Talk:After Midnight (J. J. Cale song)

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 articles

Rock music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Version with Clapton, Santana, and Hendrix

Is there a version of this son with Clapton, Carlos Santana and Jimi Hendrix together? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.20.250 (talk) 23:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is a well-known one, but it's unofficial and some claim Santana and Hendrix to be fake attributions - meaning it would really be two unknown players beside Clapton. You can check it out on Youtube and the mp3 is very widespread I think. The track certainly sounds authentic to me, all three appear clearly recognizable by their styles of playing and there was time to do it - it sounds live and of course they could have done it onstage some time before EC recorded (or released) his own take. I would not rule it out as a misnomer. A very cool take by the way. Strausszek (talk) 12:03, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cale infobox please

The Cale version needs an infobox, in the manner of Cocaine (song), I Shot the Sheriff, and countless others Anarchangel (talk) 04:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Of the two songs on which we have articles, this would appear to be the primary meaning and no evidence to the contrary has been presented. DrKiernan (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After Midnight (song) → ? – Eric Clapton's version is well known, but I read that J.J. Cale did his own demo version first. There is After Midnight (Blink-182 song), so should this article be After Midnight (Eric Clapton song) or something else? --Relisted Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC) --George Ho (talk) 00:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this song is the primary meaning. The article already mentioned that Cale wrote the song. Hot Stop (Talk) 02:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's fine where it is a the moment. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if this is the primary meaning then it should be located at After Midnight; if it isn't then it should be disambiguated so as to not be ambiguous. Ambiguous disambiguation is just a bad idea. As to what to call this... After Midnight (J.J. Cale song) seems to be the answer, or After Midnight (1966 song). The current title should redirect to the disambiguation page. -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 10:48, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I thought WikiProject Songs generally opposed the idea of sub-primary topics. --BDD (talk) 18:42, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on After Midnight (JJ Cale song). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.1050chum.com/index_chumcharts.aspx?artist=7675

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:38, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Different versions released by Cale

The article begins "After Midnight" is a rock song by J. J. Cale, issued by him as a single in 1966" and then goes on to say "The single by Cale reached #42 on the Billboard Hot 100 in 1972."

However, if I understand the history of the song correctly, the "slow tempo" version released by Cale in 1972 was not the same recording as the 1966 original, which had a faster tempo. For clarity, perhaps the article should read "Cale released a re-recorded version of the single in 1972, which reached #42" etc. Muzilon (talk) 11:55, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from WP:RM/TR

After Midnight (J. J. Cale song) → After Midnight (song) – I was unaware of the discussed move two years ago. The previous RM result in "not moved". Somehow, the consensus was ignored, and the article was disambiguated further without another discussion. After reversion, the renaming shall be re-discussed. George Ho (talk) 23:41, 26 November 2016 (UTC) See below.[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 00:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dicklyon and George Ho: I have moved this to here for discussion; please feel free to propose alternatives. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 00:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 November 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED —UY Scuti ^Talk 03:54, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

After Midnight (J. J. Cale song) → After Midnight (Eric Clapton song) – The rationale is too lengthy for the bot and for those browsing at WP:RM. In short, Eric Clapton is more recognized by the masses than J.J. Cale. WP:DABSONG says use the name of the original performer. However, WP:GUIDES and WP:Criteria shall triumph WP:DABSONG and be utilized for the name change. Also, the results of my failed RM proposal on Somebody to Love (Jefferson Airplane song) shall be used as precedent to this discussion. See my full rationale at the "Discussion" section. George Ho (talk) 01:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Oppose. There is a good chunk of this article dedicated to Cale and his connection to the song. It is not an Eric Clapton song, and Cale and Clapton are not connected the way The Great Society and Jefferson Airplane are. Nohomersryan (talk) 02:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, regardless of what disambiguator is decided on, I oppose this page occupying After Midnight (song) (which was opposed to be moved from in the RM above and sort-of suggested in the section above this one). Regardless of the fact that it's partial disambiguation, it is not even the primary topic for this song name, since After Midnight (Blink-182 song) gets pretty much the same amount of views. Nohomersryan (talk) 02:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. J. J. Cale wrote the song and charted with it, so credit should remain with him. See It's My Life (Talk Talk song) for a similar example, where No Doubt is not credited in the title. A counterexample might be Black and White (Three Dog Night song), which was a top 10 hit for UK band Greyhound before Three Dog Night. And the issue seems to have been avoided entirely in the incomplete disambiguation of Respect (song), originally written and record by Otis Redding (and in contrast to Respect (Alliance Ethnik song)). —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 07:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose same in effect as Talk:What a Man (song) In ictu oculi (talk) 08:02, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - if this was some kind of popularity contest between Cale and Clapton, then maybe. But, as with many popular songs, it's been recorded by plenty of other musicians. Cale wrote it, simple as that. I think the songwriter should always take precedence, unless there's an overwhelming argument against that. After all, the article is "After Midnight (J. J. Cale song)" not "After Midnight (J. J. Cale single)". Martinevans123 (talk) 11:24, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Martinevans123, who nails every point. --MrStoofer (talk) 10:52, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Originally, I requested the previous title After Midnight (song) to be re-used. However, the wide consensus would not approve the partial disambiguation. Therefore, I'm going for the alternative and am proposing the name change instead. I recently read WP:DABSONG, a shortcut to a section of WP:MUSICDAB. Per guideline, the name of the original performer shall be used. However, per WP:GUIDES, a policy about "guidelines" themselves, common sense can be utilized for exceptions. Now I shall make an exception to that guideline and use a policy to triumph that guideline.

Per WP:Criteria, since choosing the title for the song is not easy, at least one criterion can apply but should be strong enough for name change or retention. The present title might fail "recognizability" because J. J. Cale is less recognized than Eric Clapton, though both artists recorded the song. Neither the present title nor the proposed one is concise, but "conciseness" doesn't apply due to statistics and After Midnight as a dabpage. Both titles are precise, but "preciseness" is redundant because the parenthetical disambiguation is already used. "Naturalness"... I can't tell whether a reader can exactly type the parenthetical title, so I might push the criterion aside. "Consistency" is very tricky. The present title follows other titles disambiguated by the names of original performers, like Fever (Little Willie John song). However, I did a failed RM proposal on Somebody to Love (Jefferson Airplane song). The result was "not moved"; the opposers found "Darby Slick", "Grace Slick", and "The Great Society" less recognizable than "Jefferson Airplane".

"Consistency" might be important for disambiguation. However, I can't strictly interpret it to retain the present title. I found "recognizability" the strongest criterion of all five criteria, which the policy calls "goals, not [r]ules." Therefore, "Eric Clapton" shall be part of the title. George Ho (talk) 01:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proof that Eric Clapton is more popular than JJ Cale. George Ho (talk) 01:48, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics on the target page and redirect page. George Ho (talk) 02:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added another entry in the stats, Ryan. Combine JJ and J. J., so the total will be higher than the Blink 182 song. George Ho (talk) 02:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Even with those added, this song still only gets 57% of the pageviews, which does not mean it is the clear primary topic or that we should implement partial disambiguation. Nohomersryan (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind partial disambiguation or primacy, which I am not mainly proposing. What about another precedent, All Through the Night (Cyndi Lauper song)? What is the difference between the two articles? George Ho (talk) 03:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not fond of it, but that one seems less dubious because Shear's version is completely non-notable, as is the album it comes from, and that there is essentially little to talk about that isn't in relation to Lauper. Here, the original version is by Cale, who's a much more famous figure than Shear, and his original actually charted on the Billboard Hot 100, so you could have an article asserting the notability of Cale's song without resorting to mentioning Clapton at all. Nohomersryan (talk) 03:18, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While the article might have details about the original performer and the composition of the song, Ryan, Eric Clapton made the song a lot well known and more successful. Most radio stations, most retro and classic rock ones, familiarize the Clapton version, but very few or less play the original (or Cale's re-recording). Also, readers often use the words "after midnight" and "eric Clapton" on search engines, like Google and Bing, to search for the song. In short, readers (and general audience) must come first per WP:AT#Deciding on an article title, even with article improvements and a little weight on Cale. George Ho (talk) 05:27, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cale's 1972 re-recording was charted, not his original version. That was two years after Clapton's successful version. Also, Gordon, Billboard Hot 100 was the '72 version's only chart. I tried finding other charts of Cale's versions but came empty-handed, even when Cale's versions were released domestically and sparsely internationally. At least I can find some reviews. George Ho (talk) 08:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ryan and Gordon: I reworked the article into the present condition. Thoughts? George Ho (talk) 10:11, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.