![one republic apologize remix techno one republic apologize remix techno](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Bpu8gdOVILc/sddefault.jpg)
There can be no possible rationale for including his name in this article as anything other than a minor note that he has contributed to its popularity.Īnyone with a bass and treble control on their stereos can "remix" a song. It was composed, performed, produced, and engineered more than a year prior to his having even heard of the band One Republic. The song "Apologize," the subject of this article, pre-exists all of Tmibaland's involvement with it.
One republic apologize remix techno free#
Timbaland fulfills NONE of the qualifications for authorship of this song, and the repeated foregrounding of his remixing "efforts" smack alarmingly of free advertising. Arguably, the performer of the music may also share billing, and it has become standard practice, in Wikipedia as elsewhere, to credit the artist who initially performed a song as one of its creators. It should not be necessary to redefine for some people that the "author" of a song is not its producer, remixer, or publicist. Finally, it is Wikipedia policy to keep all versions of a single song on a single page (see, for example, the much-covered "I Will Always Love You," which lists Parton and Houston's versions, though they charted entirely separately). Further, as noted, most charts do not distinguish between requests/plays of the original and the remix.there is no way to distinguish them in this article, therefore. I hardly think the description fits Timbaland. Note that the song was linked in the EU charts, for instance, to the best performance by a "debut" act.
![one republic apologize remix techno one republic apologize remix techno](https://static.qobuz.com/images/artists/covers/medium/8aeb0a3a67d19cd8bf747ab9677376c6.jpg)
![one republic apologize remix techno one republic apologize remix techno](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YGm2F7Gwz2I/maxresdefault.jpg)
Although I'm hardly denying it still is a song by OneRepublic, there is still a clear distinction between the two. No, it was clearly the remix that got the song it's attention and charted.
![one republic apologize remix techno one republic apologize remix techno](https://img.youtube.com/vi/rF5oITEq43Q/hqdefault.jpg)
Even though William Blake's poetry was largely ignored until it was rediscovered and reprinted by Dante Gabriel Rossetti, we speak of each poem as a single textual object, by Blake. In the second place, the song exists as a single textual entity, outside of any particular version. As noted, many of the charts do not distinguish between plays of the remix and plays of the original. Yes, but why is the original version noted as charting around the world at the top of the article, when it was clearly the remix that charted.- XCheese360 ( talk) 23:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)īecause in the first place, that isn't "clear" at all. Each performance doesn't get a separate page, no matter how popular, and the performers don't get to claim 'co-authorship' of the piece. Some of those versions were popular, others less so.but they are all Ludwig v. It has been performed, recorded, re-recorded, remixed, sampled, and altered hundreds and thousands of times. It is a single piece of music, written by Ludwig v. No, each version doesn't get its own page.Ĭonsider the case of Beethoven's Fifth Symphony. Like many songs, it exists in several versions. The song is called "Apologize," by One Republic. It is essentially the same song as the original, Wikipedia guidelines on song articles keep remixes and cover songs in the same article. No, don't create a separate article on the remix. 29 Most downloaded song of all time in Australia?.23 Erronous attribution to Justin Timberlake.14 RfC: Inclusion of Timbaland chronology.6 Fair use rationale for Image:Apologize.jpg.