A number of repeated references, especially 28-36.
I believe that I've corrected this problem, can you check to make sure I fixed all the references? Thanks
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 12:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Not yet. You need to replace all the Hung Medien references with a single one as it's the same content repeated in all of them.
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
A number of times procession is added, however, bigger markets like Australia and Norway are left for no reason. Why?
I have not been able to locate all of the songs chart procession and succession in countries where it peaked at number one, so I've instead removed the section altogether.
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 11:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Done I've just added the chart procession and succession to Australia and Norway.
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 23:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The date formatting for Australia is incorrect.
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
"Do The Bartman" sold half a million copies and was certified gold by the British Phonographic Industry on February 1, 1991." – This is so wrong. The BPI doesnot certify on sales, it certifies on shipments. And BPI gold certification is for 400K copies.
There is a case of huge
WP:OVERLINK happening. One example, ref no 8. You are citing it to
BBC News while formatting as BBC.co.uk which is wrong. Same with EW.com, News.BBC.co.uk, BPI.co.uk etc etc.
Done I believe I've corrected this problem, if I missed any references please let me know. Thanks,
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 12:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Please correct these mistakes so that I can actually proceed to the article. I am giving concerned editor/s 3 days for it.
--Legolas(talk2me) 10:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Online sources are not supposed to be italicized. A number of them are still left.
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
I have not been able to find any online sources that are in italics. Could you cite the section(s) that they are in?
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 04:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The title of the section "Reception". I beleive Reception implies both critical and commercial performance, but this section contains only the critical ones. Hence you can rename it as "Critical reception".
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The Hung Medien is left still. I believe you did a similar change for the Hung Medien in "
Say Say Say".
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Done I corrected the problem, but I left ref. 19 because it sources the songs weeks at number one in that country.
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 04:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
A number of repeated references, especially 28-36.
I believe that I've corrected this problem, can you check to make sure I fixed all the references? Thanks
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 12:40, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Not yet. You need to replace all the Hung Medien references with a single one as it's the same content repeated in all of them.
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
A number of times procession is added, however, bigger markets like Australia and Norway are left for no reason. Why?
I have not been able to locate all of the songs chart procession and succession in countries where it peaked at number one, so I've instead removed the section altogether.
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 11:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Done I've just added the chart procession and succession to Australia and Norway.
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 23:03, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The date formatting for Australia is incorrect.
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
"Do The Bartman" sold half a million copies and was certified gold by the British Phonographic Industry on February 1, 1991." – This is so wrong. The BPI doesnot certify on sales, it certifies on shipments. And BPI gold certification is for 400K copies.
There is a case of huge
WP:OVERLINK happening. One example, ref no 8. You are citing it to
BBC News while formatting as BBC.co.uk which is wrong. Same with EW.com, News.BBC.co.uk, BPI.co.uk etc etc.
Done I believe I've corrected this problem, if I missed any references please let me know. Thanks,
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 12:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Please correct these mistakes so that I can actually proceed to the article. I am giving concerned editor/s 3 days for it.
--Legolas(talk2me) 10:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Online sources are not supposed to be italicized. A number of them are still left.
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
I have not been able to find any online sources that are in italics. Could you cite the section(s) that they are in?
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 04:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The title of the section "Reception". I beleive Reception implies both critical and commercial performance, but this section contains only the critical ones. Hence you can rename it as "Critical reception".
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:24, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
The Hung Medien is left still. I believe you did a similar change for the Hung Medien in "
Say Say Say".
--Legolas(talk2me) 04:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply
Done I corrected the problem, but I left ref. 19 because it sources the songs weeks at number one in that country.
Crystal Clear x3[talk] 04:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)reply