Talk:Indian Love Call

A fact from Indian Love Call appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 March 2009 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Nelson Eddy and Jeanette MacDonald's 1936 recording of "Indian Love Call" was inducted into the Grammy Hall of Fame 72 years later?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/March.

Wikipedia

Frederic Remington painting Love Call - 1909[edit]

Don't know if this is relevant enough (it's a painting) but I came to this page looking to see if there was a connection between this song and 1909 Frederic Remington painting The Love Call, called out on his Wikipedia page but not shown there. Apparently refers to same legend? Painting is shown here: https://www.sidrichardsonmuseum.org/gallery.php/art/love-call -- says acquired by Sid Richardson Museum in 1996. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.193.226.111 (talk) 15:35, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image of a duo singing the song replaced by movie poster[edit]

[[:File:Cabaret Large A-Cup (MetroRm) "Indian Love Call" 2011.jpg|thumb|Yaiya and Emil Eikner sing Indian Love Call on tour with Cabaret Large A-Cup in New York in 2011.^[1]^[2] - The image & caption removed --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)]] An image of Yaiya and her producer and show colleague Emil Eikner singing Indian Love Call was called "random" and replaced with a movie poster from 1954. I put the singers back and moved the movie poster further down in the article where I felt it could do well, if that poster can be deemed relevant at all to an article about the song.[reply]

The opposing editor then left me a personal message accusing me of spamming, after all these years of trying my best to contribute only relevant images to Wikimedia projects in 8 languages so far.

In any case, it is my opinion that an image of two cabaret singers in time-honored costuming doing the song on a well known Manhattan stage as recently as 2011, no matter who they are, is a better illustration (especially better as the article's only image) than a movie poster from 1954 (the rather unknown movie in question also has an article of its own). I will be reinstating it. If neutral editors think the names of the singers should not be mentioned, that's OK by me, but in this case it could be rather odd to link the woman to her article and put "with an unidentified man" next to her name in the caption.

If there's a better free image of other more notable singers doing the song, that's OK by me also.

As I did here I will add a video clip of this performance for a footnote to refute the claim that they could be anyone singing any song. Just a few minutes of checking out the image and it's connections at Commons would have made that accusation less than feasible.

What isn't OK by me is the campaign that editor subesquently has started against Emil Eikner's name and a number of my image contributions at Jacob Truedson Demitz, Batavia, Illinois, Christoph, Prince of Schleswig-Holstein, Moritz, Landgrave of Hesse, Wild Side Story and Valentine's Day. I guess I'll have to reply to all those accusations and attempts at personal censorship of content on the talk pages of each of those articles (and more to come?), or maybe just refer talk here on them also. I might add that when I was accused similarly once (only once) before, I was found not guilty. That was encouraging and led me to continue to contribute gladly, and in a way that I've thought constructive, more than well aware of our rules about conflict of interest. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Metropolitan Room online listing 2011-10-02
^ YouTube clip of this performance

You have created a commons gallery to promote this non-notable person and are using your own commons gallery as justification for keeping these images that add nothing to the notability but are clearly spam. Domdeparis (talk) 06:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NOTSOAPBOX and if needs be discuss her User_talk:SergeWoodzing#Emil_Eikner.Domdeparis (talk) 06:34, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are not using this talk page as it supposed to be used. Please stop making personal accusations and reply to the issues concerning this article and its images!

I have now also asked you twice to stay away from my talk page. Please respect that! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Indian Love Call and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. That being said, the issue seems to be a dispute about which image is more appropriate for this article: a poster from the 1954 move adaptation of the original Broadway musical or a Swedish musical artist singing it as a cover song. I believe the answer is clear when comparing the two concepts: the films poster is much more appropriate for use in the article. There are more notable covers of the song by more popular artists as demonstrated by the article itself. Additionally, the poster provides more editorial value (EV) for the reader. Nihlus 12:11, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nihlus: Thank you for your reply. This editor has been adding photos of a cabaret that he seems to be involved with all over wikipedia and commons has nearly 1500 photos of people involved with this cabaret. I have open a question on the administrator's noticeboard there and I think I will have to do the same thing here as he is refusing to discuss the issue on his talk page and multiplying the discussions is counter-productive. Domdeparis (talk) 13:18, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The "people involved" with the cabarets and/or the venues are all notable and have Wikipedia articles of their own, often on multipe language projects. Other non-notable people do appear there, but that does not make the images & info inappropriate.

@Nihlus: There are no other free images of any performances of "more notable covers of the song by more popular artists". If there was one at all, I would replace this one with that myself, as I often have done in the past. I try to contribute as well as I can with the free images I have access to, especially where there was no illustration at all in an article. In this case, I only tried to move the new image, the poster, further down. There is no personal promotion whatsoever involved in that or in any of my WP work. I never contribute any considerable article text, for example, without reliable sources. There is no good faith to be found in the unfair serious accusations being leveled at me now all over by my opponent here, as a result of this problem here, and I am truly feeling discouraged and hounded. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:47, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I avoided commenting on the behaviors of either one of you and focused on the question at hand. The question was one of comparing two images, and the answer for that was pretty clear. Also, read MOS:LEADIMAGE: Lead images are not required, and not having a lead image may be the best solution if there is no easy representation of the topic. While images are nice, they are by no means required. I considered going with that opinion and would still not be opposed to remove all images or at least move one down. However, I do not believe the image you added was appropriate for the topic. Nihlus 16:57, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for neglecting thus far to thank you for your neutral input, which is always so valuable. In saying that, I cannot say I agree. An article, I think, is always better when illustrated, always less interesting/valuable when not illustrated, as long as an added illustration clearly is relevant to it. It was only my intention to illustrate this article with its only photo when I added these 2 singers doing this song at the Metropolitan Room, thinking, as I often do, that eventually some even better free (free) image might come along, as they often do. I have seen articles about songs illustrated with such images contributed by others than me, many times; also by record covers, record labels or other images relevant to the song directly, but never by a poster for a movie (a rather obscure one at that which apparently tried to coat-hanger the previous fame of the musical), in which the song was included. All I did was move the new contribution, the poster, further down in the article.

To me, this article would be better off with no image, than with a poster which pertains to that unsuccessful movie but not to this world-famous song. It's confusing and much more borderline relevant, I think, than singers performing this song.

So, I still feel that an image of 2 people doing a song, especially if at least one of them is notable, in principle is more relevant as the only illustration to an article about that song than any movie poster would be, especially as that article's only image. It would be interesting to do an RfC on that image/content principle of relevance, but not on the the living Mr. Eikner being so non-notably irrelevant to any article text that we must banish his name entirely from this project. (Is there even such a black list here?) Poor man, I hope he hasn't seen any of this. I feel guilty for having mentioned his name in 3-4 relevant places on English Wikipedia, only to have him embarrassed like this.

Sadly, I still feel this actually is about him, not about what's revelant to the lovely song Indian Love Call (which I understand was just heard in Swedish for the first time ever at Eikner's wedding this month, sung by an opera duo he has worked with at Confidencen). --SergeWoodzing (talk) 22:01, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You asked for a third opinion and you got it. I think it's time to move on. 3rd opinions are supposed to help settle a difference of opinion and as the asker it would nice to respect that. Domdeparis (talk) 07:27, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@SergeWoodzing: This has nothing to do with the people in the photo. If it were Brad and Angelina Pitt or Mary and John from the bar down the road, I would say the same thing: that it's tangentially related to the topic at hand. Nihlus 11:37, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do I still have the right to my opinion, as long as it is respectfully stated? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:29, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My comment was a response to this mild aspersion: Sadly, I still feel this actually is about him, not about what's revelant to the lovely song Indian Love Call. I explained it had nothing to do with the person in the photo. Nihlus 12:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and I've thanked you sincerely and respectfully, though I respectfully disagree, for you your opinions, which I respect. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indian Love Call. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:49, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Metropolitan Room online listing 2011-10-02

[2] YouTube clip of this performance

[1]

[2]