Talk:Cha-cha-cha (dance)

message: Cha-cha dance is a ball room dance which Latin American cultures participates in.
also, where are the citations for those specific songs being cha-cha. I listended to them and they do not seem to be cha-cha songs. the 3rd sextion is about the music. Unlike salsa and slasa (dance), there is not enoguh information to differenciate the two 
I object to the term "street cha-cha-chá in Cuba."  In Cuba, there is no such thing as "street cha-cha-chá."  There is just one kind of cha-cha-chá and it's usually danced inside.Ricardovacilon 21:42, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dance

message: I think there is no reason to have both Cha-cha-cha and Cha-cha-cha (dance) articles. They are practically about the same topic, have substantial overlap in meaning and text, and they do not have enough information separately to warrant two separate pages.
I will merge them in a few days unless there is a good reason otherwise.
--Yurik 4 July 2005 19:52 (UTC)
:And the reason is good: These are different things. It is ridiculous to claim that music and dance are the same things. And I fail to see any overlap of the contents, by the way. I have an impression that you have no slightest idea on the subject. Removing the merge notice and suggesting to do drastic article changes only in the areas of some minimal expertise. mikka (t) 5 July 2005 00:54 (UTC)
Actually, people often dance to music. And for what it's worth, the two articles do overlap dramatically in their opening paragraphs, to the point where I had to double-check to make sure they weren't duplicates. I suggest a merge. --Quuxplusone 03:39, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I do. And I know the difference. I only don't have time to expand the dance article up to what it deserves, wasting my time on various obscure and useless topics like zand, zandik, and People's Artist... mikka (t) 02:09, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: I don't take a stance in the merge/preserve issue, but the overlaps should be sorted out. And there are more issues with this article:
The issue of dancing cha-cha-cha on 1-2-cha-cha-cha or 2-3-cha-cha-cha is disputed, and the article doesn't mention any sources. According to my sources, there is only one rhythmic pattern which correctly fits in a cha-cha-cha song, the one where the cha-cha-cha falls on the opening tones of the tumbao, namely beats 4, 4& and 1. (Source: martin Blais: "Latin Dance Study Guide", 2004, http://furius.ca/salsa-notes). There are of course people dancing otherwise as well, but it should be mentioned that this is musically incorrect. Cha-cha-cha is till very closely related to its cuban origins, and should be danced accordingly.
Furthermore, the artcile starts with some quotes, are these relevant? There should be more information in the beginning about the dance itself, or why not write that there is a dispute over how it should be danced? Comparing the articles cha-cha-cha and cha-cha-cha (dance), there seems to be an inconsistency about the history.
Also, some of the music in the examples is really only pop, there should be more cuban examples to provide an unbiased sample. And having five versions of "Sway" is redundant.
Finally, we don't need to have the International latin Cha-Cha Syllabus written out here, at least not without providing an explanation as to what it is. Some might even see this as an commercial, it's not encyclopaedia-material.62.142.46.22 00:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: `'mikka (t) 22:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed information and cleanup 

message: Would it be incorrect for the feet to go 'Cha-Cha-Cha' at the same time that the music goes 'Cha-Cha-Cha' ?
Why ?
Maybe 'one' is in the wrong place ?
Confused !
--195.137.93.171 (talk) 00:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As of 4.11.22 the article explains this as well as I've ever seen it explained. The origin of the name corresponds to the sound of the feet in the original metric orientation. Kevintimba (talk) 09:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  musically incorrect 

message: The following table is moved out of article. Please provide references that prove that these songs (a) exist at all and (b) cha-cha-chable. `'mikka (t) 22:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Arranged alphabetically in order of artists last name or band name.
Artist                       	Title                            	Album        	Year
Antique                      	When the Rhythm Starts to Play   	             	
Black Eyed Peas              	Where's the Love                 	Elephunk     	
Michael Bublé                	Sway                             	             	2003
Cribbins, Bernard            	Right Said Fred                  	             	1962
Arielle Dombasle             	Quien Sera (Sway)                	             	2004
Idol, Billy                  	White Wedding                    	             	1982
Julio Iglesias               	Gozar La Vida                    	             	
Michael Jackson              	Billie Jean                      	Thriller     	1982
Tom Jones                    	Sex Bomb                         	             	
Julie London                 	Sway                             	             	
Dean Martin                  	Sway                             	             	1954
George Michael               	Amazing                          	             	
Wilson Pickett               	Mustang Sally                    	             	
Pink                         	Get The Party Started (party mix)	M!ssundaztood	2001
Pussycat Dolls               	Sway                             	PCD          	2004
Bobby Rydell                 	Sway                             	             	1960
Santana                      	Corazon Espinado                 	Supernatural 	1999
Santana feat. Rob Thomas     	Smooth                           	Supernatural 	1999
Santana feat. Michelle Branch	The Game of Love                 	Shaman       	2002
Smash Mouth                  	Walkin' On the Sun               	Astro Lounge 	
Shania Twain                 	That Don't Impress Me Much       	Come On Over 	1997
In fact, I don't see why this table must be here at all. There are THOUSANDS of cuban cha-chas, thousands of ballroom arrangements and thousands 4/4 tunes that "feel" like cha-cha. A common wikipedia rule is  only notable things must generally be mentioned. Wikipedia is not a musical catalog. `'mikka (t) 22:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cha-cha-cha dance music

message: The definiton in Wikipedia talks about Pierre Lavelle from the United Kingtom visiting Cuba in 1952 "to discover mambo"  he can not discover anything he learn to Mambo and/or Cha Cha but "not discover it." 
In 1952, I was doing the Mambo and Cha Cha-ing at the Palladium ballroom in NYC. I understood it to be part of the Afro-centric music of Cuba (Afro-Cuban). Part of the cane cutting rhythms of the slaves.  It is a work rhythm as is most of the Afro-centric music in the Americas.  It has been danced as the Cha Cha long before 1952, As per some of the Black Exploitation film of the twenties.
68.6.75.51 02:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused about the origin of the Cha Cha. 

message: Why in the world does the article start with a discussion about the foreigner who traveled to Cuba to "discover" the dance?  What about how the dance originated in Cuba in the 50s? What about the Cuban dancers and musicians?  They might tell you a different story.  Funny how the dance can become universal but language is not.  dmcmanam dmcmanam December 2007  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.32.249 (talk) 04:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Spanish version speaks about music and nothing meaningful and referenced about dance.  `'Míkka>t 21:23, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, quite so. Macdonald-ross (talk) 20:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Read the Spanish version

message: Let me list the problems:
# Too, many, commas
# Poor general organization
# Sentences don't flow, even though there are transition phrases occasionally
# Ridiculous amount of typos
# What's the point of a syllabus taking half the article?
# Italics beginning paragraphs (i.e. "Foot work)
# Reads like a collection of opinions
The entire article needs to be rewritten, or at the very least restructured.
Rosenbluh (talk) 21:41, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completely pathetic article! 

message: I can find no evidence that any dance organization calls it Cha-cha, whatever people may say informally. It's called Cha-cha-cha in Britain, Japan, all of Europe (including Russia), and best of all, Cuba. So, either this is a US peculiarity, or it's just plain wrong. That part of the text offers no reference. It's got to come out or be modified. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My instructors have always insisted that it is "Cha-cha" not "Cha-cha-cha". (We also count the beat as "1, 2, 3, cha-cha, 1..." or "1, 2, 3, 4 and 1...") However, the references in the article that I've looked at name it as "Cha-cha-cha", so I'm not really sure. Will have to find a reference to the "Cha-cha" variant though, to go beyond "here is some anecdotal evidence". I'm a silver-level competitive dancer in the US, and I've yet to hear anyone use the "Cha-cha-cha" version, except for Dancing With the Stars (a television show). Deathanatos (talk) 22:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, American instructors often call it 'Cha-cha', but worldwide, and originally in Cuba, and in international competitions it's 'Cha-cha-cha', so we go with that. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  not Cha-cha!? 

message: The video of the couple dancing in the studio is not a good video to include in the article for the simple reason that the music (which I believe is overlaid on the video) has the couple off-beat. If the couple is dancing to the music included in the video, then they are stepping on beat 1 instead of beat 2, which is not how cha-cha-cha is danced at all. The music should be changed, or, better yet, the video should be removed and replaced with a video of people who dance better anyways.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.0.80 (talk) 04:02, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad Video

message: So-called "reference" number 8: "The 'one, two, cha-cha-cha' rhythm variant was popularized by the Tommy Dorsey Orchestra's Tea For Two Cha Cha(1958), and is arguably the correct timing when dancing to such arrangements." This is not a reference or citation; rather it's a statement with no reference or citation to back it up. It contains the word "arguably" which is generally made to flag a claim for which no citation or other support is given. The sentence would clearly be subject to if it were in the body of the article; as an unsupported uncited claim. It's even worse to pretend that it's a reference. I will delete it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 19:19, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Bad reference