Talk:Popcorn (instrumental)/Archive 1

Composer

Gershon Kingsley was definitely the composer of Popcorn, not Stan Free. Page edited accordingly, but I'm not sure about Stan Free's role. --Ardonik 01:34, Jul 13, 2004 (UTC)

---

The Gershon Kingsley 1969 version being the original, does anyone know if a complete recording of the song exists on LP somewhere? The versions of the original I've heard sound incomplete somehow. 140.104.224.14 04:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

---

Well, I found that the original composer of Popcorn was Jean-Jacques Perrey, definitely not Gershon Kingsley. A guy called Kid Baltan made him decide to create electronic music. 'Kid Baltan' was an engineer who worked for Philips in the Netherlands. Kid Baltan's real name is Dick Raaijmakers. He started electronic music in the late 50's. One of the first pionering tracks is 'song of the second moon'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.149.29 (talk) 20:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Remixes

I have SEVERAL remixes of the popcorn song, from a now defunct webpage. Copyright info is sketchy at best, just whats present in the status bars. Would this page be suitable? --Superslash

The Wikimedia projects don't tolerate media with uncertain copyright status anymore. If the remixes were GFDL or in the public domain, they could be added to Commons, but otherwise, it's probably better just to link to then from your own webpage. (Which you should do and then provide an external link here, since I like Popcorn remixes, too!) --Ardonik.talk()^* 00:52, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Crazy Frog

Crazy Frog isn't special enough to deserve being mentioned apart from other cover artists, merging.

---

I tried to delete Crazy Frog part of the article but the 3 times I did it the ClueBot accused me of vandalism and restated the previous form of it. I don't have anything against Crazy Frog, I just believe that such an exhaustive presentation of the single must be some way of publishing and/or unnecessary information. Judge yourself; I give up. Battocchia (talk) 07:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

---

I removed the Crazy Frog portions of the article. The first time, a vandalism false positive occurred. After reporting the false positive I made the edit again. Noisejunky (talk) 15:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

---

Please justify Crazy Frog's dominance of this article, Superflewis. Noisejunky (talk) 16:50, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I can answer : this version was charted internationally, reached number one in four countries, was certified in two of them. Other cover versions didn't achieve the same success. And even if they are also successful, we can expand the article instead of removing a large part of content. Btw, many other articles have incorporated specific sections for a cover version, such as "Without You", "Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)", "Endless Love (song)", "I Will Always Love You", etc. Regards, Europe22 (talk) 17:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

I disagree as the content seems less like a section and more like 75% of the article that acts more like promotions for Crazy Frog but I will let it rest at this point. I also disagree with my edits being labeled vandalism (per comment from Superflewis in my talk page). Noisejunky (talk) 20:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

The Crazy Frog section - that doesn't represent 75% of the page - contains the same subsections that can be found on any song article or version (see the Hot Butter version) : chart performances, track listings, certifications, charts, successions. In addition, the content of Wikipedia isn't done all at once. Some things get done sooner than others. The fact that nobody has written about the other notable cover versions (if there are other ones) or not expanded enough the original version is no excuse for deleting info on this one (See WP:NOTPAPER). The goal should be to have info on all of these notable covers, not none of them. Lastly, removing the Crazy Frog version sounds like a lack of WP:NPOV, as this version is generally not appreciated. Regards, Europe22 (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

FYI, I had never heard of that bands particular version (nor that band) prior to reading the article and still have not listened to it. I have no point of view on the band nor could I care less. I just thought, mistakenly apparently, that Crazy Frog overshadowed everything else in the article, including the original artists. Honestly, I prefer to just not contribute to this site after this. Thought I had what it takes to hep edit, apparently not. Noisejunky (talk) 20:45, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

---

Get rid of crazy frog 118.208.209.188 (talk) 11:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. It's obviously marketing. I hadn't even heard of that version until I read this article to find out more about the original composer. The attention given to it is unwarrented given it's just one of many versions and dwarfs in reknown compared to the Jean Michel Jarre, Hot Butter or Gershton version, unless you have a buck to make with the Crazy Frog version. --Egregius (talk) 13:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I personally don't care one way or the other whether the Crazy Frog version has it's own section in the article, but if Europe22's claims earlier in this thread about it charting internationally are true (and they should be easy to verify) then that version would be notable enough to merit its own section. --mwalimu59 (talk) 17:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

That's not notable enough to merit its own section. It's notable enough to merit an extra sentence or two. It's possibly notable enough to merit its own section in the Crazy Frog article. But not in this article.--24.190.224.244 (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Please remove the Crazy Frog section. I have no idea who they are, and this article is about the original song, not some unknown bands remix, even if it did top a chart here or there. Move it to the Crazy Frog article instead. (BTW, just because it was the author of that section's favorite song or whatever, doesn't mean it should take up over half the article -- perhaps the original author may want to consider proclaiming his love for Crazy Frog on Twitter or his blog or something instead). --24.190.224.244 (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

An song article is not only about the original version, and all notable covers should be included in the article (e.g. see "Against All Odds (Take a Look at Me Now)", "Because the Night" or "Endless Love (song)"). Remember that "I don't like it" is not a valid reason for removal/deletion of content, even if you can deemed the subject is "annoying"... (e.g. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crazy Frog (2nd nomination)). -- Europe22 (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Crazy Frog section reduced to give equal attention to it as the rest of the notable covers mentioned in this article (in fact, it's still a bit more, I left it in its own section, unlike the other covers mentioned). I've also linked back to the main articles at Crazy Frog and Crazy Hits, which contain all the relevant information in the appropriate places (those articles are about Crazy Frog and Crazy Hits, this article is not primarily about those topics, and it really cannot be argued that 3/4ths of the article being about Crazy Frog makes sense).--24.190.224.244 (talk) 02:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

If you have opinions on how cover versions of songs should be handled on Wikipedia, feel free to join the discussion and weigh in at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions. --mwalimu59 (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright

The image (Image talk:Hott Butter-Popcorn Melody.PNG) was deleted because the sound was okay. Hyacinth 11:06, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

O RLY?

In internet humor circles (specifically on YTMND), this theme is also associated with the fad of the O Rly Owl. Since it's quite a widespread joke, I think it deserves to be mentioned too. How about you lot?

Hey, put something in about Popcorn Shred, too. It ought to be linked even.. ^_^

I've never known of it being associated with the O rly owl, and I view 4chan and SA daily. Vkeios 04:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Snipets or Snippets

I have no idea, anyone? Rich Farmbrough. 15:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Kraftwerk

Perhaps we should add some hidden text informing editors that Kraftwerk and the other commonly added groups and artists who didn't cover the song didn't. Hyacinth 12:48, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, do you have a source on that? (Kraftwerk)

Yeah, I'd like to know a source as well. All I'm finding is kraftwerkfaq which doesn't say whether they recorded it.(3/27/08) Haythere (talk) 21:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Unless you have a reliable source saying they did it, they're not going on the list. Hyacinth (talk) 23:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Tetris 4000

Has anyone ever played Tetris 4000 by Alawar Entertainment? Because I think that I ran into the popcorn song playing this game, which was MUSIC11.MID in the MUSIC folder.--71.112.0.150 23:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

YTMND

YTMND actually does not incorrectly list Popcorn as being by Kraftwerk in their soudtrack. It is properly tagged as being the M & H Band version.

Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 20:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of YTMND someone should mention that Popcorn song is very popular with YTMNDs featuring O RLY owl.

Yes, But should this really be listed under "Television Appearances"?

How high did it chart in 1971?

Should be mentioned... AnonMoos 18:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:S191261.jpg

Image:S191261.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:38, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

1970 Download Charts

This song was Number one in the U.K. download charts in 1970 beating Akon by 300,000 downloads.

What exactly was a download chart in 1970? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beetle B. (talk • contribs) 19:10, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps a list of most downloaded from the 1970's and bad formulation from above poster?--Deleet (talk) 04:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Digger

I believe that the song was also used in Digger, a PC Pac-Man clone from 1983, as stated on the Digger (computer game) wikipedia page.

Illu45 (talk) 03:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Pop Singles???

What is the Billboard Pop Singles, is it the Hot 100??? If so change it to avoid confusion!71.255.223.132 (talk) 15:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Muppet Version

If every band who has a remix of the original song is included on this page, why was my edit concerning the Muppets version taken off? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.84.185 (talk) 00:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)