Talk:Another One Bites the Dust

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Queen, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.QueenWikipedia:WikiProject QueenTemplate:WikiProject QueenQueen

Songs Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Anyone else think that is so-called "subliminal message" of marjuana smoking pleasure is a very big stretch?

Too big a stretch. I've removed it. I may be crazy, but I'm not stupid 21:18, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

it's crystal clear not like that stairway to heaven thing. the best way to see if a subliminal message is "lagit" is that how you spell "lagit?" never mind. is to record the lyrics of youself saying it and then reverse it. another bites the dust works when you do that. also there's a weird al song that when played backwards says "chewbacca likes to eat cheese" or something stupid like that

And contrary to what the message says, it is NOT fun to smoke pot, it's bad for you and illegal (this is there for those who don't know) CoolKatt number 99999

Speaking of Weird Al and backmasking, if you play "Nature Trail to Hell" backwards, there is deliberate backmasking that says "Satan eats Cheez Whiz" CoolKatt number 99999

Auch come on, it's PURE COINCIDENCE that if you play the lyric backwards, it sounds VERY VAGUELY like "it's fun to smoke marajuana" - Deacon wrote the lyric because of what it sounded like sung forwards! there's nothing actually recorded backwards on the recording - it's just Mercury singing it forwards.--feline1 12:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it's a coincidence. We all know that. However, that isn't demonstrable fact unless we have record of a denial from Deacon or Mercury. Debunking urban legends is original research. Finding a reliable source where someone else has isn't. Besides, we explicitly call it an urban legend, which should be discrediting it enough. Deltabeignet 06:52, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but this is just fantasy and nonsense. It *IS* demonstrable. By listening to it. With your ears. When playing the record forwards, there are no audible backwards vocals: there is only a forwards vocal. There is no backwards vocal on there. Nobody went into the studio and recorded a vocal with the tape running backwards, to embed a "subliminal message" into the record. It simply is not there. There is precious little other instrumentation on the tape to confuse the matter (just drums, and bass guitar + guitar playing the riff.)Even if someone is congentially deaf, they can double check by reading EMI's published "off the record" transcriptions of the multitrack tapes (in the "Queen Greatest Hits - Off the Record" sheet music book). I'm quite sick and tired of the continual vandalism and rubbish on this article about this!--feline1 17:31, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oi! What's all this, then? You can't really be seriously moved to edit war over whether the article says "doesn't countain backwards masking" or "really doesn't contain backwards masking", surely? Pull your heads in, the pair of you, or I'm turning this encyclopaedia right around and you'll just have to miss out on your holidays this year. By the way, Feline1, I assume you didn't intend to accuse an opponent in a content dispute of "vandalism" just there ... fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 23:40, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add my two penceworth, but I don't think it sounds *remotely* like "It's fun to smoke marijuana". It will sound a bit like it, but that's because you've been told what it is supposed to sound like, and the power of suggestion is obviously huge. I guarantee if you played the backwards sample to someone without telling them what to hear, they wouldn't have a clue. After all, it is just a load of reversed word sounds. Davetibbs 06:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this stems from a fundamental misunderstand of Wikipedia's nature. The encyclopaedia cannot state that there is no deliberate backmasking, without a source to back this up, even if it is obvious to one and all; that would be no different from writing that "Another One Bites the Dust is a catchy song with a good beat". This is true, but says who? User:Feline1 can't cite himself. We could perhaps cite this article at the Wall Street Journal, from January 2006, in which a spokesman for Queen's record label expressly denies the presence of backmasking. I have to wonder why no-one here has done so already. I am unwilling to make the edits myself, because of the aforementioned edit war; I bet lots of people have this page on their watchlist, and will pounce at the slightest change. Perhaps it would be better to simply write about the backmasking controversy, with some facts ripped from backmasking, and not make a statement one way or the other. E.g:

"A common urban legend has it that the chorus of Another One Bites the Dust, when played in reverse, contains the messages "it's fun to smoke marijuana" and "start to smoke marijuana". This was first pointed out by RESEARCH RESEARCH in YEAR and was cited in a bill passed by the Arkansas State Senate RESEARCH RESEARCH (link to New York Times article). The band denied this RESEARCH, although the legend persisted for several years afterwards (link to Wall St Journal). The song can be heard in reverse here."

The article on backmasking links to this New York Times article, which indirectly references Another One Bites the Dust. Perhaps someone with access to the US legal system could dig out the Arkansas bill mentioned in the article and slap it up on the internet. -Ashley Pomeroy 20:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

genre

The genre status claims that this is a funk-oriented rock song. I believe that is unverifiable although it was dubbed into an album of the Pure Funk series. This song is played on classic rock radio stations and dubbed into classic rock albums. The case of the song "Low Rider" overlapping both genres is more logical than this song. So I removed the funk orientation reference on this article. --SuperDude 03:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd more tend to call it "disco"? --feline1 12:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason for the NPOV/Factual warning to remain in place, or can it be removed now? Sherurcij 09:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There was also an italian versione "Annamose a fa du' tost"

Use of Song in Rocky 3

Wasn't this son supposed to be used for rocky 3 instead of eye of the tiger but then the band (queen) rejected sly's offer. I think this should be mentioned. Opinions... 78.69.235.75 (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)Jerry[reply]