Talk:Closer (The Chainsmokers song)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Correction

This is not the first song with Andrew on vocals, as the first paragraph states. He sang backup vocals in "Roses" and you can see him talk about this in the Youtube video "The Track: The Chainsmokers on making roses" where Andrew talks about his vocals. If you want to state that this is the first song where he sang LEAD vocals, then you may be correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.123.223.157 (talk) 16:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Roses (The Chainsmokers song) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

"EDM"

I don't think EDM shouldn't be used as a genre here, because the Wikipedia article defines EDM as:

Electronic dance music [...] is a broad range of percussive electronic music genres made largely for nightclubs, raves, and festivals. [...] Despite the industry's attempt to create a specific EDM brand, the initialism remains in use as an umbrella term for multiple genres, including house, techno, trance, drum and bass, dubstep, and their respective subgenres.

So I think we should be able to find sources that define a specific genre for this song and other of the Chainsmokers' songs, instead of just simply categorizing them as "EDM", which is an umbrella term for actual electronic music genres.

Tjdrum2000 (talk) 14:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Closer (The Chainsmokers 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/20170226192005/http://national-report.com/nacionalColombia.php to http://national-report.com/nacionalColombia.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161228174302/http://oe3.orf.at/charts/stories/2749413/ to http://oe3.orf.at/charts/stories/2749413/

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) 07:55, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Why the Odyssey article doesn't support "Closer" being electropop

I think it is best to first repeat the relevant text here:

“ Halsey along with The Chainsmokers are new, fresh faces to the music industry. They’ve both individually brought very unique music up to the radio surface such as a little bit of angsty indie pop from Halsey, to the upbeat electro-pop that The Chainsmokers bring to the table. When you bring these two things together it results in the vibe consisting of teenage angst, pop, and dance- something every teenager can relate and want to dance to. ” — Madison Appleby, The Chainsmokers Collaborate with Halsey to Give Us "Closer"

A key factor (and in this case, the relevant factor) in determining whether a source supports a musical work being of a certain genre is whether it is explicitly stating the work to be of that genre; describing abstract elements ("feel", "mood", "edge"); parts that do not comprise its entirety (rhythm, chorus, break); using adjectival forms ("bluesy", "funky", "jazzy"); or other non-definitive wording ("influenced by", "has elements of", "-inspired") are all non-satisfactory in this respect.

With this in mind, is this text sufficiently explicit in calling the song electropop? In the first two sentences, the author is clearly describing the music styles of the individual artists and not the song itself. If the third sentence is taken to mean that these terms apply to the song as well (a position I wouldn't necessarily disagree with), those terms (the Chainsmokers' electropop and Halsey's indie pop) are said to be no more than influences that combine to create the song's "vibe". This "vibe", I argue, falls under the aforementioned "abstract elements" category and is therefore not definitive enough to support "Closer" being an electropop song; if a source stated that a song had a "post-disco vibe", I doubt a reasonable person would consider that to be equivalent to the source directly calling the song post-disco.

Even if nothing in this argument holds up and it is deemed that the author is explicitly calling the song electropop, it is still the case that she describes indie pop similarly in relation to the song, meaning that both genres would have to be listed. LifeofTau 14:00, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Hot 100 removal info missing

Can't we place info that the song spent 52 weeks on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, leaving on August 12, 2017, making the song absent for the first time since August 13, 2016. Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 19:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Lyric vs Music

why Lyric video has more views than Music video? there should be explanation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.54.84.147 (talk) 11:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "Closer (The Chainsmokers song)"?

Their name is official "The Chainsmokers", not just "Chainsmokers". The other Chainsmokers songs all have "The" in the article title. Nikki Lee 1999 (talk) 18:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 31 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist (talk) | Americans, unite 10:09, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

---

Closer (Chainsmokers song) → Closer (The Chainsmokers song) – The duo's name is "The Chainsmokers" not "Chainsmokers". In Talk:Roses (The Chainsmokers song)#Requested move 23 April 2017, there was no consensus to remove the "The" from the Chainsmokers song titles. Also in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Music/Archive 8#RfC: using "The" in song/album article titles, there was no consensus to remove "The" in song titles. CountyCountry (talk) 19:46, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Interstellarity (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

This should be discussed before making a move. Interstellarity (talk) 14:52, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support... I don't think this should have been contested. The original move was based on an RFC decision that has since been overturned. Per WP:CONSISTENCY the DAB should be reverted to "The Chainsmokers" Nohomersryan (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:CONCISE. See also Category:The_Beatles_songs. -- Calidum 18:36, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Also Category:The Rolling Stones songs as well, but if you look at Category:The Chainsmokers songs, you'll see that basically all of those that have disambiguation include "The". We should either rename this one or rename all those other ones – there are about 18 of them. — BarrelProof (talk) 01:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
• Support. Disambiguation follows the name of the subject, that makes it easier for both readers and other editors to find related topics. As long as the article is listed at The Chainsmokers, that should be the disambiguation. This is WP:CONSISTENT with Roses (The Chainsmokers song), Until You Were Gone (The Chainsmokers and Tritonal song), New York City (The Chainsmokers song), Don't Let Me Down (The Chainsmokers song), Inside Out (The Chainsmokers song), Paris (The Chainsmokers song) and The One (The Chainsmokers song). It should also be noted that this page was moved by User:Sir Joseph following an invalid technical request, which they should have checked before moving, seeing as how this page was listed at this RM where resulted in a consensus to not move the names. As such the title should be resorted to the previous title.--Gonnym (talk) 12:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
• Support per WP:CONSISTENT. Hayman30 (talk) 12:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
• Support + Save Yourself (Chainsmokers song) -> Save Yourself (The Chainsmokers song), per consistency. We should also start to reconsider the (Beatles x) until there is a consistent consensus to drop the "The"s. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:04, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
• Support unless the other articles in Category:The Chainsmokers songs are renamed to be consistent with this one: I note that all other disambiguated articles about songs by the Chainsmokers include "The", except Save Yourself (Chainsmokers song), for which there was an undiscussed removal of "The" one week ago (after this discussion started). I think we should at least have consistency among songs of a particular band, if not an agreement that generally applies across different bands. At the moment we do not seem to have a consensus that applies across different bands. In September of last year, we had such an agreement, but it has evaporated. The lack of such an agreement is not an agreement that "The" should be included in everything, but there should be consistency for the Chainsmokers. The situation for the Rolling Stones and the Beatles is clearly very different – the articles about their songs do not include "The", with one exception (see the RM that I just opened at Talk:Scarlet (The Rolling Stones song)). — BarrelProof (talk) 21:40, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Red Rover sample

This song is pretty clearly based around the rhythm of the children's game red rover (even using a cars name to further lampshade this). Why isn't this mentioned in the article? James (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Is this recorded in 2016 or 2015?

Heelo, when is this song recorded? 2016 or 2015? I would like to know that. Thanks a million Rudik1991 (talk) 20:43, 3 April 2022 (UTC)