Talk:Ain't That a Shame

Sax player?

Who played sax?Kdammers (talk) 14:08, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Dave Bartholomew?

It was recorded by Fats Domino. Bartholomew is irrelevent in that sentence. George Slivinsky (talk) 10:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Ain't That a Shame. 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/20090823074654/http://www.patboone.com:80/bio.php to http://www.patboone.com/bio.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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} 15:11, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

"Ain't It a Shame", and not "Ain't That a Shame"

First line of article says:

"Ain't That a Shame" is a song written by Fats Domino and Dave Bartholomew. Domino's recording of the song (mistitled on the single's label as "Ain't It a Shame")...

First of all, why "mistitled"? This statement is not supported by anything.

Next, why "on the single's label" only? That is, it is assumed that the album's label has the correct title. This statement is simply wrong, because the title on the label B of original US Imperial album "Rock and Rollin' with Fats Domino" (Imperial LP 9004) is "Ain't It a Shame".

Maybe the label Imperial Records later discovered and corrected this so-called error? We'll see.

This album has been reissued next under Imperial label at least twice. In 1969, by Liberty Records (owner of Imperial at this time), with the catalog number LP-12387, but with the same title "Ain't It a Shame" on label B. In 1978, by United Artists Records (owner of Liberty at this time), with the same catalog number (preceded by own number UAS 29.297) and with the same title on label B.

But back to the Imperial Records. The first album was not the only one that included this song.

First, the compilation "Fats Domino Swings (12,000,000 Records)" (Imperial LP-9062) was released in December 1958. This time the song title was printed not only on the label of side 2, but also on the back cover. There are the labels of two reissues of this compilation, of 1964 and of 1969, with new catalog number LP-12091.

Next, in 1963, the album "Lets Dance with Domino" (Imperial LP-9239) was released. It starts just by "Ain't It a Shame" (same original recording, but overdubbed for this album by vocal chorus). Here's its back cover and label. Nothing changed in 1981 with the French reissue if this album, look at its back cover and label side 1.

Thus, everywhere on editions and reissues of this song on the original label and its subsequent owners, the song title did never change and remains always "Ain't It a Shame".

The song is officially registered in the relevant organizations, the ID ISWC T-070.231.863-5 is assigned to this musical work. If you find the work on ISWC source (the direct link is unavailable), you will see the title "AIN T IT A SHAME" (sic!) by BARTHOLOMEW DAVE and DOMINO ANTOINE, and only you'll click to "+" for additional information, you will read "Alternate title: AIN T THAT A SHAME".

I hope everything is clear here.

Optional part: why do the authors of the article consider another title to be correct, and not the original or official one at all? First of all, this is the only edition of the album with the pirated title of the album itself and with the pirated title of the song, by London Records. Even here, in Wikipedia, this album is described as a reissue, and not as the original edition, see the track listing with this British title. (And it's no surprise that John Lennon used the title from a British album.)

Subsequently, starting in 1967 (note that this is also a British edition), budget compilers (mainly European labels) began to make extensive use of this pirated British name. However, compilers of serious compilations or "Complete recordings", being professionals in their field, used only the correct original name:

• "They Call Me the Fat Man - The Legendary Imperial Recordings" (EMI, 4 CD, 1991)
• "Out of New Orleans" (Bear Family, 8 CD, 1993)
• "I've Been Around: The Complete Imperial & ABC-Paramount Recordings (Bear Family, 12 CD, 2019)

I propose to return the song to its rightful, original and official name.RocknRollArchivist (talk) 11:28, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The article title is determined by the criteria at WP:NAMINGCRITERIA. Essentially, in this case, it should be the name by which the song is most commonly known - which, I would argue, is "Ain't That a Shame" - rather than, necessarily, the title of the original record. Whether the original title is "correct" or "incorrect" is, I think, a matter of opinion. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:51, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Are you talking about what should have been done, or what was actually done? Because from the article, which says about the "mistitled single" (and implies that on the album the song was not "mistitled", that is, correct), it follows that the author saw only the British reissue of the album, in which the only (and first) the recording was not mistitled. In any case, what you say does not agree with what is written in the article. And in the article, the statement about the "mistitled single" is not true. The fact is that only one British edition of a sole album includes this "not mistitled" recording, whereas all American releases, including singles, three different albums and their numerous reissues over the years and decades, have the wrong title, according to the authors of the article. RocknRollArchivist (talk) 15:57, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

The word "mistitled" can easily be changed - I don't think that's a significant issue, so I've amended the wording (and bolded it). But, if you wish to change the title of the article itself, by "moving" it, that should probably be raised for discussion through the process at WP:RM#CM. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

However, the phrase "stated on the single's label as "Ain't It a Shame"" remained untrue. It should be replaced by the phrase "stated on both 1955 singles, on three different albums released from 1956 to 1963, and on all their reissues throughout the 1960s and 1980s as "Ain't It a Shame", with the exception of the British label's London Records reissue of the first album, where the song was titled "Ain't That a Shame"". But in this case, any reader will immediately be puzzled why the article is called "Ain't That a Shame". Can anyone justify this title? RocknRollArchivist (talk) 08:18, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

The words "stated on the single's label as "Ain't It a Shame"" are absolutely true, and there is no need to go into the details of later releases - certainly not in the opening paragraph. For the question of the article name, see WP:COMMONNAME. If you can show that the most usual name for the song is "Ain't It a Shame", rather than "Ain't That a Shame", it will be changed - but you will need to gain consensus through the process I mentioned. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:58, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

PS: Maybe it's worth noting that the article is about the song, including all later versions, and not solely about Fats Domino's original recording. Your edit to the infobox reveals a clear inconsistency with the image - are you intending to upload an image of the original label? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:08, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

When someone read this phrase, where "the single's label" is used, he can think that "the album's label" was different with the single's one. And that is not true. So, for avoid this ambiguity, it would be useful either to delete the words "the single's", or to add the words "and album's" (followed by word "labels" instead of label). Because "the album" means always its original issue, and not its later reissue such as "Carry On Rockin '". To your P.S.: This is just the infobox in its previous version which revealed an inconsistency with the actual single. Yes, I'm going to load the true label of a single instead and to add a story of releases of this song by Fats Domino like higher on this page. There are the interesting facts (e.g., about overdubbed version). As for the title of the article about the song, I decided not to encroach on it. RocknRollArchivist (talk) 11:43, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

That's fine. When you include the history of the song's releases, we can adjust the wording - at present, the article makes no mention of the original Imperial album, so simply adding a mention of "the album" at this point would be confusing. But perhaps we could change the mention of "the single's label" to "original Imperial record labels". Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:42, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

Content about the song

There's so much about what the song did in terms of business and where it came from, but zero information about the song itself. Wikipedians need to look at some Beatles song articles to see how songs should be covered. -Rolypolyman (talk) 23:07, 14 April 2022 (UTC)