Dammit has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: March 18, 2015. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Songs This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles Punk music (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Punk musicWikipedia:WikiProject Punk musicTemplate:WikiProject Punk musicPunk music articles

the version of Dammit on the Can't Hardly Wait soundtrack has a muted "fucked" in the line "he fucked her". is that a censored version? is the lyric sung in the album version? thanks. Streamless 11:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

yes. it is.

Yeah, that's the censored version. The line is clearly audible in the uncensored song.--Gen. Quon (talk) 23:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw at a lyrics site another version of this song (with this "Growing Up" subtitle), in which the word "he" is replaced by "she" every time it appears (as well as "on the arm of that girl" instead of "on the arm of that guy"). Can anyone confirm its existence? IF so, where's it from?189.82.43.63 (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's supposedly from an Avril Lavigne cover that I have not been able to locate. In fact, this very article claims (unsourced, of course) that Avril has covered the song. I'm going to take that part out, if someone actually finds a reliable source verifying that she has actually covered this song, please put it back in.--Mmckerch (talk) 09:08, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doing it because most other song articles don't have it, aside from spelling errors, lack of indentation, random boxing, lack of capitalization, censorship... I feel it really doesn't serve a purpose, someone could look it up anytime.

While I do feel that articles about songs should have lyrics, as this hasn't become part of Wikipedia policy yet (as far as I know), it's going. Atomforyou (talk) 03:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the possibility that it's a copyright violation, as we're publishing work without permission. Atomforyou (talk) 03:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dammit (Growing Up)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cloudz679 (talk · contribs) 17:37, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

• The sentence "The song was serviced to radio remixed by Tom Lord-Alge, which includes cleaner instrumentals and a drum roll during the intro." doesn't seem to be grammatically accurate, or comply with WP:LEAD
• "created by Hoppus" needs context in the first mention outside of the lead
• "blow out his voice" the meaning is not clear
• what are "top spins"?
• "MCA's marketing strategy for "Dammit" involved waiting until after the band's Warped Tour performances wrapped in order to have a retail story to back up radio promotion efforts." wording seems very close to the source. could you put "retail story" in other words?
• "The label first serviced "Dammit" in August 1997 and several SoCal stations were quick to pickup the single" unfamiliar with the term "serviced", plus "pickup" cannot be used as a verb without a space. Very close wording to the source here, too
• "Mainstream rock received "Dammit" in November" isn't mainstream rock a genre? How can a genre receive a song?
• "bumping it into stress rotation in December" - is this jargon? Also seems to be very close to the original wording at the source
• "Consequence of Sound, in a 2015 top 10 of the band's best songs, ranked it as number one" better to start with concrete terms rather than "it" and "the band" in this instance
• "The song was famously used" WP:PEACOCK
• "Doane was on board with the musicians improvising during the shoot" clarify?
• DeLonge isn't given a first name anywhere in the prose

Referencing

• "The song peaked at number 11 on Billboard '​s Hot Modern Rock Tracks chart, and charted on the airplay chart of the Billboard Hot 100.[9]" can't see that in the citation
• "The song was called a "radio staple"" - a little more context is called for, more accurately "a modern-rock radio staple"
• I don't feel that quoting the entire first four lines of fn14 is justified. The quote doesn't reflect the connection between the song and film which is detailed elsewhere in the article.
• "The song was also included in the music video game Guitar Hero World Tour, along with an in-game representation of Travis Barker, who becomes available to play upon completing the song in the drum career." has a reference at the Guitar Hero World Tour page, so why not use that here?
• The chart positions for Billboard are not evident at fn9

C679 10:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two more things:

• The image used doesn't seem to fully conform to the Non-free use rationale guideline. The word "Google" is insufficient as a source, as this is not evidence that it has been "published or publicly displayed outside Wikipedia by (or with permission from) the copyright holder".
• The infobox details where and when it was recorded, but this is unreferenced and omitted from the article itself, so please add and source. C679 10:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All existing prose and image issues have been resolved. Regarding the referencing, <ref name="UScharts"/>(fn9) is not allowing me to see anything about this song, something I mentioned before. Does the reader need to go somewhere from the linked page?

• The guitar hero reference which was added, is dead. The underlines the importance of using access dates.
• I wouldn't necessarily take Hoppus' estimate of 10 minutes or DeLonge's estimate of 5 minutes as facts suitable for the article, regarding how long the song took to write.
• The FIDLAR and Good Charlotte covers aren't appropriately referenced - looks like an error with the ref name attributes.

C679 08:22, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Saginaw-hitchhiker:. See above. C679 18:40, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Cloudz679: gotcha! all refs, including the chart data, have been updated. i've also removed the 5 to 10 minutes thing. Saginaw-hitchhiker (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Just made a minor change to the ref names, the article now meets the criteria. C679 14:16, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article is currently titled "Dammit (Growing Up)", and the opening sentence identifies the subject as "'Dammit (Growing Up)' (often shortened to 'Dammit')". I am curious as to why the parenthetical "(Growing Up)" is considered part of the song title proper, and why just "Dammit" is considered a "shortening" of the title. I have several Blink-182 releases on which this song appears laid out in front of me: The Dude Ranch album, The Mark, Tom and Travis Show (The Enema Strikes Back!), the Greatest Hits album, and both VHS and DVD copies of The Urethra Chronicles. All list the song as just "Dammit", on both the back covers and inside liner notes. Not a single one of these carries the parenthetical "(Growing Up)". As far as I can tell, the only releases that carry the parenthetical are the CD-singles for the song, and that has always been fairly common for songs whose titles do not appear in their lyrics. However, the original title, and the one most commonly seen on the band's releases, is just "Dammit" without any parenthetical. I therefore propose that the article be moved to the title Dammit (with the present disambiguation page moved to Dammit (disambiguation)), with the lead sentence adjusted to indicate that the parenthetical is sometimes appended as a subtitle. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's been over a week with no response (I also posted at Talk:Dude Ranch (album)#Song titles), I'm going to be bold and make the moves. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]