Talk:Blank Space

Requested move 15 November 2014

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: the primary arguments made here rely on WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. (While concerns of recentism are an element in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, WP:RECENT itself is an essay.) Certainly, the long-term significance of this song is undetermined, and thus one of the two elements of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC remains unfulfilled, but it has also been clearly shown that the other element is fulfilled: at this point, the song is the likely target of any search for the plain title, and there seems to be little utility in pointing readers elsewhere. As always, it will be possible to revisit the location of the article in the future, but at present, there is sufficient support for the position that moving the article to the plain title will benefit readers that the result of the current request is to move the article to Blank Space, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 05:34, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

---

Blank Space (song) → Blank Space – Clear primary topic given page view stats. Blank space has existed as a redirect since 2009, but received zero page views in the past three months until after the Taylor Swift song came out. [1]. Because of that, WP:DIFFCAPS doesn't apply. There was never a consensus to use the disambiguated title to begin with either. -- Calidum 03:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

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 – the Taylor Swift song literally just came out a few weeks ago. Long-term significance and notability is a concern here. "Blank space" has been and still is a common reference to the punctuation form, while songs tend to come and go, for the most part. Swift's song is not significantly more notable that capitalization should serve as proper disambiguation. –Chase (talk / contribs) 03:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• That doesn't address the concern I raised that no one was searching for the term blank space before the song's release. -- Calidum 03:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• "A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term." Until you demonstrate how a current hit single has more long-term significance than a form of punctuation, my !vote remains. –Chase (talk / contribs) 04:04, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. But there's something troubling about the fact that readers are so so so overwhelmingly searching for a particular target, and we're sure of that, and yet we are directing them to a page we know they are not searching for. Disambiguation primarily exists to be a navigational aid, and in this case, even if we are making assumptions about what should be a primary topic, we are not aiding but rather impeding with the intentions of readers. I'm not the biggest fan of our guideline that states that capitalization differences in a subject versus a proper noun are an acceptable disambiguation, but honestly in this case it seems to be the most logical outcome. It would be a bigger issue if our article was actually at the title Blank space rather than Space (punctuation).--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support--and speedily. WP:DIFFCAPS applies, and both criteria for WP:PRIMARYTOPIC are satisfied. Red Slash 05:20, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose per Chase. "blank space" is not only a punctuation character, it should be rewritten into a topic article. Blank spaces in artwork is a significant topic, as are blanks in commonications theory; and blank spaces in textual documents as a form of content. A simple google search [2] shows the visual arts topic is dominant if you eliminate the rush of Taylor Swift entries from recentism -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• I'm not sure I disagree with what you're saying, but I don't see what the search you linked shows us. If anything, it's showing us that there is not a clear primary topic, but obviously saying that this search brings up no Taylor Swift results doesn't tell us anything.--Yaksar (let's chat) 06:12, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

• Mild oppose mainly per generic-ness of "Blank Space" and WP:RECENT. Most helpful to readers would be Blank Space (Taylor Swift song) since there are other songs by Fennesz, Azar Swan, Tea for Julie, but in each case the album has no article. 19th Golden Melody Awards says Blank Space (Tanya Chua song) (in Chinese Kongbai ge空白格 from zh:My Space (蔡健雅專輯) was nominated for an award, likewise the album Olive Tree (橄榄树) (1995) by Sibelle Hu also has a song of the same name .. of course these are mainly notable in Chinese). Here & Now (band) mentions Blank Space (band), again not particularly notable. But really there are worse titles in Category:Taylor Swift songs; look at Forever & Always and Fifteen (song) for example. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:17, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support per WP:DIFFCAPS. There is for example Ice Cube and Ice cube. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:49, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. Basing this proposal primarily on the page view stats of the last few months reeks of WP:RECENTISM. Also, per the second paragraph of WP:DIFFCAPS, there is a exception to that guideline: "this form of disambiguation may not be sufficient if one article if one article is far more significant on an encyclopedic level or far more likely to be searched for than the other". So far, no sufficient reason has been made that the recent Taylor Swift song has far more encyclopedic significance. And you cannot sufficiently judge that the song is far more likely to be searched for than the other solely based on, again, recentism. Zzyzx11 (talk) 03:15, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support Per WP:DIFFCAPS. It would be rare for someone to type in "Blank Space" and expect the article for blank space. Adabow (talk) 03:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support. The difference in capitalisation between blank space and Blank Space is disambiguation enough. JIP | Talk 09:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose. Capitalization, ampersands, commas and other speech marks are pretty useless to identify articles at the best of times. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:50, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia naming policy disagrees with you, Richhoncho. Red Slash 23:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
    • Not necessarily, User:Red Slash, it says "may" which can also mean "may not" and gives examples why not, too! FWIW, My objection relies on the frailty of human cognitive powers as opposed to computers. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:32, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support, seems reasonable. Everyking (talk) 03:45, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support - For the comparative few who might use title for this term when looking Space (punctuation), a hatnote will do the job just fine.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
• Support- I understand that a punctuation has more long-term significance then a hit single. However, I doubt people would search Blank space for the meaning of Space (punctuation). You see, have you really heard people saying "Blank space"" in the form as the punctuation? Even Swift does not use it that way, she is using it in a way that describes "an empty space". As SNUGGUMS mentioned, Ice Cube and Ice cube are different articles. I figured out that, Bo$$ and BO$$ are different articles too, despite a difference in capitalisation. Therefore, Blank Space (song) should be moved to Blank Space. However, In ictu oculi mentioned that "Blank Space" is also a title for a lot of songs by other artists, including Chinese award-winning singer Tanya Chua. This problem, applies to Am I Wrong (song) by Nico & Vinz. If you search Am I Wrong, it turns into a disambiguation page. It also clearly states that the song title, "Am I Wrong", is not just a song title by Nico & Vinz. I think everything I mentioned will benefit the discussion, and I hence summarise my point of view: A hit single might not have more long-term significance than a punctuation. However, the capitalisation actually matters too if you compare it to other articles. Cheers, DEW. Adrenaline (Nahnah4) 07:01, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

---

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.

critical reception?

There is a bit of this at the beginning, in the overview, but no section named critical reception talking about it. It should be added. (Cajalden (talk) 13:55, 14 December 2014 (UTC))

Parody

Should Shane Dawson's Blank Space parody be mentioned? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hclukRzt3o8 -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 03:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

If it has significant media coverage or reception attached to it, by all means, it can be included in an "In popular culture" section. However, if such materials don't exist, it isn't worth mentioning (like most internet parodies, honestly). Sock (tock talk) 17:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, it has like, 1 million views, but Swift's record label decided to block it. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 04:44, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

It was stupid to block that, Taylor is blocking everything now. Argh. DEW. Adrenaline (Nahnah4) 08:55, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

If it's notable and has reliable sources to support the claim I don't see why it shouldn't be mentioned. It doesn't matter that Taylor's record label blocked. Oh and you can also mention about the block too (if it has a source).--Chamith (talk) 14:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure if everyone else considers it significant media coverage, but it was mentioned on Hollywood Take, Perez Hilton, MediaPost Communications, Popcrush, CBC, Glamour, and others. Google and Bing Links are here: http://www.bing.com/news/search?q=shane%20dawson%20blank%20space&FORM=HDRSC6

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl&safe=active&ssui=on#q=shane%20dawson%20blank%20space&tbm=nws&safe=active&ssui=on

Except CBC, rest of them are definite unreliable/barely-reliable sources. So I won't say that it has widespread notabililty. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 13:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

I found another source. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/laura-blumenthal/shane-dawson-sony-hypocrisy-north-korea_b_6397856.html

Cover version by Louisa Wendorff?

Should we add the cover version by Louisa Wendorff? It has garnered 10M views, a lot for a cover. It is the Blank Space // Style Mash-Up, and I guess it is notable enough, even Taylor herself enjoyed it and tweeted it. What do you guys think? Nahnah4 (talk | contribs | guestbook) 08:43, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Cover Versions

Specifically the 'Postmodern Jukebox' one(s).

My addition of ths 'Cover Versions' section and the listing of the Scott Bradlee cabaret style cover was removed by talk. First excluse: "Not notable". However, the guidelines doe not require notability for additions inside an article/topic. Notability only applies to the need for a separate article itself. Second excuse: "No independent reference". The link to the Youtube Channel (where Postmodern Jukebox themselves released it, so it's not a bootleg) was given. That video alone has 1.8 million views in 4 months! Also, Ryan Seacrest commented on this release on his website: http://www.ryanseacrest.com/2014/12/16/taylor-swifts-blank-space-gets-vintage-cabaret-treatment-in-new-cover/. Further links: http://www.whosampled.com/cover/323210/Scott-Bradlee-%26-Postmodern-Jukebox-Ariana-Savalas-Blank-Space-Taylor-Swift-Blank-Space/, https://www.song365.cc/track/scott-bradlee-amp-postmodern-jukebox-blank-space-3335943.html. The cover is also release on an album and as single in iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/nz/album/blank-space-feat.-ariana-savalas/id951297603 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sejtam (talk • contribs) 07:36, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Sejtam, does it meet this condition? I think not.

When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:

the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song (not on the subject of the rendition),

the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS. And your claim on views, Shane Dawson's parody has more coverage, and more views, but yet was declined since only a few reliable sources discuss it. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 01:15, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Joseph here. The YouTube performance fails WP:SONGCOVER. Calidum T|C 01:45, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Not notable enough to be included. The only reliable source provided, if any, is the Ryan Seacrest website. It would need more than that. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:18, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

How about a mention by LA Times?: [[3]], Washington Post: [[4]] and MTV UK: [[5]] And unlike the parody, this version has been used in the PMJ's tours including Europe! ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sejtam (talk • contribs) 02:04, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Sejtam, if you read, the outside sources must be on the subject of the song (not on the subject of the rendition). And the parody wasn't used in a tour because Shane Dawson doesn't do music tours. He releases parodies and original songs on iTunes and that's it. And unlike his song Superluv!, the cover did not chart either. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 02:20, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Parody

How about adding Adam Jesin's Toronto Blue Jays' parody, "First Place" to the article? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swZmk85s4-w) It has almost 1.5 million views, and was covered by several major Canadian news organizations, and at least one international one too. 69.196.141.93 (talk) 04:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Blank Space. 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.vevo.com/watch/taylor-swift/blank-space/USCJY1431509
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.vevo.com/watch/taylor-swift/blank-space/USCJY1431509

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:27, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit request 2016 June

This is wrong according to sources:
Some listeners, including Swift's mother, misheard the lyrics of "Blank Space", incorrectly hearing "got a long list of ex-lovers" as "got along with Starbucks lovers". On Valentine's Day 2015, Swift jokingly tweeted about the misheard lyrics and Starbucks responded.

It should read:
Some listeners, including Swift's mother, misheard the lyrics of "Blank Space", incorrectly hearing "got a long list of ex-lovers" as "all the lonely Starbucks lovers." On Valentine's Day 2015, Swift jokingly tweeted about the misheard lyrics and Starbucks responded.

What's in bold is what needs to be fixed as what is in bold is what is in the sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:806:8201:f2e0:2906:1d87:19b6:6683 (talk • contribs)

 Note: I don't think this is a CoI edit request and I've changed the template to a semi-protected edit request instead. --st170e^talk 13:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Done st170e^talk 13:35, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Blank Space. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.recordreport.com.ve/publico/top100/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150109053819/http://aria.com.au/pages/aria-charts-end-of-year-charts-top-100-singles-2014.htm to http://www.aria.com.au/pages/aria-charts-end-of-year-charts-top-100-singles-2014.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160124201045/http://www.aria.com.au/aria-charts-end-of-year-charts-top-100-singles-2015.htm to http://www.aria.com.au/aria-charts-end-of-year-charts-top-100-singles-2015.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150629021849/http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?content_selector=riaa-news-gold-and-platinum&news_month_filter=5&news_year_filter=2013&id=C19496E7-CEC0-C453-D8A1-BD80E56E610F to http://www.riaa.com/newsitem.php?content_selector=riaa-news-gold-and-platinum&news_month_filter=5&news_year_filter=2013&id=C19496E7-CEC0-C453-D8A1-BD80E56E610F
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.republicplaybook.com/genre/hot-ac/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases

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) 01:57, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Blank Space. 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/20150122181029/http://www.billboard.com.br/tipo_lista/top-100/20150117/ to http://www.billboard.com.br/tipo_lista/top-100/20150117/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141219103506/http://gaonchart.co.kr/chart/digital.php?f_chart_kind_cd=E&f_week=51&f_year=2014&f_type=week to http://gaonchart.co.kr/chart/digital.php?f_chart_kind_cd=E&f_week=51&f_year=2014&f_type=week
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.recordreport.com.ve/publico/top100/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases

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: 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) 19:02, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blank Space. 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/20150221133025/http://www.bamp-bg.org/2009-07-08-09-48-53/nielsen/519-09022015-15022015.html to http://www.bamp-bg.org/2009-07-08-09-48-53/nielsen/519-09022015-15022015.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: 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) 08:21, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Blank Space. 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/20150221133025/http://www.bamp-bg.org/2009-07-08-09-48-53/nielsen/519-09022015-15022015.html to http://www.bamp-bg.org/2009-07-08-09-48-53/nielsen/519-09022015-15022015.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: 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) 20:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 28 June 2018

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. No support for moving. (non-admin closure) Natureium (talk) 17:47, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

---

Blank Space → Blank Space (Taylor Swift song) – per WP:CONCISE, WP:COMMONNAME, WP:PRECISE 209.52.88.33 (talk) 16:14, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as determined at the previous RM above. Nothing in this nomination contests that the song is the primary topic here. The current name is also more concise and precise than the suggested new name, despite what the nominator states. Calidum 17:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose. No evidence this song is no longer the primary topic. Also, how do WP:CONCISE and WP:COMMONNAME even apply here. Nohomersryan (talk) 22:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
• Oppose for same reasons. jamacfarlane (talk) 23:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Key of E Sharp Major

for the sake of discussion, since I've changed the key of E sharp major to say key of F major I would like anyone who perhaps has a more advanced knowledge of music theory than myself to tell me why the author or contributor to this page would have written e sharp major instead of F major. as far as I know there is no difference whereas with so-called accidental based keys such as a sharp there is a difference where you may want to call it be flat instead in some cases. This is not the case between E and F. Only rarely have I seen say a c chord referred to as a b sharp or even a b-flat sharp sharp in my years of playing various instruments. also I apologize that the text which says F major does not link to the F major or key of F major Wikipedia article I'm not sure why I did put two brackets around it however. Psx1337 (talk) 16:57, 27 June 2019 (UTC) Chris

Lyrics Of This Song

You Can Find This Songs Lyrics At This Site — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdip patel (talk • contribs) 09:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Length of article

This article is twice as long as the article for Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. Is that too long? Antignomi (talk) 22:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I think this article is of average length for a pop-song article. A significant proportion of the size comes from tables anw. Ippantekina (talk) 02:49, 15 August 2024 (UTC)