User talk:UrbanJE/Archive 1

Fix a Heart sample
Hi, LikeGaga. According to the Manual of Style/Music samples, "As a rule of thumb, samples should not exceed 30 seconds or 10% of the length of the original song, whichever is shorter". With that being said, "Fix a Heart" has a lenght of 3:13 minutes, and the 10% of that is 19.3 seconds, so I suggest you to reduce the lenght of the sample to 19 seconds. Regards, --Paparazzzi (talk) 17:09, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Oh! Thank you so much for call my attention for this, I couldn't imagine, I was so focused on edit the album's article and just uploaded the sample without think about it. And, you did great jobs in the creation of "Fix a Heart". LikeGaga (talk) 17:20, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! And thanks for the compliment Also, I think I may use the sample on the Fix a Heart article, just to let you know. Thanks for uploading the sample and reducing the lenght, I was thinking about uploading it by myself but then I realized you did it, haha. Regards, --Paparazzzi (talk) 02:18, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

March 2017
I hate to be picky with you, but I have pinged you in a discussion on Talk:All in My Head (Flex) regarding your work on the aforementioned article. May I also point out that in this edit for a separate article you removed a "citation needed" tag on a statement regarding the release date of "Me and My Girls", replacing it with this reference. The MuuMuse link does not accurately back up the information discussed in that statement and instead just reveals that a music video was distributed to Radio Disney. Please be more careful when removing these tags and revert from adding original research to the article; it has been re-added. Regards, Carbrera (talk) 04:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC).

All in My Head (Flex)
Hello:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article "All in My Head" (Flex) has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 21:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Problem (Ariana Grande song)
The article Problem (Ariana Grande song) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Problem (Ariana Grande song) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Calvin999 -- Calvin999 (talk) 08:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of All in My Head (Flex)
The article All in My Head (Flex) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:All in My Head (Flex) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Aoba47 -- Aoba47 (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Baby I
If you'd like, should I add a song sample in the composition section?--Beachey23 (talk) 11:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is awaiting improvements. Onhold.--Beachey23 (talk) 09:09, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for you review, I decided remove the sound sample, I think it's unnecessary because the section of "composition" has a quote box so, I don't see any real benefit of including it.

Collaboration/Fifth Harmony
I have been seeing that you have edited several Fifth Harmony articles. Maybe you won't accept this, but I was wondering if you and I could collaborate in bringing these articles to a higher degree in their status. Personally, I created and re-wrote about 50 percent of the group's 7/27 album article, re-structured, re-wrote and expanded their discography, songs and awards sections. I was also the one who created their synopsis section on their singles, such as 1, 2, 3 and 4. De88 (talk) 00:40, 16 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Of course! I ever noted your wonderful edits in some articles and I shouldn't ignored this invitation, we can work collectively to improve articles related to 5H. I worked in the section of "Composition" in "7/27" and "Reflection" articles, but there's a lot of information to add, the same is valid to others articles as "Work from Home" (that topic of "critical reception" is lacking content). I appreciate your contributions and really wanna work with you.


 * I am so glad to see such a positive response from my edits. I will say that I have seen other articles and what matters is the quality of the edits, not the quantity. With the "Work from Home" article, I think a few tweaks can help push for a "GA nomination". The "Critical reception" is fine, since I compressed the "Year-end list" publications. I do believe the "Background and release" could use a bit of compression or maybe dividing it will suffice. All the essential information is there, but a picture from the music video is desperately needed. Perhaps we can try uploading it and captioning it with a comparison that critics noted with other videos from past girl-groups or the style the director took. He was after all the director behind Rihanna's song of the same name.


 * By the way, congrats on getting "Sledgehammer" to "GA status". I had been wanting this to happen for the longest time. De88 (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

"The Life"

I think the work you did here is amazing. What other sections should we include? Fixed the "Background and release" section. From what I remember on some of the comments for the "GA nomination" on "Sledgehammer", the proof-reader mentioned something about chunking quotes so that is what I did here. Changed the picture of Tinashe since this one looks more presentable. I'll try to find some articles for the "Composition" section. De88 (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh I saw that and I thank you for fixed that! The article needs of a sample and a little more text, I'm willing to expand "Write On Me". We could work collectively in the article, what do you think?


 * I was actually about to go into that article as well. Yes, we should work on it. The thing with samples is that sometimes they are copyrighted and you cannot use them. Honestly, I do not know if the sample will go through. I know the "Work from Home" sample was disallowed for that reason. For the "Write On Me" article, however, I plan to use a screenshot from the music video. Maybe even include a "Reception" section. I have several articles from Digital Spy, Rolling Stone and Fuse that I hope to use. Would that suffice? De88 (talk) 15:26, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ironically, I thought the same. "Write On Me" is lacking quality and quantity, "critical reception" is the only section expanded in the article, I should upload the screenshot and ready the section for you! And the WFH sample was deleted due the WAV format (I guess), when uploaded that I hadn't added the template needed. I will try upload it again.


 * I added the music video screenshot and the synopsis section for "Write On Me". It looks much more presentable now. If you could add the "Work from Home" audio sample, that would be amazing but I have seen good articles that do not feature it. Although, it is always something that just makes an article stand out and look professional. De88 (talk) 00:57, 17 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh! Great jobs, the synopsis is very well written and clear. I will put new investments in "composition" as well as "background and release". About WFH, I just have added the sample, it has a length of 22 seconds and is uploaded in an acceptable format. As already mentioned, the article need a clean up in "critical reception", I'm not sure about the review from "Wizard Radio" and the ref 28 is broken/dead (also is unreliable), I'm looking for commentaries about the song in reviews from 7/27.


 * Thank you. I wanted something detailed and not so lengthy. That was a mistake I made on "Boss" which needs a lot of help as well. Apparently, there was an Idolator review that spanned four critic reviews. Originally, there was only one of those reviews on the "Work from Home article. I deleted the "Wizard Radio" review. Not reliable at all. By the way, I don't think the sample went through. It is totally fine if it won't work (see what I did there?). As long as the essential information is on there, that is all that matters. I will note that the "songs and lyrical content" section on Reflection is a bit too lengthy. I love how much detail is on there but I can't help but notice how long it is. Is this a format that is also used on other GAs? You know, the transition from introducing a critical analysis, adding lyrics and explaining how it relates to pop culture. I am new to wording these types of sections. De88 (talk) 07:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I expanded "critical reception" in "Work from Home" using reviews from 7/27 is know that is more important put focus on the quality than quantity, however, "Work from Home" caused a great repercussion in the music industry, so, a lot of critics commented about the song, topics as "critical reception" and "commercial performance" need to be a reflection of its impact and success. About "Reflection", I agreed and I'll move that paragraph about "Boss" to Boss (Fifth Harmony song) and rewrite some points, the pictures of Beyonce and Mariah also will be removed, them were just added there due the lacking of pictures showing the group performing.


 * That is great. I do think that the first paragraph needs to be chunked up into two, with both paragraphs being expanded as well. It looks kind of awkward when there is one big paragraph and the rest that follow are noticeably smaller. Although, I agree. "Work from Home" was ranked as one of the best songs of the year and it definitely needs to be shown to readers how much music critics loved it. Previously, I had divided the "commercial performance" section in two: "Europe and Oceania" and "North America" to show how much of a global hit the song was. "Boss" definitely needs a "composition" section so this would put it up to par with "Sledgehammer" and hopefully get to "GA status" with revisions on the "critical reception" section. I think the pictures of Beyoncé and Mariah should be kept. They add depth and meaning to the article. The only suggestion is the compression of that section but everything else looks great. I see Reflection as a great contender for a "GA nomination". It has an in-depth introduction and "critical reception" (which I expanded) and your work for the "writing and composition" was desperately needed. De88 (talk) 00:53, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

"Write On Me"

We have been doing some great work on this article. I expanded their "background and release" section, added a picture of Kygo in reference to the critical comparisons and I think an additional paragraph about the lyrical content could finish this article for "GA nomination." What do you think? De88 (talk) 13:33, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * That's great, you did an wonderful jobs! Can you handle the nomination process? I'll just finish the section of "credits and personnel". The article is clear and readable, it deserve the GA status. I'm just finishing some points in The Life to put it as a company in the nomination and later, we can improve That's My Girl.


 * Thanks! Yeah, I can do that. Great to hear. I have been meaning to work on that article as well. It is lacking a lot of information for a single that has enough coverage in the media with performances and the like. We should work on the group's previous singles like "Miss Movin' On" and Boss later. It is so much easier working with someone else who knows how to handle Wikipedia. Had you not agreed to work with me, I would have given up a long time ago. De88 (talk) 15:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

"Work from Home"

I got rid of the quote in the "background and release" section and instead chunked it up and incorporated it into the paragraphs that were previously written. It was bugging me since that section looked awkward. I think this article is also a good contender for a "GA nomination", along with "Worth It". What do you think? De88 (talk) 18:34, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Good! This is something that I've been working so hard to happen, I can take this nomination but not for while, the article is well written but isn't completely ready, I forgot to say that I requested a copy edit, and that it will received a revision at the very least before being nominated as a GA. For "Worth It", we can make a clean up and expand "commercial performance" section, I have found a great numbers of sources and information to improve it. We could even try put it in a featured article status!
 * A copyedit is always a great help. Glad you did that. Wow, you really think "Worth It" can be pushed to become a "featured article"? I thought "Work from Home" had more information than "Worth It". You should send me the sources so I can help you put the article into words. Which sections do you plan on expanding for "Worth It"?
 * I'm interesting in expand "commercial performance" with some articles by Billboard that explores its performance on the Hot 100 step-by-step, from debut to peak. I guess it can be useful and beneficial.


 * By the way, are my messages coming up on your alerts? For me, they don't. Weird. De88 (talk) 19:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, every single message that you published appeared in my notifications. This is really weird, see in your account settings. --LikeGaga 20:20 18 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I tried fixing it. Hopefully it works now. Expanding the "commercial performance" would be a bonus. I don't know if it was you but if it was, you did such a great job on the "commercial performance" section of "All in My Head (Flex)". So detailed and short but loaded with quality. The "Worth It" article already has a a nice "composition", introduction and "music video" section. This would only balance the article. It also has a lengthy "live performance" section with other 5H articles don't usually have. De88 (talk) 21:21, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

"Sledgehammer"

A user has removed the GA icon from the article. Sent a message on their talk page. Apparently, this user wrote "revert sock" when doing this. I don't know why this happened. De88 (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

UPDATE: User responded. Said that the person who did the review for Sledgehammer was a sock puppet. We will have to nominate the article once again and hopefully have it pass the nomination. De88 (talk) 22:18, 18 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Oh gosh this is sad! But i'm not worried, "Sledgehammer" is well written, I guess them will put the article on Good article reassessment to others users review the content present and choice if the GA status keep or need of other nomination.


 * Yeah, I agree. All we need to do now is just put it back in the GA nomination page and we are set to go. Do the same for the two Revival singles you nominated and any page reviewed by @Beachey23. The GA icons have also been taken down. De88 (talk) 22:28, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Added more information on the introduction's of "The Life" and "Write On Me". I can safely say both articles are now great contenders for GA status. We did a really great job on this. The articles look very presentable. De88 (talk) 02:40, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

"Boss"

I spent some time editing this article. Introduction, critical reception, background, took your composition of Boss from Reflection and inserted it here and fixed the music video reception (compressed with the release date of the video). Commercial performance is the only section that looks lackluster but radios blackballed the song so it did not receive much airplay. I could not find an article that explicitly talk about the date "Boss" impacted contemporary hit radio. My apologies for continuously spamming you. De88 (talk) 09:26, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes! You slayed I'm looking for sources to expand "commercial performance", I can search on Hot 100's archives, but if I don't find anything about, let it pass. "Boss" was one of the group's first singles, the commercial performance was minimal in comparison to future projects (as Worth It or WFH)!  And don't worry haha, Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, that is the whole point of the project.
 * It is unfortunate that not much radio data is present about this song. It would balance the article out but it really doesn't matter. I honestly feel that the majority of their articles are fixed, which is amazing since I remember two years ago, their articles looked nothing like they do now. Which article should we move on to? De88 (talk) 23:21, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I think our next task should be on "Better Together (EP)", we can expand "background" section, there are a lot of info about its background (how the group was formed, their journey on The "X Factor"). I nominated "Sledgehammer" again! I'm waiting 4 someone with a good heart to review it.


 * I was about to suggest that. It is an article lacking a lot of information. It looks so un-balanced. 7/27 also has this problem. Let's hope someone gives a nice review of "Sledgehammer" because it deserves to be a GA. After Better Together, we need to fix their main article. It desperately needs fixing. By the way, I fixed their "Me & My Girls" article. Looks really nice now. De88 (talk) 03:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I have found this interview which Dinah spoke about the decision of release "Boss" as their debut single and their expectations about its reception in the radios. What do you think in use this at "release and reception" section?


 * Yes, this could help expand and elaborate on the what the group thought when the song was blacklisted on mainstream radios. I'd say go for it. De88 (talk) 00:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

"I'm in Love with a Monster"

After editing for hours and gathering sources, I have fixed up the entire article. There is one time I hope you would do since you are so good at it. I found the music sheet for the song. I was hoping you could create a "composition" section for this. The article looks amazing and this would make it looks even better. Plus, the song features a lot of different rhythms and blends different genres so it won't be too hard to create this. Here is the music sheet. De88 (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for the lateness, but currently I don't have time to edit. I uploaded a sample and created "composition" section, you did an amazing job on the article!
 * The article now looks complete and so good. Thank you! De88 (talk) 03:23, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Progress

We've definitely helped improve these articles. I am formatting their articles the way most of Selena Gomez' singles and promotional singles from Revival are made. The work done on those articles is truly amazing. That is what I hope can happen on Fifth Harmony's articles as well. De88 (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Down

I have to ask you, do you like "Down"?

I love it, "Down" sound a lot like "Work from Home", I really like the way that the girls adapted their voices without Camila, I loved that wonderful chorus where Normani sings using nasal voice and the high notes by Lauren after the bridge, she replaced Cabello's voice perfectly.


 * I also love it but I felt that given that this is meant to be the group's most radio-friendly song, it could have used a bit more but I enjoyed it. The standouts in my opinion were Normani and Lauren, although everyone did an amazing job. I can definitely see more soul, R&B and trap songs in their forthcoming album. Reflection was a critical success and 7/27 doesn't fall far behind. Surely hope this one can impress the critics. It definitely sets them apart from other girl groups and takes them seriously as artists and performers. I am also looking forward to this record since the girls say they co-wrote more than half of the songs, something they had not been able to do. Plus, us harmos are pretty savvy when it comes to radio updates, chart information and other essential streaming updates. We can help them get to the top position on the Billboard 200. De88 (talk) 00:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

That's My Girl

I worked on this article extensively. Re-wrote the "synopsis" section (added a new screenshot with all five girls present), moved the video reviews to the top of the "music video" part. Added a "chart performance" section, improved the "critical reception" and expanded the introduction. I combined the "live performances" and "usage in media" section and added The Vamps cover as well. What do you think? I think the only part that needs an expansion in the "composition" but that is it, at least in the way I see it right now. De88 (talk) 04:31, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I sincerely apologize for being late. Currently, i don't have so much time to edit, although I will expand "background" section and merge with "composition". LikeGaga (talk) 13:30 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize. We are all busy. I completely understand. If you need help with Gomez's articles, just ask. I'd be more than happy to lend a hand. I think I'll expand the "commercial performance" section for "Work from Home" since you are pre-occupied at the moment. I feel that an expansion of this section can surely guarantee a "GA status". The article is nearly complete at this point. A copy-edit review later would make it complete. De88 (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Worth It

I fixed up the article's "commercial performance" section. I know you said you would fix this section but I had too much time on my hands and proceeded doing this. If you found any articles or statistics that I left out, you're more than welcome to add to it. Since I did the section for this article, I think you should do the one for "Work from Home". Since it was their highest charting single, there is probably more than double the articles that Billboard published compared to "Worth It" so it would make it much easier.

By the way, I found out why your messages never showed up on my talk page. You have to sign your name in order for pings to work. De88 (talk) 13:17, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Work from Home (2) Hey you have done a good job in "WFH",  I don't have a lot of free time for this article right now and when I am on Wikipedia I only concentrated on other articles, can you handled the GAN for "WFH"? LikeGaga (talk) 18:31, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Kill Em with Kindness (song)
I wont be reviewing this article but I highly suggest you add a commercial performance section. It wont pass without that.--Beachey23 (talk) 16:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your suggestion! This is exactly what I'm doing right now. And I wanna say that I'm grateful for those incredible reviews, you got a good pair of eyes. -LikeGaga 16:56 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Baby I GA review
LikeGaga, it appears that Baby I was reviewed by a sockpuppet of a blocked editor. The sockpuppet has been blocked, and a number of their edits have been undone, including the GA review of Baby I, which has been deleted.

Unfortunately, this means that the GA review and subsequent listing have been rolled back. I have placed Baby I back into the pool of articles needing a GA review with no loss of seniority. With any luck, it will be picked up by a proper reviewer. Best of luck, and I'm sorry for the bad news. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello Thank you for letting me know. And I have a question, the sockpuppet also reviewed three other articles that I had nominated (Same Old Love, Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song) and Hands To Myself), can I nominate them again? LikeGaga (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)


 * LikeGaga, I'm so sorry you were hit four times by this sockpuppet. I have restored the other three nominations as well with their seniority intact, so they are available for new reviewers, and in the same order by date. (Same Old Love was all set, though I restored the date based on the edit date/time of your original nomination.) BlueMoonset (talk) 16:59, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Selena Gomez - Come &#38; Get It screenshot.gif
 Thanks for uploading File:Selena Gomez - Come &. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:That&#39;s My Girl - Screenshot Video.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:That&. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:58, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

NOY
Hey, thanks for the help with the review of the article. I made two changes that seemed more logical to me...it seems to fit the timeline and the topic better. However, what do you think? and

Ping me when you are done checking this. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Anyway you did an amazing job. The article seems more organized now, Mars' commentary made more sense in "composition". So, I think is time for "Uptown Funk" or "24K Magic (song)". LikeGaga (talk) 12:32 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * 24K Magic is just too soon, I want the Year-end Charts of this year. More sales and coverage. Next year or once the era is done. Don't worry I will get there. Regarding, Uptown Funk I'm just trying to get the guts, there is so much information regarding that song, I could probably take that to the next level regarding the amount of information available. Next on my list perhaps Billionaire or Doo-Wops & Hooligans album, I don't know. I will do Uptown Funk sooner than 24K Magic that's for sure. Thanks for the complements. Keep up the reviews. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:00, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Baby I
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Baby I you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:02, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Baby I
The article Baby I you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Baby I for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 21:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ariana Grande ft Nicki Minaj - Side to Side.ogg
 Thanks for uploading File:Ariana Grande ft Nicki Minaj - Side to Side.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ariana Grande - Tattooed Heart.ogg
 Thanks for uploading File:Ariana Grande - Tattooed Heart.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:44, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Baby I
The article Baby I you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Baby I for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MarioSoulTruthFan -- MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 11:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

A page you started (List of songs recorded by Fifth Harmony) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating List of songs recorded by Fifth Harmony, LikeGaga!

Wikipedia editor Boleyn just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"This has been tagged for 1 issue."

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Boleyn (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Baby I
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Same Old Love
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Same Old Love you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hands to Myself
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hands to Myself you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kill Em with Kindness (song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kill Em with Kindness (song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 21:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hands to Myself
The article Hands to Myself you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hands to Myself for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 20:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song)
The article Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Same Old Love
The article Same Old Love you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Same Old Love for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hands to Myself
The article Hands to Myself you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Hands to Myself for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kill Em with Kindness (song)
The article Kill Em with Kindness (song) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Kill Em with Kindness (song) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 07:02, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

GA reviews for Fifth Harmony pages
Long time, no see. I saw that several Fifth Harmony pages have been picked up for GA reviews. My apologies on the Sledgehammer edits. I think I made some pretty sloppy edits which attributed to the article not passing the GA test. My time is limited but I'd be more than willing to help improve the articles which are in the process of being reviewed. De88 (talk) 03:17, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi It's been a long time since you came around. How you doing? Idem, I don't have much time and completely understand you. I'm slowly working in some articles, I'm very busy in right now. Have you seen that your GAN for The Life has been reviewed? About Sledgehammer, don't blame yourself, it just happened. I'm happy that the reviewer gave a second change, hope it pass this time. LikeGaga (talk) 22:43 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Havana (Camila Cabello song)
When you are reverted, please do not continue to restore your edits. This can be seen as disruptive editing. I already explained to you why it is not relevant to discuss every movement a song made on a chart—if we did this, the article would be full of statements like "It moved to number 6 in its fifth week, then dropped to number 7 in its sixth week. The following week, it moved up again to number 5." We could do this for every chart it appeared on; it would clog up an article. You also added unsourced statements, as along with the song's movement on the chart, you added reasons why this happened when merely looking at a chart (per the sources you provided) does not tell us why a song moved up or down that week. If you really think it matters, propose your changes on Talk:Havana (Camila Cabello song) per WP:BRD.  Ss 112  18:19, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Sledgehammer (Fifth Harmony song) new GA nomination
UrbanJE, your third GA nomination of this article was reverted earlier today. (I think it's the second time this has happened since your second nomination was failed on September 15.)

You haven't edited the article at all since your last unsuccessful nomination in September. At that time, Cartoon Network Freak said It still has several issues, but is at least closer to GA status now. I'm not at all sure why he then goes on to suggest that you might have better luck with a different reviewer and to try again, as if no edits were needed; as there are "several issues" still to be addressed, they need to be fixed before trying a third GA nomination, yet you haven't edited the article at all since then.

I'd like to suggest to you that if you do wish to bring this to GA again, and you're unable to identify the issues that were mentioned, that you first request a Peer Review so that they can be. Once that Peer Review has been completed, you can then nominate the article again. (Simultaneous peer reviews and GA nominations are not allowed.) When you do renominate the article, please don't create the GA nominee template yourself, because you've gotten it wrong the last two times you've tried; please follow the process described at WP:GANI using the GAN template. Thank you, and best of luck going forward. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)