Jump to content

Talk:Naturally (Selena Gomez & the Scene song)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNaturally (Selena Gomez & the Scene song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 25, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Responses to an outdated Afd

[edit]

I don't think this should be deleted at all. It is a legit single by Selena Gomez & The Scene and should be saved in her discography and this page needs to remain to teach readers about the song and tell them about her latest music. Circusstar (talk) 02:18, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why should this be deleted? sure its small, but there's nothing wrong with it. There should be something in here about it being charted #2 under lady gaga...*dream on*dance on* 01:20, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Naturally (Selena Gomez & the Scene song)

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Naturally (Selena Gomez & the Scene song)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "pressrelease":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:31, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Component charts in Chart performance section

[edit]

Please see WP:CHARTS#Chart trajectories, "Chart trajectories may be mentioned in the article text when there is sufficient reason to do so..."
It is my position that the component chart, Hot Digital Songs has a 'sufficient reason' to be mentioned due to it being presented as 'explanation' (somewhat) to subsequently charting action on the Main chart, Hot 100.
I don't believe that a later 'stand alone' mention of a component chart position of 40 is notable after the song has appeared on the MAIN Chart.
The 'stand alone' mention in this case refers to Pop Songs, which redirects to Top 40 Mainstream which is Component chart of Hot 100.—Iknow23 (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As with digital songs, added explanation. Candyo32 (talk) 00:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't consider 'due to radio impact' sufficient reason to mention a component chart position of 40. It is still 'stand alone' in that no relevance to the MAIN chart is shown for mentioning this.—Iknow23 (talk) 01:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Singles release dates is when being SOLD as a Single

[edit]

Radio is not a release date, see example Video Phone (song) U.S. radio on September 22, 2009 but "Released November 17, 2009" in infobox & "Release history" section. Also in infobox = "Format CD single, digital download". Sending to Radio is PROMOTION prior to release as a Single and does not constitute 'creating' it as a Single. I'm sure that there are MANY MANY MANY songs (Promotional CD's) sent to Radio that are ignored. Due to the failure of this 'promotion' the Record labels have probably decided to cancel their plans for the Release of such songs as a Single (SALES). Radio PROMOTION dates can be mentioned in the article Lead as background info leading up to the Release as a Single or the failure of such release.

A Single is the way that the song is sold

It is Not a single while only being sold [commercially released] as an ALBUM track. When sold as a single it will have a different release date than the album.

Example of Release date for an Album, Kiss & Tell

Per the Lead Performer, Selena Gomez at http://www.facebook.com/Selena?v=feed&story_fbid=137239266694 "album comes out next Tuesday September 29th...the record release party that night as well!!!!!!!!" The record release party is to celebrate the SALES release of the Album. Please note that the release party was not held on Friday, September 25, upon the completion of the PROMOTIONAL play at Radio Disney.—Iknow23 (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For one, the Video Phone article needs an overhaul, so it shouldn't be used as an example. However, on GA's such as LoveGame and Already Gone airplay dates are included in release history. Also Radio Disney is promotion for Disney, and is not compared to standard radio stations. About the Album track argument, ALBUM tracks are only played on radio stations via unsolicited airplay, and it is not official. However, only SINGLES are SOLICITED to airplay as a result of initial promotion. Usually if the promotion doesn't go well, release to radio is perhaps canceled. For example, Blah Blah Blah was added to over 39 stations, and as a result was solicited to airplay on February 2, 2010. So Naturally's official date for going to adds was January 19, 2010, and should be included. Candyo32 (talk) 02:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since you brought up Blah Blah Blah, please review it's Talk:Blah Blah Blah (song) page.—Iknow23 (talk) 02:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmm, u say "...only SINGLES are SOLICITED to airplay as a result of initial promotion." If they are never sold as a SINGLE, do you still call them a single? What about all the Promo singles of songs that don't end up being sold as a single? I can't state any exact examples, but Radio stations must have stacks and stacks of them.—Iknow23 (talk) 02:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume that they would either be referred to just as a song or a promo single, considering that a promo single is different than a regular single, if I am understanding the question correctly. Candyo32 (talk) 02:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As for the Blah Blah Blah discussion, "The add date (set by the artist and their people) is a "push" for radio stations to add the song to their playlist for rotation" -- can be compared to the date set by the artist and their people to purchase by digital download or a CD single. With that said, both sales and airplay contribute to position on charts, so should be represented equally. Candyo32 (talk) 02:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing, for the Eh, Eh, article referred to in the Blah Blah discussion, I agree that the case would be different when the info box becomes lengthy. Candyo32 (talk) 02:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The PROMO Single is given to Radio in the hope that it will generate interest/demand for a Sales Single. But if this does not occur, I think that your position leads to the conclusion that just in it having the virtue of a Radio add date, you must forever classify this song as a Single, with or without SALES as a single?
Also, the radio add date is in the article Lead, I didn't try to say that it cannot be mentioned at all!—Iknow23 (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "sales and airplay contribute to position on charts" but a song does not have to be a single in order to chart these days. It can chart as just an ALBUM track.—Iknow23 (talk) 02:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think there are very few cases in which radio singles are not release as physical/digital singles. Try Again is one of the only that fall into that category, and even it was eventually released physically. Also it remains to be released to radio only, then that's just presumably a promo single. Candyo32 (talk) 02:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With that said, songs can chart only via RADIO also (ex. Try Again). Candyo32 (talk) 03:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As this affects WikiProject Songs, I have taken this to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs#Singles release date is when FIRST being SOLD as a Single, NOT Radio Airplay. Please continue the discussion there. Thank You.—Iknow23 (talk) 10:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Song was listed in the US annual charts at number 77 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.190.239 (talk) 21:51, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UK Cover

[edit]

One Fascination records websitw, they have the UK cover for Naturally and Kiss & Tell. COuld they be added —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.35.244 (talk) 17:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hot (Inna song) shows an alternate cover for a single, so I guess why not? (As long as it comes from a WP:RS).—Iknow23 (talk) 01:12, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genre arrangement war

[edit]

This edit war is beyond ridiculous. Nine reverts have been made by both editors in the past 24 hours, which is just unacceptable. I would go with the comma-separated format, as related articles (Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album) and Falling Down (Selena Gomez & the Scene song) use this format. But of course, that's just my opinion, and it's really only for consistency with the articles. But as long as consensus can be gained (in favor of edit warring rapidly), either one should do. –Chase (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the format a few days ago so that they would be consistent with each other, but it was reverted today.

--Babyjazspanail (talk) 21:08, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, before you changed the arrangement was comma separation. Candyo32 (talk) 21:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Genre arrangement consensus

[edit]

Option 1: Comma separated Option 2: Line break— edit history reviewed to see who started this section. Answer:Candyo32 16:06, March 7, 2010

Support Option 1. It is the one generally used and I prefer it as the line break stretches out the infobox further.—Iknow23 (talk) 03:01, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Year-end decade charts 2010

[edit]

"Naturally" charted at #77 on 2010 Year-End Billboard Hot 100[1], #89 on Canadian Hot 100[2], #27 on Dance/Club Play Songs[3], Belgium Singles at #53[4].

  1. ^ http://www.billboard.com/charts#/charts-year-end/hot-100-songs?year=2010&begin=71&order=position
  2. ^ http://www.billboard.com/charts#/charts-year-end/canadian-hot-100?year=2010&begin=81&order=position
  3. ^ http://www.billboard.com/charts#/charts-year-end/hot-dance-club-play-songs?year=2010&begin=21&order=position
  4. ^ http://www.ultratop.be/nl/annual.asp?year=2010
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Naturally (Selena Gomez & the Scene 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:

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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Naturally_(Selena_Gomez_%26_the_Scene_song)&oldid=1209271198"