Talk:What Child Is This?

Child of the Poor
Should it be noted that it can be combined and/or used as accompaniment with another song, "Child of the Poor" (and vice-versa)? --Geopgeop (T) 05:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

The Manger Throne
While looking about I found that a few references said that "What Child is This?" was adapted from "The Manager Throne", Stories Behind the Best-Loved Songs of Christmas and The Complete Book of Hymns are just a couple. However, the song here and here bears no relation to "What Child". In fact both links indicate the hymn was written in 1867, two years after "What Child". Anyone have any more info? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 15:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that "The Manger Throne" seems to have nothing to do with "What Child Is This?" I made a small correction to an edit made some time ago to take out the reference to "The Manger Throne," which accidentally left some nonsense in the article.


 * Looking through the history, I see that the last sentence of the first paragraph had read, "Yet out of his near-death experience, Dix wrote many hymns, including a poem entitled, 'The Manger Throne,' from which three stanzas were later culled, set to the traditional English tune 'Greensleeves,' and retitled as 'What Child Is This?'”


 * It had been edited to this: "Yet out of his near-death experience, Dix wrote many hymns, set to the traditional English tune ’Greensleeves,’ and retitled as "What Child Is This?’"—which says that all of Dix’s hymns were called "What Child Is This" and set to "Greensleeves."


 * I changed it to this: "Yet out of his near-death experience, Dix wrote many hymns, including this one, set to the traditional English tune 'Greensleeves.’"


 * It would be very nice if some motivated person (apparently not me) could expand the story a little bit from there, and maybe add to the article on Dix as well.

Cbaile19 (talk) 15:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Upon examination, "What Child Is This?" was not taken from "The Manger Throne" in any way. The rhyme schemes and meter are completely different. Yet your page still attributes the origination of "What Child Is This?" as taken from "The Manger Throne". I tried to edit this but it was changed back. https://www.hymnsandcarolsofchristmas.com/Hymns_and_Carols/manger_throne.htm Rhyme scheme - abcbdb, Meter - 9.8.10.10.9.8. (heaven and power seem to be one syllable) https://library.timelesstruths.org/music/What_Child_Is_This/ Rhyme scheme - abccbddef, Meter - 8.7.8.7.6.8.6.7. The Orange Mailman (talk) 23:42, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

I just made the same observation with the same website. If there is a longer version of "What Child Is This?," it's NOT "The Manger Throne." I'm currently reading The Merry Wives of Windsor, and today came to a line mocking Sir John Falstaff as someone who would use "Greensleeves" to set psalms, which is close enough to make me curious about "What Child Is This?," only to learn it's almost 300 years later than the play. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 03:47, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

There is no connection between The Manger Throne and What Child is This? Why does this website still contain the erroneous information if it is plain to those involved in this conversation.The Orange Mailman (talk) 21:19, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Again, why does Wikipedia continue to propagate false information? There is no connection between The Manger Throne and What Child Is This?The Orange Mailman (talk) 00:56, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Recordings
This is just a trivia list. Nothing here is sourced, not even the fact that the people named recorded the songs. Why are the recordings notable and in what way? Are they notable recordings of "What Child Is This?", as opposed to the other people that have recorded the song but are not listed here? Are the recordings notable in the role that the song played in the recording artists life? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 22:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC) 1. 'Lists of miscellaneous information': This is not a list of miscellaneous information. It is a list of recordings, which may certainly be of interest. 2. 'This section does not cite any references or sources': There is nothing to reference. Either the song is there, or it isn't. Does the list of tracks of any album need a reference? Obviously not. 3. 'unclear or questionable importance or relevance': This is certainly relevant, there is nothing to dispute. It is meaningless to say that a list of recordings of a song is irrelevant to the song.
 * I would say you would need consensus to remove all cover version sections from the thousands of song articles in Wikipedia. Cover versions by notable artists is certainly not trivia. Period.  And how much more referenced can it be when all versions are either linked or album names are cited.  ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 03:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not interested in other articles just this for now. While the album may be listed, if it's not linked then how do I know that the song is included? However, that aside, the artists may be notable but why are these recordings notable. Where is the source for that piece of information? What makes the recording notable? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 21:04, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Removed useless tags because:

The [when?] tag is meaningless. There is no way to know when this happened. It obviously happened 'later' so this is as much as can be told. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vlonvo (talk • contribs) 17:31, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Reverting back to a merged article.
This article is about the song. Different versions do not receive different articles. Take a look at The Climb (song), which has a Joe McElderry version included, or Last Christmas (with multiple versions), I Want to Know What Love Is (with multiple cover versions), or any other notable cover. I have therefore remerged. There was nothing to discuss. --Richhoncho (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Disagree. This is a completely different type of song, a carol nearly 150 years old, not a modern pop-song.  The comparison with a pop song is poor.  Compare rather with all the other Christmas carols.  None of those have individual modern performances swamping them. Furthermore, proposed mergers should be discussed beforehand, to achieve consensus... or not.  Therfore I am reverting, until this proper protocol has been followed. Feline Hymnic (talk) 23:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Looking back through the history of this article I see that the Bocelli/Blige version was spun off from here in December 2009. Having looked at the Bocelli/Blige article and I can't see why that particular cover version is notable having only managed to reach #63 on the "Hot Digital Songs" list. That should be redirected to My Christmas. At the same time I think that some of the removed recordings should be restored. As to the three examples given above. Joe McElderry version of The Climb (song) at least "debuted at number two on the UK Singles Chart" and later climbed to #1 giving it some notability. As for Last Christmas and I Want to Know What Love Is. Neither of those should include all that information about the cover versions given the marginal notability of them. On the other hand look at It Came Upon the Midnight Clear. That is how Last Christmas, I Want to Know What Love Is and Bocelli/Blige should be listed here. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 04:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I applaud CambridgeBayWeather's merge! However, in response to Feline Hymnic, I cannot see for the life of me see any justification for every notable version of a song to have a separate article irrespective of age of recording, genre or any other reason - an article about A SONG should have ALL the information relating to that song on that page. Anything else is ludicrous. These two are the same song. --Richhoncho (talk) 12:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with both of you to a certain extent. The amount of coverage in the article about a cover of a song should be in proportion to the covers notability. For this article, this is probably too much but there should be some mention of the Bocelli/Blige and other covers. Other songs also include a list of recordings by notable artists but it seems (given a very small search) that few, if any, articles have a seperate version other than the original. For example look at Ain't That a Shame. For some odd reason there is a second infobox there for the Four Seasons but no other mention in the article. However, in the body of the article there is mention of the Pat Boone version and a sentence on the John Lennon cover. On the other hand I Want to Know What Love Is is way out of proportion, as is the other two cover sections. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 16:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I will take it on the chin for the edit of this article you didn't like - I wanted to merge two articles about the same song, not to make important one part or the other of the article. Consequently I really didn't think about balance. I have removed the Jitka Zelenkova part from I Want to Know What Love Is on the grounds that as she doesn't have an article at WP and the discography certainly din't belong in the song article. As for the Four Seasons, maybe some kind editor will add, with references, some text to go with the infobox. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 19:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * [outdent] Firstly, my apologies for being too blunt yesterday. I should have reacted in a more gentle manner.  Secondly, a further apology for assuming that people were familiar with the established principles of WP:MERGE and for my failure to reference this policy explicitly when reverting. (This policy, of course, means that mergers are a planned, and managed process, agreed by potentially all interested parties, taking place over an extended period of perhaps several weeks.) Thirdly, an expansion of why my vote in such a proposed merger would be 'against': namely that while a song written as a pop song might well regard different versions as variants of each other, this particular item, as with traditional church hymns and old carols, is not in that written as a pop song category; the articles on this type of song tend to be of a historical nature about history and evolution of the carol/hymn; they may perhaps include a 'notable recordings' section, with details that are deliberately very brief, but even the existence of such sections in the first place is sometimes disputed!  So when I saw a basically historical article suddenly being swamped (contrast WP:UNDUE) with a mass of detail about just one (amongst potentially very many) I was worried.  (And again, my apologies for the poor way in which I then reacted.) Feline Hymnic (talk) 22:08, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * @Richhoncho, Sorry my intention was not to blame you for the material. It was originally added back here and you were just making a good faith attempt to fix what was a problem in that Wikipedia does not have different articles for the same songs. I have moderated my stance on the inclusion of covers from what I said in the section above this. However, I would argue against a section of covers being called "Notable recordings". A section could be made called "Covers", "Recordings" or "Cover version". Calling it "Notable recordings" would require sources that show why a particular cover was notable. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 22:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No apologies necessary Feline Hymnal, it's life at WP! With songs it's standard practice to merge different versions of a song/piece of music -otherwise we would have everybody who thinks "my favourite band is more important than that horrible band you like" creating articles for every different recording of a song, and that creates a backlog of songs to be merged, nor can I fathom why somebody referring to, say, the B&B version wouldn't like the option to see, on one page, as much info on the song as possible. FWIW If you had trimmed the Bocelli/Blige part in a merged article I would not have had anything to say, nor any objections. Maybe next we meet we shall be singing from the same "hymn sheet" Cheers.--Richhoncho (talk) 22:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * CBW, Again no apologies necessary, I wanted the two parts merged, and as I told Feline above, if it had been trimmed I wouldn't have minded in the least. I actually prefer "notable recordings" to "covers" for several reasons, a) it automatically excludes single stage performances on wet Wednesdays when nobody is listening, c) it also suggests that it is a copy of another recording - the original meaning of "cover" and c) it is meaningless when a songwriter has written for others to perform, as it might be in this particular case, it was probably written by Dix for others to sing which means every version is a cover. But I am swimming against the tide on this. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:41, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the best thing that can be done, is to just add a Singles section in the My Christmas article, which I have done.--65.92.5.28 (talk) 00:27, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The original lyrics are conspicuously absent. May we please add them?
May we please add a section to include the original lyrics?:

1. What Child is this who, laid to rest

On Mary's lap is sleeping?

Whom Angels greet with anthems sweet,

While shepherds watch are keeping?

This, this is Christ the King,

Whom shepherds guard and Angels sing;

Haste, haste, to bring Him laud,

The Babe, the Son of Mary.

2. Why lies He in such mean estate,

Where ox and ass are feeding?

Good Christians, fear, for sinners here

The silent Word is pleading.

Nails, spear shall pierce Him through,

The cross be borne for me, for you.

Hail, hail the Word made flesh,

The Babe, the Son of Mary.

3. So bring Him incense, gold and myrrh,

Come peasant, king to own Him;

The King of kings salvation brings,

Let loving hearts enthrone Him.

Raise, raise a song on high,

The Virgin sings her lullaby.

Joy, joy for Christ is born,

The Babe, the Son of Mary.

Skeptical Realist (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:03, 24 December 2020 (UTC)