a single reviewer's option on a minor song, of course, I think there's a balance issue with presenting him as giving a much more positive opinion than I recall -- and it's not like this is an overlong section. It could do with a broader discussion of how that cover tied into Bowie's 80s attitudes. Vaticidalprophet 05:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vaticidalprophet Sorry it's taken me a couple of days to get to this. O'Leary does have some strong opinions on "Criminal World". Just for clarification, would like appreciate some more context regarding Bowie's famous "I'm gay" interview, and the build up to '83? I can do that but if you could give a little more clarification I'd appreciate it. Thanks! – zmbro (talk) 18:14, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries about response-timing, I can be spotty myself :) I think some additional context about those things would be important, because they were a pretty significant part of the album's reception in general, and one that gets missed in a lot of more mainstream retrospectives. Vaticidalprophet 04:35, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Vaticidalprophet Sorry it's taken me so long to get to this. I guess I'm a little stuck/confused on what you're looking for exactly. Do you want it to tie back to his famous "I'm gay" interview from '72 and acknowledge he didn't mean that in '83? Or do you have access to Ashes to Ashes to where you can put the info in yourself? This has honestly just thrown me in a loop here. – zmbro (talk) 16:15, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New reviewer needed per discussion here. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:20, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vaticidalprophet, Usernameunique, buidhe, Kyle Peake & Zmbro, I'm going to take this one over. Tkbrett (✉) 13:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Background[edit]

  • The murder of John Lennon in December 1980 affected Bowie deeply: might be helpful to include more context by mentioning they were previous collaborators and friends (however much there was a friendship, I'm not particularly read up on Bowie and John's relationship). As it's written, it just makes it sound like Bowie was only a fan.
  • Added a note to help clarify.
  • "... where he became a recluse[2][5] and continued working." Any reason the citations aren't at the end of the sentence?
  • I have no idea; moved

Development[edit]

  • ... were considered "dance classics" by Pegg.: I understand that the sentence means that, according to Pegg, listeners considered "We Are Family" and "Upside Down" "dance classics", but as it is currently worded, you could also read it as saying that only Pegg considers the songs to be dance classics.
  • Tkbrett I see what you mean. My intention was to make sure it was properly attributed. How would you say it? – zmbro (talk) 20:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "were considered" is passive as well, which should probably be "contemporary listeners considered", since they are the ones who hold the opinion Pegg is discussing, rather than Pegg himself. How about: According to Pegg, contemporary listeners considered Rodgers' writing and production work, including Sister Sledge's "We Are Family" (1979) and Diana Ross's "Upside Down" (1980), to be "dance classics".
  • Yep that works. Changed. – zmbro (talk) 12:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recording[edit]

  • Be sure to introduce Albert King.
  • Also, introduce Strange Fascination.
  • Both done.
  • Be careful not to editorialize with "Nevertheless, Bowie and Rodgers offered ..." (MOS:EDITORIAL).
  • Reworded
  • Sorry, I should have been clearer, I meant the "Nevertheless", which can be dropped to simply Bowie and Rodgers offered ... or Bowie and Rodgers praised ...
  • Fixed.

Songs[edit]

  • I made a few edits here, so make sure to check them over.
  • Looks good, thanks.

Tour[edit]

  • ... so stakes were high.: seems a little unencyclopedic in tone to me. Try rewording.
  • Removed entirely.
  • ... he was fired ...: watch for passive voicing. Who fired him? Bowie?
  • Changed to 'let go'. It's a very complicated story (I recall Buckley having like three pages devoted to this alone). I tried to summarize it as best I could.
  • Okay. That's still passive as written though – to make it active it would be "_____ fired Vaughan ..." or "______ let Vaughan go ...", with the blank filled in with Bowie or whoever it was that was responsible for firing him. If it's unclear who exactly did the firing then we can leave the wording as is.
  • Was able to confirm it was Bowie so added.
  • ... the most elaborate stage set yet.: compared with what? The shows of other artists or just Bowie's shows?
  • Just Bowie's; reworded.

Final verdict and comments[edit]

  • All images are PD or have good free use justifications.
  • Copyvio gives a score of 41.9% entirely due to quotations, so no copyright concerns here.
  • As always, great stuff. Sections I don't mention above are good as is, so once the above is addressed we are good to go. I made several edits as I made my way through, so make sure to check and let me know if you have any concerns.
  • zmbro, sorry it took me so long to get to this one – work has been hectic. It's wild that Bowie didn't play anything on this album; I never knew. Also, I didn't know it was his most sold album, as it is definitely not my number one listen. That was always Ziggy Stardust, though Scary Monsters has loomed large in my recent listening, due in no small part to your work on that GA. Tkbrett (✉) 19:42, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Tkbrett, All good man thanks for the review! I agree I was also surprised he played nothing (Tonight included). Imo, you could argue Never Let Me Down is more of a Bowie album than these two (because he actually played on that one). Thanks for the compliment on Scary Monsters. Believe it or not SM is actually not one of my favs (I know, I know). Side one is one of the best song-runs in his entire career, but side two just does nothing for me (and I've heard it many times at this point). – zmbro (talk) 20:16, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Tkbrett All done. Thanks again. – zmbro (talk) 12:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    zmbro Great stuff, another GA! Tkbrett (✉) 12:57, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recording date confirmation[edit]

Hey 87Fan might you have any magazines or other sources from the time period laying around that could possibly confirm when this album was actually recorded? I know it's either December 82 or January 83 and in my quest for expanding the title track page, the info O'Leary cites basically counters this page. If you might have anything that could give more insight I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks! – zmbro (talk) (cont) 21:53, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zmbro let me see what I have. Might take a few days, but I have plenty of old articles and magazines, maybe something can shed some light on that! 87Fan (talk) 21:31, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
87Fan Thanks for the help. I also just ordered Kevin Cann's Chronology book published in 1984 so fingers crossed that helps. If not back to Amazon... – zmbro (talk) (cont) 15:42, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Zmbro so I can't find a lot of definitive info in the old magazines. RS was useless. The May 1983 issue of Musician has Bowie saying that he met Nile Rogers "a few months ago in a club in New York, just after I'd come back from doing the Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence movie". That's as close as I got to a timeframe. But there's no production date on Wikipedia. IMDB claims it was around August 1982 but it's unsourced. There's the quote that recording for Let's Dance took 3 weeks - but I think that either December 1982 or January 1983 are reasonable. I'll keep digging, but that's all I've found so far. 87Fan (talk) 02:44, 29 December 2022 (UTC) EDIT: RS had one bit of timing: Bowie states that in February (1983), he met with David Mallet in Switzerland to storyboard the videos for "Let's Dance" and "China Girl".[reply]
More info: The book In other words (edited by Kerry Juby) has this bit: "By the end of the year (1982), Bowie had begun recording a new album in New York and it wasn't long before he was to sign a five year contract with EMI America, and release the Let's Dance album." Jerry Hopkins' biography Bowie says that on January 27 1983, he turned over the master tapes for LD to EMI after signing & announcing the new contract. So it's evident that recording started in December 1982, but hadn't finished it until January, in time to sign the contract and hand over the master tapes at the end of that month. 87Fan (talk) 03:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey 87Fan. Thanks for the info. Kevin Cann's Chronology book just arrived today and he says recording began in "early December 1982", which fits Buckley's description so I think we're gonna go with that. I'd be interested to hear where O'Leary got his info, as even on Pushing ahead of the dame he lists December 1982 but then in Ashes to Ashes all of a sudden it's January '83. So weird. But given we now have multiple things that say Dec '82 we are just gonna go with that. Thanks again for the help! – zmbro (talk) (cont) 03:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the term 'Aborigine'[edit]

In the first paragraph under the heading "Release" there is multiple uses of the word 'Aborigine'. The use of the term 'Aborigine' is offensive. Consider "Australian Aboriginal" as a suitable replacement, or re-write references accordingly to better account for Australia's First Nations communities. For more information, refer to the Australian Government Style Manual: https://www.stylemanual.gov.au/accessible-and-inclusive-content/inclusive-language/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-peoples OR this Amnesty International article: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2015/08/why-saying-aborigine-isnt-ok-8-facts-about-indigenous-people-in-australia/#:~:text='Aborigine'%20is%20generally%20perceived%20as,or%20'Torres%20Strait%20Islander' 2001:8003:1C38:1D00:4D42:6827:1104:9968 (talk) 11:29, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adjusted. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 13:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Let%27s_Dance_(David_Bowie_album)&oldid=1218970834"