Talk:Everybody's Fool

Everybody's Fool 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 7, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Everybody's Fool article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Evanescence (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Evanescence, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.EvanescenceWikipedia:WikiProject EvanescenceTemplate:WikiProject EvanescenceEvanescence articles

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

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Least favourite Video

there were no references and I looked and looked and I can't find it so I'm going to erase it...Lijahrobrt (talk) 02:37, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Everybody's Fool/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 12:52, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
"F Major" -> "F major" Done

"She also portrays an extreme motorcycle girl in a commercial who drinks a soft drink called "Lies" that affords its drinker the opportunity to "Be somebody."[14]" - what does "extreme" means? Is this POV? Done

"In another Japanese commercial she is playing " - not sure why you switched to simple present Done
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
References are ok, but could you replace the Amazon refs with another, more reliable?
Not done Amazon is reliable.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
see above about "extreme"
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Dabsolver check: ok
Checklinks check: ok
Reflinks check: ok
Fixed dashes
All in all a very nice article
- Hold and I will pass if you fix the issues.

Everything

Done. My love is love (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will pass! Very nice article! :)

Not Dedicated to Britney

Sadly Britney Spears fans repeat fake news about her and they have reported on Breatheheavy.com that this song was dedicated to Britney.. As this article clearly states, Amy Lee was talking about fake celebrity. She did NOT dedicate this song to Britney which would have been the opposite of her intention to encourage young girls not to hold Britney and her type up as role models. In fact as this video was filmed years before Britney's break down, one might wonder if Britney saw the video and was inspired to wear a pink wig and cut her hair just like the character in the video, not because she was crazy, but because she was choosing to act out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14B:4401:D5C0:4D76:F34B:EF17:3587 (talk) 02:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Everybody's Fool. 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://www.webcitation.org/6DoyycQ1B?url=http://listenin.org/player/playshow.aspx?Show=%2FThemes%2Flistenin%2Fplayer%2FMakePostPlaylist.ashx%3FPlaylistOrder%3D3291%2C3292%2C3293%2C3294%2C3295%2C3296%2C3285%2C3286%2C3287%2C3288%2C3284%2C3289%2C3290 to http://listenin.org/player/playshow.aspx?Show=%2FThemes%2Flistenin%2Fplayer%2FMakePostPlaylist.ashx%3FPlaylistOrder%3D3291%2C3292%2C3293%2C3294%2C3295%2C3296%2C3285%2C3286%2C3287%2C3288%2C3284%2C3289%2C3290&Title=Evanescence+-+interviews+

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: 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) 17:22, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Everybody's Fool. 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/20121213184409/http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=2666 to http://www.the-trades.com/article.php?id=2666
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.theofficialcharts.com/archive-chart/_/1/2004-06-19

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: 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) 19:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Statement in lede not backed by article

"Critical reception towards "Everybody's Fool" were mixed to positive with critics praising the nu metal sound of the song." Curious to know more, I went to the Reception section which states "Johnny Loftus of Allmusic classified 'Everybody's Fool' as a nu metal song". This acknowledges a critic identified it as nu metal, but includes no praise for it. Second, what's "mixed" about the reviews? Who said anything bad about the song, and what did they say was bad about the song? Currently the Reception section has critics talking about the theme of the song, one predicts it would be a chart-topping hit (which says little about its quality- it's only a prediction of popularity), one calls it "cold, sad and angry" (could be positive or negative), one calling the singing "disembodied" (positive or negative?). Ribbet32 (talk) 00:38, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]