Talk:Bringin' on the Heartbreak
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What's meant by "solicited" in this article? It doesn't make sense in context (especially with the preposition "to"; I've corrected that to "by", but it's still obscure). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:01, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV tag
This article needs much more information on the Def Leppard version of the song, assuming it was released as a single (and even if it wasn't, this article still concentrates too much on the Mariah Carey version). Extraordinary Machine 18:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
- I have duly removed the NPOV tag and replaced it with expansion. Lack of coverage is not the same thing as a biased viewpoint. --moof 10:03, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
- But the proportion of the article documenting Carey's version of the song could in and of itself be considered POV. Regardless, I've expanded the material on the Def Leppard original and trimmed some of the information on the cover. Extraordinary Machine 19:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Carey's singles chronology
I changed it back from "What Would You Do" to "U Make Me Wanna". "What Would You Do" did not make an impact on any charts and was not even an official single. No article will be created about it as it doesn't deserve its own article, so adding it to the singles chronology will not help readers as it will break the chronology and they will be unable to find the article about Carey's next single. --Musicpvm 06:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- "What Would You Do" did appear on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop chart (see [1]), but since it was only a promo it might not officially be considered a "single". I don't think making sure the chronology is unbroken is too important though; there's a link to Mariah Carey singles discography on every page that has Template:Mariah Carey2 on it so readers can just click on that. Anyway, I think we should centralise discussion about chronologies and things that apply to all of the single articles at Talk:Mariah Carey singles discography. Extraordinary Machine 17:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations
Note: This article has a small number of in-line citations for an article of its size and currently would not pass criteria 2b.
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 02:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)