Talk:Come On Eileen

message: Every version of "Come On Eileen" I've heard that was supposed to be performed by Reel Big Fish was really performed by Save Ferris. Is there really a Reel Big Fish version out there? -cprompt 18:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah I thought the exact same thing. Save Ferris is always miscredited as No Doubt, too...I doubt there are RBF or No Doubt versions. Can anyone provide some proof?Atticus2020 04:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No Doubt didn't do a cover of this song.  I always find files for it that say No Doubt, but it is really Save Ferris. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clevelander223 (talk • contribs) 06:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm pretty sure that the incorrect punctuation is the "true name" of the song. It's much the same with the name of the band -- Standard Written English would insist that "Dexys" have an apostrophe in it, but that apostrophe is absent  on official material like the album cover. 86.163.203.106 (talk) 19:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reel Big Fish

message: The article states ""Believe Me If All Those Endearing Young Charms", by Matthew Locke." This song was actually writtn by Thomas Moore. (79.190.69.142 (talk) 19:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thomas Moore

message: What does "too-rye-ay" mean? AmericanLeMans (talk) 02:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing. Just nonsense syllables. 91.107.186.14 (talk) 23:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Too-Rye-Ay

message: During 2006 for the Mexican market, Pepsi launches Pepsi Retro a sugar cane and cola nuts soft drink and the TV spot campaign used like jingle the begginings notes of the song.Jaboolanee (talk) 23:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come On Eileen like jingle. 

message: After the sentence stating this was their only US hit there is a bit pointing out they had already had a UK Hit with Geno and that they went on to have more UK hits, why is there a citation needed tag as going to the bottom of the page and clicking on the next chronilogical single in the info box tells us they had a record hit number 5 the next month? I'm removing it as it makes the infomation look dubious when it isn't.(Morcus (talk) 04:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There is still an implication in many parts of the article that Dexys were a one-hit wonder, because that's what they were in the US. This "all the world's America" perspective infests WP music articles and is very irritating 'overseas'. --Ef80 (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The bit about one hit wonders... 

message: I was about to convert all mentions of "Come On Eileen" in this article to "Come on Eileen" and move the article per MOS:CT ("prepositions containing four letters or fewer" are not capitalized), but thought that perhaps this change may not be uncontroversial. MOS:CT also states "For titles in languages other than English, the capitalization used in the original language is applied". Although this article makes NO mention that it is intended to apply British, the group is British and so there is a possibility that British naming conventions apply.  And since I am unfamiliar with British naming conventions, I am leaving this suggestion on the talk page for now for editors who are more familiar with the artist's articles and the preferred language (and that language's rules).  This process will be completed if there are no clear reasons why this change should not take place. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 05:14, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: After doing a quick web-search, every occurrence of this song that I saw had it listed as "Come On Eileen". I would therefore oppose changing the song name unless there is evidence that "Come on Eileen" is indeed the preferred title. Doniago (talk) 13:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd rather base the opinions of what the formats should be on actual policies and true grammar rules rather than what other random websites do.. To be honest, the only reason why this came to my attention was that I base all of my formats in my MP3 collection on Wikipedia formats since there's the set of style rules in place.  When I wanted to play this song, "Come On Eileen", I saw "Come on Closer" (by Jem) next to it and the formatting error jumped right out at me.  It's not super important or anything, but it's like when you see signs that say "Open Tonite Until 11pm!" instead of "tonight".  Sure, it's an "accepted" version, but it's technically wrong and the more we just let things go (especially on an encyclopedia), the more the actual worth of it decreases.  I think we need to find a British literary professor to clear up the capitalization rules for titles. ;) ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 01:13, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with going by policies and grammar in general, but we're talking about the title of a song here, and oftentimes those have nothing to do with rules of grammar at all, much less WP policies. It's my humble opinion that the song should be capitalized as per the actual title of the song. I'll agree that what a "random website" does isn't pertinent, so the question is, what do credible websites that could serve as reliable sources do, and do they do so consistently? Doniago (talk) 14:07, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with Doniago, and I'd argue that "on" in the song title isn't a preposition anyway: the title is urging "Eileen" to "come on" [edit: though I imagine the band were aware of the potential double meaning]. MOS:CT explicitly says: "the following words should be capitalized:...words which have the same form as prepositions, but are not being used specifically as prepositions" (the example given there is "Walk On"). I reckon "Come On Eileen" is correctly capitalised as it is (and for what it's worth "Come on Closer" is wrongly capitalised, but I'm not proposing a change to that). [Edit: I couldn't find my vinyl copy of Too Rye Ay on which the song first appeared; on the CD version it's written as "Come On Eileen" in the track list (but as "Come on Eileen" in the accompanying booklet), and in the booklet accompanying the compilation CD Let's Make This Precious: The Best of Dexys Midnight Runners it's shown as "Come On Eileen"...so even the band's own issues are inconsistent.] Dave.Dunford (talk) 15:38, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Come On Eileen → Come on Eileen 

message: The full lyrics of the song can be found on this website:
http://www.metrolyrics.com/come-on-eileen-lyrics-dexys-midnight-runners.html
As you can see from these lyrics, the song begins with a reference to Johnny Ray  -  I would like to know who he is. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 20:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Johnnie Ray, not Johnny. I'll correct the added lyrics. Dave.Dunford (talk) 14:24, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrics of the song

message: It seems that nobody can agree on who wrote this song!  So far I've found three different composition attributions, two in this article and the third in the Too-Rye-Ay album article.
# First paragraph:  The first paragraph of this article attributes the song to Kevin Rowland, "Big" Jim Paterson, Micky Billingham and Billy Adams.
# Sidebar:  The sidebar of this article lists the writers as Kevin Rowland, Jim "Big Jim" Paterson, Billy Adams, and Roger Mann.
# Too-Rye-Ay album article:  The Too-Rye-Ay article list the writers as Kevin Rowland, Jim Paterson, and Billy Adams.
To make matters worse, nobody can agree on what to call Jim Paterson, either: Jim Paterson, "Big" Jim Paterson, or Jim "Big Jim" Paterson.
The Dexys Midnight Runners website, lists the composers as Kevin Rowland, Jim Paterson, and Billy Adams, and I am, therefore, changing the information in this article to match that, using the name Jim Paterson throughout.  According to their website, he is sometimes known as Big Jimmy Paterson.  Given that none of the uses on this page match that, I'm avoiding it entirely. The use of Rowland, Paterson, and Adams as composers matches the information given on the Too-Rye-Ay album page.  Ge0nk (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composition 

message: The reference 7 should be supporting the fact that Eileen did not exist, but actually does not - the songfact articles mentions in the main body of the article that Eileen was indeed a real person and inspired the song. So which is true ? And if anything, that reference is anyway not accurate with the WIkipedia summary.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.246.39.13 (talk) 04:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference 7 Problem 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Come On Eileen. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170109053925/http://www.worldcharts.co.uk/chartfeatures/aus/aus80.htm to http://www.worldcharts.co.uk/chartfeatures/aus/aus80.htm
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) 05:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: same song no separate notability Richhoncho (talk) 10:32, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat questionable statement there, Rich.  Same tune, different lyrics, and separate notability as a football record.  Skinsmoke (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

text: Oppose: The lyrics are distinct. The occasion different. In "Come On Eileen" mentioning "Come On England" as an adaptation is ok, but in my opinion, "Come On England" should stay as a separate article. werldwayd (talk) 00:22, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

text: Weak oppose  I see you've suggested this merge again. I don't really care either way, but has anything changed since 2014? Dave.Dunford (talk) 12:46, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose per the two above I think 'Come On England' is a distinct enough song that they shouldn't be merged. FlalfTalk 18:55, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Oppose I've literally never heard of "Come On England" before. I've heard Come On Eileen before, since it's a well-known song that's been covered many a times. Google has more results for "Come On Eileen" (in quotes) than "Come On England" (in quotes), which while not entirely bulletproof, should at least serve to prove my point that Come On Eileen is distinct and far more culturally important than Come On England. In fact, if not for this entire discussion about Come On England, I would have continued to not know about it's existence. If it helps, I was born in 2002. 119.18.19.8 (talk) 14:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  woops, I just noticed that it was advocating for the merge of Come On England into this article, not the other way around; in that case, I'm going to Weak Support the move, since, yeah, nothing's changed since 2014, not even the notability. That notability template message on the top of Come On England has been there for 6 years. Maybe it should just be a section of this article instead? 119.18.19.8 (talk) 14:39, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Come On England]]