Talk:Breaking the Habit (song)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Linkin Park High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linkin Park, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linkin Park on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Linkin ParkWikipedia:WikiProject Linkin ParkTemplate:WikiProject Linkin ParkLinkin Park
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

Breaking The Habit → Breaking the Habit – Use correct capitalisation.

(Copied from the entry on the WP:RM page)

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

Support; capitalisation as used by band. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 16:25, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Add any additional comments

Song Meaning

On the page it says that the song is actually about Chester's past. However, from what I've read in various articles it's not about him, but he had a hard time singing it because he was able to relate to it so closely. Perhaps the article should be rewritten to note this?

um the text about the who the song was written about does not make sense. it first says people think it was written about chester, then it says it was written by mike, the way this text is written does not make sense. using the words "when in fact" confuses the reader because the two bits of information are not connected in any way 71.166.51.76 (talk) 23:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On another note, during The Making of Meteora Mike says that he was the one who wrote Breaking the Habit and I am going to correct the page. --SayCheese 17:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Animation

The animation style looks alot like the style used in "Kid's Story" for the Animatrix. Wikipedia says Studio 4°C was the production company behind "Kid's Story".

Anybody know if the animation is fully original or has pieces of something else? - SkarmoryThePG 11:20, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's fully original. Patrick Tatopoulous came up with the backgrounds and the rest was animated live footage. --SayCheese 17:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't people take cool video clips (like this or Pts.of.Arthry. and make movies outta them? <.< I'd watch in a heartbeat - SkarmoryThePG 11:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to have to correct you there, SayCbeese; only the band's performance at the end of the video was based on live footage. Everything else was hand-designed. By the way, not only were "Kid's Story" and the video for "Breaking the Habit" made by the same studio, the animation for them was led by the same person. -Unknownwarrior33 16:47, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I might be wrong - there's a lot of confused information on the subject. -Unknownwarrior33 16:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The animation studio was GONZO? What? Source? From what I've heard, Production I.G. did the animation.

Stub?

I removed the stub tag from the page, but I don't quite understand the directions on the template at the top of this page. Could someone address them? Paul Haymon 11:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Breaking the habit.jpg

Image:Breaking the habit.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 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 20:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Power Ballad?

Couldn't we classify this song as a power ballad?Lpfan4eva1990 (talk) 23:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chester's Face

I counted that Chester's face flashes on the screen 25 times in the video. Is this correct? Bentu 01:10, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IT'S NOT NU METAL, SO QUIT IT.

Geez... you might as well say it's country music unless you have the proper genre. Out of all the songs on Meteora, this one is the furthest from Nu Metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.200 (talk) 16:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, Wesleydodds, for some reason you are Anti-Linkin Park. If you've ever listened to this song, you would hear that this is NOT a Nu Metal influenced song, but rather an Alternative Rock song. So, stop it unless you have some sort of mind controlling device to make me think that an Alternative Rock song is a Nu Metal song. But until you come up with this device, I will stand to fight your bias changes in the genre of this song. 4.68.248.132 (talk) 00:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dare I say.... Post Rock?

Nu Metal just can't describe this song, because this song breaks away from traditional Nu Metal songs. Post Rock is the best description because there isn't screaming, heavy guitar riffs, or a hip hop beat. So, technically it can't be described as Nu Metal, and therefore Post Rock. Also, Electronica is part of Post Rock, so Post Rock describes the use of violins and whatnot. Nu Metal would be a false genre and will be taken down. I think Alternative Rock is a good genre for this, but somebody keeps on taking it down and replacing it with Nu Metal. So, unless someone has a better genre, Post Rock will be listed and Nu Metal will be taken down. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.200 (talk) 03:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You don't know anything about Post Rock. Post Rock is Godspeed You Black Emperor, Explosions in the Sky, Mogwai, Talk Talk's later stuff. If you'd read the wikipedia article on Post Rock, I'd hope you'd realize how vastly different this song is from anything Post Rock. Don't call it Nu Metal if that makes you happy, but I personally think it has more important things in common with that genre than Post Rock.

DragonGuyver (talk) 14:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the world of animé music videos...

... this song is frequently linked to one animé. Neon Genesis Evangelion.

Now, Breaking the Habit is used in AMVs to represent Shinji Ikari and all his problems.

But, have you ever transposed the song?!?

One semitone, minus ten cents is all you need to do.

Then it sounds like Spike Spencer (Shinji's VO).

I'll share this link via my iMeem

Rjsec4ever (talk) 00:45, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube?

This song has been taken off various user's MV featuring The Matrix, Equilibrium (better then Martix), and others. What happened. (JoeLoeb (talk) 03:07, 5 May 2009 (UTC))[reply]

"songs about suicide"

why is this song categorized under "songs about suicide"? there are no clear references to suicide in the song, and i don't think the band has stated that it's about suicide. correct me if i'm wrong. 75.44.217.165 (talk) 05:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Total redundancy

The section regarding the DVD is:

A.) Completely out of place in terms of article structure (coming after chart positions and references?) B.) Is virtually just a retread of the information in the "Music Video" section, save for one or two possible, minor differences, and thus highly redundant. C.) Consequently lacking the ability to truly elaborate on the DVD itself other than the same passing mention as the former of the two sections, whereas a separate and more thorough explanation would be the logical idea behind it. This should be ameliorated, or the section should just be removed entirely. I know it once had its own article, but it failed to meet the criteria for notability, and was deleted. Meanwhile, what purpose is there in having two sections that say the exact same thing?
KirkCliff2 (talk) 17:25, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who convinced who?

"The song was originally going to be an instrumental track lasting a little over three and a half minutes, but Shinoda was convinced by the band to change it."

Shinoda was convinced by the band? It seems more likely that Shinoda did the convincing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielDPeterson (talk • contribs) 22:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Breaking the Habit. 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/20140222022322/http://www.rockband.com/blog/linkin-park-pack-02-dlc to http://www.rockband.com/blog/linkin-park-pack-02-dlc

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

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) 18:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 15 January 2019

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 07:04, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Breaking the Habit (song) → Breaking the Habit – WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for a two dab situation. The song gets 94% of pageviews, and the DAB literally always has more than the film, so the current setup is quite useless for readers. Nohomersryan (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2019 (UTC) ETA: Added some stats Nohomersryan (talk) 10:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Fails second criteria of Primary Topic since in books the 1964 Academy Award nominated smoking documentary is more notable than the 25-charting single. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:24, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- A Gold certification is not worth nothing, you know. Nohomersryan (talk) 10:04, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neither is an Academy Award nomination. The song is at (song), the film is at (film), nothing is broken. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:09, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Both are based on the real long-term primary topic - a reference to smoking cessation or drug rehabilitation and I've added those to the DAB page. Long-term page stats show that the historical large number of hits to the DAB is likely residual due to the song being moved from primary in April 2018. I think since these are already disambiguated, there is little to gain by changing that. -- Netoholic @ 19:33, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Not a bad point about the smoking term, although I still believe the WP:DIFFCAPS is enough. And the DAB page getting more hits as a result of the move just makes me think the move shouldn't have been done at all. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Re DIFFCAPS, breaking the habit already redirects to the DAB, which is pretty typical since we combine capitalizations and other forms together on one DAB. -- Netoholic @ 20:28, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, clear primary topic. It was the primary topic for ~14 years. It was moved briefly in 2012 which was reverted, then moved again in April 2018, which wasn't reverted for some reason. The current setup does not benefit readers who are overwhelmingly more likely to be looking for the song. —Xezbeth (talk) 21:43, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I agree with arguments set out by In ictu oculi and by Netoholic. Narky Blert (talk) 15:08, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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