Talk:Ain't No Sunshine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

R&B and Soul Music Top‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Library of Congress Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Merger

I am preposing this be merged with the Just as I am Album. And a redirect twards the Album. --Bonojohn 19:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Hmm no, almost every song in the top 500 songs of all time as an article Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 19:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well than it needs to be improved. --Bonojohn 19:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

Yea, but right now it's an harmless stub, I'll expand later on Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 19:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad you placed the expand box Jaranda its better than the merge I preposed --Bonojohn 07:30, 17 July 2006 (UTC)--[reply]

I believe verification and/or explanation is required for Otis Redding’s cover of “Ain’t No Sunshine”. The song was first released in 1971, three years after the death of Otis Redding. Now as I understand it, Bill Withers, having wrote the song, began playing the song in jook joints at night, while still working in a factory during the day. All of this was going on in L.A. when he moved there in 1967, the same year Otis Redding died. As far as I am able find, there is no version of "Ain't No Sunshine" done by Otis Redding. futhermore, the only connection that I can find between Otis and Bill is there connections with Booker T & The MG's. Otis working with Steven Cropper, while Bill worked with Booker T himself. Therefore, I believe, if it is true, that an explanation how Otis Redding covered the song is needed, to fill in the seeming discrepancy for those, like myself, who might wonder how it’s possible.Elamantededios 14:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I know" x 26

Seems that any discussion of this song would be incomplete without at least a passing reference to it being the only song, in any genre or decade, in which the vocalist repeats the words "I know" 26 times -- at least on the recording Bill Withers made popular. Who else has sung it, and has s/he also included that? Does anyone know if alternate takes exist w/o that? What was the point of that being part of the song, anyway? Typofixer76 03:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Will Young's version, he sings "I know" 26 times. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:AintNoSunshine45.JPG

Image:AintNoSunshine45.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 20:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UK radio

""Ain't no sunshine" is one of the few songs that is still a major hit on UK radio stations."

what does that mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.46.116.110 (talk) 04:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How is it possible that this song has been covered by Otis Redding if it was written in 1971 and he died in 1967? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.118.248.19 (talk) 03:34, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"All That" repeated use?

I never saw the show, but apparently a character on "All That" would sing that song, after which she'd say "Bacon good". The character was some old grandma or something. Played by Britney Spears' younger sister, Jamie Lynn. Not sure if any of that is true, if it is, prolly makes sense to include a reference in the "pop culture uses" section here. 199.214.26.82 (talk) 23:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cover versions

Despite the template reminding folks to reference their edits, the list is now way too long. Not sure how to fairly include/exclude items, so I suggest a future List of cover versions of Ain't No Sunshine. Meanwhile, am removing redlinks.--Technopat (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talking about the cover versions list, it definitely needs some sorting, alphabetically. The way it looks now is just, well, messy. Like people randomly threw names at it. :-) BTW, the Michael Jackson version is actually a Jackson Five version. It's featured on the album "The Very Best of Michael Jackson with the Jackson Five". --78.34.40.33 (talk) 09:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why on earth is DMX given his own cover section? Is this cover more important than the other covers?--121.45.190.187 (talk) 11:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DMX section now filed under "Use in pop culture", details moved to DMX (rapper); --78.52.143.228 (talk) 15:43, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was this song really recorded by Elvis Costello? All I see on the internet is the Lighthouse Family versions atributed to him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.91.28.232 (talk) 21:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, there's no such record by Elvis Costello, the version for the Notting Hill Soundtrack was recorded by Lighthouse Family. --78.52.134.191 (talk) 22:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There also seems to be an Italian language cover version: Com'è buia la città. There are multiple hits on youtube.com for it, for instance, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPENcsshDbg Most are of Caterina Caselli signing it. I do not know how this version came to be written. Wcomm (talk) 16:00, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pourquoi avoir supprimé la mention au sujet du groupe Hanson qui a bien repris ce titre ? C'est vraiment risible !!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.226.9.108 (talk) 09:09, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On toilets and trivia

We've recently had an edit war over including the following sentence in the article.

"Withers was still working at a factory that made toilet seats for Boeing 747s when he recorded the song."

I'm bringing it here for wider discussion in hopes of gaining consensus. To begin with, the reference on that particular fact didn't mention the toilet seats. It seems unsourced without a proper reference, although I'm certainly not saying it didn't happen.

Furthermore, this seems extremely trivial to me. One of the edits adding it even referred to it as "trifling," [1] so it doesn't seem this adds anything to the article other than trivia.

As I've said, I don't see this is anything other than trivia, but I'm certably willing to listen to opposing views. Any thoughts? Dayewalker (talk) 22:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the editor who originally removed the item, the reason I did so was that even if were true, and there isn't really any reason to doubt it, a) it wasn't sourced/referenced; b) I don't think it adds anything to the article, that is, in my opinion it's trivia, and c) the article mentions a living person and Wikipedia is especially careful about contentious content. Any of those three reasons would justify removing it, but if consensus says otherwise... sigh!--Technopat (talk) 22:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To begin with, the reference on that particular fact didn't mention the toilet seats. This comment is not true. I checked the reference Rolling Stone Ain't No Sunshine, and the source says:When thirty-one-year-old Withers recorded "Sunshine," his first chart hit, he was still working at a factory making toilet seats for 747s. Withers intended to write more lyrics for the part of the song where he repeats the phrase "I know" twenty-six times, but the other musicians told him to leave it. "I was this factory worker puttering around," Withers said. "So when they said to leave it like that, I left it."

I have therefore reinstated the statement about toilet seats. Given the prominence of the statement in the source, it must be judged significant.--Toddy1 (talk) 05:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Toddy1, I appreciate you finding that quote in the reference, don't know how I missed it. I stand corrected on the source. However, the question of relevance still stands. Just because it's mentioned in a short blurb in Rolling Stone doesn't necessarily make it notable or signifiant information about the song. It's still seems very trivial to discuss what the songwriter was doing before he wrote the song on the actual page for the song. Dayewalker (talk) 06:14, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it is the key to understanding the song. Perhaps that is why it is the first sentence of the Rolling Stone blurb.--Toddy1 (talk) 06:53, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't "see" that bit in the reference, either - my mind must have just glossed over it as too trivial. So do you really think that Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, and with a whole set of guidelines, aims, etc. different from those of a commercial music publication, should do the same as Rolling Stone and stick it in the first sentence of its ~~blurb~~ article? OK, so the toilet seats are referenced. But still trivial.--Technopat (talk) 08:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You both need to step back, stop WP:WIKIHOUNDING other editors and quit your POV pushing. Radiopathy •talk• 02:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provide evidence for such baseless accusations, or retract them.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs 04:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Cover Versions too long?

We had another discussion about this section a year ago, that discussion is still on the page above. As it stands now, the list of cover versions is now more than twice as long as the actual article, and mostly unsourced. Any thoughts on what to do? As it stands, the list of covers overwhelms any actual information in the article. Dayewalker (talk) 06:45, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the list overwhelms the article, but I am not convinced (yet) that it's too long. To determine if it's too long, we'd need to establish criteria for inclusion in the list, such as "only include versions released by a notable artist on a single or album, i.e., no live covers that weren't recorded and released, no non-notable artists." If all the songs on the list met that criteria, then the list would be the right length. The criteria could be more restrictive, "only include cover versions released as a single," and I suspect that would eliminate most of the entries. We could restrict the list to entries that can be sourced, but that won't be much of a restriction. (See below) In any case, without criteria, we can't decide which entries are valid and which are not.

If the criteria results in a long list, perhaps the list should be moved to its own article. Alternatively, we could use one of the techniques for hiding the full list such that the reader has to click "show" to see it.

I am not sure if we should require sources or not. On the one hand, I think almost everything in WP should be sourced. On the other hand, based on WP:VERIFY, are the cover versions, "likely to be challenged"? Most of the entries would be relatively easy to source if we restrict the list to released versions. If we restrict the list to versions that can be sourced, then sources are obviosuly required.

I struggle with this issue because I think song articles are primarily about the definitive, notable version (original or otherwise), but the fact that a song is covered many, many times indicates something important about it. Also, should someone who hears one of those cover versions be able to confirm via WP that the cover they heard is the same song? If so, will "Yesterday" include a list of the hundreds of cover versions? Ouch. — John Cardinal (talk) 16:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Al Green did not record this song. I will remove his name from the list. Nov 1, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.68.23.38 (talk) 19:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

here is the cover version information if anybody is interested/ Jonpatterns (talk) 15:04, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson?

I've never edited an article, and am not going to start now, but I find the list of all Michael Jackson's singles at the end of the article very out of place. Similarly, I don't know why the sidebar has Michael Jackson's single displayed over all the other covers. I suggest that they both be removed. 69.173.108.129 (talk) 22:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like things have improve. However perhaps a mention should be made of who has covered the song? Including Mr Jackson's cover on his Got to Be There album. Jonpatterns (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Marley covered this song?

Is there any evidence for that? Because I really doubt that!...

--92.224.58.111 (talk) 10:10, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could be a mixed up with Sun is Shining ? Jonpatterns (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Zakk Wylde's Black Label Society also covered this song

on the 2013 acoustic album Unblackened by the heavy metal band Black Label Society, which is the band featuring Zakk Wylde formerly the guitarist for Ozzy Osbourne, they covered this song, it's on the second disc of the 2 disc acoustic album. --Boutitbenza 69 9 (talk) 07:13, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ain't No Sunshine. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.chartstats.com/artistinfo.php?id=285

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:38, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ain't No Sunshine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theofficialcharts.com/search-results-album/_/Ain't+No+Sunshine#single

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ain't No Sunshine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120711124624/http://www.rollingstone.com:80/music/lists/the-500-greatest-songs-of-all-time-20110407/bill-withers-aint-no-sunshine-19691231 to http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/the-500-greatest-songs-of-all-time-20110407/bill-withers-aint-no-sunshine-19691231

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]