# Talk:Suffragette City

What does the song mean?!

It's fair enough that it might not exactly be enlightened use of the word suffragette, but contrasting it to suffragist is perhaps belabouring it a little bit; the distinction between the terms wasn't clear to me in school, and probably not glaringly obvious to musicians in the early '70s.  142.167.187.174 04:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Electricmic asks ****
Is it ok to just post the entire lyrics?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Electricmic (talk • contribs) 15:40, 18 March 2021 (UTC) 

Image:Bowie SuffragetteCity.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 Wikipedia articles 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 18:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see the trivia section say something about the link to Paul McCartney's Wings song "Jet" which supposedly refers to this song but I don't know the exact details. 
And jet, i thought the major
Was a lady suffragette  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.79.154.82 (talk) 14:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC) 

a lady suffragette is a term from the early 1900s referring to women trying to get the right to vote in political elections. There is no connection between the two songs other than the use of this word. 86.182.10.183 (talk) 09:39, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The "Popular Culture" section seems pretty gratuitious. Any reason I shouldn't remove it? Judging by the guidelines in WP:IPC, it doesn't look to me like anything makes the cut, except the fact that Bowie offered the song to Mott the Hoople--and we can just move that into the body of the article. -- Narsil (talk) 21:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I can't see any reason why they need to be kept. --JD554 (talk) 07:45, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment! Yeah--I moved the Mott the Hoople story into the body of the article, and nuked the rest of the "Pop Culture" section. -- Narsil (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

"Wham-bam thank you ma'am" is semi-infamous, and should be mentioned in the article... AnonMoos (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

 ° It's a well-known and even at that time well-worn phrase, and as Bowie was a self-professed fan of the Small Faces, I imagine it's also a reference to their earlier, proto-metallic song of the same name. HippyGumbo (talk) 13:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Suffragette City/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kyle Peake (talk · contribs) 16:56, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

So I am now reunited with the reviewer who helped me build my Wiki background, should be great to review one of your articles and I'll listen to the song shortly, as a fan of Bowie. --Kyle Peake (talk) 16:56, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Kyle Peake Hey long time no speak! Good to hear from you again. Looking forward to your comments :-) – zmbro (talk) 19:11, 25 June 2020 (UTC)


### Infobox and lead
Cover arts both need alt text – Done
Target B-side to A-side and B-side in the infobox – Done
"Cover of the 1976 single release" is not needed in the second infobox since we know that already since it is a single release with the art there – Done
"as the B-side of" → as the B-side of the single" with the appropriate targets – Done
"his 1972 album The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars" → "his fifth studio album, The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars (1972)" – Done
"the compilation album Changesonebowie in" → "the compilation album, Changesonebowie (1976), in" with the appropriate wikilink
Added link but adding (1976) is not necessary as it's already stated earlier in the sentence that it was 1976.
"co-produced the track, which Bowie recorded at" → "co-produced the former and it was recorded by Bowie at"
It doesn't make sense to say "Bowie and Ken Scott co-produced the former". Reworded it.
"and Mick Woodmansey at a" → "and Mick Woodmansey, at a" – Done
""Suffragette City" was originally offered to the English" → "The song was originally offered to English" – Done
"recorded Bowie's" → "recorded Bowie's written track"
Reads much better as is
""Suffragette City" is a" → "The song is a"
Changed to "It"
"that is influenced by the music" → "that was influenced by the music"
Doing this changes the tense to past and present in the same sentence
"The song's lyrics include a" → "The lyrics include a" – Done
""Suffragette City" received critical acclaim, with many critics" → ""Suffragette City" received acclaim from music critics, with many of them" with the target – Done, without "of them"
"the famous lyric and the song's power" → "the famous lyric, and the song's power"
British grammar says there can't be an Oxford comma there
For the publications, mention "including..." then add in two or three notable ones like NME for example – Done
"Bowie performed the track frequently" → "Bowie performed the song frequently" – Done
Remove wikilink on compilation album – Done
Start new sentence after compilation albums – Done
"and has been remastered several times, including 2012 for its 40th anniversary; this version was included in" → "The song has been remastered several times, including 2012 for the 40th anniversary of The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars; the version was included as part of" – Done, just put "the album" though


### Composition and recording
Shouldn't the recording para (opener) be the last one instead?
In other GAs for this album (i.e. "Moonage Daydream" and "Ziggy Stardust") I put the recording sections first
[1][2] should both be solely at the end of the sentence – Done
"the end of the Ziggy Stardust sessions" → "the end of the sessions for The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars"
The title of this album is often shortened to just Ziggy Stardust as its definitely a little long. Removed the link but it's perfectly fine to just refer to the album in its shortened form, especially when discussing it mid-sentence like this.
"during this session was" → "during the session were" – Done
"was co-produced by Bowie" → "was produced by Bowie"
No...?
"recorded the song with his backing band" → "recorded it with his backing band"
Reworded sentence
"Bowie offered the song" → "Bowie offered "Suffragette City"" – Done
"a band he greatly admired" → "a band from England that he greatly admired"
Changed to "an English band"
[1] should solely be at the end of the sentence – Done
"The group refused but recorded Bowie's "All the Young Dudes" instead." → "The band refused but instead recorded "All the Young Dudes", which Bowie wrote."
It's totally fine as is. Saying it's "Bowie's" clearly means he wrote it.
"a glam rock song with elements" → "a glam rock song, with elements" – Done
Wikilink piano and riff to themselves
Linked riff but positive this goes against WP:OVERLINK and WP:SEAOFBLUE
Target ARP synthesizer to ARP Instruments
Why? It's already linked to its own page.
"which underscores the guitar" → "underscoring the guitar" with the wikilink
Again, WP:OVERLINK
"Scott used the ARP located at Trident to find the right sound, and" → "while Scott used the ARP located at Trident to find the right sound and" – Done
"while other rock songs such as" → "while other rock songs like" with the target
That's totally unnecessary, you don't need to link every single thing that has a page
Target to Chord (music) – Done
"structure spaced "two" → "structure that is spaced "two" – Done
Wikilink A minor and A major to themselves – Done
"He believes that this" → "Doggett believes that this" – Done
"instrumentatuion was played by Bowie but" → "instrumentation was played by Bowie, but" – Done
Wikilink electric guitar
Again, unnecessary
"ma'am!" before the band gets" → "ma'am!" After this, the band get"
That'd make it a pretty short sentence so I'll leave it as is; reads better this way too
""Sister Suffragette" from the" → ""Sister Suffragette", from the" – Done
"He argues the Mary Poppins song had more" → "He argues the film's song had more" to avoid reinstating title or should it be "has more" in this context? – Done, should be "has more"
Add (1962) directly after the novel's name – Done
""sexually charged" hook" → ""sexually charged" hook:"
Positive this wouldn't be a colon because the rest of the sentence is not a list
Wikilink jazz to itself – Sure
[8][11] should both be solely at the end of the sentence in numerical order – Done
Remove wikilink on hard rock – Sure
"theatrics" to close" → "theatrics", to close" if hard rock is the closing bit only and not the rest, since I don't know since source is a book I don't have
I feel like he used the words "to close" so reworded.


### Release and reception
"released on 28 April 1972 by  RCA Records" → "released on 28 April 1972 by RCA Records" – pretty minor but Done
"B-side of Bowie's single "Starman" (as RCA 2199)" → "B-side of Bowie's single "Starman" (RCA 2199)" with the targets
"on the album" → "on Bowie's fifth studio album" – Mostly done
It's already linked, it's fine as a redirect
Remove wikilink on the album
Left it linked on other articles so it's fine here.
"on 16 June 1972" → "on 16 June of that year" – Done
"on 9 July 1976 to promote the compilation" → "on 9 July 1976, to promote the compilation" – Done
"with the US single edit" → "including the US single version" to avoid identical wording with the lead
Really no better way to word it
"The single failed to chart." any more info on this, i.e background type stuff; how long was he/was not he charting for before this or anything like that?
Sadly nope. Couldn't find many things online and Pegg doesn't say much about it, probably as much as I do here.
"Since its release, "Suffragette City" has received critical acclaim" → ""Suffragette City" has since been met with acclaim from music critics" with the target
"many writers praising the guitar work, the band's performance, the false ending, the famous lyric and the song's power" → "many writers praising the guitar work" since description of the reception is supposed to be larger in the lead instead so this is overkill, good work though
I have never ever once heard or read this. Plus, removing the other things would be understating.
""Suffragette City", Bowie's" → ""Suffragette City" Bowie's" – Done
"He concludes by saying:" → "Cromelin concluded by saying:" – Done
"here she comes' "." → "here she comes'"." – Done
"of AllMusic praises Ronson's guitar work" → "from AllMusic praised Ronson's guitar work" – Done
""Moonage Daydream" and "Hang On to Yourself" "." → "'Moonage Daydream' and 'Hang On to Yourself'"." per MOS:QWQ – Done
"but argues there are finer results on" → "but argued there are finer results on" – Done
"Ronson's guitar work, writing; "[It]" → "Ronson's guitar work, writing that "[it]" – Done
"He said some of the lyrics seem" → "Of the lyrics, Raggett said some seem"
"from worst to best, ranked" → "from worst to best, placed" – Done
"he ends his review by describing" → "he ended his review by describing" – Done
"Jordan Blum of PopMatters describes "Suffragette City", along with "Ziggy Stardust"," → "Jordan Blum, writing for PopMatters, described "Suffragette City" and "Ziggy Stardust"" – Done
"that 40 years later are "still endlessly addicting and pleasantly infectious"" → "that are "still endlessly addicting and pleasantly infectious" 40 years later" – Done, so much better thanks
"He added; "Both songs" → "He added, "Both songs" – Done
It must have been the copyeditor that did that because I 100% did not write it like that
"dynamics is remarkable"." → "dynamics is remarkable."" since that is a full sentence quote – Done
I honestly need to paraphrase these. That's probably where the copyvio violations are coming from.
"He concludes his review" → "Blum concluded his review" – Done
"and acknowledges it as" → "while acknowledging it as" – Done
"as Bowie's 14th-greatest song" → "as Bowie's 14th greatest song" – Done
Wikilink Ultimate Classic Rock to itself per MOS:LINK2SECT – Done
"placed the song on their list" → "placed the track on their list" – Done


### Live versions and subsequent releases
"Sounds of the 70s presented by John Peel; the session" → "Sounds of the 70s, presented by John Peel; the session" unless it is the full name of the programme and if so, then put the target on the full text to that wiki – Done
"was broadcast on 23 May 1972" → "was broadcast one week later" – Done
"In 2000, this recording was released on the album" → "In 2000, the recording was released on the compilation album" – Done
"Pegg called this performance "excellent"," → "Pegg called the performance "excellent"," – Done
"piano-playing of Nicky Graham" → "piano-playing from Nicky Graham" – Done
"have appeared on" → "have appeared on the live albums" – Done
"announced, "This is the" → "announced it as "the" – Done
"have appeared on" → "have appeared on the albums"
Little excessive
"were released on the 2017 edition" → "were included on the 2017 edition" – Done
Remove wikilink on Changesonebowie – Done
"including 1990 by" → "including in 1990 by" – Done
"and in 2012 for its 40th anniversary" → "and 2012 for its 40th anniversary" – Done
"the 2003 remixes by producer Ken Scott were" → "the 2003 remixes, by producer Ken Scott, were" – Done
"in the box set" → "as part of the box set" – Done


### Track listing
Remove All songs written by David Bowie. since this is a track listing section of a song, not credits/personnel
This is not true at all the track listing section IS where song credits go
[12] should be directly after the B-side's title, while [14] should be after the A-side
It's fine as is


### Personnel
Retitle to Credits and personnel
It's fine the way it is
Shouldn't the producer be third?
Why would it be like that?


### References
Make sure all of these are archived by using the tool – Done
Might have to do a few manually
They should all be good.
Copyvio score looks somewhat poor at 40.1%; try to fix this – Done
That's highly unfortunate. I'll see what I can do
Did some rewording; should be fixed now.
MOS:QWQ issues with ref 11
Not seeing this on ref 11...
Remove wikilinks on David Bowie and targets to RCA Records on refs 13 and 14 per MOS:OVERLINK; also remove the former from refs 28, 35 and 36 – Done
Remove wikilink on AllMusic for ref 16 – Done
Target Louder to Classic Rock (magazine) on ref 17 – Done
Remove staff from ref 19 and wikilink Ultimate Classic Rock – Done
Remove wikilinks on AllMusic and Stephen Thomas Erlewine for refs 21, 25, 29, 31, 32, 33 – Done
Remove wikilink on NME for ref 22 – Done
Remove wikilinks on AllMusic for refs 23, 27 and 34; plus always cite as publisher – Done
Remove target on Pitchfork for ref 26 – Done
Fix ref 30's author and remove target on Pitchfork
Idk what you mean by "fix author"
Sorry I thought this was the wrong one initially because it was identical to AllMusic; checked the source and it is correct, coincidentally. --Kyle Peake (talk) 12:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Remove wikilink on Parlophone for ref 37 – Done


### Final comments and verdict
 On hold for now, there was some edit warring but that happened nearly three months ago which was quite a while before this was nominated anyway so I would say it meets the stability criteria at this point. Nice article though, will be ready for GA pretty soon I hope. --Kyle Peake (talk) 14:50, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Kyle Peake Should be good now. Thanks for the review! – zmbro (talk) 20:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Zmbro Will be able to meet the criteria shortly; only things you need to do are fix the redirects with appropriate targets, and not include the full quotation about critics' feelings in the section, as a more detailed summary is how this is frequently done in the lead. --Kyle Peake (talk) 12:10, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Kyle Peake Sorry just now getting to this. Been busy irl. What do you mean by "not include the full quotation about critics' feelings in the section"? There isn't a direct quote in lead... – zmbro (talk) 23:41, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Zmbro I didn't mean direct quote, I should've phrased better; full context of critics' feelings should only be in the lead; I'll fix for you. --Kyle Peake (talk) 06:04, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 Pass after some copy editing from me --Kyle Peake (talk) 06:08, 2 July 2020 (UTC)