Talk:Locked Out of Heaven

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLocked Out of Heaven 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.
Good topic starLocked Out of Heaven is part of the Unorthodox Jukebox series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 31, 2014Good article nomineeNot listed
June 22, 2014Good article nomineeListed
March 2, 2017Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Reverting twice information on Contrafuctum[edit]

Usually when you mark a comment non-relevant it has to be non-relevant. In this case this is relevant and no explanation was given. Meanwhile remixes seem to be relevant beyond their worth. Meanwhile for most intents and purposes this is a cover.

A Hebrew contrafactum was performed by Roi Yadid called Halleluja.[1]

Here are examples where it has been used -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_(Michael_Jackson_song)#Cover_versions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Another_One_Bites_the_Dust#Other_cover_versions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gangsta%27s_Paradise#Parodies_and_covers

Could you please clarify MarioSoulTruthFan

I checked a few other pages and there is no consistency on this matter to mark this non-relevant.Saxophonemn (talk) 18:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Saxophonemn: Plain and easy; those remixes were included in the deluxe edition of the album. How is a cover with 10k views relevant when I compare it to performances with a million viewers that were on TV and shows like "The Voice", covered by other artists in their tours. They were used? Where I see no Roi Yadid in those articles. BTW, please spell my username correctly, I'm not an iron duke. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MarioSoulTruth: The problem is that you're forgetting that this is a song played on the radio in a country of around 10 million people? Some how this guy has a wikipedia page (though in Hebrew, etc. In this instance this is a "cover" done by somebody notable. In regards to wiki Wikipedia:Relevance it would appear that this was relevant enough to be the last line of the section. IN regards to the IronDuk, I accidentally didn't delete all of the code from getting your attention in the first place.Saxophonemn (talk) 11:20, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Saxophonemn: Well, I have no idea if it's played or not, I need a source for that. I wonder how many of those people listened to the song as well, otherwise, it wouldn't have had 10k views o Youtube. Just because it has a wiki page in hebrew makes it notable? All the other people in the cover section have a wiki page. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:26, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@MarioSoulTruth: Needing a source that a song is on the radio is a bit foolish, many listings have chart positions, but again you're way too much for this one line. The artist has a wikipedia page in Hebrew, showing that he's not a nobody. I'm not sure why there is such immense effort being applied to remove this piece of information. I see you're also the person who removed this back two years ago. The point is that this exists and it's linked to this song.Saxophonemn (talk) 10:56, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Saxophonemn: its not foolish, you can't claim something without using proof, in this case, source. Well, if you have chart position for it you can and should add that, but once again do you have a link for that? I could make a wikipage for many people, means nothing. Everyone does covers, there are many covers of this songs and others that aren't here. The wiki pages are not supposed to be a farm with everyone who did a cover of a song. Why do you insist so much in adding this cover? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:20, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a neutral party: this type of reference is generally allowed in a section on cover versions. However, the song itself needs some level of notability to be included. 14k Youtube views is definitely not sufficient for notability; did the song appear in any "Hot 100" charts or get mainstream news coverage? Power~enwiki (talk) 21:08, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Power~enwiki:Youtube would ordinarily be a good reflection, but since the audience of the song when most of the audience uses YouTube. However most of the target audience of the song doesn't necessarily use YouTube, so other factors need to be considered like radio and Haredi specific web pages.
For example - A web page billed as the biggest Haredi web page in the world reported on the song.[2]
The radio station where I heard this has a link about the song as well [3] bolstering my claim that the YouTube count is not a good indication of notability for something in the Jewish world.
I hope this supports the reinstatement of the edit.Saxophonemn (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Those websites don't even mention its a cover. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I said and wrote it was a contrafactum which falls under the cover umbrella, as noted from other articles when listing parodies a subset of contrafactum. One site mentions Bruno Mars as the coordinator of the music, however I'm surprised that one line in an article would need 5 references.09:18, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
You said. How about the publications? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:06, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, those aren't good enough. They're not general publications like Haaretz, and the articles don't claim that this song is particularly notable in the Haredi community. It's purely local coverage. I removed a few other low-notability cover versions. Power~enwiki (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
General publications? Arutz 7 is one of the big stations - http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/277815. As for purely local coverage, you're aware that the radio station Kol BaRama covers the two major population centers of the country metro Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem. Meanwhile the other main radio station hasn't Kol Chai has a page for many of his singles, but not as far back as this song. Thus this song exists and the artist isn't a nobody, etc.Saxophonemn (talk) 09:18, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leona Lewis' covers on YouTube have on average less views than the cover from Roi Yedid, the one the most counts is in the same order of magnitude as Roi Yedid. Total views Roi has more, his video is listed twice at around 15k views each vs. Leona Lewis with various videos, with a total views no more than 20k. Yes, her overall channel is an order of magnitude more popular by an order, not very impressive when you compare the populations of the UK and Israel. I'm still trying to figure out why this one line requires this much scrutiny. We're using made up metrics for one line that aren't required for another line, as just demonstrated.Saxophonemn (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Foreign language examples
- Seasons_in_the_Sun this page lists various covers adaptations, etc. many without references.
- Autumn_Leaves_(1945_song) same idea. Saxophonemn (talk) 15:49, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCgB_ODP3w0
  2. ^ http://www.bhol.co.il/68975/%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A2%D7%99-%D7%99%D7%93%D7%99%D7%93-%D7%91%D7%A1%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%92%D7%9C-%D7%97%D7%93%D7%A9-%D7%94%D7%9C%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%99%D7%94-.html?cat=2&scat=51
  3. ^ http://www.kol-barama.co.il/live/52543/

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Locked Out of Heaven. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:39, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CopyEditing[edit]

I've completed an initial copyedit! As far as grammar and clarity are concerned I find everything to be in order. I will check back again in case of new information/edits. --Spatium apis (talk) 04:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Spatium apis: So soon I won't add anything else. I have no more sources for developing this article or improve it. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 03:06, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rock[edit]

This is a pop song not a rock song Dark Lord Thomas Pie (talk) 00:30, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


@Dark Lord Thomas Pie: First of all it's not what you think, you need sources for said claims. Regarding its genre

So in response to you affirmation the sources back it up as a rock song. Mixed with pop or reagge. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind Dark Lord Thomas Pie (talk) 12:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

career-opening[edit]

But what does "career-opening" mean, MarioSoulTruthFan? I can see that it is a direct quote from Billboard. Fine. I want you to explain it to me, because as I think you know by now, I am a person of moderate intelligence with excellent English, and I should be able to grasp the concept. I don't know what it means, and the source is no help; that is because IT IS JARGON. I am not the only person who doesn't understand what it means. It SHOULD mean something with which one begins one's career; but context tells me that can't be right. Do YOU know? His ninth consecutive career-opening top ten. So nine songs in a row that opened in the top ten? In his career? But, I mean, if they're his songs, presumably they're in his career; they aren't in someone else's career; they don't come from before he was born. I tried that edit, and you said "no". So explain it to me. Regulov (talk) 00:04, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Regulov I'm sorry, are you blind or something in that vein? I don't mean to offend, I'm asking 100% truthfully because you can't miss it on the BB source. " Radio Songs, marking his ninth consecutive career-opening top 10," 1; "half of which have climbed to No. 1. That career-opening streak is the longest among men in the chart's 20-year history." 2. I can't say much, as you fail to read a simple music article. Are you not? You strike me as such. You are making a huge mess, of course, they are on his career but do you think every single and artist release goes in the top ten? BTW they didn't start on the top ten, most of them at least. Some of them are features, henceforth BB makes that distinction. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 22:29, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Calmly, Mario. I'm pretty sure you can tell I know how to read. I will try again.
I do not understand what "career-opening" means. I have not failed to read it. I have failed to understand it. What exactly is the difference between "his ninth consecutive top-10 [release]" and "his ninth consecutive career-opening top 10"?
Is "career-opening" an adjectival modifier telling us what kind of "top 10" the song is? What is the difference between a "career-opening song" and a "song"?
I'm not trying to be an asshole, I actually don't understand it, and I suspect many other readers won't understand it, either.
Do you understand it? Regulov (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was not sure, henceforth I was asking. Very calmly, like I said it was a genuine question unlike when you called "JARGON". Yes for a matter of fact I do understand, it means since he started his career everything up to this point (Locked Out of Heaven) went top 10. The former sentence could be at any given point in his career. Imagine could be "his ninth consecutive top-10 [release]" since another year, let's say 2015. It means up to this point everything from 2015 to 2021 went top 10, but since his career started (2010) up to 2012, I believe he did. Do you get it now? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 23:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Thank you.
It is jargon. What that means is that it has special technical meaning for music-industry people, but its meaning is opaque to ordinary English speakers.
It needs to be explained, simply and clearly. Many thousands of readers—maybe millions!—have come to this page who could not have guessed what "career-opening top 10" meant, and the page has not informed them. I will work on it tomorrow. Regulov (talk) 00:22, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RegulovMaybe something in the vein of "since he debuted on the chart"? MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MarioSoulTruthFan
Yeah, sorry; my attention has been drawn away.
So my next question is what counts, and what doesn't count? I mean, not every album track has made the top 10; so what is it about the nine consecutive songs that makes them special? Is it just that the songs are played on radio enough to appear on the Radio Songs chart—so every song he's had that made the Radio Songs chart also made the top 10? Does it matter whether a song had a distinct single release? So, for example, if a song was released as a single, but stations and djs hated it and didn't play it at all, and it never even made the Radio Songs chart, even at the bottom, would that break the streak? If a song didn't get a single release, if stations and djs just loved playing some album track, and it climbed to the top 10, would that count?
I'm not trolling you; I'm still trying to understand it. If I understand it, I can rewrite it. Regulov (talk) 12:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regulov No worries. It counts what enters the chart, single or non-single. In this case, all of these were released as singles in the US ("Marry You" was also a single, but it wasn't released in the US, same for "Count on Me"). Everything that was released to that point in entered the top 10, doesn't happen to every artist, it rarely happens that's what makes them special. Yes, everything up to this point not only made the chart, but also the top 10. Yes, that would break the streak, which eventually did happen. Yes, that would count toward the streak, even if not a single, usually that doesn't happen because the label jumps on the bandwagon and gives the song an official release, it happens from time to time. However, all were released as singles in this case.
Its fine, you are understanding it. You got the picture. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


So. I'm going to flip the order.

On the Mainstream Top 40 chart, "Locked Out of Heaven" debuted at number 26, extending a streak begun with his debut single, "___", in 20__, and marking the longest such career-opening streak among male artists in the chart's 20-year history.

Here you can use "career-opening". This is what "career-opening" means; but you have to be careful about picking it up and redeploying it in different constructions. It doesn't make sense to speak of a "ninth consecutive career-opening top ten"; but that's where we started.
Okay. And now we want to find an interesting way to say almost the same thing about a slightly different streak on a slightly different chart.

When "Locked Out of Heaven" climbed to number seven in its sixth week on the Radio Songs chart, it became his ninth consecutive top ten, also in a streak beginning with "___".

This doesn't say it's a record. You can only cram so much into a sentence before it starts to split at the seams. I feel if you want to tell people about the record, you have to do it in a second sentence.

This extended a record he set in 20__ with his __th-straight top-ten single, "___".

I think the proposed phrasing makes it possible for normal readers to know what we're talking about. But I'm going to repeat my main complaint. The real obstacle for normal readers—and I realize that trying to anticipate the needs of some ill-defined "reader" raises all kinds of problems—the real obstacle is that there's just too much stuff, and it all feels the same. What's important? What's the take-away message? It just feels bewildering. The song reached number 12 after eight weeks on the Radio 80 in Fredonia; it climbed to number 55 after three weeks on Sylvania's Pop and Klezmer Hits, remaining on the chart for nineteen weeks, but was number 8 on Sylvania's HRTP Top 12 after five weeks, leaving the chart after seven weeks. We're just pointing a firehose at the reader. "Here's everything we could find. You figure it out." They don't read it. They skip it; they all skip it. Editors, too.
I know that isn't actually everything you could find. I know it is condensed; but it doesn't feel condensed. I think we have a duty to be concise. It is true that WP is liberated from the constraints of paper publishing, and can say as much as it likes, but most people are coming to this page for a digestible summary. If they want more, we're pointing them to selected sources; they can start there. I agree it is tough to be selective, and I know it doesn't feel helpful to be hectored by some weirdo who doesn't even really care about Bruno Mars. Anyway, my two cents. Good luck. I'll try not to harass you any further. But I'll be keeping an eye on those possessives. ;D Regulov (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regulov There is a problem, the sentence sounds great. But I can't say which song was because the source doesn't say it. It only says "Mars has reached the chart's top 10 with each of his first eight entries prior to "Heaven". In the second sentence I have the same problem, "It climbs 11-7 (88 million, up 18%) on Radio Songs, marking his ninth consecutive career-opening top 10, extending his record among men." I can't say things that aren't backed up by sources and BB doesn't really say which one was the first song, if I'm going to add that, I will be leaning into WP:OR. He only set the record with this song, it's not something you can start, it happened. I do understand what you mean, but one can't write it like that. In other articles, I tried to condense it more, you can see it by yourself. You don't harass me, on the other and I need someone that gives me another perspective on the articles. I also only mentioned the top tens, I will try to summarize a bit more. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you and I are communicating better. Thank you.
Original research really isn't an issue here, truly. No time now, but I'll try to explain what I mean in a few hours. Regulov (talk) 05:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regulov I went ahead and tried to fix the issue, I made minor changes to what you asked, see if you are ok with it. If so, we move to the other article we are having trouble with. Otherwise, you can go ahead and fix it. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:05, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Locked_Out_of_Heaven&oldid=1208551322"