# Talk:Zooropa (song)

Image:U2 Zooropa.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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I saw that this song was released in as a single in the US and Mexico as a promo, it was a tangible single, it had artwork, and it charted. Therefore, I made it into a single and added it to the singles list on the U2 discography and singles template. I think I'm justified, do you guys agree?--Gen. Quon (talk) 22:18, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Zooropa was released as a promotional CD to promote its eponymous album, but it was not released as a single on its own.[1] All of U2's official singles can be seen here.  It looks like there are a few others on the singles template that shouldn't be there either. –Dream out loud (talk) 00:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Zooropa (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 
In the Releases section, this sentence ---> "Although the song did chart, "Zooropa" never released as a single", reads odd.
I see that this sentence is taken out of the article b/c I don't find it anyplace in the article.   Why don't you write the following instead:  
Although the song charted, "Zooropa" never was released as a single. 
That sounds less odd.  V Schauf (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Check.
B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 
In the Recording section, link "Zoo TV Tour" once. In the Composition and Reception and legacy section, "favorite" needs to be "favourite". Same section, "The song describes two characters in an "underground" setting with a dull and grey appeal, which Bono compared to the film Blade Runner" ---> "The song describes two characters in an "underground" setting with a dull and grey appeal, which Bono compared to the film Blade Runner (1982)", so that it can provide context for the reader. Same section, there's no need to link "European", since "Europe" is already linked. In the Releases section, "Currently, the Mexico release of "Zooropa" is among the most the valuable releases in U2's catalogue, with an estimated value of up to €800", you might want to remove "currently" per WP:DATED or might want to say "As of [insert date]".
Half-check.
Check.
Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 
There's a dead link.
Half-check.
Check.
B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!
--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

A little more to do. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Sentence was fixed for prose quality, and I believe the dead link was fixed.  Checklinks does not seem to be working so I had to manually click on each link.  Article should be good to go.  –Dream out loud (talk) 14:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Really? Cause, every time I click on the site, it says "Page not found". --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:07, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you to Dream out loud for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Here is a list of some books that mention the song or the album's concepts in which the song possesses, which I may incorporate into the article eventually:

The Novel and the Menagerie
The Man Comes Around: The Spiritual Journey of Johnny Cash
My Generation: Rock 'n' Roll
–Dream out loud (talk) 20:26, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a list I've compiled of "Zooropa"'s Billboard charts, featuring the dates and the rankings for the two charts on which they appeared.  I will incorporate this into the article soon.

–Dream out loud (talk) 21:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The article says the introduction begins with suspended chords, which are chords with the third replaced by a second or fourth. I've not seen a reference that explicitly says they are suspended chords. Then I realized, perhaps the editor who added the information meant to say that they are sustained chords (e.g. the synthesiser that is playing the notes is sustaining them for the length of the introduction). Any thoughts on this? Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 14:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm no expert when it comes to music, but that's probably what was meant. The two names are similar so it would be all too easy to put one for the other. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 22:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm no expert either, but I double checked my source and it did in fact say "suspended chords".  I got this from the Hot Press article, which can only be viewed by subscribers.  A variation of the interview with slight changes was published in Musician magazine with a different title, by the same author (Joe Jackson), and can be viewed here. It does in fact say "suspended chords", of course that could be a mistake, but we must find a citation that says "sustained chords".  I chose not to cite the latter because among the changes in the Musician article was the song's title change from "Babble-Zooropa" to "Zooropa" I cited the first one to show the song's original working title. –Dream out loud (talk) 01:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Though the article is almost there, a few references will need replacing before taken to FAC. Ref 11 (U2wanderer for Promo), ref 30 (U2Gigs for live), and ref 32 (U2wanderer for album) will all fail the sourcing criterion based on previous FACs for other U2 articles. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 22:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought it was decided that U2gigs.com was reliable in the NLOTH FAC. –Dream out loud (talk) 06:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately not; the user in question was unconvinced regarding the site and just left it up to other users to decide for themselves. A similar concern over it was brought up in the "City" FAC. But the book U2 Live: A Concert Documentary, used in 1997 U2 concert in Sarajevo could be used, if the right page is found. And I think there's another similar book out there too. Melicans (talk, contributions) 01:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Did a quick search; all three "Zooropa" performances are on page 168, with a note about it being dropped on page 169. Hope this helps as a replacement. Melicans (talk, contributions) 01:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Although I am not blind, I could not figure out what the image was. Your alt text was extremely helpful. Thanks!  Tuxedo junction (talk) 20:59, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

In the article "The Zooropa Story", written by Flood, he states that "...the second half [of 'Zooropa'] was taken from a soundcheck the band did in New Zealand or Australia about two years ago."[2]  This was written in 1993, meaning that Flood was referring to a time around 1991.  There are a few things wrong with this statement though.  First, Achtung Baby was still being written in 1991 and didn't begin the Zoo TV Tour until 1992, so there were no concerts in 1991 where the band could have performed a soundcheck.[3]  Second, the band didn't travel to Australia/New Zealand until late 1993 on the final leg of the Zoo TV Tour.  The last time they were in those countries was in late 1989 during the Lovetown Tour.[4][5]  Not only was that four years before the article was written, but knowing the history of U2, the chance of the band having came up a part of "Zooropa" during a Lovetown soundcheck is highly unlikely.  So there is something wrong with Flood's statement here. 
Of course this is original research (and not relevant to the article's content), but my personal guess is that the soundcheck took place sometime in 1992 in either North America or Europe.  The fact that the soundchecks took place "about two years prior in Oceania" should be removed from the article, simply stating that the song originated from a soundcheck, without specifying when or where. –Dream out loud (talk) 23:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

For the sake of accuracy while maintaining the information, I agree that is probably the best course of action to take. Melicans (talk, contributions) 04:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm also finding all references to the song to be annoyingly ambiguous when they say "first half" and "second half" of the song. That's pretty annoying, considering the song comprises 3 sections - the intro, the slogan-dominated verses, and then the uptempo part with the "squishy" synth part. I was just reading a reference that I interpreted more clearly than others and it had more information about recording (e.g. such as the band being disappointed with parts of the soundcheck and re-recording them), but I can't for the life of me remember what it was or where to find it. Can anyone figure out what I'm talking about? Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 13:43, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

As "Zooropa" has now returned the band's set list, we can't get too carried away with updating the "Live performances" section.  We do no need to update the section each time the band performs the song, as that information would become too trivial and not encyclopedic.  For now, the section mentions that it has been played and the date of its return, which can be left as is for the time being.  As the tour goes on, the section should be edited as follows: 

If "Zooropa" becomes a regular part of the set list after several shows, that information can be mentioned briefly (but not every single city/date/venue/etc.).
If the song disappears from the set lists after its surprising first performance (such as "Electrical Storm"[6]) then we can mention more details (similar to that of its Zoo TV performances), but as per WP:CRYSTAL, we would have to wait long enough to the point where the band hasn't played it for a while.
Please note these are just guidelines I've come up with to (hopefully) avoid a large amount of IP or other random edits, and feel free to ignore all rules if necessary. –Dream out loud (talk) 22:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)