Talk:All I Really Want (Alanis Morissette song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the All I Really Want (Alanis Morissette song) 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

Comments

All I Really Want is the first track on Alanis Morissette's highly successful debut, Jagged Little Pill, and was the last single released from the album(though it was released to Modern Rock radio in the US between You Oughta Know and All I Really Want in 1995.

What does this mean? "All I Really Want" was released to radio between "You Oughta Know" and "All I Really Want"? Pumpkingrrl 05:56, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It should have been "Hand in My Pocket". Somebody's corrected it now. Extraordinary Machine 22:21, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The song references Estella. "I'm like Estella, I like to reel it in and spit it out..." Who is Estella? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.150.58.102 (talk) 19:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move. -- tariqabjotu 01:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All I Really Want → All I Really Want (Alanis Morissette song) – Alanis Morissette is more well-known than Kim Lukas. However, the Morissette song is less successful, while the Lukas one is more successful based on charts. All I Really Want (disambiguation) should be primary. --Relisted. -- tariqabjotu 17:48, 16 September 2013 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 05:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All I Really Want (disambiguation) → All I Really Want

Comment this is a malformatted multimove request. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 10:04, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support disambiguation should be primary -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 10:04, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Kim Lukas' song has done commercially better, but I would like to gain attention that the notability of Lukas with independent sources is being questioned, and after doing two deletion discussions, other users are suggesting that her wiki article be kept due to her singles becoming successful internationally, while not raising concerns about the independent and secondary coverage she has received. 和DITOR E tails 19:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Mild support but we don't do move requests like this, we need to redo the request to also have it on All I Really Want (disambiguation). Red Slash 00:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I have placed a notification at Talk:All I Really Want (disambiguation) and appended it to the request description above. I think that should be sufficient. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The Alanis Morissette song is the clear primary topic. It was viewed 3,090 times in the last 90 days, roughly 6 times more than the Kim Lukas song at 523. This is basically a WP:TWODABS situation as none of the other entries on the dab page have their own articles or much coverage at any other article. Of the two, this one is clearly the primary topic.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

and the Dylan song 5940, it's possible that a large number of those hitting the Alanis Morrissette song were mishits, autofill in RH search box missing the "To Do" for the Dylan/Byrds/Cher song, or for the 7 other songs with the same name as the Alanis Morrisette song. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:14, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Dylan song doesn't have this title, it's called "All I Really Want to Do". It's a partial title match and the obvious differences in the title distinguish the sufficiently from one another already. We don't need to invent reasons to send readers to disambiguation pages.--Cúchullain ^t/c 18:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I get that but

Schwann Monthly Guide to Stereo Records 1967 lists "All I Really Want (Byrds)"

Schwann Monthly Guide to Stereo Records 1968 lists "Cher — All I Really Want (11-65)"

Songwriters: a biographical dictionary with discographies - Page 139 lists "All I Really Want 139 285 • DYLAN"

The title difference wasn't enough to fox some sources. In any case it's a secondary point. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:03, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Primary use is pretty useless for songs where fame and notability are so transient. --Richhoncho (talk) 12:52, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cuchullain. With only two articles to choose from, this one seems primary enough given WP:TWODABS. I'll grant that this song being at the unqualified title might skew results somewhat, but even if every one of the Lukas views started off here, that still leaves 2567 views for this one. --BDD (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. WP:Primarytopic says, A topic is primary for a term, with respect to long-term significance, if it has substantially greater enduring notability and educational value than any other topic associated with that term. I can't see how this applies to the great majority songs which are only transiently notable. That's before even taking into consideration the generic title "All I really Want" --Richhoncho (talk) 13:47, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But that's a relative consideration. A topic of lesser significance in absolute terms can still be a Wikipedia primary topic if other uses are demonstrably less significance. No, it's unlikely that the vague "educational value" clause will apply to many songs, but the general principle of making it easier to find more sought-after topics still applies. And I'm not sure what you mean by generic title, unless the phrase itself is somehow encyclopedic. --BDD (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Generic - as in commonplace, as in 2,430,000,000 Ghits - I noted all the Alanis Morissette related entries also had the words Alanis Morissette there too - with the exception of WP. Anybody looking for the AM song will probably not bother with WP... Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 19:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support all 8 of the "All I Really Want" songs mentioned on en.wp are probably going to get confused with All I Really Want to Do by Bob Dylan which was later covered and hits for both The Byrds and Cher. I certainly wouldn't have known to add "..To Do" to the title in order to find the Dylan/Byrds/Cher song. Let alone that the current title doesn't even tell anyone that the article is about a song, not a film or a book, nor that its by Morissette, Lucas, R. Kelly (who has the bestselling All I Really Want mp3 on Amazon.com). All I Really Want (Steven Chapman Curtis song) is also on Amazon.com mp3 and hundreds of other sources including in print in Billboard without "for Christmas" and again All I Really Want For Christmas is better selling on Amazon.com mp3 than either of the songs in this RM. I don't know maybe the R. Kelly and Steven Chapman Curtis songs are selling better on Amazon.com mp3 has no bearing on "notability" - but then is this song by Alanis Morrissette more notable than any of the 8 others, or 10 others including the Dylan and Chapman songs. This doesn't look like a case of WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, Cuchullain, we'd have to also do grok.se counts for the Dylan and Chapman songs, and also do grok.se for the albums and divide by however many songs are on the album. This wasn't what WP:PRIMARYTOPIC was designed for, unless we believe that 60% of all readers are heading for the song that is at no.10 on Amazon's mp3 chart for this title. And that those 60% of readers will be helped by removing "Alanis Morrissette" and removing "song" from the title. Anyone here seriously going to claim that for this 1 song? And anyone have any downside for (Alanis Morrissette song) being in the title? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:06, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Including the name of the artist is helpful to readers, there are several other songs with this name that are covered on Wikipedia, this article doesn't have much depth or any indication of exceptional noteworthiness, and the popularity of songs is volatile. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. For all the reasons above. The stats given in support of the status quo just show how careful you need to be in interpretting such statistics. Andrewa (talk) 16:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.