# Talk:Billie Jean

@Synthwave.94: wouldn't it be more appropriate for the article's image to be the UK sleeve cover rather than the vinyl considering that album articles feature the cover? Isaacsorry (talk) 09:31, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

@Isaacsorry: I don't know what to think about the order of the two images in the infobox. I'm therefore pinging George Ho, who changed the two images back in July 2019, why he exactly did it. Synthwave.94 (talk) 00:49, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I don't know why the images are to be discussed here. Why not WP:FFD as mutual agreements wouldn't be reached in this talk page? Regarding the images, I believe that the US vinyl label is more suitable as the American customers were the main focus/target of the vinyl single sales. I appreciate the willingness by others to use the UK cover just because the cover exists, has the artist's face, and the song title. I felt that having the two images would be the suitable compromise. However, if the editors felt obliged to lean toward just one image, I don't think, without taking the images to FFD, there would be an agreement at the talk page to prefer one over the other. Honestly, I feel that taking the US image out would make readers believe that the US single is less relevant than the US single already has been. The US single release was one of MJ's great hits on sales, charts, and airplay. The fact that overseas releases have picture sleeves wouldn't prompt me to use them. Until the images are taken to FFD and then agreed upon there, I'd rather revert the removal of the US vinyl label if the pre-FFD removal were to happen. --George Ho (talk) 01:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Re-seeing the UK cover, the picture sleeve looks like an enlarged portion of the album cover of Thriller. George Ho (talk) 02:22, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Update: the UK image is speedy deleted per WP:G4 and Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 March 13#File:Billie Jean.jpg. You may want to go to User talk:Fastily if you want File:Michael-jackson-billie-jean-epic-s.jpg undeleted. George Ho (talk) 10:06, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

The article stated in the description of the song’s arrangement: „The song opens with a standard drum beat along with a standard hi-hat, and joined two bars later with a shaker.“ The „shaker“ is quite obviously a cabasa. You can find confirmation of this fact in almost any article about the song that has not been copied from here. An explanation anyway: The two instruments do sound quite similar, but sound is respectively generated in two completely different manners. Without going into detail (please google or read on Wikipedia), it is quite impractical trying to play 8th notes with a shaker in such a low tempo. There are shakers nowadays that are able to play slow 8th notes due to internal dampening, but they weren’t around in 1983. I can’t say for sure if they recorded a real cabasa; to me it seems it’s a sample from a Linn LM-1 drum machine.
Moreover, the sentence „Jones had Jackson sing his vocal overdubs through a six-foot cardboard tube“ is misleading. „His vocal overdubs“ means ALL overdubs, which is utterly unrealistic. The only vocal part that soundwise matches the recording method described is Michael’s fist „Do think twice“ repetition in the second verse. So I changed the sentence to „Jones had Jackson sing some of his vocal overdubs through a six-foot cardboard tube“, which is at least not definitely wrong. User:Millicentvongork 15:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Why is his edit not incorporated? The guy's right in every aspect. More so: On the song's LP version, bass and cabasa start together after two bars, and on the 12" inch version the bass starts after four bars and the cabasa comes in after another four bars. The article is at least sloppy about this Matzeachmann (talk) 10:45, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Excuse me if I get this wrong--first time editing Wikipedia here. Article might lead one to assume that Greg Phillingaines played the infamous three chord synthesizer progression. Elsewhere, Michael Boddicker erroneously claimed that Michael himself played the part. In truth it was Bill Wolfer, who played the part on Michael's demo. Michael had heard Wolfer experimenting with a sound on the Yamaha CS-80 synthesizer during the Jacksons' 1981 tour. He called Wolfer to help make the demo, and then later to record the same part for the album with Quincy Jones. Wolfer wrote about it on his blog in 2007:  "I did it, because during the 1981 tour when I played keyboards for Michael and his brothers, he heard me fooling around with a sound on the Yamaha CS80 synthesizer that I was using on the tour. Afterwards, he called me to help him with the demo for Bille Jean, which involved deciphering those three chords from him singing the top notes to me, and re-creating that sound that I had long since forgotten.
Months passed, and Michael called me to play the part on the tune when he and Quincy Jones were making the Thriller album at Westlake Studios in LA. When I arrived for the session, Michael led me into Studio B to record the part, because he and Quincy were busy recording a children's album based on the hit movie E.T. in the main studio.
So I sat in Studio B, alone with the second engineer, and I played the part, because I remembered it from the demo (apparently, this demo is on the special edition of Thriller; I've never heard it.) So it was just work. Michael came in to listen to it, approved it, and that was that." Here's the link: http://billwolfer.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2007-11-20T19:53:00-08:00&max-results=7
Not taking anything away from Greg or Michael Boddicker, they both played integral roles, and I ran into them often while we were recording Thriller. In fact, every top keyboard player in LA came through there, because it was Michael Jackson and Quincy Jones. We all knew this was going to be special.
Just want to set the record straight. Let me know what else I might need to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billwolfer (talk • contribs) 19:41, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Why is this article using his surname as a first person, while he preferred to be called Michael? Eoinocinneide (talk) 21:28, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

It should be using both his first name and last name, like the whole Wikipedia should to every single person in it. 188.113.95.213 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
MOS:SURNAME --Onorem (talk) 21:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

The redirect She was more like a beauty queen from a movie scene has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 § She was more like a beauty queen from a movie scene until a consensus is reached.  1234qwer1234qwer4 09:46, 20 September 2025 (UTC)