Talk:Sweet Jane (Mott the Hoople version)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

removed merge proposal - see Sweet Jane for details.--Fantailfan 00:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:MUSIC/SONG says There is consensus that the vast majority of songs do not deserve an article specifically devoted to them. Most songs should redirect to another relevant article, such as on the album the song was originally released on, or the artist in question. Songs should only have an individual article if there is enough verifiable material to warrant a detailed article. If a song has a body of published criticism, the song should probably have an article on Wikipedia. Even if a song is otherwise notable, there is no reason to start an article which can only say the name of the song and who performed it. With due respect to both VU and MTH I can't see how a song can warrant two entries. There is nothing claimed in this article to make this specific version notable. --Richhoncho 01:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a general consensus that singles -apart from songs- are okay for articles. OR such as "Bowie had Mott do it to increase their American visibility as well as give him one of his own compositions" is unacceptable. I have not yet placed content for it (from AMG or another published source) hence the stubbing. --Fantailfan 13:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Then perhaps this single should be nominated as "non-notable" --Richhoncho 14:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I have updated the content to include AMG ref. On what basis would this be non-notable, please? --Fantailfan 19:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:MUSIC/SONG also says "The fact that a song is notable enough to deserve an article does not mean that each individual recording of a song deserves an article. Articles on different recordings should be merged into an article on the song unless that article becomes overly long or inordinately unbalanced." Every version of every song belongs on a specialist site ie AMG, not an encyclopaedia. After all, the song was written by Lou Reed, a member of the VU, everything else follows. --Richhoncho 20:07, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The single is notable on its own terms. In 1972, as a Mott the Hoople single, it is part of popular music history. David Bowie gave it to them to do, and placed it as the first song of All the Young Dudes, for a purpose--to revive Mott The Hoople. Mainman (Bowie's management company) was also working on Lou Reed's comeback at the time and the Bowie-Reed-Mott connection was extremely important for all three.

As a side point, the number of bands that cite Mott The Hoople in their desire to perform, record and make their place in the musical marketplace of the mid-seventies is quite large. Additionally, I fail to see that any single of a popular band of its time is non-notable, particularly given what I say above (which is, yes, OR). I placed the NOR reference to AMG to indicate that it is not just a stub for a band which I liked at the time, but to indicate its notability, and to avoid OR. How can one win at this kind of argumentation if OR is banned by policy but NOR reference to another website to justify notability is also banned?

Finally, I have seen other bands' songs given far more OR and POV without similar justification. It remains that MTH's version was the only version released in single format before 1988. Velvet Underground's studio and Lou Reed's live versions were played on the radio as the AOR format gained ground in the seventies and were never released as singles. The next single version, from Cowboy Junkies off of The Trinity Session is sixteen years after this one and while it has no page for its release, that is not because it is not notable, only that it has not been wikipedia'ed. --Fantailfan 20:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not disputing the relevant value of Lou Reed, VU, MTH or David Bowie (I'm a fan of all), As for other entries, not relevant. It's just this separation goes against everything in WP:MUSIC/SONG. Please read it. Would it be better to take this discussion to arbitration? --Richhoncho 23:16, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

References or links to WP:MUSIC/SONG should not describe it as "policy". If you wish to redirect (to All the Young Dudes, not Sweet Jane), well, it's your prerogative. Doing so is a matter of judgment, however, rather than perception, and hence not particularly valid reasoning to me. In addition, this is not a song page per se but a single page, for what that's worth. --Fantailfan 01:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

That seems an admirable suggestion, I'll leave the job to you, also might be worth checking out [1] for US details of MTH. --Richhoncho 12:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Useful Site - thanks! --Fantailfan 14:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Also well worth checking out ASCAP [2] Generally speaking Brit bands in the US will be with BMI (associated with PRS, who unfortunately don't list), but these are much more useful than AMG which anybody can submit to. Such is life. --Richhoncho 15:20, 2 July 2006 (UTC)