Talk:The Elements (song)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gilbert and Sullivan on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gilbert and SullivanWikipedia:WikiProject Gilbert and SullivanTemplate:WikiProject Gilbert and SullivanGilbert and Sullivan articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 730 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Lehrer added the missing elements[edit]

I corresponded with Tom Lehrer a few years ago and suggested an arrangement for the missing elements for inclusion in a game I was making for a charity.

Tom replied with his own arrangement. https://peterlesliemorris.com/tom-lehrer-adds-newly-discovered-elements-to-his-song-the-elements/

I tried adding this information to the wiki page but it is locked. If anyone would like to contact me to prove this information, please contact me @PeterLeslieMorris PeterLeslieMorris (talk) 12:28, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia only includes information that can be verified by published, WP:Reliable sources. We do not accept private correspondence or conversations as sources. The philosophy is, basically, that if information is of encyclopedic importance, it will be published, critiqued, etc. See our key content policies: WP:V and WP:OR. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It obviously can't go in the article either, but I must say that I'm disappointed by Lehrer's version. Squee3's version in the archives is clearly better: it scans and rhymes perfectly without splitting any eighth notes. :) Double sharp (talk) 08:53, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PeterLeslieMorris: In case you're interested. :) Double sharp (talk) 08:58, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

As per Lehrer's other songs, I have added an infobox for this one. There is no reason to remove it, as including it satisfies the purpose of an infoxbox --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 22:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From usertalk: I'm really not sure why you would remove the infobox I added to The Elements (song), or why you did so in a way that did not generate a notice that you had reverted my edit (so I didn't actually notice you did this until now). The song being in the public domain and therefore available means that an infobox is appropriate, as with the other songs by Tom Lehrer. As other songs by Tom Lehrer have an infobox without any issue, consensus favors this article also having one. There was no reason to remove it. Please review the purpose of an infobox. Thank you. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 23:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In violation of the ArbCom cases concerning infoboxes, you have added an infobox to an existing article without first establishing a WP:CONSENSUS to add it. Then, when I removed it, you WP:EDIT WARred to put it back in, when you should, instead, have used the WP:BRD process. Further, the IB that you added is just an audio file and repetition of the songwriter's name, so it would be more efficient to simply add the audio file (below the table of elements) with a caption that would include Lehrer's name anyhow, which I suggest that you do. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:36, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it isn't an edit war (no 3RR), but I'm fine with removing the infobox and just having a caption with the song. When I get to my desktop I'll make that change, or you can. My apologies for being overbearing. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 17:23, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I am looking forward to your change. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I added the "Listen" box. -- Ssilvers (talk) 00:44, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ssilvers: Perfect! Thank you so much. Again, apologies if I sounded rude at first.

--Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 02:04, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'm glad that we could reach a satisfactory compromise! -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:33, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bit confused with Ssilvers' comment.[edit]

@Ssilvers, I made an edit to the short description, changing it from "Song by Tom Lehrer and Arthur Sullivan" to "Song by Tom Lehrer". Your rationale for reverting was " I disagree. Lehrer wrote the lyrics, but he merely arranged Sullivan's music.", which I agree with, but that does insinuate they worked together on the song, but Arthur Sullivan didn't work on this song, he worked on Modern Major General, which is then taken by Lehrer and used for this song. Along with that, the song was public domain by then, so it debatably doesn't even have an owner.
I don't really know the solution to this, but I think it is incorrect to list Arthur Sullivan as the co-creator of the song in the shortdesc.
Thank you for your time, I can do stuff! (talk) 03:11, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A song is by a lyricist and a composer. The composer of this song is Sullivan. It is not true that they need to "work together" on a song to be credited as the songwriters. It has nothing to do with copyright. Sullivan was one of the songwriters of this song, even though his estate is not entitled to any royalties. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:59, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]