Talk:Today (The Smashing Pumpkins song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Today (The Smashing Pumpkins song) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Article milestones Date Process Result April 12, 2007 Good article nominee Listed April 21, 2007 Peer review Reviewed September 3, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

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. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale. Alternative music Portal This article is part of the Alternative music WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the Project's importance scale. This article is part of the Smashing Pumpkins WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of The Smashing Pumpkins. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to Smashing Pumpkins-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page. FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale

Contents 1 old discussion 2 GA review 3 Live versions? 4 Grunge 5 Fair use rationale for Image:TodayIntro.JPG 6 Fair use rationale for Image:Todaypromo.jpg 7 Irrelevant?

[edit] old discussion

The previous format of the chart positions was consistant with other articles on Wikipedia of the same type. If nobody justifies why it was changed, I am changing it back. -- LGagnon 03:36, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

Hi LGagnon, I hope I didn't offend. I changed it because 1) I don't see why it should be presented in typewriter font, and 2) I don't see why the song name should be repeated on every line. But it's not a big deal to me. --Dbenbenn 22:45, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't offended; I just wanted to keep the article consistant with the current style model. If you still think it would be better a different way, you can talk with the guys who run the music Wikiproject; they decide the standard for how the articles for albums and singles are done. But if you'd rather not, that's fine. -- LGagnon 00:12, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

I didn't find anything at Wikiproject Albums addressing chart positions. I'll bring up the issue there. By the way, Pieces of Me is an example of a single that does it differently. Though I agree the fixed-width format is most common. --Dbenbenn 00:39, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for taking up the task. The more concensus we get on such things, the sooner we improve Wikipedia's consistency. -- LGagnon 01:31, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

It seems like the table format has become the preferred one lately, and I was told during a FAC nomination for another article that I should change the format to the table. I do think the tables look nicer. Everyking 00:45, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't really have anything against the table format. My only concern is with the uniformity of the articles; after all, Wikipedia looks more professional when there is a consistent style to it. -- LGagnon 01:31, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

The non-tabled version is what we've been using, I guess out of tradition and because nobody wanted to do the work of making something pretty. I think DCEdwards has been the prime force in switching to the tabled version. Tuf-Kat 08:21, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

I feel that this song isn't necessarily ironic or sarcastic, although you could interpret it that way. I always found the lyric "Today is the greatest day of them all" sincere since the singer is uplifted knowing today he will commit suicide. So I changed the article a little so there isn't the claim the songs lyrics are sarcastic, but if you think my view is bogus let's talk about it. Rab V 08:49, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I think it's sarcastic... just with the happy little guitar in the begining completely contradicting what's expect from a song about suicide... I'd just change the first sentence back to saying it's ironically upbeat. Underwater 01:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but if you think that the singer might also be honetly happy thinking today he is going to end his life, or at least see this could be a valid interpretation I don't think we should lay down one way of understanding the song like it is absolute. Rab V 02:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

This article is well written, it has a good lead, and it's broad in its coverage. It also has reliable references and citations throughout the article, therefore I'm passing the article. Good job to those who worked on it! Mahanga^Talk 02:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the review! --Brandt Luke Zorn 03:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Live versions?

Hey, I'm a big fan of SP and like the articles on Wikipedia. Some of the singles articles discuss live versions and I think Today should also have this as it is perhaps their best known song. For example the early incarnations of the song stuck to the Siamese Dream sound, wherease during the Adore era it was acousticified if played at all. Finally, it's now taken on a short solo at the end as new live versions have shown.

Just a suggestion... DrBobert 19:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I have been meaning to get around to expanding on how the song was performed live (much like what Smells Like Teen Spirit has), but these kinds of sources can be hard to find. I've taken a liking to the SPLRA for live Smashing Pumpkins-related info, but isn't really an appropriate source for how the song was played. You can help with it, if you want. --Brandt Luke Zorn 22:47, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the song is performed differently enough to warrant a mention. The way it's played hasn't really changed in any significant way at all, but that's just my opinion. MrHate 00:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grunge

This sounds like grunge? Anyone agree? Thundermaster367 09:21, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

It may sound like grunge, but the Smashing Pumpkins are typically associated with the wider genre alternative rock rather than the more narrow grunge category. --Brandt Luke Zorn 13:38, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The thing is though, alternative rock is such a wide genre that it does not give a good definition of their sound, don't you think. Alternative rock covers Placebo, Radiohead, Hard-Fi and Nirvana. So do you think that this should perhaps be narrowed down a bit so that when the reader sees this page, they have an understanding of what the Smashing Pumpkins' sound is. Thundermaster367 08:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The Smashing Pumpkins explored a wide variety of genres (from the band's page we have gothic rock, heavy metal, dream pop, psychedelic rock, and progressive rock listed) but they usually aren't classified into a more specific alternative rock subgenre. Plus, if the "Composition and lyrics" isn't specific enough in describing the Pumpkins' sound, I don't think that a change as minor as a different genre tag would help a reader. --Brandt Luke Zorn 14:45, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Alt-rock is fine. Also note that in the "Composition" section the sound of the song is directly compared to that of The Cure and My Bloody Valentine, goth and shoegaze bands respectively. WesleyDodds 01:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TodayIntro.JPG

Image:TodayIntro.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 (talk) 20:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Todaypromo.jpg

Image:Todaypromo.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 (talk) 20:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Irrelevant?

Reqluce (talk) 21:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)Why does this article contain a non-sequittor " It's important to note that Billy Corgan and Brett Hickman are long time buddies. Brett Hickman is obese" ? Who else is in favor of the deletion of this line?