Talk:I Heard It Through the Grapevine

	I Heard It Through the Grapevine 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 October 5, 2012 Good article nominee Listed

This  level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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 R&B and Soul Music High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles 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.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

I've cleaned up the section on the Isley Brothers rumored recording. The only source that actually explains the issue in depth (instead of just stating that the Isley Brothers did or didn't record the song) is a post on Joel Francis's blog The Daily Record. Although Wikipedia:Verifiability generally prohibits the use of self-published sources, it states that such sources may be "acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications". Since Joel Francis was previously a music writer for the Kansas City Star, it seems he would qualify for this exemption. I would suggest we use his blog as a source for the issue until a more reliable account emerges. Kaldari (talk) 17:30, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:I Heard It Through the Grapevine/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 09:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Ok, overall very nice. Here are a few nitpicks:

• Not so tragic, but perhaps "and made famous in a Marvin Gaye version released as a single in October 1968 on Motown's Tamla label." Kürbis

Done. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You use the word "version" a lot in the lead alone. Kürbis

Lordy there were a lot of versions, weren't there! And a good number of recordings as well. Adjusted. See what you think. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:46, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Sometimes you use semicolons incorrectly. For example, "; with a slightly different take," is not an independent clause, nor is there a conjunction in between. I replaced some I found unnecessary with a comma.Kürbis

Thanks for doing that. I've checked through, and the existing semicolons seem fine. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 11:51, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Isn't "though" placed at the end of a sentence? I replaced "; though," with "however Kürbis

Thanks. I've looked through and the existing "though"s seem ok. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 12:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Why is "psychedelic soul" in quotation marks? Kürbis

I have no particular preference for doing it that way - I'm just following what I saw - as in the article on the album in question: Cloud Nine (The Temptations album), and in sources which discuss it: [1], [2], [3]. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 12:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "with the comment that Whitfield had recorded the song with a number of artists with different arrangements, and that with Marvin Gaye he had a "golden idea" when he set the song "in a slower, more mysterious tempo".[22]" - too many "with" Kürbis

Amended. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 12:33, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• "about the death of their college friend, and then travels to his funeral; the song serving in an extradiegetic fashion to both unite the main characters' friendship and to locate it nostalgically for the viewer.[31][32][33]" - I changed this to "about the death of their college friend, and then travels to his funeral; the song serves in an extradiegetic fashion to both unite the main characters' friendship and to locate it nostalgically for the viewer.[31][32][33]" because "the song serving..." is not an independent clause. --Kürbis (✔) 10:25, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 12:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Pass Meets the criteria. Regards.--Kürbis (✔) 17:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on I Heard It Through the Grapevine. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for //www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/500songs
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/6595925/i_heard_it_through_the_grapevine

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:11, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on I Heard It Through the Grapevine. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://joelfrancis.com/2009/09/09/gladys-knight-and-the-pips-%E2%80%93-%E2%80%9Ci-heard-it-through-the-grapevine%E2%80%9D/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/500songs
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130703012738/http://www.infodisc.fr/Bilan_G.php to http://www.infodisc.fr/Bilan_G.php
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5hFf8iFDu?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishcharts.ie%2Fsearch%2Fplacement to http://www.irishcharts.ie/search/placement

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) 07:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to his article, Joe Messina played guitar for most of the Motown artists of late-1960s (including Marvin Gaye) so I've edited the personnel list to include Messina on guitar. Of course, I know that other Wikipedia articles can't be used as sources, per WP:CIRCULAR and WP:WINARS, and so if my edit is reverted, I understand.--2601:153:800:8308:3813:9EF8:FA5A:C703 (talk) 22:22, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can we classify Gaye's version as psychedelic soul? The Mo-Ja'al (talk) 19:32, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to what source? DonIago (talk) 22:31, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to Berry Gordy speaking on Hitsville: the making of Motown" the song was first recorded by Marvin Gaye but Gordy refused to allow the single to be released until after the Gladys Knight version had reached no 1 31.185.168.21 (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It strikes me as strange that a relatively unrelated track like "Grapevine" by Tiësto has its own paragraph, complete with infobox and categories?

As far as I can see, it uses some samples and that's it. I would suggest that it either just has a short mention in "Other versions" or that it is split out to its own article. Seeking input from User:Aspects and User:Unistra. Regards KnudW (talk) 08:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering about that as well. Maybe a mention that the track uses samples (with appropriate sourcing), but an infobox and categories? DonIago (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While the article states that the track uses a sample of the song, the sample is all that is used throughout the song over and over, plus with the lyrics being a line from the song used over and over, makes this a version of the song and not an entirely new song using a sample as part with other new parts added to the song. Therefore, with it being a notable cover version of the original that would pass WP:NSONGS, it should have its own section like it currently does. Aspects (talk) 21:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia editor who handled the section on the expression "heard it through the grapevine" implies that the expression is only associated with enslaved people (and most likely originated with this particular group). I obtained a copy of the source that this editor cited for the relevant sentences -- a book titled _America in So Many Words: Words That Have Shaped America_. Following is the section on that book on the expression "heard it from the grapevine":

"But it was the likeness—and unlikeness—of grapevines to telegraph wires that inspired the modern use of grapevine to refer to the means by which unofficial news and rumors are spread. In contrast to the straight copper wire of the telegraph, a grapevine is gnarled and twisted. So the grapevine telegraph, as it was originally called, was also gnarled. Like Morse's telegraph, it was speedy and carried news, but unlike the Morse telegraph, it operated privately and by word of mouth. Public and official news zipped

"Like Morse's telegraph, it was speedy and carried news, but unlike the Morse telegraph, it operated privately and by word of mouth. Public and official news zipped along the telegraph wires; nearly as quickly went the person ­to ­person reports of the grapevine.

Since the grapevine was clandestine, we do not know when it was first used, but the late 1840s is a safe guess. There is a printed report in 1852 declaring, "By the Grape Vine Telegraph Line... we have received the following."

In Up from Slavery (1901), Booker T. Washington marvels at how rapidly slaves in the South got news about the abolition movement, Lincoln's campaign for the presidency, and the Civil War through the "grape­vine telegraph."

Coming from unofficial and often unknown sources, news on the grapevine was properly viewed with skepticism. Soldiers in the Civil War used grapevine to mean "gossip" and rumor," news that was not to be trusted.

Around the same time, out in California, grapevine telegraph meant "a BOGUS (1797) or tardy source of information." A newspaper that suspected a rival publication of inventing fictitious reports would accuse it of using the grapevine telegraph instead of the real thing.

The telegraph now is in disuse, but in this era of instant electronic communication, the grapevine is stronger than ever, efficiently circulating news, gossip, and rumor in an organization or community outside of official channels."

The Booker T. Washington reference is undoubtedly what the Wikipedia editor was thinking of when (s)he made her/his edits, and I have no objection to that reference being included in this article. However, the verbiage needs to be improved to not lead to a false impression that this phrase was used only by enslaved people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.15.238.176 (talk) 19:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SOFIXIT? DonIago (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]