Talk:White Lines (Don't Don't Do It)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Hip hop Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title[edit]

Have I been mis-reading it for the past 25 years or does the title of this song really have two "don't"'s? -- eo 20:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen it listed both ways, but Whitburn lists it with two, so I suppose that's as good a way to leave it as any, unless somebody has an actual copy of the single. GassyGuy 00:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a photo of the single's label. http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?what=R&obid=98750 The title is correct. --131.229.60.25 16:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge White Lines (Duran Duran song) into White Lines (Don't Don't Do It)[edit]

Also support merge with the Duran Duran article on this song... there's barely any info there anyway. -- eo 20:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also support the merge. GassyGuy 00:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. DON'T MERGE! This is a completely different release than Grandmaster Flash's! - Feduciary 16:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Here we go again. It's the same song, however you put it; the article can only be enriched by including all versions. –Unint 03:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral; I wouldn't necessarily object as the DD article is pretty slim, but I think it could be expanded, and it'd be a shame to lose its parallels with other DD singles articles. See also my opinion at Talk:Perfect Day. — Catherine\^talk 18:31, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: As was said above, I'd support an expansion of the DD section, but I don't think they need to be merged. The DD page is an entry in their discography, and should be separate. I think the small blurb in the Grandmaster Flash page is sufficient enough. KhanadaRhodes 04:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. On the grounds that the two songs are really not that similar. Duran Duran's cover sounds a lot different than the original. --ChrisP2K5 04:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A precedent has been set by the article Mad World. Here, the Tears for Fears original sounds much different to the Gary Jules version, yet they are both in the same article. R o gerthat ^Talk 04:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Wikipedia's aim is to detail information on songs, not have a different article for several versions of the same song. Can you imagine if there was a different article for the thousands of cover versions of Yesterday? R o gerthat ^Talk 04:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support The Duran Duran is filled mostly by a bunch of different track listings. --Wolfer68 (talk) 22:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Book citation[edit]

The following statement cites a website which contains details of a book: Originally, the song was intended to be an ironic celebration of a cocaine-fueled party lifestyle, but it was abridged with the "don't do it" message as an anti-cocaine song as a concession to commercial considerations. Presumably the intention is to cite the book. Could somebody confirm that the book validates the claim and provide a page number, so that a proper citation can be built. Cheers. Bm213 (talk) 18:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging versions of same song[edit]

Please note : There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separate different versions of the same song. Please make known your feelings on the matter. Regards.--Richhoncho (talk) 23:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"starred future actor Laurence Fishburne"[edit]

Umm, "future actor" huh? So Laurence Fishburne wasn't an actor when this video was made? Really?!? If IMdB is to be believed, he's been acting since at least 1972... In fact, he's got 12 credits preceding 1983 (and 3 IN 1983).

Seems to me he was already an actor when he did the video, no? -- MyrddinEmrys (talk) 17:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

==hello- There needs to be information on the original Liquid Liquid version of this song, and especially the court case between 99 Records, Liquid Liquid's label, and Sugarhill Records, which was decided in 99's favor but then bankrupted both Sugarhill and 99 Records. That case is a key early example of sampling law (though in this case the song wasn't sampled, it was replayed) and is an important aspect of this song. There is some of that info on the Liquid Liquid page but not much. In fact, saying White Lines was written by Melle Mel and Sylvia Robinson is incorrect, as the court ruled the song was written by Liquid Liquid. -Ezra Gale

Vandalism[edit]

On 02-Jan-2011 the article still stated that "This was done to mislead Marzel Martens into believing that Grandmaster Flash participated on the record". I can find no evidence for this in the cited interview; the only references found online to Marzel Martens are copies of this article. Therefore I suspect that this is a piece of vandalism that has gone uncorrected for too long. I have therefore changed it to read "mislead the public" which fits with the information found in interviews regarding Flash's use-of-name lawsuit.

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on White Lines (Don't Don't Do It). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150217121914/http://www.grandmasterflashandthefuriousfive.com/ to http://www.grandmasterflashandthefuriousfive.com/

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) 13:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]