Number one in Australia, 2 in New Zealand and Belgium should be mentioned as well.
It's about a British subject, adding 3 more charts is making the lead unnecessarily too long. This is only a summary. —
Calvin999
So what? British artists can only make it in Britain? while American singers only in the US? Make no sense. I agree since they are British it is important to mention their home country, however, if they are successful elsewhere should be mentioned as well.
MarioSoulTruthFan (
talk)
13:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
I kept it to UK only on purpose, because otherwise the lead will be bigger than some of the sections beneath it, it only needs to be a summary, not a complete repetition of what's below. —
Calvin99918:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
I'm not saying to put all the the charts just two more. It was very successful there and a reader should not have to read the entire article to find such information. Besides this, it will help one became more interested an engaged with the article.
The lead is already too long for an article of this size, I'm not adding more. It's not not fillfiling any criteria. —
Calvin99921:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)reply
No more reviews, that has to one of the harshest reviews I ever read!
Robert Copsey review I would move it to the top, after the NME one
After that reviews in one paragraph and other would be for the commercial section. Seems more logical, however, I knew what you were trying to do there.
Agree but promotion can be a lot of things, its a derivative title if you use music video you are being more specetific. All Ga's and FA's article have such section.
Yes, music video and live performances = Promotion. And FA's and most GA's have a lot more info available than this song, so usually have separate sections anyway. —
Calvin99918:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
You make a good point.
Done
Formats and track listings
Discogs ot a reliable source, I wouldn't use. Try to find in it however, the identification number.
I've added IDs for the record labels, but I've lifted the credits from the images of the booklets, so they are reliable as they can be checked on it. —
Calvin99908:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)reply
So I and the nominator seem to have a little disagreement towards the information the lead should contain. I claim that the information regarding the song topping the charts in Australia and Flanders is relevant enough to be mentioned in the lead, however, the nominator strongly believes that adding that will make the lead "bigger than some of the sections beneath it" and that it's not fulfilling any criteria. I would like a second opinion towards this issue down below. Thank You
MarioSoulTruthFan (
talk)
16:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)reply
I would imagine that a brief line about the song's commercial performance outside of UK markets would be appropriate; it could be a short sentence to prevent expanding the lead too much. Besides, the lead should contain information about the single as a whole, so only including the commercial performance of the song in UK markets can be interpreted as giving that part a little bit of undue weight. I noticed this especially since the lead goes into a rather in-depth take of peaks, streams, and certifications, which makes the absence of information on its commercial performance in other regions/countries even more apparent. Again, the sentence can be short, and just something along the lines of ("5,6,7,8" peaked in the top ten in Australia, Belgium, and New Zealand). Just wanted to add my opinion as this was tagged for a second opinion, and I have to agree with MarioSoulTruthFan on this matter.
Aoba47 (
talk)
16:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)reply
Number one in Australia, 2 in New Zealand and Belgium should be mentioned as well.
It's about a British subject, adding 3 more charts is making the lead unnecessarily too long. This is only a summary. —
Calvin999
So what? British artists can only make it in Britain? while American singers only in the US? Make no sense. I agree since they are British it is important to mention their home country, however, if they are successful elsewhere should be mentioned as well.
MarioSoulTruthFan (
talk)
13:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
I kept it to UK only on purpose, because otherwise the lead will be bigger than some of the sections beneath it, it only needs to be a summary, not a complete repetition of what's below. —
Calvin99918:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
I'm not saying to put all the the charts just two more. It was very successful there and a reader should not have to read the entire article to find such information. Besides this, it will help one became more interested an engaged with the article.
The lead is already too long for an article of this size, I'm not adding more. It's not not fillfiling any criteria. —
Calvin99921:25, 18 July 2017 (UTC)reply
No more reviews, that has to one of the harshest reviews I ever read!
Robert Copsey review I would move it to the top, after the NME one
After that reviews in one paragraph and other would be for the commercial section. Seems more logical, however, I knew what you were trying to do there.
Agree but promotion can be a lot of things, its a derivative title if you use music video you are being more specetific. All Ga's and FA's article have such section.
Yes, music video and live performances = Promotion. And FA's and most GA's have a lot more info available than this song, so usually have separate sections anyway. —
Calvin99918:15, 17 July 2017 (UTC)reply
You make a good point.
Done
Formats and track listings
Discogs ot a reliable source, I wouldn't use. Try to find in it however, the identification number.
I've added IDs for the record labels, but I've lifted the credits from the images of the booklets, so they are reliable as they can be checked on it. —
Calvin99908:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)reply
So I and the nominator seem to have a little disagreement towards the information the lead should contain. I claim that the information regarding the song topping the charts in Australia and Flanders is relevant enough to be mentioned in the lead, however, the nominator strongly believes that adding that will make the lead "bigger than some of the sections beneath it" and that it's not fulfilling any criteria. I would like a second opinion towards this issue down below. Thank You
MarioSoulTruthFan (
talk)
16:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)reply
I would imagine that a brief line about the song's commercial performance outside of UK markets would be appropriate; it could be a short sentence to prevent expanding the lead too much. Besides, the lead should contain information about the single as a whole, so only including the commercial performance of the song in UK markets can be interpreted as giving that part a little bit of undue weight. I noticed this especially since the lead goes into a rather in-depth take of peaks, streams, and certifications, which makes the absence of information on its commercial performance in other regions/countries even more apparent. Again, the sentence can be short, and just something along the lines of ("5,6,7,8" peaked in the top ten in Australia, Belgium, and New Zealand). Just wanted to add my opinion as this was tagged for a second opinion, and I have to agree with MarioSoulTruthFan on this matter.
Aoba47 (
talk)
16:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)reply