Talk:Dangerous Woman (song)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Dangerous Woman (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Music Videos
According to Grande, there will be two versions of the musics video, differentiated by the titles of "Visual 1" and "Visual 2". Should we include both versions or treat them as one? I would like to refer to the Sparks (Hilary Duff song) music video for reference. -- User:192.5.215.225 (10:57AM EST 3/31/16) —Preceding undated comment added 14:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

The charts peaking positions are not true
Someone fix it please. Thanks. SalemHanna (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You are someone. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:43, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Protracted WP:SYN / ip-hopping edit wars by socks of Smoore95GAGA / highly positive/universal acclaim/acclaim/positive
Summarizing the reviews is synthesis. Are all the reviews everywhere positive? Prove it. How many of the reviews randomly selected to be here are "acclaim" rather than merely "positive" or "neutral"? How did you decide this? Are the sources here representative of all the professional reviewers on the planet? The sources say what they say. As soon as we decide this review is positive, this other one is a rave and a third one is acclaim, and lump them together, we are combining material from two or more sources to say something none of the sources say directly. This is synthesis. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 00:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If material is synthesis and someone removes it as such, restoring it a week later is no better than restoring it immediately. The material is disputed. Per WP:BRD, it is time to discuss it.
 * If you discuss the material, you might convince others it should stay or you might work together to come up with a workable compromise.
 * If you do not discuss the material and repeatedly restore it, you are edit warring. The material will be repeatedly removed and you will be blocked from editing.
 * Take your pick. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 16:34, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * , you're wasting your time. The IPs that keep adding that SYN include:
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * These all appear to be the IP versions of and its now-blocked sock  as evidenced here.  I've requested semi-pp.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * And has been done. Thanks .  Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Excessive material
Two editors are intent on keeping excessive material in this article. This is the latest one. What the singer has to say about the lyrics which are written by someone else is probably real important to the fans, but have very little encyclopedic value, especially given that a. the article is already full of fairly insignificant detail and b. at least the comments on the lyrics are terribly sourced--what is Enstarz.com but a gossip/chat site full of commercialized fan trivia? And that quote on the title change, that's just way too long and needs to be cut if it is to be kept. In addition, the edit summary by, "Selena Gomez also didn't write Same Old Love, and her explanation wasn't removed just because she didn't write", betrays their inexperience: that another mediocre article (also C-class, and ever more bloated than this one) has something doesn't mean this one should have it. Articles on hit songs seem to be the new area where everything that's more or less verified gets stuck in as if we're Wikia. Drmies (talk) 17:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

The pure sale is right
Dangerous woman US pure sale is 890,000 keeps on changing back to 842,000+ for some reason Iamgoffe (talk) 17:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Lyrics
Should the article include as many lyrics as are currently displayed in the "Composition and lyrics" section? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:29, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging the two Good article review participants, just in case. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:29, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Fixed the whole section now. Best, Cartoon network freak (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:26, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Dangerous Woman (song). 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/20151226122413/http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH_RESULTS&artist=Taylor%20Swift&format=&go=Search&perPage=50 to http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH_RESULTS&artist=Taylor%20Swift&format=&go=Search&perPage=50
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://recordreport.com.ve/publico/anglo/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)