Talk:Alice (Avril Lavigne song)

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

Disney Low‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies 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.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alice vs Alice (Underground)

Why is this article called "Alice"? The song is listed as "Alice (Underground)" by the official press release here and only as "Alice" on unreliable sources. Can someone verify the actual title please? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 23:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avril did an interview with Ryan Seacrest and she calls it "Alice." Straight from the source, so works for me. Obviously we'll know by the end of the week. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 06:30, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Link to the interview here. Relevant part starts at roughly 4:30. "I'm shooting the video today and then the song, I called it 'Alice'..." Rorschach 07:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

She definitely calls it "Alice"—Amazon.com has it listed as such as well, which leads me to believe this is definitely the title. The press release adds "(Underground)" to it, so maybe there was an "inside" change; time will tell! Also, note that the "Deryck Whibley as mixer" part (see lead-in to article) is at the far end of the interview, beyond the otherwise-relevant segment of the interview. I thought I would clarify this point before it gets contested. –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 09:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Release dates

According to the interview I linked above, the song will be released on January 31 on MySpace and on radio on February 1st. Which is appropriate for the infobox? Currently it says February 4th, which was the original MySpace release date. Should both be included?

| Released = January 31, 2010 ([[MySpace]])<ref name='ryanseacrest'>{{cite video|people = Ryan Seacrest, Avril Lavigne |date = 2010-01-26 |title = Ryan Seacrest On-Air: Avril Lavigne |url = http://www.ryanseacrest.com/audio/?MediaID=559 |format = Adobe Flash Player |medium = Radio broadcast |accessdate = 2010-01-27 |time = 4:30 | quote = ""It goes to radio February 1st and January 31st it's going to by on MySpace." }}</ref> <br/> February 1, 2010 (Radio)<ref name='ryanseacrest'/> --Rorschach 07:56, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I refactored the entire article and updated it to reflect the new interview. I noticed Avril had different release dates as well; I used hers as the official source of information—this may or may not be against first-source policies. –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 09:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:No_original_research: Primary sources are acceptable but should be used with care. Ideally we should find a secondary source (I'll see if any news articles are posted later on about the interview). But since this one doesn't really require any interpretation it should be fine for now. Here's an article citing the Feb. 1st date for the radio premiere. --Rorschach 09:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Original research would refer to my interviewing Avril. On Air with Ryan Seacrest is a legitimate source that's ok to use; there is no original opinion or arguments being used. It's fine to cite the interview. The only reason I questioned it was because Avril's dates were different to what's been published. Obviously secondary sources are wrong. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 10:31, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well the interview is indeed a primary source, per Wikipedia:No_original_research (and more specifically, Footnote #2 in the Notes section). A secondary source would be an article recounting the details of the interview. At any rate, there's no interpretation involved so there's no problem with using it. --Rorschach 11:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I'm glad you were able to confirm the interview was properly cited then. –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 11:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Wavin' Flag"

I'm on the fence about the "Wavin' Flag" song being listed as Avril's next single. Technically, it's K'naan's single, but Avril participated in a group cover of the song. But that group is called Young Artists for Haiti, not Avril Lavigne. If Avril had recorded the cover by herself, not as a group effort, I could see this being resolved easily. Any thoughts or ideas? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think it should be put in the 'Other singles' section for her article but not listed as her next single. Zylo1994 (talk) 16:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LDR Referencing system

Because this article is relatively new, I have converted the referencing system to a system to keep the article edit window free from reference clutter. This is an incredible advantage for those of us who don't use special software. Please see Help:Footnotes#List-defined_references for a very simple explanation of exactly what is happening.

In short:

You may now add/edit/remove references by editing the References section
Every reference must have a name assigned to it. For example, <ref name="rollingstone">{{cite web |url=...}}</ref>
Every citation only requires the <ref name=xxxxxxxx/> segment

This is a new feature implemented in the {{reflist}} template since September 2009. The gist is to keep all references together in a section and to free up space and time while editing.

As always, with any referencing system, be aware of orphaning references by adding/removing information, and of course, be sure that referenced information remains properly cited when inserting sentences or shuffling phrases around.

Any questions, feel free to ask me. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 04:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charts

The song dropped out of the UK singles chart. here Should we add this? Zylo1994 (talk) 07:22, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not up on the charts rules, so I may be wrong, but the song peaked at 59, which your link shows, and which is already mentioned on the article. I think that's all that needs to be said. Weeks on the chart don't really matter unless it's some record-breaking event... ? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 07:49, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks. It's just that sometimes I see a summary of how the song did in the charts section with this sort of information. Zylo1994 (talk) 16:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Album version vs radio edit

So, is there such thing as a reference for these "album version" times (which seem to differ between the article's Wiki languages)? Because I sure can't find one. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 08:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The album version has an extra verse + chorus so its longer. The radio edit (which is used for the film and music video) is shorter. Can iTunes not be used as a reference? Zylo1994 (talk) 08:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can't find any mention of this longer song on iTunes, Amazon, or anywhere online. If you have a link, that would be great. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:20, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I could only provide a YouTube link. Would that be okay? Zylo1994 (talk) 09:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I found it. Seems legit. I don't understand why the full song wasn't released on Almost Alice. I wouldn't use the YouTube video as a reference; I suppose we'll just have to wait for the song to be re-released one way or another. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 16:55, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If Keep Holding On is anything to go by, it will probably appear on her fourth album and at a guess I'd say it would be the full version. Zylo1994 (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand calling it "Album version", though. If on both the single and the soundtrack, it has the shorter version, wouldn't this other version be best described as an "Extended version"? ~ [ Scott M. Howard ]:[ Talk ] ~ 18:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, the "album version" is the Almost Alice (three minute) version. The "extended version" would be fine, except that I actually find the longer track length crystal because there are absolutely zero reliable sources (YouTube is a pirated copy of the song) of any actual 5 minute release. I'm staying uninvolved because I've removed it in the past and users seem intent on re-introducing it to the article. But I think policy would require that only one track length be listed, the 3 minute version. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

K. I don't really mind it either way, I was just getting confused with calling it "album version" thinking that I had missed something. =D ~ [ Scott M. Howard ]:[ Talk ] ~ 21:11, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the runtime. I'm trying to bring the article to B-class status, so once a reliable (and legal) source has been found, it can be re-added. ("...any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited." Source: Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment#Quality_scale) – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 01:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed "radio edit" from the track list because the edit wasn't made for radio, it was made for the actual Almost Alice album. I'm very curious to see, like Zylo suggested, if the longer version will be included on the fourth album, in which case there will simply be two versions, AA version and 4th album version. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First song written on her own

It was me who added that it's the first song she has written on her own and I see it has an 'original research?' tag. Maybe I didn't phrase it very well; she may have written hundreds of songs all by herself at home etc. but what I meant was that this song is the first proper, released song she has written on her own. Do you see what I mean? Zylo1994 (talk) 16:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Phrasing was fine, except the "notable" part. But did you make this conclusion yourself? Or did you read it somewhere? The former is original research, the latter is merely a case of "citation needed." I tagged it {{or}} because I haven't read anything about it being her first self-written song anywhere, but of course I don't read every article on Lavigne that comes along lol. Doesn't matter if it's true or not, it just needs to have been mentioned elsewhere, or else it's not a valid entry. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 19:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. But surely all her albums stating that every song is co-written is enough?Zylo1994 (talk) 04:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Wikipedia is a tertiary source and only reports what's already been reported. Zero original thought. We are zombies. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No other input from anyone else regarding "It is the first song Lavigne has written entirely on her own, her previous songs being co-written with various songwriters."? I changed the tag to {{cn}} but am I wrong in tagging this sentence at all? It's not an opinion, it's true as far as I know, and maybe it's one of those sentences that doesn't need to be cited. I'm completely on the fence, and my tagging it (at all) could've been entirely wrong. It's one of those things I'm admittedly confused about, so I'm hoping someone can just tell it to me like it is? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 06:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In a way, I'm with you. Not 100% sure if it needs a source or not, but that leads me to agree that the CN tag is appropriate. To me it says "Hey, we're going to leave this statement on the article, but it's not sourced. It's not a big deal if the statement stays, but we'd prefer to have a source". I think that's pretty accurate. =D ~ [ Scott M. Howard ]:[ Talk ] ~ 12:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, works for me. The only source I managed to find was unreliable; last.fm with a user-editable summary. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this counts, Virgin Music on-demand has "It is the first song Lavigne has written entirely on her own" in their infobox. I do wonder though if they got that from Wikipedia...Still, does that help at all? Zylo1994 (talk) 12:01, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Do you have a link?~~ No wait, that's the exact same wording from the article. Not reliable at all. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 14:36, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

I was wondering if this would be suitable for the critical reception section. It talks about Lavigne's live performance on the Jay Leno show saying that she's grown as a vocalist. Zylo1994 (talk) 08:49, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of the website before, but it has an author, a publish date and appears to be a legitimate entertainment news website. The critical reception section does look a bit large, but it's good to show opinions from all angles. I say go for it. It certainly couldn't hurt the article. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 14:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I added it to the last paragraph where they talk about her vocals. I didn't add it to the professional ratings table though. Zylo1994 (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Musical structure

I found this really great website and thought I'd try out a musical structure section. I know it looks really bare so I was wondering if it should maybe be a sub-section within History? Also, as you can probably tell, I don't know that much about musical structure so I'm not 100% certain if my wording is correct - to be honest I borrowed a lot of it from My Life Would Suck Without You! Oh and the reference I added for all the information (ref [14]) isn't using the given title as the link to the website - could someone please take a look at that because I can't figure it out! Zylo1994 (talk) 19:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ref fix I facepalmed when I saw my error...So is the section okay? If it is then I'll apply it to every AL single-article. Zylo1994 (talk) 11:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the four month delay in replying lol, this one went under my radar. I would leave it as is. If the article were ever up for a GAN, then we can cross that bridge then—most likely try to expand on it if possible. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:09, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar nominaton

Alice didn't make it to the final four nominations (source) but what do we say its result is in the award section? It didn't make it to the short list but it was a possible song, so was it technically nominated? Zylo1994 (talk) 16:06, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with the awards sections of song articles. But my own opinion would be to remove it entirely. If it wasn't nominated, then there's nothing notable about it "pending". – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 18:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well this is the problem; it sort of was nominated. It just didn't make the final four. Zylo1994 (talk) 18:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, it wasn't nominated, then. I looked at a few headlines that make it clear that there were 41 songs competing to be nominated for the Oscar. So the song isn't nominated; like you said, only four are official nominees. Another headline used the word "pre-nominated", but surely that doesn't count as much of anything. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 20:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection

The IP editor whose edits lead to the page protection is apparently looking for someone to do the work for him.[1] The point of the protection, of course, is to require discussing the issue. I am not involved in this issue and intend to stay out of it. - SummerPhD (talk) 03:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alice (Avril Lavigne song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100214105556/http://www.calgaryherald.com:80/entertainment/Disc+Picks/2539771/story.html to http://www.calgaryherald.com/entertainment/Disc+Picks/2539771/story.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alice (Avril Lavigne song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110726184319/http://www.promusicae.es/files/listastonos/Top%2050%20Canciones_w15_2010.pdf to http://www.promusicae.es/files/listastonos/Top%2050%20Canciones_w15_2010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:52, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alice (Avril Lavigne song). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fdr.com.ua/compilation/P/435/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Alice (Avril Lavigne song). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604161800/http://www.billboard-japan.com/system/jp_charts/hot100/ to http://www.billboard-japan.com/system/jp_charts/hot100/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.billboard.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 08:13, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Alice (Avril Lavigne song). 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 18:18, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Remove "Brazil Hot 100" review

I removed the ranking of this song for the Brazil Hot 100. It did not have a proper reference, and I was unable to find that ranking anywhere other than on this slide. Balon Greyjoy (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]