Talk:Eternal Father, Strong to Save

Untitled

There's a sentence that this hymn is usually sung to the tune Lodsworth in the article. Where does this come from? I have universally heard Melita. Jhlister (talk) 15:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I also know this as "For those in Peril on the Sea". Is this the correct title? DJ Clayworth 19:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

It's my understanding it was written as Eternal Father Strong to Save. However...a footnote detailing its differant names would seem OK if it was done correctly. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.18.216.191 (talk • contribs) 14:16, 4 January 2006

Recessional

Rudyard Kipling's Recessional (poem) is also set to Melita, and is notably used by Australia and New Zealand in ANZAC Day services. I'd like to add it here but am unsure whether that's appropriate. Either that, or a page about Melita itself might need to be added -- it's the tune for several hymns, not just some for the US military. Raena 18:30, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyright in later additions

Anyone know what the status of the revised version is ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 16:34, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Other verses

I wrote the following verse:

Most Holy Jesus who didst die for our sins he was sacrificed. Forgive the sins we daily do And help us to return to you Oh, Holy spir't who made us whole protect our serving soldier's souls.

Is it appropriate to add with the others?

Thehuskarl, 06/17/09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehuskarl (talk • contribs) 00:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, you wouldn't see fan-made verses of Madonna's "Like a Virgin" on that page either, so you shouldn't post them here either. Alec92 (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Additional verses

About half the article is taken up with additional verses, not a single one of which is cited. Shouldn't the article stick to its core topic, the hymn itself, and perhaps truly notable variations? (I've already removed one, which had errors of punctuations so basic and fundamentally flawed, it suggested a single sailor could staff an entire ship!)

I guess some people might still want to see this material in Wikipedia. If the consensus is indeed to preserve these variants, I suggest that they be moved into a separate article, something like "Eternal Father, strong to save (additional verses)".

Feline Hymnic (talk) 22:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

My suggestion - tag the additional verses (or just the section(s)) as needing sources. If sources don't present themselves (and hence the verses seem to be non-notable), they can be removed after a reasonable amount of time. Doniago (talk) 12:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, done. But my main idea is to get those variants (referenced or not) out of this particular article because of article balance. They could still remain in Wikipedia, but in another article dedicated to the topic of variant/additional verses. Feline Hymnic (talk) 17:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I guess I'm more of a cynic (smile). I'm not opposed to an article for the variant/additional verses, but I also feel that any that remain unsourced should be deleted entirely. Depending on how many we actually find sources for, article balance may not be a problem after clean-up's taken place. Doniago (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

They all seem to be unsourced. There being no substantial dissension. I've removed them. The article is about the hymn itself; it should stay about the hymn. The article had become very unbalanced by their presence. If variants are notable enough to be in Wikipedia, they should be in a separate item (to which this article may of, course, link). Feline Hymnic (talk) 15:30, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I found where all those other verses came from. http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq53-1.htm I think they should have an article Biosci01 (talk) 04:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, you're welcome to start one, but I don't think I could support it unless there's third-party sourcing establishing that these other verses have significance of their own. Just because they exist doesn't mean they're notable. Doniago (talk) 13:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

This article ought to stay focussed on the original hymn itself. This may include minor textural variants. But we should be diligent about balance; the material about variants shouldn't swamp the material about the original. It seems that this hymn has an unusually large number of variants, particularly in one country, the USA. And this material may be worthy (notable) of inclusion somewhere in Wikipedia. But, I would suggest, any substantial discussion (or inclusion) of variants should probably be in a separate article, rather than overloading this one. Agreed? Feline Hymnic (talk) 18:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Additional verse for our police officers in harm's way

Oh Guardian of domestic calm, Please hear this small, but urgent psalm. From all along the "Thin Blue Line," Thy servants watch for danger's sign. Oh, guide their actions on the street, For those in peril on the beat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.102.117.168 (talk) 05:13, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

St. John's College Fight Song

Inclusion of this parody within this article makes sense. The hymn was not chosen randomly. It was parodied by St. John's precisely because it is the Navy Hymn. I agree that the balance of the article is about the hymn, and that is why mentioning parodies is valid. I made the mistake, originally, of putting it under "Other Uses," which I grant was not appropriate, but I have now created a new section. Articles about many other songs and hymns include references to parodies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Constantinodd (talk • contribs) 15:49, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing. The article is primarily about the hymn. WP:UNDUE requires that balance be maintained. The discussion above (in April) reached consensus to remove most of the extraneous things. Sure, this article can mention the existence of other versions, including the "St. John's" variant, but the place for any substantial account of such variants is in those articles not here. Once it is there, then, sure, we can mention its existence here, including linking to it. Please could you place the detail in the St. John's article? Thanks. Feline Hymnic (talk) 15:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

It's been added to the St. John's page. I still see that other hymns, for example The Battle Hymn of the Republic include sections such as "Other songs set to this tune." Stars and Stripes Forever includes a section titled "other lyrics." And so on with many songs which have been parodied. Inclusion of a parody does not disrupt the balance of an article. Perhaps we could delete some of the extraneous information about the croquet match, but the lyrics of the parody do seem to belong here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Constantinodd (talk • contribs) 16:07, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for adding it there. I've looked. It seems to sit well there. And you have linked it back here (to the hymn article), which is good, so that readers of the college article, whose primary interest is the college, can, if they wish, follow it through to this hymn article. Few college readers will be interested, but this link is there. Good. The next step is now to tidy up the hymn article in exactly the same way, bearing in mind that the primary interest of the readers of the hymn article is the hymn.

Viewed another way: The college article properly includes the text of the parody and a link to the hymn. Should it also include the full text and history of the hymn? I think we'd both agree it shouldn't. Turning that symmetrically around: The hymn article properly includes the text of the hymn and a link to the college. So should it also include the full text of the parody? Feline Hymnic (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I see your point, but I think including the full text of the parody is valid. It should not, by any means, include a full text and history of the schools. A brief explanation, providing context for the parody seems helpful to me. Other songs and hymns include the text of parodies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Constantinodd (talk • contribs) 16:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Eternal Father, Strong to Save. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110822234503/http://www.ohinemuri.org.nz/journal/07/wg_parker.htm to http://www.ohinemuri.org.nz/journal/07/wg_parker.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Notable uses

The content of this section should be in chronological order, as it is a type of history section. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:46, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

It also needs additional sourcing; especially sourcing that establishes that these are indeed "notable" uses. DonIago (talk) 17:41, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Use in Britten's 'Noye's Fludde'

Doniago has twice reverted my reference to the inclusion of the entire hymn in Benjamin Britten's cantata "Noye's Fludde". I referred him/her to the vocal score published by Boosey & Hawkes in 1958 but this was not enough for him/her. On page 44 of the score, the entire cast begin singing the words "Eternal Father, strong to save" and there is a footnote "*[J. B. Dykes: W. Whiting}. It carries on to page 48, and the words "For those in peril on the sea." I trust this is sufficient to satisfy him/her that "the score specifically mentions that it's using EFStS". (I see now also that it is already mentioned in the entry for the cantata.) --Hugh7 (talk) 09:13, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

If the score specifically mentions that it is using EFSTS, with appropriate accreditation, then I would consider that satisfactory. I don't have access to the score so am unable to verify that for myself one way or another. DonIago (talk) 14:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

It is as I said: it uses the entire text and names the hymnodists, but no, it does not mention that it is doing so. --Hugh7 (talk) 06:50, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

So...at best it's an "uncredited" mention? That would be problematic. DonIago (talk) 20:56, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

It's not 'an "uncredited" mention' it's a use of the entire song, with credits to the authors. How is that problematic? Since it uses the entire text of EFStS including the title words, to add the title as well would be superfluous. Peter Evans' exhaustive "The Music of Benjamin Britten" (Dent 1979, 562pp) takes the use of the hymn so much for granted that he never names it in full: "...'Eternal Father' is a cry of faith from the centre of the storm..." (p273) - and in the previous sentence he refers to "the body of universally familiar English hymnody" - so I guess that won't satisfy Doniago either. --Hugh7 (talk) 00:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Given that you felt the need to passive-aggressively snark at me in your above message, I feel it is best to wait until other editors weigh in on this. DonIago (talk) 14:45, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Major template problem on this page

As many Wikipedia pages as I've ever seen fit to modify or correct over the years, I have frankly never encountered one as screwed up as this particular inexplicably animated template overlapping the entire right side of the text which apparently starts to extend from top to bottom only upon clicking the first audio sample, but continues uncontrollably even when pausing that audio. I certainly have no idea at all how to begin to address the issue, let alone take on what I must assume may be extensive reformatting, if not some relatively simple "close template box" or similar command which I would hope and trust someone else with more experience and inclination to troubleshoot the matter can correct or add. RRawpower (talk) 21:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

I played the three audio clips I saw on the page within Google Chrome and wasn't able to reproduce this, unfortunately. DonIago (talk) 23:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

I have found the problem on this page only with the very first audio clip and not either of the others. As I first noted never having seen such an issue with any other Wikipedia page before, I would not automatically think it might necessarily result from my Safari browser v. 11.1.2 running on the latest Mac OS High Sierra 10.13.6 on a relatively recent MacBook Pro Retina, 15-inch, Mid 2015. Though I must add that I made a point of checking both Firefox on the MacBook Pro as well as Safari on my iPhone X and found no such problem with that first clip invoking the "runaway" box.

And as a former Apple Mac tech I wasn't sure why JavaScript or some similar embedded programming engine might be involved with basic audio playback to any extent that might possibly trigger such action. But as soon as I refreshed the page a number of times, I noticed that particular first audio box ("Service hymn of the Royal Navy") consistently expanded and contracted vertically while a spinning clock icon very momentarily appeared directly over the audio clip in question. As I can only conclude that there may well be some defect in the specific formatting or implementation, I have to wonder about the apparent difference between the first audio clip and the other two in that "sound =Eternal Father.ogg" is definitely not the same as "{{listen|filename=Eternal Father - U.S. Navy Band.ogg... |filename2=Eternal Father, Strong to Save (1992).ogg". Which begs the question just why that first audio clip is designated "sound" and does not likewise follow the "{{listen|filename" protocol. RRawpower (talk) 09:39, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

The only thing missing in my In Popular Culture edits were the sources. But instead of sourcing it, it was deleted for possible vandalism. There was NO vandalism whatsoever and I suggest In Popular Culture be added back with correct sources. Lostfan333 (talk) 00:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

If you have sources, reinsert the information with those sources? Or are you asking other people to do your research for you? DonIago (talk) 01:50, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Where in my edit summary was there the word vandalism? Anyways, as I've said, Eternal_Father,_Strong_to_Save#Notable_uses is a far superior way to present this (the information is already there, with more accuracy, too) than the usual popular culture list-bloats. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:54, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

You're far superior as well so I'll agree with your point and ignore any further editing to this page. Thank you for the feedback. Lostfan333 (talk) 02:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

space verses?

The sci-fi writers Robert Heinlein and John Varley suggested verses for space travellers. Heinlein's is (I think):

Almighty ruler of the All Whose power extends to great and small, Who guides the stars with steadfast law, Whose least creation fills with awe, Oh grant thy mercy and thy grace To those who venture into Space.

I think Varley simply quotes this version in Tango Charlie and Foxtrot Romeo but I do not have the text on hand.

2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:3167:66A1:1588:91FA (talk) 09:09, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

That's nice. Have sources commented upon these? DonIago (talk) 14:33, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

The Heinlein Journal #29 – Winter 2021-’22 (Vol. 2, No. 5), pp. 16-23, documents the verse in an article by Dr. C. Herbert Gilliland, a retired professor of English at the United States Naval Academy, and a retired naval reserve captain. The Heinlein Journal is a publication of The Heinlein Society, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. The article describes an artifact found posthumously in the collection of Virginia Heinlein - a gift of handwritten sheet music for EFStS incorporating the verse. The sheet music is now in the collection of the US Naval Academy, and was performed there by one of Professor Gilliland's classes on 28-Apr-2008. The verse originally appeared in the short story Ordeal in Space (1948), collected in The Past Through Tomorrow. (Heinlein was a graduate of the US Naval academy, reaching the rank of lieutenant.)

It is reportedly referenced in James Gifford's "Robert A. Heinlein: A Reader's Companion" (Nitrosyncretic Press, Sacramento, California, 2000) in the section on "Ordeal in Space" but I don't have that book.

"The Wandering Minstrels" blog quoted it in a Feb. 2003 entry, signed "martin", remembering the Columbia spacecraft disaster.

Is this sufficient for Wikipedia? DonWW (talk) 04:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Blogs typically aren't reliable sources. Can you provide a source that's clearly more secondary? I'm not saying these sources aren't sufficient, but but I'm not sure they are. DonIago (talk) 13:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)