Talk:Daniel (Elton John song)

Fair use rationale for Image:EJdaniel.JPG
Image:EJdaniel.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Rationale for removing (rather than querying) a small portion of the Covers section
I've removed the following from the covers section:

A very popular cover was made in Montreal by Nasser Al-Shawwa, a Civil Engineering student at McGill University, in October 2007, and a notable jazz influence was added to the song.

I can find no external reference to this 'popular cover' despite multiple searches using multiple engines (both Anglophone and Francophone).

Even broadening the searches show no signs of this 'popular cover'.

For example a Google search on just 'Nasser Al-Shawwa', as of 2008/01/01 13:13 UTC, returns only one hit: the Wikipedia article on the John/Taupin song Daniel.

I couldn't find any reference to this apparently significant recording in Montreal-specific media either.

I think this is enough due diligence to call this vandalism.

Bforte (talk) 13:15, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The repeated use of 'notable' is telling, I think. If it was 'recorded' in October 2007, it could hardly really have reached any reasonable 'notability' in less than 3 months, when you saw it. Check the user, and I'll bet it's the same guy. CFLeon (talk) 00:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Perception
I reverted this edit because the information is unreferenced and I think a controversial statement such as this one needs to be backed up with reliable sources. If a good reference can be found to verify this claim then by all means it can be restored. Thanks. TheRetroGuy (talk) 10:28, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I am attempting to do so, but it is hard to accomplish, given that links to dicussion boards etc is not an acceptable reference, is it? Even though they are examples of people assuming that is what the song is about. It is extremely difficult to cite a general perception among the public. Even if a newspaper states it in an article, how have they sourced that perception? Tom Green (talk) 13:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I see your point, although if you can find a newspaper source I think it would all right. TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

'Misinterpreted'
Since the quotation used mentions the 'misinterpretations', some explaination of what Taupin is talking about should be made. The legend I've heard most is that the song's about a brother of Elton's. The Straight Dope some years ago had an article on the urban legends concerning this song.CFLeon (talk) 00:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm also kind of cruious as to whether or not the namesake is meant to be literally blind. Saying someone's eyes have died could just be a way of describing someone who is no longer animated and just sort of stares of at nothing. An alternative way to say it would be that there's no life in his eyes. I just don't see it as necessarily conveying blindness. Sonlee (talk) 03:25, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure that the misinterpretation quote applies to this song? It seems far, far more appropriate to "Goodbye Yellow Brick road." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrbobbyg (talk • contribs) 15:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow, okay, looking at the first and second paragraph of this section, I see that they're wildly inconsistent. The first cite is to an Elton John FAQ, and it seems to be directly contradicted by the second quote. This page needs work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrbobbyg (talk • contribs) 15:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I had heard that the song was about a delivery boy who was killed on his way to a recording studio where EJ waas working -any source on this ? --— ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht Talk/Stalk 07:19, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

About Spain in this song

They say Spain is pretty though I've never been Well Daniel says it's the best place that he's ever seenOh and he should know, he's been there enough Lord I miss Daniel, oh I miss him so much - oh ho — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.30.15.64 (talk) 10:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Many people would read the song as being about someone who is about to die, after a painful illness, or an otherwise disturbed existence, or who has just died. "Going on a plane to Spain" seems a natural metaphor for death, leaving for another realm. Lines such as "Your eyes have died/ but you see more than I" and "he should know 'cause he's been there enough" also seem to imply dying. Although "he's been there enough" syntactically refers to Spain (metaphorically, the next world) the real drift of those words is "been there" as in "been through long pain, been wasting away far too long". Now, nobody is claiming this should be in the article, but lots of people do read the lyrics and the gently mournful tune that way, and I don't think this dimension of the lyrics could have escaped Elton and Bernie when they wrote it. It's quite another thing that they don't like to discuss the meaning of their songs in public in any detail - most rock/pop songwriters try to avoid to discuss what their lyrics are about, in order to keep off eliciting silly, embarrassing or angry responses from nitwits, prudes, racists etc. 83.254.151.33 (talk) 04:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Lyricist “misinterpreted”? What?
The article relates:

“'Daniel' had been the most misinterpreted song that we'd ever written," explained Taupin, in the Two Rooms tribute project. "The story was about a guy that went back to a small town in Texas, returning from the Vietnam War. They'd lauded him when he came home and treated him like a hero. But, he just wanted to go home, go back to the farm, and try to get back to the life that he'd led before. I wanted to write something that was sympathetic to the people that came home."

Gee, I wondered why the song was “misinterpreted”? It would have rather been like the songwriter of “Happy Days Are Here Again” stating that the song was really about a man just diagnosed with flesh eating bacteria.

For the record, I always thought the song was about a man lamenting the loss of either a brother or close friend who had been killed in a plane crash while heading for Spain. Silly me. Although that might not be the only reasonable interpretation, how does Mr. Taupin expect anyone to “correctly” interpret his scenario from these lyrics? A wounded Vietnam war veteran? (Spain?) Longing for the farm? (“Daniel, you're a star in the face of the sky”?) The point of this is that I have never previously considered Mr. Taupin to be irrational. Therefore, I am wondering if there is more to this account than what is included in the article and, if so, might it not be added to perhaps provide some context to make his remarks seem coherent?HistoryBuff14 (talk) 18:11, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Look just above this section on the talk page, Buster. ;) I agree the song is most likely hinting that the guy died - 'plane leaving for Spain' is a metaphor though, a poetic image for dying, likely after some time of disease - but many songwriters and singers habitually prefer to avoid discussing what their songs are about on any kind of imagery level (even when it's not controversial stuff). In the same way, Tina Turner pretended not to understand that the character we encounter in Private Dancer (written by Mark Knopfler) is a prostitute or a sex club worker. If you listen to the record and her tired, bluesy delivery it's plain that she knows the sense of the lyrics, but she didn't want to have to answer prudes and idiots who were acting offended that she was singing that kind of song, so she just said "Oh? no man, that's not what I thought it was..." 83.254.151.33 (talk) 03:34, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 one external links on Daniel (song). 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/20080220003524/http://www.radio538.nl:80/web/show/id=44685/chartid=6999 to http://www.radio538.nl/web/show/id=44685/chartid=6999
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121012235513/http://dutchcharts.nl/showitem.asp?interpret=Elton+John&titel=Daniel&cat=s to http://dutchcharts.nl/showitem.asp?interpret=Elton+John&titel=Daniel&cat=s
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5nE7hmwjG?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishcharts.ie to http://www.irishcharts.ie
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121024025434/http://norwegiancharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Elton+John&titel=Daniel&cat=s to http://norwegiancharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Elton+John&titel=Daniel&cat=s
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121110110531/http://hitparade.ch/showitem.asp?interpret=Elton+John&titel=Daniel&cat=s to http://hitparade.ch/showitem.asp?interpret=Elton+John&titel=Daniel&cat=s
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160603211749/http://50.6.195.142/archives/70s_files/19730616.html to http://50.6.195.142/archives/70s_files/19730616.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006134948/http://australian-charts.com/forum.asp?todo=viewthread&id=40275 to http://australian-charts.com/forum.asp?todo=viewthread&id=40275
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150111233703/http://50.6.195.142/archives/70s_files/1973YESP.html to http://50.6.195.142/archives/70s_files/1973YESP.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Remove Storyline
The Storyline section, added on 11 Oct 2016, was tagged with OR on 11 Jan 2017. I'm really inclined to just remove the section. It is clearly someone's personal interpretation of the song, it is not cited, and it is directly contradicted by the quoted statement by the song's author in the Composition section. Unless someone can provide a citation, this should go. CodeTalker (talk) 20:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

This section really needs to be fixed properly, or removed. The most recent change fixed the mondegreen "faith in the sky", but now makes even less sense. This is the sort of thing which turns people off of WP, and really needs to be removed. 198.235.255.4 (talk) 14:56, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I've been bold and removed the section. As it stood it made no sense, as 198.235.255.4 noted, and ever since its creation it seemed to be just a place for people to dump their own personal interpretations of this song's difficult lyrics. If it is re-added, it should be cited to a reliable source. CodeTalker (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 21 July 2017

 * The following is a closed 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: moved per Cuchullain, and disambiguations like "x (song)" are Wiki terms and are very unlikely for a reader to search for it. WP:Other stuff exists shouldn't be a valid reason here since that other article could be moved too, if a consensus is reached. (Requested moves/Closing instructions) -  The   Magnificentist  15:18, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Daniel (song) → Daniel (Elton John song) – There is a Daniel (Bat for Lashes song) of the same name and "Daniel (song)" should redirect to "Daniel (disambiguation)". 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:2DC9:63F9:6391:2DD (talk) 14:26, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Philg88 ♦talk 15:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Support. This should be fully disambiguated. kennethaw88 • talk 05:55, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
 * There's also Stand by Me (song) and Stand by Me (Oasis song) where one is a primary topic with 10 times the number of page views, here the Elton John song's article has 13 times the number of page views of the Bat for Lashes song. Peter James (talk) 00:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:INCDAB. If disambiguation is used at all, it should fully disambiguate the article from other topics, and just (song) doesn't cut it. Daniel (song) should redirect to the dab page.--Cúchullain t/ c 21:00, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose Per Peter James' point above, someone going to "Daniel (song)" almost certainly (with >90% probability) is looking for the Elton John song. I think the hatnote for the Bat for Lashes song at the top of the page is sufficient. CodeTalker (talk) 15:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.