Talk:Personal Jesus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
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. |
[edit] Biggest selling 12" comment
the article states: "...the single was particularly successful commercially thanks to the fact that it was released six months prior to the album it would later appear on. Up to that point, it was best selling 12" single in Warner Brothers history. "
The "up to that point" comment is confussing to me as it seems to be a misquote from the allmusic article you quote.. I think you mean that it went on to become the biggest selling 12", not that it was and then, subseuqently, once the album came out, was no longer. There is a cause and effect in the statement that I don't think you mean. I also think it STILL is the best selling 12" in WB history.
The All Music quote is "the EP release of "Personal Jesus" became the biggest selling 12" single in Warner Bros.' history up to that point." which has a different meaning from what the wiki article attests. But I am unsure what the author of the article meant so I will leave it to him or her to edit as they see fit. --Jackbox1971 00:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
Similarities----------
There is quite a clear connection to T. Rex's 1971 song "Get It On". In the Cash version the piano line in the intro is very similar to that of T. Rex, and the chord structure is generally the same (although the song has a different overall structure) - the verse is almost entirey on an Em chord, deviating only to A for a couple of bars near the end of the verse. The chorus then also follows "Get It On", with the G, distinctive Am, before going back to E5. I do not own a copy of the Depeche Mode single, so this is mostly based on Johnny Cash's version of the song.
Anybody agree/disagree? Byrney86 18:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Marilyn Manson cover
Does there really need to be such a lengthy section regarding the Marilyn Mansion cover? This is suppose to be about the DM original. A mention is fine but such detail could be saved on the Marilyn Manson page. Just seems like a shameless plug for Manson. Just a thought!
- Agreed. Why is the Marilyn Manson section necessary? It's probably just me but as far as cover versions of this song go, I'm actually much more familiar with the Johnny Cash version. Either way, the Marilyn Manson cover is given way too much space. Just a mention of it among the other cover versions would be quite enough, or if the Marilyn Manson cover was notably succesful (i.e. clearly more so than the other cover versions), this should be clearly stated and backed up with info about its success. Shadowcrow (talk) 05:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PersonalJesusBack.jpg
Image:PersonalJesusBack.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 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 06:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:PJ.jpg
Image:PJ.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 01:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Naked Debbie Gibson on the single's cover?
An anonymous contributor 12.75.233.186 wrote, "This girl happens to be fellow popstar Debbie Gibson. (She was dating Andrew Fletcher at the time, and thought the photos would be a fun thing to do.)" I am sure this is vandalism and therefore have removed this part. Still, correct me if I'm wrong and please cite a source. Garik 11 14:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Promotion of Single
I am pretty sure I've read in a music magazine that the single was promoted in England with posters with "call your own personal jesus" (or something similar) written on them and a telephone number which once called would have the single playing at the other end of the line. I think this is something worth mentioning in this page but the only reference I managed to find online is in a Spanish blog. If someone knows more and has a better citation please add it. Gpap.gpap 14:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Inspired only by a specific book/movie?
The editor did bring a reliable source that proves Personal Jesus was inspired by the Presley's relationship. However, why should anyone deduce it is also inspired specifically by this book/movie and not by the other endless material based on the aforementioned relationship? Unless there is a source that backs the statement, I suggest removing it. Opinions, anyone?
- See also: Talk:Elvis and Me -Lwc4life 18:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
- To me, it looks just perfect now. A reliable, comprehensive and sourced statement without overloading. Garik 11 10:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Marilyn manson personal jesus.jpg
Image:Marilyn manson personal jesus.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 06:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Youtube link?
Why on earth is there a link to a Marylin Manson cover version on a page about a Depeche Mode song? I'm going to remove it...80.229.225.16 (talk) 18:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
