Talk:Can't Be Tamed (song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Can't Be Tamed (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

Can't Be Tamed (song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 22, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

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

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Miley Cyrus High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Miley Cyrus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Miley Cyrus 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.Miley CyrusWikipedia:WikiProject Miley CyrusTemplate:WikiProject Miley CyrusMiley Cyrus articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electronic music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Genre war free zone

Genres are usually the subject of heavy debate and constant reversions/edit warring. However, genre warriors and over-opinionated contributors can be diminished by following one simple rule: like every other contribution on Wikipedia, material must be published in secondary sources. As subjective as genres are, they must be sourced by reliable secondary sources in accordance with WP:RS. Unsourced genres will simply be removed. I hope fellow editors who agree will help. –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 07:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly any genres on Wikipedia are sourced. It's rather obvious that Cyrus is a pop singer and the song doesn't seem to be edging to the pop rock and country genres she's been trying lately. I'll narrow it down to pop, which is a pretty generic term, until some sources come out. –Chase (talk) 20:22, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for some odd reason, genres seem to have escaped the whole point behind Wikipedia: it is a tertiary source meant to report what's already been reported, nothing else. Someone's opinion of what a genre is could be construed as WP:OR and certainly WP:OPINION. According to WP:GENRE, genres not cited need to be tagged {{citation needed}}. Genres are completely subjective, and they're the source of the most edit warring I see on this site, but the rules must be followed — unsourced genres are removed, genres referenced by reliable sources can be kept. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 20:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm not saying I agree with the original research. But sadly, as much as it defies Wiki's purpose, it is everywhere and genres - sourced or not - are simply a staple of music articles and therefore I don't think they should be outright removed. Narrowing it down to root genres like pop isn't original research IMO, especially when it's obvious from listening that it's a pop song and Cyrus is known by many to make primarily pop music. However, for more specific genres like electropop, those would definitely need a source. –Chase (talk) 20:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That works fine for me. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:11, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen genre's directly sourced, even on the best articles. I thought refs weren't supposed to be in the infobox anyway. Well, its common sense to know the song is pop, and since a reliable source says it relies heavily on synths, then what is the problem with calling it synthpop? Candyo32 (talk) 19:42, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Refs are not preferred in the infobox but they can be; either way, who said that for these genres to be sourced, they had to be? Using a source that says it uses synths to source synthpop is a violation of WP:SYNTH. –Chase (talk) 20:18, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think they have to be directly somewhere in the prose, because im working on a GA and that's what I was told. Candyo32 (talk) 23:20, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cover

I might be wrong or just speculating here, but how do we know the cover is not fake? It looks O.K. but I have not seen any website with it. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 20:50, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I've read in several sources that no one knows if it's not a fake or not. But I haven't read any confirmation on it being legitimate or not. The moment I'm informed that it's fake, I can speedily delete the file (as author). I do question its authenticity simply because the official Hollywood Records upload of the song on YouTube does not show the cover. But the font stylization matches the MySpace artwork to some degree (I haven't exactly analyzed the grunge patches or anything). I did spend some time yesterday looking for girls in cages/birdcages that may be the source of Miley's "image" and though I found plenty of eye-opening things, nothing matched the cover image. Finally, and this may be breaking some guideline or policy, I figure the moment the image is taken down, someone else will put it right back up. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 20:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, the only official source providing a cover is Cyrus' myspace, which shows her name and the title in gold against a black background (she's not featured in the cover). Therefore, the one we have uploaded right now is likely a fake. I can't find the actual cover on any website though, I can't access her myspace pictures to see if it's perhaps there, and you can't copy and paste from the music player. –Chase (talk) 20:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The music player only shows a black background. I will remove the image immediately and until any image comes along with a more verifiable status, then it can be re-uploaded. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This picture, more likely than not the single cover, is Cyrus' default picture on myspace. We should use an official source like this instead of a random tween blog. –Chase (talk) 21:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Thanks for doing that. Btw, quick explanation: if you click on the image file, it shows I uploaded the same image you did, only two minutes later. This is because my cache (or Wikipedia) showed your replacement image as the birdcage image. So sorry about that. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:09, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New cover is confirmed, the one with Miley in the cage with "Miley Cyrus" logo on the upper left and "Can't Be Tamed" on the low right. It is official! I'm finding a trusted source to prove it. Or just wait til May 18, the cover will be shown on iTunes. Here it is: click! Josh (talk) 04:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cyrus's vs Cyrus'

For the record, I was being consistent with the main Miley Cyrus article in terms of using Cyrus's... that was the style discussed on the talk page and consensus was reached to use the s's. Looking at the article now, it looks like someone went through and reverted all of the s's to s'. I like the articles I work on to be grammatically correct, so I'd love to hear what other editors have to say. Consistency with other articles obviously is nice, but the only reason there wasn't consistency in the first place is because I never went through every Miley-related article to make changes. Anyway, either way works for me, but I'd like to read what others have to say. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, according to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Possessives, either way is acceptable, but the rules are in favor of the extra 's: one, because it's normal and originally grammatically correct, and two, because Cyrus's is pronounced with an extra s sound. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think whatever works for me and for many people OAVJunior (talk) 15:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, both s' and s's is being used throughout the article, sooooo I'm going to change them all to s's. Revert my changes if no one's happy :) – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 06:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Music video details are too general

You don't really need to go into the whole detail of the music video like describing what she's wearing and what she does in the whole music video. Just summarise it up. Blueknightex (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is summarized and detail is good. It describes everything needed without adding too much. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 01:04, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but you don't need to desribe what she's wearing completely. Blueknightex (talk) 10:46, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was too long when you made your first comment and you shortened it appropriately, but I think brief descriptions of her costumes are worth mentioning. If these were simple costumes, like a t-shirt and jeans, I'd agree with you, but they're fairly complex and have been discussed in the media. liquidluck✽talk 14:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UK Release

Please can you add a Release History box, and note that the UK Release is different as it is June 14 http://www.radio1.gr/music/forthcoming_uk_singles.htm: and look under June 14th —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.35.244 (talk) 16:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, since a release history is just a list that will never be completed. There is no way to list every single country the song was released to and the first date suffices for the infobox. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 23:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, but many other countries will use their language Wikipedia, so this version only needs UK, USA, Canada and Australia really. And the UK is a big market. Nearly all other song pages have a release history and it would look silly for this page not to —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.35.244 (talk) 17:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, a lot of the song articles you are speaking of are stubclass, unsourced material and this shouldn't follow that example. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 03:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Allaboutmusic, 8 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} One songwriter's name is spelled incorrectly. Please change "Marek Pompetzi" to "Marek Pompetzki" throughout the page (missing letter "k"). source: http://www.waves.com/content.aspx?id=10654 i also know the songwriter personally.

Thank you!

Allaboutmusic (talk) 09:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Favonian (talk) 11:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wnba Promotion

Some in the article it should be noted. --Cooly123 21:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

Review

a new review for single: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/singlesreviews/a222622/miley-cyrus-cant-be-tamed.html "'Can't Be Tamed', the title track from her upcoming third album, is a Britney-style robopop stomper with a brain-invading chorus, beats that won't take no for an answer and enough attitude to give Billy Ray a coronary. "If you try to hold me back I might explode," she sings at one point. Given what her CV already looks like at the age of 17 – seventeen! - something tells us that's no idle threat." http://www.billboard.com/new-releases/miley-cyrus-can-t-be-tamed-1004097586.story "kept controversy at a safe distance from her music in the past, but on "Can't Be Tamed," the 17-year-old officially declares herself a wild child and absolvers herself of tween role-model responsibilities ("If there was a question about my intentions, I'll tell ya/I'm not here to sell ya"). The under-three-minute track revs up with piercing synths that scream "edgy," while Cyrus shouts, "I can't be tamed! I can't be changed!" over a grating death-march of a chorus. The angst could be construed as forced-not to mention questionable, since Cyrus' big 2009 hits, "Party in the U.S.A." and "The Climb," were full of fizzy poptimism and hum-along melodies. But Cyrus knows how to proffer her sass. When she sneers, "I'm not a fake, it's in my DNA," in pre-emptive retaliation against her critics, she does it with the professionalism of a Disney-groomed star.-Monica Herrera" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noxpack (talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Can't Be Tamed (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very good job, not many things to fix at all:

Throughout the article you use "Cyrus's", apostrophes after words ending in 's' don't need another 's' - ie just write "Cyrus'"

Background

Source for writers/producers?

Done CD added. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 21:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

"...that always helps.", McAlpine concluded. - remove full stop

Done

Link 'Disney'

Done

Music video

Link 'choreographed'

Done

"she didn't want them to wear scales and look too fish-like or too wear bird feet and look too scary." - rewrite

Done

why do you link 'avis' (esp to a non-existent page)?

Done

'Video reception' section should simply be 'Reception'

Done

Track listings

Sources?

Many GAs and FAs don't have sources for the track listings. I don't think this should be an exception. Do you really, really want it? -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 21:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. It doesn't detract anything from the article. I'll let it slide, but I strongly recommend that you add cites. Adabow (talk · contribs) 00:25, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stability

There seems to be a bit of IP vandalism. Have you thought about requesting semi-protection?

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. per WP:GA? vandalism is not a GA impediment. Tbhotch^Talk ^C. 04:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, just a suggestion... Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media

File:Miley cyrus cant be tamed single.ogg needs to be reduced in quality

I'll place the review on hold now. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the track listing sources, everything has been addressed, so I am happy to pass it now. Adabow (talk · contribs) 00:26, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Can't Be Tamed (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:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/64wvbyh3C?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aria.com.au%2Fpages%2Fhttpwww.aria.com.auaccreds2010.htm to http://www.aria.com.au/pages/httpwww.aria.com.auaccreds2010.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090823042730/http://irish-charts.com:80/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Miley+Cyrus to http://irish-charts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Miley+Cyrus
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mileycyrus.com/2010/04/29/mileys-new-music-video-“can’t-be-tamed”/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.myfoxchattanooga.com/dpps/entertainment/miley-cyrus-can't-be-tamed-video-hannah-montana-dpgoha-20100506-fc_7405014

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) 20:39, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Can't Be Tamed (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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100503111742/http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/oh_crap_like_another_miley_cyrus_ZO5cBC9gi2MEvbBxitRQsN to http://www.nypost.com/p/blogs/popwrap/oh_crap_like_another_miley_cyrus_ZO5cBC9gi2MEvbBxitRQsN
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.aria.com.au/pages/httpwww.aria.com.auaccreds2010.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://irish-charts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Miley%20Cyrus
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mileycyrus.com/2010/04/29/mileys-new-music-video-%E2%80%9Ccan%E2%80%99t-be-tamed%E2%80%9D/
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2010/05/04/1111134/miley-cyrus-can%27t-be-tamed-video.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://en.terra.com/music/pictures/miley_cyrus_private_concert_in_paris/44461

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) 16:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]