Talk:What You Want (Evanescence song)

Lyrics

I changed the "bad" reflection into "pale" reflection, since Amy wrote that on the official forum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dean64 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Notability

As of now, this song has zero notability and the article content consists only of bulk quotes from a single article (possible copyright violation, even if it IS quoted). This song has not charted, has not yet been released, has no covers, etc. If you wish to slowly create this article, please do so in a User Sandbox until the article can meet Wikipedia's notability standards. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 23:37, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

The single is already announced via MTV (a reliable source) and Evanescence's official website (a direct source). Wikipedia's page on Notability of music states "they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources". This single DOES have have significant independent coverage in reliable sources. The United States copyright law states that it is permissible to use quotes "for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, and scholarly reports. There are no legal rules permitting the use of a specific number of words, a certain number of musical notes, or percentage of a work". Also, information in this article IS presented in a form other than quotes. — ErickAutumn (t @ c) , 15 July 2011 (UTC)

ONE source is not "significant coverage". With that said, the proper quote of WP:NSONG you're looking for is "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable." (emphasis mine).

This song meets none of those qualifications per Song Notability. Simply having it mentioned in ONE source is not grounds to have its own article AT THIS TIME. The recommendation that the article be developed in SANDBOX (since there STILL is no worthy information even in the article outside directly quoting this ONE source) is the best procedure here before someone comes along and nominates it for deletion (might even be me soon unless some actual content makes its way to this stub), losing all editor attribution. I'm not getting into an edit war with you, but your reasons for keeping this in article space at the moment are clearly against the guidelines of music notability. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 00:23, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:What You Want (Evanescence song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Prism (talk · contribs) 10:50, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Prose

Lead section

• I think you should mention the overall theme of the song.
• "instrumentally" is redundant
• "on several other component Billboard charts" this makes it seem like the song peaked at number 68 on the other Billboard charts... maybe "achieved higher success in its component charts"
• "number 1 of the UK Rock Chart" of → on // or change it to "topped the UK Rock Chart"
• "other charts in different countries" (other is redundant)
• accompanying is redundant
• I'm not sure if the date when the video started production is essential to the lead.
• "Upon its online release" is very similar to "Upon its release" which was already used in the previous paragraph, could you reword that part so it doesn't become repetitive?
• "later" is used twice in back-to-back sentences

Background and recording

• I think linking New York City is overlinking and you could remove the state.
• "then-upcoming first single from Evanescence's third self-titled album" this is already given in the lead". Make it simple and change it to "the song".
• "more than a hit." How?
• Couldn't the release information be used to expand the 'Release' section?
• "Lee stated the song was inspired by and talked about her relationship with her fans, and the realization that "this [the music career] is what I'm supposed to do".[2] In an interview with MTV News, she explained the theme and the meaning behind the song, "It's about freedom — that's definitely a constant theme on the record — but, it's like Evanescence, and me, and my relationship with the music and the fans, and coming to that realization of 'This is what I'm supposed to do ... I want to do this,' And when it says, 'Remember who you really are,' that's exactly everything you could assume it means" This block of text repeats the same information twice. Perhaps

Lee stated the song was inspired by and talked about her relationship with the band's fans, and the realization that following a music career "is what I'm supposed to do". She also explained that the theme of the song was freedom, saying that the song's lyric "Remember who you really are" was "exactly everything you could assume it means."

• Try to paraphrase the last paragraph a bit, it's just that this section is kind of heavy on quotes.

Release

• "will be released" → "would be released"

Composition

• PopCrush and About.com are not reliable

Chart performance

• "It debuted at number 35 on the Billboard Alternative Songs chart in the United States.[51] The song peaked at number 7 on the Billboard Mainstream Rock Chart." Join the sentences with while so the first paragraph of this section flows better.
• "because it coincided with the band's Evanescence Tour" What date are you referring to? Clarify. (April or August)

Music video "The video featured the band's fans who were featured" repetition of featured

• "videos adding" is missing a comma
• ";ee knew" (something's wrong here)
• Break the last paragraph in two

Live performances

• Artisdirect is a typo
• "rocking a lot harder than you might expect" is this referring to the performance of the song or the concert/band overall? if it's the latter, then remove it

References

• Billboard references are inconsistent, being that some are formatted like Billboard (Prometheus etc) and others like Billboard. Prometheus.
• You forgot Rolling Stone's publisher
• Top-40 Charts is a website to avoid, according to WP:BADCHARTS.

Everything  Done except removing Pop Crush. It can be used in GAs, but it is not used in FAs. My love is love (talk) 17:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC)