Jump to content

Talk:John Wayne (song)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleJohn Wayne (song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 9, 2017Good article nomineeListed

Sources

[edit]
Done

---Another Believer (Talk) 06:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MagicatthemovieS: Thanks for your recent article improvements. @Calvin999, Carbrera, and IndianBio: I'm curious if any of you are interested in promoting this article to Good status? I think there is still some work needed, but not nearly as much as some other Gaga songs. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:47, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to help if it means improving it in the form of editing first. It is my favourite song Joanne.  — Calvin999 21:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yea good job MTTM. A little bit more content expansion is needed. But we are definitely there. —IB [ Poke ] 04:15, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to help. I will expand the composition section if you two work on the music video section. ~ MagicatthemovieS
I wonder if a screenshot from the music video could be uploaded under fair use? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:55, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer: Certainly - I've seen it done for other song articles.~ MagicatthemovieS
To both AB and MATM, the current section does not justify any screenshot being needed. It needs something that concretely passes NFCC. I would say if you give me somedays time (currently pretty busy with exams), I can spruce up the article a bit and maybe even use a GIF like from "Perfect Illusion". —IB [ Poke ] 07:47, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good! Good luck with exams. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:43, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
MagicatthemovieS and IndianBio, once you've both finished your round of work, I'm happy to nominate the article for a copy edit from the Guild of Copy Editors as an extra set of eyes going into Good article nomination. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:56, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great work on the article expansion, IB, and thanks for nominating for Good status! ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:50, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Production credit?

[edit]

This source says Father John Misty co-produced and plays drums on the track. This is incorrect, right? Can someone with album's liner notes confirm? If this is incorrect, then the "Writing and recording" section of the Joanne article may need to be corrected, because it mentions this credit. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:17, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: I have just checked the liner notes, and there is no mention of Father John Misty. TheKaphox T 22:02, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you for checking. I think I posted about this on the Joanne article's talk page, but that article's "Writing and recording" section may need to be corrected. ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:09, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fuse Video Review

[edit]

Fuse's Jeff Benjamin has reviewed the John Wayne music video on the 8th February, stating that "From the high-fashion outfits (the skyscraper heels are back!) to the intense dance numbers (the best one comes at the end), this new video is classic Gaga with her new, real AF grungy aesthetic." Perhaps this would be worth adding to the music video's reception? The review can be read here.

86.142.42.182 (talk) 02:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? Cover?

[edit]

What is File:John Wayne.png? ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:43, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This image is used at French Wikipedia. Do we want to use this for any reason at English Wikipedia? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
AB, thats not a cover. You should know these things by now. —IB [ Poke ] 14:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to make sure there wasn't a foreign single/EP release or something like that. Also, wanted to make sure this was appropriate to have at Commons, and pointing out its use at another project. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:08, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too many genres

[edit]

There are too many genres listed in the info box. I'm a believer that only one should be listed, as that is all that is possible. Songs can only be one genre, albeit they can be influenced or contain elements of others, too. The song can't be bubblegum pop, and country, and disco, and pop-rock. Bubblegum pop is a sub-genre of pop and therefore closely related to pop-rock, and country and disco are distinct genres and entirely different in form and structure too. The Popmatters review says it the song "experiments" with pop, country, rock and dance, another one in there says pop-rock, and another dance-pop. Allmusic calls it "hard disco", Billboard pop-rock, and 'country-jam' in the Time review. I'd pick the one most described and use that one.  — Calvin999 08:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the definitions cited by the four genre citations in the composition section (I know not all have been included, but I'm using all as examples):

  • 'Rock-orientated' - PopMatters, doesn't make it a rock song, just contains influences.
  • 'Pop-rock and dance blend' - PopMatters, doesn't make it exclusively pop-rock or dance (dance is not a genre, it's a blanket term for all music you can dance too, whether it be disco, dance-pop, synth-pop etc). A blend of Pop-rock and dance is Dance-rock.
  • 'dipping her toe into strutting country-rock' - PopMatters, doesn't really state it's a country-rock song, more that she's experimenting with parts of the genre.
  • 'strong pop sensibilities' - Popmatters, doesn't make it a pop song, is talking about Gaga.
  • 'As for the song, Lady Gaga makes more bubble gum pop,' - PopMatters, this should be used. He is explicitly calling the song Bubblegum pop and that is really good for us to use as editors.
  • 'two of the harder disco songs' - Allmusic, not sure what he means by 'harder' because disco is disco, but I don't think the phrasing is strong enough to warrant it being included as a disco song explicitly.
  • 'pop-rocker' - Again, it's more of a sweeping statement rather than an explicit definition than being a pop-rock song.
  • 'Country-jam' - Time, not the same as calling it a country-song. Words such as jam, tune, hit preceded by a genre doesn't make it so.

I would keep Bubblegum-pop as the only genre in the infobox because that is the only one whereby a reviewer has actually said in basic terms'This is a bubblegum-pop song'.  — Calvin999 08:52, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this summary wholeheartedly Calvin999. —IB [ Poke ] 08:57, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ah good, I thought I might have been alone in my assessment lol  — Calvin999 09:00, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go with just "pop", but I don't feel strongly. I'm also open to multiple genres being listed, if they're sourced, but again this is not something I worry too much about. I'll let others decide the best way to note genres. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:48, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I really think labeling it as Bubblegum is very incorrect. It doesn't sound anything like bubblegum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.127.123.210 (talk) 05:28, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But that is the only genre whereby a critic said "it is a bubblegum pop song", rules are rules. It is a sub-genre of pop-rock so it's not exactly incorrect.  — Calvin999 10:16, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Ronson? / Screenshot from music video?

[edit]

Do we want to add an image of Ronson, who co-wrote, co-produced, and performed guitar on the track? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:56, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another option for an image is a screenshot from the music video. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:42, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry to jump in on this conversation. A screenshot from the music video would only be beneficial if a particular moment from the visual attracted a lot of critical attention. The addition of non-free media (in this case a music video screenshot) needs a strong rationale to explain its inclusion. In my opinion, though, I do not believe this article needs any additional images as there is more than enough in its current incarnation. Aoba47 (talk) 17:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to apologize for contributing to discussions. I understand your position re: music video screenshot. I also agree there are enough illustrations throughout this article, but I wonder if the image of Josh Homme should be replaced by one of Ronson, who was more involved. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:52, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The picture of Josh Homme works for me, as the critical reception section, where the photo is placed, even mentions his contribution to the song as a highlight. As for the screenshot from the video - there are lots of sources that talk about the same scenes, but that section is quite under-written at the moment. If there was more info and sources collected, a still from the video could be a good idea. --Sricsi (talk) 19:22, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Wayne_(song)&oldid=1207448864"