Talk:Blue (Bill Mack song)

My reason for the page to be deleted.

This page was deliberately made after this incident here, and here it is a deliberate attempt at vandalism as the sources are questionable. Dfw.com uses a music video that is uploaded by a fan not Rimes herself that's the biggest hint right there many of the other sources are not very reliable. So I ask this page be deleted. Swifty*^talk_contribs 11:52, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This article should not be speedy deleted as lacking sufficient context to identify its subject, because this is the original version of the song, by the songwriter, and the redirect should be from Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) to this page, rather than the other way round. Whether the song is a single or otherwise is irrrelevant, whether the Mack or Rimes version make it notable is equally irrelevant. This is the orginal version, as recorded by the songwriter, and was before it as turned into a redirect and nominated for speedy deletion (why?) a referenced article and part of the story of the song. --Richhoncho (talk) 11:53, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

As I stated before this was done deliberately and it is poorly sourced as it used the same sources that were questioned on Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) and almost started an edit war. So the page may not need to be deleted but should stay redirected to Blue (LeAnn Rimes song). Swifty*^talk_contribs 11:58, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Proof this was deliberately done here, here, and here Swifty*^talk_contribs 12:04, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Secondly most pages like this are singles NOT normal songs. As Rimes released it as a single this version is wrong. Mack did record the song but as a demo which he sent to Rimes' father. SOURCE: CMT Inside Fame: LeAnn Rimes plays a recording of Mack singing Blue. Swifty*^talk_contribs 12:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

The guidelines are established regarding naming at Invisible (Jaded Era song) amongst other places. Title should be as per original version, not subsequent (whether more famous or not) versions. But at the basics, if Mack didn't write the song, there would be nothing for Rimes to sing! --Richhoncho (talk) 12:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps this will convince you that the song was originally recorded by Mack himself, in 1958, here. Rimes might have heard a demo first, but that's not the whole story, is it? --Richhoncho (talk) 12:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Nope it's not a reliable source that was uploaded by a user and not Mack himself and I listened to it and that's the demo he sent to Rimes. Swifty*^talk_contribs 12:46, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay relooked at that it's a demo. Notice the record says vocal. It's nothing but a demo and does not prove that he released this as a single or that this page should exist. Swifty*^talk_contribs 12:50, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd also like to point out the summary:

From 1958, this is the very first version of the song made famous by LeAnn Rimes in 1996. Kenny Roberts' version was released also on Starday label in 1966.

This does not prove that Mack or Roberts released it as a single it only proves that they recorded it and that song pages are usually singles or promotional singles and as there has been no proof given that Mack released this as a single merging the two pages is not necessary and the redirect is correct. Swifty*^talk_contribs 12:59, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Proof of vandalism

As seen here, here, and here this page was deliberately made out of an attempt of vandalism and as such needs to be deleted, also Richhoncho seems to think it is okay to do such things because of what is seen above when the obvious is shown. Also I'd like to point out that the sources used were the cause of the edit war on the Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) page and is another proof that this page was made out of pure vandalism. Fastily was also involved and warned the user against their vandalism and she is an admin on here. Swifty*^talk_contribs 13:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as pure vandalism or a blatant hoax, because the editor who added this speedy request has already added and deleted a speedy before, please see talk page for the full details. It wasn't pure vandalism or hoax last time, so that claim needs to validated --Richhoncho (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

DUDE I SHOWED THE PROOF STOP HOUNDING ME! I've already reported you because you are conducting in vandalism dude now stop! Swifty*^talk_contribs 14:30, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

REMOVED balance of copy and paste from articles.

Look at the sources they are the same ones that was causing an edit war hmmmmmm. Swifty*^talk_contribs 15:08, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

RFC on title/subject matter

It is disputed whether this article should be titled Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) and concern the composition and LeAnn Rimes' single or whether it would be more appropriate for it to be titled Blue (LeAnn Rimes single) and only concern her single, or whether it would be better named Blue (Bill Mack song) and cover the composition and also covers of it (including LeAnn Rimes' single). I personally support the second option (and a separate article on the LeAnn Rimes cover), but as there is no clear consensus in prior discussion I am initiating a request for comment on the issue. --He to Hecuba (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

• Unfortunately, the tussle over this resulted in licensing problems from cut-and-paste moves, so I had to step in with my admin bit to clean things out. The path I saw that looked cleanest is where we are now: cut-and-paste moves deleted, article merged, history pointers inserted, and redirects from the LeAnn Rimes redirects to the section in the song article. I will also point out that this is the normal treatment of such things: songs get articles, and any notable releases of the song get covered as sections of the article. Any exception that I'm aware of has been merged back to this format after discussion.—Kww(talk) 19:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

• There are several reasons why the article should stay in it's present article space and I note my arguments below :-

1. Although the Rimes version might be the most notable, it had been released as a single at least 4 times before. As the article says, Although it was claimed that Mack had been waiting to find the right vocalist to record "Blue" for all that time, the song was recorded by at least four artists (Mack himself, Roy Drusky, Kathryn Pitt and Kenny Roberts) before Rimes.
2. As Mack is the writer and there is evidence that his was the first single release No 361 on the list of Starday Records release, together with a photo of the single at Youtube it seems logical to disambiguate the song by the first artist/writer in this instance. A similar instance is at Invisible (Jaded Era song) where the Ashlee Simpson version is more notable, but it is disambiguated by the first artist/writers. There are numerous other articles named after the original artist, rather than a later, more notable artist/recording.
3. If you split two articles both versions, it would would separate the history of the song. It is also against the guidelines voiced in WP:SONGCOVER. Then you have an additional problem, which parts of the song should be in which article? The alternative is that the Rimes entry becomes merely a list of chart entries, which would be counterproductive. Again, there is a large body of precedent not to split different versions including, American Pie (song)#Madonna and Higher Ground (Stevie Wonder song)#Red Hot Chili Peppers version.
4. WP has never disambiguated by "single" and any song disambiguated by the use of the word single are moved very quickly by many different editors (as indeed this song has already be reverted 3 times this week by different editors when it had been moved to Blue (LeAnn Rimes single)). This emphatically suggests that even if there is concensus now for moving to single, another editor is going to move it again.
5. As User:He to Hecuba said on another talkpage related to this song, Describing the song as a "LeAnn Rimes song" is contentious as she did not write it." I totally agree with this, which means we have no choice but to leave where it is.

Cheers.--Richhoncho (talk) 19:54, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, the fact that several editors moved it to the "single" title shows significant support for such a move. I agree with you about having a "Blue (Bill Mack song)" article, but I think perhaps it would be a good idea to spin-out the content on the cover and summarize that information in this article. --He to Hecuba (talk) 20:34, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Save that I put a merge tag on last week under WP:SONGCOVER because I am a lazy editor, another editor would have merged immediately on sight. I can provide an extensive list of merged song articles to prove my point if you wish. BTW Shouldn't the repeats of the article above be removed from the talkpage, especially as they include cats? --Richhoncho (talk) 20:46, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

If we ever move Hallelujah (Leonard Cohen song) to something else, then move this one too. Hallelujah was written by Cohen, and despite being recorded by more than 200 artists, including John Cale and later Jeff Buckley who had huge hits with it, we quite correctly do not have articles called Hallelujah (John Cale song) or Hallelujah (Jeff Buckley song). It's not their song, and Blue, written by Bill Mack, is his song, not someone elses. Moriori (talk) 02:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Several artist do not write their own songs but just cause several people recorded doesn't mean that it shouldn't have stayed as Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) because no page does it differently. It mentioned of the prior recordings which is correct but your argument is that every song NOT written by an artist should be changed to the writer. That's pardon my french, bullsh*t because it'd be like taking I Need You (LeAnn Rimes song) and changing it to I Need You (Dennis Matkosky and Ty Lacy song) because it was written by them but several artist have recorded a song called I Need You but they are different but you wouldn't move them to a page about the writer you'd move them to the page about the artist most notable for singing it and make mention of previous recordings. But I personally don't trust half the sources or this page as no source here has literally stated that Mack released this song as a single. There's no doubt he recorded it but he no reliable source has been posted to say he released it as a single and until such source appears this should've remained as Rimes' song but no one will listen to me cause "I'm a vandal" when the real vandals are those who go about making pages and not going about things the way they should on Wikipedia and those who try to correct it are the ones wrong. Swifty*^talk_contribs 17:30, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

As pointed out to Kww. There are demo released and I've always heard that Mack released a demo of the song to artist so someone could record it. Rimes herself got a copy of the demo. Another good point here is that Linda Davis recorded a demo of "Does He Love You" prior to hers and Reba's recording of the song but does that mean the page should be totally devoted to Linda Davis as she's the previous sing? NO it should only be those who released it as a single. Swifty*^talk_contribs 17:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Source to Linda Davis recording "Does He Love You" before their duet: Reba: My Story Swifty*^talk_contribs 17:59, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

My significant other has this to say on it: "Demos don't count. Just cause someone did a demo doesn't mean they get credit for the song, if you look you can find that Reba McEntire and Dolly Parton also did demos but they don't get credited for it. So why should Mack?" Swifty*^talk_contribs 19:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Whether a Mack version of this song was released by Starday Records as a single is beyond doubt, I have found two references, there are other reliable references already on the article. The picture of the single shows a catalog number is pretty conclusive - unless somebody wants to claim it was photoshopped! The Rimes story is that they heard a demo - this may be part of the Cline story (which is patently untrue and merely a marketing ploy), or Mack actually re-recorded the song in a style to enthuse the Rimes team at the time (FWIW fairly common music biz practice - pitch a song sung in the style of, and the same sex, of the target artist).

There has been quite a debate regarding whether songs could be disambiguated by writer(s), and it was more or less agreed that the answer was no because in many instances songs have been written by committee and it is not practical to name all the writers. Therefore the article title as it is at present was not because it was written by Mack, but that the first version was performed by Mack and released as a single in 1958. There are many, many other instances where a song is not named after the most notable version, but after the first version, two examples have already been noted above. If WP were to choose song disambiguation by the "most notable" version think of all the arguments that would ensue! This debate is bad enough, but imagine it replicated everytime a song is covered by another act. Perish the thought!

Having two articles for different versions of the same song is really silly. Why would anybody interested in either version not want to see the whole story for the song? Also splitting is bowing to the pressure of the fancruft purveyors.

When I originally put my merge tags on the two articles (single & Mack) it was in line with WP:SONGCOVER, and I wanted to get rid of that horrific and non-WP disambiguator "single" but I was looking for a debate, not to be reverted, or to see one of the articles blanked and listed for speedy deletion (twice!), as indeed my contested deletion post above was struck out by another editor. My preference is still for the present title, but I could easily be swayed to support a move to Blue(LeAnn Rimes song), but I haven't seen a truly valid justification at the moment. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 12:35, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:COMMON it's interesting how people will throw rules around like WP:COMMON and everyone will pick and chose to follow the rules. Rimes is most notable for the song not Mack, or any other artist at that matter. And if I have this right it's Wikipedia's rule to uphold that. So yes it should be under Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) not Blue (Bill Mack song). Swifty*^talk_contribs 15:07, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

And as I have pointed out before this page was created the day after an edit war over this stuff and was a deliberately done. Swifty*^talk_contribs 15:10, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Another good example of pick and chose is Sailor Moon where most of the titles are either Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon and Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon but all go under the name of Sailor Moon as it's a franchise and it is the most commonly known name for it. Rimes is the most commonly known artist to do this song so to post it as Mack is breaking the WP:COMMON Rule. Swifty*^talk_contribs 20:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Certainly we have flexibility here, Swifty. WP:COMMON is a reasonable issue to bring up, but the counter question is also interesting: if Lady Gaga recorded the song tomorrow and hit number one with it, would we rename the article "Blue (Lady Gaga song)"? Probably not, but if we used a rule of "most notable version", we would be having rename arguments every day over it. By naming it after either the composer or first documented release, at least we have a convention that keeps things stable, and we could add a redirect named "Blue (Lady Gaga song)" that took Lady Gaga fans to exactly where they wanted to go. What do you see as the actual problem with this? Doesn't entering Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) take you to a very reasonable place?—Kww(talk) 21:18, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

No because Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) was created first then this page Blue (Bill Mack song), many years later, it should've been as I had put it redirected to Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) under WP:COMMON instead of being merged and any conflicts should've been discussed on the talk page but instead people did what they wanted and now caused a complete conflict. Swifty*^talk_contribs 15:05, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

• Perhaps that might have happened, if you had not removed my merge tag here and immediately accused me of vandalism here for it here. Then you post on about a dozen different talkpages that I am 'hounding you' because I respond to your comments on my talkpage. Furthermore we are being accused of not listening to you, yet it has been proved, imo, that there was a Mack version of this song released as a single in 1958 - something you still refuse to accept. Your whole argument is based one premise and one premise only, 'Rimes is more important than Mack' Just a thought, if it wasn't for the Mack-written song that made her famous, would we know who she was today? (Purely rhetorical question, no reply required). Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:13, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Please see mine and Kww's talk page to see more. Swifty*^talk_contribs 16:50, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Facts should put this to rest.

FACT. in 1997 Bill Mack was awarded the grammy for Best Country Song, Blue.

FACT. At the same awards ceremony, LeAnn Rimes won the grammy for Best Female Country Vocal Performance, for her rendition of Mack's song, Blue.

FACT. Mack the songwriter and Rimes the singer are explicity differentiated by the music industry's own premier organisation for honoring achievement, and the current title of our article accurately reflects that reality. Moriori (talk) 23:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

This is Swifty, my account has a perma ban on it that I created. First to Richhoncho no one has proved that Mack released the song as a single no one so you're whole he did is still unproved as I pointed out DEMOS don't count. Second to Moriori none of your agruements and facts prove it deserves to be under his name just that he wrote it nothing else. RIMES RELEASED IT AS A SINGLE MACK DIDN'T AND NO ONE ELSE DID AND SHE IS MOST COMMONLY KNOWN but EVERYONE wants to pick and chose the rules and it's ridiculous. That's why I'm done you all can do what you want I don't care anymore you break the rules and feel good about it that's all your issues NOT mine. The vandals are those who want to break the rules. Bye. 99.148.192.124 (talk) 19:51, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay everyone remember the demo I mentioned earlier? Here is the source: Sgammato, Jo (1997). Dreams Come True: The LeAnn Rimes Story. Random House. p. 61. ISBN 0-345-41650-3. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help). It says and I quote "Wilbur took a little longer to be convinced. "The first time I heard 'Blue' I didn't like it, but it was a demo version that sounded old fashion."" Swifty*^talk 06:31, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Whether Wilbur heard a demo version of the song is not relevant as it does not prove, one way or the other, whether there was an official single released 20-odd years earlier by Mack himself. The fact that there are references in the article, and elsewhere, to a single release by Mack on Starday is relevant. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

DFW.com proved to be unreliable as it is an abridged version of the conversation so that could have been a mispost by editing to the abridgment. And I do not consider globaldogproductions.info a reliable source as it was pointed out to me this is a gray area BUT Rimes is most commonly known for the song and that is a standard by Wikipedia. That is not a rule that is pick and chose and it should never have been changed for that reason but no pick and chose the rules. As I will state again there is really no proof and the sources are unreliable. There is no doubt that Mack recorded the song for a demo but there really is no 100% proof that he put it out as a single sorry. Until better sources are found then we have placed this under false name and credit. And that's that. Swifty*^talk 11:06, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 04:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

---

Blue (Bill Mack song) → Blue (LeAnn Rimes song) – This merge was done based on mis-concepts, unreliable sources that are completely contradicted and Rimes is most commonly connected to the song not Mack. As I have pointed out SEVERAL times there is no denying Mack recorded the song but as pointed out Dfw.com and globaldogproductions.info is not reliable and was not enough for all the problems it caused. It needs to be moved back and all unreliable sources need to be removed. Swifty*^talk 11:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. It doesn't matter who recorded it. So long as the article is about more than one recording, we should use the composer's name to disambiguate; anything else is misleading. Powers ^T 15:01, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose. For all the reasons already stated above. --Richhoncho (talk) 15:47, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
• Support x2. Rimes is most commonly known as the artist for the song which by the standards of Wikipedia:COMMONNAME which people like to pick and chose on here. She is commonly known for the song and my significant other, Josh, also supports this as well. We have both discussed this and have even made a great example. Say you walked up to someone on the street and asked them. "Do you know the country song, 'Blue'?" Random person: "Yes." then you ask them, "Who's the artist?" Who do you think the person is going to say? Rimes or Mack? The answer Rimes. So per COMMONNAME this breaks that. Swifty*^talk 18:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
  • What the heck does "Support x2" mean? Anyway, COMMONNAME is not at issue here; the common name of this song is simply "Blue". Choosing a disambiguating phrase is a completely separate procedure from COMMONNAME. Powers ^T 01:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose. Round and round we go once again. So let's run through it.
  • Hallelujah (Leonard Cohen song) is so named because he wrote that song. It was common sense to name it after him, not any of the 200 or so artists who covered it, including Jeff Buckley whose version was voted 3rd place on Triple J's Hottest 100 of All Time, 2009.
  • Blue (Bill Mack song) is so named because he wrote the song. It was common sense to name it after him, not any of the artists who covered it such as Rimes.
  • Bill Mack was awarded the 1997 grammy for Best Country Song, Blue.
  • At the same awards ceremony, LeAnn Rimes won the grammy for Best Female Country Vocal Performance, for her rendition of Mack's song, Blue.
  • Mack the songwriter and Rimes the singer are explicity differentiated by the music industry's own premier organisation for honoring achievement, and the current title of this article, about the song, accurately reflects that reality. Moriori (talk) 02:46, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - Well, having looked into it a bit more, I've got to say I think this should stay as it is. How it got here isn't really important, but the song, the subject of the article, is a "Bill Mack" song. The most popular version is undoubtedly Rimes version, and it's clearly covered as such in the article. What's more, there is a redirect, so anyone typing that in gets to the right place. One thing I do recommend though is that Blue (disambiguation) is changed so that it mentions the Rimes version, possibly with a link to the anchor. Worm^TT(talk) 18:13, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blue (Bill Mack 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131105181101/http://store.gustorecords.com/coston2cdsva.html to http://store.gustorecords.com/coston2cdsva.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 12:00, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Blue (Bill Mack 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150212043922/http://www.grammy.com/nominees/search?artist=&title=&year=1996&genre=All to http://www.grammy.com/nominees/search?artist=&title=&year=1996&genre=All
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304044317/http://www.strictlycountry.nl/images/Auction%20100/06_100_LPs.pdf to http://www.strictlycountry.nl/images/Auction%20100/06_100_LPs.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.legalmetric.com/cases/copyright/txnd/txnd_397cv00303.html

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

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 03:58, 22 July 2017 (UTC)