Jump to content

Talk:Straight Outta Lynwood

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleStraight Outta Lynwood has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 10, 2013Good article nomineeNot listed
August 17, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Reference to Guerrilla Radio

[edit]

Is it just me, or is the outro to "I'll sue you" much more similar to the ending of "Killing in the name" as opposed to "Guerrilla Radio"? It starts out softer before getting louder at the end. Plus, the ending to killing in the name is more well known, and more likely what it was a reference to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.170.14.31 (talk) 11:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

another mention of 27?

[edit]

Wierd Al mentions the number 27 quite often in his tracks, cover arts, etc... (running with scissors art, straight outta lynwood: car plate "027 NLY")...

here's a quote from the track "Confessions Part III":

Baby forgive me I'm still trying to figure out why I used your toothbrush to clean off the bathroom grought
Oh and sometimes in private, I really like to dress up as Shirley Temple and spank myself with a hockey stick (hockey stick)
My boss thinks I'm a jerk, I didn't get that raise.
I haven't changed my underwear in twenty-seven days!
And when I'm kissing you I fantasize you as a midget
I'm so sorry Debbi! I mean Bridget!

i do think this has gotta be mentioned in the article....

--BratX 08:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't "gotta" be mentioned. Al fans are well aware of the whole 27 things, and those that aren't aware of it probably couldn't care less. If a Weird Al wiki gets created, then detailing every incident of the number 27 would be fine, but it's not something that Wikipedia needs. A lot of the Al-related articles are already overloaded with needless trivia. And even if it does get mentioned, the single line would be sufficient, the extra 5 lines of context are overkill. - Ugliness Man 16:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This was made nearly 27 years after My Bologna was released. Also, as of now, there are exactly 27 references in the article. —Coastergeekperson04's talk@Mar/29/08 23:26

Article title

[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) for capitalisation rules. --Phronima 15:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From that page:

In general, titles of books, films, and other works are also capitalized, except for articles (a, and, the) and prepositions and conjunctions shorter than five letters (e.g., to, from, and).

Outta does not fall into one of those categories so it gets capitalized. Michael Greiner 19:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAME, which provides capitalization conventions, "documents an official policy on the English Wikipedia" -- and it doesn't say anything about five letters, and has a specific section for album titles. The page you cite is not official policy, and is much less complete; I think it should be deleted. -- Jibal 00:00, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only reason I cited that page is that User:Phronima first mentioned it as an example as why it should be "outta." The page did say something about five letters but it was removed by User:Mel Etitis since this controversy started. (Which is a move I don't particularly like because he changed it after becoming involved here) I only cited the page to show incorrect usage, and was not the first to bring it up. Michael Greiner 00:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As "Outta" means/stands for "out of" it would normally remain uncapitalised. I'm not sure when the MoS changed so as to make capitalisation apply to prepositions over five leters (fairly recently), nor why — but "outta" isn't a preposition, it's a portmanteau of two prepositions. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 15:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"However" means "but", but that's not a reason not to capitalize "However". It doesn't matter what "Outta" means, the simple and obvious fact is that it isn't shorter than five letters. However, that's not relevant, because there is not currently any five letter rule. -- Jibal 23:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But it's not shorter than five letters. And if it isn't a preposition, then it certainly should be capitalized. I challenge you to find a source that does not capitalize "Outta". --Maxamegalon2000 16:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Prepositions at least five letters long have been capitalized in such cases since well before there was any such thing as Wikipedia, at least in MLA style. (I learned this rule in the late eighties or very early nineties...) Perhaps Wikipedia's style manual was based on different conventions in the past, I don't know, but even if this is a change I'm not sure why it would be a surprising change. --Jonadab, 2007 Mar 15 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.213.116.3 (talk • contribs) 13:22, 15 March 2007
Yes, according to one manual of style they're capitalised; according to others (such as that used by Oxford University Press) they're not (see, for example, their editions of Locke's An Essay concerning Human Understanding). Ours always took the same line as the OUP MoS. It's surprising that it changed because there was no discussion or consensus; it was slipped in recently by a single editor. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 13:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to find any manual that specifically mentions "outta", as it's a slang form. Abbreviated forms of prepositions are not capitalised, however, but follow the rule for what they abbreviate; in the same way, as this non-word stands for two prepositions, each shorter than five letters, I can't see why it should be capitalised. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 16:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you would assume that the rules for prepositions with fewer than five letters apply to portmanteau slang terms with five letters. Also, Webster's New Millennium Dictionary of English lists "outta" as a preposition, not an abbreviated portmanteau. And again, I challenge you to find a source that does not capitalize the word in this title. --Maxamegalon2000 16:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised and disdainful of Webster's; I can only hope that their print version is more careful. As it's difficult (impossible?) to do a case-sensitive Web search as one used to be able to (and in any case that would be difficult, as "outta" is capitalised when the first word, or when a style manual capitalises all prepositions and articles, etc.), your challenge is empty — and in any case, irrelevant here.

I've discovered the point at which our guideline was changed to allow capitalisation of five-letter prepositions — a few months ago, and by one editor who seems to have slipped it in with no consensus and no-one really noticing. I've raised the issue. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 17:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I'm confused. When presented with evidence that Webster's considers the word a preposition, you dismiss it as a careless mistake. When asked to find a source that follows your postion, you admit that doing so difficult or impossible. And when shown that your position is contrary to our guideline, you attempt to change the guideline. What evidence supporting my position would you consider legitimate? This is not a rhetorical question. --Maxamegalon2000 17:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. outta prep. an informal contraction of "out of", used in representing colloquial speech: we'd better get outta here. (From The New Oxford American Dictionary)

2. outta preposition a non-standard contraction of "out of", used in representing informal speech: we'd better get outta here. (From The Oxford Dictionary of English (2nd edition revised))

That's the sort of thing that I'd have expected from a decent dictionary; not to mention that it's a contraction is poor. You seem to think, though, that giving one dictionary entry is enough to make your case; it isn't. You also seem not to have read what I said about the Wikipedia guidelines: the page was changed by one person, without consensus. I've merely reverted that, and asked for discussion. If consensus is reached, then I'll abide by the result (though, if the four-letter limit is aproved I'll need to ask the separate question about "outta"). No evidence will prove things either way; it's a question of Wikipedia's Manual of Style. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 18:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This suggests that the "Outta" is capitalized. If the musician's own website uses a certain method of capitalization, then by all means this article should remain here. There have been two threads at the admin noticeboards that discuss these moves, one of which I had to do a histmerge to fix. I've been in several situations where there are multiple possible readings, capitalizations, etc., and I defer to whatever "official" source there may be for it. Citing dictionaries to note with the manual of style is one thing, but when you actually see the creator use something that defies our MoS, then you go with what he uses.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive78#Page move issue
  2. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive78#Page move issue - again
The relevant WP:AN threads.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, you seriously misunderstand the issue of our naming conventions. Secondly, you've misused your admin powers in first moving and then protecting the move. I've raised this at WP:AN/I. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:17, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the move back restored the status quo. File at WP:RM. Chris cheese whine 22:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that you read the instructions on using protection. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ryūlóng's comments about what "should" be done and what "you go with" are wrong. According to WP:NAME, "In band names and titles of songs or albums, unless it is unique (don't worry, nobody pays any heed to this disclaimer anyway), the standard rule in the English language is to capitalize words that are the first or the last word in the title and those that are not conjunctions (and, but, or, nor, for), prepositions (in, to, over), articles (an, a, the), or the word to when used to form an infinitive." Nowhere in any WP convention does it say that capitalization should follow the musician's website. -- Jibal 23:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated the links to the AN threads that discuss the issues for why I protected this article from moving.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:44, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe this is even an issue. Does Staight outta Lynwood look better than Straight Outta Lynwood? Didn't think so. Quite frankly, the fact that this is even being debated means there is a flaw in Wikipedia's naming conventions and that is what should be corrected here. Xizer 02:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused, I've read most of this, but is this basically saying the article should not carry the lettering of what it's about and should follow a certain rule? That seems backwards to me, I personally don't care, but the original source, namely the album, is named "Straight Outta Lynwood" and not "Straight outta Lynwood", I think this might be a case of people accepting a common truth, articles carry the exact names of their subject matter, whereas the rules awkwardly state otherwise. Revrant 09:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with this logic. We all need to just look at the actual album and copy it exactly as shown in the artwork. There's a reason the artist chose to publish that we and we need to follow the evidence. --Mtjaws 00:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this debate is stupid, that "Outta" is 5 letters and therefore immune to the rule, and that "Straight Outta Lynwood" is simply the official album title... however, album artwork isn't a good source, since the title is actually in allcaps on the cover, and anyone trying to get the article renamed to STRAIGHT OUTTA LYNWOOD will get their heads dunked in a vat of tuna-flavoured pudding. If you need a source, just go to [his official site, which has the proper mixed-case title on the music page. - Ugliness Man 01:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For another example, in the "straight from the horse's mouth" vein, try the September 2, 2006 installment of "Ask Al"; in both a fan question and Yankovic's answer to one such question, "Outta" is capitalized. -- Pennyforth 17:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you rip the music off the CD onto the computer, iTunes capitalizes "Outta." Jedi_feline | Talk 06:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

White and Nerdy Fan Video

[edit]

Just a note that the fan-made version of the white and nerdy video no longer has a proper working link. It links to American Idol now, of all things. - Some random non-registered user (N00B) at 3:17 PM CST.

Link has been changed. Thanks. Michael Greiner 21:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link that's up there now is not the Yahoo fans only version - its one individual's submission to that "contest" - the correct link directly to the Yahoo video is http://music.yahoo.com/video/36680429 or http://music.yahoo.com/vid-36680429-White-&-Nerdy-(Fans-Only-Version)72.89.144.132 01:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link has been changed again. Thanks. Michael Greiner 15:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two unrelated (to each other) thoughts

[edit]
  • From the "Music Video" section, Notes on "Weasel Stomping Day":
"...in response to Yankovic's first time on the Cartoon Network, the network on which Robot Chicken airs, jokingly took credit for his success in one of their commercial bumpers during Adult Swim, the adult-oriented television programming block on the network."
Didn't Yankovic's voice work on Johnny Bravo (as himself) and The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy (as the Squidhat), both Cartoon Network series, predate both the Robot Chicken episode and the release of Straight Outta Lynnwood?
Someone edited that part. Should have read, "in response to Yankovic's first time in the Billboard Top 10, Cartoon Network, the network on which Robot Chicken airs, jokingly took credit for his success in one of their commercial bumpers during Adult Swim, the adult-oriented television programming block on the network." So I fixed it. --Michael Greiner 19:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • A friend pointed out to me that, thanks to the DualDisc format, this may be the first of Yankovic's studio albums to debut on CD without an image of himself as disc art. I wonder, is this notable enough for inclusion in the article (under "Title and artwork"), and more importantly, is it true? I can't confirm this personally because I only own certain "Weird Al" albums on CD (the rest on cassette). I know from what I do have on CD that all of his albums from Alapalooza through Poodle Hat have a picture of him on the disc art, and that his first two albums do not. -- Pennyforth 17:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think this should be added. As you said his first two albums don't have his picture and also his greatest hit albums do not have his picture.(I only own his first, his two greatest hits albums, and Bad Hair Day - SOL)--Michael Greiner 19:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

R. Kelly reference?

[edit]

Is there any evidence that the Confessions Part III midget line is an R. Kelly reference? It seems like a stretch to me, and since there's no source given I've removed it — the Bridget/midget connection is probably just parallel use of an obvious rhyme. Even if it is a deliberate reference, it seems like an unnecessary piece of trivia; we don't need to enumerate every reference in every song. The joke there is that Al forgets his girlfriend's name in the middle of a long confession of his other romantic sins, which doesn't need explication. --Jere7my 16:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chamillionaire Tried To Stop Song?

[edit]

Is it true that Chamillionaire at first only gave Al permisson to do a song parody, and not a video parody? I heard he didn't want Al to do a video, because it would downplay what they were trying to say in the orignal song & video. My source on this is pretty solid, but I wanted to some opinions before I permently insert it into the article. Any thoughts?--71.35.187.128 01:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your source needs to be reliable and verifiable. --Maxamegalon2000 01:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Chamillionaire loved Al's parody and raved about it in the press. Eminem hated "Couch Potato", Al's "Lose Yourself" parody. Eminem stopped the song from having a video. ~~ Gromreaper(Talk)/(Cont) 05:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Five senses

[edit]

The comment on previous CD art relating to five sense was recently "commented out" with "what does this mean?", so I wanted to offer my theory. On the CD for Alapalooza, the art printed on the CD has Al's nose "missing" because it's situated in the center (the hole). Al is cross-eyed in that picture, looking at where his nose should be. On Poodle Hat, the center of the CD is in his mouth. For Running With Scissors, the hole is on his ear. That takes care of smell, taste, and hearing. However, even though I can't find an image of the Bad Hair Day CD, I'm pretty sure the hole is in his gut, which doesn't seem to relate to any of the senses (except maybe taste which we already dealt with). So, there does seem to be an explanation for the trivia, but it doesn't appear to be completely accurate. Also, the US edition of the Straight Outta Lynwood CD has no image because it's a dual disc (audio CD on one side, DVD on the other, with text in the center label), but the Canadian edition was released as two seperate discs, which did have artwork... although I can't find the artwork at the moment (and my copy is currently in a different province), so I guess I can't comment on that. - Ugliness Man 09:46, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your right about Bad Hair Day. This is seemingly Original research, and I doubt somewhat that those were an orchestrated effort. So it should probably just be removed. --Michael Greiner 12:51, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Soli4.jpg

[edit]

Image:Soli4.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) 09:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed

[edit]

"Despite Straight Outta Compton being released 17 years prior to Straight Outta Lynwood, Yankovic is believed to be the first known human being ever to have parodied the album's title by replacing Compton with the name of a different locale; many commentators [who?] see this as indicative of Yankovic's determination to remain at the absolute cutting edge of American satire."

I think this may have been a tongue-in-cheek addition. See also Le Frisur, track seven.

I'm not that familiar with Yankovic's work but the first thing regarding the title that came to my mind was Straight Outta Cashville which appeared only 2 years earlier. Perhaps Californian acts especially like this reference (see Straight Outta Humboldt that was also released before Lynwood). --Hodsha (talk) 20:01, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Straight Outta Lynwood/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Taylor Trescott (talk · contribs) 20:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC) I'm going to be failing this. It is not very well organized and there are quite a few claims that are either original research or unverified:[reply]

  1. Even though Straight Outta Lynwood was released on September 26 in the U.S., apparently because of a mix-up at the label it was not released in Australia until September 29 and not until October 3 in Canada.
  2. The PAL and Canadian release versions of the album are not on a DualDisc, but rather a separate CD with a DVD showing only the music videos and the Making Of featurette. However, the DVD side of the U.S. DualDisc is region free, so it may be imported without region problems.
  3. it is probably also a nod to the popularity of subsequent "Straight Outta _______" rap album titles, such as Straight Outta Ca$hville by Young Buck
  4. Yankovic performed the song in the parody medley during his Straight Outta Lynwood Tour.
  5. James Blunt also gave Yankovic permission to record the song "You're Pitiful", a parody of his hit "You're Beautiful", however Blunt's record label would not allow the release of the song in any form that could be profitable to Yankovic. However the song was still recorded and released, and if the record label had not prevented the release on the market it would have been a single instead of "White and Nerdy".

...and much more. This article isn't bad but needs lots of work if a GA is wanted. The nominator should have a look at the list of GAs for musical albums. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 20:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Straight Outta Lynwood/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Seattle (talk · contribs) 15:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can review this soon. Seattle (talk) 15:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No dead links, no DAB links.
  • The single was extremely successful, peaking at number nine on the Billboard Hot 100. The song "Canadian Idiot" also proved to be a minor chart hit, peaking at number 82. "extremely successful" and "minor chart hit" are WP:PEACOCK phrases; I would combine the two sentences.
  • "White & Nerdy" went on to become → became
  • first single to have ever been certified Platinum → first Platinum-certified single
  • Very well, thanks. To continue:

In short, clean up the references and get back to me... I don't like drive-by nominations that don't give due diligence to the process, but I'll stick with this one. Seattle (talk) 00:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All the points you bring up have been fixed, amended, or commented on. And just a heads up, I wouldn't consider this a drive-by nomination. I did several days worth of edits to this in my sandbox before moving it to live article space, drastically improving the article. I just don't want you to think I've been sloppy!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:51, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Everything above looks OK. Seattle (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Some more:

  • In reference 40 I can't see the chart
    That's really weird... I'll try to find a replacement chart soon (it looks like the website is acting up).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:44, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference 43 says "White and Nerdy" made it to 80 later in 2006.
    Fixed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The song takes a moderate approach would rather you say "according to x, the song takes" due to original research concerns
    Done.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • biological functions of the aforementioned organ., watch comma at end
    Fixed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It tells the story of a man that breaks up with his seemingly perfect girlfriends due to the most inconsequential of flaws. seems like OR, could you reference that somewhere besides the liner notes, or is an overview of the song given with the lyrics? Is this allowed by the same logic as plot summaries don't require a reference? Can you provide me a specific policy link? Thanks.
    I added a source to back up that claim, so that it's not OR.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you know the guideline for movie plot not requiring references? I know there has to be one, and I want to see if that applies to songs too. Seattle (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      Here's what I found, concerning primary sources: "A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge." I agree that some of text (like the Canadian Idiot part) crossed the boundary over into OR, but I feel some of them, by just condensing down what the lyrics say, should probably be OK (for instance, "Do I Creep You Out" is fairly obviously an ode to a stalking victim, and the fact that Yankovic is a comedian does take some of the "debateability" out of his songs' meanings.)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 13:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • After being denied permission to release "You're Pitiful" (as described below), I don't think "(as described below)" is needed
    Fixed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first of these is a play on "Do I Make You Proud" by Taylor Hicks, in which a singer addresses the object of his affection and stalking.[3] The song was also Yankovic's jab at American Idol, a musical competition show that Hicks had won in May 2006. I would combine these two sentences
    Fixed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm to the "Title and artwork" section. Seattle (talk) 15:01, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Seattle (talk) 20:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed a whole mess of the points you brought up. I'll work on the rest in a bit.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think everything is fixed.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 03:51, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • in 1996, he began seeking permission directly from the artists themselves. can you give a specific footnote to this?
    I thought it was sourced to the following citation, but I guess it wasn't. I couldn't find a new one, so I just removed it.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Close But No Cigar

[edit]

There is a music video for Close But No Cigar. Wolf O'Donnel (talk) 08:18, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, and it's discussed under the "Visuals" section.--Gen. Quon[Talk] 13:29, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Straight_Outta_Lynwood&oldid=1245845057"