Talk:All of Me (jazz standard)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the All of Me (jazz standard) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Jazz Low‑importance

	Jazz portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz 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.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

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

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Giuseppe Luca Scaffidi (23 October 2023). "Vittorio Camardese non suonava la chitarra come gli altri" (in Italian). Il Post. Archived from the original on 24 October 2023. Retrieved 24 October 2023. In that occasion, Camardese played two songs: a mambo and one of the most famous jazz standards – as the tracks that, throughout the years, enter the common repertoire of jazz musicians are named – "All of Me".

Lyrics?

I am note sure on whether the lyrics break copyright.

Chord sequences are not copyrightable.Dndn1011 13:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it breaks copyright or not either, but I know we don't include them in articles. Portions are okay, if there is some need to discuss them. But, in general, we don't list a song's entire lyrics. Peace. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:24, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The notion that "chord sequences are not copyrightable" is an urban myth and pretty much complete and utter hogwash. It's true only to the extent that they have to appear in a piece of music, but then so does everything else. The actual copyright law says absolutely nothing one way or another about chords and, for that matter, nothing about melody, rhythm, or instrumentation, etc. In actual practice if the piece sounds to a judge and jury too much like an earlier piece and the composer of the later piece had access to the earlier piece, copyright infringement is likely to be found whatever aspects of the later piece make it sound like the earlier piece. It could well be primarily because of the chords. TheScotch (talk) 12:22, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We do and should include first lines, and any other notable/sourced lines. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NoFX Version? Really?

Um, OK. They recorded it, I get it. But this is one of the most recorded and played jazz tunes of all time. Arguably the best known version of it was done by Sinatra. Does it really make sense for a version done by a group called "NoFX" to be the version that gets details specifically listed? Sure this is not a good example of the tune's history. I don't know wikipedia rules well enough to know whether this violates any of them, but it seems like it must. Fool4jesus (talk) 04:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason there are more details is because NOFX (a very notable act) released their version as a single, hence there are details about a physical release to share. The lack of coverage of other versions (including the original) is a reason to add such coverage to the article, not to remove information you think is undue. This article is basically a stub; it really needs expansion with well-sourced commentary on the original composition. Then perhaps you would not feel that coverage of any particular cover version was overweighted. --IllaZilla (talk) 04:53, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that NOFX is a very notable act; I had heard of them. But Louis Armstrong, Frank Sinatra, and Ella Fitzgerald are also notable. No, what's the word? Legendary. And their releases of the song were also on records, including singles. It's more to the point when you say that this article is basically a stub. And among the few who have worked on it is a NOFX fan.

I came in here to say the same thing that Fool4Jesus said: No way does NOFX headline that line-up. Fat Mike would be the first to tell you that. TypoBoy (talk) 02:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd never heard of NoFX, and outside of this discussion the chances seem to me high that I'll never hear of them again. Who is "Fat Mike"? Never mind; I don't want to know. TheScotch (talk) 12:27, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Ruth Etting"

I find this really disingenuous, Ruth Etting is just one of a multitude of recording artists associated with this song, composed by Gerald Marks and Seymour Simons.

The title of the article should be "All of Me (jazz standard)" or "All of Me (jazz standard; Marks/Simons)" or "All of Me (Marks/Simons)".

FYI, I arrived at this page from the disambiguation page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_of_Me, which I have edited accordingly, as searches through Google and the like will be for jazz standard or (possibly) the composer, and certainly not Ruth Etting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.198.122.66 (talk) 10:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I very strongly agree that this article should not be subtitled "Ruth Etting song". Very few people living have ever heard of Ruth Etting, yet the song itself is to this day extremely well-known. Why hasn't this been changed yet? TheScotch (talk) 12:14, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 January 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not done (non-admin closure) samee ^talk 16:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All of Me (Ruth Etting song) → All of me (standard) – The song is extremely famous and has been for a very long time, but Ruth Etting is pretty obscure. Moreover, many other singers are at least as closely associated with the song (Billie Holliday, for example); it's long been a standard vehicle for jazz instrumental performance; and Ruth Etting was not even the first singer to perform the song in a broad commercial setting--or, for that matter, in any other setting. TheScotch (talk) 12:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:NCM, not aware we use just (standard) in any articles, but will check. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:06, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All I could find was [Atom (standard)], which I not very boldly just moved to [Atom (Web standard)] in line with the category and lead line. That pretty well proves that "(standard)" doesn't mean (jazz song) to at least Web standard article editors. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:14, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't look far enough, now found Nexus (standard) ASCOM (standard) KNX (standard) ETIM (standard) and one jazz one Equinox (standard) ... plus many more like Draco (military standard) DSS (NMR standard) ASTERIX (ATC standard) Code (audio standard) S10 (UPU standard) etc etc etc plus about 5 (jazz standard) articles, most jazz instruments are under (song) or (instrumental). Based on that flyby Equinox needs to be either at (jazz standard) or (John Coltrane instrumental) In ictu oculi (talk) 16:33, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"All of Me (standard)" is only one suggestion for an alternative title. You need to say if you want the name of the article to remain "All of Me (Ruth Etling song)", and if you do, you need to present an argument in favor of this. It's true that "All of Me" is a jazz standard, but it's not merely a jazz standard; it's a standard, period. Since the song is a standard, it seems to me perfectly reasonable for Wikipedia to call it that, and if it turns that Wikipedia has never before called a standard a standard, then Wikipedia needs to change. In any case, I'm certainly open to other suggestions for the title of this particular article. TheScotch (talk) 22:54, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per arguments presented at the recent Talk:Cry Me a River (Arthur Hamilton song)#Requested move 27 December 2017 where one of the suggested main headers was Cry Me a River (jazz standard), which was created as a redirect in the course of that discussion and serves well as a redirect here: All of Me (jazz standard). However, per the successful close of that discussion, I would support All of Me (Gerald Marks song), All of Me (Seymour Simons song) or All of Me (Gerald Marks and Seymour Simons song). —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 23:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.