Talk:Nearer, My God, to Thee

French

The same tune is used in French with the title "Plus près de toi, mon Dieu" (meaning literally "nearer to Thee, my God"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.193.117.131 (talk) 19:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

An editor added: "In the Max Ophuls 1952 film, Le Plaisir, the French version of the hymn, 'Plus près de toi, mon Dieu,' is sung in a country church, which causes sobbing among a group of visiting Parisian courtesans."<ref>[http://www.criterionconfessions.com/2008/09/le-plaisir-444.html Review of Le Plaisir]</ref>

However, the citation given does not say that 'Plus près de toi, mon Dieu' is sung in the movie. By the way, what musical setting is this? How do you know that it is the french version of the hymn? A much clearer explanation will be needed. Besides, the reference is trivial and, even if clearly explained, is hardly of note in this article.

The same editor also added <ref>http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/ArticlePrintable.jsp?id=h-2643 Quote from Ted Turner]</ref> But this citation does not, as far as I can tell, cite the quote discussed in the article. Is this the right citation? -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

After watching the film (it's really great), I checked the wiki entry for the hymn, and added the reference. The original edit of my addition resulted in a fractured sentence: "In the 1952 film, Le Plaisir, the French version of the hymn sung." [sic]

In answer to the editor's queries:

"However, the citation given does not say that 'Plus près de toi, mon Dieu' is sung in the movie" The new reference does. But I have to note that few of the other references in this section include citations.

"By the way, what musical setting is this?" As is explained in the reference: "sung in a country church."

"A much clearer explanation will be needed." I don't agree. Many of the references in this section are brief and to the point. By the way, none of the others seem to require a citation. What is the problem with Le Plaisir?

"Besides, the reference is trivial and, even if clearly explained, is hardly of note in this article." Definitely not so. Max Ophuls is major filmmaker, Le Plaisir is a masterpiece, with both film and director cited in wiki. The scene in which the hymn is sung is central to the plot and deeply affecting. The reference demonstrates the international reach of the hymn, indicating its power no matter what the context, even among a group of Paris courtesans. Not trivial, and definitely of note.

I don't see the problem here. The Simpsons (with no citation), and not Max Ophuls? Kevorkian (with no citation) and not Max Ophuls? Is the issue with including "courtesans" in an article about a Christian hymn? If so, that is an individual prejudice unworthy as a basis for an editing decision.

I'll put back in the reference. If it gets kicked out again, then we'll have to appeal to a higher wiki power somehow.

I had nothing to do with the Ted Turner quote or its citation.Greavill (talk) 04:51, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I note that immediately in front of the Le Plaisir reference, another film reference ("Nearer, My God, to Thee" is sung at the end of the award-winning 1936 movie San Francisco") is allowed to stand without citation. Editor: Please explain why the Le Plaisir reference is being singled out.Greavill (talk) 05:03, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Is this a hoax?

When I go to the cite that Greavill added to the article, I get this message: "Page not found: Sorry, the page you were looking for in the blog Dirty Writers does not exist." By the way, I do not question that the film you mention is notable, or that its director is notable. My question is, what is it in that film that is relevant to this article? You have not explained it clearly, except to say, without being able to give a Reliable source, that you believe that a French version of this hymn is sung in the film. But the IMDB does not mention it, and I am beginning to think that you are just joking around. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I see that citations were added to the (most, but I CN'd a few) other references in this section, so at least some good has come from this tempest in a teapot back-and-forth.

This is of course not a hoax, I'm not joking, it's not vandalism (I'll try not be offended by the offhand accusation, but it is sort of weird that editor would take it that way). It's a legitimate attempt to add a legitimate reference to an entry, repeatedly blocked by an editor whose concerns seem to change. But I'll refrain from beginning to think this is vandalism toward the whole idea of Le Plaisir being cited...

Now editor grants that the film and director are notable, so that the reference is now deemed not "trivial and hardly of note," as previously expressed. So that concern no longer seems paramount, and we can move past the "trivial and hardly of note" issue and move forward to the citation business. If the hymn is sung in the film, and a written source can be cited to prove it, then the reference cannot be rejected, correct?

I don't know why the "dirtywriters" blog note did not work for you. It worked for me. I'll try to put the episode in Le Plaisir where the hymn is sung on U-tube, so editor verify

I'm going to put the entry back in. Please editor don't vandalize it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greavill (talk • contribs) 16:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Note to editor: greavill is not a crank or vandal, he's an authority, a published author and produced screenwriter. Greavill (talk) 17:02, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

I have found a stable URL reference which confirms the use of the hymn in the film. Unfortunately it links to a site in French, which is not ideal for English WP. I'll look out for another, preferably in the vernacular, and add shortly, I hope. - Tim riley (talk) 21:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

This is not a hoax

Screen grabs from the film featuring English subtitles from the hymn are now on the dirtywriters blog (http://dirtywriters.blogspot.com/). Still working on posting the relevant scene from the movie on You-Tube.Greavill (talk) 22:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Segment from Le Plaisir featuring the hymn now posted on YouTube and worth a look: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT19xL2qniY Greavill (talk) 16:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

For the record, the site I mentioned above is here. The ref is confirmed in other French sites, but I couldn't find any specific ref on an English website that was prima facie authoritative. - Tim riley (talk) 17:27, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Post-mortem

A little post-mortem, if you please. I'm not a big wiki person and I don't know the ropes around here very well. My initial impulse was simply to add a reference to an entry. When I did so, first off my addition was disfigured by SSilvers's bad edit (which resulted in an ungrammatical entry), then SSilvers x'd it out completely, afterwards labeling it trivial, hardly of note, a joke, a hoax and vandalism. I was nonplussed to find the "citation-needed" rule enforced so vigorously when other references had none. When I pointed this out, citations were quickly added. Now the "Other associations" section of the "Nearer My God to Thee" entry has to be the most citation-heavy zone on wikipedia!

I guess my concern is about the overall atmosphere of wikipedia. I see where SSilvers is wiki black belt, and I am just a dabbler, so maybe it is right that a sense of ownership crept in over this entry. But the reaction seemed all out of proportion to the perceived trespass. I would think a collegial atmosphere is essential to making wikipedia a welcoming place on the web, and though I understand that past problems might color some people's impatience over gaffes and mishaps, still I felt pushed around and bullied, and I didn't like it. I tried to be measured in my response. I went out of my way to secure the citation, not because I have any great interest in making this particular entry complete and plenary, but because I don't like bullies. Much ado about not much? Maybe. But it speaks to the larger issue of what kind of place we want wikipedia to be.66.167.244.78 (talk) 15:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

PS Thanks Tim Riley for the French citation.66.167.244.78 (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Greavill, Your descriptions of what went on here are fictional. Here are the facts. First, on January 8, you added an assertion that a French version of the hymn was used in the film Le Plaisir, and an overly long description of the cultural reference, but no citation.[1] I tried to verify the assertion by checking IMDB, the article on Le Plaisir itself and a couple of other sources. On January 9, having failed to verify your assertion, I shortened what you wrote (yes, I made a typo, omitting the word "is") and asked for a citation by leaving the cite needed tag, and I left the following edit summary: "Is there a source for this? See WP:V."[2] You then re-added your long description, again without a citation.[3]. I reverted, again asking for a reference.[4] You finally then added a reference about the film, but the reference did not mention the hymn, and so it did not support your assertion.[5] On January 10, since this was your third posting about this cultural reference, I began to suspect that this was a joke, and so I deleted it and referred you to the talk page, where I then asked for further information.[6] You then reverted, took out your old reference and put in a new citation which I could not read and appeared at the time to be a broken link or hoax, called "dirtywriters.blogspot.com". At the same time, you left the long message on this talk page complaining about the lack of in-line citations in the article. Apparently you did not understand that all the references were already there, but that they were at the bottom in a reference section. This was the way most articles were referenced years ago when this article was written.[7] Since your citation to "dirtywriters.blogspot.com" appeared to be a broken or dead link, I then felt that you were most likely a hoaxer. Nevertheless, I went through the article and converted the references to the more current style of in-line references, updating a few as I went.[8] I also asked bluntly on the talk page whether your assertions were a hoax. In response, on January 11, you re-inserted your material [9] and added another long message to this talk page, above, concluding "I'm going to put the entry back in. Please editor don't vandalize it again." Now I was finally able to access your dirtywriters blog and see that the blog was at least real and that you, yourself, were blogging about the film. Of course, your blog is not a WP:Reliable source. However, on January 13, User:Tim riley kindly found an actual reference (although in French), that showed that the film did indeed include a French version of the hymn.[10] You also finally put a clip of the film on Youtube on January 13 that also demonstrates the truth of the assertion.[11] This was the first time that I saw any evidence that the hymn was actually included in the film, as you had been asserting all along. In short: I had asked you politely, twice, to give a reference that showed verifiable evidence that this hymn was used in the film. You refused to do this, and you have been abusive towards me on this talk page. I submit that it was not my actions that made this experience unpleasant, but yours. You can improve your Wikipedia experience in the future by adding citations to WP:Reliable sources when you add new information to articles. Please read WP:RS carefully, as it will explain the type of sources that we can use in this encyclopedia. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and patience. I apologize if SSilvers felt wronged. I look forward to working on wikipedia in the future, adding references, properly this time, with citations.Greavill (talk) 03:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

And I apologize that I was not more diplomatic. I am sure you have much to contribute here, and I look forward to seeing more of it. As the encyclopedia becomes more mature, our referencing gets better, and articles that were not so well-referenced in the past tend to become better-referenced over time. So, when I see people adding new information to an article that I am interested in, I ask them to cite references, even though there may be older parts of the article that are not yet referenced. This way, we are constantly improving the quality of the content. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:05, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Webrot

The link in footnote 7 is dead. Here's the archived version and the archived version of a page by B. Greenberg linked from there, with scores and MIDIs of all versions.--87.162.26.140 (talk) 03:41, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

White Star playbook

I think the discussion of what setting the deck band played as Titanic went under should include information on what tune the White Star Line playbook contains. My understanding is that the tune is Horbury in the playbook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.207.93 (talk) 18:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Bamforth & Co?

Someone added the following, but the reference does not support the assertions made. Can you give us a more specific reference?:

"Whether apocryphal or not, the link between the Titanic and the hymn was established quickly in the public mind, as evidenced by commemorative postcards published by Bamforth & Co in 1912. The company produced both lantern slides and postcards to mark the tragedy. The slides featured other songs, such as 'Be British', but all six postcards produced featured words from "Nearer, My God, To Thee", accompanied by images of the sinking ship. This was not the first time that Bamforth had featured the song, which appeared in a lantern slide set produced in 1906 and postcards. The original postcards can be seen in the collection of Kirklees Museums and Galleries.http://www.kirklees.gov.uk/leisure/museums/museums.asp"

Thanks, -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Alternative text

At freehymnal.com is a slightly different text shown as "Alternate Shape Note Verses", in which the verses 2 and 5 are different (see below). Does anyone know where these are from? The website only mentions Sarah F. Adams as lyrics author.

2. Tho’ like a wanderer, daylight all gone,

Darkness be over me, My rest a stone,

Yet in my dreams I’d be nearer, my God, to Thee

(Chorus unchanged)

5. Or if, on joyful wing, cleaving the sky,

Caught up to meet my King, swiftly I fly,

Still all my song shall be, nearer, my God, to Thee

--SiriusB (talk) 19:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Daily Sketch

A contributor wrote that: a report in the Daily Sketch on April 22, 1912 stated that a colleague of Hartley’s recalled how some years earlier, while working aboard the Mauretania, he asked Hartley what he would do if he found himself on the deck of a sinking ship. Hartley replied that he would assemble the ship’s orchestra and play “O God Our Help in Ages Past” or “Nearer, My God, to Thee.” Does anyone have this report from the Daily Sketch? What page did it appear on? -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:48, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Music composition infobox

I think that this article would be improved by having a music composition infobox. A lot of hymn articles have these and they provide important information in way that is easily readable. I was going to add one, but I saw a note in the source that said that there should be consensus in the talk page about whether or not to have one. What do people think? Should this article have a music composition infobox? I think Abide with me is a good example of what I'm envisioning. Glucosegeyser (talk) 21:57, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

I would oppose adding infobox-type material, but a well-referenced text section about the composition of the various tunes used for the piece would we welcome. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Also in the 2022 film “Women talking”

This hymn was sung by the main characters in the 2022 film "Women Talking" by Sarah Polley and should be added to this article. Thanks Aliciafl954 (talk) 08:41, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Is the hymn important to the film? Is the hymn mentioned as important in reviews of the film? The film's article doesn't mention it. See WP:IPC for more about when this type of content is considered noteworthy, and then provide more information responsive to that guideline. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:42, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I'm not sure why it's not mentioned in any review but the song is sung by the protagonists at the emotional climax of the film, so it was definitely noteworthy. I suggest you watch the film (it was really good) and judge for yourself. Alternatively, you could probably find that scene on YouTube. Aliciafl954 (talk) 08:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

We can only mention the film if a review or article about the film mentions the importance of the hymn to the film's story. See WP:IPC. -- Ssilvers (talk) 09:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)