Talk:Strangers in the Night

message: The article claims that this song was written by Ivo Robic. However, the Bert Kaempfert article claims that he wrote it. allmusic.com and all other articles that I can find on google back up  Bert Kaempfert as the composer (maybe with the lyrics written by Charles Singleton and Eddie Snyder). As I don't know which is correct I have not changed the article—hopefully someone knows who the true composer is.  JeremyA 03:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes he told the story in an interview... read below. 99.7.123.116 (talk) 00:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Composer of Strangers in the Night?

message: This sentence above is not quite true; see below:
#Croatian song was made before the Bert Kaempfert arrangement
#Harmony (chords) with english version (that is: Strangers in the night) is the same
#Melody is a little bit different, due to melisms and vocabulary, and of course, different arrangement
#Originally, Robič-s song was not very well accepted by the audience and the jury in Germany (some kind of competition performance), so perhaps he sold the author-s rights or something
#Lyrics (text) is quite more changed than music allright, but, thematically in all, it derives from Robić.
#Robić sung it allright in croatian, there are recordings, held by national RTV-s.
Nevertheless, Robić is the real author of (the first version) Stranci u noći, which is arranged as Strangers in the night by Bert Kaempfert (correct the article there, into arrangement). For instance in jazz music, you can hear such adaptations of "borrowed themes" you can barely recognise, but still, those are arrangements. In this case, the structure of the piece is still quite well recognizable and therefore there is no reason to dispute about.
One can check this data via year of composition, or phone Radio Slovenia or Radio Croatia for further information.
Check this, also,  http://www.yotor.com/wiki/en/iv/Ivo%20Robic.htm
Best regards,  (Wiki sl.)
thats not really a source! way more sources could be cited for kaempfert.--Tresckow 06:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about a source directly from the composer? Read below why Uvezian is the author of the music. 99.7.123.116 (talk) 00:45, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The author 

message: What are "pitch noises"?? --ND (talk) 22:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pitch noises

message: Please ask Avo Uvezian, I asked him face to face and he told me personally, he is the composer of this song. Bert Kaempfert adapted it later. This was also announced in Switzerland by the "davidoff" cigar company.
:This needs to be resolved. The only links I've found saying that Avo wrote it are press puffs glorifying his cigars. Who get the royalties? Me thinks Kaempfert. No Swan So Fine (talk) 19:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true Avo Uvezian is the composer, and he got Kaempfert to publish it that's why... I posted excerpts of his interview below. 99.7.123.116 (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The real composer of "strangers in the night" is still alive, 82 years old 

message: I was wondering if it was appropriate for these quotes to be in this article. I would think that using "shit" and "fuck" is unencyclopedic.  Not sure and don't care either way.  Just bringing it up for future reference. Deigo (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is sanctioned under WP:PROFANE. The words used are indicative of the strong feelings that Sinatra had for the song. No Swan So Fine (talk) 09:12, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since back-and-forth editing between you and another editor has been going on, I checked out WP:PROFANE.  I think you're wrong in this matter now that I've read it. It clearly states that: "Words and images that would be considered offensive, profane, or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if their omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate."  Omission of Sinatra's quote (or at least omission of the profanity) would not cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate.  Deigo (talk) 16:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

text: The profanity has to come out.  It detracts more than it adds.  It's not encyclopedic.  It's bizarre to have it in there.  It hints at POV rather than objectivity in the drafting and editing of the article.  It attracts attention to the writing and editing process, and to the selection of information.  Who put it in there to begin with?  Carlos_X (talk) 20:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes in introduction 

message: The profanity is completely uncalled for, and Sinatra's opinion on the song is irrelevant. If we add his opinion of the song then we might as well do it with all artists.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.109.247.148 (talk) 16:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't tell if the sources are legitimate or not, so I've tagged the section and quotes. If nobody discusses their inclusion, I am removing them in 1 week. Nowyouseemetalk2me 19:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I added this information, and I don't think Sinatra's opinion on the song is irrelevant. The sources are also legitimate. Why is 'profanity uncalled for'? No Swan So Fine (talk) 21:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed with the dubiousness. I can find no reliable sources that verify this quote, only Wikipedia mirrors and personal fansites. Note that Wikipedia is not censored, so if someone swears in a quote, we must leave it as is. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What about the book that it is sourced to? No Swan So Fine (talk) 22:21, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I found the book on Google Books and it does indeed say that quote. The rest of that paragraph, however, was totally unsourced OR. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My bad. I've come round to your position, but I feel the article has lost some of its colour. No Swan So Fine (talk) 22:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Profanity 

message: All reliable sources indicate, as in opposite to this article, that Kaempfert is the author of Strangers in the Night. Not even the obit of the Croatian Musicians Union, of which Robić was vicepresident at the time of his passing away offers pretences of authorship, establishing him rather as "Mister Morgen", after his greatest success. Note, that the original Yugoslav release of Stranci U Noći indicates on the record label "B. Kaempfert" and "M. Renota" (Yug. Lyrics) as authors (Jugoton, EPY-3779), conducted and arranged by N. Kalogjera. The music has been registered for copyright by Roosevelt Music (NY) in 1966 as part of the Kaempfert score for the movie A Man Could Get Killed.
At best, the article rebus sic stantibus reflects some dispute in the history of the tune which is not explained, or in the worst case it is a matter of a plain POV that was erroneously allowed to find expression. I see the need to immediately alleviate the article by removing any references to Robić authorship. With the time at my hand now this will be more a kind of a tough love job to the article, with however a clear intention of providing some well sourced information inside the next week. Oalexander-En (talk) 12:49, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Kaempfert is not the author, but rather the copyright holder... read the story I posted for more info.99.7.123.116 (talk) 00:22, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kaempfert is the author. 

message: Avo Uvezian was interviewed (in Armenian) and he told the story behind Strangers in the Night. He composed the music while someone else composed the lyrics. He did not want to publish the music in the US because he said he wasn't going to make any money, so he asked his friend Bert Kaempfert in Germany to publish it for him, in which case they shared the profit. Bert Kaempfert acknowledged Uvezian as the composer and gave him a letter stating so, so the publishing in Germany was purely for economic reasons. He also stated the original lyrics was not accepted for Frank Sinatra to sing and thus the lyrics were re-made so that Sinatra would sing the song. Thereafter Sinatra became a close friend of his. This story needs to be incorporated in the article and Uvezian needs to be credited. It is ridiculous to dismiss Uvezian as the composer with "lack of sources" - after all, how many people are claiming credit for the composition? Uvezian was a close friend of both Sinatra and Kaempfert, and he composed the music for this song, end of story. 99.7.123.116 (talk) 00:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I added credit in the article, and also cited a reference. This should clear up the confusion. 99.7.123.116 (talk) 02:30, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia is a fact-based information source. Just because someone told that story in an interview does not make it a fact. As long as there is no official acknowledgement - e.g. by a court or the authentication of the above mentioned letter - Mr. Uvezian cannot be named as composer. RegardsAssessorJurBerlin (talk) 18:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: By the same token, just because Bert Kaempfert published it under his name, it does not mean he was the composer either. The opening of this article makes this absolute and it is not and must be changed. Uvezian is alive and made his statements and if they are in doubt let the people who have proof then come forward and prove otherwise. Also, if Kaempfert will be credited as the real and sole composer, we would also need to see non-copyright proof if Uvezian's story is to be discredited, for example any documents of the period openly acknowledging Kaempfert as the composer without challenge. As it stands, since wikipedia is a fact-based information source, then anyone so inclined can bring forth some facts as to why Uvezian is lying - and until then, his interview has merit and is a source itself which will need to be incorporated into this article better than it is. 99.7.123.116 (talk) 22:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Avo Uvezian is the real composer of Strangers in the Night 

message: In reading through the article, it appears that Frank Sinatra's recording of the english version is the THIRD one, preceeded by Connie Francis then Jack Jones.  In such an instances, would it be accurate to consider later recordings to be a cover of Connie Francis?  Or of Jack Jones since Francis' recording was never released?  Just because Sinatra's became the famous one, would it really be accurate to consider future recordings a cover of his?  Relevance being, should there be a mention in the article crediting subsequent recordings as a Francis, Jones, or Sinatra cover?  Medleystudios72 (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Releases - covers 

message: In this interview Engelbert Humperdinck reveals that he originally recorded the song, but he could not released it since it was already claimed by Sinatra. He also says his recording disappeared afterwards. The part begins at 9:10 in the video.--z33k (talk) 21:13, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Engelbert Humperdinck  

message: The competing claims paragraphs can be summarized to add popular culture influences. 
The Scooby-Doo page notes Sinatra's song ending influencing the naming of the title character. 
According to Ruby and Spears, Silverman was inspired by Frank Sinatra's scat "doo-be-doo-be-doo" at the end of his recording of "Strangers in the Night" on a flight to one of the development meetings, and decided to rename the dog "Scooby-Doo" and re-rechristen the show Scooby-Doo, Where Are You!
. 22yearswothanks (talk) 22:18, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In the following version – if I got it right – it is actually "Doo-dee doo-bee doo. Doo-doo-doo dee dah. Dah-dah dah-dah dah yee ahyeeyahyah ...". I don't know if I heard any other scatting in the tune. —Source: ~2:20 into the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTOeRwIUnG0&t=140s  And this link has the song with an additional 9 to 10 seconds added at the end where he scats a little more. Again at about 2:20 —Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fd_3EkGr0-4&t=140s BUT, I wonder if someone else later made it start with "doo-bee". Later, in some movie, I think it was Who Framed Roger Rabbit that a cartoon version of Sinatra sings part of this song, and part of the scat. Misty MH (talk) 06:42, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular culture 

message: Reading this section made me feel I was listening to a non-native speaker just relate a story out loud, which was then written down and published as the article.  
I suppose spurious claims of a song's authorship are also a story worth telling (at times), so maybe it should stay in, but at the very least this section needs a major rewrite, as there are few sources cited, anyway. This could be truncated to a couple of sentences, perhaps a mention of the interview where the claim was made without the whole play-by-play account of what happened. Deliusfan (talk) 13:38, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ivo Robić section needs reevaluation or at least rewrite