Talk:Dive (Usher song): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:02, 17 October 2017

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dive (Usher song) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Dive (Usher 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.

Dive (Usher song) is part of the Looking 4 Myself 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
Date	Process	Result
September 4, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed
June 5, 2014	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Songs GA‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

R&B and Soul Music GA‑class Mid‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Dive (Usher song) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 September 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Victoria's Secret Angel model Chanel Iman plays Usher's love interest in the music video for "Dive"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dive (Usher song).

Wikipedia

DYK nomination

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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dive (Usher song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 17:05, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see anything wrong with it! Passing :) — ₳aron 14:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Charts

Dive at number 15 in ukraine?? I think thats not correct. I can´t find this information in the FDR Charts and i can´t the specified link open. I am pleased with new information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joey929292 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Dive (Usher 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) 14:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OMG! It's the greatest song in the history of the whole wide world EVERRRR!!!

While I am sure the IP editor (currently taking a brief break) believes this song "received universal acclaim from music critics, with overwhelming approval towards Usher's vocal performance", that is completely unsourced and likely to remain so.

First, "universal" would mean absolutely every critic everywhere. If there is a blogger in a remote village in Minsk who disagrees with the rest of the critics, it is no longer "universal". I cannot imagine a source confirming what every critic everywhere thought.

Next is "acclaim". This means enthusiastic and public praise. How you would measure enthusiasm in the praise is beyond me. Additionally, coupled with "universal", the "public" part would now require that even critics who hadn't reviewed the song to have enthusiastically praised it publicly.

How, exactly, was the approval "overwhelming"? What is the cutoff point for this metric?

All things considered, this statement is a shining example of why you've been asked by several editors to stop and discuss the issue. After your block, please discuss the issues here, on other article talk pages and/or your talk page. - SummerPhD^v2.0 17:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, it's my fault that I didn't discuss my edit beforehand. Sorry for that.

Secondly, do you realize that the line I edited used to indicate "universal positive acclaim"? I don't know why you're blaming me for writing down nonsense while that indication has literally been there the whole time. To some extent I feel like you're the biased one here. I mean you can at least have reverted it to the original line instead of removing the whole introduction line. That counts for all the edits I made.

@@ Line 54: / Line 54: @@
 All things considered, this statement is a shining example of why you've been [[User_talk:82.217.67.186|asked by several editors]] to stop and discuss the issue. After your block, please discuss the issues here, on other article talk pages and/or your talk page. - <span style="color:#D70270;background-color:white;">Sum</span><span style="color:#734F96;background-color:white;">mer</span><span style="color:#0038A8;background-color:white;">PhD</span><sup>[[User talk:SummerPhDv2.0|v2.0]]</sup> 17:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
+::First of all, it's my fault that I didn't discuss my edit beforehand. Sorry for that.
+Secondly, do you realize that the line I edited used to indicate "universal positive acclaim"? I don't know why you're blaming me for writing down nonsense while that indication has literally been there the whole time. To some extent I feel like you're the biased one here. I mean you can at least have reverted it to the original line instead of removing the whole introduction line. That counts for all the edits I made.