Talk:Death Cab for Cutie (song)

Huh?
How is this the secondary page and some band named AFTER the song the primary? The S 18:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It can appear confusing, as the disambiguation conventions do not equate primary meaning with original meaning. If you take a look at WP:DAB you will note that primary means "much more used than any other". So Death Cab for Cutie the band becomes the primary topic because editors believe that it is the meaning much more used than any other, even if it was not the original use of the term. --Paul Erik 03:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * (Scratches head) Hmm... but I'm from the state in which the band was formed, and I've never heard of it. I thought everybody had heard of the song... whatever. The S 02:36, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

I think someone ought to MAKE the writer rewrite it so that it tells about the song to someone who's never heard it before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.156.208 (talk) 15:29, 18 June 2009 (UTC)


 * you can't make anyone do anything, nor must you. be bold

72.208.145.184 (talk) 05:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Hank Janson novel
Marked 'citation needed'. What kind of 'citation' would be required to dispel the implied doubt? The book exists. Used copies are occasionally offered for sale. At the time of me posting this comment, there is one copy for sale at AbeBooks (at over £100, despite its far from pristine condition), with bookseller photographs of the cover (priced one shilling and sixpence), title page (which includes publisher and distributor details) and 'other books by' page. The title is even listed as being one of Hank Janson's 1949 works on that author's Wikipedia entry. It's hard to fathom why there is no 'citation needed' for the book in that article, yet its existence is queried on this page. Grubstreet (talk) 08:57, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


 * The above is now irrelevant. Apparently at one time there was a reference in this article to the novel Slay-Ride for Cutie, which indeed appears under https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hank_Janson#Works. That reference is no longer present. GeorgeTSLC (talk) 01:54, 20 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Unless someone wants to lend me a Tardis, being relevant at the time of posting is the best I can manage ;-). Grubstreet (talk) 17:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Origins of title.
The use of "claim" and "although" tends to cast doubt on Innes's account of how he came by the title. He freely admits that he took it from elsewhere, and has nothing to gain by being misleading. Maybe the author of the magazine story pinched it from Hoggart, but that's just speculation. And we don't know how old the "old" magazine was - Hoggart might even have pinched the title himself, but we'll never know. So we've got a direct quote in a reliable source, which, I venture, means we can take it as good enough for Wikipedia. Hengistmate (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2019 (UTC)