Talk:The Star-Spangled Banner/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Superscript "C" in "McHenry"

I did that on purpose, to pre-empt confusion about it. Soem have interpreted it as a an apostrophe. It is not an apostrophe, it's a super-scripted "C". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That's just the old way people wrote 'Mc'; and probably even then it was a stylistic choice of the author, it's not the modern form, and we use the modern form in the wikipedia.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 19:31, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
No, it needs to be there in order to make it clear that it's a superscript "C" rather than an apostrophe. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you have a notable reference for the claim that it must be expressed as a superscript in modern writing? If so add it to the article, otherwise, leave it alone.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 19:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
You are entirely missing the point. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 19:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
No, you are missing the point. Unless you have a verifiable, notable reference you are engaging in OR. Do you, or do you not have a reliable reference?- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 19:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
You don't get it. You're just forcing extra work to be done, down the road. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:14, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
If it is a notable controversy, then find references to both sides and add them to the article. Otherwise, forget about it.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 20:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
This is a waste of my time. When they start putting the apostrophes back in, I'll let you handle it. Enjoy. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 20:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
And it's not about a "reference", it's about editors trying to interpret that tiny character in the document. It's complicated by the fact that in the old days, an apostrophe was used, sometimes, in place of a "C" in names starting with "Mc"... hence the need for clarity. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
By writing it in this way, you are making the unreferenced claim that this is the correct way to write it. None of the references I have checked, and certainly not the reference I added (which you removed) wrote it that way. Therefore you are engaging in OR.- (User) WolfKeeper (Talk) 03:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Good grief, sir, look at the article. In particular, look at the illustration of the "broadside", the original published version. That's the way it was printed, with the "Mc" in the old-fashioned way as a superscript instead of the modern simple lower-case "c". Notice I put the title of it in quotation marks. I'm not arguing that's the correct way to write it nowadays, I'm clarifying that that's how it was printed in 1814. If you want a "reference", take some time and look through the history of the article, assuming you're needing a break from quantum physics for awhile. That's where the "controversy", such as it is, takes place. It's not a citable controversy, it's simply a misunderstanding on the part of some well-intentioned wikipedia editors who didn't look at the 1814 broadside closely enough. I'm simply trying to make it clear for future editors. Maybe you can suggest a better way to do that than I have. Totally rubbing it out is not the better way, as someone is liable to come along and say, "Oh, hey, that's an apostrophe!" CONTINUE LOOP! Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 03:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
OK, I have taken away the superscripts in the few places they were, except for the now-rather-wordy explanation under the broadside illustration. Hopefully this compromise approach will make you happier. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:02, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Two more points. One, I added back your reference, hours ago. Two, it is not original research to point out that the superscripted "c" in "McHenry" on that broadside is a "c" rather than an apostrophe. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 04:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It *is* based on a drinking song? Where was this discussed?

From the page on "Anacreon ..." (the song): "In all probability some drinking did occur at Society meetings, but the primary purpose of the Society (and its song) was to promote an interest in music." ... . According to User Baseball Bugs this has been discussed before (see my edit he reverted). So, either this article is wrong, or the page on the club's song is wrong. Flex Flint (talk) 07:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

lyrics?

im new here, but wasnt it that wikipedia is NOT a lyrics database? is there a exception for national anthems?--Jim88Argentina (talk) 00:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The contents of the lyrics require discussion, and that's hard to do without the lyrics being there. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Early history

On September 3, 1814, Key and John S. Skinner, an American prisoner-exchange agent, set sail from Baltimore aboard the ship HMS Minden flying a flag of truce on a mission approved by President James Madison. Their objective was to secure the release of Dr. William Beanes, the elderly and popular town physician of Upper Marlboro, a friend of Key’s who had been captured in his home. Beanes was accused of aiding in the arrest of British soldiers. Key and Skinner boarded the British flagship, HMS Tonnant, on September 7 and spoke with Major General Robert Ross and Admiral Alexander Cochrane over dinner, while they discussed war plans. At first, Ross and Cochrane refused to release Beanes, but relented after Key and Skinner showed them letters written by wounded British prisoners praising Beanes and other Americans for their kind treatment.

Because Key and Skinner had heard details of the plans for the attack on Baltimore, they were held captive until after the battle, first aboard HMS Surprise, and later back on HMS Minden. After the bombardment, certain British gunboats attempted to slip past the fort and effect a landing in a cove to the west of it, but they were turned away by fire from nearby Fort Covington, the city's last line of defense. {{ clarify }} During the rainy night, Key had witnessed the bombardment and observed that the fort’s smaller "storm flag" continued to fly, but once the shell and rocket < ref> .< /ref> barrage had stopped, he would not know how the battle had turned out until dawn. By then, the storm flag had been lowered, and the larger flag had been raised.

image 15-star, 15-stripe "Star-Spangled Banner" flag]] Key was inspired by the American victory and the sight of the large American flag flying triumphantly above the fort. This flag, with fifteen stars and fifteen stripes, came to be known as the Star Spangled Banner Flag and is today on display in the National Museum of American History, a treasure of the Smithsonian Institution. It was restored in 1914 by Amelia Fowler, and again in 1998 as part of an ongoing conservation program.

Aboard the ship the next day, Key wrote a poem on the back of a letter he had kept in his pocket. At twilight on 16 September, he and Skinner were released in Baltimore. He finished the poem at the Indian Queen Hotel, where he was staying, and he entitled it "Defence of Fort McHenry."

Key gave the poem to his brother-in-law, Judge Joseph H. Nicholson. Nicholson saw that the words fit the popular melody "To Anacreon in Heaven", an old British drinking song from the mid-1760s, composed in London by John Stafford Smith. Nicholson took the poem to a printer in Baltimore, who anonymously printed broadside copies of it—the song’s first known printing—on 17 September; of these, two known copies survive. image Francis Scott Key's original manuscript copy of his Star-Spangled Banner poem. It is now on display at the Maryland Historical Society.]] On 20 September, both the Baltimore Patriot and The American printed the song, with the note "Tune: Anacreon in Heaven". The song quickly became popular, with seventeen newspapers from Georgia to New Hampshire printing it. Soon after, Thomas Carr of the Carr Music Store in Baltimore published the words and music together under the title "The Star-Spangled Banner", although it was originally called "Defence of Fort McHenry." The song’s popularity increased, and its first public performance took place in October, when Baltimore actor Ferdinand Durang sang it at Captain McCauley’s tavern.

The song gained popularity throughout the nineteenth century and bands played it during public events, such as July 4 celebrations. On 27 July 1889, Secretary of the Navy Benjamin F. Tracy signed General Order #374, making "The Star-Spangled Banner" the official tune to be played at the raising of the flag.

In 1916, President Woodrow Wilson ordered that "The Star-Spangled Banner" be played at military and other appropriate occasions. Although the playing of the song two years later during the seventh-inning stretch of the 1918 World Series is often noted as the first instance that the Anthem was played at a baseball game, evidence shows that the "Star-Spangled Banner" was performed as early as 1897 at Opening Day ceremonies in Philadelphia and then more regularly at the Polo Grounds in New York City beginning in 1898. However, the tradition of performing the national anthem before every baseball game began in World War II.< ref>{ }</ ref>Today, the anthem is performed before the beginning of all NBA, NFL, MLB and NHL games (with at least one American team playing), as well as in a pre-race ceremonies portion of every NASCAR race.

On 3 November 1929, Robert Ripley drew a panel in his syndicated cartoon, Ripley's Believe it or Not!, saying "Believe It or Not, America has no national anthem." < ref> .</ ref> In 1931, John Philip Sousa published his opinion in favor, stating that "it is the spirit of the music that inspires" as much as it is Key’s "soul-stirring" words. By a law signed on 3 March 1931 by President Herbert Hoover, "The Star-Spangled Banner" was adopted as the national anthem of the United States.

  1. 1 The Star Spangled Banner
  2. 2 Star spangle banner
  3. 3 Star Spangled Banner
  4. 4 Star-Spangled Banner
  5. 5 Star-Bangled Banner
  6. 10 The star-spangled banner
  7. 11 Star Spangeled Banner
  8. 12 Star Spangaled Banner
  9. 13 Star-spangled banner
  10. 14 Star-spangled
  11. 15 The Star-Spangeld Banner
  12. 17 The Star-spangled Banner
  13. 18 American national anthem
  14. 19 United States national anthem
  15. 20 United States National Anthem
  1. 21 US anthem
  2. 22 National anthem of the united states
  3. 23 US National Anthem
  4. 24 Tssb
  5. 25 The land of the free and the home of the brave
  6. 26 National Anthem of the United States of America
  7. 27 U.S. National Anthem
  8. 28 Star Spangeld Banner
  9. 29 Oh Say Can You See

I do have comments; I need to start somehow,....

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 04:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there some question you're trying to ask here? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 10:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Doesn't appear that there is a question. Just a test-edit. Tedickey (talk) 11:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Ernie Harwell

Since you question it, I'll try to find the exact place and exact quote in the Ernie Harwell CD's where he talks about the Feliciano performance. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:22, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

It's hard for anyone else to verify that (and since according to what you're saying, it's Ernie Harwell commenting sometime later) hard to source reliably. A reliable source would be a third person (well known...) commenting on the other two. I didn't find anything in print, though with some knowledge of the details, you may be able to find something. Tedickey (talk) 22:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
It's a perfectly valid source and is available. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
It's Ernie Harwell's comments, dated when? Tedickey (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
It's a recent issue. [1] I'll see if I can find where he talks about it. Unlike the guy who was pushing his own book as a source in Superman music ... and got away with it, by the way ... this CD is not being advertised as a "limited edition, get 'em while you can". I first got wind of it when Harwell was in the TV both the Jon Miller and Joe Morgan during an ESPN broadcast at Detroit last summer. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
It's on Disc 3, Track 9, "The Anthem Gets Booed". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 22:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
But here's one of the points - it's either recent comments about 1968 (fading memory and selective recollection make it unreliable), or a recording that dates to sometime within a year or so after the event, e.g., an interview. If it's the former, about all one can do with the material is a qualified comment such as "As Ernie Harwell recalls on his CD released in XXXX...". There are lots of things that I recall which would be interesting to make topics about - but there are no reliable sources available. Tedickey (talk) 23:05, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Please watch/listen to this clip before you pass judgment on Harwell's memory. [2] Discussion of the anthem is about halfway in. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Further info. [3] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 23:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
What I get from listening to the youtube (the visual aspect is irrelevant) and reading the article is that Harwell's involvement was selecting the singers, and not disavowing the selection. The article notes that he did not get involved with the controversy. That's a far weaker statement than liked it and defended him, first because Harwell gives no indication that he knew how the song would be presented in advance, and second because there's no source given to show Harwell making some public comments to defend it (his comment that he got to keep his job is in line with that). Tedickey (talk) 19:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Contemporary use of the Star Spangled Banner at Baltimore Orioles Games.

Whenever the SSB is sung at Baltimore Orioles Games, The "O" for Oh say can you see is emphasized in Baltimoreon-ese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sharonboesen (talk • contribs) 10:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting trivia, I suppose, but lacks verifiability and notability. Thanks for the information though. Perhaps it will be useful in the future if it can be sourced! — BQZip01 — talk 02:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Conduct

If you are on the way to your seat at a sports event, or in any public place, when the strain, 'Oh say, can you see, by the dawn's early light," sounds, stop where you are and stand at attention until the end. Don't talk, chew gum loudly, eat or smoke during the singing of the anthem.

No source is given for this statement. Is it an instruction from Wikipedia? If it is a quote from someone or something, it must be put in quotes and sourced. Otherwise it is just someone's opinion and should be removed. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC) yes i would like to add that when some one says oh it sounds like o quit making a big deal out of nothing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.193.183.47 (talk) 17:38, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

capitalization and hyphenation?

Would removing the hyphen be more correct in the article title? This online guide to grammar says that hyphens should not be used with capitalized words in a title. However, is a hyphenated "Star-Spangled" the spelling with the weight of tradition behind it?

71.139.168.250 (talk) 18:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

The hyphenated form is apparently the most common, e.g., in The New York Times Tedickey (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

When the national anthem starts playing, if you stop and put your hand over your heart, don't move until it is over it just shows how much you love being free. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.193.183.47 (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Veterans Saluting

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 changes the rules for veterans saluting the flag during the playing of the national anthem. "`(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute in the manner provided for individuals in uniform" I'm too stupid to add this to the article so can someone else please add it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.32.16.100 (talk) 04:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


weasal words

The article was tagged with no entry in the talk page. I suggest someone [who?] cite wome wesal words inline [weasel words], to help clean up the article. --Work permit (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

In verse #1, line #5 I think the word "galliantly" needs to be written as "gallantly" [1] Musicwriter (talk) 01:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Stravinsky version

The Igor Stravinsky version "raised more eyebrows" than almost any other. There should be a mention of his version on this page, when the information becomes known to wikipedia editors. EnglishHornDude (talk) 16:32, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Francis Scott Key's earlier version

Delancey Place, a daily email excerpt from an interesting, usually nonfiction book, emailed last year (4/3/08) a a short passage from the book "Power, Faith and Fantasy," by Michael B. Oren, Norton, 2007. In this excerpt, the author describes how Key wrote an earlier version of the lyrics to "The Star Spangled Banner" for Captain William Bainbridge and Captain Stephen Decatur in 1805 to celebrate their defeat of Barbary Coast pirates. According to the excerpt, the original version described 'turbaned heads bowed' to the 'brow of the brave.' Key revised the song during the 1812 battle of Fort McHenry and it became the National Anthem.

I see no discussion of the earlier version of Key's lyrics in this discussion page. This seems an important issue. The idea that Key's was inspired when he saw the "Star-spangled banner yet wave" by the dawns early light, sounds great. But it may be largely a deliberately constructed myth, if he had already written most of the words and had even picked the tune years before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.166.253.37 (talk) 02:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Date is off on the picture?

When you click on the picture listed to the right of this page, it shows the date as 1812 instead of 1814 as the article states. One of these must be wrong, probably the picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.12.110 (talk) 02:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Controversial use

If Jose Feliciano's version of the song was considered controversial, and so "shocking", (surprised me, I don't recall it at all) then I think there should be some mention of Jimi Hendrix's electrifying psychedelic rendition of it during Woodstock, where he smashed his guitar. Hendrix was a veteran too.

And--This may not be as important, but during George W. Bush's administration, the Dixie Chicks sung the anthem at the 2003 Super Bowl, only to have the majority of their target audience boycott and blacklist them the same year for disagreeing with the President's decision to go to war.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 12:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Lyrics

Yeah, sue me, I'm coming to this article on the heels of the Super Bowl. The question is: do we need the lyrics in this article? It's just a big blob of public domain text: for which the correct location is Wikisource. See also: Infamy Speech. Sceptre (talk) 03:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

We used to have a show/hide template that hid the 2nd-4th stanzas. For most of the national anthem articles I write, we kept the lyrics in the article and still linked to Wikisource. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Personally, I'd be fine with keeping the first verse, as it's the only one people normally sing, and it does help the article to have that verse, at least, in the article. But I feel we owe a service to give our sister projects a bump by not encroaching on their goals, especially when doing so is also not in our goals (specifically, storing PD text, which is explicitly a Wikisource function). If the entire text must be there, it'd be better off off in a box to the side. Sceptre (talk) 04:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't care either way, really. If you think the article is best served by placing the est of the lyrics at Wikisource, fine by me. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 04:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

IMO, printing a stanza of lyrics is very different from reprinting an entire speech. My suggestion would be to continue to print the first stanza and provide a link to Wikisource for the remainder of the lyrics. Powers T 15:51, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd strenuously object to leaving only the first verse. All or nothing. Personally, I'm okay with nothing (and a link to Wikisource), since the text is all in the image from the original printing, if people want to read it. But the text was originally a poem, and the first verse is a series of questions that are not answered without the rest of the verses. The first verse as a text by itself makes no sense. If this were an article only on the PERFORMANCE of the SSB, fine, just put the first verse, since that's all that is commonly sung. But this is an article on the whole thing -- the poem, the official national anthem, etc. which by definition includes all the verses.65.96.161.79 (talk) 17:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
On most of the anthem articles, the lyrics are present. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
As with any piece of famous poetry, we should not be in the business of reproducing it in its entirety, unless it's exceptionally short. Rather, we quote appropriate excerpts as needed to illustrate the points being made in the article. I see no reason this poem, among all of the poems on Wikipedia, needs to be "all or nothing". Powers T 20:05, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
You're absolutely right that this poem should not be excepted from the general guidelines of Wikipedia, and I completely agree. However, the citation of the lyrics in this article does NOT fit your concept of "quot[ing] appropriate excerpts as needed to illustrate the points being made in the article." It is simply quoting the lyrics, which are not discussed in any depth in the article and certainly don't "illustrate" any "point." (And the first verse alone wouldn't illustrate anything either.) Therefore, we should EITHER follow the precedents set in other articles on national anthems and give the lyrics of the national anthem (which is, by definition, all the verses), OR we should follow your recommendation and only include lyrics that illustrate points from the article, which would mean DELETING all the lyrics, since the current article doesn't need them in any way. Hence, ALL or NOTHING. I'm proposing we follow the precedents of other Wikipedia articles. You're citing policy, but then proposing an ad hoc solution that doesn't actually follow that policy. (I'm not trying to be argumentative; I'm just following your own logic.) 65.96.161.79 (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
I looked over the article in more detail, and by the "illustrating points" criterion, the third and fourth verses deserve as much attention as the first, since the fourth verse's lyrics are directly cited in the introduction (and they make an important point about the national motto), while the third verse's lyrics are also discussed regarding British slavery practices. The discussion of the first verse in the article only amounts to references to performances (e.g., Jimi Hendrix), and those citations mostly belong in the separate performance article. So, by your criteria, we should only include the third and fourth verse lyrics, and maybe the first (although that probably belongs in the performance article). (I don't think that would make sense personally, but I'm just trying to follow your argument.) 65.96.161.79 (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Porn star

In the version as of Feb 18, 2010 (22:06 ECT) where does Skinner's description as a "retired porn star" come from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.191.159.111 (talk) 20:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

It's called vandalism. Just fix it when you see it, please. Powers T 15:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

folk-anthem

While a popular song, there's no reliable source that This Land is Your Land is a national anthem Tedickey (talk) 08:14, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I think it is common knowledge that many consider it to be a sort of alternative national anthem. This NPR story even suggests it in the first sentence. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1076186 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.19.204.31 (talk) 04:01, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

the woodstock movie

jimis version might be named in the performers list, but the movie itself should also be mentionen in the movies section, because it's kind of a highlight near the end of the movie to show the directors view on the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.196.227.222 (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

National Anthem USA with 4th verse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAYPN-1Yjt0&feature=fvw


--OxAO (talk) 00:22, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Jimi Hendrix version separate article

I think the Jimi Hendrix version of the Star-Spangled Banner is notable enough to receive more coverage than it does here or on his own article, and that adding a lenghty section about it to either article would be garish, so I propose a new article for his version. Thoughts?--May Cause Dizziness (talk) 07:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

New articles use the usual guidelines (establishing notability, providing sources, etc). Given that, there's unlikely to be a conflict with this topic, unless an editor names it to coincide too closely, thereby requiring a disambiguation page that interferes with this topic's name TEDickey (talk) 08:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Punctuation

Does anyone know how to properly punctuate the anthem? The following variations all appear on .gov sites.

  • [4] Oh, say can
  • [5] O say, can
  • [6] Oh, say, can
  • [7] O say can

Key's original prints say, "O! say"

This site uses an apostraphe after slave:

  • [8] No refuge could save the hireling and slave'

Furthmore:

  • [9] heav'n rescued land
  • [10] heav'n-rescued land
  • [11] heaven-rescued land

Also, commas, periods, exclamation points, and question marks vary from one version to the next.

  • [12] gallantly streaming!
  • [13] gallantly streaming?
  • [14] gallantly streaming,
  • [15] gallantly streaming;

Can someone get ahold of the March 1, 1931 resolution so we can get the official punctuation? Tbjablin 08:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I am very interested in this as well, I had heard a theory that the ? mark at the end of the first stanza was not Key asking the people around him if they saw the flag but asking them and everyone in the future if the flag that they were all looking at would stand for the freedom and bravery in this land, basically if we were man and woman enough to continue on with the promise of the declaration and consitiution, again not saying this is indeed the fact but it is a theory I have heard. The text of his original is ? at the end of the first stanza which I am going to amend to that, I will also be interested if someone can indeed find a copy of the original Act of Congress. Thanks and interested in others opinions. Hholt01 23:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The use of "O" is related to the vocative case from Latin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocative_case#English says that "O" is preferred to distinguish it from the interjection "Oh", which arose much later. 76.227.231.62 (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

"Musical references"

This entire long, unreferenced section is kinda silly; most likely there are ten timess as many musical references to the song than this list could possibly include. Every show that includes American patriotic themes is likely to make a reference to it. Perhaps we might have a list there of particularly notable instances, but as it stands, it's not particularly useful. --jpgordon::==( o ) 03:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

agree - no more than 2-3 examples. Example farms aren't encyclopedic. TEDickey (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect citation for the unusual performance in UK?

Is this a mistake? The sentence "One especially unusual performance of the song took place on September 12, 2001, after the United States had been attacked by terrorists the day before: it was played by the Band of the Coldstream Guards at Buckingham Palace in London at the ceremonial Changing of the Guard as a gesture of support for Britain's ally.[39]" cites a news report that states "The Spanish national anthem has been played at Buckingham Palace in tribute to the victims of the Madrid bombings." This page is protected which is preventing me from making any chances to this myself. 96.225.229.34 (talk) 08:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

- Further on in the article it mentions that the Spanish anthem was not the first foreign anthem to be played, that the Star Spangled Banner had been also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.148.215.156 (talk) 12:01, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

PRC Flag: Star-Spangled?

) Is it accurate to describe the flag of the PRC as "star-spangled?"
No. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 01:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but nobody calls it that because the USA monopolised the term SSB. :) Plenty of flags with stars and stripes, but only one Stars and Stripes, yeah? -- Миборовский 19:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

It is not "spangled" with only one star. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.253.81 (talk) 19:05, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

The flag of the PRC has five starts. Vietnam's flag has one star. 152.7.61.151 (talk) 16:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
The term "spangled" means the same as "sparkling", with the apparent connotation that the points of light are too many to grasp at once. TEDickey (talk) 21:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Television stations

Should we mention in the article that all United States over-the-air broadcast television stations must sign-on and sign-off with the national anthem, if they do sign-on and sign-off (instead of going for 24/7 broadcasts)? I think it's pretty important... several full-powered stations in large markets (like WTOL in Toledo, Ohio) still sign-off occasionally, even in this day and age. I'm not sure if this requirement extends to radio stations, however. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 15:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Is that a requirement (which would have a reliable source), or a common convention? If the latter, that's down in the popular culture swamp Tedickey (talk) 16:25, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it's a rule enforced by the Federal Communications Commission. I've sent them an email, and I hope to hear a response. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 17:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
It sounds as if it would fit in the "Custom" section.... Tedickey (talk) 18:13, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I got a reply from the FCC! They stated it's not required by law, or as a condition of their license... it's just a common courtesy to the public. Kinda surprising to me. RingtailedFox • Talk • Contribs 02:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Why does that surprise you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.253.81 (talk) 18:58, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Super Bowl

The Daily Mail is reporting that Christina Aguilera's mistake in singing the national anthem at Super Bowl XLV is based on a mistake on this page. See: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1354005/Super-Bowl-2011-Christina-Aguilera-sings-botched-Wikipedia-National-Anthem.html XinJeisan (talk) 11:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK is currently in contact with the newspaper to get their reporting corrected - seeing as the edit was made here as a result of the mistake, rather than the other way around... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
The Daily Mail apparently got confused over the timestamps. Aguilera's error was noted in the article prior to the (very temporary) change in the lyrics which matched the way Aguilera had already sung it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Star Spangled Banner on the Billboard Hot 100

I need to point out an inaccuracy regarding the anthem's success on the Billboard Hot 100 charts. Whitney Houston is not the only act to have hit the Hot 100 with The Star Spangled Banner; according to the book Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Singles 1955-1999, page 218, José Feliciano's version that had raised eyebrows was released as a single, and it peaked on the Billboard Hot 100 at #50 in the fall of 1968. Since the page is locked down to further changes, I can't amend the article to reflect this fact (listed under "Modern history"). In order to be correct and give José's version its proper credit, if someone could make this change it would be appreciated. Thanks.174.126.231.184 (talk) 10:51, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Archiving

As the talk page has exceeded 110 kilobytes, I have initiated automatic archiving. KimChee (talk) 21:01, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

nonnotable trivia

The given source doesn't mention "Star Spangled Banner"; furthermore it doesn't appear likely that there is an independent WP:RS elevating this trivia to a notable reference (a review written by a well known reviewer - not a wiki or blog) TEDickey (talk) 23:10, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

It mentions the "national anthem". Since they are in the present day United States on this Earth (if you don't get that reference, look up the article for the show) so therefore that would be the Star-Spangled Banner. And might I point out that most of the references don't even have sources. So what we need here is a massive overhaul of that section, not a nitpicking of individual parts of it. Smartyllama (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
It "mentions" a large number of things. Are you contemplating adding a link in each place? (Pointing out that the mention of the national anthem in the given source is incidental, and unlikely to be noted in a WP:RS review). By the way, your source isn't WP:RS, being a community-edited site - like this one TEDickey (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps this reference should be removed. But then we need to reevaluate the section as a whole. I'm not trying to say WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS but I'm just saying that, whatever policy we choose, we should apply it consistently to all trivias/cultural references in that section. If we say that there is no major source that alludes just to the national anthem part of the sliders episode, we will also need to find a source that alludes merely to the national anthem component of the Ken Burns baseball documentary, a reliable source that alludes solely to the national anthem component of Charlie Brown, and so on, or else remove those parts. So if this isn't acceptable, I have no problem with that, but then what we need is to completely rewrite the section because clearly it's not up to proper standards. Smartyllama (talk) 16:16, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Sure - we should remove most of that stuff (and it gets weeded periodically). However, this instance is not more topical in any respect than any of the others TEDickey (talk) 00:57, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm not saying it is. I'm just saying we need to apply a consistent standard, whatever that standard is. And it isn't any less topical either. Which brings us back to the consistent standard issue. We should probably open up to further discussion regarding what defines a "topical example" and then weed out the section accordingly. Smartyllama (talk) 17:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your example, a review noting the feature being discussed. TEDickey (talk) 01:00, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Note that I added a better source for this example and also corrected the quote regarding Canadian teams per the better source. Smartyllama (talk) 14:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
Your recent edit refers to the main page, without being specific. TEDickey (talk) 14:40, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I suspect we wouldn't find a source for any of those which just mentions the national anthem component. Which brings us back to the idea of reevaluating the topicality standard. Smartyllama (talk) 23:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
The Wikipedia guidelines are workable. Adding exceptions doesn't sound like an improvement. TEDickey (talk) 10:11, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Which is exactly why we need to evaluate the section as a whole before making a decision on individual items. By the way, where in WP:RS does it say that the source must refer only to the specific item mentioned in the citation? I couldn't find anything along those lines there. Perhaps I'm missing something... Smartyllama (talk) 16:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
There's more than one point (you might find it useful to read through WP:RS and become familiar with it). For instance "Sources should directly support the information as it is presented in an article, and should be appropriate to the claims made." TEDickey (talk) 23:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Which this source does. It clearly provides support for the fact that Rembrandt was driving to SF game to sing the national anthem when he drove through the wormhole, and also provides support for the Soviet anthem/Canada statement when the USSR anthem is played before the "Reds" game. I don't see where it says that it must directly support the information presented in an article and nothing else. And on a side note (which I don't give too much credence to to avoid OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) most of the citations in this article link to sites that discuss other related subjects as well as the specific, exact subject matter which is being cited (ie where it says "My Country 'Tis of Thee" is to the same tune as God Save the Queen, the source is an article about MCTOT which mentions the tune note as well as other related info about it, which is not mentioned in this article. Most other sources have similar properties). So, while I'm not using that as an example to prove that the rule is not as you say it is, I'm saying that if it is as you are interpreting it, we probably need to rewrite the whole article, not just this section. Perhaps I am misunderstandind something. If I am, let me know. Smartyllama (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
None of what you're saying addresses my point that it is an incidental mention, and hence not a good source per my previous comment. If the relationship is notable, one would expect it noticed - not simply regurgitated in a blow-by-blow listing of the plot. TEDickey (talk) 23:32, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Changes in spelling of the lyrics

There are several differences in the spelling of some of the words in the lyrics between the original handwritten copy and what is printed in our article. Perhaps these should be noted. For example, the fifth line of the first verse has a singular "bomb bursting in air", but we now sing "bombs". Has someone researched where these changes were introduced and why they were made? --Thomprod (talk) 17:16, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Dunno, but the 1814 printed copy has the modern version. Maybe when he took it to the publisher he had some discussions with them to "polish" the wording a bit. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:27, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

We celebrate the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence; to wit, Independence Day, not July the Fourth.

I have been reading several articles related to the United States National Anthem and songs that have been proposed as the U.S. national hymn and have found a disturbing reference made in each article. The reference is to our celebration of the "Fourth of July" as a national holiday.

We do not celebrate the fourth day of the seventh month of the Gregorian, or civil, calendar! That day has no intrinsic importance or value to our American history or our celebration of our accomplishments. What we do celebrate is the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. That day, which is the anniversary of the 1776 Continental Congress' signing of our declaration to the European countries and territories of the reasons why we were breaking with England. Had we been using the Julian calendar still, our anniversary celebration would be on the 23rd of June.

I believe that this distinction/correction needs to be made on all articles pertaining to U.S. History and celebrations. Likewise the same courtesy and relevancy needs to be made to all other incorrect references to country's celebration days. If you believed current advertising and marketing you would think that all of Mexico celebrated their independence on "Cinco de Mayo"; a gross error. Nobody in Mexico celebrates the 5th day of the 5th month of the civil calendar. Primarily only the State of Puebla celebrates the victory of the Mexicans over the French forces at Puebla de Los Angeles on the 5th of May, 1862. In America it's just another day people have found to 'parrr-teee'.

In allowing the usage of current calendar date to substitute for the name of the actual anniversary celebration, you encourage a general laziness, and disregard for each country and community's achievements and historical culture. As the 'encyclopedia to the world', I don't think that would meet your intentions or expectations of excellence in documentation.

Please consider having the appropriate corrections to all articles dealing with celebration and history of any country, culture, or people.

Yours Sincerely, SC -- 98.232.52.184 -- 23:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

In America, "July 4th" is synonymous with "Independence Day". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
United States Declaration of Independence. Buffs (talk) 03:10, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

star spangled banner

does anybody know what the star spangled banner really means?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.128.23.242 (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it means a flag (banner) strewn (spangled) with stars. In other words, a flag with stars on it. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

It Was Never a Poem

Sorry, it was not a poem later set to music. This is a common misconception. What are the chances that one could find a song that perfectly matched an existing poem? Key deliberately wrote new words to the song, "To Anacreon in Heaven." It wasn't even the first time he had written new words to that song. In that period, it was common to write new topical words to popular songs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrandonShw (talk • contribs) 18:23, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The article could be clearer on that point, but it's not in dispute. Note that the contemporary printing of the poem suggests the Anacreon song as the tune. And finding a song that matches a poem is no big deal. Poems with the same meter are interchangeable as songs. For example, "America the Beautiful" and "Auld Lang Syne" can be sung to each other's music seamlessly. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
Can you document that, BrandonShw? --Thnidu (talk) 18:29, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
This article also starts off: "It is also among some of the world's national anthems that are based on a poem, along with the Hymn to Liberty, the national anthem of both Greece and Cyprus." It is obvious how mentioning the Greek national anthem in any context here makes any sense in terms of an introduction to the Star Spangled Banner. One might as well as say, the Star Spangled Banner is a national anthem, much like "O Canada" or "Rule Brittania (or whatever they use)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.48.18 (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Sheet Music

The Sheet Music on the page is not the type that is normally used. There are numerous times (such as the first two notes) where the sheet music has two eighth notes and normally it has dotted eighth and sixteenth. Also at parts (such as "proudly we" in the first line) it has three quarter notes when normally it is dotted quarter, eighth, quarter. 67.86.150.191 (talk) 18:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

It appears to be copyrighted 1917, so maybe things were done a little differently then? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I doubt it, looking at the 1915 song version on the wikipedia page, both of the changes I pointed out were implemented. Although there were a few other noticeable differences from the more modern versions I've heard. I listened to all the rest of the songs on this page, and they are all very similar to the more modern arrangements I've heard. So while there has been a bit of space for interpretation with different arrangements, I haven't heard any arrangement that plays it like that sheet music does. 67.86.150.191 (talk) 05:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The US Air Force has sheet music posted online in PDF files, and I think other governmental websites have it. So more can be added, but I would rather have maybe just 1 from 1917, one from today and from different periods. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

The sheet music shown in the article (as of 2012-04-27) is really a simplified version of the song, not the actual national anthem. It's "dumbed down" a bit, and I don't think there's any reason to present this simpleton edition simply because of the copyright date displayed (on what is a public domain piece), or the fact that it's available as a free PDF. In the context of it's status as the US national anthem, a government source should be used. The sheet music, as shown, is clearly wrong. Although it might be suitable for young children first learning the song, it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Deleting it, and thus having no sheet music in the article, is clearly preferable to displaying this incorrect version. Anyone can publish sheet music to this song, without regard to quality control, but that doesn't make such sheet music a definitive encyclopedic source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't know the best way to include this information, because it is easily confirmed by any one of millions of people who know the song, but isn't written down in some other citable source ( the "encyclopedic"-citable-elsewhere-only rule of Wikipedia is dumb and needs to go, it gets in the way of the productive usefulness of the site)

Here's the basic chords for the song: 

The Star-Spangled Banner
By Francis Scott Key

Gsus
  1   2   3
1---|-X-|---|
2-X-|---|---|
3---|---|---|
4---|---|---|
5---|-X-|---|
6---|-X-|---|

            C                                     Am         D7    G
O           say can you       see  by  the        dawn's ear -ly   light,

            C                 G                   C
What so     proudly we        hailed at the       twilight's last gleaming,

            C                                     Am         D7    G
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the per   -i   -lous fight,

            C                 G                   C
O'er the    ram-parts we      watched, were so    gallantly  streaming?

            C                 G                   Dm               F
And the     rockets' red      glare, the bombs    burst-ing  in    air,

            C                 G                   Am         D7    G
Gave        proof through the night that   our    flag was   still there;

            C                 F                   Dm         Gsus  G
O           say does that     star-span- gled     banner yet wa    -ave,

            C                 C                   F          G     C 
O'er the    land of the       free, and the       home of    the   brave?

Ace Frahm (talk) 00:49, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

I fail to see the relevance in including the chords of the national anthem in the article. Did I miss something? Please explain. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 11:10, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
It would enable a musician to actually play the song, which is the top reason a musician would be reading this article. This is quite obvious. Ace Frahm (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
If musicians are hoping to use Wikipedia to find chords to songs, they'll learn quickly they're in the wrong place. I suppose we should add to WP:NOT "Wikipedia is not a songbook". --jpgordon::==( o ) 20:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Question marks and obtuse comments

From a brief perusal of the talk page archives, I've found no explanation for the obtuse comments placed after the question marks in the Lyrics section. There's also no explanation of why the comments were even added, or if removal of the question marks was even a long-term issue. As written, the hidden comments "Yes, "?". Do not change." are unclear at first glance. Furthermore, the comments have not prevented an IP user from removing both the question marks and the comments without any explanation, so the comments really aren't helping. Perhaps the user is simply removing the comments because they are there.

Both the image in the infobox of the song from an early printing, and the source used in the article, all support the question marks. As such, I don't see the need for unclear comments, evidently added bya user who was not very fluent in English. If we do have a consensus for having the hidden comments, we need to write the comments to be clearer. For now, it's probably best to leave out the comments in hope that the offending IP will move on, so I've removed them. - BilCat (talk) 07:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Lyric versus Lyrics

The plural form lyrics is accepted when it refers to the words of a song and is standard usage, for example, Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry. For other references, see:

In keeping with standard usage and to avoid confusion, I suggest that the plural is preferred when it describes the words of song.
--Mtd2006 (talk) 19:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Indigenous-language versions

Are there any media files that can be added for §Translations, especially with regards to indigenous languages like Navajo and Cherokee? Thank you. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 11:09, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Star-Spangled Banner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Star-Spangled Banner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Star-Spangled Banner. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 00:41, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

The Hireling and the Slave

The article notes Blackburn's interpretation of "hireling and slave" but fails to mention that his is not, and has never been, the common interpretation of those words, which in are generally understood to refer to the attacking force in the battle Key had just witnessed. The "hireling" refers to the mercenaries who fought for the British. And the "slave" refers to the British troops, often conscripts, who fight because they are still figuratively enslaved to the Crown, and must, as Subjects, live and die at the will and whim of their King. It was a common rhetorical device among early Americans, as it was in the Roman Republic, to derogatorily refer to those in thralldom to monarchies as "slaves". F.S.Key is contrasting the Americans, who fight as free men defending their own liberty, to the opposing force, who fights under compulsion. He is making the point that the Free and the Brave cannot be conquered by those who fight for lesser motives. The surrounding lines within the song make this clear. The article should note that Blackburn's interpretation is neither commonly held nor the traditional understanding of the lyrics. 2602:30A:2E1B:8E0:4C71:2B9A:6148:25A5 (talk) 07:24, 2 September 2016 (UTC)dms

The British Army did not have conscription at this time. In any case, one paragraph on the issue certainly is not "undue weight" (currently the section has this complaint attached to it), but other interpretations should be included (with citations). --Jaakko Sivonen (talk) 06:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I have to agree and reverted it. Your argument also sounds like original research and not cut and dry at all: http://www.snopes.com/2016/08/29/star-spangled-banner-and-slavery/ If anything its undue weight not to discuss it more honestly. AaronY (talk) 09:56, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show

In a TV documentary by arte about Buffalo Bill they say that a rider bursting into the arena at a gallop with the american flag flying while the band played the Star Spangled Banner was a fixture in every show's opening. They even claimed that William Cody chose this "Navy March" which he liked, and proceeded to portray this as the origin of America's national anthem. Now, while this latter part may be laying it on a bit thick, still, the former part might be worth investigating. Keeping in mind the huge impact of the extensive tours of the Wild West Show and Rough Riders Congress, in the US as well as in Europe, over several decades, it's not unlikely that many viewers had a fixed association of the flag and the music in their mind, after attending one of these shows. So this might well have contributed a fair bit to the public perception of the song, which led to many people regarding it as the unofficial anthem of the USA around the turn of the century. --BjKa (talk) 15:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Inappropriate Melody Alterations

I believe the following should be added to the article in the section dealing with "John Stafford Smith's music":

"A common, but inappropriate alteration of the "official" melody occurs in measure 27 (see sheet music examples above and attached), when singers (or instrumentalists), both amateur and professional, intone two eighth notes (pitched on the second and third intervals of the chosen key) on the syllable "ban" of the word "banner". The correct intonation is one quarter note pitched on the second interval of the scale for 'ban', and two eighth notes pitched on the fourth and third intervals of the scale for 'ner'.

"Equally offensive is the frequent practice of adding a second note to the word 'free', ascending to a high 'root' of the key, in a misguided and largely unnecessary attempt to showcase the performer's prowess."

File:477px-2 Star Spangled Banner Wiki Correction.jpg
Correct/Incorrect example

JRGRedDawgEsq (talk) 17:52, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

It all depends on where the above statements come from. Unless it's from some kind of published anthem etiquette or similar authority (like the US Flag code, for instance), it really has no place here since it's a matter of opinion. And if it is from some kind of authority, it would need to be placed in proper context. How the anthem is performed and interpreted by singers and instrumentalists is not something bound by law or even tradition. There is no known requirement that the anthem must be performed exactly as written by Smith or that deviations are "inappropriate". --JonRidinger (talk) 18:11, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
  1. ^ Webster's New World Dictionary
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Star-Spangled_Banner/Archive_2&oldid=1137243464"