![]() | The contents of the Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd page were merged into Have I Told You Lately on 7 August 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Image:Long Black Veil.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I just listened to both on YouTube. Same song. Van Morrison's version was yet another cover of the original. 123.2.223.96 ( talk) 09:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any connection of "Have I Told You Lately" to the title music of "Rio Grande", written by Victor Young? It sounds similar, although not the same. -- 129.13.186.3 ( talk) 00:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Let's face it, we have two almost identical songs here. I think any entry in wikipedia with a name that is almost identical with another should admit the problem and try to help out the user. Just mentioning the other entry often does NOT solve the problem. I can see that Wikipedia doesn't want to mention such things in the article. It seems harmless to simply provide the second line. However it just sits there - because I don't dare write "to differentiate it from a song with a similar title", which seems completely improper in Wikipedia. Zipzip50 ( talk) 04:05, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Well, it got undone, with the comment, " It is clear to readers if they read the article." Darned if I can see which part of the article would give you a clue as to which song it is. I admit it was awkwardly placed. Perhaps someone else could handle this better than I have, since I have yet to master the ins and outs of wikidom, and it's too late now! Zipzip50 ( talk) 19:19, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
I propose to merge the Dutch-language version of this song, Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd It is the same song and separates the history of the Van Morrison song, which is contrary to WP:NSONGS . A merger will not take this article anywhere near the recommendations for separating articles. Richhoncho ( talk) 12:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
DETAILS - SAME SONG?; COVER OF A COVER; SUMMARY STYLE; NSONGS
A fuller treatment of any major subtopic should go in a separate article of its own, while a summary of the subtopic (i.e. "SUMMARY STYLE") is placed in the main article with a link to the more detailed article. Readers who want more detailed info will click the link, and those who don't will skip it.
The two main reasons for splitting material out from an article are size and content relevance.
If...a section of an article has a length that is out of proportion to the rest of the article, it is often appropriate for some or all of the article to be split into new articles.
Sometimes...an unduly large section of the article is made into its own highly detailed subarticle, and the handling of that subject in the main article is condensed into a brief summary section. This is completely normal Wikipedia procedure.
Songs and singles are probably notable if...
Notability aside, a standalone article is appropriate only when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article.
Songs with notable cover versions are normally covered in one common article about the song and the cover versions.[emphasis mine]
fans of a given cover would argue that that particular cover was special. I'm the author of the article in question, but am not a "fan" of the Dutch cover, per se. I only found out about the song and the band from the Van Morrison song article, which I've been editing for awhile. (If you look at the page edit stats for "Have I Told You Lately", I'm #2 on "Top 10 by edits", #2 on "Top 10 by added text", and #1 by character count/"Authorship".) Since the Dutch cover is notable, my original intent was to create a "Clouseau section" in the Van Morrison article. But when I discovered the (notable) cover by Udo (see next), I realized it could be expanded into a full article.
I don't see anything...atypical for a foreign-language cover.Most foreign-language covers (and covers in general) mentioned in song articles don't meet both of the WP:NSONGS requirements for notability and length; the Dutch cover meets both (see "Rod Stewart Cover", next). Also, as noted above, there is a notable cover (per #5 of WP:NALBUM) of the Dutch cover, making the Clouseau Dutch cover the "original version" of the (notable) Udo cover. Keeping the standalone article preserves this unusual connection: in the "Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd" article, the Clouseau Dutch version is the original version, and the Udo version is a derivative (notable) cover of Clouseau's original version.
why would the Dutch cover need its own article, but not the Rod Stewart? The Stewart version is currently half the article.
![]() | The contents of the Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd page were merged into Have I Told You Lately on 7 August 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Image:Long Black Veil.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I just listened to both on YouTube. Same song. Van Morrison's version was yet another cover of the original. 123.2.223.96 ( talk) 09:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Is there any connection of "Have I Told You Lately" to the title music of "Rio Grande", written by Victor Young? It sounds similar, although not the same. -- 129.13.186.3 ( talk) 00:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Let's face it, we have two almost identical songs here. I think any entry in wikipedia with a name that is almost identical with another should admit the problem and try to help out the user. Just mentioning the other entry often does NOT solve the problem. I can see that Wikipedia doesn't want to mention such things in the article. It seems harmless to simply provide the second line. However it just sits there - because I don't dare write "to differentiate it from a song with a similar title", which seems completely improper in Wikipedia. Zipzip50 ( talk) 04:05, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Well, it got undone, with the comment, " It is clear to readers if they read the article." Darned if I can see which part of the article would give you a clue as to which song it is. I admit it was awkwardly placed. Perhaps someone else could handle this better than I have, since I have yet to master the ins and outs of wikidom, and it's too late now! Zipzip50 ( talk) 19:19, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
I propose to merge the Dutch-language version of this song, Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd It is the same song and separates the history of the Van Morrison song, which is contrary to WP:NSONGS . A merger will not take this article anywhere near the recommendations for separating articles. Richhoncho ( talk) 12:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
DETAILS - SAME SONG?; COVER OF A COVER; SUMMARY STYLE; NSONGS
A fuller treatment of any major subtopic should go in a separate article of its own, while a summary of the subtopic (i.e. "SUMMARY STYLE") is placed in the main article with a link to the more detailed article. Readers who want more detailed info will click the link, and those who don't will skip it.
The two main reasons for splitting material out from an article are size and content relevance.
If...a section of an article has a length that is out of proportion to the rest of the article, it is often appropriate for some or all of the article to be split into new articles.
Sometimes...an unduly large section of the article is made into its own highly detailed subarticle, and the handling of that subject in the main article is condensed into a brief summary section. This is completely normal Wikipedia procedure.
Songs and singles are probably notable if...
Notability aside, a standalone article is appropriate only when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article.
Songs with notable cover versions are normally covered in one common article about the song and the cover versions.[emphasis mine]
fans of a given cover would argue that that particular cover was special. I'm the author of the article in question, but am not a "fan" of the Dutch cover, per se. I only found out about the song and the band from the Van Morrison song article, which I've been editing for awhile. (If you look at the page edit stats for "Have I Told You Lately", I'm #2 on "Top 10 by edits", #2 on "Top 10 by added text", and #1 by character count/"Authorship".) Since the Dutch cover is notable, my original intent was to create a "Clouseau section" in the Van Morrison article. But when I discovered the (notable) cover by Udo (see next), I realized it could be expanded into a full article.
I don't see anything...atypical for a foreign-language cover.Most foreign-language covers (and covers in general) mentioned in song articles don't meet both of the WP:NSONGS requirements for notability and length; the Dutch cover meets both (see "Rod Stewart Cover", next). Also, as noted above, there is a notable cover (per #5 of WP:NALBUM) of the Dutch cover, making the Clouseau Dutch cover the "original version" of the (notable) Udo cover. Keeping the standalone article preserves this unusual connection: in the "Heb Ik Ooit Gezegd" article, the Clouseau Dutch version is the original version, and the Udo version is a derivative (notable) cover of Clouseau's original version.
why would the Dutch cover need its own article, but not the Rod Stewart? The Stewart version is currently half the article.