Talk:Season of the Witch (song)

Fair use rationale for Image:Donovan-Sunshine Superman.jpg

Image:Donovan-Sunshine Superman.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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

nate what?

I removed this (non)sentence from the main article. Finch points to a page about the songbird. If it means anything other than a joke, it needs to be comprehensibly rewritten:

• Finch covered the song on Buzznet in 2008. It was just nate on an online broadcast. You can find it on Buzznet's website or on Youtube

--UnicornTapestry (talk) 06:56, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Simpsons

The song was played over the end credits of the Gus Van Sant movie To Die For. It was featured in the House, M. D. episode "Words and Deeds" and in the witchcraft-themed Simpsons episode "Rednecks and Broomsticks".

The Simpsons is a direct reference to To Die For, which features Lisa ice-skating as Ileana Douglas did in To Die For, to the song. 12.162.122.5 (talk) 19:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

More than one Donovan recording?

OK, it's been going on half a century, but I'm sure that at one time I had two different versions by Donovan. The feel was somewhat different, but what stands out in memory is that one said "beatniks out to make it rich" and the other said "hippies". I'm querying here because that's really all I remember. No hard data, but surely if Donovan covered his own song that's worth a mention? Davecat4 (talk) 20:58, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Metal Songs with the Same Name

Aren't there numerous metal songs with the same name, but completely different lyrics (if any lyrics)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLxmPOWmlJs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIngvpxwWy4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDkRPN1qKhs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyzmrRKFdis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVydh48h3yY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPmnykQXYHA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snDaTXNOlYM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJuHcYRho5w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSeGXkvVrZo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHmLXxxx4e0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laBjQrF4GQY

Conner Fields2600:8804:7500:15C0:3D3C:395B:F5B6:2B39 (talk) 23:04, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Lana Del Rey Section

Adding a new header comment under this discussion as I believe the previous comment chain devolved into a not so pretty tangent and I just wanted to provide a more attractive introduction, and perhaps, a fresh start, to this discussion. See discussion below between me and another editor regarding the previous state of this article.

As it stands, after the discussion with an editor below, the article has since been updated and includes the addition of a subsection under Covers for the Lana Del Rey cover. This is a change from before where there was no covers section in the article whatsoever, and instead, just a single, very verbose, Lana Del Rey section, and a change from my original edit which included no Del Rey subsection, but instead just had a Covers section for the article which included information about Del Rey's cover of the song.

I believe that in its current state, the section of the article appears to be unproblematic and all excess text regarding the film, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, has been removed. As I stated below, I think it is beyond clear that this cover meets the guidelines to be mentioned as a cover in this article about Season of the Witch, a song by the artist Donovan, but the sections previous representation in the article, seems very heavy and putting undue weight on this single cover in an article about the original Donovan song.ThereWillBeTime (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I recently stumbled upon this article and made a revision where I removed a substantial chunk of text describing various details of a Lana Del Ray cover of the song. I did so after reading the style guide for songs and deciding that this cover did not seem notable enough to warrant such a degree of detail. If anyone has any serious thoughts regarding this edit and feels as though the Lana Del Ray section should exist in the article as it did before my edit, I would be very happy to hear them ThereWillBeTime (talk) 01:27, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps it would have been better to propose removing or trimming the section before removing it entirely. I don't agree with its removal, because as far as I can tell, it is the most successful cover of the song, at least in terms of media exposure and chart success (if only primarily on component charts). That's why it had its own section. Ss112 05:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Well, two things I would say to this. One, I am not so sure it is 'the most successful' cover of the song. I'm not suggesting this is untrue, just that I have not seen anything to demonstrate this. Two, even if that were the case, and it was demonstrated that it is 'the most successful' cover, I would still challenge that the level of success and notability of the Lana Del Ray cover is still quite small. Because of this, it certainly did not seem to merit it's own sub section in the article for the original song. and seems completely appropriate listed amongst over covers of the song which also meet the guidelines for notability. After reviewing many articles for other songs with covers of relatively similar success and the model articles from the song style guide, I just can't see precedent for that sections inclusion.ThereWillBeTime (talk) 08:13, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Has any other cover of "Season of the Witch" charted anywhere? There's your answer. Lana Del Rey's cover is automatically more notable because it has. By the way, WP:SONGCOVER states that the requirements for cover versions to be on articles are "the rendition is discussed by a reliable source, showing that it is noteworthy in its own right" and "the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS", both of which it meets. One of the criteria that a song may be notable at WP:NSONGS is that "Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts". It has. You should try assessing each article and its content on its own merits; bringing up what other articles with cover versions have done is an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. Where exactly you have demonstrated that "the level of success and notability of the Lana Del Ray cover is still quite small" remains to be seen. You have done nothing of the sort. There were nine citations in the section for the Lana Del Rey cover, excluding the citations for its chart peaks. You also didn't just "trim" the section, you removed it entirely and relegated her cover to a mere mention. If you don't somehow demonstrate how exactly Del Rey's cover is not notable when there were nine citations for its prose (obviously not including its chart peaks), I will be reverting your removal and then you can follow WP:BRD.

By the way, even though this is probably better suited for your talk page, I suggest you stop editing in tandem with your account and your IP address. I got in trouble for this over a decade ago, and found out that "can't be bothered to log in" is not a valid excuse. Even if you declare that this IP editor is also you, to casual readers and editors who haven't clicked over to your profile, it can look like you're trying to back yourself up with an additional account, and that's a huge no-no. If I were you, I'd start making sure you're logged in. Ss112 08:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and restored the content, because you haven't demonstrated any of your claims that the Del Rey cover is of "very small" notability thus far, and I doubt you will. Please follow WP:BRD, meaning don't revert again, otherwise I will bring this up along with the fact that you're editing while logged out and an admin can deal with it. As I said in my revert summary, this cover survived a 9,000 byte cull by Ojorojo last year. If a more experienced editor than yourself believes the cover passes notability to have its own subsection, than I trust their opinion over yours. Finally, you should have proposed this before removing, then gone ahead and removed it when you got no response. Thank you. Ss112 08:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

So I would just first please request that you stop acting so aggressively towards me. I feel as though you are greatly misinterpreting things I have said and are saying I have claimed things which I have not. First and foremost, I never claimed the Lana Del Ray cover was not notable. It very clearly meets the standards of notability for a cover and should be mentioned in the article for this song. I believe this is beyond reproach and something everyone can agree on. You seem to reply above in a way that suggests that I said that I had demonstrated that the level of success of the Del Ray cover is quite small. I assure you, if you read over my reply, I never said any such thing. I said I would make this challenge if it were proven that this was the most successful cover. I will gladly express the logic behind that statement; looking at all the chart numbers of the Lana Del Ray single, it seems to only have briefly appeared on the charts and not a very high position. That being the case, it's level of representation in an article about the song by Donovan seems high.ThereWillBeTime (talk) 08:51, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. And yes, I do know it's best to always be logged in and of course will always try to be. I added that note specifically on my talk page after realizing I did edit without being logged in so it would not appear as though I was attempting my other edits on the article on some alternate or hidden linked account.ThereWillBeTime (talk) 08:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I didn't say you said that the cover wasn't notable. I directly quoted you saying its significance is "quite small". Sounds like you're the one misinterepreting. You removed it based on your opinion, because you have not engaged with what is written about cover versions at WP:SONGCOVER or WP:NSONGS, and you directly ignored the nine prose citations that were present on Del Rey's cover, which you removed based on your opinion and not our content guidelines. Hence my revert. The Del Rey cover had considerable news coverage and some chart performance, which means it passes WP:NSONGS and WP:SONGCOVER to exist as its own subsection. @Ojorojo: you left this part in, and this user has now removed it. I thought you may like to contribute. Ss112 09:12, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey, so I really feel like you have a WP:BATTLEGROUND regarding this discussion, and I think we're kinda just running over the same old ground here and probably won't have much in the room of productive discussion. You have reported this to the admins, as you've made me aware. I will of course accept whatever decision they make. Best.ThereWillBeTime (talk) 09:21, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Great. Let the record show you've yet to provide any reason based in our content guidelines WP:NSONGS and WP:SONGCOVER, only an opinion. I pointed out there were nine prose citations for Del Rey's cover, and an additional five chart positions for it. You have only said its chart peaks were "brief appearances", and ignored the news coverage of the cover version, except substantial news coverage and chart positions are what makes songs, and by extension song covers, notable. I'm engaging with the content, you're just focusing on character aspersions. WP:USTHEM/WP:NPA. Ss112 09:33, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

And one more time, for the record. 'Looking at all the chart numbers of the Lana Del Ray single, it seems to only have briefly appeared on the charts and not a very high position. That being the case, it's level of representation in an article about the song by Donovan seems high.' - the songs position on the charts, its length of time on the charts (1 week on Billboard from what I can see?), would appear to me, to be fact based reasoning to not include such a large section in this article for a cover. Meeting the guidelines for notability suggest that the songs should be mentioned in the article, which it absolutely should be mentioned and it is of course included in my edit. All the various background regarding the film, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, certainly seems superfluous and unrelated to an article about a Donovan song. ThereWillBeTime (talk) 10:02, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I guess, too, just in terms of discussing the quality of this article and trying to ensure the best outcome. Perhaps the thing to consider here in some alternate third instance of the article. I am certainly not against this. But there certainly seemed to be a plethora of information unrelated to the song Season of the Witch by Donovan in that section. Just a thoughtThereWillBeTime (talk) 10:13, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

So, another editor recently restored the entire Lana Del Rey section without joining the discussion here. I would implore anyone who has any feeling about this, to please, express them here. This section in particular has already been an issue of a content dispute between editors and it has been advised by admins to, 'Please use the talk page to decide what to do. See WP:DR if you can't reach agreement there. ' (Initial report from content dispute - contains quote from admin) ThereWillBeTime (talk) 07:43, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

(outdent) I came across this article because the song cover was an orphaned fair use image. Since it is a notable cover version with reliable sources, it should have its own section. Per WP:BRD, I reverted back to the previous stable version. It was reverted based on this conversation, which is incorrect because this is an ongoing conversation with no consensus for the change. As such, I am reverting back to the last version before the BOLD edit per WP:BRD and it should stay that way until there is a consensus on the issue. Aspects (talk) 23:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Please, do not restore this section to it's state pre-protection from admin. Quote from reviewing admin, regarding this exact content dispute; 'Please use the talk page to decide what to do. See WP:DR if you can't reach agreement there. ' (Initial report from content dispute - contains quote from admin) ThereWillBeTime (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you are the one not using the talk page per WP:BRD, you keep reverting to your preferred version, when the correct move is back to the original pre-BOLD version until there is consensus for the change as I discussed above. You are clearly edit warring here and this will lead to you getting blocked from editing. Aspects (talk) 00:20, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I disagree completely. I am reverting to the state the article was in when an admin came in, said we should discuss the issue on the talk page, and if an agreement cannot be reached to, to try to use other tools to reach consensus. You have independently decided to skip this discussion part, other attempts to reach consensuses, and just restore the content. This is after discussion had already happened regarding this topic and changes / edits had been made by both of the editors in the discussion to try to improve the quality of this section. You appear to be edit warring. ThereWillBeTime (talk) 00:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Furthermore, I would like to add that just because a song is notable does not mean it 'should have' its own section as you're claiming here. Nowhere is this mentioned in Wikipedia:WikiProject_Songs and looking at other articles of class GA or above, covers do not appear to be given their own section under the article of the original song, and instead, are either listed in the general, 'Cover Versions' section, or as a subsection under Cover Versions. Even in these cases, the amount of representation given to these covers is generally limited to a paragraph or less. In your revert, you removed the covers section completely, you gave a single cover, whose notability is directly tied to the release of a film, its own section, and then created a second section entitled 'Other Cover Versions'. This was a change from before, where the song had a Cover Versions section, and details of the Lana Del Rey cover were discussed in a Lana Del Rey subjection of the Cover Versions section. I don't feel like this is a step in the right direction for the quality / health of this article. ThereWillBeTime (talk) 02:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Just sharing some additional thoughts from my side of the room. The Lana Del Rey section seems problematic because it is giving undue weight to a single cover of a song in an article about the song, Season of the Witch, by Donovan. In addition, much of the sources cited and information detailed in the section, is related to the film, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, and not sources simply discussing the song itself. It seems like that perhaps a lot of this information regarding Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark that is being proposed to be included about in an article about the song, Season of the Witch, by Donovan, might fit better in the article for the film. Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (film) under a soundtrack section. ThereWillBeTime (talk) 01:22, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

And just for those editors who appreciate citations from wiki articles, I would say that the previous section was problematic for WP:RECENT and WP:PROPORTIONThereWillBeTime (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

And another very important note regarding this topic. Upon undertaking an attempt to add a soundtrack section to the film Scary Stories in the Dark, I have reviewed more closely the content that was in this original section. It includes patently false claims such as 'The song was featured in the first official trailer for the film. ' and that Del Toro chose Del Rey to sing the 'theme' to the movie. Here is the first official trailer Her song was featured in the third trailer for the movie, and there is no source claiming that her song is the 'theme' to the film. The film itself does have a theme, I would say (a recurring melody and piece of music throughout the entire film), however, this theme is entitled Sarah's Theme (named after a crucial character in the film, Sarah), and was written by score composers Marco Beltrami & Anna Drubrich. To that end, I would just simply express that I wish the editors who seem concerned about the an image being abandoned were as concerned about the quality of this article and the original addition of this section, which in my opinion, is the BOLD edit.ThereWillBeTime (talk) 23:29, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Hiya! Huge Donavan fan here. By no means is this cover especially notable in the grand scheme of things compared to the original or other covers. I would consider having a conversation about her having her own section if, in the future, her song is mentioned and maintains notability outside of the release of the film, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark.

But does an entire section for covers of her cover seems totally appropriate to me? No. I think a short craze due to a recent movie release (Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark) that may have caused some exposure to her song doesn't dictate that her cover should have such a large representation in the article for the original song. To steal attention from Donavan seems to me, to be a shame. I completely disagree with the previous version of her section in the article, and find that a sub section under the covers section like it is now, is appropriate. If anything Donavan needs some more content for this song, one of his greatest works of music.Mataytay (talk) 01:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

So far there's been plenty of explanation about why the article shouldn't include the Lana stuff, and none of the replies have been focused on the real subject at hand or supplied reasoning to include the section. It's been a lot of talk about protocol and citing/cherry-picking guidelines like laws. The Donovan song is widely known and very popular (it's been in hundreds of things), and Lana's cover by no means rivals that. This article misrepresents that fact, as the section about Lana's cover constituted a disproportionately large part of this article. This made no sense, because by being so long this section made the article more about Lana's cover, and not Donovan's song. Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, the information given in the Lana section was entirely about its context in the film 'Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark' (2019). This section about Lana's cover is much better suited to reside in a Soundtrack section on the Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (film) film page. --Kelseytron (talk) 05:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

To anyone who's interested, I am working on a draft now for an inclusion of a Music section for Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (film) which includes details about Del Rey's cover and the score. It is not done yet, and I will continue working on it, and once finished, I will bring it up on the talk page for Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark (film). I understand that my work on this draft has no bearing on the outcome of this discussion regarding content in this article, and I am just posting it here just in case any other editors have any thoughts about it or suggestions for improvements as the subject seems related. Best. Draft for Music Section for Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark ThereWillBeTime (talk) 23:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

References

RfC on Inclusion of Lana Del Rey section

See dissension above. There is a disagreement between editors, myself included, about a previously included Lana Del Rey section in the article and to what degree the information should be included in this article. Thoughts from other editors are appreciated.

Include

Don't Include

Include Revised Version

ThereWillBeTime (talk) 07:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Include Revised Version - The current version, which includes a subsection within the Cover Version section and a mall table of its chart performance seemed to me a good compromise between dedicating a large chunk of an article about a Donovan song to a cover version that is much less known than the original version and only mentioning it in passing, without the context of its movie soundtrack origin and charts. PraiseVivec (talk) 13:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Include Revised Version - I feel that the proposed addition of the Lana Del Rey section seen above puts undue weight on Lana Del Rey's cover and this is problematic for reason related to WP:RECENT and WP:PROPORTION. In addition, the proposed section addition contains factual errors and much of the cited material and text is related to the film, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. The current state of the article with the Del Rey cover having its own sub section under a Cover Versions section, seems like a good representation. ThereWillBeTime (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Recording and release date may be before September 1966 --inconsistent dates in Wikipedia

The article currently states that the song was recorded AND released in September 1966. Yet the US album on which it appears was released August 26, 1966, according to the Sunshine_Superman_(album) article. So one or the other is wrong (if not both).

And it was extremely rare, in any event, for a song to be released in the month it was recorded in the 1960's, due to production schedules. Can this be made more accurate?

Sojambi Pinola (talk) 16:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

I changed the date to August 26 based on the other Wikipedia article and many sources outside Wikipedia. A little update -- the album appeared on the Billboard top 200 album charts for only 2 weeks, starting in Mid-September (surprisingly low on the chart given that it included a #1 song). This is not proof of when the album was actually released, especially given its low peak. I would love to know the sources of the August 26 claims, which are prevalent on the internet. Although I am inclined to believe them, misstatements of facts have a way of getting repeated endlessly, and sometimes they can bounce between Wikipedia and sloppy reviewers, who are then used as reinforcement by Wikipedia editors. https://www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200/1966-09-24.

Sojambi Pinola (talk) 16:47, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Further update: This article dates the album release to August 26, 1966:

https://ultimateclassicrock.com/donovan-sunshine-superman-album/

but what are their sources?

Sojambi Pinola (talk) 17:00, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Hey, joining this discussion regarding the release date as someone appeared to have edited it back to being a September date. The article has a source in it pointing to an August release date, and as the member above mentioned, the article for this album presents the same release date. This of course doesn't mean August is right, both articles could be wrong. Still, as it stands, it looks like we have one citation citing an August release date, and zero citations citing a September release date, is that correct? 173.88.250.97 (talk) 15:40, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Primary topic

"Season of the Witch" should be the title of this article, not "Season of the Witch (song)", and other uses listed under "Season of the Witch (disambiguation)". Other uses are subsequent to Donovan's song, and most refer to it directly. Doug butler (talk) 22:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)