Talk:867-5309/Jenny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< Talk:867-5309
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] Archived AfD debate

867-5309/Jenny was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP

  • DELETE! Some would argue that the song has enough cultural signifigance for its own page but I disagree strongly. It needs to just be simmered down into the Tommy Tutone page and the "phenomenon" of people calling the number when the song came out deserves a one or two sentence mention at best. If we entered a seperate page for every song which has had a meaningless cultural impact...well it would just be clutterful. I suspect that's not a word, but I'm using it anyhow. Pacian 22:55, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Significant cultural impact; numerous pop culture references. Over 45,000 Google hits for "867-5309" [1]. I'm not saying we need individual articles about every song with "cultural impact", but this one's particularly important. There are many articles in Category:Songs that should be merged into their artists' articles; "867-5309/Jenny" isn't one of them. • Benc • 00:26, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. I can't even believe that someone was so conceited to BRAG about their creation of this stupid article. [2] The Crow 00:38, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. —tregoweth 01:04, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete or merge into Tommy Tutone. I think User:Pacian should be an admin. I totally agree with User:Pacian It's only a expanded a few sentences longer since 6 months ago and not likely to expand in the future. To even brag about creating something like that is like bragging about having a one inch erect penis, which probably the creator does. Bonsai K 02:08, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. klkjlk,.,.

Ironically, this article is longer than the Tommy Tutone article itself... -Sean Curtin 03:12, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

  • Delete, move info to article on singer. Wyllium 03:14, 2004 Oct 9 (UTC)
  • Keep. Cookiecaper 03:31, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, significant cultural phenomenon, or at least redirect. And insulting people really doesn't help your case. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 04:08, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: In addition to the creator's attempt to boost his ego by bragging about creating this entry, the song is clearly not-notable. If was removed from the list:List of songs by name: 0 - 9 [3] with the summary: Remove non-notable album tracks from non-notable albums. Also, nobody has rushed back to add it in. I doubt anybody would even care to add it back in since it's clearly NON-NOTABLE. I will definitely inform Gareth about this VFD and your evil intentions of keeping this non-notable song. The Crow 05:14, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Comment: I've informed Gareth of your conspiracy to keep this trash. Judging from your comments, you're all Tommy Tutone fans who are trying to promote his songs. This article deserves to be deleted with prejudice. The Crow 05:39, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge and delete. -- WOT 05:37, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. Notable song, even if I do dislike it. --Viriditas 06:39, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - Notable song. DCEdwards1966 07:59, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • Abstain -- I think this is a borderline case. It was a huge hit, and was extremely memorable, but there's not a lot of interesting things you can say about it, short of reciting the lyrics. Since the singer was basically a one hit wonder, I'd have no problem with a merge and redirect.-- GWO
  • Keep. I agree that there's not much room for expansion, but I have nothing against short articles where appropriate. JamesMLane 12:25, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. I agree with JamesMLane's reasoning. Posiduck 15:23, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. A quite notable song, and IIRC the resulting lawsuits from some of the thousands of people who actually had that number is why TV and movies are required to use phony numbers like 555-5555, so it probably can be expanded a little. [[User:Livajo|力伟|т]] 16:36, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect Keep; merge and redirect Tommy Tutone to this song. There's no point in having two really short articles instead of one short article. —Rory ☺ 16:42, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep: Unfortunately, I think this is over the line to "pop ephemera that gets reference." I.e. it isn't that it was a fad, but that it was a fad that stands out from others by being continually referred to. Thus, knowing this helps people understand contemporary, as well as recent, cultural references. Tommy Tutone is less important than the song, when it comes down to it, and we'd have done better with a redirect from him to it, except that we have articles on just about any band. Geogre 18:44, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Merge somewhere else, and redirect. This article is poorly titled and probably should be part of the author's page. --Improv 19:14, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Delete. Great song, but it's a poor title for an article, and I don't believe its story, though odd, is notable; it's more one of those silly quirks of life that occasionally go into Cingular commercials. Eight-six-seven-five-three-oh-nah-ee-ah-ine. Ian Pugh 20:30, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
    • Is it not the correct title for the song? How is it a poorly-titled article? —Rory ☺ 20:32, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
      • I don't think it's poorly titled on the grounds that someone titled it; you're right that it is the correct title for the song. But, for the purposes of an encyclopedia, it's awkward. If I was for such an article's inclusion, I'd say that "867-5309" would be suitable - but even then, it raises some problems. In any case, the story belongs with Tommy Tutone - which should be expanded... Ian Pugh 20:40, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
        • Hmm, it seems redirects have already been made. So my "poorly-titled" comment is withdrawn, but my vote still stands. Ian Pugh 20:53, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • A pretty blaring Keep, don't redirect it to Tommy Tutone because the song is much more famous than the artist. —siroχo 20:35, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
    • Concur. -- Jmabel 21:32, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
    • Pehaps Tutone should be a redirect to this, then, as he's not famous for anything else. GWO 23:04, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, significant cultural reference and notable by itself, regardless of the artist. --Goobergunch 22:57, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep and delete Tommy Tutone.
  • Keep. Ambi 04:27, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Doesn't make any sense to remove it. Kiand 18:15, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep - notable song. A one-hit wonder's one hit. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:57, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Songs should be on their own pages for easy linking. If not before this song will need it when someone gets a hit with a cover version of it. bbx 22:22, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep It has real content, no reason to delete it. -- McGravin 00:05, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. At worst, the song certainly deserves more than a couple of lines explaining the phenomena of calling the number. It was reasonably significant. As Siroxo pointed out, the song is actually more notable than the performer. I'm not sure how often a seven digit string has more recognition than the one who sings it, but it's certainly a worthy subject. Cool Hand Luke 06:41, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
To further add my insight to this, I think the problem here arises in deciding what makes a song "important" enough to have it's own encylopedic entry away from the artist. And I must again stress that I do not think the song "867-5309" qualifies. The *ONLY* "cultural impact" it had was that it was A: a popular song, and B: it incited people to dial the number. It did not change anybody's lives or make a major societal statement. ANYONE could argue that any song that has achieved enough success to even make a random group of people aware of it could be "culturally significant" enough to be included, if that's all it takes. Why don't we put in a seperate page for "Get Naked" by "Methods of Mayhem" simply because it references the Tommy Lee/Pamela Anderson sex tapes? I can only assume that everyone voting "keep" are letting their sentimentality get in the way of logic and reason. Perhaps if the song had been so popular that it had been covered by 30+ other significant artists such as "Unchained Melody," that would speak volumes. But it isn't. It simply IS NOT. It's just a popular song that started a nutty phone-number-dialing fad. Pacian 04:48, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I agree with Pacian. Also, the song is ruining the reputation of Jenny. Nowhere in the song says the number is from a bathroom wall. The article can state that the song implies it, but the article states it as a fact. The article is filled with too much misinformation. It is beyond repair and cleanup. Just delete it. If someone really wants to write about the song, then they can start with a blank page The Crow 04:56, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Also, I've seen a "quirky" Cingular ad that match up men's choice of underwear with different cellphone covers. I doubt the community would want separate ENCYCLOPEDIA articles on "boxer shorts", "briefs", and "none". Please delete this silly entry already. The Crow 05:01, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable song which became a minor pop-culture phenomenon. The article sucks as it stands, but it could easily be whipped into shape, even just by the editors here. Gamaliel 06:25, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep It's important enough song to deserve it's own article.--[[User:Plato|Comrade Nick @)---^--]] 10:09, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep, merge and redirect the Tommy Tutone article. The song's much more notable than he is. Varitek 15:22, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. I know the song, but had only vaguely heard of the original artist, so certainly don't merge into Tommy Tutone. A merge the other direction might be OK but I'm neutral on that. Isomorphic 18:16, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • keep Cabalamat 21:37, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Keep. Some girl called me at 45 minutes past midnight this morning (and it wasn't a complete stranger because she called my cell and knew my name), asking to have sex with me, and when I said it was late and I would talk to her tommorrow, she gave me 314-867-5309 (314 is a local area code in my city) as her cell phone number to call back. That number sounded familiar to me, so I googled it and the seventh hit out of 229,000 was this article. For comparison, I googled "breeder reactor" in quotes and got 304,000 hits, and nuclear breeder reactors are an important source of power for hundreds of thousands of people (more people than the number of hits). Oh, and the wikipedia article on breeder reactors was the first hit. And it was, admittedly, shorter than this ariticle.

End archived discussion -- Graham ☺ | Talk 01:19, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

[edit] 9035-768

How often do people reverse Jenny's phone number? Did they ever discontinue use of the reversed version of Jenny's phone number in all area codes? I becha there are dimwits that might reverse a phone number they see or hear. If the reversed version Jenny's phone number was discontinued, mention it in the article. --SuperDude 03:50, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

- You could possibly reach a satanic Jenny. --User:Dotto 00:37 14 Oct 2005 UTC

[edit] Additional Sightings

The number was also listed in, of all games, MDK2, where it was a sector on Earth containing Edmonton which was being attacked by a crawler. Does this merit inclusion?

It's in Splinter Cell, too!Is is Is 11:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MMORPG Everquest trivia

I saw the section it was in, but I didn't think that MMORPG Everquest counted as "popular culture." Obscure culture is more like it. Also, just because it's true doesn't make it notable.

This is the trivia in question:

  • In the MMORPG Everquest, players can obtain an item named "Jenniy's Two-tone Cuirass" from the zone boss Grieg Veneficus. This item is a breastplate, and grants the wearer 8 strength, 6 dexterity, 7 stamina, 5 charisma, 30 wisdom, and 9 intelligence, among other benefits.

I think it ought to be taken out. —Cleared as filed. 03:23, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Glad to see this piece of information survived, as a reformed 4 year EQ player it made the article for me. I never knew / noticed that. Little things like that are what make wiki wonderful. 24.69.132.107 03:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Opinion?

At the time of this post, the article says: "Although Tommy Tutone is primarily remembered for this song and commonly considered a "one-hit wonder", they actually had a Billboard Top 40 hit in 1980—two years before "Jenny" with "Angel Say No", which peaked at #38. "Angel Say No", however, is now almost completely forgotten by the general public."

I suppose this doesn't really violate NPOV, but it still seems like an opinion to me. -Todemo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.254.111.250 (talk • contribs) 08:26, August 1, 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reason?

One explanation I've read, that makes the most sense to me, is that it's simply the diagonals on a touch-tone phone. 86-753-09 form three diagonal lines Nik42 04:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other Theories about this number?

I believe that there is some more infomation about this number out there, especially about claims to its origin. Anybody have some suggestions? R.J. Herie 21:24, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 8675309 is prime

Is it of any interest that the number 8675309 is prime? 67.166.242.232 17:04, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

That's been known for a long time. R.J. Herie 18:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] number removed

A listing of a telephone number is removed here [4]. That anon has been on IRC #stewards about it. That person says that "he" is not "Jamie" . And he finds it not funny that people keep telephoning him. On a normaly day 50 a 100 a daybut now it was up to 1500 calls a day he says. That can not be funny. I would like to request to keep that number of the article. --Walter Do you have news? Report it to Wikizine 00:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I am this user, I receieved a total of 1858 confirmed wikipedia related phone calls. I've asked that this number please not be reposted. --Somitho 17:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../8/6/7/Talk%7E867-5309_Jenny_d2c8.html"