Talk:Puff, the Magic Dragon

message: The land of Honah Lee is Hawaii, Puff the Magic Dragon is in fact a mountain shaped like a sleeping dragon in Hawaii.
03:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Supply a WP:RS confirming both the fact and that this was the songwriters' intention, and we can put it in. DavidOaks (talk) 21:27, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was recently in Hanalei,_Hawaii and it occurred to me that it sounds like the place in the song. As above, I have no WP:RS for it, but it is interesting. We can discuss all here without the RS, just not add it to the article. Gah4 (talk) 23:44, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Mountain in Hawaii

message: Is it copyright infrigement to post the lyrics here?
:Probably not, but we don't generally post lyrics to songs unless we are presenting an analysis of them or something. Don't add them just for the heck of it. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk June 28, 2005 20:39 (UTC)
::It is infringement --Tenfour
:No, I don't beleive it is, as long as you give credit. There are 1000's of places on the Internet that do it--many commercial--that don't get in trouble for it. It's covered under fair use or some such thing. But as long as you give credit to whoever came up with them, you aren't infringing on their copyright.
:Tenfour, please sign your posts. I added your signature above, but you can do it with 3 or 4 tildes (~~~ or ~~~~). The latter is preferred as it also adds a timestamp. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:30, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
::It is most certainly copyright infringement to post lyrics. Several music companies have actually began to take action against web sites that post lyrics in recent weeks. ~MDD4696 07:01, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact it is not; posting lyrics for the sake of commentary, analysis, or review is covered under fair use. 75.71.194.124 (talk) 20:33, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do, Frecklefoot. Yeah, it's definitely infringement. In the leaflets that come with CDs even, they have to get legal permission to print the lyrics, even though the leaflet is accompanied by the recorded songs. That's why they say "Lyrics reprinted with permission". Tenfour 19:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Copy that (oops). The American Musicological Society, which would have as vested interest as anyone in reproducing lyrics, would appear to take exception to the wholesale display of a complete song as 'fair use' unless every part of it were to be explicated in a scholarly fashion. http://www.ams-net.org/AMS_Fair_Use_Statement.pdf .  Inasmuch as doing that in Wikipedia would be a flagrant transgression of the no-original research proscriptions of Wikipedia, the matter should be considered closed. And reproducing such in entirety from primary or secondary sources would overreach 'fair use' and encroach on copyright law itself. JohndanR (talk) 14:51, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright infrigement?

message: Hasn't anybody else noticed that this page states that Puff is written by Peter Paul and Mary, only to change it the next line saying that Leonard Lipton wrote it as a poem and Peter Yarrow made it a song? Seems mutually exclusive to me, as a poem/song can only have one author (unless two collaborated, which this page does not even insinuate). Kingerik 23:55, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see what I can do. Lipton wrote the poem, but PP&M made it famous. — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:38, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

text: After looking at it again, I think it's okay as it is. The song was by the "Peter" or Peter, Paul and Mary. The poem the song was based on was written by Lipton. The article states this. In a way, it was a collaberation: each person contributed something. The band contributed by actually recording the song. I think it's okay. — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The first sentence in the article is "Puff, the Magic Dragon is a song written and popularized by Peter, Paul and Mary in the 1960s." Either they wrote the song or not. If they were the first to record the song, or make it popular, or something other than writing it, the article should state that implicitly. Also, "the 1960s" is kind of vague; we should be able to figure out exactly when the record was released, on what album, etc. Dyfsunctional 03:05, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and BTW, the Peter, Paul and Mary article states that PPM member Peter Yarrow wrote the song in 1958, a year before Lipton. Dyfsunctional 03:09, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Fixed it. Dyfsunctional 03:21, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Something must be done

message: It is attested by the Lennon estate that he wrote the song about a picture his child drew (check the page Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds - not about an LSD trip. If anybody has another example, add it please - but Lucy in the Sky will go due to disputed accuracy Lochok 08:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Paul McCartney admitted that the song was about LSD in a recent interview, although he does not confirm or deny that it was intentional that the song title has the same initials as LySergic acid Diethylamide. Do you think the Beatles denied the song was about LSD for nearly 40 years for any reason other than to protect themselves? Do you honestly think that others haven't done the same sort of thing? --Thoric 21:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you honestly think that you can prove they DID? (And even if you could - No Original Research ring a bell?). I find it really weird that so many people honestly feel they HAVE to read drug references into a children's song, though (it's not like the Beatles, who were aiming all of their stuff at teenagers you know, this song was aimed at kids originally). I mean honestly, I know the title is suggestive with the "Puff" in there as the dragon's name, but every time I see arguments "for" it being a drug song, it's always the most ludicrous stretchs of lyrics-bending I've ever seen (see the above "see he lives by the SEA which rhymes with C which is the first letter of Cannabis which is marijuana" argument). Regardless of drug references or no, though, you still make it sound like you care more about whether a 1960s song has drug references than what its more obvious (and intentional) allegory was. :\ In any case, the accusations of it being rumored to have drug references are covered just fine in the article now. I hope no one decides to overdo it with unsourceable material in the future. Runa27 07:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds

message: Is the song actually called "Puff, the Magic Dragon"? The record label just says "Puff".220.157.83.11 10:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite what the label says, it is popularly known as "Puff, the Magic Dragon." And if you look here, you'll see that the song is labelled as "Puff, the Magic Dragon" on their album. — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: That already works as a redirect. The title on the image of the 45 rpm record is simply "Puff" which will take the user to the dab page, where it's identified as a character in the song, title as presently given. DavidOaks (talk) 16:02, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Correct name of song

message: Did Peter Yarrow ever explain how "it's easier to interpret The Star-Spangled Banner as a drug song than Puff, the Magic Dragon," as mentioned in this article? The external reference confirms that Yarrow made the assertion, but does not elaborate on his reasoning! Mtford 03:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to see that too. :-) — Frecklefoot | Talk 14:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I recall him talking about it once, long ago. All I remember is where he brought up the first line "Oh say can you SEE", which rhymes with "C", which stands for Cannibis or Cocaine or whatever. Wahkeenah 12:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do see what you're saying with the second paragraph of that part. The tonality of it is more opinion based, so a simple or more thorough rewrite is needed.Dguenther - DGun (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Star-Spangled Banner as a drug song??

message: Perhaps it wasn't originally a children's song, but it did inspire a 1978 television special aimed at children, and Peter Yarrow wrote a book that appears to be based on the television special. Since these projects seem to be "officially" related to the song, perhaps they should be mentioned in this article. B7T (talk) 16:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Children's TV special and book

message: I've removed the lyrics to this poem from the article as they are almost certainly copyrighted, and posting them here breaches that copyright. Even when lyrics are not copyrighted, we very, very rarely include them in the article but link to a copy on Wikisource.
See also the "Copyright infringement" section further up this page. Thryduulf 09:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: South East Asia version

message: I recently bought the book, Puff the Magic Dragon, by Peter Yarrow and Lenny Lipton (published by Sterling of New York and London, copyright 2007). A few things are written in the book that are of interest to this article. First, the name of Puff's home is written as Honalee. Also, in a note from the authors at the end, Lipton relates that he was unaware of Hawaii's Hanalei when he made up the name of the place. Finally, both of the authors clearly refer to this as a children's song.
Austineze 14:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Children's Book Adds Info

message: Weird, but it never says it was videotaped, and after a couple of minutes Googling I can't find another page that doesn't reference the FOXNews article. Wrong Google search, maybe? But I think we should have another, independent reference. Oh wait... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/06/politics/main591734.shtml. But it only references the marijuana once, and very briefly.
But...it doesn't look to me like John Kerry actually intended this movement to look as if he was smoking pot. Just an accidental movement, at the wrong time.
It'd be nice to have a link to the actual video, if it's at all possible? Also, did anyone ever question John on his gesture? If so, is there a reference on the net?
Not defending the song at all, just noting that it says "he did this" without a counter-argument, which looks fishy. 121.245.0.247 (talk) 14:45, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The FOXNews reference

message: I recall some years ago that somebody sang "Puff the magic dragon" backwards, I believe this was a guy, with a cockny accent...can anyone else remember this.??? or indeed who in fact sang it.
It was Bill Homewood. A quick internet search revels he did it on Multi-Coloured Swap Shop Zipperdeedoodah (talk) 20:32, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Puff the magic dragon .......Sung backwards??

message: Removed the following from "Other versions" section:
*100 Folk Celsius (performed in Hungarian as Paff, a bűvös sárkány)
*Brothers Four (the)
*Grup de Folk (performed in Catalan as "Puff, el drac màgic")
*The Loop (band) [Puffmagic.com]
*http://musicfortheblind.co.uk/archive.html#puff Nivi
None of the above were had their own wiki page. They had redlinks instead. The last link was to an external site. As a minimum, only acts with a wikipedia page shold be included in the list. Otherwise the section has no quality control at all.Adimovk5 (talk) 19:31, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What, no Barack the Magic Negro? 204.52.215.107 (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. Added it. DavidOaks (talk) 14:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Actually, I'd prefer if we removed all the "less notable" performers of cover versions of this song. I don't think it adds anything at all (in fact, I think it makes the article look cluttered). It demonstrates that it's a popular song, but that's already clear from the rest of the article. We could just summarize by saying "it's been covered by dozens of other artists." Just MHO. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 13:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur with Frecklefoot. This is becoming trivialistcruft. It's relevant and notable that "lots of artists have covered this" (and also in languages other than original), it may be important to mention it (for discography, etc.) in relation to each cover group, but specific covers do not seem important to the song being covered. Unless there are actual sources talking about the specific covering. DMacks (talk) 16:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I whole heartedly disagree, or rather I disagree with the removal that has taken place. To remove "less notable" performers would be a good idea. But how to decide which are the "less notable"? What I would suggest is cutting all "live" performances but retaining all recorded versions, this list of artists is then in itself another indication of how deeply the song has become rooted in various societies and cultures Satoriforsale (talk) 10:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at WP:SONGCOVER and see what it says. Each cover song must have been commented on by a reliable source to be included in a list. The guideline sets a very high bar. Binksternet (talk) 14:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Other versions: removed non-notable acts

message: Yet another possible interpretation: The fiddle (or bagpipe) tune called The Boy's Lament for His Dragon is claimed to be about a kite.
__Just plain Bill (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This was my interpretation also.  The song mentions "painted wings and giant's rings" -- dragon kites are made with painted silk and large rings of bamboo.  See  and  for example.  To be clear, the dragon is not the kite, but the appearance of the kite, so Puff merely "brings him strings and sealing wax" and the dragon (unlike the kite) lives forever.  But we could use a source.  Here is one such source, though it's a pretty minor one; still, how much do we need to insert a picture?  On the other hand I didn't quickly find evidence "sealing wax" or even "beeswax" is used in dragon kites. Wnt (talk) 21:23, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Dragon kite

message: Mgreason (talk) 13:12, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Attribution

message: I supplied a ref for the naming of the AC-47 gunship, which seems to be accurate. I deleted WP:Coatrack discusssion of the bird's firepower, along with an unilluminating quote (which therefore no longer needed to be sourced). Finally, I deleted the unref'd quote attributed to Yarrow, suggesting he ultimately approved the usage. If he did, it would surprise me, and it needs ref. If he didn't, it would probably outrage him, and while this is not a biographical article, attributing a controversial statement without ref is inconsistent with WP:BLP. So with the single remaining claim sourced, I removed the ref tag. DavidOaks (talk) 17:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Gunship

message: This is incorrect punctuation, is it not? Is this really the proper title? We don't say "Attila, the Hun" or "Henry, the Fifth"... 78.86.61.94 (talk) 00:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is indeed what the author/singers used in their published version (see http://www.amazon.com/Puff-Magic-Dragon-Peter-Yarrow/dp/1454901144 ). So I guess it does not matter what the grammatically correct punctuation is. -  Subh83 (talk | contribs) 16:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

text: 1) In this title, the comma is helpful if not mandatory, to remove ambiguity. With the comma, "puff" is a noun and the rest is an appositive. Without the comma, "puff" could be parsed as a verb. 2) More and smarter examples: No comma: "Billy the Kid", "Cedric the Entertainer", "Edward the Confessor". With-comma: "DoDo, The Kid from Outer Space". It looks like two standard styles co-exist. No comma if it's more like a part of the name; with-comma if it's more like a description. -104.148.244.119 (talk) 04:45, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Comma in title

message: In the paragraph on gender neutrality, it is claimed that the sentence was changed to "A dragon lives forever, but not so girls and boys." However, apparently (listen to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlRrb5LOnM4 ), the word "little" is still in there even after the change. So it should be "A dragon lives forever, but not so little girls and boys." -  Subh83 (talk | contribs) 16:41, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to change! Be bold! — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:17, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: gender neutral

message: The infobox claims the genre of this song is folk and Baroque pop. I get the "folk" genre (acoustic guitar is the primary accompaniment), but why "Baroque pop"? I don't recognize anything in the song that is overtly Baroque-ish. Is there a reference that claims this?
Also, I think children's music should be added as a genre. It may have not been written as such, but I remember my mom playing this song for me all the time as a tyke. I know it's widely considered a children's song. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 13:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good spot, I have changed it back to pop which was its value before this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puff,_the_Magic_Dragon&direction=next&oldid=587871518 -- I'll leave adding childrens music to you James Fryer (talk) 18:57, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre

message: I suggest removing the Vietnamese war portion of this article. First, check the reference given: it does not support the claim that "the AC-47 Spooky gunship was nicknamed the 'Dragon' or 'Dragon ship' by the North Vietnamese" since the cited document gives no indication about who named this gunship the 'dragon', and it could easily have been Americans. Second, I highly doubt that the general Vietnamese population at the time spoke much English or listened to English-language songs. Perhaps more importantly, the cited document on the AC-47 is a simple webpage that itself has no citations. Also, the wikipedia page for the C-47 ( Douglas AC-47 Spooky ) indicates that the call-sign was "puff"... this fact is un-referenced in that document, but clearly a radio call-sign of an American plane is an American usage, not a Vietnamese usage. To summarize, if this section is to be kept, it should be referenced better and should be correct in terms of who used the term. It's a little bit offensive to pretend that people under fire from above might refer to that rascally magic dragon as the source of all the hubbub. I have modified the section rather than remove it myself, but I presume somebody who flew one of these can add this trivia since I guess wikipedia now accepts trivia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.246.45.195 (talk) 02:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Vietnamese war gunship mention

message: Is Honah Lee from Puff The Magic Dragon a real person? The phrase in the story looks alot like a person's name  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:246:803:6EF0:ED6F:ED05:D0C5:DA31 (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Honahlee is the name of the land where Puff lived, not a person. Schazjmd (talk) 20:37, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: How come there is not a section about to what languages it has been translated, by who, with what title...?
For example in Catalan it was translated by Joan Boix Masramon, member of the band Falsterbo 3, in 1967, and is called Puff, el drac màgic (sometimes with Puff spelt in Catalan, Paf).
Source: https://www.enderrock.cat/noticia/7548/mort/joan/boix
--77.75.179.1 (talk) 22:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations