Talk:Because of You (Kelly Clarkson song)
|Because of You (Kelly Clarkson song) 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.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I'm confused with Mel Etitis. Why is the header "Song information" being removed? If it's in every other music single article, there is no excuse to be removing it from this one. Winnermario 23:18, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
- It isn't in every other music-single article.
- We use section headings to break up text when it's too long; sections help to break up a long article into manageable chunks for easier reading. This article is too short to need it, as indicated by the fact that the whole of the text becomes the one "section". --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:56, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Digital songs and digital songs?
There appear to be two "Hot Digital Songs" in the charts posted in the article. Did the person who added these positions perhaps mean "hot digital songs" and "hot digital tracks"? Someone with the following knowledge should make the correct edits immediately. Thank you. Winnermario 23:20, September 13, 2005 (UTC)
Reasons For Changes
The USA Charts should be listed in one table because they all have something in common namely, they all come from the same region ie. USA.
The International Charts also have a common element, namely they all come from regions outside the USA.
Listing the two tables as one does not make sense because there are many USA charts and only one chart from each of the other regions.
-South African User
This article has been posted at RfC as a sport of test case for these issues in general. The two main questions are:
- Should an article that's this short be divided into sections?
- Pro: other similar (but longer) articles are divided.
- Con: it goes against the guidelines in Wikipedia:Guide to layout#Structure of the article: "veruse of subheadings should be avoided, as it can make the article look cluttered. Short paragraphs and single sentences generally do not warrant their own subheading".
- Should the table of information be divided into two or more smaller tables?
- Pro: it's less confusing.
- Con: It's neater and more compact; there are no (NPoV) grounds to distinguish between the U.S. and "International" (or between "The World" and "Billboard").
With the "pro" reasons I'm playing devil' advocate, as it's not my position. If I've misunderstood the reasons, or omitted some, I'm sure the proponents will correct me...
Mel, I have some other points I'd like to add. Should I edit them onto your heading or just state my views here? Let me know.
Anyway, for the tables, I believe they should not be compacted. Coming from the point of view of compaction, nowadays many (if not most) singles of these types of popular music have multiple versions charting on the same chart. As these are different entries from one another, it needs to be pointed out and stated. While older singles tend to have only one version chart, as stated above most newer songs have multiple versions charting. For the sake of consistency, one look should be applied to the tables, and that is the current seperated view. Some have argued that the songs with multiple versions could be left alone, and the versions with one version could be compacted, but it would present a very messed up look on a chronology. For the sake of consistency, the current seperated and uncompacted view should be used. OmegaWikipedia 22:09, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- All articles don't have to be formatted exactly the same way.
- The tables could be easily compacted by combining both into one, and removing the name of the song (only include that distinction if, and only if, different versions of a song chart on major notable charts). And we certainly don't need a chart trajectory. Of what encyclopedic value is such a table? It turns this article and the others into scorecards for each artist, an attempt to show "who did better" and how. All that is important, as far as an encyclopedia--even one as broad as the WIkipedia is concerend--are peaks, unless the song did something very, very unusual during its chart run. The rest of the information is simply overinformation. --FuriousFreddy 16:01, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- All article should be formatted exactly the same way.
- I disagree with everything you typed. Combining tables makes the article look messy and unorganized, whereas when they are separate, it is clearer, and vision-friendly. Now, the thing about the chart trajectory heavily offends me. There is a reason chart trajectories are being added. For one, they indicate how well the song ran on a specific chart. This shows if the song had a bad beginning on the charts, but then did well or vice versa, etcetra. Also, this is indeed an encyclopedia—perhaps someone wants the chart trajectory, and if they are all on Wikipedia, it makes it easier for them to explore the web, staying within Wiki boundaries. This is useful to others. Finally, it's an encyclopedia, again. If it's about a song, the chart trajectory is acceptable, since it has to do with the single. --Winnermario 21:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Most other song related stubs I've seen do not print lyrics- do we need to here? I understand the song is personal to her, and the lyrics illustrate this point, but every verse is surely a little much? If the concensus is to retain them, they need formatting- perhaps indenting?
EvocativeIntrigue 21:52, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Everyone says the lyrics are personal to her and she wrote the song. I have heard this song years ago. I believe in the early 90s. I know it was definitely before Kelly Clarkson was popular. I have searched for the singer, but haven't had any luck yet. At the time the song wasn't a huge hit. Just a little popular. Does anyone know who it is that I'm thinking of? When I first heard Mrs. Clarkson sing this song, I thought she had just done a re-make of it. I didn't know that she says she wrote it. It was sort of a pop song. But it had a lot more power behind it than what I've heard from Kelly Clarkson. If I am mistaken on this, I do apologize. But, I wish someone would really check on that. There has to be some record of it some where. Thanks. Gracie30 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:36, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Is it necessary to go off on a tagent about Carrie Underwood and Guy Sebastian?
- Yes! I mean, no. Not here, anyway. Stevage 08:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 03:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- For the benefit of future editors who come across this, I can't see any YouTube links now as of 20:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC). (Actually, I can't see any YouTube links as of November 9, 2006 either, so maybe the links were removed before then, heh.) Anyway, all seems to be well now. --Ciaran H 20:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:BTHE.jpg
Image:BTHE.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
"Because of You" still a current single?
I doubt that this song should be considered a current single still. Released in 2005, the song hardly appears on the radio anymore than a song that isn't a current single. I think that it's appropriate to remove the current single template. Thoughts? •Silver• Talk | Contribs 22:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- The Reba/Kelly version is currently on the charts, so yes, it's a current single. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 02:48, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Because of You (Kelly Clarkson song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- Which is the correct image; File:Kelly Clarkson - Because of You.jpg or File:Because of You Single.PNG? If the first one is the correct image, then reduce its size to 300 × 300 pixels. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Add the place where the song was recorded in the "Recorded" part in the infobox. Done— My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- I've copy-edited the lead but there are still a few issues.
- "It was written by Clarkson with David Hodges and Ben Moody and produced by Hodges and Moody" a bit awkward. Don't you think that this flows better: "It was written by Clarkson, David Hodges and Ben Moody while the production was handled by Hodges and Moody"? Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "... her request was not entertained by her label." - "... her request was not accepted by her label." Done
- "Critically, "Because of You" garnered generally positive receptions." - "Critically, "Because of You" garnered positive reviews by most music critics who generally praised Clarkson's vocals." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "... in the United States, the song peaked at number seven..." - "in the United States, it peaked at number seven..." (The song is already repeated in the previouse sentences.) Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "The video won the MTV Video Music Award for Best Female Video at the 2006 MTV Video Music" - "It won in the category for [[MTV Video Music Award for Best Female Video|Best Female Video]] at the 2006 MTV Video Music Awards." Done
- "It was covered by several artists, including Ronan Parke. - Explain who is he. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Background and writing
- "It was written by Clarkson with David Hodges and Ben Moody and produced by Hodges and Moody" - Same as above. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "She took less than 25 minutes to write the song lyrics." - "She wrote the lyrics of the song in less than 25 minutes." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Un-link Evanescence in the quotation "Hearing the Evanescence album...". We shouldn't link terms in the quotes and Evanescence is linked below in the critical reception section. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- ""Because of You" is a pop rock song with a length of three minutes and thirty-nine seconds." - This isn't said in the source you cited. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "According to the sheetmusic..." - "According to the sheet music..." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Please provide a source after "The song begins with piano-led melody as Clarkson sings "I will not make / the same mistake that you did"" - this sentence. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- I've also done some small correction in the article because I didn't want to point them here.
- Critical reception
- There were several reviews in the composition section which I moved in this section as they were discussing the song critically, not musically.
- Again there were some small mistakes that I didn't want to point here.
- Chart performance
- Please write the numbers bigger that ten with numbers not with letters. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Numbers as figures or words Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "It also topped the Pop Songs chart." - When? Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "On December 2009, the song appeared at number seven on the list of Best of the 2000s - Pop Songs compiled by Billboard." - ""Because of You" became the seventh best selling single of the 2000s decade on the Pop Songs chart complied by Billboard." Plus put this sentence right after the information about topping the Pop Songs chart. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- "Additionally, the song appeared on the ARIA's Year End Charts of 2006 at number fifty-eight. - "The song became the fifty eighth best-selling single in Australia in 2006." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Music video
- Small issues fixed by me.
- "The video starts at the Clarkson household. - "The video starts at Clarkson's household." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Reception and accolades
- "Elizabeth Black of VH1 Blog ranked the music video at number four in her list of five emotive music video performances review. - "Elizabeth Black of [[VH1]] ranked the music video at number four in her list of "Five Emotive Music Video Performances"." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Live performances
- On August 21, 2007, Clarkson appeared on the fifth season of Canadian Idol as a mentor for the Top 5 contestants and performed "Because of You" and "Never Again (2007)." - "On August 21, 2007, Clarkson performed "Because of You" and "Never Again" (2007) on the Canadian Idol where she was also a mentor for the top five contestants" - I still find the fact that she was a mentor to be unimportant. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Clarkson's performance of the song during the tour in the Hammerstein Ballroom, New York City, was given a positive review by Jim Cantiello of MTV. - Un-link New York City, as it is linked above. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Track listing
- The comma goes right after "Because of You" not in the whole nime. Ex. "Because of You (Jason Nevins Radio)" should be "Because of You" (Jason Nevins Radio). Do it everywhere you see it. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Credits and personnel
- Link liner notes in the sentence "Credits adapted from the liner notes of Breakaway." Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Charts and certifications
- Add "|accessdate=January xx, 2012" (xx is the date when you added the Template:Singlechart) in the chart section. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Year-end charts
- I'm pretty sure it is listed on several other year-end charts. Done — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Release history
- Can you expand this a little more?
- I could not find any other sources — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- , , , , , , , . Maybe you have some of this sources in the track listing section so be careful not to repeat them. And remove the information about the release of the music video in this section. My love is love (talk) 00:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC) Done — My December (talk) 06:10, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
- I could not find any other sources — My December (talk) 08:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- There's a problem with File:Because of You Single.PNG. Please improve its summary. A bot will delete it if you don't. My love is love (talk) 16:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)'
- I'll continue tomorrow. There are lots of problems with the references. My love is love (talk) 20:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
- Cover versions
- "Lisa Tucker was eliminated in the Top 10 following her performance of the song on the fifth season of American Idol." - Awkward. It looks like she was eliminated because of the song not because of her performance. Done— My December (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- Reba McEntire & Kelly Clarkson version
- First of all change the name of this section to Reba McEntire and Kelly Clarkson version. Done— My December (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- "The duet garnered mixed reviews from critics who felt that even though McEntire's singing was beautiful..." - Change beautiful with some other word. Done— My December (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
- The other paragraphs has small mistakes which i corrected.
- First of all, I want to ask you do you want me to go through the references, or you want to do them yourself? I have to tell you there are lot of issues with them.
- FN 7: Billboard is italicized. Plus add publisher=Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 17: add publisher=Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 18: Unlink Blogcritics.
- FN 22: Unlink Billboard and Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 28: Link Yahoo!.
- FN 29, 30, 32, 33, 36, 37: Unlink Billboard. Plus remove Billboard from FN: 32, 33, 36, 37.
- FN 35: Unlink Australian Recording Industry Association
- FN 38 and 39: Media Control Charts and Bundesverband Musikindustrie shouldn't be italicized. And replace aberratio GmbH on FN 39 with PhonoNet GmbH.
- FN 43: Unlink MTV News.
- FN 46, 47: Unreliable. Remove them with the accompanying text.
- FN 49: Unlink MTV.
- FN 50: Unlink About.com.
- FN 51: Los Angeles Times is italicized. Plus link Tribune Company.
- FN 52: Rolling Stone is italicized. Plus unlink it and change Wenner Media LLC to Wenner Media.
- FN 56 and 57: Unlink MTV.
- FN 58: USA Today is italicizes. Plus rename the publisher to Gannett Company.
- FN 59: This one is from Los Angeles Times not Eddy Hartenstein. Plus unlink Tribune Company.
- FN 60: Unlink Yahoo! Music.
- FN 61: Change Straight.com to The Georgia Straight.
- FN 62: Change The Hartford Courant to Hartford Courant. Plus add publisher=Tribune Company.
- FN 63: Change Gannett Company, Inc. to Gannett Company.
- FN 64: Soul Shine Magazine is not italicized.
- FN 65: Unlink MTV.
- FN 66: Change Jann Wenner to Rolling Stone.
- FN 67: Allmusic isn't italicized. Plus unlink both Allmusic and Rovi Corporation.
- FN 68, 69: Remove RCA Records from here. FN 69 should be publisher=iTunes Store. Apple Inc and link both of them.
- FN 94: Add year.
- FN 97: Change Dutchcharts.nl to Dutch Top 40 per consistency.
- FN 98, 99, 100: Add year.
- FN 102: Unlink both Billboard and Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 104: Store in iTunes Store is with capital letter. Plus remove double full stop from Apple Inc and.
- FN 105, 106 and 107: Remove RCA Records. Plus unlink Amazon.com from FN: 106 and 107.
- FN 108: Same as FN 104. Plus unlink iTunes Store.
- FN 110: Digital Spy is not italicized. Plus its publisher is Hachette Filipacchi Médias.
- FN 111 and 112: Unlink MTV.
- FN 114, 115 and 116: Unlink Allkpop.
- FN 117: USA Today is italicized. publisher=Gannett Company. Unlink them.
- FN 119: Allmusic and Rovi Corporation aren't italicizes and unlink them.
- FN 120: Blogcritics is not italicized and un-link it.
- FN 121: Unlink Billboard and Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 122: It's Radio & Records not Radio and Records.
- FN 123: PopMatters is not italicized. Plus remove Sarah Zupko from here.
- FN 124: About.com is note italicized. Unlink The New York Times Company.
- FN 125, 126: Country Universe is not italicized.
- FN 128: Unlink AOL.
- FN 129: Unlink Billboard and Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 130: Unlink About.com and Add publisher=The New York Times Company
- FN 131: Unlink Rolling Stone; it's also italicized and add publisher=Wenner Media
- FN 132: Same as 130.
- FN 133: Change Ascap.com to American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers
- FN 134 and 135, 137, 138, 140, 142: Unlink Billboard and Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 136: same as 130.
- FN 139: Add Billboard and Prometheus Global Media.
- FN 141: Yahoo! Music is not italicized and unlink it. Also unlink Yahoo!.
- FN 143, 145, 148: Country Music Television is not italicized.
- FN 144: Unlink MTV. Plus it is not italicized.
- FN 146: Unlink Los Angeles Times and add Tribune Company.
- FN 149: Oprah.com is not italicized.
- FN 151: Allmusic is not italicized; unlink Allmusic and Rovi Corporation
- FN 152: Unlink iTunes Store and Apple Inc. iTunes Store is not italicized.