Talk:O Canada/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Use in schools

Talking to my mom, she mentioned singing God Save the Queen in school. I never did, It was always O Canada and I started school in the 1970s. The article states it was officially adopted in 1980. So some time between 1967 and 1980 it was already adopted in spite of not being official. Does anyone have sources for this? Maury Markowitz (talk) 00:31, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

By the early 1970s, many schools used both "O Canada" and "God Save the Queen" at assemblies. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:33, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Version of the Innuit

The version of the Canadian Innuit in their language:

ᐆ ᑲᓇᑕ! ᓇᖕᒥᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ!
ᐱᖁᔭᑏ ᓇᓚᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᕗᑦ.
ᐊᖏᒡᓕᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᑎ,
ᓴᙱᔪᓗᑎᓪᓗ.
ᓇᖏᖅᐳᒍ, ᐆ ᑲᓇᑕ,
ᒥᐊᓂᕆᑉᓗᑎ.
ᐆ ᑲᓇᑕ! ᓄᓇᑦᓯᐊ!
ᓇᖏᖅᐳᒍ ᒥᐊᓂᕆᑉᓗᑎ,
ᐆ ᑲᓇᑕ, ᓴᓚᒋᔭᐅᖁᓇ!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.141.45.66 (talk) 00:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Is that sourced somewhere? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

The_Tenors#MLB_2016_All-Star_Game_controversy

Perhaps it should be added somewhere. History? Performances? Elsewhere? That parody made news when going too far.Jusjih (talk) 00:26, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

It's about the group, not the song. I don't think it's needed here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Not having legally sanctioned penalties in the USA nor Canada for desecrating the national anthem may make the matter not necessarily important for the song. Yet publicly doing the same act may be unlawful or even criminal somewhere else, like Chinese Macao since 1999. Thus your opinion is not always good for other national anthems.--Jusjih (talk) 18:24, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

But in this case it's correct, because we're not talking about other national anthems or events in other jurisdictions. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:38, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Borrowings

In a recent peer-reviewed paper published in the leading musicological journal The Musical Quarterly, the distinguished musicologist Ross Duffin has made a sophisticated extended argument for the composer of this anthem having borrowed themes from Mozart, Liszt, Wagner, and Matthias Keller. Duffin readily concedes that he cannot definitively prove his case, but I believe that any careful reader of his paper will agree that he has made a very persuasive argument in all four cases. Duffin also makes very clear that he does not think less of Lavallée for such borrowing, which was a well-represented and well-accepted practice at the time. A new subsection mentioning Duffin's contribution (not by me) has recently been reverted, twice, with the justification that Duffin's is "just an opinion." It is not a mere opinion, but a careful study that needs to be at least mentioned in this Wikipedia article. I have modified the reverted subsection slightly to make it a bit more acceptable to critics, and re-posted to the article. I would only ask that the editor who has twice reverted the earlier version please read Duffin's paper before considering reverting once more.Ajrocke (talk) 16:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

It is not supported by all musicologists, only his own. We cannot easily read his paper because it's paid. Thanks for the third opinion though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:08, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2020

The performance direction (in the 'Melody' section) should be changed from "maestoso è risoluto" to "maestoso e risoluto" (since "è" means "is" whereas "e" means "and"). Also, the translation of "risoluto" as "resolved" should possibly be changed to "resolute" (according to the English-Italian part of www.linguee.com). 82.3.26.111 (talk) 12:04, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Partially done. The source does use "è" instead of "e", which is something I think they used in error as "majestic is resolved" does not quite make sense, so changed those. Kept "risoluto" meaning "resolved" per linked article. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 13:50, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

I found other sources that used maestoso è risoluto, so it's either a copy error or an obscure rule in Italian. I marked it with a {{sic}} instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:02, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Could you also add those sources there so it doesn't look like it's just one source using the seemingly wrong term? Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 14:29, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

They're not RSes though. They're simply sheet music. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:53, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Key and score

The article says it was originally written in the key of G major, but the score and corresponding audio file are in F major. If it's more commonly performed in F major today, that ought to be explained and cited. (I found [1] which says "A lower key — F, E or E flat — is preferable when it is sung.") Otherwise, it would be better to change the score to G major, to match the original. --Bigpeteb (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

"God Save the Queen" should be "God Save the King" under History

Apologies if I'm not doing this properly (don't edit Wikipedia much).

Under the section "History" there is a paragraph discussing King George VI and King Edward remained standing during O Canada. After that, there is a line about "God Save the Queen" normally being played in Toronto, I believe this should be changed to "God Save the King", as that would have been the version used at this time under King George VI.

I am unable to edit this myself since it is a protected article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.138.220.65 (talk) 21:14, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

The two sentences are completely separate thoughts, but I attempted to make it more coherent. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:51, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Any French quotation marks should be changed to <<and>>

I apologize in advance if this is not properly formatted, I'm in the bushes about Wikipedia.

In French, quotation marks are replaced with "les guillemets", and any French writing should follow the rule, or it would be grammatically incorrect. For example, under History, "Pour le Christ et le roi!" (English quotation marks are fine here because the paragraph is not written in French but quoting French words) is quoted like it is here. However, since the entire lyrics of the song is written in French, meaning it is a truly written in thee French language and should follow the grammatical rules of the French language.

This would mean changing "Pour le Christ et le roi!" to <<Pour le Christ et le roi!>>

PoliceClarity (talk) 14:40, 6 June 23 2021 (UTC)

@PoliceClarity: MOS:QUOTEMARKS makes it clear that they should only be used when internal to an English text. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:10, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

@PoliceClarity: Your assessment is exactly right. A French quotation within a French text should use guillemets. I have made the change. Indefatigable (talk) 00:39, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

No MOS:QUOTEMARKS is clear. We do not use guillemets except when they are within a quote that is already in English. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

The guidance you are referring to says Do not use accent marks, backticks (`text´), low-high („ “) or guillemet (« ») marks as quotation marks (except when such marks are internal to quoted non-English text – see MOS:CONFORM). In this case, the French verses are being block quoted as a whole, and thus the guillemets are internal to the quoted text. Accordingly, preserving the typography is appropriate. isaacl (talk) 01:28, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I read that in passing and read it backwards. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2021

"change "O Canada" is a 28-bar song originally written in the key of G major to "O Canada" is a 28-bar song originally written in the key of F major" Enhokuo (talk) 19:21, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: This claim directly contradicts sources in the article. Please provide reliable sources for this edit. Living Concrete (talk) 20:33, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

O Canada tune as a school song

Since shortly after its founding in the 1920s Edmonton County School in the London suburb of Edmonton, in the UK, has utilized the tune of O Canada as the basis for its school song. This well predates the tune being adopted officially as Canada's National Anthem 2001:1970:56EA:2A00:7D4E:65D4:3A1C:4F73 (talk) 11:36, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

—