Talk:Firework (song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Firework (song) 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

Katy Perry High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Katy Perry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Katy Perry 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.Katy PerryWikipedia:WikiProject Katy PerryTemplate:WikiProject Katy PerryKaty Perry
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

LGBTQ+ studies

This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
Explanation for inclusion in WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies: Perry dedicated it to the It Gets Better ProjectLGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies

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

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was: Not moved. Station1 (talk) 07:24, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firework (song) → Firework (Katy Perry song) — There are a number of other songs by notable artists with the name "Firework", "Fireworks" or some other variation of that word. Though Katy Perry might arguably be the 'most recent' artist to release a song under that name other artists such as Kelis and Drake have respectively released similar recordings, 4th of July (Fireworks) and Fireworks respectively. (see Fireworks (disambiguation)) -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 21:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Katy Perry is the only artist to have a song with the singular "Firework" on Wikipedia. Disambiguation is not needed when a hatnote could be added and it would be fine. Yves (talk) 21:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:PRECISION. As noted by Yves, the Katy Perry song is the only one with this exact title on Wikipedia. Further disambiguation is unnecessary. PC78 (talk) 00:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Moved: This song isn't released yet and doesn't have enough sufficent info to support the article. MacarangaChic (talk) 11:26, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments: Doesn't seem to be moved, and the article is about the song, not the single, so it's not correct to say it's not yet released. The information and illustration relating to the unreleased single are entirely appropriate, but the article is still about the song. No vote as yet. Andrewa (talk) 14:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Yves. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 19:12, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Erasure similarity

Would I be wrong in thinking that this song sounds terribly similar to 'Always' be Erasure? Just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.28.99.211 (talk) 11:29, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW - it is not uncommon for 2010s pop songs to lift melodic structure directly from 1980s songs, using a melodic reductive analysis.

The same can be said of the beginning of Katy Perry's "Firework" hook "You just gotta ignite the light and let it shine. Just own the night like the Fourth of July" ... which is identicle in structure and chord progression to Erasure's "Always" lyric, "When it's cold outside am I here in Vain? Hold on to the night, there will be no shame." - Davodd (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Charts

The song debuted at No. 20 on the European Hot 100! Please add that! source--79.216.169.74 (talk) 10:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More info for 'music video' section

- The 'square' mentioned in the music video description is the central courtyard of Buda castle in Budapest - Towards the end, Perry an other characters are seen running onto the Széchenyi bridge Towards the Buda side of the city. - Katy announced on twitter that the video would be dedicated to the 'It Gets Better' gay rights project —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.49.6 (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Changed Original Review in 'music video' section

-The original review was very, very poor quality.

-The original synopsis had extremely poor grammar -Also, it had extremely poor descriptions, and some of them were completely incorrect (i.e.'pulling out oversized clothes' from the young street magician's jacket and calling the terminally ill girl a boy, repeatedly. 174.252.135.227 (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2010 (UTC)Allen[reply]

Genre

Isn't the Genre of the song House and Dance Pop? If you listen to the bridge of the song's instrumental, you can get a vibe of house elements. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.110.76 (talk) 15:08, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but that is considered original research; all additions have to be made with a reliable source for verification on Wikipedia. Yves (talk) 19:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charts

The song jumped to No. 29 on the Billboard Hot 100! Please add that! source--79.216.169.74 (talk) 10:17, 04 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.216.197.244 (talk) [reply]

Done Yves (talk) 11:55, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshots

Hi, I would like to request for a screenshot of the music video where it shows Katy and the firework effect. I tink it looks great & the MV's magnificent. Mayb, the part near the ending? Thks :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.54.21.214 (talk) 10:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--86.135.19.67 (talk) 10:54, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Usage Section

Came here to confirm this had been used on 'Glee' and found nothing. Must have been used elsewhere as well by now. 76.95.33.253 (talk) 08:17, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Censored for British Television

Is there any source except a blog with hysterical reactions from users? I've seen it hundreds of times on British TV, and not once was it censored.62.31.36.128 (talk) 14:18, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This claim seems to now have picked up a source [1], but I have to agree, I've seen this video many times on different music channels in the UK, and I've never seen the kiss censored -- British TV just isn't that prudish. 109.144.131.183 (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Improving Certifications Section

If no one objects, I would like to change the certifications section to include sales and more information, as the sections of 'Candle in the Wind 1997', 'Believe' and 'Con te partirò' do. I promote doing this in light of the fact that 'Firework' is not included in the list of best selling singles in spite of the fact that its added certifications are more than 5 million. Mauri96 (talk) 18:37, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

The source says that the song has a "house beat" that means the song is house. Example: the song folk melody with a pop-rock beat, therefore the song would be folk and pop-rock, same thing applys here. Mainstream house music will always be the beat because of vocals in a song, usually making it dance-pop as well. Therefore house music should be listed as a genre.--(CA)Giacobbe (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily. Skin (Rihanna song) says ""Skin" contains elements of pop, dance-pop and dubstep", but the song is not listing pop, dance-pop and dubstep as the genres. If the song has a house beat is OK, but nothing says that house is the genre. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:42, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Slant Review

This article says: "The song received acclaim from critics. Slant Magazine stated that the song is "not an actively painful listen. Sure, the would-be inspirational lyrics ('Baby you're a firework/Come on show them what you're worth') are nonsensical, and the vocal lines, which sound like they were written for someone like Leona Lewis, are well beyond Perry's capabilities, but the chorus gains some momentum and the song would work well enough in a club setting that you could forgive its otherwise glaring weaknesses."

Does this really count as a reliable source, given that they obviously did not research the song at all? It makes no sense at all to say "the vocal lines, which sound like they were written for someone like Leona Lewis, are well beyond Perry's capabilities". First of all, if Slant did any research at all, they would know that Katy Perry herself wrote this song, so she obviously would write it within her abilities. The article implies that somebody else wrote it, intending it for another artist, but that was clearly wrong. Secondly, Katy sings this song beautifully live, so it is clearly within her capabilities. Thirdly, stating that Leona Lewis is a better singer than Katy Perry is clearly an opinion, and does not belong on Wikipedia. Fourthly, why do you say that the song received critical acclaim, and then immediately focus on a mostly negative review, especially one that clearly doesn't have a clue about the song. I would delete it myself, but I don't want to be accused of edit warring. Mitsguy2001 (talk) 05:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing each point.....

Slant is considered reliable per WP:ALBUM/SOURCES
That is merely the critic's opinion
Same as previous
While critic opinions should be included, the detail on Lewis isn't really needed. The quote used is rather lengthy right now.
The article does need work, expansion, and rearranging. However, that is not by itself a reason to remove a review.

Hope this helped. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How can it be a reliable source when it clearly did not research the fact that Katy herself wrote the song, and implied that it was written by somebody else? There are many, many reliable sources that say Katy wrote this song (with others), so an article that implies otherwise is very clearly wrong. Even if Slant is normally a reliable source, they clearly made a (probably good faith) mistake on this one. Since you seem to be ok with removing the reference to Leona Lewis, I will remove the portion of the quote that is completely nonsensical and assumes that Katy did not write the song, although I will leave the rest of the criticism in, since it at least is reasonable, even if just opinion. But what still makes no sense is, if the purpose of that paragraph is to say that this song received critical acclaim (as it should), then why do you immediately start with a negative review? Wouldn't it make more sense to start off with the positive reviews, and then mention this one, saying that despite the mostly positive reviews, some sources gave negative reviews, and then list the Slate review (minus the nonsense about Leona Lewis)? Alternatively, you could say that the song received mixed reviews, but that would be less preferable, sine most reviews of the song were positive, and you can say that every song in existence gets mixed reviews, since every song gets both positive and negative reviews. Mitsguy2001 (talk) 05:39, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna search for more reviews to add and edit the article accordingly (which will include rearrangements), so we'll see how that goes. Snuggums (talk / edits) 06:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Firework (song). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120915084445/http://www.ukchartsplus.co.uk/UKChartsPlusYE2011.pdf to http://www.ukchartsplus.co.uk/UKChartsPlusYE2011.pdf

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:07, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JonTron's cover

On February 15, 2016, Brainulator9 added information on the cover released by Jon Jafari, also known as JonTron on YouTube. Two days later, I had added onto this bullet point. In less than an hour, this was removed The following week, someone or some people re-added the information, but was removed less than 10 minutes later, twice in a row within two days.

According to the users who have removed it, the reason for removing it is that it is not according due to WP:COVERSONG, or considered "unsourced and unnecessary."

I don't agree that JonTron's rendition is considered unnecessary, and I would consider it as a notable cover. At the time of writing this, the has reached over 3.1 million views, in less than 2 weeks.

I would like to open this topic for discussion, and as a community, make a final decision as to whether JonTron's cover should be kept noted on this Wikipedia page, or not. Gschadha7007 (talk) 03:51, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

View count does not by itself make a cover worthy of inclusion. The cover would have to be discussed within a reliable non-YouTube reference to be worth included. The YouTube link itself isn't sufficient either; using that would basically just be self-promotion. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Firework (song). 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) 01:22, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Firework (song). 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) 17:02, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2017

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change to a billon of views, since it surpassed that aim. Thank you.

--190.159.239.204 (talk) 22:25, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done it hasn't reached 1B yet. The count (at the time of this comment) is 998.994 million. Wait until it actually reaches the mark and don't jump the gun. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I return and insist: Change to a billon of views, since it surpassed that aim. --190.159.239.204 (talk) 20:37, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No; it still hasn't reached that total with 999.927 million views (at the moment). Please be patient and wait until it truly reaches a billion views. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:21, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK now it has reached a billion and that has been implemented into the article. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Firework (song). 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) 08:39, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sales and certification

Firework is 11xplatinum in US Rehanxidrisix (talk) 04:43, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for that? Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]