This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Love Me Harder article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Love Me Harder was nominated as a Music good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 6, 2017). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
177.177.70.208 ( talk) 15:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
177.177.70.208 ( talk) 15:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
line and above the line.
Finland's chart need to be update! Love Me Harder peak at #14 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.166.64 ( talk) 23:26, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Love Me Harder is Gold in Italy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.166.64 ( talk) 18:39, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Love Me Harder is Gold in Denmark! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.18.209.68 ( talk) 14:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Why are Israel and Lebanon's charts unnecessary?? In Israel the song peaks at #1 and in Lebanon at #8! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.55.218.35 ( talk) 15:48, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Love Me Harder reached number 4 in Billboardcanadachrtop40,according to the graph of nielsen BDS the song has received certificate for 1 million digital copies and currently passes 1,060,000.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Love Me Harder. 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:
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:18, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Ever since I started to contribute and/or develop articles here on Wikipedia, by everything that I read, I have always used a good article as an example to know how can I improve and contribute in the best possible way. Whenever an editor is editing an article, we need to understand which topics we are going to approach at the top of the article, and the critical reception part has always been useful and very important for the reader. Featured articles such as " Love the Way You Lie", " Déjà Vu (Beyoncé song)" and even " Imagine (John Lennon song)" (to name only a few) have always presented a critical point of view. It's very important and in every good article here on Wikipedia (with very few exceptions) the critical reception is present at the top. I have worked on many articles and most of them that received a good article status were approved with the critical consensus at the top (which was always said to be extremely important). I have observed that though is important to sum up, it's not good to exclude the critical consensus, because though they differ in their opinion about a song, in all of the articles that are approved to be "good", the contributors always know how to deal with different opinions.
In this case (and on the " Into You (Ariana Grande song)" article, which was also taken away, even though both songs were positively reviewed), it's very easy to interpret as "The song was acclaimed by music critics", citing a few reasons. My main reason to edit on Wikipedia is to improve articles and reaching them for "good article" status, but with this kind of exclusion of a very important part which is the critical at the top is going to be very hard. For every song/single article on Wikipedia, with different reviews, it is necessary to find a critical consensus about the song, and it's not a hard task to take it away like that, I have always done, and it's what make an article to stand out. It's simple, we can't generalize, but it's necessary to exhibit what critics said about the song in general. FanofPopMusic ( talk) 05:29, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Love Me Harder. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
No mention of this excellent version, with its dry studio acoustics showcasing their unadorned vocal capabilities. It has 13m+ views on Youtube. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.82.0.245 ( talk) 09:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Love Me Harder. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Love Me Harder article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Love Me Harder was nominated as a Music good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 6, 2017). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
177.177.70.208 ( talk) 15:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
177.177.70.208 ( talk) 15:27, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
line and above the line.
Finland's chart need to be update! Love Me Harder peak at #14 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.166.64 ( talk) 23:26, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Love Me Harder is Gold in Italy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.53.166.64 ( talk) 18:39, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Love Me Harder is Gold in Denmark! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.18.209.68 ( talk) 14:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Why are Israel and Lebanon's charts unnecessary?? In Israel the song peaks at #1 and in Lebanon at #8! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.55.218.35 ( talk) 15:48, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Love Me Harder reached number 4 in Billboardcanadachrtop40,according to the graph of nielsen BDS the song has received certificate for 1 million digital copies and currently passes 1,060,000.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Love Me Harder. 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:
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).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:18, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Ever since I started to contribute and/or develop articles here on Wikipedia, by everything that I read, I have always used a good article as an example to know how can I improve and contribute in the best possible way. Whenever an editor is editing an article, we need to understand which topics we are going to approach at the top of the article, and the critical reception part has always been useful and very important for the reader. Featured articles such as " Love the Way You Lie", " Déjà Vu (Beyoncé song)" and even " Imagine (John Lennon song)" (to name only a few) have always presented a critical point of view. It's very important and in every good article here on Wikipedia (with very few exceptions) the critical reception is present at the top. I have worked on many articles and most of them that received a good article status were approved with the critical consensus at the top (which was always said to be extremely important). I have observed that though is important to sum up, it's not good to exclude the critical consensus, because though they differ in their opinion about a song, in all of the articles that are approved to be "good", the contributors always know how to deal with different opinions.
In this case (and on the " Into You (Ariana Grande song)" article, which was also taken away, even though both songs were positively reviewed), it's very easy to interpret as "The song was acclaimed by music critics", citing a few reasons. My main reason to edit on Wikipedia is to improve articles and reaching them for "good article" status, but with this kind of exclusion of a very important part which is the critical at the top is going to be very hard. For every song/single article on Wikipedia, with different reviews, it is necessary to find a critical consensus about the song, and it's not a hard task to take it away like that, I have always done, and it's what make an article to stand out. It's simple, we can't generalize, but it's necessary to exhibit what critics said about the song in general. FanofPopMusic ( talk) 05:29, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Love Me Harder. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:21, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
No mention of this excellent version, with its dry studio acoustics showcasing their unadorned vocal capabilities. It has 13m+ views on Youtube. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.82.0.245 ( talk) 09:01, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Love Me Harder. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)