Jump to content

Talk:Hokey Pokey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 121.222.41.187 (talk) at 12:00, 21 November 2015 (Looby Loo: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconDance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
WikiProject Dance To-do list:
WikiProject iconSongs C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Lyrics

1) It goes : "You put your left leg in, You pull your left leg out... " The lyrics on this page use 'put' for both instances.

2)The line is "You do the Hokey Pokey and you turn yourself around..." The lyrics in this page do not mention the 'yourself'.

Does anyone agree or disagree with me? This is how I remember it. I am 24 and grew up in Southern California in the 1980s. --Jon in California 7 September 2007


- to add to that, in UK the chorus goes "Oh hokey cokey cokey x3" the h usually isn't pronounced either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.149.237 (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Structure

Should the section British Isles be put ahead of the section on the US, as it earlier, and the point of origination? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.122.185 (talk) 13:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

speculations

Please see the material at Talk:Larry LaPrise --Roland2 09:29, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've seen this material circulating in the internet earlier. Interesting speculations that look pretty credible, but not without contradictions and unanswered questions. IMO too early to put the stuff into encyclopedia. Mikkalai 18:17, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hokey Pokey

Your article about Hokey Pokey is about the song and dance. I have seen (I can't remember where)a dictionary with Hokey Pokey explained as 'a street ice cream vendor' simular to the 'Good Humor Man'. When I was little (in the mid 30s) the man who can in a horse drawn cart with ice cream for sale was called "Mr. Hokey Pokey".

Lukle Keeler lukekeeler@earthlink.net

Did you grow up in New Zealand? That's the only place I can find where the term was used. (I added that information to the article.) Rick Boatright 02:10, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

+++ The Hokey Cokey +++

With all the sadness and trauma going on in the world at the moment, it is worth reflecting on the death of a very important person, which almost went unnoticed last week. Larry LaPrise, the man that wrote "The Hokey Cokey" died peacefully at the age of 93. The most traumatic part for his family was getting him into the coffin. They put his left leg in. And then the trouble started…


Cokey or Pokey?

I'm suprsied "the hokey cokey" redirects to "the hokey pokey", it should be the other way round. "The Hokey Cokey" is the origanal and the article should be named accordingly starting with it's beginnings then going on to explain the US version. 74.65.39.59 00:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's just what I was thinking Jooler 22:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I'm a Brit. This is the Hokey Cokey! Also it seems that the first words of the Latin Catholic Mass, ""Hoc est enim corpus meum" is quite persuasive. To a child, the ritual might seem like a dance. In which case, "cokey" (from "corpus") might be more likely to predate "pokey". Maybe. --Timtak 01:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A quick look at the back issues of The Times shows a reference (The Times, Saturday, May 18, 1946; pg. 4) to Servicemen and Women doing the "hokey cokey" at a show attended by Queen Mary et al. I'm pretty sure I've probably seen it in films (probably George Formby) from earlier. Jooler 22:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, someone change it then! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.167.235.136 (talk) 03:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Need more definite information - but see http://www.icons.org.uk/nom/nominations/the-hokey-cokey Jooler 03:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And - http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:hm821vy5zzua~T1 Jooler 04:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion here http://our-community.org.uk/index.php?showtopic=2388&st=192 indicates that it was first mentioned in the Dancing Times in 1943 Jooler 04:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reference to the Dancing Times and also Jimmy Kennedy, incl scan of the sheet music, tantalisingly undated... Here. I've sent the poster of that scan an email, see if he can help out. Hakluyt bean 19:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Scan added :) Hakluyt bean 02:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is the Hokey Pokey, the Brits are crazy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.244.236.20 (talk) 22:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the article title should be "Hokey Pokey" as that is what it is called in the vast majority of the world, whereas the only place where it is called "Hokey Cokey" seems to be England. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.6.113 (talk) 05:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

150++ times "see also"

Why does this article contain more than 150 identical "See also" sections? Yesterday I removed all of them but one, because I thought this to be an accident of the author while using "strg-v" (see the 'v' after the last "See also" section). However, Mer-C removed my changes. Now I am quite curious what this is all about. -- 134.106.41.20 07:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC) dooya[reply]

Looks like vandalism to me, but could be an error in some code or something. I'll contact Mer-C if you haven't. Skittle 12:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Anon who added it was vandalising. Mer-C just made a mistake. Skittle 14:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New headings

Put U.S. and Brit origins under separate headings. Seems clearer imo, but feel free to disagree. Arising from that, could one say hokey pokey is just a commercial version of a traditional song - hokey cokey. That way it's maybe not a U.S./Brit thing but a commercialism/traditional thing(?) Hakluyt bean 18:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hokey_Cokey#Copyright , was: "Who owns the rights for the hokey pokey?"

just wondering... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.161.198.49 Revision as of 09:08, 5 July 2007

I also want to know that. Specifically is there a separate copyright for the lyrics and a separate for the melody? In Greece there is a song, "Hokey Pokey" but it's using different lyrics (although very similar) and I don't know if they had to pay royalties to any artist in the U.S.A. For the moment it is mentioned in the article that it is not legal for "Hokey Cokey" to be copyrighted inside the United Kingdom. Maybe I could spend some time to sing it, and then add it to the article. Logictheo (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ice cream

"In the United States the term hokey pokey previously and separately was a generic term for street vendor's ice cream in the 19th and early 20th centuries."

This has been deleted with the tag 'not just in the U.S.'. That is indeed so, but the sentence was intended as a comment on the U.S. title of the song, ie the change from Hokey Cokey. Maybe editing to "In the United States (and elsewhere)...." would have covered the objection. Hakluyt bean 01:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The world isn't centred on the US as 'US (and elsewhere)' would suggest. I'm not even sure if "hokey pokey" actually applies to the US at all. I've seen references to it in British Victorian literature. As an aside I believe this article should properly be moved to Hokey Cokey. Jooler 01:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think we're at cross-purposes except for your last line which I agree with completely. Hakluyt bean 11:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:The Cokey Cokey (Jimmy Kennedy).jpg

Image:The Cokey Cokey (Jimmy Kennedy).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 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 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 20:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded that image back in January. I assume the resolution may be too high for fair use(?), otherwise it obviously illustrates the assertion in the article that there is a work of that name, the relevance of which is clear from the context (article subject is a song of disputed provenance). However I've no objection to it being removed. Hakluyt bean 11:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The image doesn't need to be removed. You just need to fill in the fair-use rationale. Jooler 12:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do you 'do the hokey cokey'?

When the song says you 'do the hokey cokey and the turn around', what do you actually do? --86.150.203.35 (talk) 12:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Bailey

Why is the German translation described as 'incorrect'? It looks bang on to me. Jess Cully (talk) 18:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Northall, G.F. English Folk-Rhymes: A Collection of Traditional Verses Relating to Places and Persons, Customs, Superstitions, etc.. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd (1892). Chapter 11, "Games—Ring, Various." p. 301:
Can you dance looby, looby, (repeat twice)
All on a Friday night?
You put your right foot in;
An then you take it out,
And wag it, and wag it, and wag it,
Then turn and turn about.
At the third line they put their right feet within the ring, then they take their feet out, and turn around. Looby = old form of the word lubber, a clumsy fellow or dolt. Sheffield. R. 320.

ScotchHopper (talk) 20:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hokey Cokey joke

This hoax/joke has been doing the rounds on the internet since at least 2005 and perhaps should be mentioned:

THE GUY who wrote The Hokey-Cokey died last week. It was a terrible affair. When the mourners were gathered at the graveside, they discovered the coffin was too big. It became damaged as it was lowered in, a huge hole was ripped in the side and the cadaver was half hanging out. Then the problems really began. First, they put his left leg in...

--Amaccormack (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sectarianism

Is there anything to the claims that the song/dance is an attack on Catholic Mass, as discussed in this article http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/12/22/singing-the-hokey-cokey-could-land-football-fans-in-sectarian-bother-86908-20989183/ ? 81.137.227.129 (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand

Hokey tokey is quite outdated. It is known as hokey pokey by pretty much everyone in NZ these days. If anyone could do some research into when and why it changed, that'd be great.--Pokelova (talk) 05:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article, sadly, cites both versions, tokey in the intro, pokey in the New Zealand sub-section. I wouldn't worry too much; most of the article is fiction, I reckon. Heenan73 (talk) 10:17, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use of "head" instead of "whole self"

I know a variation of the last verse which goes: You put your head in You put your head out You put your head in and you shake it all about You do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself about That's what it's all about

However, the article does not mention that. I would be happy if somebody told me if the versions which use "head" rather than "whole self" are incorrect or not. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speculations on Revolutionary War

I've reverted the brief discussion by talk of the possibility of the song's origin in the United States Revolutionary War, which was recently added to the article. It's an interesting theory, but we need a source for the connection (not just references defining the legal terms) if it belongs in the main article. It could also benefit from a more careful eye towards placement and copy. 23.252.50.60 (talk) 02:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hokey cokey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looby Loo

Looby Loo redirects here but the Looby Loo I was searching for was in Andy Pandy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Pandy Is it a mistake to redirect here? 121.222.41.187 (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]