Talk:Happier Than Ever (song)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Your Power is song being released April 29

Happier Than Ever is not being released on that date, instead Your Power is - check Instagram — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobias Reiper (talk • contribs)

The article does not mention an April 28 release date anywhere. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 17:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I meant April 29, this song is being replaced by Your Power on that date, posted by her today on Instagram

Requested move 27 April 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved by Anthony Appleyard (non-admin closure). D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 01:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


Happier Than Ever → Happier Than Ever (song) – Please also move Happier Than Ever (album) to Happier Than Ever, as album titles should be WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs) 15:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink).   Kadzi   (talk) 16:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't think anything needs to be draftified. This article can just be moved to Happier Than Ever (song) and turned into a redirect there with the page history preserved. Draftifying leads to WP:GAMING by people who want to get rid of the draft and fraudulently claim to be the article's creator later on.--NØ 17:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Okay, thanks for the heads up! In that case, like you said, the article can just be moved and redirected. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 17:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Agreed Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 20:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Support – seems like the most logical course of action at this point in time. Sean Stephens (talk) 07:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Anthony Appleyard: We need two moves performed as soon as possible. Every RM participant has agreed to them.

Thank you so much.--NØ 18:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

  • I'm going to go ahead and close the discussion as the move has already been carried out. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 01:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Redirect to album article?

If this isn't the single, I'm not sure what's the point in keeping it. The coverage mostly stems from a misunderstanding some sources had. They thought Eilish was announcing a single title, not an album title.--NØ 17:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

@MaranoFan: Yeah, I think this should be redirected as well, and Happier Than Ever (album) should be moved here. It was definitely a misunderstanding. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 18:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@MaranoFan and Doggy54321: Draftifying could always be an option, until further confirmation from reliable sources provides evidence that the title track will in fact be released. Just putting it out there. Sean Stephens (talk) 00:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Single

As I’m not a specialist about the music industry, can someone explain me why this song can’t be considered as a single, please? Himeros • talk 03:10, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@Hímeros: I'm not a specialist in the music industry either, but I think I can explain. The short answer is that the song was never promoted as a single. If it was, we would see sources use the wording "single", we would see the song being promoted to various radio stations, etc., so we would list it as a single. The fact that the song received a music video is not enough to list it as a single, because having a music video doesn't make a song a single. I hope this helped to clarify your understanding! Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 13:22, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
@Doggy54321: However, according to the page itself, it was promised to be album's next single + it was called a signle in an article by ARIA Charts. I'm not saying we should change the status of the song right now, since I don't think it can be counted as single yet. infsai (dyskusja) 19:21, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
@Infsai: I just removed that, as it was 100% a guess made by NME themselves. ARIA is reliable, and I still stand by my comment above (we would see sources use the wording 'single'), so I do think the song should be listed as a single in light of this new information. Since an independent release date was never specified, I think we should go with July 30, 2021, due to the fact that the date is when the song was first released. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 19:30, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
Outlets have a habit of calling everything a "single". For example, Pitchfork called Doja Cat's "Tonight" ft. Eve a single even though it obviously isn't. The ARIA chart is called "Singles Chart" so that may be why they chose to refer to it as a "single". Plenty of songs get music videos but no actual release (e.g., "God Control"). If there is no date given then I don't think we can refer to stuff as a single just because the word "single" was used. We can't assume dates either. Heartfox (talk) 22:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
@Heartfox: The song was sent to US CHR ([1]), but it's another "Traitor" situation where it was never listed at Future Releases, so we don't have a definite date. Judging by the other four songs listed in the top five, they were all promoted this week (August 17), so I think it's safe to say this got promoted then too, but I can't be sure. Please let me know your thoughts on this. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 14:06, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Per WP:SINGLE?, the only really reliable sources on a song's single release are Billboard and the Official Charts Company. The latter source mentioned the song as a single several times ([2] [3]) and they also mentioned its release date as July 30. Billboard also indicated that the song was an independent release from its parent album on the same day. Obviously, music videos are no indication of a single release, however, they are a form of streaming so that does give this song somewhat of an independent release on 30 July. As for the All Access cool new music, Doggy54321, I would say that does also indicate a independent release, but it is unreliable for an actual "impact" date. For example, it says that "Traitor" was released there on June 22, 2021 when, according to a Billboard editor it is August 10. Another example is Dua Lipa's "Love Again" which was posted there the same day as "Traitor", but didn't actually impact until July 6. I think at most, a release there should be considered a promotional single release. "Happier than Ever" was posted on there on August 12, 2021. LOVI33 17:54, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Given the Official Charts Company articles which refer to it as a single with a release date of July 30, I think we have no choice but to classify it as one. The Cool New Music page is not impact dates, but given that a radio edit has been made available on All Access, it appears it has a semi-official release for radio airplay in the U.S. as well. Although I personally think it's still just a "song" for now, we can't ignore sources like the Official Charts Company so I would support "Happier Than Ever"'s status as a single with a release date of July 30, 2021. Heartfox (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
@LivelyRatification and Heartfox: Sorry for not responding, my ability to receive pings has been inconsistent recently. I concur with Heartfox, we can't ignore the two publications listed at SINGLE?. I will make the needed changes now. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 17:40, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Happier Than Ever (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: K. Peake (talk · contribs) 20:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)


Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I will review this from tomorrow onwards! --K. Peake 20:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I think it would be best if only one of us addresses the review comments, to avoid edit conflicts. I'd be happy(er than ever) to do it since I have some time right now, Your Power.--NØ 06:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
@MaranoFan, thank you! That's good with me. I'm "Away from Me" home right now because I've been going back to classes, so I am extremely strapped for time these weekdays... Untroubled.elias (talk) 07:12, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

  • The ref for writing is not needed in the infobox, when this is already sourced in the body
  • Only soul should be listed as a genre per the rest being mentioned as elements
    • Actually, the cited source does indicate emo and pop-punk as explicit genres. I rewrote the corresponding sentence in the article prose accordingly Untroubled.elias (talk) 02:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Can't the release lengths be written in track listing to avoid placing refs here? Also, the album version is written out in prose already.
  • WP:OVERLINK of Billie Eilish under songwriters
  • Mention in the first sentence that it is "from her second studio album of the same name (2021)."
  • "wrote it with its producer," → "co-wrote the song with the sole producer,"
    • Sorry MaranoFan but I will have to revert your edit that incorporated this. The "co-" prefix is redundant here (listing the other writer/s is enough to tell us she wrote the song with someone else), and naming one person as producer is usually good enough on its own to signal that the song had one producer. Untroubled.elias (talk) 02:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
      • I'm sorry but this is exactly the type of thing I wanted not to happen when we worked out the arrangement that I'll address the review comments. I don't appreciate this.--NØ 02:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
      • We did agree to that yes MaranoFan, but some of my reversions were necessary because some of the requests got things about the article information wrong or were detrimental to the article's readability or conciseness. See my comment on the genres for one example. I apologize profusely that I did not clarify this sooner when you first tagged me. To be clear, I'll let you handle most of the responses, but wherever I feel some healthy objection is necessary, I'll be bold and say it outright. I hope we still can keep our heads cool and work towards the common goal of improving the article's quality. Untroubled.elias (talk) 04:46, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
        And apologies to the reviewer Kyle Peake for my absentmindedness and the confusions that may arise ^^ Untroubled.elias (talk) 04:47, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Place the release sentence as the third of the lead instead
    • I placed it as the second - really I don't think it matters where in the first paragraph (or the lead for that matter) we mention its single release, but establishing as soon as possible that it was a single might be good. Untroubled.elias (talk) 02:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Writing should come first, as that happened before release obviously. --K. Peake 17:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • "A soul, emo, and pop-punk song with elements of" → "A soul song with elements of genres including" listing out numerous ones since emo and pop-punk are not lead genres
    • See above comment about genre parameter in infobox Untroubled.elias (talk) 02:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • That is fine with the given context, but still change the below part to "it is about" to avoid using the title twice in a para. --K. Peake 17:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • ""Happier Than Ever" is about" → "it is about"
  • "It opens with a" → "The song opens with a"
  • Wikilink as snare drums instead
  • Pipe distortion to Distortion (music)
  • Replace the "off her second studio album..." part with "from the album", as the title should have been mentioned in the first sentence
  • "It was included as one of her best songs to date in online lists." → "The song was listed as one of her best songs to date by multiple publications, including"
  • Place the awards sentence directly after the above one
  • ""Happier Than Ever" won a" → "The song won a"
  • Wikilink music video and shouldn't you mention it was the same day as the single release instead?
  • "Eilish speaks to someone through" → "Eilish performs the song through"
  • Add in 2021 after The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon
  • "performances of "Happier Than Ever" in" → "performances of it in"
  • "in support of the album." → "in support of Happier Than Ever."
    • I would prefer that this not be done. Some folks who use screen readers might have a hard time telling if the article is referring to the song or the album when "Happier Than Ever" is mentioned. I'll inevitably be mentioning the album by name, obviously, but I want to make the references as clear as possible. Hence "second studio album, Happier Than Ever" is acceptable to me, but "'Happier Than Ever' provided it with its 'only one moment of greatness', and he lamented that the rest of Happier Than Ever was not as vocally loud and cathartic" is not. Untroubled.elias (talk) 02:32, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Background

  • Retitle to Background and development
  • "as inspiration behind" → "as an inspiration behind" on the img text
  • Remove singer-songwriter introduction to Billie Eilish since that being in the lead is sufficient
  • Remove commas around the album title
  • Ditto for Finneas O'Connell
  • The CinemaBlend and Billboard citations should be swapped to correspond with the order of the singles listed
  • "for her second studio album," → "for the album,"
  • Pipe chorus to Refrain
  • "They picked it" → "The two picked the song"
  • "Finneas wanted the production to be dynamic, and" → "Finneas wanted the style to be dynamic and"
  • Pipe programming to Programming (music)
  • "she had to write." → "she had wrote." per the source

Composition

  • Retitle to Composition and lyrics
  • Audio sample looks good!
  • ""Happier Than Ever" is a" → "Musically, "Happier Than Ever" is a"
  • "Others wrote that it" → "Others wrote that the song"
  • "upon its release," → "as of its release,"
  • Pipe verse to Verse (music) per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • "done on her voice." → "applied to her voice."
  • "Multiple critics noted that her" → "Multiple critics noted that Eilish's"
  • ""It was probably" → ""[It was] probably" per paraphrasing
  • "can’t even explain it."" → "can't even explain it"." per MOS:QUOTE
  • "fucking leave me alone."" → "fucking leave me alone"."

Release

  • "are comingggg", on her" → "are comingggg" on her"
  • "in the visuals of which she sits in" → "featuring visuals of her sitting in"
  • "to contemporary hit radio in" → "to contemporary hit radio stations in"
  • "and its radio edit was" → "and the radio edit was"
  • Note: I had made all of the review changes up to this point but some seem to have been reverted out with this series of edits. Apologies, Kyle Peake.--NØ 02:54, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
  • MaranoFan It is fine but in this context, only one of you should address these comments I believe. --K. Peake 17:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Reception

  • "who dubbed it a highlight include" → "who dubbed the song a highlight included"
  • Remove pipe on Billboard
  • "because it demonstrated" → "due to demonstrating"
  • "provided it with its "only one moment of greatness"" → "provided it with the "only real moment of greatness"" per the source
  • "Zoladz thought it was" → "Zoladz thought the song is"
  • Mention that the best song ever rankings were in 2022
  • "lungs" but never quite dare to." → "lungs", but never quite be able to." per the source

Rankings

  • Maybe use the N/A formatting instead of placed in the table?

Accolades

  • The list of MTV awards is confusing; why is it not mentioned as winning Song of the Year, why is Song of Summer treated like a separate ceremony with the first of two ands in the sentence and why is there not a comma before the usage of and per American English?
  • "at NME Awards 2022," → "at the NME Awards 2022," but this award is not sourced

Commercial performance

  • Pipe Billboard Hot 100 to Billboard Hot 100
  • "chart issued for" → "chart issue for"
  • "topped the country's Hot Rock & Alternative Songs, her second number one there" → "topped the US Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart, becoming her second number one"
  • Remove wikilink on "My Future"
  • Reword the Canadian Hot 100 sentence to first mentioning the chart position, then add making it Eilish's seventh song...
  • "It peaked at number four in" → "It peaked at number four on the UK Singles Chart in"
  • Uncapitalize platinum and add BPI in brackets, mentioning it was in the UK and the date of the certification
  • Generally I disagree with uncapitalizing the certification names since they are award titles and not metals. An attempt to discuss this did not lead to any particular conclusion, however I've capitalized them on all my FAs and that's what I've come to prefer. Also, abbreviations are discouraged unless used again.--NØ 06:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • "reached number three," → "reached number three on the ARIA Singles Chart," with the pipe
  • Again, platinum should not be capitalised and add ARIA in brackets while mentioning it was in Australia with the date
  • "on the New Zealand singles chart, giving Eilish her 12th top-10 there." → "on the New Zealand Singles Chart, giving Eilish her 12th top-10 in New Zealand." with the pipe
  • Decapitalise platinum and mention the country while adding RMNZ in brackets along with the date
  • Any specific order for the top 10 of record charts?
  • Only a peak of number 21 is sourced for Greece
  • "number 5 in" → "number 5 in both"
  • There are three countries in this part now so I've refrained from using "both".--NØ 06:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • "number 8 in" → "number 8 in both"
  • "and number 10 in" → "and number 10 in both"
  • Platinum nor gold should be capitalised

Music video

  • Mention that she performs the song over the telephone to a former partner
  • "and completely submerges" → "and is completely submerged"
  • Pipe Vulture to Vulture.com per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • "honed the video as a" → "honored the video as a"
  • Remove pipe on Billboard
  • "of serenity", and that" → "of serenity" and that"

Live performances

  • Img looks good!
  • "of a storm. Joining her were a" → "of a storm, joined by a" to avoid overly short sentences
  • Mention that the Jimmy Kimmel Live! performance was on top of The Roosevelt Hotel in Hollywood
  • Remove wikilink on Saturday Night Live
  • Add the release year of "Male Fantasy"
  • "Eilish accompanied the fictional character" → "Eilish was accompanied by the fictional character"
  • "and sang it as a" → "and sang the song as a"
  • Add the release year of "Misery Business"
  • "On June 24, Eilish headlined for the year's Glastonbury Festival in the United Kingdom," → "On June 24, 2022, Eilish headlined the year's Glastonbury Festival in the UK,"
  • Add a comma after Taylor Hawkins
  • "She climbed atop the roof" → "The singer climbed atop the roof"
  • I've been discouraged from doing this by people citing WP:ELEVAR before, so I've reverted to "Eilish" instead to avoid repetition.--NØ 06:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Add "the staff of" or something similar before The New York Times, also remove the wikilink
  • "and described it as" → "and described the performance as"
  • Remove comma after extended play

Credits and personnel

  • Good

Charts

Weekly charts

  • The Greece position is sourced as number 21 and should the chart really be identified as international?

Year-end charts

  • Good

Certifications

  • Good

Release history

References

  • Copyvio score looks decent at 38.7%
  • Pipe Vulture to Vulture.com on refs 8, 32 and 129 per MOS:LINK2SECT
  • UDiscover Music → uDiscoverMusic on ref 13, citing as work/website instead and piping to Universal Music Group
  • Wikilink CinemaBlend on ref 15
  • Why is YouTube not linked on ref 17?
  • Cite NPR as publisher instead on refs 22, 34 and 138
  • Remove or replace ref 26 per WP:RSP
  • Cite AllMusic as publisher instead on ref 28
  • Cite last name followed by first on ref 42
  • Cite Triple J as publisher instead on ref 45
  • Cite Associated Press as publisher instead on ref 51
  • Pipe Complex to Complex (magazine) on ref 69 since this is the website section
  • Cite MTV Australia as publisher instead on ref 77
  • Cite Lakes Media Network as publisher instead on ref 92
  • Cite Grammy.com as publisher instead on ref 95
  • Wikilink Recording Industry Association of Malaysia on ref 109 and cite Facebook as via with the wikilink
  • Only cite the publisher on ref 113
  • Ref 118 should cite both the original and archive URLs
  • This is generated automatically by the certification template so I assume some past discussion determined this was the best way of doing it.--NØ 06:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Why is Rolling Stone not linked on ref 128?
  • Pipe Plötutíðindi to Music of Iceland on ref 181
  • Cite Hitparade as publisher instead on ref 186

Final comments and verdict

  •  On hold until all of the issues are fixed; this didn't take too long! --K. Peake 17:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
    • I believe everything is addressed now, Kyle Peake. If you find the explanations provided by me and Elias on a few comments satisfactory, I belive we can wrap this up!--NØ 06:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • MaranoFan This definitely looks better, but you should still mention at least the months + years of the certifications even if specific dates are too much to write continuously. Also, why is and used after Song of the Summer 2021 in the awards then a second time for the list for the same awards show? --K. Peake 08:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • I've added the months + years in the places you had asked. And regarding the second question, the song was nominated at two separate VMA ceremonies, 2021 and 2022. I think a conjunction makes sense to separate the two ceremonies.--NØ 11:19, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
  • ✓ Pass now, top job and I understand why you didn't implement certain changes! --K. Peake 06:38, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by RoySmith (talk) 21:05, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by MaranoFan (talk) and Your Power (talk). Nominated by MaranoFan (talk) at 07:11, 4 September 2022 (UTC).

  • MaranoFan, would it be okay if I suggested alternative hooks? ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
    📝 "Don't get complacent..."     10:21, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
    Unless there's something wrong with ALT0, that would be highly unnecessary.--NØ 13:21, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
    @MaranoFan and Your Power: unless I'm missing something, DYK thrives on a collaborative environment that can only improve with new ideas. In fact, I'm inclined to hear more suggestions, if only because pop songs tend to underperform at DYK. Your Power, please feel free to suggest hooks – even more so because you contributed to the article. I'm willing to review them, if anyone wants to ping me :) cheers! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
    theleekycauldron, I’m sorry but I do not like the implication that my reply was discouraging a collaborative environment. I put a lot of thought into the hook and I wanted to find out what might be wrong with it for there to be need for alternatives. You changed the hook on my last nomination as well so please enlighten me with suggestions on how to write better ones. Thanks.—NØ 19:40, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
    @MaranoFan: Well, I don't think you intended to discourage that environment – I've never known you to act with ownership or arrogance, and I enjoy working with you :) I would say that I think your comment could be interpreted as putting a seal on the nom a bit too quickly, even if that's not what you intended. I certainly wasn't accusing you of acting dictatorially or in bad faith. I mean, the suggestion of new hooks doesn't mean that anything is wrong with your current ideas – maybe Your Power has a different idea for the hook fact entirely, and wanted to jump in. From my perspective as a prep promoter, I would say that there might be a few too many details in ALT0, and it might fare if it were pared down. I'd be happy to elaborate on that if you'd like, but I still basically agree with Corachow that the nom is good to go as is – really, I was just pointing out that more input can help, even if nothing is wrong per se. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 19:52, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
@Theleekycauldron:, thank you for clarifying this for me. If there are any general tips you would like to share with me for writing better hooks, feel free to use my talk page. I just saw a pattern forming, that's all.—NØ 20:02, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
  • theleekycauldron, I appreciate the encouragement, really I do! I was very eager to suggest hooks here, but I felt like the more polite way to go about it was ask the co-nom for permission first ... Sorry. I still feel new to direct communication with other editors sometimes, and I am always scared of when I might mess up again .. Anyways, here are some other hook ideas - please feel free to let me know what you think of them leek :) ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
    📝 "Don't get complacent..."     20:46, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
    ALT2: ... that "Happier Than Ever" appears on an album that its singer described as "almost" unhappy?
    ALT2.5: ... that "Happier Than Ever" is the title track of an album that its singer described as "almost" unhappy? Source for both: Rolling Stone
    I hope I don't get accused of being a terrorist for saying this, but I really still prefer ALT0. At this point, I am feeling a little uncomfortable by the virtue signaling, so I will be leaving the final decision to others. Regards.--NØ 02:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
    Terrorism aside, I do think that the original hooks are our best choice. ALTs 2 and 2.5 are sensible, and I'd stamp them if there weren't an alternative – but I think they lack a bit of the "wow"-factor hookiness that the previous hook facts get. No real preference between ALTs 0 and 1 – they're good executions of different styles. Your Power, if you want to talk to me about crafting hooks, my talk page is always open :) critical reviews make for good hooks, but they gotta make the reader want to know more. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 02:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
  • The article was recently promoted to GA and meets all article requirements. The hooks are sourced and interesting. QPQ done. Good to go. Corachow (talk) 17:17, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Happier_Than_Ever_(song)/Archive_1&oldid=1112034081"