Talk:Candle in the Wind

message: Moved back from Candle In the Wind, which surely cannot be the correct title.  There seems to be some dispute whether the title is "Candle in the Wind" or "Candle In The Wind".  Anyone know for sure? -- ALoan (Talk) 11:16, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Did Elton John actually see Marilyn Monroe perform live?--Splashen (talk) 04:26, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "The Young Man In The 22 Row"

message: (from Wikipedia:Requested moves)
====Candle in the Wind → Candle In The Wind====
The  Official UK Charts Company and Elton's single cover both use capitalised I and T. Bush Me Up 17:58, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move discussion 

message: The  Official UK Charts Company and Elton's single cover both use capitalised I and T. Bush Me Up 17:58, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Candle in the Wind]] &rarr; [[Candle In The Wind]]

message: I assume from the above discussion that this article name is the most appropriate, however looking at the articles, it seems that Candle in the Wind 1997 is much more comprehensive, so I think it's wise to move all the info from that article in this one. Please discuss. KittenKlub 20:12, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not surprisingly, John soon sank into a deep depression, and found himself wondering if he had enough inner strength to attend the funeral. Thankfully for John, he was able to pull himself up with the support of other personal friends. Now that he had recovered enough, but still reeling from the pain of her death, John decided he wanted to pay a tribute to Princess Diana.
have no place in an encyclopaedia. It needs a fair bit of rewriting. JDH Owens talk | Esperanza 09:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  There are two entries for this song 

message: I have merged per discussion above. Below is the '97's talk page. - Glen 05:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged articles

message: Some of this material is inappropriate, stylistically speaking, and may violate NPOV rules. Sections like:
:Not surprisingly, John soon sank into a deep depression, and found himself wondering if he had enough inner strength to attend the funeral. Thankfully for John, he was able to pull himself up with the support of other personal friends. Now that he had recovered enough, but still reeling from the pain of her death, John decided he wanted to pay a tribute to Princess Diana.
have no place in an encyclopaedia. It needs a fair bit of rewriting. JDH Owens talk | Esperanza 09:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: See: Talk:Candle in the Wind. KittenKlub 20:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging discussion 

message: I added a parentheses where one had obviously been forgotten.
Avsn 22:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super minor edit 

message: What Elton John did with "Candle In The Wind" may be respectable, but why did he include "Something About The Way You Look Tonight" in the CD? This could be seen as taking advantage of the fact that "Candle in the Wind" was going to be a major sell. Even if the word does not seem to exist, we could talk about Necrobusiness —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.54.47.124 (talk) 05:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about "Something About The Way You Look Tonight" ? 

message: In Wikipedia:Requested moves I found a request for a move ": Candle In The Wind 1997 → :Candle in the Wind — Capitalization - correct caps for a redirect Candle in the Wind 1997 is occupied and points to Candle in the Wind —SkierRMH 00:29, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-separated

message: Can someone explain the relevence of the Track Listing at 1.1. What is it the track listing of, and why is it here? Keithmall 21:25, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Track Listing

message: the artcle on RIAA certification says that an albumn goes "diamond" when it reaches 10,000,000 sales - here it says 11 times platinum - wouldn't that make it diamond - should this be mentioned? [[Guest9999 21:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diamond 

message: The following statement in this article
As of 2007, it is the world's best-selling CD single in history.
contradicts with the introduction of Candle in the Wind 1997.
In March 2007, Media Traffic ranked "Candle in the Wind 1997" as the most successful song in music history. However, despite the popular and artistic success of this recording, The Guinness Book of Records 2008 recognizes that Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" is the world's best-selling single in history.
I added the  template to both articles. –W2bh (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction with "Candle in the wind 1997" 

message: Goodbye rose England. lol  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.83.22.92 (talk) 00:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candle in the Wind and Di 

message: The line  does not belong in this article. I removed it, but was accused by an IP of removing it because I just don't like it. Really, I removed it because it doesn't follow WP:NPOV. It doesn't matter that a random, unrelated composer said in an interview it was his least favorite song ever. It is not relevant or encyclopedic. It looks like the line was added in January 2017 by a now globally blocked IP editor.
I'm leaving the line in for now to avoid an edit war, but hoping for consensus here, even though it seems to me to be a pretty cut and dry case.– Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 19:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Oy. Here once again, though this is quite ridiculous. If there's any justification to keeping the line mentioned above, please discuss here. Otherwise, I will delete again in 1 week. :Gruff Rhys has no relation to this song, artist, or subject, and including his opinion on the song is completely irrelevant. See WP:INAPPROPRIATE, WP:NPOV/WP:DUE, WP:NOT, etc. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 22:35, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you won't. You'll build WP: CONSENSUS instead of trying to WP:OWN the article and bend wikipolicies to eliminate criticism of a song you just adore. 2A02:C7F:8E93:DF00:4DD6:FA23:289B:D9A6 (talk) 22:50, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you please explain why you think this should remain? And I mean why this line is at all relevant to the article, not some phony notion that it belongs because it's been there for 2 years already. You've thrown plenty of accusations at me, but my only goal is to help make a better encyclopedia. That some unrelated person doesn't like the song is not encyclopedic. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 22:57, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia welcomes commentary on musical recordings, which typically comes in the form of some John/Jane Doe from a music rag saying they like or dislike a piece. A noted musician declaring "Candle" the worst song ever, in a high-end publication, is absolutely a worthwhile addition. I doubt we'd be having this discussion, had our "unrelated person" called the song the best ever. 2A02:C7F:8E93:DF00:4DD6:FA23:289B:D9A6 (talk) 23:15, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter if he called it the best or worst song ever; it still wouldn't belong. Criticism and general reception, yes, are welcome, but these tend to come by way of notable critics, awards, charts, etc. Rhys' opinion came as an off-handed comment, likely in jest, during a quick interview that The Independent called "teasers". You seem to think that my objection to this line comes from my love of the song, but really, I'm not a fan of it at all. But my opinion and your opinion and Rhys' opinion are not relevant to an encyclopedia. General reviews, positive or negative, are welcome, but this interview hardly comes close to that. – Broccoli & Coffee (Oh hai) 23:43, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Criticism does not tend to come from "notable critics". It typically comes from some guy, in a rag deemed notable. Here we have a famous musician, telling a very reputable newspaper that "Candle" is the worst song he's heard. I'm dumbfounded as to how anyone who doesn't just love the song, can say this isn't a worthwhile addition. Your claim that Rhys' comment was "in jest", is obvious opinion. Please, stop scrambling to eliminate criticism; you can take comfort in the fact that Rolling Stone said it was great. 2A02:C7F:8E93:DF00:4DD6:FA23:289B:D9A6 (talk) 09:12, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

text: What makes it pertinent? Calidum 16:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Notable figure within the same industry, in a notable paper, calling it the worst song he has ever heard. Seems significant. Micky Moats (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Note the above user has been blocked as a sock  as has the IP user . Calidum 15:27, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Worst song"