Talk:Baby Shark

On removing the template
--GSMC(Chief Mike) Kouklis U.S.NAVY Ret. ⛮🇺🇸 / 🇵🇭🌴 02:51, 17 January 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkouklis(2) (talk • contribs)
 * Notoriety: As of January 2018 this is still trending in the Phillipines and has been mentioned on several occasions in TV news and other shows. I don't know how to reference to a television broadcast.

Article scope
The article as it stands feels a bit more like a promo for PinkFong than a comprehensive article about the song. I think it needs either expanding or deleting. Star-one (talk) 06:27, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

CPR
My brother a practicing EMT in Alaska told me that EMT hate this song because it is at 110 BPM and that is the ideal speed for chest compressions, so some one started singing it during CPR and they "hate" that song now. I just think that would be fun in the song description that is it also used as a tempo for CPR by some people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.58.200.81 (talk) 00:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Origin
Just to comment, I know that I sung this song at camp before 2007. I haven't found a citable source to back this up yet. 97.113.50.130 (talk) 04:01, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

I found a link to a forum post from April 9, 2006 discussing the song: https://www.acamessageboards.org/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=68802 97.113.50.130 (talk) 04:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I've heard it around 1990. Until there are sources, I suggest we leave out the origin -- penubag  (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


 * I strongly disagree. There seem to be a very large number of people who remember it from campgrounds, church functions, and family during their childhoods in the 80s and 90s.  Implying that it is a recent song originated by Pinkfong is too absurd to justify solely on the basis that sources have not yet been tracked down.  I've added a blurb.  Someone else can dig up the sources.  If the rules Nazis aren't happy with that then I'd suggest just deleting the article entirely. 146.6.208.28 (talk) 18:35, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, anecdotal accounts from anonymous Wikipedia users is not an acceptable source for use in Wikipedia. FallingGravity 20:30, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * As for my own personal research (as an anonymous Wikipedia user), the oldest version I could find is from 2004. There's an archived page of a song is titled "Jaws", which has some recognizable elements of "Baby Shark". The song (both the Jaws and shark versions) was apparently discussed discussed in the ACA message board the same year. FallingGravity 21:13, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * A similar children song in Swedish ("Hajarna") about mommy-, daddy-, child-, and granny shark seem to originate from 1997 per https://smdb.kb.se/catalog/id/001514675 (t) Josve05a  (c) 17:53, 29 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The song "Baby Shark"... titled "JAWS" is in the 1981 Making music fun : a complete collection of games, puzzles, and activities for the elementary classroom by Marvin Stanley Adler on pg 18. See here: https://archive.org/details/makingmusicfunco0000adle/page/18/mode/1up?q=jaws — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C40:5FF0:500:F0A9:CA1B:A147:4D95 (talk • contribs)
 * Similar but not the same. Binksternet (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

"prompting SmartStudy to threaten legal action over copyright infringement"
Makes no sense unless they own the copyright. Who wrote the song and who owns the copyright? More importantly, WHO is making money from all these cover versions and sudden increased popularity in 2019? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starhistory22 (talk • contribs) 10:59, 11 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Quite right. On the other hand, as of August 2022 the article states "SmartStudy lost their lawsuit after a South Korean court ruling held that children's songs handed down via the oral tradition are not copyrightable." This is nonsense, referring to a quite different lawsuit. When an American plaintiff sued SmartStudy, the reference supplied stipulates that SmartStudy prevailed: "Johnny Only, an American toddler music entertainer known for his rendition of "Baby Shark," lost a legal suit against a Korean YouTube video containing the same song that went viral worldwide, after a South Korean court ruled that children's songs handed down by oral tradition are not copyrighted.". 125.236.151.190 (talk) 09:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

2018 Youtube Rewind
Should it be added that it was included in the 2018 Youtbe Rewind? EDG 543 (talk) 14:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Gerardo Parra/Washington Nationals
This is becoming notable: NBC Sports Washington, Washington Post, USA Today. David in DC (talk) 17:55, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

for whatever reason this still hasn't been included, even though it played a notable role in the Nationals' World Series run and is likely responsible for some of the success the song has had in the US and added to its views on youtube. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:985:800:57E0:783E:3CAF:855D:670E (talk) 14:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Jauz remix
I'm not very sure about how things work around these parts of town as I work almost exclusively with EDM, (not children's songs) but Jauz, a prolific electronic music producer had recently released a bass house remix of Baby Shark. It was released as an official remix by Pinkfong/SmartStudy, so it would likely be notable enough to get a paragraph or two, maybe even an infobox. Anyway, I'm posting this as I thought y'all would be interested in adding it, or not. I can't really do it myself as I am working on other Wikipedia projects. Here are some reliable (electronic dance music-focused) sources that could be used for Jauz's remix (more may come out as the remix was released recently):     Micro (Talk) 09:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Eren Newton?
The article claims the song originated as a chant by Eren Newton, and later says that Eren Newton was "known to be" singing the song in 2003, with no citations for either claim. The only thing on the entire internet connecting "Eren Newton" to "Baby Shark" is this article and derivatives of it. What is the source for this claim? 140.147.152.43 (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Split proposal
I think that Pinkfong's version of Baby Sahark is famous enough to be on a separate article. Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 07:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Oppose split...this page and the Pinkfong page are covering the "Baby Shark" song well. No need for another page.--Bonnielou2013 (talk) 10:25, 23 March 2020 (UTC) Strong Support Not sure if I'm too late to the conversation, but the Pinkfong version is the second most viewed video on Youtube, and just by glancing at Google Trends, searches of "Baby Shark" increased 50 fold in the aftermath of the Pinkfong version, implying that that's what the large majority of people know it from, regardless of how long the song/dance itself has been around. In addition, most of this article seems to be built around coverage of the Pinkfong version in the first place. I think we could keep this article, but I also think that it's pretty clear that the Pinkfong version deserves an article of its own. To address John Pack Lambert's point, I realize you might be nostalgic about this, but I don't think we can let the drown out the bigger picture, which is that the Pinkfong version specifically has garnered far more coverage by reliable sources then the song/dance version that proceeded it. Stavd3 (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose I remember the original debate on deleting this article. We kept it because of deep reliable sourcing on its presence in the 1980s (or was it 1960s) local culture of Louisiana, evidence of its use decades ago in youth camps in Kenya and all sorts of things showing the song has a long history. As a pre-school teacher I was playing safe versions (no sharks eating people) of baby shark back in 2013. This is one song which has appeared in more versions than even the most dedicated folklorist could track. We should not let current youtube sensations drown out the deep folklore issues involved here. The song needs to stay in its proper context.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Overly redundant. All it's going to do is a merge proposal right away. We sholdn't be content forking. &#123;&#123;replyto&#125;&#125; Can I Log In 's  (talk) page 20:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I would suggest just making this entirely about the Pinkfong version, then, especially because the vast majority (maybe all, but I haven't gone through every single one) of the reliable sources in this article are referring to the Pinkfong version and that version only. Either way, regardless of what happens to the rest of the article, I think it's very clear, given the vast amount of reliable sources and its status as the second-most-viewed YouTube video ever, that it needs to have its own article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stavd3 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose, the Pinkfong version is just another iteration, and not even the first or only modern one, of an old song, so why on earth would it need another article? It's just a kids' song with a video, and the fact that one commercial interest has managed to promote it well has nothing to do with having a separate article, creating the need for disambiguation, hatnotes, and so on.  We have much bigger and more significant concepts sitting unified, and this song has no special claims. SeoR (talk) 22:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: There is little or no precedent for different versions of the same song having separate Wikipedia articles, even when one artist's version eclipses the others. There is no separate Wikipedia article for the Cyndi Lauper version of Girls Just Wanna Have Fun, the Talking Heads version of Take Me To The River, or the Janis Joplin version of Me and Bobby McGee, for instance (I could keep going but I'll spare everybody). The Pinkfong version may seem huge right now but this will fade; pop culture fads have a way of doing that. Carguychris (talk) 23:04, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: It's just an internet fad which will be forgotten in a few months' time. --Ef80 (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: pls close this proposal now. 178.153.45.46 (talk) 11:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Not all Internet fads fade away, but i'm sure this one will. - MegaGoatContribs 16:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Learning Station
The Learning Station had a version on one of their CDs. Here is the YouTube link. That was not posted until 2017 and only has 7 million views. However as I said I used to have that physical CD and would play it to the children in my pre-K class back in 2013.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Baby Shark's Big Show! into Baby Shark
Coverage of the Baby Shark's Big Show! appears to be limited to press releases and routine coverage, which falls short of meeting notability guidelines. However, some mention of it would likely be appropriate at Baby_Shark signed,Rosguill talk 19:41, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Support merge – at least at this time, the TV series does not appear to be independently notable. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose merge - there is an in depth article about the show's production and reliable articles from Deadline  and Variety . OpinChan (talk) 23:51, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The first source you link appears to be a less-than-reliable trade magazine whose about page does not inspire confidence. The other two articles are WP:ROUTINE pieces of coverage. That doesn't add up to WP:GNG. signed,Rosguill talk 00:03, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed – this hasn't gotten enough coverage yet to justify a WP:SPLIT-out from the main article. For now it's best to cover this in a section there (redirected to there from here). If the TV series ever gets more coverage, this can always be converted back into a standalone article. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:11, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * FTR, Kidscreen is usually considered a WP:RS. But, again – three sources isn't really enough for a separate article. Leave it as a section of the main article. As per WP:NOHURRY, this doesn't need its own article yet. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:12, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * OK. I now support a re merge, the show won't have regular episodes until March anyway. OpinChan (talk) 20:04, 24 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose merge - The show is related to the original video but in a separate entry. Mainly once the show progresses and airs more episodes in 2021. kpgamingz (rant me) — Preceding undated comment added 16:26, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * IOW, it's not ready to be a separate article right now. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:36, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2021
As of 2 November 2020, the most popular video of the "Baby Shark" song (labeled as "Baby Shark Dance"), uploaded on June 17, 2016,[23] has received over 7 billion views worldwide, making it the most-viewed video on YouTube.[24][1] This video surpassed the world population on 3 February 2021 at approximately 8:58PM UTC. Due to a 2013 change that the Billboard Hot 100 music charts made to account for online viewership of YouTube videos, "Baby Shark" broke into the Billboard Hot 100 at number 32 during the week of January 7, 2019. Giovannit2 (talk) 21:06, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. &#8209;&#8209; El Hef  ( Meep? ) 21:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

View Count Surpassing World Population
I don't know if this is noteworthy enough to be put onto the article, but as of February 3rd, 2021, the view count on PinkFong's version of the song surpassed the current world population. I thought that it might be a neat piece of trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.103.244.4 (talk) 22:38, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

HOW IS THAT EVEN POSSIBLE!!!!!!??? - Another person :O :O :O

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:14, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Baby Shark Dance Live Show.png

Another proposed split to Baby Shark's Big Show!
I know there aren't a lot of press release for this show but it doesn't really need to be part of an article that's mostly talking about a famous song. Keeping it there would just make the article itself longer. If opposed again, then we'll just let it be in this article and not rush it into its own article. kpgamingz (rant me) 14:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose: There isn't much information about the series, there for splitting it is unnecessary. The series did have an article before but was merged for a reason. Until more information is available, the split should not happen at this time. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 19:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Support. Keep all details regarding the song in one article (so would have opposed previous nom to separate two versions of the same song), and the TV show in another article. It's what works best in WP, and what we normally do if notability concerns are met. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

abc
'Bold text'Bold text

Due weight, not everything
I think the article is off balance and hopefully the origins section can be expanded too. I think the article is suffering from WP:RECENTISM, mostly with the Pinkfong section needing improvements to be consistent with WP:NOTEVERYTHING and WP:NOTNEWS. I don't have time to trim the excessive details at the moment, but thought I'd point it out. We don't want this to sound like a promo piece. Pythagimedes (talk) 18:45, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Language use
I am uncomfortable with the language used in this article, “stupid” and “f u c k” does not seem appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Am I misinterpreting it or should an edit be made? Lachiquilladelosandes (talk) 20:49, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Edit request - A joke from a Netflix show made it on to the page and needs to be taken off
Remove the Controversy section which states the author of the song murdered his wife. That originates from a joke in the Netflix show Inside Job - and the only reference attached to that fact is an article about Inside Job. (The article has multiple grammar mistakes in the title to boot.) Nwdunlap17 (talk) 06:14, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 19:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2022
Include : “Baby Shark Dance" is also the most disliked "made for kids" video on YouTube, with over 13.3 million dislikes.

Reference : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-disliked_YouTube_videos 66.229.125.242 (talk) 11:27, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Turns out that the statement cited in that Wikipedia article isn't properly sourced; neither of the sources after that statement say anything about Baby Shark. I've tagged it as a failed verification, and I was unable to find any reliable source confirming this (although it appears to be true). But in lieu of a source, I'm wary to add it in this article. Please let me know if you find a published source confirming this fact. Thanks! Ovinus (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Report to Pinkfong
This thing is dated back yo. 49.145.69.11 (talk) 10:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

7 billion not 11 billion.
Can someone fix the number of views for when it became the most viewed. Reference 3, I think. Besides how can it have 11 billion views in 2020 and then 10 billion in 2022. Kriil (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Which one is it? 11b in 2020 or 10b in 2022?
"In January 2022, it became the first YouTube video to reach 10 billion views. In November 2020, Pinkfong's version became the most-viewed YouTube video of all time, with over 11 billion views." 2600:8805:9088:5800:BCA3:BFDD:ECBA:1D6B (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Baby Shark
In the Spring of 2005 and Summer months of 2005 Baby Shark was sung all over Philadelphia by Education Works staff and campers. 174.173.81.112 (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)