Talk:I Have a Little Dreidel

Copyright
Unless this song is public domain (not clear, since it has an author but no date of writing), the lyrics ought not be published on wikipedia, since they are copyright. I am going to delete them, but note that the edit prior to mine as of today in the edit history will still contain them if there is good cause to put it back. TheHYPO (talk) 18:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * To the best of my knowledge this song is not under copyright and no longer (or was ever) attibuted. It addition its authors and composers are unclear, for instance both Goldfartb and  Gelbart are listed as composers in different places. See here for an article from Goldfarb's grandaugher claiming he wrote the song as a young man living in Brooklyn Heights, working at the Kane Street Synagogue and the Bureau of Jewish Education of New York as well as atesting to it not being a song that is attibuted. Epson291 (talk) 12:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

the connection of the song to Israel
The song is neither in hebrew nor it is common in israel and so i propose to remove the category Hebrew songs. --Oren neu dag (talk) 13:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

South Park
This article is about the extremely well-known song, not about South Park. South Park has no relevance whatsoever, and does not belong here. The claim that "many or most people know the song from the South Park episode" is absurd. -- Zsero (talk) 02:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
 * As surprising as this may be to some, most of the world is not Jewish and have only cursory knowledge of Jewish culture and traditions. You are welcome to your POV, but then, that's all it is. __meco (talk) 08:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you should leave the SP stuff out unless you've got a good reference for it, in which case it may deserve some sort of mention. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 15:03, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Why? It is common practice to mention references in other media. That is done with songs and other works of art. Why should this particular song be an exception to that general practice? __meco (talk) 19:09, 9 May 2010 (UTC)


 * It is not common, and not appropriate. See WP:TRIVIA.  That a well-known holiday song happened to appear on a TV show's holiday episode is not a relevant fact about the song itself. That South Park episode also featured about half a dozen other songs; did it occur to you to add a mention to the articles on those songs?  Of course not.  So why this one?
 * Should the article on Amazing Grace contain a list of every one of the hundreds of TV episodes and movies in which it has appeared? Or look at the mess that is Danny Boy, which does seem to include a list of every TV episode and movie in which the first line appears!  Note the cleanup tag on that article. (OTOH if one were to get all ones information from TV and movies, one would never know it goes on past that first line, so a list of movies or TV episodes in which the whole song appears, or at least the whole first verse, might be interesting...)  -- Zsero (talk) 22:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

If a list of other times this song has been used in film/t.v. is created, then I believe the south park reference belongs. --Iankap99 (talk) 01:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Well...such a list doesn't belong. If there were verifiable information about why the use of the song on South Park was so important and of interest to a broad range of readers, then it should go in along with sources. Otherwise, you would simply be creating an indiscriminate collection of information that doesn't provide further understanding of the subject of this article (other than "it appeared in this show, and this show, and this one, etc.). As Zsero pointed out, that would be trivial material. See also WP:IPC. -  SoSaysChappy   (talk)  04:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)


 * The reason I would have wanted the South Park information included in this article is that the song has been featured in several episodes if I'm correct, and also because of the elaborate and prominent presentation of a burlesque parody basically focusing on the song itself. __meco (talk) 06:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
 * So include it under parodies. --Iankap99 (talk) 21:12, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Direct English translation of Yiddish version
The presence of the observation "...whereas in Yiddish the singer is the dreidel" invites curiosity about the difference. I know mine was piqued by it. I'd like to suggest adding a direct English translation of the Yiddish version to the chart showing different versions, if someone is willing and able. Manganeez (talk) 02:31, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * This should be accompanied by moving the Yiddish version to a separate table since there is no direct correlation between the Yiddish and English verses. I can work on translating it when I have some time. --- Wikitiki89 (talk) - 08:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Finally got around to it. A year later, LOL. --- Wikitiki89 (talk) - 02:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

German Title
Why is the German title "ich [sic] bin ein kleiner dreidel [sic]" included at all? I don't believe any well-known version of the song exists in German, and Yiddish is not just some colloquial dialect of German that would invite a "helpful" translation of the title into Hochdeutsch. Incidentally, the first word of a title in German should be capitalized, as should nouns, and the Yiddish word is דריידל (dreidl), not *דריידעל (*dreidel). The e in the English rendering of the word is due to English orthographic conventions and phonological constraints. I recommend deleting the German title, but if it is kept, I believe it should be "Ich bin ein kleiner Dreidl."AviJacobson (talk) 00:17, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Miss Lucy had a baby
Same melody as Miss Lucy had a baby?