(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
Talk:These Boots Are Made for Walkin' - Wikipedia Jump to content

Talk:These Boots Are Made for Walkin'

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hi there, Lee Hazlewood himself recorded "These Boots Are Made For Walkin'", unfortunately I don't know the year when it happened (some sources say 1966, but I'm not sure), but well, it should be added here. -andy

217.94.164.46 2 July 2005 23:43 (UTC) are complete lyrics legal here? No, not if they're copyright (as they are here). --Mel Etitis (Μみゅーεいぷしろんλらむだ Ετητης) 11:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The release date given here (2/22/66) must be wrong. The ARSA database shows that this song was appearing on radio station playlists as early as 12/24/65.

Merge proposal

[edit]

It has often been pointed out that individual recordings of songs should be merged with the main article. In this case, the article might seem too long, but most of it is an over-inflated description of a music video. --Mel Etitis (Μみゅーεいぷしろんλらむだ Ετητης) 11:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Major ditto to the merge. I don't think any of the video description is necessary - I could see the point if the video was groundbreaking, controversial, etc.; but it is just Jessica's (ample) assets shaking for the camera. I'm not complaining, but it is far from encyclopedic. If you're really energetic, Mel, you might look into Take My Breath Away (Jessica Simpson single) as it is also a non-notable cover. If you are really feeling productive, Angels (Jessica Simpson single) is not only a cover single, but doesn't match any notability standards (peaked at "#106" on Hot 100, and outside top 20 on pop radio). Volatile 02:42, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Your wish is my command. --Mel Etitis (Μみゅーεいぷしろんλらむだ Ετητης) 22:04, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Volatile, Nancy's assets were pretty respectable, too. See "Boobs" - er, I mean "Boots" - album cover. :-)
PS to Mel, yes, merge. - Rlw (Talk) 00:18, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please merge, also shouldn't Jessica's "Sweetest Sin" a cover of Diane Warren's single. Couldn't that be merged too?

I think the only thing that should be mentioned about the video is the name of the director, and it shouldn't be in its own paragraph. Now we have two paragraphs of text and charts information. This is too little, they have to be merged somewhere. The text and the infobox could go to this article, the chart description to And The Band Played On (album). -Hapsiainen 07:16, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Being bold, I went ahead and merged the articles, seeing how there's a consensus here. Volatile 18:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have to disagree with this. The video was very controversial even to the point of having a Christian group yell at Jessica to remake the video. It also was a major hit too and is very well known for its music video and ties to The Dukes of Hazard. OmegaWikipedia 01:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with OmegaWikipedia. The video was indeed controversial, as it was the final strike that separated Simpson from her previous bubble gum image (look at what both Britney and Christina did). The song was a modest hit, and due to it being the original song for a film, it deserves its own article, split from the original Nancy Sinatra version. --Winnermario 01:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with OmegaWikipedia and Winnermario. The song was a hit across the world and is well-known for the controversy caused by its music video. Merging it would only bloat the article; therefore, they should be seperated. --Anittas 04:57, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OmegaWikipedia has expanded the article. Now the song is analyzed in several paragraphs, which don't feel bloated. Good work, I can't any more be a mergist. But I still think that the video is described too detailedly. I wouldn't write so much about any music video despite its fame or influence. The videos are less than five minutes long. You can't see the wood for the trees, when you explain all that happens in a video. -Hapsiainen 13:56, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The J.S. article is very much bloated and very much unnecessary. However, since its proponents are very dedicated, I don't see a point of arguing logic to a chimp. As you wish, O/W/A. Ditto to what Hapsiainsen said about the video, but there is little one can do there that won't be reverted by the afformentioned O/W/A either. Volatile 00:30, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the pages should be merged because the original by Nancy Sinatra has been known for decades and the only reason the Jessica Simpson version is popular now is due to the movie. In a year will the Jessica Simpson version be noted? Or just a blurb on a page. I think the two versions should stand on their own accord and their pages should reflect that. 71.197.153.88 22:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)soyoung[reply]

Keep separate. Merging them would create a big messy article.--Fallout boy 23:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep separate. Merging them would create a big messy article.--Bob 02:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't merge. As to many people would complain. ILovEPlankton 13:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with a merge. There's no reason the two should be moved, and there's enough information about the Jessica Simpson version to allow for it's own article. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 18:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Merge. There are two different artists and two different singles so let them keep their own pages even though it's the same song. --Stzr3 18:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC) Definitely needs merger. One song, one article. - Nunh-huh 22:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely merge the two articles. If we were to write an article about every controversial music video or song that a Christian group considered offensive, we'd never get anywhere. Why should this particular video/song be any different from any other? Spacini 11:31, 30 July 2006
  • Merge There's no reason not to do so. It may have information, but it still fits fine into the other article. Why should this be kept separate? It makes more sense to talk about it in the context of the song, not the context of the Jessica Simpson single. GassyGuy 18:37, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge Articles should be merged as they are about the SONG. Same goes for any other cover version. -- eo 00:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DON'T MERGE It is neeeded for Jessica's chronology and her verison has had a lot of controversy, so why does it belong with the original? It is different. It should have it's own article. So there is no consensus.

These article should not have been separated. It is a Wikipedia guideline that articles are about SONGS and not SINGLES. There is no reason why Jessica Simpson gets special treatment. This "it's needed for her chronology" makes NO sense - it can still be part of her chronology and merged with the original, just like every other artist who has a cover version. - eo 01:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Psychological weapon?

[edit]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but wasn't this song used to flush out some terrorists some time in the 1980s? I think it might have been somewhere in Latin America, I'm not sure. If I'm right then I think there should be some note of this (though i certainly wouldn't know how to find a record of it, myself). If I'm wrong then I apologize for the mistake. Mk623SC20K 05:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also used by the BATF during the standoff in Waco, Texas. I remember reading that it was blared from speaker trucks circling the compound. 69.178.66.187 05:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another cover

[edit]

Another cover is Le Braghe Corte's (an Italian group,) the video of which is featuring Italian and international porn star Rocco Siffredi. --Blazar.writeto() 10:22, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove info on Jessica Simpson's version

[edit]

In an effort to make the world a better place, I suggest that all references to Jessica Simpson are deleted. Because it would be a better world without Jessica Simpson's voice. How about we simply pretend she doesn't exist? --201.9.92.254 (talk) 04:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful as the above comment is, I do think that Simpson's version snags a lot more content in the article relative to it's notoriety than a potential reader might be looking for. Sinatra's original is by far the one most widely known, recognized, and thought of when people hear the song. Not a comment against content for Simpson, but rather for Nancy Sinatra. ~ Amory (talk) 01:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, the section could use additional citations.~ Amory (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There IS objectively too much info about the Jessica Simpson version, whether you like her or not. This version isn't relevant enough to deserve so much content. The article should mainly be about Sinatra's original version. --81.244.234.116 (talk) 19:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Simpson's version shouldn't be removed, just moved and edited. Also wp:NOR. Grimsooth (talk) 10:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The image Image:NancySinatraBoots.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --01:15, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Symarip version is not a Ska version!

[edit]

Symarip version is not a ska version but an early reggae version (skinhead reggae to some), they didn't make ska anymore in '69. This is how ska sounds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHVLYA6i4og This is how early reggae sounds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe3KvB8AT_c

You hear the different beat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.123.67.72 (talk) 10:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"written by"

[edit]

This article says that the song was written by Nancy Sinatra. The article on Lee Hazlewood says he wrote it. Now who wrote it? What does it mean to "write" a song? And who cares if a song is actually written, except for those interested in sheet music?--217.232.193.1 (talk) 09:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It says Nancy wrote the words. THere is no such credit on the records. I'm changing the article. George Slivinsky (talk) 22:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Megadeth version

[edit]

I think it's important to note that Megadeth's version was only a track on their "Killing Is My Business... and Business Is Good!" album, not a single. Their first single as a band was "Wake Up Dead" off their next studio album. Currently on the page, it says "Single", which is not correct. I don't know what to do in order to correct that, but I assume someone does. Also, it is titled "These Boots", not "These Boots Are Made For Walkin'" as it currently displays. 76.165.235.19 (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I fixed it. 76.165.235.19 (talk) 03:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"from the album"?

[edit]

A general question about this crediting approach. I think the hit single comes first doesn't it? Then it gets placed on an album. Related - just because a song is taken from an album doesn't make it the "album version", as many sites write. George Slivinsky (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feminist Anthem

[edit]

One thing that I find interesting is that there is not a single mention of this song being embraced by the feminist movement of the 1960's / 1970's. This song seems to be a battle cry for women to overthrow their patriarchal oppressors and gain control of society. It's probably been used in a lot of protests and marches. Are there no clear links? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.6.208 (talk) 09:45, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Song used in network coverage?

[edit]

I have some suspicions about this line: "During television news coverage in 1966/67, the song was aired as a soundtrack as the cameras focused on US Infantrymen on patrol during the Vietnam War." Was this used in one network's report? If so, which network? I have problems envisioning the TV networks of 1966 using any popular song as a "soundtrack" to news footage. If it was done, article should say who did it and when. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.212.91.236 (talk) 03:31, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

Rockabilly? Rock and roil?? Are you kiddin' me? ... with all that shiny brass going off?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I know it opens with a double bass line (and tambourine!), but is there any actual source for "Rockabilly"? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:16, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. It was changed here by a now-blocked vandalism-only account, so I've now reverted it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. But I'm hoping to ask the same question about "Traditional pop" (which sounds to me more like a genre insurance policy than a real genre!) Martinevans123 (talk) 22:28, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pop? Country? Just watch the video, and relive your youth.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:31, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yay! Let's all have a rave up! Martinevans123 (talk) 09:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on These Boots Are Made for Walkin'. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 06:14, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on These Boots Are Made for Walkin'. 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 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 00:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on These Boots Are Made for Walkin'. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 10:14, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

add to pop culture

[edit]

On the season finale of Supergirl, there was a commercial/promotion for Wonder Woman, featuring Melissa Benoist, Chyler Leigh, Teri Hatcher, and Lynda Carter, with this song playing in the background. I am not sure which cover was used for the song. JenniferRSong (talk) 06:49, 3 June 2017 (UTC) [1][reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLlwgBuKymo
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on These Boots Are Made for Walkin'. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:25, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on These Boots Are Made for Walkin'. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 04:00, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First Release

[edit]

Boots Randolph first released an instrumental version of These Boots Are Made for Walking138.210.238.33 (talk) 12:27, 28 April 2018 (UTC) in 1965 in Denmark under the London Records label.[reply]

Credit for the double bass riff

[edit]

Hazlewood seems to deserve at least some credit for the double bass riff, according to this Facebook post, but I can't find a more reliable source for the relevant quote. Relying on FB post seems too slim. Batternut (talk) 11:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

[edit]

Category:Songs about footwear?? In this article, honey? I don't think so! (and even that one is a bit debatable). And Category:Songs about parting? Well, kinda. But we probably need Category:Songs about revenge or even Category:Songs about domination? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:These_Boots_Are_Made_for_Walkin%27&oldid=1206321959"