Talk:Wind It Up (Gwen Stefani song)

"Wind It Up" Single Cover

someone take that picture off, i don't know how...i want to take it off, it ain't the official cover, someone created it, i even saw the picture before...stupid. LuverOfLuv 05:45, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

On the same note, here is what one of the sources (beacon-street.net) had to say about the picture: "Wikipedia.com, a website where basically anybody can post information, has listed a new page on Gwen Stefani's upcoming single, "Wind It Up." They seem to have referenced beacon-street.net for thier source, but don't be fooled by the cover art they show for the single. The artwork was actually done by my friend Mary, who ran the previous sexy-tomboy.com (you can find the wallpaper on her fansite), so someone obviously made the cover and submitted it, it is not the official single cover." Please do not upload unofficial covers. — ShadowHalo 02:35, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Sample?

Is there any confirmation that the version of "The Lonely Goatherd" from the movie is actually being sampled? I just listened to it, and it doesn't sound like a sample to me, it really sounds like a "reproduction". I'm not saying that it's Gwen herself singing that part, but I'm pretty darn sure it isn't Julie Andrews, either. - Ugliness Man 13:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Not related?

This article is was incorrect. First of all, what is "Yodelling?" Is it a song title? I know it's a style of singing, but aside from the obvious... Are the people who wrote this article deaf? The opening lyrics are ripped straight from the Sound of Music. Whether or not it is Julie Andrews singing is irrelevant. This song does, in fact, sample The Lonely Goatherd. Saying it's not related to the Sound of Music is like saying that Rihanna's S.O.S. didn't rip Tainted Love, or that the melody from Rich Girl wasn't directly pulled from the Fiddler on the Roof.

Actually, as I was typing this someone edited it. I thank you for that.

You say that regardless of the source, sampling has taken place. This is a contradiction of the definition of sampling. The additional examples you point to are not examples of sampling, they are likely examples of interpolation. For actual sampling to occur, a previously existing recording is incorporated into the new recording. If someone involved in the production of this song took a copy of the Julie Andrews recording from the movie and incorporated it into the new song with editing techniques, that is sampling. If the vocals and instrumentation were recorded specifically for this song, it's not sampling. I don't know how I can be more clear on this issue. And we still don't seem to have a definitive answer of what took place, and there may not be an undisputed answer until the album's liner notes are available to the general public, or some publication releases a relevant interview with Stefani or one of the producers. - Ugliness Man 07:39, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

First off, I didn't say regardless of source. I said it may or may not be Julie Andrews singing. I am 95% sure that the tune from the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical was used as a sample. (That's why in my previous statement I said that the song was sampled, because I'm 95% sure of it.) The opening lyrics sound like they could be sampled and just be sped up or have the pitch changed a little bit, or they may have been re-recorded. You can incorporate interpolation AND sampling, using the same song. I was originally just contesting the previous entry saying that, regardless of sampling or interpolation, it did not have any part of The Lonely Goatherd from The Sound of Music. Until we find out for certain, the entry can be contested, but the credit has got to be due because whether the music was interpolated or sampled, Gwen borrowed yet another song. Chimaera2005 14:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I am perfectly aware that you did not use the phrase "regardless of source", but you did state, as if it were an undeniable fact, that the song "does, in fact, sample The Lonely Goatherd." I was only clarifying that sampling has only taken place if they used a portion of a previously existing recording, which hasn't yet been confirmed. Your insistence that sampling has occured is based on your own personal opinion, formed from listening to the song, which smells suspiciously like original research. - Ugliness Man 13:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

We should wait until the album is released — the track listing credits will confirm whether or not "Wind It Up" either "borrowed" or "sampled" a song from The Sound of Music. The commercial CD single will probably reveal this too. Velten 00:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

There will be no commercial CD single. PatrickJ83 01:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

How do you know this? Where was it announced? Velten 00:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I am assuming you are referring to an AMERICAN release? There were no commercial CD single releases for any of the L.A.M.B. singles. Likewise, very very few singles are released in commerical CD format these days except dance singles and dance-oriented music (such as Madonna). The dearth of CD singles are only exacerbated by the existence of iTunes. A CD single (for America) is extremely unlikely. PatrickJ83 22:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, why is only a CD single relevant? According to the article the way it currently reads, there has been a vinyl single. I know that people today seem to keep forgetting that vinyl records still exist, but a single is a single. If this vinyl single is a commercial release, it should have the information that this section is making speculations about. If it's only been released to radio stations and magazines and such, it probably still has the credits. Maybe first we should verify the existence of this vinyl single, which might lead us to some sort of confirmation. - Ugliness Man 13:08, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I was, in fact, not referring to the U.S. release, but the Canadian release, where CD singles are still released and promoted. Velten 22:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

To answer this age-old question, an Entertainment Weekly article (link) states "Stefani's new single, 'Wind It Up,' finds the singer mimicking Andrews' yodel from the film's The Lonely Goatherd". ShadowHalo 06:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Gwen said on an MTV artist bite that she loved "the sound of music" and always wanted to incorporate something from the movie in one of her own songs and the "wind it up" was the result of this. and have you guys seen the video? 155.232.128.10 07:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Critical response

Even though my work for this was reverted, I have put this back in BECAUSE many song pages have critical reaction mentioned. Just because it was a negative review doesn't invalidate it - just read the customer reviews on iTunes - this song is getting just as many if not more negative reviews than positive. Thanks :) PatrickJ83 01:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree entirely. Velten 00:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Also I wish people who aren't even registered would stop reverting that section or changing it so only "fan reviews" are mentioned. PatrickJ83 22:35, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Bwahaha, "a musical brain aneurysm". --80.42.33.178 17:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

i think the nme review is worth mentioning: Worst. Single. EVER.

With a reference, yes. Velten 23:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Chart trajectories

Please note that all chart trajectories will be removed from this page per what Wikipedia is not and WikiProject Music/Tables for charts. Velten 00:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Many song pages have chart trajectories. Just leave it in, but only include important charts (Hot 100, UK top 75)PatrickJ83 01:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I have been tyding many of those articles. Wikipedia is supposed to be universal, therefore we will not include "important" charts such as the Hot 100 or the UK Singles Chart. Instead, they will not be included altogether because they are difficult to verify afterward. If you want to argue this, please open a discussion at WikiProject Music/Tables for charts. Velten 21:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

The same guideline applies to all component charts; they will be removed because they are excess information and the singles chart is enough to illustrate how a song performed in a country. However, genre-specific airplay charts are acceptable from any country. Velten 22:21, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Is this [1] a component chart? Even if it is I think her being at #2 is at least worth a mention in the article.

Hollaback Girl doesn't mention its peak of number one on the digital charts. It's a component chart and this article doesn't need the excess info either. There needs to be room for more important charts (such as other nations) now that the song is being released all over the world. Velten 00:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

But there is plenty of room on the page! And cant we make 2 coloumns side by side? -Anthony- 05:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

We should wait a bit first. Like I said, it's important for other nations to be included. Yes, we can make columns, but currently it hasn't charted in enough countries to permit this. Velten 15:55, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Says who? -Anthony- 23:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

"Says who"? What do you mean? You have to be clearer. Velten 20:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You say it hasn't charted in enough countries. Who decides how many is enough? Where on wikipedia does it state how many countries it needs to have charted in..? -Anthony- 23:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm speaking from a logical viewpoint. Not an overclustered "fannish" perspective. Velten 01:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Viewpoint? Isn't there a POV rule which forbids this? -Anthony- 11:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You're being silly. I said that we should wait a while before introducing possible unnecessary charts, which was my view. WP:NPOV ensures that articles do not include "point of view material". How does my opinion regarding the article have anything to do with the content currently in it? Velten 20:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

It does, it's your point of view which is stopping chart(s) which the single has clearly done well on to be excluded from the article. That's how it has anything to do with the content currently in it. -Anthony- 21:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

That's got nothing to do with NPOV, which clearly states "All Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly and without bias all significant views that have been published by a reliable source"; this has nothing to do with discussion outside the article. Please stop misleading this guideline. Velten 22:36, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Erm, okay. Has it charted in enough countries yet? -Anthony- 04:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I see no problem adding more charts now. Velten 23:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yea,I added the official romanian chart,she's at 66 but don't worry cause she just entered the chart(she is the highest new entry of the week).cristy 14:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

False

The song isn't acutaly an interpretation of The Sound of Music. I do love the movie very much but in no way was i hinting to the movie in the lyrics of my song.

Love, Gwen —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.211.249.76 (talk) 01:27, January 23, 2007

"She's Crazy, Right?

I'm trying to figure out who is the guy that says that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DJ Biloedau (talk • contribs).

Pharrell. ShadowHalo 05:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Good Article nomination Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

5. It is stable.

   

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

   a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):

7. Overall:

   a Pass/Fail:

Issues/Suggestions

• Ref 1 doesn't make note of Miami. Done
• "In Canada "Wind It Up" debuted at number eighty-eight on the BDS Airplay Chart and managed to climb to number 18." - Needs source. Also, is there any particular reason eighty-eight is spelled out? Done
• "The song's music video was directed by Sophie Muller." - Needs source.  Done
• "The video was successful on music video television programs. "Wind It Up" premiered on MTV's top-ten chart program Total Request Live on November 10, 2006, where it reached number two.[25]" - According to the provided link, TRL did not air November 10, 2006. It skips from Nov 9 to Nov 13. If I'm reading something wrong please show me, but it reads as though it premiered on Nov 13.

My review has been cut short. I'll be back to finish the rest tonight. Another fine example of good work, however. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 20:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ref 1 was to cover the date, so I've added a citation that states the sessions were in Miami. The general convention I've seen is to spell out chart positions (at least in the article body). Canada doesn't really keep an archive of chart performance, and other sites tend not to record Canadian positions. It's not a substantial singles market (it's listed at number 16 at World music market, below Belgium, Switzerland and Ireland), so I wouldn't consider it a "major aspect" and I've removed it. I used the MTV News citation for the two items about the music video; Contactmusic sketches me out because it looks like it will occasionally use stuff from press releases, unlike MTV which can just be a little doting or gushy. ShadowHalo 23:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Ya know, I didn't even notice that all the chart positions were spelled out other than that one. I think it's because eighty-eight was spelled out but not 18. It took one being different to make it stand out. I'd always thought it was proper to spell out only numbers under 10, so I looked through some other GAs to see if there's any sort of standard. Most use numbers (i.e. #7; see Garbage (band), Fluke (band), Kiss (band)) while some chose not to include it outside of a template (see Californication (album)). Then some write it out as you have (see Keane and, of course, Gwen Stefani). I get the impression it doesn't really matter. In that case, had it remained in the article, I would just say the 18 would also need to be written out for consistancy. As the article is now, it's good.

"The song's title is often visualized by a colorful sign that reads "wind it up". - Is there possibly an image? A screenshot from the video maybe? Not a requirement, just think it would be a nice addition. The only other discrepency I still notice is the TRL statement. The dates appear to be off. Past that, another fine job. It's almost there. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 04:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh...I figured it out now. I re-read the source, and it premiered Friday, November 10 on MTV. It didn't premiere on TRL though until Monday, November 13 since TRL is only broadcast Monday through Thursday. Could you clarify what you mean about the screenshot? If you have doubts that the sign appears in the video, I can find how far in it first appears. I think you're talking about adding a screenshot to the article though; I think there was at some point months ago (not sure where it went, I think it might have been unsourced or something). WP:FU recommends against using more than one image to describe a work. Cool (song) uses two, but that article has quite a bit more discussion of the video, and I'm not so sure we could make a decent fair use justification here. If you think a picture of the sign would be more helpful than the one that's there now, I can change the image, but in my opinion illustrating the key motif and the video's connections to The Sound of Music are more useful to the reader. ShadowHalo 05:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about the image. It just sounds like it would be a cool image, but leave it as is. I'm going to read over it once more. As long as all of the above is done, you should expect GA status in about 20-30 minutes. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 03:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I just noticed the concert image... you can't really see much. It's within the guidelines, I guess I'm just pointing out that I think it would be better removed or replaced. :/

Listed as a Good Article

It's passed. Thank you again for your fine work... I still don't like that image, tho! ;) Anyway, very good article. Better than the song, really. :) Good luck with future nominations. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 03:58, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on finding a new image to replace the one that's there. I've left it in for now, because it's good to have at least some free image, but I agree there's gotta be something better. I've sent a message to someone on Flickr to see if he'll release a bunch of images from The Sweet Escape Tour freely, in which case this image would work pretty well. (I'm assuming that's "Wind It Up" given the sheep on a hill, but I'll look at other people's photos to make sure.) ShadowHalo 21:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Good Article

This article is really good.But i think the next single,The sweet escape,is much more famous and people are tend to rearch for it more.So i think the sweet escape article needs more care and should be made beter and better so that it gets a FA status. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.224.44.215 (talk) 07:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

Keep in mind that The Sweet Escape (song) can't make featured, or probably even good, status so long as it has the {{CurrentSingles}} tag on it. Once the song has left the charts, that may be a good time to improve and nominate it. ShadowHalo 17:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The Guardian

The Guardian had declared Wind it up to be the worst song of 2006.Can ShadowHalo or anyone please source this.It was published in my newspaper.I have spent years seaching for it(sarcastic, of course)User:Luxurious.gaurav

Genre

Note Gwenspirde08, This source [2] calls the song rap while others call it Pop. Therefore best is pop rap. Indianescence (talk) 18:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I am changing the genre to pop because its a pop song..I have already given my sources calling it pop..just because she may talk a little bit(its not the main focus of the song) doesnt make it a pop-rap..thats like calling it electro because of the keyboard used in the chorus Jamalar (talk) 18:23, 07 April 2008

I may have missed on you source, Can you provide it again. My source is above. Can your give yours again please? Thanks! Indianescence (talk) 17:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Overall this considered a pop song..I have a source to back that up. So no reverts. This is pop. Lets leave it at that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.245.181 (talk) 17:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Wind It Up (Gwen Stefani song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will do the GA Reassessment on this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

First off the following links the reference section are dead: 4, 10, 18, and 38. Also "Wind it up Lyrics" and "Sweet escape audio" are dead. H1nkles (talk) 21:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

The image of the carnival-theme concert is so blurry it's almost unrecognizeable. I think it could be removed as it really doesn't add to the article. The lead should include information on the music video since that is in the article. Otherwise it's a pretty good article. Please address the dead links, and beef up the lead a little bit and I'll be happy to keep it at GA. I'll hold it for a week pending work. H1nkles (talk) 22:26, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey, I only watchlist this article for vandalism. I believe the original editor has left Wiki. I can give it a go, but I might need a little longer than 1 week. Is that OK? — R² 23:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

That's fine, can the work be done by Friday the 26th? Otherwise I am on vacation until July 13. Please contact me on my talk page when the fixes have been made. Thanks for stepping up to do the work. H1nkles (talk) 15:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I'll go for it. — Please comment R² 16:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've taken care of the issues. Regarding the dead links, I removed all. For all I did not, or could not replace them. Some failed WP:CHARTS and WP:RS, the content shouldn't have been in the article at all. For critical reception quotes that were dead, when doing a google search I could only find mirrors of this Wikipedia article. — Please comment R² 17:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

The article looks good and I'll keep it at GA, thanks for stepping up!!! H1nkles (talk) 13:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wind It Up (Gwen Stefani 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/charts/european-hot-100?chartDate=2006-12-30

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} 06:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC)