Talk:Rocket Man (song)

Untitled

I think the nod to "Space Oddity" is fine, but making it the very second sentence is a slight to this song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.103.204 (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Added the bit about Me First and the Gimmie Gimmies.Wanderer 03:01, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

I remember listening to This American Life when the song was performed. The story about how they gathered the musicians together was great. I am sure the MP3 of the show is still in the archives of This American Life's web site. Worth the download. Jack 15:41, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Here is the link to the This American Life piece which includes a free download link. I think it warrants a mention in cover versions list: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=223 Could someone a bit more experienced with Wikipedia edits than me add it please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.68.221 (talk) 15:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Historical notes - irrelevant?

Is the "historical notes" section even slightly relevant? OK, it's slightly relevant - the Apollo missions, etc. But the song isn't about them specifically, it has no political subtext as far as I can make out. These notes seem to have almost nothing to do with the article. Anyone wanting to place the song in context can easily do so simply based on its release date of 1972. Graham 09:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

It seems completely irrelevant to me. I'm going to delete it.--Cspencer 03:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps someone can find a direct quote from Bernie Taupin about whether the song was intended to be about actual space programs. However such intent would be ludicrous, considering the song lyrics are completely ridiculous, and do not accurately tell the story of astronaut life. Marc S. 206.192.35.125 (talk) 13:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Pop culture fact edit

"In the Japanese manga One Piece, the main characters use a train named Rocket Man to chase after another on which some of their friends are held captive. The train is noted as being a failed prototype which can go only one speed, fast. It also features a painted shark design on the engine's front."

I don't think we need to add every instance the words "rocket" and "man" appear in media to the bloody list. Japanese anime carries many western influences, but not in this.

Fair use rationale for Image:Rocketmanej.JPG

Image:Rocketmanej.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 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 04:38, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Kate Bush Infobox?

Is it really necessary, afterall it takes up more bloody room than the Elton John one, which should be the focus here, because it kind of is his song. Comradeash (talk) 02:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Well enough. Removed. Michaelbusch (talk) 02:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ: the page is about the song (not the composers or the original performer) and cover versions are part of a song's history, and in this particular case a) the cover was also released as a single b) it is part of Kate Bush's singles discography c) it is thus part of the Kate Bush singles chronology and therefore naturally entitled to have its own infobox. (see other Wikipedia Songs pages like for example The Tide is High etc.).

Dreamer.se (talk) 06:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

actually I would suggest having a separate article called Rocket Man (Kate Bush song); all singles are notable to have their own article. indopug (talk) 21:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's the same song. -- 201.9.84.120 (talk) 08:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps "Rocket Man (Kate Bush version )"? -- Captain Quirk (talk) 12:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Other media section

This section was removed wholesale; the scope and nature of the use of a song in pop culture is relevant and adds to understanding of the song; this is a common and accepted part of many song articles. I agree we do not need to know what is happening in every scene where the song is used. I've returned many of the references in much-consolidated form as part of an overall cleanup. Jgm (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Drug metaphor?

Shouldn't there be something about the song being a metaphor for drug use. The touch down making him realise he's not the man he thinks he is, 'space' not being a place to raise kids &c Tony2Times (talk) 02:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Unless you can find a reliable reference for it, it is original research, and forbidden here. Many songs can be re-interpreted for things they weren't originally intended for (e.g. "Fire and Rain", "Puff, the Magic Dragon", etc.). John claims it is based on "The Rocket Man" story from Bradbury's The Illustrated Man. If you've read the story, there are clear parallels. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 11:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I found a reference that I hope is adequate and added in a mention of this theory. Invertzoo (talk) 00:52, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Puscifer Version

On July 6,2010 the band Puscifer started streaming their version of this song on their website, www.Puscifer.com. The song is officialy credited to Puscifer & Steven Drozd (from the Flaming Lips). The song will be available on the soundtrack to the film "The Heart Is A Drum Machine". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyinyc (talk • contribs) 22:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

What about Bill Shatner?

He did a very wierd cover of this song, the version that Stewie on Family Guy copied. BlackSabbath1996 (talk) 22:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, the Shatner version has taken on a life of its own and has been mimicked/spoofed in dozens of television shows. I don't remember who did it, but a poll several years ago (a poll having something to do with media & technology and age groups) showed that more college aged kids knew of the Shatner version than the original song. However, the article here only briefly mentions this version in passing (I actually came to this page to see if there was a separate article for the Shatner version linked from here). — al-Shimoni (talk) 00:52, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Kate Bush version

Does anybody know when the KB version was recorded? It says that Alan Murphy played on it, but he died in October 1989. The single was released in November 1991. Was the song really recocorded more than two years before? This also raises the question of how long before release this album was first proposed, since Bush recorded the song after a request to contribute to the album.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 06:05, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived 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: To be moved back to Rocket Man (song). Since nobody seems to be diving in to close this one, and it has been around on WP:RM since the stone age, I will take this on as a slightly controversial non-admin closure. As far as I can tell there is enough consensus that the current form, with the subtitle, is unwieldy and should be shortened. On whether it's primary topic for Rocket Man, I don't think there's enough consensus to determine that. Hence bringing it into line with WP:SONGDAB seems to be the option with the best traction. On whether it should be (song) or (Elton John song) I'm not really sure why people are proposing the latter; there is no other song of this name is there? Hence my final determination is to go with Rocket Man (song), which was explicitly supported by several and also has the bonus of being the longstanding title from May 2008 until April 2012. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 12:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: The move has not yet taken place as I need to request technical assistance with deleting the target page. Any competent admin could also carry that task out. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 12:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Yunshui 雲‍水 13:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

---

• Rocket Man (I Think It's Going to Be a Long, Long Time) → Rocket Man
• Rocket Man → Rocket Man (disambiguation)

– First, per WP:SUBTITLE this song's rather unwieldy subtitle is too long to include in the article name. This needs to be changed as it's sure to cause confusion to readers searching for the article.
Second, the song is clearly the primary topic of this name. The song was a major hit single for John and at least two cover versions also charted. Even with its clunky title, Rocket Man (I Think It's Going to Be a Long, Long Time) was viewed 23,699 times in the last 90 days, compared to 6987 for Rocket Man: The Definitive Hits (an album containing and referencing the song), 692 for Rocket Man: Greatest Hits Live (a tour for that album), 657 for Rocket Man (TV series), and 591 for Rocket Man (manga). All combined, they get a fraction of the views of the Elton John song. One additional article, the film RocketMan, has a differently written title, and "separation or non-separation of components" is already enough to distinguish it per WP:DIFFCAPS. Even still, it was viewed 13,039 times in the same period - adding that in it's still less than the song. Other entries either have no article or are questionable nicknames, and are unlikely to challenge this song as the primary topic.
Google Books also clearly favors the song: "Rocket Man" song returns 5,200 hits, compared to 107 for "Rocket Man: The Definitive Hits" 10 "Rocket Man: Greatest Hits Live"; 30 for "Rocket Man" "Robson Green", and 513 for "Rocket Man" manga. Additionally, "RocketMan" "Harland Williams" (the film) returns 151 hits. A few other topics with some measure of coverage on non-dedicated articles also turn up, like "Rocket Man" "Ray Bradbury" (1080 hits, discussed here) but nothing that approaches the song. Cúchullain ^t/c 15:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

• No opinion - after looking. But note that I just moved RocketMan to Rocket Man (1997 film) per WP:MOSTM; yes some sources, such as NY Times and Leonard Maltin do have it in CamelCase as RocketMan, but there are more Google Books with Rocketman or Rocket Man that don't, so my understanding is we should default to normal spacing and caps. However this move can happily be reverted by anyone who wants to, and shouldn't be given any account for the above RM. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:06, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I went ahead and reverted the move, because sources seem split, and the CamelCase version (which still redirected there) distinguishes the title from the others with natural disambiguation. I also moved the recently created article on the 1954 film to The Rocket Man, which seems to be the title, according to one of the sources used as well as IMDB. It may be worth having discussions for those two articles to make sure they're properly distinguished from one another, but I don't think either have implications on the primary topic status or otherwise for this article.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:24, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

That's okay, as I said anyone was welcome to. However The Rocket Man should go to the dab page, there is no way that the 1954 film is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with or without the "The". In ictu oculi (talk) 18:32, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

That's a good point. I've redirected "The Rocket Man" to the dab page; we can probably continue the discussion at the article.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

• Support per nom. I feel stronger about the first move (WP:SUBTITLE) than I do about the second (WP:PRIMARYTOPIC), but evidence supports them both. --BDD (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. It seems to me that Rocket Man (I Think It's Going to Be a Long, Long Time) is one more typical ephemeral pop music song out of tens of thousands of such. Rocket Man is a disambig page with so many meanings that it has no primary meaning. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:17, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
• Strong support. I don't think typical ephemeral pop music songs are automatically disqualified when it comes to being primary topic. Supporting as per sources and pageviews. Red Slash 04:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
• Comment only. I have a sympathy with the nomination but cannot bring myself to support. I note there are a couple of song RMs going on at the moment relating to the what the precise title of the song is, yet, here we are trying NOT to follow the precise title. We are due a film called "Rocket Man" about the life of Elton John. A reading of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC will make the reader aware that it is a "may" guideline, not a "should" or even a "must." The examples given in the guideline are significantly notable. As Anthony Appleyard says, are songs ever that notable long-term? I also note that the article has been moved 4 times already, and when the film above out, probably again. So all in, I think whatever John/Taupin called the song is good enough for me, it's not WP's to make it a better title for them! --Richhoncho (talk) 11:51, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
• Move back to Rocket Man (song); many sources use "rocket man" instead of the long title. George Ho (talk) 00:47, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
• Move back to Rocket Man (song) it's the primary song, but there are too many other uses for it to be primary use. DrKiernan (talk) 18:11, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
• Pile on move back to Rocket Man (song). The most sensible approach. The song is commonly referred to under its short title, and at the same time there are too many other uses of the term for the song to qualify as the sole primary topic. --85.197.57.70 (talk) 10:49, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
• To many people a Rocket Man is a rocket man is primarily a man flying with a backpack rocket pack, not some pop music group. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 08:23, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Great input, but I don't believe "Rocket Man" is a pop music group to anyone, although it is a pop music song to many. Also, I doubt that a substantial majority of people would understand the generic term "rocket man" to refer to a person using a rocket pack rather than simply a man flying in a rocket. But I may be convinced. Not that it matters in the context of this discussion. Do you have a source for your assertion that to many people a Rocket Man is a rocket man is primarily a man flying with a backpack? --85.197.3.153 (talk) 20:01, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

• Move to Rocket Man (Elton John song). Not primary for "Rocket Man". Justify more precision in the parenthetical disambiguation due to the severe abbreviation of the true name, which is too unwieldy to use for the title. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
• Strong oppose There are way too many many different rocket men for the song to be wp:primarytopic. No opinion on whether Rocket Man (song), Rocket Man (Elton John song), or Rocket Man (I Think It's Going to Be a Long, Long Time) is the best title. ¨^walk victor falk ^talk 15:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
• Move to Rocket Man (Elton John song) to simplify the title while retaining consistency with WP:SONGDAB. —BarrelProof (talk) 00:28, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose change to disambiguation. The song can remain where it is or be moved to Rocket Man (song) or Rocket Man (Elton John song)—I have no preference on that issue. Binksternet (talk) 21:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
• Back to Rocket Man (song), usual title, usual song. Rothorpe (talk) 21:41, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
• Comment. I understand that the song is in its elongated title on the album - but isn't this article predominantly about the single (ie. if it wasn't a single it probably wouldn't have an article)? What was the single released as? Looking at the picture cover it simply says "Rocket Man". Further down, the Kate Bush single simply says "Rocket Man". What do the national charts register the title as? This is what we should be considering. Mention of course can be made about its elongated title on the album, but certainly I think the article should be at Rocket Man (song).--Tuzapicabit (talk) 01:59, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Of course; I had the single and it was just the two words. Rothorpe (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2013 (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.

Thanks! How about fixing "Heat Wave" now? Rothorpe (talk) 17:29, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

The closer seems a bit confused. Regarding "there is no other song of this name is there?". Well, yes. There are two other songs listed on the Rocket Man dab page. I therefore can't see how this move is "bringing it into line with WP:SONGDAB". —BarrelProof (talk) 18:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

True, but neither has an article. If either (or both) go on to have articles, then it can be changed.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 10:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rocket Man (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150607100039/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l_fDyLfc4 to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3l_fDyLfc4

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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} 21:23, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Nix '(song)' from Article Title

The title of the article is 'Rocket Man'. That is the name of the song. That it is an article about the song is evident, blatantly obvious.

The use of the search differentiator '(song)' needs only appear on the drop-down Search list. That it appears on the 'Rocket Man' disambig--whatever page is also completely unnecessary. It adds no information. This is because the song '(song)' is listed under 'Music'.

Making the differentiation between 'Rocket Man' the song and 'Rocket Man' the dog '(dog)' is only a search help. Unlike a qualifier, e.g., 'Jungle Book' - the book? or the film? well the film was Disney's...so, you could qualify 'Jungle Book' making it 'Disney's Jungle Book' this would appear in the title of the article. (song), (book) & (film), however, are nothing more than search differentiators and therefore do not appear in an article's title or categorized listing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.206.199.50 (talk) 23:17, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Rocket Man (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://observer.theguardian.com/omm/ttremastered/story/0%2C%2C2166706%2C00.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.berniejtaupin.com/discography.bt
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081204043802/http://www.morgenutgaven.com/2008/10/morgendagens-helter/ to http://www.morgenutgaven.com/2008/10/morgendagens-helter/

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) 20:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)