Talk:Patter song

message: As this article has evolved, it has been taken over by its Gilbert & Sullivan content. Gilbert & Sullivan did not invent the patter song. It was a well established form in grand opera before either of them was born. Yet, because "G&S folk" have been largely the ones editing the article, the historical patter song has been pushed to the bottom, and marginalized.
I would suggest a split, with "patter song" describing the form in a general way, and "Gilbert & Sullivan patter song" containing the G&S-specific content. Marc Shepherd 15:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  The article needs more background and explanation to put the G&S patter songs in proper context.  An article on them by themselves would obscure even more the historical antecedents.  IMO, what needs to happen is for people who have more knowledge of early patter songs in opera, or someone who wants to do the research, to step in and improve the article.  I think the last thing Wikipedia needs is a bunch of little articles on similar subjects that don't give the reader an overview of the topic that puts it in context.  --Ssilvers 15:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly enough, but "an overview of the topic that puts it in context" is precisely what this article lacks. As it has been more-or-less dominated by people who have predominently a G&S perspective, it has become basically a G&S-specific article, with the historical perspective increasingly marginalized. Having said that, maybe it can be rescued, so I changed "split" to "expand." What we'll probably get is more anecdotes from amateur G&S, but let's see what happens. Marc Shepherd 15:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split proposal 

message: I reformatted the page, as I could tell that it would quickly degenerate into chaos without an alphabetical filing method. I hope no one minds and that it assists users in locating items of interest. If additions are sorted first by composer, then work title, then song title, then the appearance will remain user friendly. Also, please link only the first mention of a composer or work. I hope Gilbert & Sullivan fans do not curse me for filing G&S under Sullivan -- that exception to the conventions of filing always has bothered me. Ivan Velikii 00:57, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can see Ssilvers is determined to maintain the primacy of Gilbert & Sullivan in the crowded arena of patter song. 68.121.162.48 05:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Format

message: In case anyone is reading this, I've rewritten the entire article, though retaining a fair amount of what was there before, in order to provide more information about the relationship between G&S and the works of earlier composers.  I left the list as it was but turned it into a separate article (List of patter songs).--GuillaumeTell 21:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great job.  I made a few minor changes and also moved the reference to Grossmith to the previous section.   Most of the changes were to reflect that your three examples do not include several blazingly fast "classic" patter songs (even eliminating the ones that are part blazingly fast patter and part something else) certainly including the following:
*"Henceforth all the crimes that I find in the Times" (Robin) 
*"My name is John Wellington Wells" (J. W. Wells) 
*"Oh! A private buffoon is a light-hearted loon" (Jack Point)
*"In enterprise of martial kind" (Duke of Plaza-Toro)
The "moderately fast" ones that are undoubtedly patter songs, but are classic "catalogue" songs (again eliminating the ones that merely have a section with patter) include:
*"Rising early in the morning... First you polish off some batches of political dispatches" (Giuseppe) 
*"I've got a little list" (Ko-Ko) 
*"If you want a receipt for that popular mystery" (Colonel Calverly) 
*"If you give me your attention, I will tell you what I am" (King Gama) 
*"My boy, you may take it from me" (Robin) 
--Ssilvers 23:52, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: OK, GT moved Grossmith back to the previous position which implies that most of the G&S patter songs are of what GT considers the slower kind, rather than the faster kind, which is just wrong.  The dividing of the two sections does not work.  I'll try it another way, but Grossmith belongs just as much with both sections.  -- Ssilvers 21:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect implication

message: ...The description here given is, frankly, somewhat bizarre in parts. Why is so much unlisted? Adam Cuerden talk 01:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: G&S Patter songs

message: I've noticed that it seems to be common practice for stage productions of G&S operettas to slip the line from Rudigore into other shows as well.  I know I've heard it tacked onto songs from Penzance, HMS Pinafore, and the Mikado at least.  (It fits in rather well with the Major General song.)  It does seem as though Rudigore isn't performed nearly as often as those three, but that line has been reused many times.  Since the verse is about patter songs in general, and not at all relevant to the plot of any of the plays, it might deserve a mention here as one that's been reused in other places.  I've also heard a slight variation to the text - instead of "and if it is, it doesn't matter", it's "and so it really doesn't matter". Lurlock (talk) 13:39, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The Joseph Papp production of Pirates on Broadway interpolated songs from other G&S shows into Pirates, including the matter patter number from Ruddigore.  This has been copied in some productions.  We mention that it was used in Thoroughly Modern Millie in the List of patter songs article, which is where the information belongs.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other appearances of "Unitelligible Patter" rhyme  

message: Major-General, with new and imho great lyrics, performed as it should according to this article: here. I think it should be added as a contemporary example. Joepnl (talk) 04:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi.  If this is Notable (for example, if it has been discussed in major newspapers), it could be mentioned at Major-General's Song, but we don't need such parodies/pastiches in this article.  Best regards, and happy holidays!  -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great example 

message: The following has recently been added: "The voice synthesizer Vocaloid can be used to create songs at speeds which are considered impossible for humans to sing, such as The Disappearance of Hatsune Miku (although fans have created covers which equal the original in speed)." The mention of a machine that can sing faster than humans except for those humans who have sung just as fast seems hardly worth mentioning. It has been deleted once and I have deleted it again pending any consensus to the contrary. Tim riley (talk) 22:11, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this has little or nothing to do with the topic, patter song, and no WP:Reliable source was given that stated how this is important to a reader's understanding of the topic.  -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:31, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that no RS described Disappearance Hatsune Miku as patter song. However I disagree that it unimportant for understanding of the topic. Patter ong is characterizes by fast tempo. I specifically created a section for similar notable exampes of very fast tempo singing. It is usually instructive to mention related topics, because there is nothing isolated in the world.Staszek Lem (talk) 04:17, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

text: You said that "some sources relate rap to patter".  If you can find WP:Reliable sources that specifically relate any rock or rap songs to patter, we could cite them. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:57, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  self-contradictory trivia 

message: The references are a bit higgledy-piggledy, with some books listed under "Notes" and others under "References". Would anyone mind if I tidied them up, moving the bibliographical info for Balthazar, Fiss, MacDowell and Shaw down to the References section? Tim riley (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: "Be Our Guest!" -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:31, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like a good idea to me. There is presently a discussion of a similar problem with the references in List of musical works in unusual time signatures, and I am reminded that a year of so ago the same thing emerged for the references to Noise in music. Perhaps you will find some useful thoughts in the Talk pages to those two articles.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I say! I've just looked at the unusual time sigs article and boggled at the magnitude of such a task. Happily it's no great labour here, and I'll attend to it tomorrow. Thanks to Ssilvers and Jerome for comments above. Tim riley (talk) 22:22, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion