Jump to content

Talk:Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Born2booze (talk | contribs) at 00:48, 23 June 2012 (→Full List?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconSongs List‑class
WikiProject iconThis 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
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Article title

The 500 greatest songs of all time for the the aesthetically challenged perhaps. Shouldn't the title be in quotation marks or reworded something like "Rolling Stone Magazine's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time"? Badmintonhist (talk) 18:20, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just made the change. Badmintonhist (talk) 23:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was just changed back by editor Tbhotch, presumably on the basis that this is the common name for the subject. Really! When people around the world refer to the ninth greatest song of all time it is assumed that they are talking not about, say, I Can't Get Started or The Toreador Song but, rather Smells Like Teen Spirit? Badmintonhist (talk) 00:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And I came here expecting to find the Hallelujah chorus from Handel's Messiah :-).
The Hallelujah chorus is not a song.Bitbut (talk) 09:04, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

173.79.44.156 (talk) 19:49, 3 July 2011 (UTC) I expected to find a full list of the 500 songs, not just the top 20, and some recent additions. Nonso 007 10:55 7 October 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonso 007 (talk • contribs) 09:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC) Hmmm...is it a surprise to anyone that the quantity of songs per decade essentially follows the baby-boomer demographic as they progress from teens, 20-somethings, 30-somethings, etc.? 00:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)justthefactsnow00:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)14 April 2012[reply]

To be sure, the title of the original article in Rolling Stone reflects the bias of that magazine. This list, at best, is the 500 best American pop/rock recordings since the end of World War II, but to Rolling Stone that is the same as "best songs of all time." Wikipedia reports the article title without irony, something that Wikipedia does not do well. Paul (talk) 05:52, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know some (many) of the artists are not American, but they are playing in an American cultural sandbox and they are being evaluated by an American magazine. Paul (talk) 05:54, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Update - Statistics

The article says that The list differs only slightly from the 2004 version, with all of the new additions being songs from the 2000's with the exceptions of "Juicy" by The Notorious B.I.G. and "Big Pimpin'" by Jay-Z, which were released in 1994 and 1999, respectively. However, the statistics indicate that there was one song from the 1940s in the original list whilst there are two in the updated list from 2010. This appears inconsistent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zalambur (talk • contribs) 07:45, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This has been fixed. For some reason one song had been added to the 40s and one song deducted from the 50s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.30.76.114 (talk) 20:53, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Length

The list is getting ridiculous. Do we really need to include 40 songs? I think we need a consensus on how many songs to include. I’m for only including the top 10. Anyone else? --John of Lancaster (talk) 18:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

Hmmm... now that the list is gone, it strikes me that the Statistics section is Original Research. Anyone care to argue that it isn't? Provide a source for it? -- Mwanner | Talk 19:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can't argue that it isn't. Also the update section. The whole article could probably become a redirect to a few sentences in the 500 Albums article. Uniplex (talk) 19:48, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are 23 songs of the Beatles, no 20

Here all the 23 Beatles'songs of the list of Rolling Stones Magazine:

8 Hey Jude

13 Yesterday

16 I Want To Hold Your Hand

20 Let It Be

23 In My Life

28 A Day In The Life

29 Help

64 She Loves You

76 Strawberry Fields Forever

83 Norwegian Wood (this Bird Has Flown)

136 While My Guitar Gently Weeps

138 Eleanor Rigby

140 I Saw Her Standing There

154 A Hard Day's Night

186 Please Please Me

205 Come Together Lyrics

278 Something

295 Can't buy me love

311 With A Little Help From My Friends

370 All you need is love

394 Ticket To Ride

456 Penny Lane

469 Rain

--Fgonmar (talk) 23:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Full List?

Shouldn't we have a full list of all 500 songs on the page? http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/the-500-greatest-songs-of-all-time-20110407

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rolling_Stone%27s_500_Greatest_Songs_of_All_Time&oldid=498918502"