Talk:Amy Lee/Archive 2

message: As far as I was able to see, there was no reference to religion in this article. So I went hunting and wasn't able to find anything that would suggest what she considers herself to be. Her page on WikiQuote seems to talk about Christianity in a third-person perspective. "There are people hell-bent on the idea that we're a Christian band in disguise, that we have some secret message. We have no spiritual affiliation with this music. It's simply about life experience." 'Course, I may be wrong. If someone can provide reasonable citations, let's add it back in. --Brad Beattie (talk) 21:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the reason it is there is because back in the day, they *did* align themselves with the Christian music scene, and Ben and Amy were definitely Christian as well.  While they have distanced themselves from the music scene, there has been no indication that they (specifically Amy) have changed their personal philosophies.  Check out some of the older references here and in the main Evanescence article, there's plenty to point to Christian roots.  I'm not concerned either way, so I'll let you add it back if you feel these reasons are sufficient. -- Huntster T • @ • C 22:18, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

text: While your contributions would be appreciated, they need to be backed by some quotable source.  Also, I believe they acknowledged that they were originally a Christian-esque band, but later on decided to focus more on the mainstream audience.   -- Huntster T • @ • C 03:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

text: It would appear all evidence is pointing to the fact she is a christian herself, this this page should be categorised as such. Do not be assuming that because she is a christian her band has to be christian, or visa versa. Mathmo Talk 04:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely agreed, though it would probably be a good idea to find a more recent source that says she is Christian before deciding whether or not to keep that particular category.  We know she was several years ago, but I'm cautious in applying old citations like that.  Honestly though, I don't care either way, it's just a suggestion. -- Huntster T • @ • C 05:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Very well stated.  As I said before, there's nothing wrong with mentioning her faith, provided it is cited and preferrably from a more recent source (there are a number for back in the day that could be used, but I hesitate to use old material in this fashion). -- Huntster T • @ • C 00:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed American Christians category 

message: Is there a better picture of Amy that we can use because the one up shows her eyebrow peircing and she doesn't have it anymore. Zacanescence 05:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Na... She's beautiful like that (Amy Lamedes (talk) 10:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures Of Amy Lee 

message: I have read in several places that the death of her younger sister was caused by leukemia. Can anyone back this up? NargleFishHat 05:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No.  Armando.O  (talk|contribs) 17:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Her sister died from an unknown illness - not even doctors knew what it was. Don't remember where I read it, though, but it was something Amy said. Maybe on evboard.com, but I'm not sure. --Annerpapaya 18:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sister's Death 

message: Carrie Lee, is this Amy Lee sister???  Armando.O  (talk|contribs) 23:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I seriously doubt it, else *something* would have been mentioned before now, somewhere in the world of Evanescence.  I've certainly seen nothing of that nature. -- Huntster T • @ • C 03:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, but not that Carrie Lee that Armando linked to above. -- Huntster T • @ • C 14:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carrie Lee 

message: can we include something about her involvement with the Damning Well?  i know that details on that group are sketchy at best, but she's mentioned on its wikipedia page, and i think we should at least link it back though her "other projects". Deutschebag17 05:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, she was involved in what way?  Can you locate any verifiable source?  She isn't showing up on the Wikipedia article, at least not in its current revision.  Please, do not add any such link without a source to back it up. -- Huntster T • @ • C 08:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: got the information off Danny Lohner's page.  don't know how verifiable that is, but it is there. Deutschebag17 14:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A simple google search revealed that information to be false.  While there were two songs recorded by Lee, both were scrapped because of label interferance.  I'll see about adding something about this to the article. -- Huntster T • @ • C 20:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Contributions to The Damning Well

message: i read somewhere that the song "October" was based on the death of one of Amy Lee's bf's, this song and "My Immortal" is this true?
*If you could find where you read it then maybe we could check, but i personally dont know. Might goooogle it and see what we get --Childzy (Talk|Contribs) 08:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  is this true? 

message: If amy lee is now married to Josh Hartzler will she be taking his second name?  Luke255 14:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Until and unless she officially states that she will be known as Amy Hartzler, we cannot even consider changing the article name, as that would be considered original research.  Even then, Wikipedia policy states that article titles should be the most commonly known form of the name or title, so "Amy Lee" should probably remain as the article title, since that is what the vast majority of people will know her as.  In that situation, a simple redirect to this page can be set up from Amy Hartzler or Amy Lee-Hartzler or whatever she chooses. -- Huntster T • @ • C 15:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

text: She signs a post on EvThreads as Mrs. H -Monkey 13!!! 14:24, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, and the article itself notes the change in name, but Wikipedia guidelines state that the most commonly known name should be used.  "Amy Hartzler" simply isn't, nor will it likely be, the better known form of her name.  She is, simply put, professionally known as "Amy Lee". -- Huntster T • @ • C 17:28, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Name Change 

message: What is her religion.User:Bloodsource
:Unsourced information, but she is believed to be Christian.  Unless it can be fully sourced, it is not worth including.  Also, please do not sign your username as something other than what you are actually using.  Having multiple accounts can be considered Sockpuppetry, which is highly frowned upon.  See WP:SOCK. -- Huntster T • @ • C 22:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What is her religion

message: I thought born and origin are from the same place. How can she be born in California, but originate from Arkansas? Speedboy Salesman 17:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Born is of course birthplace, Origin is where the person became noted for their music.  In Lee's case, while she was born in Cali, she became known for her music in Arkansas.  See the fields section at  for a better explanation. -- Huntster T • @ • C 18:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Born/Origin

message: I added korn, and someone removed it. Its a well known fact, stop taking it off. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sexylui (talk • contribs) 16:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well-known or not, it needs a citation. -- Huntster T • @ • C 21:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Its worth mentioning that Nirvana arent sourced as being an influence (though she has stated at gigs that they are) so im removing that --Childzy (Talk|Images) 21:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't pay attention to that one.  It had originally been added with a YouTube link as citation, but because it was not stated whether the video was copyrighted, I removed the cite.  Don't remember why I didn't remove Nirvana itself. -- Huntster T • @ • C 21:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You know the article is looking pretty good huntster, what you reckon needs doing to give it that push to GA? This article used to be my baby! Would love to see it as GA --Childzy (Talk|Images) 22:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't hurt to have another Peer review, though make sure that all material stated in the previous review has been taken care of. Note that it appears we're going to have ongoing difficulties with this  fellow adding the Nirvana bit without valid references. You want to handle this instance? -- Huntster T • @ • C 23:11, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well's he's referenced it now but its just like a fansite, the source that is, personally i'd take it out. Not sure how reliable so i'll let you take a look and see what you think. Nothing wrong with a bit of the old democracy ;] --Childzy (Talk|Images) 08:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the point, though.  Fansites are *never, never* valid references.  Don't care if it is the biggest fanclub in the world, the most detailed or accurate or whatever, fansites are never valid.  Oi, sorry.  This type of thing drives me inside, why people would use such links.  Ah well, revert time. -- Huntster T • @ • C 16:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

text: No.  If it's a fact, then it needs a reference/citation, and if it influenced her entire life as you say, it wouldn't hard to find a reliable source. -- Shatterzer0 18:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hes not saying that it infulenced her entire life, but her musical direction. ill look for a citation, but i guess everything on the page that doesnt have citation should be deleted also, even if they are confirmed facts75.4.18.100 03:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

text:  http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R10MRN4HGOG4Z0 there happy now? KoRn Untouchable is one of the albums she recommends to ppl that buy HER music. So stop deleting KornSexyLui 04:03, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influences 

message: I just read through the article and I noticed how it mentioned the 2005 lawsuits between Dennis Rider and Evanescence/Amy.  Anyone know what the outcome of the lawsuits were, or if they're still tied up in the court system?  It'd be nice to add the results to the article, if there are any.  --Brownings 12:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, I've heard of nothing and haven't read anything on the message boards, though it's highly possible I just missed it.  You may want to check out EvBoard and EvThreads yourself and ask there. -- Huntster T • @ • C 02:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lawsuits

message: Seeing as Amy is now married to Josh Hartzler and she has taken his last name, should the name of the article be changed as well? 75.105.128.59 (talk) 18:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because that is not the name she is commonly known by. She is specifically referred to as Amy Lynn Hartzler in the opening paragraph, but Wiki guidelines say that the commonly-known name is the one used as the article title and in the Infobox. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 21:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: okay but maybe ther should be a redirect link from Amy Hazler to amy Lee. bye... --89.164.29.111 (talk) 08:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There already is a redirect link. But thank you anyway... — Gahonzu (talk) 08:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amy Hartzler 

message: I believe there should be a section handling her vocal range and abilities. It is thought that she's a mezzo-soprano, but I have yet to find a legit source that could verify this. So, if anyone could perhaps work on this? { Zh! } (talk) 09:17, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it would be great to have such a section, but no sources exist. Myself and several others have attempted to locate one that works within Wikipedia's rules on allowable sources, and have come up totally empty. While I'd encourage you to look for some yourself, please leave a note here or on my talk page with a link before editing the main article, so it can be peer reviewed. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 10:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mezzo-soprano? 

message: Katy Perry and Alanis Morisette's pages include information on their vocal range.  Amy has an amazing voice to my untrained ear so I am very curious as to how her voice would be chacterised.____curious  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.195.211.212 (talk) 13:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of us are curious. However, there are no reliable sources that have covered it, so that's why it's not mentioned in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 16:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  vocal range? 

message: I don't understand why there's a paragraph discussing the departure of Ben Moody from Evanescence.  This is an article about Amy, not Ben or Evanescence, and this topic is given a comprehensive treatment in the Evanescence article.  
CyanideSandwich (talk) 22:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evanescence 

message: When I first read that, I thought it was vandalism, then I saw it actually had a reference next to it, so I checked it and the source turned out to be the EV Threads Forum. Does that meet WP:RELIABILITY? And how come Robert E. Lee's article mentions nothing about him having a famous descendant who is the lead singer of a famous band? --Whip it! Now whip it good! 04:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly not a reliable source, and even if she did say it, she's no genealogist. I've removed the statement until a reliable source can be found. Nev1 (talk) 04:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct descendant of [[Robert E. Lee]]? 

message: Just wondering, but what is the source for this observation? The articles on the songs don't have a source either. Furthermore, the "My Immortal" article says that the Origin version was "similar" to the Fallen version "except with added strings" - would that be best described as "further modification" or "virtually unchanged"? (And we don't have an article specifically on "Whisper" to say either way.) And the Origin article currently says: "While "Whisper" and "My Immortal" are fundamentally the same on both discs, "Imaginary" exhibited a major change in structure between Origin and Fallen."
Also, is it necessary to have a short stand-alone section on Moody's departure in this article? The quote "finally a real band" works well with "Founding" but it doesn't seem like it needs a section header. Gimmetrow 03:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin 

message: Amy has changed her hair a while lot since that photo she has now, could we change it to a picture she has recently.....
there is some recent pictures on "evanescenceville",could someone change it to one of them ?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.221.13 (talk) 17:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, one of those images would have to be under a license compatible with Wikipedia, and I have a feeling they are all copyrighted under more restrictive terms. If you see an especially good image you think would work well here, you may want to try and contact the photographer and see if they'd release the image under GFDL or a compatible Creative Commons license (or even release it into the public domain). — Huntster (t @ c) 07:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New picture for amy ? 

message: I think this because in the song freak on a leash with korn u can listen her voice totally power full and beautiful voice and in wikipedia in spanish u can read this:
Amy Lee has a kind of voice that encompasses the range of Mezzosoprano. Her voice was identified by his acting ability found in songs like "Lithium", "Going Under" "My Immortal", among others. They said her voice is the best and most representative of their musical genre.
high notes:	
D # 5 in the song Bleed (I Must Be Dreaming).
E # 5 in the song Tourniquet, Farther away, Taking Over Me, and Forgive Me.
F # 5 on live versions of the song Bring Me to Life and Weight Of The World.
G # 5 in the song Lacrymosa.
A # 5 in the Whisper song.
B # 5 in the song Hello.
C # 6 in the song Weight Of The World.
B # 6 on live versions of Weight of the World
B # 6 on MTV Diary Warm-Up (heating singing 'Are You Strong To Be My Man' by Sheryl Crow using classical technique).
E # 7 in Hello
low notes:
A # 2 in the song Hello.
D # 3 in the song Snow White Queen
E # 3 in the song Going Under, Haunted low harmonies and Give Unto Me.
G # 3 in the song Good Enough
Note longer (length reached): 8 days / black = 72 (13 seconds) was in Hello.
Vocal: 4.5 octaves. (from A# 2 to E # 7)
 
in evanescence reference says this:  Range
Lee has an impressive recorded vocal range, stretching from Eb3 (“Cloud Nine,” 0:01/0:04) to E6 ("During a Warm Up," 2:46/2:51). On an MTV Diary special, Lee is shown warming up for a show where she sings a D#6 (4:35/4:37, as timed from the beginning of the Evanescence section), giving her an exhibited range three octaves and one semitone. She can be classified as a mezzo-soprano. 
link:http://evanescencereference.info/wiki/index.php?title=Amy_Lee  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.24.21.1 (talk) 22:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no further source beyond the Evanescence Reference Wiki, so it fails the verifiability requirement of Wikipedia. —C.Fred (talk) 22:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

text: C.Fred did answer you, saying that Evanescence Reference is *not* a reliable source and unless it includes a citation along with those ranges, you should not consider them correct. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:33, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry but i don´t understand! if Ev; reference is encyclopedia about them, and evthreads says "this is for all the fans to now more about evanescence", so u are trying to say what u can read is a lie? and all u can listen on her music is a lie too?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.24.21.1 (talk) 00:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm saying neither that it's a lie nor that it's correct. I'm saying that ER is not reliable, so we need another source to verify the claim. We also can't just go by what we hear in the music; that's disqualified as original research. Now, if a well-known reviewer were to comment on her range in a review of one of her albums, we would be able to use that as a source for her vocal range. —C.Fred (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  AMY LEE: Lyric mezzo-soprano, 4,5 octaves 

message: this section is out of date,Evanescence is releasing a 2010 album which gets rid of any reason for her to do a solo album, she has dropped the idea. I deleted it, Am I right? Lijahrobrt (talk) 05:53, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not. Unless there is a reasonable source that says she has dropped plans for a solo album, the section needs to stay. We don't know whether or not the Ev album is replacing the solo or not. — Huntster (t @ c) 00:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solo Album 

message: Earlier I posted a link to a website that hosts one of her rare songs online. Rather, I posted an external link to the stream. I see it was deleted. Is that not allowed? I am learning and just wondering why it would be deleted? What would be an appropriate way to share the link? Thanks. Dongemus (talk) 06:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Dongemus, sorry to have deleted that link, but Wikipedia does not consider blogs to be acceptable sources nor are they good for external links. Plus, the song is owned by either David Hodges or his label, so the blog has neither permission to host it nor redistribute it, and that is also not permissible here. For example, we have a similar rule regarding YouTube videos...if a video is owned by the original uploader, we can link to it; if some random person simply finds it and reposts it, then that is a violation of copyright and we will not (should not) link to it. — Huntster (t @ c) 11:23, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I see. The stream is from Summit Church's website where they have it available to stream or download freely . So should I add a link directly to that stream(http://streaming14.finalweb.net/19/140002285/140002285/audio/13%20Breathe.mp3), or Summit's music page(http://www.summitworshipteam.com/site/audiodownloads.asp?sec_id=140002285)? Thanks again. Dongemus (talk) 20:19, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: To be perfectly honest, I've never seen a link to a song included in the prose, and I've been here several years. It just isn't done, since it doesn't really add anything to the article and because there isn't anything particularly special about the song and its relationship to Lee. I would advise not adding it to the article. — Huntster (t @ c) 00:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Link to mp3 File 

message: I think there should be a section here about Out of the Shadows:  http://www.outoftheshadows.com/ Its an official website I think that was created by Amy Lee to help make awareness about epilepsy. What do you all think? --Homezfoo (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: After a quick search, I cannot find any news articles or other reliable-source mentions about OotS, so no. The current mention in the "Other projects" section is all that is needed. And, as it mentions, she did not create it, she is just the American chairperson for this international program. — Huntster (t @ c) 12:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Well http://www.evanescencewebsite.com/ says it is an official website. It should be on the left side of the screen. Amy Lee even posts there too but I don't know if she confirmed it. She probably did though but who knows? --Homezfoo (talk) 04:28, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? Evanescencewebsite is an Italian fansite. There are fansites in just about every major country. We've had folks try to insert Hungarian, Brazilian, German, you name it into the various Evanescence articles, and they all get removed. This is the *English* wikipedia. Beyond even that, it doesn't matter if they are an "official" fansite or not, it's still just a fansite. No ifs, ands, or buts, their inclusion is not allowed. — Huntster (t @ c) 05:07, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Again, huh? Just because a given fansite links to Ev's official sites, doesn't make the website official. Now, they may somehow be officially recognised by Ev as being the official Italian fansite, but why would that make the slightest bit of difference to the *English* Wikipedia? Also, as I so enjoy saying (not really): just because one article does it, does *not* mean it is correct. Social media links are not appropriate for articles, and you are encouraged to remove them whenever you see them. — Huntster (t @ c) 23:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philanthropy 

message: Amy Lee's genre is listed as "Alternative Metal" yet Evanescence's genre remains blank due to lack of a consensus.  Since Amy Lee primarily performs for Evanescence, should it not follow that her genre be the same as Evanescence?  The previous edit to genre says not to edit and to see the talk page.  See the talk page for what? There are no topics containing genre.  Can someone explain where this such definitive genre comes from? ScottMHoward (talk) 00:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, this comes from the main Talk:Evanescence page. It was, over time, generally decided that Alt Metal should be the generic genre used for all Evanescence-related articles. It's just simpler that way, rather than constantly having to go in circles regarding the genre. Personally, I'd be happier than hell if the genre fields were permanently and irrevocable done away with o.O — Huntster (t @ c) 00:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What about "Dark rock"? Lee has stated that as their genre. There's a link to that in the Evanescence article. The Evanescence article also quote that. "We're definitely a rock band, but the twist is that the band's music is epic, dramatic, dark rock". --Ethan1994 (talk) 14:55, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre? 

message: ===Compositions===
Lee is considred to the driving force of Evanescence, being the bands main songwriter. She is responsible for the lyrics of the band. As a teenager she listened to Korn, Björk, Nirvana, Nine Inch Nails, Tori Amos, while also appreciating Smashing Pumpkins, Pearl Jam and Portishead.
:::(haha, wow what an old post I started.  Way back when) Dark rock is really only quoted as Amy saying it on the Evanescence article, it's not listed as a genre anywhere in the prose.  Likely because this a primary source.  We can't really classify Amy Lee as "dark rock" just because she herself called Evanescence dark rock (note she is not specifically calling herself dark rock).  If some reliable source wants to call Amy Lee dark rock, we can then use that source for a genre, but there's not really any way to include it right now. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 18:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Artistry

message: Lee is considred to the driving force of Evanescence, being the bands main songwriter. She is responsible for the lyrics of the band. As a teenager she listened to Korn, Björk, Nirvana, Nine Inch Nails, Tori Amos, while also appreciating Smashing Pumpkins, Pearl Jam and Portishead.
:::(haha, wow what an old post I started.  Way back when) Dark rock is really only quoted as Amy saying it on the Evanescence article, it's not listed as a genre anywhere in the prose.  Likely because this a primary source.  We can't really classify Amy Lee as "dark rock" just because she herself called Evanescence dark rock (note she is not specifically calling herself dark rock).  If some reliable source wants to call Amy Lee dark rock, we can then use that source for a genre, but there's not really any way to include it right now. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 18:19, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Compositions

message: Don't you think we should put the billboard 2003 picture of Lee as the default picture? She looks great and it shows her face clearly, while in the current photo, she is performing and you can't really see her face. I am thinking about moving the picture to a section where it seems to fit better. --Homezfoo (talk) 08:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The only real change I think was necessary for this article was to perhaps use that new 2009 photo as the infobox picture.  It's a good picture in my opinion.  But I must stress again.  Wait for a consensus before changing images in a Wiki article.  Simply flooding the article with images of Amy Lee is not the purpose of Wikipedia.  If you are going to start a discussion regarding changes, wait for responses. Link to the pictures you are considering for inclusion and see what others think about your ideas for placement/replacement before making such drastic changes to an article.  Additionally, Homezfoo, you may wish to consider using the preview feature before saving your changes, using the sandbox or creating your own temporary article in your own userspace to make changes before moving them over to the general namespace.  You made 28 very minor changes to this article in the span of about 37 minutes.  Copying an article to a sandbox location and making revisions from there lets other users see an article's history more clearly.  Please consider this when you intend on making future large edits. Thanks =D ~ [ Scott M. Howard ]:[ Talk ] ~ 12:52, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm impatient! >:P Lol. But yes I see your point. And whoah, how do you know how long it took me? :O And I've never heard of the sandbox before. I'll try it next time. So do you want to replace the current Amy Lee picture with the new 2009 one? --Homezfoo (talk) 13:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The two pictures are very similar.  Your statement of "she is performing and you can't really see her face" would seem to apply more to the 2009 image than the 2007 since she is "smaller" in the photo and the microphone covers more of her face.  Also, the 2007 picture is more of her well-known look.  Long dyed black hair vs. a shorter more natural brown colored hair.  The only reason why I would recommend this change is just to keep the picture updated, but I think it's fine the way it is now.  This isn't really a time sensitive issue so perhaps once the new Evanescence album is released and a tour begins (is there actually a tour planned, btw? I'm not sure if there was anything announced or if I just simply forgot..) there will be better updated pictures to choose from. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ]:[ Talk ] ~ 14:01, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes I so agree with you on the default picture. People recognize her more like that. In the new 2009 Amy Lee picture, her hair seems like a lighter shade of dark brown and it is cut a bit shorter. That's not really her trademark appearance. You're right, I think we should wait for the new album and the new promo pictures. & I'm pretty sure that a tour will follow once the album is released. --Homezfoo (talk) 15:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no, we won't be waiting for the promo pictures, since those will be copyrighted non-free. But once the tour begins (yes, it'll happen, it's already been mentioned in interviews) hopefully the Flickr fanatics will snaps some good photos for our use. It's just a shame that so far there's only been one decent pic of the band as a whole, which is what we're using for the main article infobox. Seems they don't like to be seen together? ;) — Huntster (t @ c) 16:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh no yeah! I meant that once the promo pics come out, we can see if she stills has black hair and dark clothing etc. And hopefully eh?! And who knows! ;) --Homezfoo (talk) 09:00, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amy Lee's Article Default Image 

message: So what happened with the lawsuit? That paragraph introduces it but there's no conclusion. It was a few years ago now... Kansaikiwi (talk) 23:39, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I've seen no news reports or mentions of any kind for several years. Really, I think it's probably most appropriate now to remove all but a mention of the situation, as it is currently edging into the "undue weight" territory. — Huntster (t @ c) 23:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  lawsuit 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:09, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:AmyLeeEV.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Shouldn't there be more info added on Amy Lee's article introduction? For example, introduce more of who she is and what else she's done? --Thesadisticcheeseburgerpickle1 (talk) 01:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure. Go right ahead. Elizium23 (talk) 01:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article introduction 

message: Are these pictures good for uploading: , , ? My love is love (talk) 13:38, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: They appear to have the appropriate licenses to be used on Wikipedia, though I'm not sure what their relevance might be for this article as none of them give a clear picture of her face.  Though I must say I'm absolutely downloading the 2nd one and creating a new wallpaper. lol ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 00:57, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article already uses one image from that show. Gimmetoo (talk) 01:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: This is a perfect example of how certain things associated with MOSDATE are inherently disruptive. This article developed with an established style of accessdates in yyyy-mm-dd, and publication dates were nearly as clearly in yyyy-mm-dd format. Following an edit by someone else referring to MOSDATE, I noticed that the established style had been violated in some instances. I changed those instances to match the established style. At that point, User:Hunster changed the style of the entire article, in direct violation of WP:DATERET. This is simply not an "either-or" decision - the established style of the article is to remain unless there is a genuine reason to change it. And there is not. Because the publication date format is perhaps debatable (and I don't have much objection to the publication dates in what ScottHoward is calling "full date format"), I'm going to let that go temporarily if there are no other objections. However, I object to changing the accessdates away from the clearly established style of the article. Gimmetoo (talk) 02:02, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The "established style" did not develop in yyyy-mm-dd format because people preferred that format, it is that way because the reference templates used to auto-convert to mmddyyyy, and when that stopped, no one, including myself, wanted to take the time to manually convert them back. I decided to go ahead and take that step, as all other dates in the article are in mmddyyyy format. There should never be two competing date formats in an article, and mmddyyyy is the preferred format here, as it is an American based article. The reason the MOS tends to be a hated topic is because it changes constantly and at the whim of a handful of editors. So, folks, please express your preferred format here, so we can resolve this. Gimmetoo, I admit I find it fascinating that you actually prefer the format that Scott also expressed preference for, but reverted to yyyy-mm-dd because of a seeming lack of understanding of the history of this particular article. Please don't be a policy wonk as opposed to using a style that is more readable and in line with everything else in the article. — Huntster (t @ c) 02:27, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  The basis of a decision, especially when you disagree with it, shouldn't just be because "well that's what the policy says".  Common sense should rule.  That's where the phrase "The customer is always right" comes from.  Sure, the policy says one thing, but you can violate policies to make things run smoothly and keep the customer happy--the business doesn't collapse.  Consensus can change.  I see no reason why the article shouldn't use MMMM DD, YYYY format.  As Gimmetoo has pointed out in multiple links, there is no set rule on what MUST be used.  The only thing that must rule is consistency.  So as far as I'm concerned, if a consensus points to all dates being the full text, the only "policy" that shouldn't be broken is that all dates must then be full text--which is what was done. ~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 03:44, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Policy and practice is quite clear that the article may have one style, and the references a different style, including even a different format for publication dates and accessdates. Such a situation is quite common on WP. and is indeed how this article developed and existed for years. The contrary edit is Hunster's recent one, in violation of guidelines. I consider the established style more readable, and I see no good reason the references should not continue to retain the format they have had for years. It is you arguing for a change, and you need to provide a valid reason. You have yet to provide any "reason" except a wish that "all" dates in the article in the same format. To the extent that wish includes formats in both the article body and references, that wish is not supported by policy. And I formally warn Hunter not to make assumptions about what I may or may not "lack understanding" - I consider such phrases inherently uncivil. Gimmetoo (talk) 04:23, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: And your "formal warning" is the uncivil action. I stated that I believed you didn't understand the history of the article, not that you absolutely didn't; it isn't a statement of fact, just a statement of my belief based on your current actions. You apparently didn't even read what I wrote...the citation date styles are like that because of an autoformatting system that no longer exists, and simply hasn't been rectified until now. If you don't like something I've done, then take it to the community. (And please, don't call me Hunter or Hunster.) — Huntster (t @ c) 04:48, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  If warning you that I perceived your statement as dismissive and demeaning is considered uncivil, then clearly nobody is allowed to warn anyone. Keep that in mind. If your argument is based on alleged information that I allegedly may not be aware of, then it is your job to provide proof of that alleged information. Gimmetoo (talk) 04:55, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  MOSDATE

message: Amy Lee has been criticised in the UK Parliament. To avoid allegations of bias or vandalism, here are the links to the citations.
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2010-12/2394
http://www.edms.org.uk/2010-11/2394.htm
As a motion signed in a foreign parliament by 3 elected politicians, one Conservative and two Liberals, this is a well sourced event.
The motion states - "That this House notes that Schillings acting for Amy Lynn Lee Hartzler, the lead singer of the band Evanescence, and her manager Andrew Lurie of 110 Management threatened Sam Smith with legal action unless he agreed to enter into a contract not to report allegations of criminal activity, including abuse and sexual predation and illegal drug use on the band's EvThreads website; recognises that the allegations have not been tested in a court although there is evidence to support them; believes that threats of legal action and the consequential threat of legal costs being claimed should not be used to prevent allegations of wrongdoing being reported to the police or other authorities; further believes that legal actions that prevent information getting to regulatory authorities (including the police) act contrary to the rule of law; calls on the Government to introduce legislation to ensure that such legal actions are considered to be criminal in nature as they are in the US (US Penal Code, Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 73, 1512 (b)(3)); and calls for the band to release Mr Smith from the contract so that he can pass the allegations to the authorities."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.233.235.50 (talk) 23:36, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This motion only discusses the fact that a contract between Evanescence and Sam Smith is not legal.  Whether Mr. Smith actually did report any allegations of criminal activity after such contract was lifted might be relevant, but this motion is not as far as I'm concerned. Also, this is very heavily original research: finding information and then extrapolating your own conclusions is not how Wikipedia works.  If you can find someone else reporting this incident in reliable sources then I might see it as being relevant.~ [ Scott M. Howard ] ~ [ Talk ]:[ Contribs ] ~ 00:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:BLPPRIMARY specifically says that court records or other public documents are not to be used to support assertions about living persons. You definitely need secondary sources here. Elizium23 (talk) 00:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allegations in UK Parliament 

message: Ok all, lets all take a vote on which picture is good for the infobox. The recent and old ones. 
File:Amy Lee in São Paulo 2.jpg
File:AmyLee2003BillboardAwards.jpg
File:Rockinrio lisboa 2012 f 011.jpg
File:Amy Lee of Evanescence @ Maquinária Festival 07.jpg
File:Lee, Amy (2007).jpg
File:Amy Lee of Evanescence @ Maquinária Festival 03.jpg
Tribal44 (talk) 05:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously #2. We've been through this time and again, and this one is always the best representation of Lee. All others suffer from some kind of bad composition, comparatively speaking...mostly being at bad angles or being obscured by a microphone. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

text: Agree completely with Huntster. All other photos are concert action shots, lacking the quality and clarity needed to clearly identify Lee in the infobox. Elizium23 (talk) 13:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding :File:Amy Lee by Maneki Neko.jpg, I'm trying to determine if this is a legitimate photo on Commons...if so, I don't think it would be a bad replacement, given that the existing primary image is a bit dated (from 2003). I just don't know yet if it's an image the uploader actually made or if it was taken from somewhere (no Google hits, so that's good). — Huntster (t @ c) 13:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: My concern with the Maneki Neko image is lack of contrast: dark grey clothes, black hair, black background. The image is just this side of disembodied face and arms. —C.Fred (talk) 13:42, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

text: That said, no hits on a search for the image with Tineye. —C.Fred (talk) 13:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree regarding contrast and composition, but even so, I kind of feel that it is slightly better than the Billboard image. I've never particularly been fond of it, but it's the best representative image we've had available to this point. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, the uploader got back to me and satisfied my concerns, so if anyone things it could be used somewhere in an article, go on ahead. — Huntster (t @ c) 20:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

text: I object to the Maneki Neko image on the same grounds. The current 2003 picture has two problems: outdated and low resolution. Certainly a high quality updated image would be preferable... we just have to wait around until someone licenses it properly, which is of course the largest obstacle to inclusion here. Elizium23 (talk) 15:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So this image, :File:Amy Lee by Maneki Neko.jpg is legit enough to be on the infobox? Acutally, that's a good photo of her. More updated. Tribal44 (talk) 04:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, in my opinion it is, but two others have expressed opposition to it being used in the infobox, so we'll sideline it until and unless opinion changes. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So, the final verdict is to leave the current image on the infobox be for now until someone else says otherwise? Tribal44 (talk) 02:42, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: For the time being, I believe so. Hopefully another will come along; I'll continue to keep an eye on the Flickr feed. (Also, if you would, don't add your signature to a new line...it makes conversation threading a bit difficult to follow.) — Huntster (t @ c) 03:32, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures vote. 

message: Amy Lee sang Caged Bird with Ashley Arrison, Everybody Hurts with Ashley Arrison and Paula Cole, Epiphany with Staind, she performed with Finger Eleven (the video of which was one of only two videos favorited by the Evanescence YouTube channel to date), Break In with Lzzy Hale...not to mention the unofficially released recording of 'You' and 'The Cartoon Network Song'. None of these are listed on the collaborations or solo works and I don't know why. Should I go ahead and add them? I feel like there must be a reason they were never added, otherwise I wouldn't have asked. Peacelovefrenchhorn (talk) 17:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Because a long, long unsourced list is neither encyclopedic nor relevant. Dkendr (talk) 20:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are there so many missing collaborations? 

message: There is absolutely no source for this. In fact, I remember an interview where Lee said she never wore contacts, but unfortunately I can't find it. --Markhoris (talk) 10:21, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding Lee wearing blue contacts 

message: I found this picture of Lee on Flickr. What do you guys think about it? --Markhoris (talk) 13:27, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry Mark for not seeing this before now. That wouldn't work because it is copyrighted under a non-free "all rights reserved" license. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:46, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Amy Lee picture 

message: Is it just me?  I can't parse this phrase from the Appearance section.
  "she used to heavily wear corsets in fear of diluting the bands’ image,"
What does that mean?  Is it a mistake?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.227.136.48 (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reworded it, hopefully makes more sense now. In essence, she wanted to preserve the band's early public goth perception. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:51, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appearance 

message: Hartzler is not licensed as a therapist in New York, where he and Amy live….. how can he then be a "therapist"? http://www.op.nysed.gov/opsearches.htm#nme 173.162.252.241 (talk) 10:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Arkansas Online calls him a "mental-health counselor", and People calls him a "therapist". Denver Westword also calls him a "professional therapist". So, we went with the term used in the sources. Besides, it's possible that his license lapsed between the date of the marriage and the present (but that's well beyond the scope of this article). In any case, it's inappropriate to use professional databases that way, per WP:BLPPRIMARY. It's better to use what published sources use, and in this case, the People article does the trick nicely. —C.Fred (talk) 16:02, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Josh Hartzler not licensed as a therapist 

message: Amy Lee and Josh Hartzler gave birth to their first child on July 28th. The baby is named Jack Lion Hartzler and Amy Lee introduced her son with a picture on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, stating: "Our little cub, Jack Lion Hartzler, is here. I have never known the depths of my heart till now. The world just exploded into technicolor."
79.13.80.127 (talk) 21:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: . Birth added to article, but there is no need for the quote. Keeping it simple. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2014 

message: Amy Lee gave birth to a baby boy "Jack Lion Hartzler" on July 24th 2014.
Girlofdarkness (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: . It has already been added to the article. If you're claiming that it occurred on July 24 rather than July 28, you'll have to provide a reliable source. — Huntster (t @ c) 12:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 29 July 2014 

message: === Voice ===

Lee has a total vocal range of 3.3 octaves (C3-E6), with her highest recorded note in chest voice being a G5 in the songs "What You Want" and "Never Go Back"; and in head voice a C#6 in the song “Weight of the World”. Her lowest recorded note is a C3 in the song "Never Go Back". In an MTV special, Lee managed to hit an E6 live during a vocal warm-up in full head voice, also showing that she is capable of reaching up to A7 through exclamation.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVoqf4YLJcs She is often classified as a mezzo-sopranohttp://www.pluggedin.com/music/albums/2011/evanescence-evanescence.aspx, though this has not been confirmed by Lee herself.
Lee is not professionally trained in singing and utilizes what she learned from her years as a choir member in high school. She incorporates operatic vocals into her style and her use of crescendos is notable. She also uses a mixed-technique in her 5th octave and can sustain 5th octave notes in all vowelshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSyELfHnXEE.
Critics often consider Lee’s vocals to be one of the highlights of the bands’ music, describing it as “ethereal”, “dramatic” and “haunting” while praising its “powerful” and “crystalline” qualities.
86.135.200.225 (talk) 19:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: . Fan-made YouTube videos are not valid references, and most of the others don't actually exist. Not sure what to make of PluggedIn, but I seem to recall that in the past it was not considered a reliable source (regardless, it is a lone voice in this crowd of non-existence). — Huntster (t @ c) 01:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2014