Talk:You Know My Name

Seriously?

Could the intro be more confusing? After reading I have no idea how many male vocalists have sung or when it was last or anything. I couldn't make it more ambiguous if I tried. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.200.52 (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

"A second version with more orchestration was used for the music video and for the movie."

This is wrong. The music video version is exactly the same as the leaked/iTunes version. The movie version distinctly has more orchestration. You can hear this with the very first guitar riff - there are very loud french horns playing in unison. Listen to the music video again: no french horns in the beginning riff.

The movie version of the song has not been released or leaked in any form. The only ones you can find on the Net are the music video/leaked/iTunes version, and the third MySpace version which has little to no orchestration, but the fully orchestrated movie version can only be heard in theaters.

This section needs changing, but it would require editing of the whole paragraph for it to all flow and make sense. I'm not even going to attempt that right now ... If someone else is up to the challenge, please make the edit. 24.17.73.47 06:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Should this be allowed?

"This is the shittiest Bond song ever made, even Lulu's 'The Man with the Golden Gun' and Madonna's 'Die Another Day' are eons better than this drivel."

Is it still there? I wanna edit it out but I can't find it in the "Edit this page" —the preceding comment is by 156.34.45.189 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 20 November 2006: Please sign your posts!.

I think it's gone, you know. By the way, I loved that song, and stuff like that should not be allowed in an article. Arguments on things like it should be kept to the Talk page and to the minimum at least. Jedd the Jedi 04:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I actually liked this Bond-song, it has the feel that someone claims its missing. --BugsyTK 21:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)BugsyTK

This is not a forum. Please discuss changes/improvements to the article- not whether you like the song etc. Thanks. Mark83 21:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Hey, who said Die Another Day was rubbish? Apart from the song in question Die Another Day was the best one. But I'm getting carried away. The fella who wrote the post above is right. Still, the line that says the song was "shitty" should definately be removed, assuming it hasn't already been.

Anon

"The leaked version is the one used in the movie"

I removed this. There are many differences. The whole section from the beginning of the song to the first words has many different notes, the leaked version has "I've seen diamonds cut through harder men" the title version is "I've seen THIS DIAMOND cut through harder men". Most obviously the way "You Know My Name" is sung repeatedly at the end is very very different.

There are other minor diffs, e.g. after the diamond line mentioned above the way "arm yourself because" is sung differently. Mark83 00:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

There are 3 versions I guess... The first Internet-iTunes-version, the orchestral music video edition and the brass movie version. Only in the music video/radio version Cornell sings "I've seen this diamond", in all of the others he sings "I've seen diamonds". In every version, he got another intonation and - of course - other instruments. Only in the music video there is a second lead guitar in the intro on top of that staccato-like one. In the first version he got this realy rocky guitars which are mostly replaced in the movie by a huge brass section...
Author of the German article 87.169.110.72 20:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Signifigance of the title

Regarding the titles: Surely the title of the song and the way character is hidden until the very end when Cornell is repeating "You Know My Name" as Daniel Craig appears from the shadows is meant as some sort of introduction. I know it would be original research to include what I have written, but surely that is the inference and some reference to back it up would be good? Mark83 23:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Opening Sequence

I seem to recall that Dr. No, the original Casino Royale and the Thunderball remake Never Say Never Again did not have silhouttes of naked women either. Should the paragraph on the opening titles be changed to reflect the break with tradition but not the unprecidented move? I may be wrong on this point, please double-check for me. -- The Real Zajac 02:53, 26 Nov 2006 (PST)

Well, Zajac, you sort of have a point there. However, Dr No's credits did briefly feature scantily-clad women, and NSNA and the original Royale were unofficial Bond films, thus their opening titles were not designed by Binder. Jedd the Jedi 05:49, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

You can't really include the original Casino Royale in that sort of analysis - it broke so many "traditions" of the EON Productions films. Mark83 15:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

From the point of view of M

I question the final two sentences of this article. I would like to see some sources that support the assertion that the song is presented from M's point of view. The statement "The song was written from the point of view of M, as can be seen after viewing the film then seeing the title. If one looks at the lyrics, then it is also possible to see the links meaning it is from M's point of view." seems to at the very best be an instance of original research. Comments?

24.131.239.82 07:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Dorian (No account yet)

I have already removed it. Mark83 13:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I was always of the opinion that the song was told from Le Chiffre's point of view. It could apply to "M" I suppose. Or Bond for that matter. The thing with most Bond songs is that they are told from the point of view of a lot of people. For instance "I guess I'll die another day" could apply to both Bond and Gustav Graves/Colonel Moon.

I kinda thought it was from the point of view of the original Bond from the first 20 films. A sort of... passing of the torch. Original research, I suppose, so that little nugget will have to be hidden from the masses. For now... 99.243.148.20 20:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Anon

Information should really be included in this article regarding the debate over whose viewpoint the lyrics are meant to represent. Currently, the paragraph about the lyrics gives interpretations about their meaning (e.g. "the coldness of the character of 007 ('Forget how to feel', 'The coldest blood runs through my veins', etc.)" ) and makes no mention of the fact that these are only the interpretations of the article's author. In reality, this is clearly in dispute -and likely to remain so, as no official interpretation has been given- so should the article not reflect this? 82.32.0.224 20:33, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

---

In my mind the article should clearly reflect the fact that an interpretation of the meaning of the text is under dispute. I would also suggest to summarise a couple of previously offered interpretations.

One obvious interpretation has been neglected at all. For some reason no one suggested that "You know my name" is about a cold-blooded man who adresses his new girl-friend. The text clearly supports this as he keeps saying that he will replace her without a problem. Even refering to the previous partner he "deceived". The music video btw would support this "interpretation" as a woman appears in key scenes of the video.

--Nick Adams (talk) 11:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I know it seems new, but...

I think this article needs a really good cleaning. It is merely trivia that, for example, it is the first 007 song to have a name other than that of its movie since Octopussy's. Firstly, this does not actually contribute anything to the information on the song. Secondly, it isn't the first time anything. Just because it seems like it has been a while since The Living Daylights came out, doesn't mean YouKnowMyName/Casino Royale is doing anything different from other bond openings.

Sure, you can point out these trivial things (that is what most people turn to Wikipedia for), but at least make a separate section for "Firsts". Then maybe when you have to call it a "First Since" you'll realize that it really isn't as significant as you thought it was.

Blazingluke 20:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

For the last time: Diamonds/This Diamond

The single says "diamonds", the song in the film's credits says "this diamond". Unless someone suggests we shouldn't go with the lyric of the film, it's "this diamond". OK? :) Mdiamante 00:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Lyrics

The lyrics page in the "external links" section seems to me to be inaccurate. I found a better one here. I think we should replace it, but I defer to the experts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.174.16.27 (talk) 00:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Plagarism

This reminds me a lot of 'Bus Stop' by The Hollies. A lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.183.80.133 (talk) 08:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Woopy doo 92.2.117.86 (talk) 20:23, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Deadlinks

There are five deadlinks from billboard.com that need to be addressed in which I couldn't find any archived versions on web.archive.org:

• http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=396&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Pop+100&ci=3080497&cdi=9129280&cid=12%2F16%2F2006 (Ref #24)
• http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=379&cfgn=Singles&cfn=The+Billboard+Hot+100&ci=3080484&cdi=9128767&cid=12%2F16%2F2006 (Ref #23)
• http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=395&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Hot+Digital+Songs&ci=3080377&cdi=9124673&cid=12%2F09%2F2006 (Ref #40)
• http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=349&cfgn=Singles&cfn=European+Hot+100+Singles&ci=3081575&cdi=9165195&cid=12%2F30%2F2006 (Ref #41)
• http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/chart_display.jsp?cfi=401&cfgn=Singles&cfn=Euro+Digital+Tracks&ci=3082037&cdi=9182994&cid=02%2F03%2F2007 (Ref #42)

–MuZemike 23:00, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:You Know My Name/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I made some minor copy-edits[1].

   There is a final stray, uncited sentence: In 2008, the Finnish rock band Poets of the Fall covered the song in a Studio Live CD that played in the match between Manchester United and Inter Milan. Doesn't seem notable and is not clear. Would be best to remove this.

   Reworked, but if you feel unnnecessary, I'll remove.

   I am a little confused about Cornell and Arnold playing all the instruments except the drums and then references to an orchestral version. Can this be clarified?

   Removed. Didn't make much sense either.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are un-addressed dead links. Billboard is not archived at the Internet Archive, so you will need to hunt for replacement links. they may be somewhere on the Billboard site, I have come across this before.

   Done with Google Books, and a Billboard.biz (registration required, but works) replacements.

   ref #5 [2] has been tagged as an unreliable source. If you attribute the interview with a phrase such as: "Speaking to film music fan site Maintitles, Arnold said ..." that should be OK

   Done.

   The quote from Cinefantastique [3], has a typo (it is there in the source) which looks clumsy. the best Bond theme song in years, one the captures the full-blooded glory of classics like 'Goldfinger'" suggest change to the best Bond theme song in years, [that] captures the full-blooded glory of classics like 'Goldfinger'" to eliminate this.

   Done.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days for the above issues to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 14:05, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

   Anything else needed? igordebraga ≠ 20:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

   Everything is fine now. I am happy to list this as a Good Article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on You Know My Name. 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/20160410082433/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGXN2IZ8D-Q to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGXN2IZ8D-Q
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pressacademy.com/satawards/awards2006.shtml

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) 10:35, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on You Know My Name. 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/20080723160623/http://www.mtvasia.com/News/200802/12015407.html to http://www.mtvasia.com/News/200802/12015407.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090224194526/http://www.poetsofthefall.com/news/12242_poets_of_the_falls_you_know_my_name_cover_out_now/ to http://www.poetsofthefall.com/news/12242_poets_of_the_falls_you_know_my_name_cover_out_now/

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) 21:43, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambig

It ought to be clearly separated-out from the Courtney Love number of the same title. Valetude (talk) 12:19, 18 May 2017 (UTC)