Talk:Doo-Wops & Hooligans

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleDoo-Wops & Hooligans 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.
Good topic starDoo-Wops & Hooligans is the main article in the Doo-Wops & Hooligans series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 16, 2018Good article nomineeListed
April 19, 2021Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

"Liquor Store Blues" single[edit]

Where is "Liquor Store Blues" single ? Why don't it say it.Wasn't that the 3rd Single Bruno Mars dose have a video out for "Liquor Store Blues" that is on Doo Wops & Hooligans album.

Dutch album year end chart[edit]

Number 5 in the year-end list for 2011 http://www.dutchcharts.nl/jaaroverzichten.asp?year=2011&cat=a — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.153.64 (talk) 13:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 25 external links on Doo-Wops & Hooligans. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:06, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Doo-Wops & Hooligans. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 05:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Doo-Wops & Hooligans. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 06:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Doo-Wops & Hooligans. 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.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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) 16:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Doo-Wops & Hooligans Critical reception[edit]

I'm opening this discussion due to a disagreement with an editor Aardwolf68 regarding the "generally favorable reviews from music critics" according to Metacritic. The editor claims that the general reception is lukeworm or mixed and I do have to agree, 61/100 is not the same as 70 or 80 and so on...out of 100. Nevertheless, the Metascores beg to disagree as 61/100 is inside the "Generally favorable reviews" indication. Threfeore, unless there is a change on the Metascore method and classification it should stay the way it always was. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We had this very same discussion for "Kamikaze" by Eminem. The album's metacritic page stated "generally favorable", but the reviews in its entirety were mixed. The same goes for this album, as most of the reviews in the sidebar at 3/5 or other grading scales that indicate a semi-positive, or a lukewarm reception. We should be editing this type of stuff on our own accord, not just what Metacritic's flawed rating system indicates. ~aardwolf68 Aardwolf68 (talk) 12:37, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is not kamikaze, I don't care what happened there. You know we can't do that? The only you can edit to your own accord is the singles as there is no metacritic for it or simmilar. Sure it is flawed but it is what it is, I can't rate something just cause it seems more correct. There are rules. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 20:26, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not this is Kamikaze isn't apart of the issue, it's about accuracy, and considering that not only ADM has a 4.9/10 on its scale, which could be seen as negative could very well ALSO prove that the overall reception key words should be changed. And even then, yes, there are rules, however, this isn't breaking any rule, rather, this is helping people reach correct information rather than just abiding by what the source says, as there are moments and times where we can edit something even if the source says otherwise, this is one of them. ~aardwolf68
ADM is different from metacritic, already told you once, so let's stay on topic here. I do agree with you this scores on Metacrtic are not very well adjustes for music, despite being for video games, tv and others. Nevertheless, do you have any notion of what this could mean? The implications are much bigger than you might think, as for instance universal claim for me could be anything above 90, while for you it could be everything over 95, and for a different user it could be anything above 85...we are basing this under our own criteria (just an example to get my point across). The information is correct, wheter we like it or agree with it. Needs changes? Sure it does. Honestly its not to me you have to complain. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:24, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Aardwolf68: All I seeing you doing is adding unsourced content in the article, you need to add a source to justify the album's critical reception. If you didn't notice before, in the article Kamikaze, there's a source supported the fact that the album received mixed reviews from critics. Here's the source. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 00:49, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That would also be aceptable. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was my mistake, as I had not not noticed the extra source provided on the Kamikaze page, my apologies. Aardwolf68 (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Doo-Wops_%26_Hooligans&oldid=1207012181"