Talk:Sugar Mama (song)

Proposed merge with Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song)[edit]

Per WP:NSONG One article per song Richhoncho (talk) 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This may be similar to "Nobody's Fault but Mine" vs. "It's Nobody's Fault but Mine". Led Zeppelin has stated that based their song on Johnson's, but the LZ contingent fought to keep it separate. Another example is "Key to the Highway/Trouble in Mind" – it's a medley of two well-known blues songs (with their own articles). I agree with Richhoncho that this should be merged. —Ojorojo (talk) 19:27, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. "Sugar Mama" are two different songs, lyrically and musically. The only thing they have in common is the song title. There is a song called "Stairway to Heaven" by Neil Sedaka. No-one in their right mind would want to merge the Neil Sedaka song with the Led Zeppelin song. 85.159.210.103 (talk) 01:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a song which has existed with different titles and varying lyrics for many years. The version I listened to was recorded before LZ and sounds extremely similar. Blues songs go back to an aural tradition and each performer changed the song a little bit because they didn't have a recorded version to refer to. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I say wait until we see the release on CD/Vinyl, as there will be information on there on who LZ credit's it to. If they do not credit anyone outside of LZ, my opinion is to leave it alone, but if they credit one the artists in this article, then merge it.—SPESH531 Other 21:04, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is safe to say that we can remove the proposal to merge the pages, but that is my opinion. Anyone else agree or disagree?—SPESH531 Other 16:28, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, hold on for a while. Because Sugar Mama was out of copyright it would be ok for Plant Page to claim arrangement credits and ignore that it is a traditional song. Knowing how deep LZ mined the blues (including losing copyright infringement cases) they would have been aware of the song - but that does not make it the same song, and for that reason I think it is prudent not to merge at the present. FWIW. There are many different versions of this song and I doubt either of us are familiar with all the variants. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:22, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Spesh531. I have now heard the LZ version of the song and referenced it against recordings by Lighnin' Hopkins, John Lee Hooker, B B King (released as Sugar Mama Blues), Tampa Red and Sonny Boy Williamson. There is no doubt in my mind that it is the same song, different arrangement. I have no doubt the two articles should be merged under WP:NSONG. It's not helping WP to hide the roots of the LZ song. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Rich, but I disagree with you. The only the commonality between all those songs and the LZ one is the refrain "Sugar Mama, Sugar Mama". IMO there is enough difference to warrant a separate article. BluesListener (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Richhoncho, not sure if this helps, but at least two RS have identified Sonny Boy Williamson as the source of LZ's version:

"Sugar Mama: A cover of a Sonny Boy Williamson song recorded in June 1969 at Morgan Studios for Led Zepplin II ..." – The Rough Guide to Led Zeppelin by Nigel Williamson[1]
"the still unissued [by 2005] Zep version of Sonny Boy Williamson's 'Sugar Mama' from the Led Zeppelin II sessions ..." – Led Zeppelin: The Story of a Band and Their Music, 1968-80 by Keith Shadwick[2]

BTW, BluesListener (talk · contribs) appears to be a single-purpose account, similar to Blues246 (talk · contribs), BluesAnytime (talk · contribs), BluesBanana (talk · contribs), BluesFan38 (talk · contribs), Bluesfan1928 (talk · contribs), Bobbyblues57 (talk · contribs), FolkMusicFan1963 (talk · contribs), GrahamFolklorist (talk · contribs), JumpBlues62 (talk · contribs), BlindWillieFan (talk · contribs), etc., etc., etc. —Ojorojo (talk) 20:57, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, it obviously wasn't a LZ original and I had spotted the single purpose account - which is why I didn't bother to respond. It seems clear that the merge should go ahead, would you do the honours as you are far more knowledgeable of that era than ever I am. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Should Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song) be merged with Sugar Mama (song)?[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge —Ojorojo (talk) 15:02, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should "Sugar Mama (Led Zeppelin song)" be merged with "Sugar Mama (song)"?

"Sugar Mama" is a blues song that was recorded as early as 1934. Although he did not record it until 1937, the song is often attributed to or associated with Sonny Boy Williamson I (Herzhaft, Encyclopedia of the Blues[3]). It has been recorded by numerous artists, often with variations in the lyrics and music (Tampa Red, Tommy McClennan, John Lee Hooker, B.B. King, Howlin' Wolf, Taste, Fleetwood Mac, etc.) with credits to various songwriters.

In 1969, during their recording sessions for Led Zeppelin II, Led Zeppelin recorded a preliminary/demo "Sugar Mama" with somewhat different lyrics and arrangement. The song was included on the expanded edition of Coda in 2013. The album lists it as "Sugar Mama (Mix)" and is credited to "Page, Plant".

Two reliable sources have identified Sonny Boy Williamson as the source of LZ's version:

"Sugar Mama: A cover of a Sonny Boy Williamson song recorded in June 1969 at Morgan Studios for Led Zepplin II ..." (Williamson, The Rough Guide to Led Zeppelin[4]).
"the still unissued [by 2005] Zep version of Sonny Boy Williamson's 'Sugar Mama' from the Led Zeppelin II sessions ..." (Shadwick, Led Zeppelin: The Story of a Band and Their Music, 1968-80[5]).

A review of other Led Zeppelin biographies has not revealed that their song is a unique, original composition.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs provides the following guidance:

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,

the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS. (WP:COVERSONG)

Please preface comments with * Merge – or * Don't Merge –. —Ojorojo (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge – As with several of their tunes, Led Zeppelin based their song on earlier blues. Just because it has some differences and is credited to Page & Plant doesn't justify a separate article. There are precedents – "Bring It On Home", "Dazed and Confused", "Gallows Pole", "In My Time of Dying", "When the Levee Breaks", etc. —Ojorojo (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The question is, "does WP do song articles?" If it does then it makes sense to keep all information relating to a song together - which is why WP:NSONGS says what it does and this particular song has no reason to be different. WP:NOTINHERITED also applies. --Richhoncho (talk) 01:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A consensus of just two people?!? What a joke. Wikipedia is well and truly moribund. 195.184.68.33 (talk) 06:21, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]