Talk:Chocolate Rain

message: I just watched Chocolate Rain played live on Jimmy Kimmel on ABC.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.101.40 (talk) 04:13, 9 August 2007(UTC)
As much as I detest that song, I strongly disagree with the article protected from creation.  Choclate Rain has become an Internet phenomenon (over 4 million YouTube views, as well as several parodies), plus Tay Zonday performed it on Jimmy Kimmel Live, which is brodcast nationally.  Does that not fall under WP:NOTABILITY?  CardinalFangZERO 09:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I came here looking for information on the song/phenomenon, was a little disappointed a few days ago when there was nothing at all, happy to find something here now. Contemporary culture is an area where Wiki has great value. 24.203.45.242 15:50, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: chocolate rain

message: Hello, I am now aware that to post the song's lyrics requires copyright permission, well I have contacted Tay Zonday with my request for permission, and I am still waiting for a response. If he grants permission for the Chocolate Rain lyrics to be included in this article, should I add them? I just want some opinions.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Firejunk (talk • contribs). 
:It wouldn´t hurt, but I still don´t think it needs them. - !Malomeat 08:20, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They would be better suited to Wikisource if permission can be gained. Darksun 20:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Lyrics are almost never good ideas for article content. this isn't an exception -- Firejunk 10:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Chocolate Rain The video says: (Some right reserved under Creative Commons License). You know what this means? --Xinjinbei 14:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a moot point as Firejunk said, lyrics do not belong on this page. the_undertow talk 00:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does the Creative Commons licence mean we could upload a sample of the song without the need for claiming fair use? anemone│projectors 20:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a noncommercial license, so we'd still need to do so through fair use (although it does make passage of WP:NFCC#2 easier). IronGargoyle (talk) 21:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find which CC licence was in use so thanks for clarifying. anemone│projectors 23:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chocolate Rain Lyrics Permission 

message: It's pretty incredible and sad when the article on encyclopediadramatica (under "Tay_Zonday") is more factual and accurate than the one on Wikipedia. I mean, it's pretty clear the people erasing the 4chan references have an agenda. I'm not going to even try to post links because the 4chanarchive should be proof enough. But hey, people spend all their time on wikipedia building sock puppets. Why? I'll never know.
I've seen archive.org used as source before. Why not 4chanarchive.org? Whatever. Because of anon you now have a funny song in your MP3 player. You're welcome. And Carson Daly clearly has someone lurking /b/ for his comedy "ideas." It happens all too often that our memes make it to air.Utils 19:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If someone added verifiable information about 4chan's role in promoting this song, we should keep it.  Until then, what is there to talk about?  Friday (talk) 14:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:IAR?--Scuzzmonkey 17:55, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:What_%22Ignore_all_rules%22_means - "Ignore all rules" does not mean that every action is justifiable. It is neither a trump card nor a carte blanche. A rule-ignorer must justify how their actions improve the encyclopedia if challenged. --Darksun 20:17, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Lurk moar. WP:POLICY, more specifically WP:RS, is not something we make exceptions to without incredibly good reasons. Also see WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Anyway, go find a RELIABLE SOURCE that backs this up, and come back when you do. --lucid 20:22, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

text: wiki can to accept that O RLY? had some credit from 4chan using an 4chan achieved post O_RLY%3F#_note-2 yet when shown a achieve on this, rejects it? Adjective Noun 20:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. —BurnDownBabylon 22:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is about confirming a detail in its rise to fame, the O RLY was accepted with evidence from a achieve, and this can also be confirmed with an achieve, so why the diffrence? WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is for countering the "they have this article X, so why not this article Y?  not for verifing somthing Adjective Noun 20:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The point of the essay is that one defect in Wikipedia should not be used to justify retaining another defect. All that would promote is a race to the bottom. —BurnDownBabylon 22:50, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

text: hahahah, so you go and remove that valid citation. "Defect" should be the motto of wiki Adjective Noun 08:38, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chocolate Rain was discovered by 4chan. 

message: Who is the cool guy who called it that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.226.72 (talk) 06:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  POST ELECTRONIC ART MUSIC? 

message: Why not put something in the article to the effect that "Many people suspect" that 4chan started the meme, and give the rationality (4chan thread just before popularity surge), but then cite t he lack of evidence for that claim.    Surely that's acceptable...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.146.33.10 (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why not... 

message: Tay Zonday stated his initial popularity is probably due to repeated postings on 4chan. 
"I'm pretty sure the "Chocolate Rain" attention started as a joke at 4chan.org, an image board that is credited with starting lots of popular internet phenomena. It spread to a general audience and people started uploading spoofs. I don't know what causes people to listen to my music. If I could speak it, there would be no reason to write songs. " 
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.28.175.4 (talk) 01:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing as this is not a resolved issue, I slightly edited the line from "The spread of the popularity of the song is attributed to 4chan" to "Many attribute the initial spread of the popularity of the song to 4chan."  This better represents current consensus on the issue, and also is more acurate (only the initial spread was from 4chan.  Word of mouth probably played a much larger role afterwards, as well as simple links on youtube and elsewhere).  This also avoids the passive voice.  But most importantly, don't enact an unresolved change.Eebster the Great (talk) 02:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See this maybe . And the 4chan article. Christopher Connor (talk) 07:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: 4chan sourced

message: Or whatever that section is called. What leads something to be listed in this section? For example, searching Chocolate Rain on YouTube produces some tribute link by the "WHB Chorus" and that's not listed on here. Wobblies 13:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are too many nothing spoofs listed.  For some reason any time you go to CR's video on youtube "Vanilla Snow" always shows up.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.6.18 (talk) 14:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tributes / Spoofs? 

message: I was quite intrigued about the lyrics reading the Encyclopedia Dramatica article (www.encyclopediadramatica.com/Jenkem) connecting this video with the Jenkem phenomenon, asserting (about the alleged emergence among American teenagers of Jenkem as a recreational hallucinogenic drug): "This increase has been partly attributed to the success of Chocolate Rain, whose lyrics implicitly refer to the practice and social effects of jenkem abuse." Having first read about this link in the About.Com:Urban Legends page Jenkem — Drug Warning I became very curious to investigate the actual lyrics of "Chocolate Rain." In a section above the need for including the lyrics is dismissed, however, I would still be very interested in at least having a link to a page which contains the lyrics. Perhaps they could find their place on Wikisource if the licence would permit that. __meco 08:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: http://youtube.com/watch?v=EwTZ2xpQwpA here's the lyrics --84.250.45.172 (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chocolate Rain and Jenkem 

message: I actually made the first post about an internet phenomenon.  Usually people make it here before me.  Someone edited it and made it better, but still, I win for once.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.3.145.36 (talk) 01:40, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cherry Cola 

message: --220.233.201.76 (talk) 12:21, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  genre? 

message: I believe that a link of the external variety regarding a lyrical interpretation, if you will, of the song in question would be in order. Wherefore am I inexplicably seeming to sound knowledgible, I ask thee. Kodster (Talk) 01:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrical interpretation

message: Should we add something about the Benefit Power album?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.45.149.42 (talk) 21:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Benefit Power?

message: this is horrible. why. someone answer me why  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.96.113 (talk) 20:46, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's been a target for vandalism. As the protection log says, the protection will expire eventually. Cheers, Alex Muller 20:48, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  why the hell is this locked!!!! 

message: I do know that the song has something to do with chocolate rain, but what exactly is the idea/story that the song is supposed to tell of? Is there even one at all? I can't identify it, if someone could please clarify it would be appreciated. If there is one, should there be a section on it? I can vaguely sense a meaning to the lyrics, but can't figure it out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.146.185 (talk) 02:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  what exactly is the song about? 

message: The youtube references don't seem reliable.  I might remove them unless there are objections. --Banime (talk) 23:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections here. Not only are they unreliable, they're mostly copyvios and discouraged per WP:EL. Stifle (talk) 11:03, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Youtube references 

message: Wikipedia is so biased, they'll have a lengthy article about someone who made a sub-par song on his computer, but they refuse to have an article about the Tourette's Guy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.6.143.133 (talk) 03:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbelievable. 

message: http://www.imeem.com/metalmaniac19/music/eQkk8xUQ/heavenly-sign-of-the-winner/
From around 2:30-3:00 of this 2001 song by Heavenly, the beat/progression is oddly familiar. My friends, better instrumentalists than I say the same. Feel free to shoot this proposal down.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.84.175 (talk) 04:15, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyright infringement? 

message: The breathing away from the mic thing doesn't seem appropriate for the song. Let's at least try to get some art for the song since it has no album.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.212.221 (talk) 03:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This song needs an image 

message: A video on youtube was taken down comparing the keyboard riff and how it was stolen (alike) to Rick Rossner's song  push it and it violated youtube's TOS.  There was a guy who spoke into webcam and showed on youtube how he played the notes of one keyboard riff melody and then alternated back and forth and slow speed then fast speed.  The melodic sequence was different but it used the same arpeggiated progression of 4 chords repeated over and over again.  I know that all music basically uses arpeggios of 4 chords repeated over and over again; but, has this not ever been mentioned before on the discussion archives?  Has it been deleted?  Has anyone mentioned this before?  Obviously the media is not going to do a "60 minutes" piece on this guy because he was an internet viral celebrity, but this video had like 100,000 views and was a reply to his video at the peak of its popularity.  If there are any deleted discussions of this in old archives, I'm willing to do the leg work and follow leads if there are any cold trails which needed an hour of effort to find reliable sources.  Can only an admin see the deleted discussions on talk pages?  Are they archived?  How do I know if there has been a discussion of this before on this article?  What if this article was deleted.  Does the old discussion page get deleted too forever?  Thanks to anyone who can answer this question, I'll check back in about a month.  66.231.146.7 (talk) 23:23, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A video on youtube was taken down comparing the keyboard riff and how it was stolen (alike) to Rick Rossner's song  

message: How encyclopedic is it to say that a critic from a tabloid is not surprised "by his lack of formal training?" Vocal art, like any art, is entirely subjective. So, I'm not sure how much weight the opinion of a tabloid writer should carry. Primium mobile (talk) 18:02, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of formal training 

message: The most recent episode of my little pony appears to reference Chocolate rain. It should be added.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.222.145.211 (talk) 01:16, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it shouldn't; that's just WP:TRIVIA. (Also see WP:XKCD.) Now, if the reference was called attention to by a WP:RS, or Lauren Faust/Jayson Thiesson/someone else involved in the production of MLP were to talk about the reference, then it might be worthwhile to mention it. But as is, there isn't much more you can say about it than "On the Sept 17 episode of My Little Pony, it rained chocolate." Why is anyone who reads that sentence (who doesn't already know about it) going to care? They won't. Why is that sentence important to the understanding of the song Chocolate Rain? It's not. (The above is merely my opinion on this type of trivia, but WP:XKCD holds regardless.) Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 21:31, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  My Little Pony Reference 

message: Title says all.
Not that I could care less.. just thought it was interesting.
Check it out for yourself - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6E3znZoFnN8  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.23.34 (talk) 07:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Melody is a copy of Penguin Cafe Orchestra's Perpetuum Mobile 

message: IT SEEMS TAY ZONDAY WAS HACKED! HIS COMMENTS SECION IS TURNING INTO A MESS!
Tay zondays youtube channel was hacked by someone, but who the hell was it? Tay zonday has halted production of videos becuase those videos are no longer in his hands. and now the hacker is on purposely trying to get the channel taken down by assumingly posting pornagraphic videos on tay zondays youtube channel.
the only problem is, I dont know who the hell hacked him, if you see any more suspicious activity please luanch a reform program for the hacker to seise and dessist or get arrested! DO NOT DELETE THIS! THIS IS CRITICAL INFROMATION THAT NEEDS TO BE HEARD! TAY ZONDAY WAS HACKED?! - furryletsplayersXtre 99.20.242.10 (talk) 17:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  CRITICAL NOTIFFICATION 

message: The video was originally posted to ebaumsworld prior to youtube existing, maybe a note of it's origins is warrented? 80.192.85.232 (talk) 12:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  lede 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Chocolate Rain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22170787-5012327,00.html
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070815.WBmingram20070815141502/WBStory/WBmingram
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:44, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Chocolate Rain. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22170787-5012327,00.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:47, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Chocolate Rain. 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://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0%2C22049%2C22170787-5012327%2C00.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130127110137/http://www.insideonlinevideo.com/2008/06/04/pork-and-beans-by-tay-zonday/ to http://www.insideonlinevideo.com/2008/06/04/pork-and-beans-by-tay-zonday/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:39, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :1. Referencing & citations
:* Needs a source
:* Needs an inline citation
:* Better source needed. Unverifiable.
:* The Performances section needs more references and inline citations.
:2. Coverage & accuracy
:* Consider mentioning the music video in the lead.
:* "YouTube Award" is only mentioned in the lead.
:* As of when?
:* Who?
:* Only one favorable review is mentioned afterwards.
:* Otherwise, 
:3. Structure
:* Single-sentence paragraph.
:* The License section may be given undue weight as a section.
:* Remove this sentence.
:4. Grammar & style
:*Consider changing  to .
:*Italicize "with Carson Daly", "Tosh.0", "The Office" and "SpongeBob SquarePants".
:*Consider using past simple to be consistent with the rest of the sentences in the paragraph.
:*Remove "of".
:*Capitalize every occurence of "Internet".
:*Change  to 
:*Change "on" to "in".
:*Change  to 
:*Change  to .
:*Change "movie" to "film".
:*Is it a spoof? Is it a sequel?
:*Remove the Oxford comma.
:*Possible pleonasm.
:5. Supporting materials
:*
:*The Performances section may benefit from a picture.
:* Otherwise, 
:6. Accessibility
:* What's a "Web Redemption"?
:* not checked
Additionally, perform a checklinks. This link, this link, this link, this link and this link are dead and they render the surrounding text and/or quotes unverifiable. The See also section contains only one link and that link should be either removed or linked elsewhere. Ꞷumbolo 09:13, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Checking criteria for B class (October 2017) 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The release date in the infobox says April 22, but the article says it was uploaded to youtube April 23 (which checks out afaics clicking on the link, unless Youtube dates are based on where you are, in which case it might read differently depending where you are?). I see looking at the article history that it original said the video was uploaded April 22, and it stayed like that for years, so is the infobox date just a hang-over from that?219.88.68.195 (talk) 03:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  April 22/23