Talk:Beep Beep (song)

March 2019
Like so much on wikipedia, the article is all wrong.

I have a 78 (if anyone here knows what that means) circa 1920 having the lyrics which are sort of described here. The writer should have admitted that he didn't have all the lyrics, but the gist of it is. . ..

Wikipedia needs two in the hat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.91.180.148 (talk) 16:07, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I have removed all unverified content from the article. —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124;  16:50, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

According to the article for the band, this song was released in 1958, not 1920. If so, that is a song by another artist.-- Auric   talk  23:35, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Song length
Is there a way to determine the length of this song? I checked the Discogs page which has "2:18-3:12" over 114 tracks. The earliest track with a length is from 1961 at 3:04.-- Auric   talk  23:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Discogs is not considered a reliable source. —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 15:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Also the information at the Discography section of The Playmates has "3:01".-- Auric   talk  23:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * To what reliable source is that claim cited? —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 15:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It isn't actually. The point I'm making is that it shouldn't be added until a reliable source is found.-- Auric   talk  15:35, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

unverified additions, July 2019
On 21 July, added album, release year, genre, legnth, and label claims with any citations to reliable sources. I removed them, noting such; they reverted my edit saying "verified from the image; removed length - multiple values found". There's a few problems here: (a) uploaded the image, and they they are not a reliable source. (b) If verifiable, the photo in the article would be a primary source, which we should eschew for secondary. (c) Auric also replaced the album, release year, and genre claims, which still have no verification to reliable sources.The verifiability policy says that "all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. Additionally, quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations." That includes this article. —  fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 15:06, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I consider the image of the label on the record, to be reliable, since it would be verified by the record label before printing. "Primary sources can be reliable, and they can be used. Sometimes, a primary source is even the best possible source, such as when you are supporting a direct quotation. In such cases, the original document is the best source because the original document will be free of any errors or misquotations introduced by subsequent sources."

- WP:PRIMARYNOTBAD


 * Can you provide a source that refutes this, such as proof that has manipulated or altered the image, or information about an earlier release?--  Auric   talk  15:47, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's assume good faith on Holiday56's part and assume they found this photo online somewhere. (a) There is still no source for the image by which we can verify that it's representative of the original release of "Beep Beep".  (b) Then there's the requirement of the verifiability policy of "any material challenged […] must be supported by inline citations."  To what, exactly, will you cite your claims?  You can't cite an article to content on Wikipedia (i.e. File:Beep Beep Playmates single.jpg) IAW the verifiability policy.  —   fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 16:10, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

image added September 2019
The image File:Beep Beep - The Playmates.jpg is alleged to be an image of this song's phonograph record. It's sourced to 45rpms.com, which doesn't strike me as a reliable source. Furthermore, the sourced prose in the article doesn't mention this pressing at all, which is supposed to be "from the album At Play with the Playmates". I don't trust the provenance of this image, it doesn't relate to the single as sourced in the article, and Verifiability requires that "all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources [… and that] any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be supported by inline citations." Therefore, I removed it on those grounds. At 03:42 on 13 September 2019, reverted my edit as "baseless". I welcome the input of editors on the "baselessness" of applying the verifiability policy. —  Fourthords  &#124; =Λ= &#124; 04:14, 13 September 2019 (UTC)