Talk:Enter Sandman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article. |
 |
Enter Sandman has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Click [show] for further details |
||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] older entries
Why no mention of the video? And why is the song interpretation written from a single point of view?
[edit] Any relation to...
Was "Enter Sandman" in any way related to the comic series Sandman? After all, the song was released in 1991, while the comic series was released in 1989, so it's possible the writer of the song may have read the comics. I mean, both the song and the comic deal with dreams, and Morpheus did say (ironically, dreams are more feared than death), while the song says that the "beast is in your head", and "we're off to never never land(the dreaming?"). Even if its just a coincidence, it's a pretty interesting one.4p0st13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.3.137 (talk) 00:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- It is natural that both lead with dreams because the Sandman" "is a character in popular Western folklore who brings good sleep and dreams by sprinkling magic sand onto the eyes of children", but I don't really think there's a relation there and if there is, it has never been mentioned as far as I know. Cheers--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 22:25, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
I just watched Logan's Run on dvd, and any enforcer who tracks down "runners" is called a "Sandman." 162.84.133.162 (talk) 17:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Motorhead
Was "Enter Sandman" written by Motorhead, or just covered? It has to be either because I know Motorhead DOES play this song.
Answer: If you don't know, and are unable to look up this most basic fact, you probably should not edit any Metallica or Motorhead information on Wikipedia.
[edit] "True meaning of the song"?
Shouldn't the "True meaning of the song" section be removed or heavily changed? That's about as non-encyclopedic and POV as I've seen here on Wikipedia...
[edit] Cleanup
I've requested a cleanup for this article, because it doesn't cite its sources, has no tracklisting, uses a weird infobox for a single and doesn't make use of paragraphs.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING(Я) 15:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
- Removed citation tag at the top of page, since most sections have citations added. Added a few citation tags to certain statements that still require verification Pnkrockr 15:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
and who gives a shit will sing the number 21 heavy metal song enter sandman in schoolwave 2007
[edit] Rammstein song ressemblance
I find Mein Herz Brennt ressembles this song a lot (They're both metal, they both talk about nightmares, specifically children's) so, could I add that? Misteryoshi 13:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- Are they similar musically in some way (I.E, similar riffs, tempo, vocals, structure, etc)? Heavy Metal has hundreds of subgenres, Rammstein being Industrial rock/metal, where Metallica is more Thrash/Traditional metal. Just because two bands fall under the giant umbrella of heavy metal doesn't mean they're exactly alike. Cronos12390 09:28, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- No, they aren't similar, at all. Both are metal (which, being a very broad genre, says nothing) and both revolve around nightmares (but in so totally different ways). That's about all they have in common.
[edit] Enter sandman
Enter sandman is one of the best songs ever written the song is awesome it is my fav. song
I LOVE METALLICA!!!!
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.107.104.93 (talk) 15:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC).
It is a great song, on of Metallica's best. I like Fade to Black, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.128.28 (talk) 20:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Mislabeled
I'm pretty sure Metallica isn't heavy metal, they are a thrash band. should someone change this?
Well, this is completely dependent upon which time period of Metallica's you're talking about. From Kill 'Em All to ...And Justice For All, they were a thrash metal band. The general consensus on the Black Album is that it was a straightforward heavy metal release. Considering this one is off the black album, they really should be referred to as heavy metal. Cronos12390 09:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Metallica is a member of the "Big Four", a group of the most influential Thrash Bands. Being such, I think that they should be labeled as a Thrash Metal band. All bands change their style slightly over the years, but it is commonly agreed upon that Metallica is still considered a thrash metal band. The song is written by the band thrash metal band Metallica. It doesn't really matter what "style" they WERE considered at that time. We're talking present tense here.
- Who are these people that still consider Metallica a thrash band? It's "commonly agreed upon" that Metallica is now a heavy metal band, and that's being generous considering it's the post "St.Anger" era. So, by your logic, if I have a band that plays death metal, then we start playing pop music, we should still be called a death metal band? Even on our pop releases? Metallica has not changed their style "slightly"... Listen to Load, then listen to Kill Em All, then listen to St.Anger, and you will have VERY different styles. So what if they were influential? We're talking about this particular work, at this particular point in time, so it doesn't matter. And I was TOTALLY unaware that Metallica WAS one of the big four of thrash. Oh, and please sign your comments with four tildes (~). Cronos12390 03:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
¨
[edit] Backmasking message
The refrain has been confirmed to be saying, "I am the snake, yeah the snake" by original research over and over, but that sentence is written in an unconfirming tone. Could someone change this?
Huh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.160.128.28 (talk) 20:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Virginia Tech
Under the reception section, could someone add a reference to Virginia Tech's use of "Enter Sandman." The Virginia Tech football team enters Lane Stadium to this song for every home game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.1.35.183 (talk) 02:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA pass
Very good article! If the lead is expanded a little bit then this has a chance of becoming featured. It meets all the criteria, well written, factually accurate, broad althought I would say pretty comprehensive, neutral, stable and media has correct rationales. Congratulations. T Rex | talk 05:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Copyedit
 |
This article, or a prior version of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors on 15:16, 20 February 2008 (UTC). The League is always in need of editors with a good grasp of English to review articles. Visit the Project page if you are interested in helping.
|
- Began with lead copyediting. Will work my way through the rest over the next 1-2 weeks. Leave comments here or at my talk page. Thanks! --Malachirality (talk) 01:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Hey, This song is also played as Tom Leykis introduces his show every single day on the Tom Leykis Show. The highest rated show in LA on FM Radio for men 18-34. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.180.224.245 (talk) 01:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Preliminary Issues
- I believe the "accolades" section should be trimmed to only the most respectable authorities on music and, more importantly, should be turned into prose. It would fit nicely as a paragraph in the release and reception section (perhaps following after the paragraph(s) on the critical reception?)
- Would also suggest longer quotations, perhaps of entire sentences (short, common, undistinctive phrases such as "the sound" do not need to be quoted).
--Malachirality (talk) 19:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- I see your point about the accolades section and I agree. About the second part, do you have any specific places where do you want exact and longer quotations for me to research in the sources?--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 16:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- For that second point, I just meant in general. Either paraphrase completely, or, if you feel a quote says something in a unique, powerful, or special way, then quote long phrases or entire sentences instead of fragments such as "the sound". If you have FA aspirations for this article, you might also want to take a look at the concerns being raised at this nom. --Malachirality (talk) 18:30, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Writing and Recording
- "Hetfield did not come up with...lyrics for a long time": specify either the duration of time or give a date when lyrics were written.
- "The producing team spent much time": do you have specifics?
- Should the info about lyrics be moved to the next section? or do they belong in the first section? --Malachirality (talk) 20:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- I can't specify the duration of time, because it were the band members themselves, Hetfield and Ulrich, who said the song did not have lyrics for a long time, but didn't mention how long it was. It was the first to be written and one of the last to have lyrics, that's what we know.
- Again, Randy Staub, the engineer said it was a "long time", but did not mention exactly how much.
- In my opinion, it should stay where it is, because that's about the writing part of the song as much as the "Hammett came up with the riff" thing is part of the writing of the song. The analysis to the lyrics and to the riff, that belongs to the next section, from my point of view.
- Going back to the DVD to check out something, I noticed Randy Staub talked a lot about getting a sound from the drums similar to a live concert and that was why they spent so much time with microphones and different combinations. I'll probably add a mention to that later. Very good job on the copy editing this part, thanks. I'll try to be as helpful as I can, if you want me to do more, or anything, just tell me. We're here to cooperate.--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 16:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Music and Lyrics
- The third paragraph deals almost exclusively with the opinions of various music critics. Thus, it needs to be reorganized into the next section. This will also let you avoid having to repeat critics' names and credentials.
- I believe minor scales have lowercase lettering; major scales have uppercase lettering (i. e. "F Major" and "e minor"). Is the "E chord (guitar)" a major or minor chord?
- Please review the diffs to make sure meaning and source attribution has been maintained.
Thanks --Malachirality (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Music Video
- I have skipped "Release and Reception" for the time being, to give you time to incorporate the "accolades" section into the "critical reception" paragraph.
- The Andrew Blackie quote is cited twice. While this is a problem, it is made worse by the fact that the quote appears in two different contexts and is thus quite confusing.
- Could this section as a whole be merged into another section? It is very short to justify its own section.
--Malachirality (talk) 06:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
I think I have addressed all the concerns you raised. About merging the Music video section into another... Well, I think the Music Video is notable enough to have its own section. However, it is indeed short. But, I also don't see where it would fit in another section. Unless you have a suggestion, I don't think it should be moved, but I'm open to hear your thoughts. If you want me to do anything else, just tell me. Thanks A LOT for your work.--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 13:35, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Can you address the first point in Music and Lyrics above? I strongly believe most of the third paragraph needs to be in the release and reception section. Only a few sentences that deal strictly with interpretation of the lyrics should stay. Everything else about opinions and criticism should be moved. --Malachirality (talk) 17:26, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Oh I'm sorry. I didn't think to check the article itself; you didn't leave a note here, so I thought you'd missed it or something. Sorry --Malachirality (talk) 18:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
-
-
Done
The biggest problem now is that there seems to be unintentional POV-pushing in the critical reception section. I noticed you took out one critic who talked about "sludgy riffs" and such. I think if criticism of the song exists in a reputable publication or critic somewhere, you need to include. Unless the song was truly universally praised (in which case you should say "universally acclaimed"), you need to show that you are at least trying to keep it neutral.
That said, it was a wonderful, fun, informative ce, and thanks a bunch for helping out. If you need a ce in the future, don't hesitate to drop me a note on my talk page. I'm gonna put this up for proofreading now, and the next step on your end would probably be to get a good peer review or A-class review. Good Luck! --Malachirality (talk) 19:27, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Great, thanks a lot for your help. I removed the "sludgy riffs" critic because it was the quote already mentioned in the music video section. Also, as a non-native speaker of English, I didn't perceive "sludgy riffs" as a critic but a description of the sound of the music and the guitars. At least that was how I saw it until now. ("“Enter Sandman” is given big-budget video treatment, combining flashing stills of the band performing with a narrative that suits the sludgy riffs and James Hetfield’s twisted lullaby lyric… though I didn’t really need to see a child almost getting run over by a truck.").
- I didn't find any criticism in the places I searched for reviews (by professionals), but I'll check for reviews in even more places now. Thank you so much for your help. If this gets to be featured, Wikipedia can thank you.--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 19:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Bill Hicks
Maybe it can be mentioned somewhere that Hicks used the song as entrance music, numerous times I believe. Or maybe it's not that important. I don't know, maybe I'm just too much of a Hicks-fan. :D Gocsa (talk) 13:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Utilization of variations of the E/B♭
I think this line is highly doubtful - the riff is E and A on the main beats, and B♭ is introduced only as a transfer from the first to the latter.
VZakharov (talk) 19:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
