Talk:Hokey Pokey

Popular Culture

Probably not so important, but in "The League of Gentlemen" one of the main characters (Pauline) uses this as a catch-phrase: "Hokey-Cokey Pig in a Pokey!". But I'm not sure, if this is worth mentioning. Anyhow, thought I'd add this (here in Talk). Cheers. --31.18.22.126 (talk) 12:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Lyrics

1) It goes : "You put your left leg in, You pull your left leg out... " The lyrics on this page use 'put' for both instances.

2)The line is "You do the Hokey Pokey and you turn yourself around..." The lyrics in this page do not mention the 'yourself'.

Does anyone agree or disagree with me? This is how I remember it. I am 24 and grew up in Southern California in the 1980s. --Jon in California 7 September 2007

- to add to that, in UK the chorus goes "Oh hokey cokey cokey x3" the h usually isn't pronounced either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.98.149.237 (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Structure

Should the section British Isles be put ahead of the section on the US, as it earlier, and the point of origination? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.122.185 (talk) 13:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

speculations

Please see the material at Talk:Larry LaPrise --Roland2 09:29, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've seen this material circulating in the internet earlier. Interesting speculations that look pretty credible, but not without contradictions and unanswered questions. IMO too early to put the stuff into encyclopedia. Mikkalai 18:17, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hokey Pokey

Your article about Hokey Pokey is about the song and dance. I have seen (I can't remember where)a dictionary with Hokey Pokey explained as 'a street ice cream vendor' simular to the 'Good Humor Man'. When I was little (in the mid 30s) the man who can in a horse drawn cart with ice cream for sale was called "Mr. Hokey Pokey".

Lukle Keeler lukekeeler@earthlink.net

Did you grow up in New Zealand? That's the only place I can find where the term was used. (I added that information to the article.) Rick Boatright 02:10, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

+++ The Hokey Cokey +++

With all the sadness and trauma going on in the world at the moment, it is worth reflecting on the death of a very important person, which almost went unnoticed last week. Larry LaPrise, the man that wrote "The Hokey Cokey" died peacefully at the age of 93. The most traumatic part for his family was getting him into the coffin. They put his left leg in. And then the trouble started…

Cokey or Pokey?

I'm suprsied "the hokey cokey" redirects to "the hokey pokey", it should be the other way round. "The Hokey Cokey" is the origanal and the article should be named accordingly starting with it's beginnings then going on to explain the US version. 74.65.39.59 00:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

That's just what I was thinking Jooler 22:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I'm a Brit. This is the Hokey Cokey! Also it seems that the first words of the Latin Catholic Mass, ""Hoc est enim corpus meum" is quite persuasive. To a child, the ritual might seem like a dance. In which case, "cokey" (from "corpus") might be more likely to predate "pokey". Maybe. --Timtak 01:28, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

A quick look at the back issues of The Times shows a reference (The Times, Saturday, May 18, 1946; pg. 4) to Servicemen and Women doing the "hokey cokey" at a show attended by Queen Mary et al. I'm pretty sure I've probably seen it in films (probably George Formby) from earlier. Jooler 22:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, someone change it then! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.167.235.136 (talk) 03:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC).

Need more definite information - but see http://www.icons.org.uk/nom/nominations/the-hokey-cokey Jooler 03:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

And - http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:hm821vy5zzua~T1 Jooler 04:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The discussion here http://our-community.org.uk/index.php?showtopic=2388&st=192 indicates that it was first mentioned in the Dancing Times in 1943 Jooler 04:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Reference to the Dancing Times and also Jimmy Kennedy, incl scan of the sheet music, tantalisingly undated... Here. I've sent the poster of that scan an email, see if he can help out. Hakluyt bean 19:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Scan added :) Hakluyt bean 02:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

It is the Hokey Pokey, the Brits are crazy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.244.236.20 (talk) 22:40, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the article title should be "Hokey Pokey" as that is what it is called in the vast majority of the world, whereas the only place where it is called "Hokey Cokey" seems to be England. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.6.113 (talk) 05:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

this is a flawed argument: it is a british folk song originally, thus the common name for it in britain should be the name used regardless of popularity. if wikipedia had no redirection functionality, this argument would perhaps hold more weight, but seeing as though there IS redirects... 2A02:C7E:295A:2D00:1405:FC60:874C:754B (talk) 08:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

The earliest references to the "dance craze" in Scottish newspapers in January 1942 refer to it as the "Cokey Cokey" (based on free searches for snippet results on the British Newspaper Archive). "Hokey Pokey" appears in British newspapers as early as October 2, 1942. "Hokey Cokey" as early as October 30, 1942. So, to the extent it matters, the "REAL" original name of the dance is "Cokey Cokey." But since people were and had been familiar with the expression "Hokey Pokey" for a long time, it naturally supplanted the new term, although the second "Cokey" was preserved in Britain where the craze started. When introduced in the United States by early 1943, it was referred to as the "Hokey Pokey."§Svaihingen (talk) 19:04, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

150++ times "see also"

Why does this article contain more than 150 identical "See also" sections? Yesterday I removed all of them but one, because I thought this to be an accident of the author while using "strg-v" (see the 'v' after the last "See also" section). However, Mer-C removed my changes. Now I am quite curious what this is all about. -- 134.106.41.20 07:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC) dooya

Looks like vandalism to me, but could be an error in some code or something. I'll contact Mer-C if you haven't. Skittle 12:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Anon who added it was vandalising. Mer-C just made a mistake. Skittle 14:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

New headings

Put U.S. and Brit origins under separate headings. Seems clearer imo, but feel free to disagree. Arising from that, could one say hokey pokey is just a commercial version of a traditional song - hokey cokey. That way it's maybe not a U.S./Brit thing but a commercialism/traditional thing(?) Hakluyt bean 18:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hokey_Cokey#Copyright , was: "Who owns the rights for the hokey pokey?"

just wondering... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.161.198.49 Revision as of 09:08, 5 July 2007

I also want to know that. Specifically is there a separate copyright for the lyrics and a separate for the melody? In Greece there is a song, "Hokey Pokey" but it's using different lyrics (although very similar) and I don't know if they had to pay royalties to any artist in the U.S.A. For the moment it is mentioned in the article that it is not legal for "Hokey Cokey" to be copyrighted inside the United Kingdom. Maybe I could spend some time to sing it, and then add it to the article. Logictheo (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

ice cream

"In the United States the term hokey pokey previously and separately was a generic term for street vendor's ice cream in the 19th and early 20th centuries."

This has been deleted with the tag 'not just in the U.S.'. That is indeed so, but the sentence was intended as a comment on the U.S. title of the song, ie the change from Hokey Cokey. Maybe editing to "In the United States (and elsewhere)...." would have covered the objection. Hakluyt bean 01:24, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The world isn't centred on the US as 'US (and elsewhere)' would suggest. I'm not even sure if "hokey pokey" actually applies to the US at all. I've seen references to it in British Victorian literature. As an aside I believe this article should properly be moved to Hokey Cokey. Jooler 01:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I think we're at cross-purposes except for your last line which I agree with completely. Hakluyt bean 11:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Cokey Cokey (Jimmy Kennedy).jpg

Image:The Cokey Cokey (Jimmy Kennedy).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 20:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded that image back in January. I assume the resolution may be too high for fair use(?), otherwise it obviously illustrates the assertion in the article that there is a work of that name, the relevance of which is clear from the context (article subject is a song of disputed provenance). However I've no objection to it being removed. Hakluyt bean 11:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The image doesn't need to be removed. You just need to fill in the fair-use rationale. Jooler 12:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

How do you 'do the hokey cokey'?

When the song says you 'do the hokey cokey and the turn around', what do you actually do? --86.150.203.35 (talk) 12:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Bill Bailey

Why is the German translation described as 'incorrect'? It looks bang on to me. Jess Cully (talk) 18:29, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

1892-possibly related song

• Northall, G.F. English Folk-Rhymes: A Collection of Traditional Verses Relating to Places and Persons, Customs, Superstitions, etc.. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd (1892). Chapter 11, "Games—Ring, Various." p. 301:

Can you dance looby, looby, (repeat twice)

All on a Friday night?

You put your right foot in;

An then you take it out,

And wag it, and wag it, and wag it,

Then turn and turn about.

At the third line they put their right feet within the ring, then they take their feet out, and turn around. Looby = old form of the word lubber, a clumsy fellow or dolt. Sheffield. R. 320.

ScotchHopper (talk) 20:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Hokey Cokey joke

This hoax/joke has been doing the rounds on the internet since at least 2005 and perhaps should be mentioned:

THE GUY who wrote The Hokey-Cokey died last week. It was a terrible affair. When the mourners were gathered at the graveside, they discovered the coffin was too big. It became damaged as it was lowered in, a huge hole was ripped in the side and the cadaver was half hanging out. Then the problems really began. First, they put his left leg in...

--Amaccormack (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Sectarianism

Is there anything to the claims that the song/dance is an attack on Catholic Mass, as discussed in this article http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/12/22/singing-the-hokey-cokey-could-land-football-fans-in-sectarian-bother-86908-20989183/ ? 81.137.227.129 (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

New Zealand

Hokey tokey is quite outdated. It is known as hokey pokey by pretty much everyone in NZ these days. If anyone could do some research into when and why it changed, that'd be great.--Pokelova (talk) 05:13, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

The article, sadly, cites both versions, tokey in the intro, pokey in the New Zealand sub-section. I wouldn't worry too much; most of the article is fiction, I reckon. Heenan73 (talk) 10:17, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Use of "head" instead of "whole self"

I know a variation of the last verse which goes: You put your head in You put your head out You put your head in and you shake it all about You do the hokey pokey and you turn yourself about That's what it's all about

However, the article does not mention that. I would be happy if somebody told me if the versions which use "head" rather than "whole self" are incorrect or not. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

It's part of folk culture, "incorrect" really doesn't mean anything here. For songs and dances and games like this, there are numerous variants spread throughout the English-speaking world. I know a variant that goes through all four limbs and the head (note that the word is drawn out when singing, i.e. he---ad, to fit the same time as "left arm" etc.) before finishing with the "whole self". --Khajidha (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Speculations on Revolutionary War

I've reverted the brief discussion by talk of the possibility of the song's origin in the United States Revolutionary War, which was recently added to the article. It's an interesting theory, but we need a source for the connection (not just references defining the legal terms) if it belongs in the main article. It could also benefit from a more careful eye towards placement and copy. 23.252.50.60 (talk) 02:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hokey cokey. 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/20090130030126/http://canada.com:80/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1202503 to http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=1202503

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} 17:41, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Looby Loo

Looby Loo redirects here but the Looby Loo I was searching for was in Andy Pandy https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Andy_Pandy Is it a mistake to redirect here? 121.222.41.187 (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

No, it’s not a mistake; both “Looby Loo” and the Hokey Pokey were originally variants of the same folk song/dance, and both are much older than Andy Pandy. They seem to have diverged from each other in the 1800s. 18.111.30.188 (talk) 22:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

For someone searching for the character Looby Loo and not knowing it is from Andy Pandy (as was the case for me) redirecting to this page does not help, there is no mention of the Andy Pandy character on this page or how the song is linked to the character. Furthermore, this page has no direct mention of "Looby Loo", only "looby" as a lyric in a version of the song. Why does it redirect here instead of a disambiguation page? They are two clearly distinct uses of Looby Loo, even if one is named for the other. 58.165.184.240 (talk) 20:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Agreed, I've changed "Looby Loo" from a redirect to a disambiguation. FOARP (talk) 09:20, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Why is article's title obscure regional name?

As the article itself states the dance is known as the "Hokey POKEY" pretty much everywhere excspt for New Zealand and Britain. Why then is the article's title not "Hokey Pokey"? What special relevance does Britain have here (bearing in mind that we are living in the 21st century and not the 18th)?

1) A name used in a country of 65 million people is not "an obscure regional name". 2) The reason is well explained above - "Hokey Cokey" was the original, "Hokey pokey" a name created later, the "special relevance" of Britain here is that the entire thing originates from there and if it did not you would never have heard of it. FOARP (talk) 09:59, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

I've got to agree with the first guy. It's called the Hokey Pokey everywhere except the UK, the Hokey Pokey is the name of the dance

And 65 million is a tiny population in context, as it stands in contrast to the combined populations of the United States, Canada, and Austrailia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.121.6.113 (talk) 15:18, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Since this is a encyclopedic article providing the history of the subject it is quite appropriate for the article to be titled after the earliest known example. Variations make little difference in this respect regardless of the number of individuals being more familiar with something other than the earliest example. I'm from the US, by the way. THX1136 (talk) 17:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

No it's not appropriate. It's far more appropriate to use the most current common name: the Hokey Pokey. Peter-T (talk) 04:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

surely, at least with regards to that which is natively english, the appropriate choice is to use the name used in the place where it originated, regardless of most popular? it is a british folk song, thus, the british name should be used. i would argue the same too if an american folk song entry were being titled with the name the brits favoured. 2A02:C7E:295A:2D00:1405:FC60:874C:754B (talk) 08:39, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hokey cokey. 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/20100905195006/http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/FryFest-Breaks-Hokey-Pokey-World-Record-102191354.html to http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/FryFest-Breaks-Hokey-Pokey-World-Record-102191354.html

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) 19:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hokey cokey. 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/20041102093927/http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/hokey.htm to http://www.niehs.nih.gov/kids/lyrics/hokey.htm

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) 15:30, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Hokey Cokey 2000

It would appear that the use of "Hokey Cokey 2000" in Constructor was a reference to this radio ad (which I've added to the Advertising section), but since I have no source for it not just being a weird coincidence, I'm guessing that would count as original research. Do we just leave it to the readers to notice the connection and draw their own conclusions? TheJames (talk) 14:26, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Precise origins of modern version of the song?

The article does not make any clear mention of the origin of the modern version(s) of the song (the lyrics of earlier 19th century songs are only loosely similar), nor does it explain the origins of the expressions 'hokey cokey' or 'pokey'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:4D63:8700:E192:D5B9:FFAF:2E2D (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Robert Chambers' Popular Rhymes of Scotland from 1826

Robert Chambers' Popular Rhymes of Scotland, first edition of 1826, does not include the similar rhyme described in the citation.

It does, however, appear in the third and fourth editions, published in 1858 and 1870, respectively. The third edition is available on archive.org and the 4th on archive.org and HathiTrust. I have not seen the second edition, so perhaps it is there.

The claim in the text of the "Origins" of the Hokey Pokey that it is attested as early as 1826 is not true. At least as early as 1858, and perhaps earlier if anyone can find the 2d edition.

Note: the 1940 reference, by Edward Deming Andrews, cites the 1842 edition of Chambers' book as having a version of the rhyme. I edited the article to cite the 1940 book for the proposition that it was attested as early as 1842 - not as early as 1826, which was wrong because it did not appear in the 1826 1st edition of Chambers' book.

Note: the 1857 reference following the paragraph about the Chambers book is part of the text from the 1940 reference. I did an edit to clarify that it was a quotation from the citation immediately above.§Svaihingen (talk) 22:22, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Japanese version

According to this video, in Japan, it's similar to the American version, but with an extra chorus that involves putting your hands on your hips. SAJewers (talk) 22:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

The Hincum Looby

Uncle John's Bathroom Reader(24th edition) says The Hincum Looby dates back to the 1500s in Tudor England. The book also mentions that the Shaker song "Hinkum-Booby" comes from the earlier Puritan song "Hincumbooby". 75.156.190.139 (talk) 18:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, a version of the dance called ‘hankyn bovy’ is attested in the 1500s; see the quotation provided at the Wiktionary entry hankin booby. A note in John Scattergood (editor), John Skelton: The Complete English Poems, 1983, page 402 comments: ‘Hankyn bovy is a kind of rustic dance.’ However, we really ought to also have a reliable source that explicitly makes a connection with the later dances of similar name. Vorziblix (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 4 October 2022

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) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

---

Hokey Cokey → Hokey Pokey – This is the worldwide name for the dance rather than for a subregion. Interstellarity (talk) 16:30, 4 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Steel1943 (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

This isn't uncontroversial as per the talk page and will require a full RM. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 16:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Also consider MOS:DANCECAPS. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I'm assuming this means this article may need to move to Hokey pokey instead of Hokey Pokey (if the article is moved at all.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, either that or Hokey cokey. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

@Interstellarity, Mcmatter, and BarrelProof: Notifying current participants that this has moved to full discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: Is this just an WP:ENGVAR issue? Wikipedia generally does not try to choose the most popular variant of English for the titles and phrasing of its articles. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support "Hokey pokey" following MOS:DANCECAPS and these n-gram results, which are limited to British usage, show that "hokey pokey" is probably slightly more common overall, even if it fell behind for a bit (which may explain why the "cokey" version is more common among certain age groups), and that both are fully acceptable in British English. Meanwhile these results clearly show that "hokey cokey" is pretty much unknown in American English. So it's not a clear ENGVAR issue in the sense that one name is used near-exclusively in one variety while the other name is used in the other. In fact, this strikes me as a perfect application of WP:COMMONALITY. oknazevad (talk) 00:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support "Hokey Pokey" While there are elements of ENGVAR to this, the ngram evidence per Oknazevad would suggest that in contemporary usage both names are about equally common in BR English, while overall Hokey Pokey is substantially much more recognisable and much more common and therefore the WP:COMMONNAME. As to capitalisation, it is the title of a song with an accompanying dance. As a song title, we would reasonably capitalise it. Cinderella157 (talk) 03:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment: In BrE, all four variants seem about equally popular, per this. In the overall English corpus, the most popular form seems to be "Hokey Pokey" with caps, per this. Personally, I think of it more as the name of the dance than the name of the song, but I can see that both may apply. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
• Hokey pokey per commonality and inconsistent capping in sources. " ... That's what it's all about!" Dicklyon (talk) 05:13, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Capitalization of "Hokey Pokey" is being debated. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 01:14, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nominator. JIP | Talk 08:52, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support uppercase per nom and Cinderella157 (a song title as well as a dance descriptor). Randy Kryn (talk) 06:44, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. As far as I can see, it's called the Hokey Pokey in the United States and Australia and the Hokey Cokey in the UK and most other English-speaking countries. So I have no idea why we'd move it from one title to another unless English Wikipedia is currently being converted to American Wikipedia. This is a clear breach of WP:ENGVAR and WP:RETAIN. I have never heard it called the Hokey Pokey in British English, incidentally, so I have no idea where the ngram got its results from (interestingly, if one actually goes into those results, one finds that most of the books on the supposedly "British English" list that use "hokey pokey" are actually American, which shows the problem with using ngrams as hard evidence without analysis). The OED doesn't even recognise the latter as a dance (although it does have "hokee-pokee" in a citation from 1873). So, I'm afraid WP:COMMONALITY simply does not apply, as it's based on an entirely false premise. I would support lowercasing, however. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support as proposed per WP:COMMONNAME. The two terms are equally used in British English according to the British Google Ngrams and are far more prevalent in English generally based on the Google Ngrams Rreagan007 (talk) 18:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
• Support as proposed, per Rreagan007 (the ENGVAR case falls apart under scrutiny, so this is all COMMONNAME). This should be lower-case if it were just about a dance, per DANCECAPS, but it's also about a song. I would actually suggest splitting, since they subjects are indepedent. The song was named after the dance.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:31, 23 October 2022 (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.