This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
This article is part of the Reggae WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the coverage of articles relating to
ska and
reggae. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by
the project page and/or leave a query at
the project's talk page.ReggaeWikipedia:WikiProject ReggaeTemplate:WikiProject ReggaeReggae articles
"Love for Tender [Demo, Ends Abruptly, Accidentally Left on Master] (Costello)" in my database. Kind of like "Her Majesty" (The Beatles) but not as annoying. I'll update the entry.
Fantailfan19:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I have finally seen used versions of the Demon "My Aim Is True" and "Get Happy!!" at my local Newbury Comics. No difference (perhaps) except that there is no green Ryko jewel case.
The Tom Carson review of the album posted on the rollingstone.com website is truncated (in error) from the original. If you want the full text, see the archive version of its original url cited in the reference.
I should remove it, but I won't (yet). But the number of songs has nothing to do with the cutting of an LP record. The length of the recording does. And even with 20 songs, this album was only 48 minutes long, well under the point where one would get into danger (as it were) territory as far as cutting is concerned. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
12.104.195.40 (
talk)
21:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)reply
The liner notes say, "Special care had to be taken with the cutting and pressing process, but now thanks to the wonders of technology we are able to present the new, improved, "Get Happy" containing, count them, THIRTY TRACKS!!!" Not even sure if that's supposed to refer to the vinyl pressing or the CD reissue.
Doctorhawkes (
talk)
09:40, 3 June 2015 (UTC)reply
It was. Does the changing of the 20 to 30 (for the CD) not sort of give that away? And I'll say it again - the tracks have nothing to do with it. The timing does. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
12.104.195.40 (
talk)
19:46, 19 June 2015 (UTC)reply
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on
Get Happy!! (Elvis Costello album). 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:
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.
The following discussion 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.
Appropriate for the article. FUR for the album cover is OK. Others are CC or PD. Captions and positioning are fine. Alt text could be added for the infobox image.
Done
Copyvio check
Reviewed all matches over 10% found on Earwig's Copyvio Dectector. No concerns.
"tracked demos" doesn't look like the right phrase, but it might be.
Changed to taped
" yielding versions of " - maybe add after the list that versions of these appeared on Get Happy!!
I clarify that this demo of "New Amsterdam" is what appears on the final album in recording so there's no point to do it here – zmbro(
talk) (
cont)00:33, 16 July 2022 (UTC)reply
"author Graeme Thomson" - optionally, could change to "his biographer Graeme Thomson"
Done
Recording
Could use
WP:CITEBUNDLE to make "[1][2][4][9]" look neater. (If it works with sfn).
Grouped
Seems fine.
Music and lyrics
" into public ones ... and personal ones" might benefit from a bit of explanation about what this distinction is.
"a misquote of a song" - probably add "deliberate" before "misquote"; I think it would be better to show "Love Me Tender" rather than "the song" in the text.
Done
"immediately addresses the soul influence" maybe "immediately demonstrates the soul influence"?
Done
" its opening line also quotes a song by them" - which song?
Clarified, it's a specific song title
"contain wordplay that referenced" - "contain wordplay that references", I think
Done
"the music mimic the disintegration of his mind" - "the music mimics the disintegration of the narrator's mind", I think
Yep done
"heavy musical comparisons" could be rephrased
I originally had his entire quote which names the entire band but I thought I'd simplify. Fixed
Packaging and artwork
"the effect was abstained from other editions" - rephrase e.g. "the effect was omittedfrom other editions"
Done
'Analysing the inner sleeve, Hinton states "humankind is reduced to four diagrams, colour coded."' - hmmm. Too bad he has no more to say about this. For me it might be better to omit this rather than leave it without further description.
Agreed, done
Release and promotion
"Costello's newfound appreciation" - earlier it's said that it was more of a rediscoved appreciation (of soul tunes) rather than a newfound one.
Changed to renewed
Costello's discography is huge, with all the different releases, and I wouldn't suggest trying to list all international and variant singles, but I do wonder if it's worth mentioning that "New Amsterdam" was also issued as a picture disc? (I've not checked to see if this is mentioned in sources; perhaps it isn't. Probably my own bias of wanting it for a few years before finally buying one.)
The retirement did not last long, as the band were back on the road throughout Europe in mid-April, although a car accident resulted in Nieve being temporarily replaced by the Rumour's guitarist Martin Belmont. Nieve's absence led to poor shows, while the setlists were amended and featured almost no tracks from Get Happy!!, save for recent single "High Fidelity" -supported by pages 143-144, 157-158. No issues.
However, it sold less copies than its predecessor Armed Forces and was thus viewed as a commercial disappointment. Béchirian recalled: "Jake [Riviera] actually laughed about having a Get Happy!! house in his garden made with all the unsold records." -supported by pages 157-158. No issues.
[10] (Galluci) In 2015, Gallucci wrote that the album contains some of the artist's best songs from the period. He continued that despite being dismissed as a novelty during discussions of Costello's works from the 1980s, Get Happy!! "may be his most jubilant LP ever", with all 20 tracks packing "more muscle, hooks, heart and, yes, soul than many of his more acclaimed records that followed." - OK, "best songs from the period" is also a direct quote, but common enough a phrase that I dn't think identifying it as suh is strictly necessary. (Not sure this really says much when the preiod is not defined; other than a few notable Dylan omissions, it's pretty normal for artists to include their best songs on their albums, I imagine.)
Gouldstone
the former is addressed to a woman, seemingly putting her down and casually references violence towards her. The latter, while not as brutal, describes an unsatisfactory affair taking place in a motel room-supported by pages 64, no issues.
The final track, "Riot Act", reflects on a past relationship with "abject desolation" rather than disdain -supported by pages 65-66, no issues.
[20] Hilburn Commenting on the number of tracks, he argued that "by including 20 tunes in the LP, [Costello] demonstrated his disregard for critics and businessmen". Deeming Get Happy!! "a vibrant work by someone who both understands rock 'n' roll's history and aggressively seeks to shape its future", Hilburn felt it was not as "powerfully framed" as Armed Forces, but "still bristle[d] with the independence that has characterized the British rocker's brief but provocative career. - no issues.
[45] Fitzpatrick Squeeze guitarist Chris Difford named the album as an inspiration in 2019, stating, "Get Happy!! was a big album for me. I just loved the lyrics. I loved the performances on that record. It's brilliant." Costello would produce Squeeze's 1981 album East Side Story. - "inspiration in 2019" could be reworded to avoid suggestion that it was an active influence in 2018, given that the quote is "was a big album", not "is a big album"
I wondered why the Elvis Costello wiki, which whilst not a reliable souce, isn't a bad place for a sense-check had 48:21 for the original release and slightly different timings for the 1994 release tracks to the original. 48:08 is OK per
WP:INFOBOXREF as the track lengths are no cited, and "the content is repeated (and cited) elsewhere or if the information is obvious".
BennyOnTheLoose (
talk)
19:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)reply
"on 15 February 1980 through F-Beat Records in the United Kingdom and Columbia Records in the United States." - The Los Angeles Times, 12 Feb 1980, p.77 says the album was due for release "the week of 25 Feb", and review publication dates seem to be consistent with a late Feb release date, so, unless there's a source confirming this as the US release date, reword. (I think what's in the body is OK)
Comments above,
Zmbro. Nothing major. Thanks for your work on the article. I've listened to the album many, many times, but tried my best to review from a NPOV! Regards,
BennyOnTheLoose (
talk)
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.