Talk:Moskau (Dschinghis Khan song)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Translation
I added a link to a translation I did of the song. I think this should be okay. -Ich (talk) 06:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] YTMND
I'm going to keep restoring the YTMND reference everytime it's removed. Myself, and I'm sure many other people, would have never heard about this song if it wasn't for YTMND. It was in the original article and I think it should stay. I don't think that having a single sentence about a popular internet humour site will 'destroy the sanctity of Wikipedia'.
- I would highly encourage you not to do so, seeing as there is a huge chance that that involves causing violations to WP:3RR. I would also like to argue that when references to internetgeeksites like YTMND begin to appear, Wikipedia won't be "destroyed because of declining sanctity" or anything like that, but serious damage will be taken by its credibility as a serious attempt to try and become the world's most comprehensive encyclopedia. -- SoothingR(pour) 18:09, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Honestly if Wikipedia wants to be credible it wouldn't have an article on a obscure song by a 70s-80s German disco group to begin with.--Virulent 78 19:15, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Dschinghis Khan was not nearly as obscure in Germany. YTMND only has one (rather obscure) link on the first page of a Google search of "dschinghis kahn moskau" (no quotation marks), so I would not include a reference to it, especially since it is copyright violation. YTMND does damage the credibility of Wikipedia, and they have frequently vandalized it for stupid purposes. --DJH47 21:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Just because a small group of immature people who frequent YTMND.com do stupid things, doesn’t make the site itself less relevant or noteworthy. You need to separate the site itself from the small segment of its fanbase who are responsible for vandalism and drop this asinine crusade to remove all traces of YTMND.com from Wikipedia. The fact of the matter is that part of Moskau’s resurgence in popularity is due to it being a popular fad on YTMND.com and is worth a mentioning in the article. The fact that a small segment of YTMND.com users are Wikipeida vandals have nothing to do with it.--Virulent 78 22:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Dschinghis Khan was not nearly as obscure in Germany. YTMND only has one (rather obscure) link on the first page of a Google search of "dschinghis kahn moskau" (no quotation marks), so I would not include a reference to it, especially since it is copyright violation. YTMND does damage the credibility of Wikipedia, and they have frequently vandalized it for stupid purposes. --DJH47 21:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- Honestly if Wikipedia wants to be credible it wouldn't have an article on a obscure song by a 70s-80s German disco group to begin with.--Virulent 78 19:15, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
- The point remains, Wikipedia's credibility suffers under the load of YTMND-references. They make the encyclopedia look immature and they are copyvios (and Wikipedia has firm policies towards that). So you're right, the segment of YTMND.com users that are also Wikipedia vandals have nothing to do with the matter at hand. -- SoothingR(pour) 09:23, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- One could argue that having internet fad listings in general makes Wikipedia look immature. My view is that either internet fad/meme material gets the same respect as other material on Wikipedia or it should not be included at all. I don’t see any copyright violation, due to fact that the actual YTMND.com page is not even linked to in the article. The only thing that is there is a single sentence stating that the Moskau song/video is a popular fad on YTMND.com which is true. (Whether the actual Moskau YTMND is a copyright violation is a whole different debate that I don’t wish to get into). Other people besides myself has taken to the task of restoring the YTMND.com reference after I had begun to initiate dialogue here, which shows that other people share my viewpoint. I am more than willing to lay off any further edits until this dispute is resolved.--Virulent 78 15:40, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Possible Compromise? Please read Talk:Dschinghis Khan. Hopefully this will be the end of this silly dispute.--Virulent 78 04:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] 1980 Olympics Theme Song
What I would like to know is who wrote that the song was the theme song for the 1980 Moscow Olympics? Where did they get that information? It doesn't make much sense because at that time that was not something likely to happen, seeing as the Soviet Union had such negative relation with FRG and the song could be viewed as anti-Soviet.
- I have the same question. From Wikipedia's own page about 1980 Moscow Olympics is a link to a page in Russian about the theme songs: http://80.ruz.net/pesni.htm. While I don't know Russian and can't understand that page, I doubt Moskau is in there. — Ming Hua 06:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- I can absolutely tell you that it was not the '80 Olympics theme song, and there was no way they would be invited to perform. When the song has first appeared, the Soviet propagand machine went full steam, labeling it "anti-soviet" and "a capitalist attack at the soviet lifestyle". The record spread throughout the country under the table. I was 12 at the time and clearly remeber, how we were whispering to each other (ridiculous, as I can see it now) specualtions as of to what the song lyrics is about. A few years later though it's been widely played at the dances, but of course no official record has been released. I don't believe it made it to the public TV until early 90's
[edit] English Version
There is no mention of the band's English version of the song (entitled "Moscow"), which has lyrics that differ from the direct translation of the German version. There is also no mention of the English version at Moscow. Which would be preferred?--Jeffro77 08:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Moskau.jpg
Image:Moskau.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 15:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
I sure hope someone preserves this. Just another reason why Wikipedia has degenerated into a really crappy site. God forbid information and *GASP* an image show up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.97.110.142 (talk) 10:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)