Talk:It Would Be So Nice

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the It Would Be So Nice article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Pink Floyd Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pink Floyd, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pink Floyd 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.Pink FloydWikipedia:WikiProject Pink FloydTemplate:WikiProject Pink FloydPink Floyd articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was a past project collaboration.

To-do list:

Fair use

Add fair use rationale to all images and sound samples (all except images already labeled free use).
Re-size large images around to 300 pixels (all "fair use" images), other than album covers (already done).

Articles

Expand all articles to at least Start class. Some song stubs can't be expanded and should be redirected to the relevant album article. Use the "Interstellar Overdrive" article as an example when editing a song stub.
Expand all of the Floyd's studio album articles to at least GA status.
See COTM for monthly collabs.

Project building

Add WikiProject Pink Floyd banner {{WPFloyd}} to all appropriate Talk pages.
Personally invite quality editors working on Pink Floyd articles to join the project.

If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list.

This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

Songs

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

Daily Standard

I think it was changed BEFORE it was released on single, and this explains why all surviving copies of the song (even the ones on 7") have the same line. I think it should be changed in every reference of the song, even because there is no source of the band changing the line after having released it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.148.181.211 (talk) 15:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I first heard the story about the lyric change in the book "Pink Floyd" which was written by Barry Miles and first published in the early 1980's. This book reprinted the entire text of the original article from 1968 and specifically states that the band spent extra time and money to re-record a special version for the BBC. It is possible that the story is false and that the story was made to get publicity. However, it appears that at least Barry Miles thinks the story is accurate. If not why did he include it in his book? Miles was a fan of the group since 1967, so he has more knowledge on the subject that most of us. The Miles book can be easily ordered from Amazon.com here: http://www.amazon.com/Pink-Floyd-Visual-Documentary-Miles/dp/0399410015 --63.224.56.217 (talk) 09:07, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Five reasons to delete one paragraph.

The song is generally regarded as one of Pink Floyd's weakest singles ^{[citation needed]}; it was written out of desperation ^{[citation needed]} as lead songwriter Syd Barrett stopped contributing to the band, and the song was largely ignored after its release (by both the public and the band).^{[citation needed]} However some fans now think the song has been unfairly criticized. It really is about as good as the other Rick Wright tunes released by Pink Floyd the same year such as "Remember A Day", and "See-Saw." The main difference is that on "It Would Be So Nice" the group was trying to write a hit single and failed.

I'm putting this poor old paragraph out of its misery. Not just because it contains three calls for citation. Not just because it contains weasel words. Not just because it has blatant POV. Not just because it's poorly written. Those things all add up, but the most important reason is, the paragraph doesn't really tell us anything notable in the first place. It's just plain unnecessary.

Incidentally, in the way of chit-chat, I like the song. Not half the song "Paint Box" is, but a damn sight better than "See Saw". --63.25.235.117 (talk) 15:08, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*** APPLAUSE ***

Definitely the right move. Thank you for deleting that! I especially hate terms like "generally regarded" and "some fans now think". It reeks of fanboys who study worthless Internet polls on their favorite Pink-Floyd-related web sites or newsgroups, thinking the opinion of 10,000 or even 100,000 fans matters. The truth is, with a band like Pink Floyd, who are "globally" famous, who are famous in countries where English is not even spoken, to have even an inkling of what ONE (1%) PERCENT of fans think, would require a massively expensive polling operation. What the majority of a fan website thinks -- or even what fans on the band's own website think -- is, statistically, fucking worthless!

Actually, I have a sad feeling I'm only addressing a past version of myself, before I registered. That looks like one of my old IP addresses, and the writing certainly conforms to my style. But if you're actually somebody else, let me know, 'cause it's good to know you're out there! Keep up the great work!

--Ben Culture (talk) 11:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Possible plagiarism?

Has anyone noticed, by the way, how similar it sounds in places to Defecting Grey by Pretty Things? AFAIK the latter came out first. It can be found on the CD release of SF Sorrow. Does anyone feel up to finding anywhere on the web this is noted? Bear in mind they were both Hurricane Smith productions, which may have something to do with it.--WestwoodMatt (talk) 22:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that could lead you to a very slippery slope. Unless you are a musician who is prepared to tell us a bunch of stuff along the lines of, "Both songs feature a chorus in F Major with the bass descending in a sequence of F - F over Eflat - D minor - Dflat major seventh", or whatever whichever song does what ... your opinion on "the general feel" of the music is not appropriate to the article. And what "many fans think ..." is less than worthless! (See my comment in previous section.) Even if you know your musical details, there is the concern about Original Research or Original Synthesis (of which I've been guilty in the past). What you'd need is a comparison/contrast article written specifically by a musicologist, not a journalist. I don't think it's worth the effort, especially considering how few know or care about the Pretty Things.

--Ben Culture (talk) 11:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Member

should we state that this is the first Floyd release with Gilmour? If it is —Preceding unsigned comment added by Partizanfighter1944 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Waters: "Yet to transition" or "Was gradually transitioning"?

Hi there!

I changed, re:Roger Waters: "(who had yet to transition into his eventual role...") Into: "(who was gradually transitioning into his eventual role ...")

I based this change upon what I read in Schaffner's Saucerful of Secrets: The Pink Floyd Odyssey, Chapter 11 ("burning bridges"), p. 129 (in original hardback U.S. edition). The relevant section begins with "A supremely unconfident [David] Gilmour, meanwhile, maintained a low profile as he alternated between playing rhythm guitar and "to be honest, trying to sound a bit like Syd."

Ex-Blackhill (PF's original management team) employee June Bolan goes on to say "Roger [Waters] was determined that it wasn't going to fall apart because Syd wasn't there anymore, and he would show everybody. And he bloody well did, didn't he? And he did it against all adversity, because nobody gave him credence for being a creator. ... Roger kept it all together. He was very much a motivating force."

Sumi Jenner (wife of ex-PF manager Peter Jenner) agrees. "It took an enormous amount of energy for Roger to get that together, and he deserves credit for it. From then on, he always thought of the band as his baby."

Thank you, ladies. I've a feeling I'll be having to quote you quite a few times from now on. Some people think it was Gilmour who rescued the band from the brink of death. While I would never want to diminish his role in the band, it must be said that the man had developed neither his signature guitar style, nor an esepcially palatable singing voice. Live performances of "Flaming", as seen on French TV clips, confirm that beyond all question.

--Ben Culture (talk) 02:57, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But the more I look at it, the more I think the parenthetical should simply be removed. It's just not all that relevant. It's about the writer of the B-side, not the writer of the article's subject, a song by Rick Wright. Anybody? Thoughts on this?

--Ben Culture (talk) 09:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]