Talk:Hymne à l'amour

merge

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 opinions on the matter.--Richhoncho (talk) 11:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Who is Hikaru Utada?

"L'Hymne a L'amour" is a classic and a standard forever connected to Edith Piaf; that a young, japanese singer records a cover in japanese for a commercial in Japan is of little importance in music history (at least so far!). Fans of Hikaru Utada will find this highly important, but the song has been covered by music legends already, and these are just mentioned. I suggest japanese fans of Ms Utada write a wikipedia entry about the cover version, and reduce the mention on the page about the song itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.117.209.156 (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Why is Hikaru Utada so prominent?

I see no reason why Hikaru Utada's version should be so prominent in this article. For heavens sake, the article tells more about her than Piaf!! Of course it is important to tell of the cover versions but not to this extent. Why would this artist merit such an extensive here? --Nedergard (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

If you were going to remove Utada's version from the article, you could've done a better job at it, i.e. removing her artist boxes as well as the references and putting the song info from Utada's version under the "Japanese covers" section, as well as removing the relevant categories. And perhaps maybe shifting the information into its own article?

I know you're saying Utada had "too much info", but if the info is there and useful to the article, it needs to be there. I've since given Utada's version its own article, so anyone looking for info on the song can actually see it. (Jeimii (talk) 20:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC))

Different versions of the same song do not get different articles. I think a compromise is in order. Bring back Hikaru Utada's version, but with a little judicial pruning. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I have no re-inserted the Hikaru Utada version in full, the problem is not that is section is too big, but that the Piaf version is too small. Having said that I certainly wouldn't object to some pruning. --Richhoncho (talk) 16:01, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I've changed the old article to redirect here. Looking over the Utada version, I can't really see anything that necessarily needs to be pruned, per se. Maybe this needs to be done by someone else with a more objective opinion.

And I'd disagree with Richhoncho saying that the Utada version is bigger than the Edith version - they're about the same size. (Jeimii (talk) 17:00, 26 August 2011 (UTC))

Thanks for completing the merge, real life took over for an hour! The Utada version was originally removed by Nedergard because it was "too big." If I had seriously felt the same way, I would have pruned it, but, no, I was only paraphrasing Nedergard. I have no other issues except that Same song/Same Article is adhered to, which it does again. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:19, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry but I fail to see how "they're about the same size"? Infoboxes aside Piaf version has only the first paragraph with about 90 words but Utada is there with about 400 words... --Nedergard (talk) 08:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

This is pure semantics, size isn't what WP is about - it's about accuracy, information and if you can add more accurate information, duly sourced, about the Piaf version I would be happy. I'd be happier still if somebody could add something about *the song* rather than the artists who recorded it. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 18:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Need for balance between different interpreters of the song

Just come across the article, and independently (and rather late) observed for myself that Utada is much too prominent compared to other interpreters. Suggest we move most of the Utada section here (to this talk page) until the other sections are similarly developed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:56, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Alternate English adaptation

The alternate English adaptation (titled "Hymn to Love") that Cyndi Lauper released in 2003 was certainly not new at that time. For example, Corey Hart recorded that same version in the 90s.

Eddie Constantine is credited for this adaptation, which would mean that it dates back to the song's contemporaneous times. Unint (talk) 15:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, this is more complicated than I thought. "Hymn to Love" appears on at least three albums:

• Edith Piaf Tribute (1993), where it was performed by Corey Hart. This album included many completely new English adaptations of Piaf songs. Three unfamiliar people, who were not previously associated with Piaf, appear in the writing credits for many songs on this album: Claire Severac, Susanne Marie Edgren, and Isabella Dante. However, "Hymn to Love" was credited to Marguerite Monnot, Piaf, and Geoffrey Parsons on this album.
• At Last (2003), the Cyndi Lauper album. On this album, "Hymn to Love" was credited to Monnot and Eddie Constantine.
• The Very Best of Cyndi Lauper (2007). On this album, the very same version of "Hymn to Love" from 2003 was credited to Monnot, Piaf, and Edgren.

With three completely different attributions for the same song, I no longer know who was responsible for this adaptation. Does anyone have any insight into this? Unint (talk) 20:29, 18 September 2011 (UTC)