Talk:All You Need Is Love (JAMs song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Talk:All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song))

All You Need Is Love (JAMs song) is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 16, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
August 20, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
October 1, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
August 6, 2022	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

The KLF (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject The KLF, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.The KLFWikipedia:WikiProject The KLFTemplate:WikiProject The KLFThe KLF

Electronic music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hip-hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip-hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip-hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip-hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip-hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip-hopHip-hop
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Reviews

Vinoir, where did you find the new quotations? They are most excellent. --kingboyk 18:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Inside Shag Times, fella. I trust them 100% because many of them can be found verbatim in the Library of Mu, while others do not have the text available at Mu but do have key quotes that match, for example "a triumph of nowness over mere newness". --Vinoir 18:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What next?

So, you've queued this one up as the next article to work on. What is needed? Or is it ready for a GA nom do you feel? I'll have another top to bottom read of it now...

Needs samples of both versions - are you doing this or shall I? (If me, you'll need to give me instructions on how to create the OGG files)
~~We need to try and identify Underground magazine~~
We also need to correctly date the Anderton quotation. I might be able to do that at the library.
~~"received a positive review in Record Mirror". Not happy with that assertion unless we have a quotation or a grading.~~

Really only niggly points. I think the article reads well and should be interesting even to a non-fan. Definitely GA material and possibly FA too. --kingboyk 10:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I only just found this thread for some reason. Have done some more work on the article today.

- I'll let you know in a day whether I can get an MP3 of the original, otherwise either please send it to me (I've a larger e-mail account to provide you with details of) or let me know if you'd prefer to do it yourself. I have the rerelease so that's okay. The delay has been that Realplayer went all stingy on me, withdrew my "convert media format" option (made it "premium feature"), and I need a M4A-MP3 converter that works. This is in progress.
- Underground magazine seems to exist, see here (long list!) or here for example.
- Will have a look at the Record Mirror situation.

--Vinoir 18:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you need the original, if it's lacking from your collection I can pay the cheap price of sending it to you in return for you doing the work :) OK on Underground magazine, will check those links tommorow and consider whether we can use it. I'll try to get an update on the Anderton quote before the end of the week. Also must remember to finish my trawl through the online newspaper archives - I wonder if I could use some sort of sucker tool to save them all to HDD? Hmm... --kingboyk 18:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, regarding the MP3. Wouldn't know about the sucker tools I'm afraid, but good luck. The Underground links are to an interview with Alan McGee of Creation Records, and a huge "for sale" list that includes copies of the mag. --Vinoir 19:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it, is it permissible for us to use a sample of the original "All You Need Is Love"? I don't know what the outcome was of the MCPS investigation into that track. --Vinoir 12:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's fair use. The fair use claim will apply to the original samples as well as The JAMs' work. (I am not a lawyer). --kingboyk 10:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's good enough for me! That could mean that "The Queen And I" is fair game too then? That would really make me smile. --Vinoir 10:34, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not! --kingboyk 10:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA as of now

Just 1 thing, can you have the dates all in the same format : MMMMM D, YYYY (or something else). I love the prose. Lincher 02:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yippee! Wonderful, thanks very much. I'll make sure the dates are sorted. --Vinoir 08:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Done.--Vinoir 07:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anderton quote

Here is another credible, referenced article dating Anderton's remarks to December 1986. This is a 1989 pamphlet by the Libertarian Alliance. I'm more than happy to call the date a fact, and have altered the footnote in the article to reflect this. That said, of course, if either of us gets the opportunity to verify it once and for all, all the better. --Vinoir 20:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice to know. I'm sure I have the correct quote and the correct era, but of course me being sure isn't enyclopedic :) It was too old to be on ProQuest and I forgot to visit yer actual library to look it up! --kingboyk 21:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I never managed to get my hands on the IGUN Hansard ref either. Oh well, "Next time, Gadget"... --Vinoir 22:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

I think the intro needs to go on further to talk about the media reaction that the single gathered talking more about its legacy on samplism for its "stunning audio collage". Or something. Fuck you guys are good, the singles articles are amazing. I feel so guilty about all the articles that I have in paper form but never published on the library. If there are any particular articles that you want me to scan, or even better photocopy and post to you! let me know. cheers Drstuey 10:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Stuart! Your library has been more than a help - without it we couldn't have done this work! I think the only articles we'd kill for if you haven't scanned them is any music press coverage of the early releases, and indeed any articles from 1987-1992. We have plenty of K Foundation stuff and - as you know - I can get my hands on newspaper articles from the last few years. Will have a look at your intro suggestion. (Sorry I didn't reply before, only just noticed your post). --kingboyk 14:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I got a bit of a wishlist going, which I've posted on your user talk... material connected with The White Room is particularly important as that article's pathetic at the moment. --kingboyk 19:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:The JAMs - All You Need Is Love (excerpt).ogg

The image Image:The JAMs - All You Need Is Love (excerpt).ogg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --09:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced material

There are various unsourced paragraphs in "Recording and release" and "Composition", and a couple of deadlinks that ought to be addressed. This is an old FA and not up to current standards; WP:FAR will be the next step. Bencherlite ^Talk 17:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping up standards....

Just a note - the Promotion and themes section has few inline notes. @Kingboyk: would you be able to ferret out some refs and give the article a once-over? It would be great to buff it and get it on the main page. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:58, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly @Casliber:, but I'm very short of time these days. Perhaps you could get the ball rolling by finding some possible references and posting them here for review?

I don't actually love the song, but it has it's place in history. I'd like to think we did a nice job with the article so thanks for suggesting it is potentially worthy of the front page! :)--kingboyk (talk) 19:35, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceoil and Kafka Liz: what do we think of this article? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:04, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not much frankly - its clear that it has depreciated since kingboyk was active....eg "artistic attitude", and huge chucks of unreferenced claims. Maybe revert to the promoted version? Ceoil (talk) 21:31, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Think it needs some work to retain its status. I think it can be done, but I confess I’m not familiar with the song, so I’d need to do some research. Kafka Liz (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very familiar with the material and sources and would be delighted to help. Ceoil (talk) 00:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thx +++ Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ceoil: Did you do what you needed with this article and if not do you have a plan? I added a few more references, forgetting about this thread; if a rollback is warranted it would be easy enough to re-apply my changes afterwards so feel free to do that if necessary.

I've been asked to try to rescue Fuck the Millennium so with that and work I really have my hands full at the moment! --kingboyk (talk) 06:19, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Title

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

This article was moved from "All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song)" to "All You Need Is Love (the JAMs song)", where "The JAMs" is the name of the band. MOS:THEMUSIC says "the word the should in general not be capitalized in continuous prose".

It goes on to say "However, "the" should be capitalized mid-sentence when it begins the name of an album or other artwork:", giving A Brand New Day (The Wiz song) as an example (where The Wiz is the name of a musical). Unfortunately, the guide does not give an example for "Song (the Band song)"/"Song (The Band song)".

My interpretation is that the parentheses mean that "The JAMs song" is not continuous prose and that the original name is correct. Looking for precedent, I Googled for "different songs with the same name" and this led me to Hello (disambiguation) (mostly albums but it's the same issue), One (disambiguation) (again, mostly albums), and The End (The Doors song), where in all cases that I can see, the "the" in the band name is capitalised when it is in parentheses before "song", "album" etc. Looking at "Love" I see Love (The Juliana Theory album).

I don't see why this article should be an exception and suspect whoever moved it has made a mistake. However, I am aware that this is a contentious area so am asking for guidance before I hit the "Move" button. I didn't post on the talk page of MOS:THEMUSIC as that appears to be discussion about the page not for seeking assistance. --kingboyk (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS I have no particular personal preference with regards to the name, I just want the article to be correctly named per policy, especially as it is a Featured Article. --kingboyk (talk) 07:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingboyk: I suggest discussing this with Joefromrandb who moved the page back in October 2018. Their edit summary claims that they were conforming to the title policy, so perhaps they can point to some clarifying discussion somewhere or else the two of you can decide it really should be moved back. FWIW, I agree with your interpretation, but I'm not claiming any expertise. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. Let's see if your ping summons the editor who moved it :) (they've not edited this month, but there's no great rush). In the meantime, I am going to have a think about whether "(JAMs song)" would be acceptable, given that "The JAMs" is already an abbreviation from "The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu". --kingboyk (talk) 19:58, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A related RFC was closed with no consensus. --kingboyk (talk) 05:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After other editors renamed articles about albums by The KLF for disambiguation purposes, we ended up with The Black Room (KLF album) and The White Room (KLF album) (no "the"). I note also that WP:BEATLES have avoided using the "The" in titles, including the Featured Article Something (Beatles song). I will follow this lead, and remove the "The" from this article's title, which not only negates the need for debate about '"the" vs "The" inside parentheses' but also makes the title shorter. "The JAMs" is already a contraction anyway, as their full title is "The Justified Ancients of Mu Mu". --kingboyk (talk) 12:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:URFA/2020

This older FA has significant amounts of uncited text and no longer meets the FA criteria. If improvements are not made, a featured article review will probably be necessary. Hog Farm _Talk 06:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Categories: