Talk:You Didn't Try To Call Me

From Zappa Wiki Jawaka
Jump to: navigation, search

I was going to have a link to the lyrics for each version but I am now tempted to split each version onto it's own page...

-Recording Details

-Players

-Included on

-Lyrics

....that kind of thing.

Thoughts?

Duncan 10:47, 22 Aug 2007 (PDT)



Sound good to split as you propose, I guess the next step is to define the pages titles.

Should this be:

or

Knowing that we could temporarily use names such as:

Might be hard sometimes to give a name to some tracks built from several tapes pieces including different studio recordings, overdubs and live solos, etc. But we have to find it out anyway...

Maroual 02:48, 23 Aug 2007 (PDT)



I see a lot of potential, and a lot of work... We definitely need "disambiguation pages" ("You Didn't Try To Call Me") that can lead you to the "versions pages"

...
Reference to the album is IMHO a prerequisite to help the unsuspecting browser...
Good point about "combined versions"; mentioning 1 or 2 years could be OK; mentioning 5, 6 or more is NOK...
--Emdebe 10:18, 23 Aug 2007 (PDT)



Awrighty, following our discussion on Talk:Trouble_Every_Day, I decided to demonstrate you my thoughts on the whole several-versions-per-song issue in a more practical way. So I made updates to You Didn't Try To Call Me, You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Los Angeles) and You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - San Francisco).

A few notes on the first page, however: I agree with Emdebe that, for the "unsuspecting browser" a reference to the album is more important than where and when the song was recorded. I also thought that it is not strictly necessary to list all albums for each version on this page (especially since the albums are given on the respective pages for the versions). So, in order to keep the "disambiguation page" (IF that is what we want to call it) both concise and user-friendly, I'd prefer a system like

You Didn't Try To Call Me (Freak Out! Version)
recorded: Los Angeles, 1966

over

You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Los Angeles)
*Included on
**Freak Out!
**The ---- Of The Mothers
**The Worst Of The Mothers
**The Old Masters, Box I
**The MOFO Project/Object
**The MOFO Project/Object (Deluxe Edition)
***Instrumental basic backing track included on:
***The MOFO Project/Object
***The MOFO Project/Object (Deluxe Edition)

Similarly, I don't think that You Didn't Try To Call Me (1982-1983 - Los Angeles) deserves its own page. Instead it should be included to You Didn't Try To Call Me (1967-1968 - New York), since it's still the same recording.

One may also argue if every bootleg version deserves its own page. In the case of You Didn't Try To Call Me I'd say yes because both You Didn't Try To Call Me (1967 - Stockholm) and You Didn't Try To Call Me (1970 - Paris) are quite different from the studio recordings. But we shouldn't generalise this for all songs. In our previous discussion, for example, I asked you about RDNZL, since there are clearly more "recordings" of that song than there are actual "versions" of it. That's why I'm against giving "RDNZL (Piquantique Version)" a separate page, for example. Instead it should be included in "RDNZl (Lost Episodes Version)" since it shares all the formal characteristics of that version.

These are just my thoughts on the subject. I wanted to open to this discussion in the forum but I don't have an account and for some reason it says that registering is currently disabled. Anyway, once we've come to an agreement on this, I think it's absolutely crucial that we include our decisions to the wiki guidelines (just like models for the track and album pages since their structure still differ from article to article).

Please let me know your thoughts on my five-and-a-half pence here, and the changes I made to You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Los Angeles) and You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - San Francisco) (especially the way I linked back to this page here, and what I did to the "notes on this song" section).

--Fishbrain 17:25, 5 December 2007 (PST)



Hey, just thought of something! Just forget about my previously suggested system:

You Didn't Try To Call Me (Freak Out! Version)
recorded: Los Angeles, 1966

I realised that it's far more convenient to do it like this:

===Freak Out! Version===
*You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Los Angeles)

The reason for this is that when you have songs that are split up into several tracks some some albums, like:

===Lumpy Gravy Version===
*King Kong (1967 - Hollywood)

===Uncle Meat Version===
*Prelude To King Kong
*King Kong Itself (As Played By The Mothers In A Studio)
*King Kong (It's Magnificence As Interpreted By Don DeWild)
*King Kong (As Motorhead Explains It)
*King Kong (The Gardner Varieties)
*King Kong (As Played By 3 Deranged Good Humor Trucks)
*King Kong (Live On A Flat Bed Diesel In The Middle Of A Race Track At A Miami Pop Festival)

===Chunga's Revenge Version===
*The Nancy & Mary Music

===You Can't Do That On Stage Anymore Vol. 3===
*King Kong (1971+1988 - ???)

Or even:

===Apostrophe (') Version===
*Don't Eat The Yellow Snow (1973 - ???)
*Nanook Rubs It (1973 - ???)
*St. Alfonzo's Pancake Breakfast (1973 - ???)
*Father O'Blivion (1973 - ???)

===You Can't Do That On Stage Anymore Vol. 1===
*Don't Eat The Yellow Snow (1979 - ???)

You can still implement them easily into this system.

Poofter's Froth Wyoming Plans Ahead!

--Fishbrain 18:09, 5 December 2007 (PST)



And another thought, this time about the question whether we should mark pages like this one as "disambiguation pages" or not. Arguments so far were that they sort of disambiguate between the different versions of the song, but don't really disambiguate between separate items (like, for example The Grand Wazoo (Album), The Grand Wazoo (Track), The Grand Wazoo (CC)). But what if we call them "indices" (e.g. You Didn't Try To Call Me (Index)).

I think this would be a good naming convention. In the long run, it might become difficult to set up an index page (I'll just call them that from now on, for simplicity's sake) and just call it, for example, You Didn't Try To Call Me. I think there will be problems with tracks that share their name with an album (again, like The Grand Wazoo). It's always better to have a consistent naming convention than a patchy mess of different page names, depending on various external factors. So:

Index page: You Didn't Try To Call Me (Index) (with a redirect page on You Didn't Try To Call Me where appropriate)
Version 1: You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Los Angeles)
Version 2: You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - San Francisco)
etc...

This system for all other songs? Yea or nay? It's AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION TIME!

--Fishbrain 05:56, 7 December 2007 (PST)



Doesn't anyone else want to comment on this issue? One would imagine that this is a crucial question for the future of this wiki...

--Fishbrain 09:56, 10 December 2007 (PST)



You are right it is truly a crucial question.

Your suggestions are really helping a lot, please do not feel discouraged by the lack of answers.

The time we spend on this wiki uses to vary a lot, this might explain...

Regarding the last system, I think the idea is here however I still have a few comments:


You Didn't Try To Call Me (disambiguation page)

 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Song) (I finally think the word 'track' sounds disrespectful)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (Album)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (CC)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Single)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Book)


You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Song)

 ==Album Name / Concert Date/Place Version==
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place A) (was only played once in Place A in 1966)
 
 ==Album Name / Concert Date/Place Version==
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place B) (was only played once in Place A in 1966)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966/12/12) (was played twice in Place C in 1966)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966/12/13) (was played twice in Place C in 1966)
 (...)

Yups, time to eat talk to you later ;-)

Maroual 11:21, 10 December 2007 (PST)



I agree with you there, Maroual, but since it said in the guidelines that in thoses cases where we have an album and a song of the same name, the album should go without addition in brackets, I felt I shouldn't argue with it. On the other hand, it WOULD be more formally correct to say "You Didn't Try To Call Me (Album)", yes. ;) If we have even more stuff of the same name, as with Them or Us, for example, we'd need a disambiguation page anyway.

Also, don't be confused by the question marks, I only put them in because I didn't know where those versions were recorded and I was too lazy to look it up in the web (since I don't have access to my CDs here in England). They were actually intended to be placeholders. ;)

--Fishbrain 12:28, 10 December 2007 (PST)



True. So let's proceed the way they do in the Wikipedia (see wikipedia:Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Deciding_to_disambiguate).

Then:

What do you think?

Maroual 13:30, 10 December 2007 (PST)



I think there is one fatal flaw in that system: if a) the pages distinguishing between albums and songs of the same name, and b) the pages distinguishing between different versions of the same song, are both called "xxx (disambiguation)", what are you going to do about the different versions of the song "The Grand Wazoo"?

I'd suggest a variation of your previously suggested model:


You Didn't Try To Call Me (disambiguation page)

 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Song) (links to You Didn't Try To Call Me (Index))
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Album)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (CC)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Single)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Book)


You Didn't Try To Call Me (Index)

 ==Album Name / Concert Date/Place Version==
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place A)
 
 ==Album Name / Concert Date/Place Version==
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place B)
 (...) (I'd suggest only one link per "version" on the index page, and more exhaustive release info on the page for the version itself)

"The Grand Wazoo" would probably be a better example, but I think you all get the point. :)

And for everyone who's confused by now: the only difference between this model and the one I suggested before is the fact that now, album pages would have to be renamed to "xxx (The Album)".

--Fishbrain 14:56, 10 December 2007 (PST)



Oops, sorry. I almost agree:

(1) I finally didn't mean to rename the albums to "xxx (The Album)". In the most common use The Grand Wazoo is an album so the page with the same name should be the album page.

(2) There was another difference implied in my previous post. IMO You Didn't Try To Call Me (Index) is never needed because You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Song) is sufficient to link to every version.

Usually, in the case there are two completely different songs (or even albums) sharing the same title, people will probably look for one and only one page (see Steal This Disc, Mystery Disc, ).

I don't mean it would be a perfect and systemic system, there should still be exceptions to it (the BTB series that have been named after bootlegs, the Au20 discs which have their own page, ...).

Maroual 16:36, 10 December 2007 (PST)



Okay, if I got that right now, you're basically saying:


You Didn't Try To Call Me (disambiguation) (disambiguation page)

 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Song)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Album) (links to You Didn't Try To Call Me)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (CC)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Single)
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Book)


You Didn't Try To Call Me (The Song) (index page for the song versions)

 ==Album Name / Concert Date/Place Version==
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place A)
 
 ==Album Name / Concert Date/Place Version==
 *You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place B)


I think that's ok. When we get more feedback on this, I will try my hands on an example page (The Grand Wazoo maybe).

--Fishbrain 16:12, 11 December 2007 (PST)



In my opinion that makes the wiki a bit too bloated. Mostly the differences are within a few words ("... watching my TV / watching MTV" in "Trouble Every Day" and some re-titlings. For me it would be better to list the alternate text versions at the bottom of the pages, complete with dates and clues and whatsoever.

Propellerkuh



Yes Fishbrain, this is exactly what I was meaning. Thanks for having been brainstorming ;-)

Yes Propellerkuh, writing one different page for every smooth variation of the lyrics might represent a huge amount of work and may be pointless in the cases you mentionned. I think I understand your suggestion as:

You Didn't Try To Call Me (the main use here is the song title, assuming there is no homonym album)

 "Main section" (a sort of TOC or summary)
 ==Album X==
 See [[You Didn't Try To Call Me#1966 - Place A|1966 - Place A]] for details
 ==Album Y==
 Mixed at Studio X on 01/01/1900
 Part A (0:00-1:30): 1966 - Place B
 Solo (1:30-2:00): 1966 - Place C
 Part B (1:30-2:00): 1966 - Place B
 ==Alternate Title== instead of Alternate Title page
 See 1966 - Place C
 "Bottom section"
 ==1966 - Place A== instead of You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place A) page
 musicians
 recording details
 lyrics
 clues
 ==1966 - Place B== instead of You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place B) page
 idem
 ==1966 - Place C== instead of You Didn't Try To Call Me (1966 - Place B) page
 idem

Duncan, Emdebe, any opinion on this whole discussion?

Maroual 02:54, 12 December 2007 (PST)



I see where you're coming from, Propellerkuh, but I don't quite agree with you. This "one song - one page" system is basically what we have now. In this system we are running into trouble with songs like Why Don't You Like Me?: Is it a version of Tell Me You Love Me? Is it a separate song? As I understood it, most people here are against linking every version of a song to one single page (not least because it's bad design to have something like Tell Me You Love Me). But that would be ultimate consequence of your suggestion. We need to have something like an index (or "disambiguation page") for at least some of the songs, so we might as well create a coherent system for the whole wiki. (See also: Talk:Trouble_Every_Day)

I also don't think that this would make the wiki more "bloated". On the contrary: it helps making the articles more clearly arranged, - the same articles that would be quite bloated if we pooled all the different lyrics.

I absolutely agree with you however, that not every single recording needs to have its own page. As I have stated before, if one recording follows the exact same formal structure as another recording, it should be treated as "another take of the same version". I think as a rule of thumb we could say: have as few different versions as possible, but as many as necessary.

--Fishbrain 05:02, 12 December 2007 (PST)



IMHO the main concern of the wiki should be to display FZ's work as clearly as possible. So even when Why Don't You Like Me? is a version of Tell Me You Love Me they should have seperate pages featuring on diferent CDs and with hints and links to each other. Fishbrain's idea of HAFDVAPBAMAN (Have As Few Different Versions As Poss... ;-) ) is the thing we all want, without seeming self-indulgent to the outsiders. I think that is possible without Prussian or Faustian rigidity.

Propellerkuh 11:06, 13 December 2007 (PST)