Jump to content

Talk:Good for You (Selena Gomez song)

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

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 14:34, 14 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}}: 5 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "B" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 4 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Pop music}}, {{WikiProject R&B and Soul Music}}, {{WikiProject Songs}}, {{WikiProject Selena Gomez}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Genres

[edit]

Justasaddream The source does not explicitly state that "Good for You" is an electro-R&B song, stating as such is WP:OR. It says "pop jam" aka pop song. "Strikes a balance" is attributed and unencyclopedic language hence why it was paraphrased as elements. Stop edit warring. Abi-Maria (talk) 10:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Abi-Maria: Okay i agree with you. Yes i'll stop changing the genres until i find a reliable source to support it. Sorry if i bothered you, i just wanted to help to improve the page. Anyways it don't says that includes elements of electro and R&B, actually says that the song strikes a balance between the two genres. Justasaddream (talk) 10:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Justasaddream: A pop song which "strikes a balance" between electro and R&B is the same thing as a pop song with electro and R&B elements. We can't state it as "strikes a balance" because that's POV and unencyclopedic. Abi-Maria (talk) 10:56, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The genre is clearly "Strip Club Seduction". - Axe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.192.72.91 (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2015

[edit]

Change "perfect compliment for" to "perfect complement for" (2 times in article). 96.246.197.129 (talk) 11:42, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done Stickee (talk) 12:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Electro-R&B?

[edit]

Hey i'm here to discuss a genre change. In several souces the song is labeled as a electro and R&B mix and even in a few is labeled as electro-R&B. I think that this genre perfectly describes the nature of the song. Do you agree with switching R&B to electro-R&B? Urjustaghost (talk) 11:17, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It would need a reliable source which explicitly describes it as such, deducing otherwise is original research. Abi-Maria (talk) 13:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed text

[edit]

Removed from "Background"; this is just waffle really:

She viewed the song as "a piece that was just everything I feel a woman should embody, but not in the obvious way".[1] In an interview with iHeartRadio, Gomez explained:

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference MTV News 2 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Mastrogiannis, Nicole (June 29, 2015). "Interview: Lyrics As Emojis With Selena Gomez". iHeartRadio. Retrieved July 3, 2015.

Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Awards

[edit]

The World Music Awards is a notable awards show and I can't stand this doesn't have it because people don't find it notable even when multiple people get nominated. It should have it, check other songs that are nominated and they're pages have those awards. I wish to come on here to state that they should be added because I don't want to do it myself as someone could "report" me. (possibly edit warring) which is not what I am here for. If someone who doesn't really know wikipedia comes here to see what awards the song has been nominated for without have to read the whole page will not work. someone please answer thanks Kennykoschny (talk) 01:18, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Ali's blog is not reliable

[edit]

@Anonpediann: Per WP:NEWSBLOG: "Several newspapers, magazines, and other news organizations host columns on their web sites that they call blogs. These may be acceptable sources if the writers are professionals, but use them with caution because the blog may not be subject to the news organization's normal fact-checking process."

Is a Jon Ali a professional, is he qualified or has he written for any other reputable sources. His blogs' bio says: "Jon ALi, was born and raised in New Jersey with his loving parents, his younger sister and brother. He first founded JonALi’sBlog back in July of 2006. What once started as a hobby has turned into a full-on music entertainment website. He’s interviewed some of the best pop acts around such as Lady Gaga, Robyn, The All-American Rejects, JoJo, and most recently Little Mix, Fifth Harmony, Zendaya, Karmin, and G.R.L. Apart from JonALi’sBlog, he now contributes regularly to JustJared.com and is slowly taking over nightlife in New York City as a DJ. His pet chihuahua CoCo Chanel is quite proud of him."

So no he is not a professional. If you wish to argue further, take it to WP:RSN. We don't use random blogs on Wikipedia, we follow by Wiki's guidelines and use reliable sources. Abi-Maria (talk) 16:57, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay but you just had to explain the reason and proof your research before. I tell you this because i saw that blog used as reference in several articles. And be careful with your constant revertions. You can delete extra information. Thanks.Anonpediann (talk) 15:00, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonpediann: I don't have to prove or explain anything to you first when the situation is of WP:BRD nature caused and blown out of proportion from the other end. It's nothing of my opinion, it's simply following Wiki guidelines. We all can see you're imminent on proving that the song is of another genre other than pop and R&B, which is fine only when a reliable source is given which clearly states it as of XYZ genre. We are here to collaborate and not edit war. Abi-Maria (talk) 15:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But you clearly deleted the page without even looking if it was even reliable or not (you retrieved it instantanly). That's what i'm talking about. I agree on the fact that we are here to collaborate and not to start stupid edit wars. I never wanted that. I just wanted to make the page as complete as possible. And once again, DO NOT RETRIEVE LIKE CRAZY. Because you can delete other reliable information added in the same edit as the unreliable. Or changes that depend on the edit (Example: is a electro-R&B song so electro is deleted as the genre that influenced the song according to other source because it has no sense etc.) Basicaly were good faith edits, i clearly don't win anything for labeling it as electro or electro-R&B, just wanted to improve the page. Anonpediann (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2015

[edit]

The references to Hector Delgado are to the wrong person. All references to [1] need to be replaced by [2] Rddelgado (talk) 19:31, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done -- ferret (talk) 01:12, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2015

[edit]

Please update the producer lists on the album page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revival_%28Selena_Gomez_album%29) and the Good for You page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_for_You_%28song%29) to include Hector Delgado (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hector_Delgado_%28record_producer%29) It's missing from the right hand window (only mentioned under writers).

Thanks! Rddelgado (talk) 19:52, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. JQTriple7 talk 06:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Good for You (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, 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: 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Good for You (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 Good for You (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 "ARIA":

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⚡ 20:12, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additional ref

[edit]

Trap (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/hear-fetty-waps-new-spin-on-selena-gomezs-same-old-love-20160107)--Giacobbe talk 18:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Good for You (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) 02:42, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Good for You (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) 07:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Good for You (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 Good for You (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 "RIAA":

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⚡ 09:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction way too long, trimmed it down

[edit]

I excised some material from the introduction, information that's already mentioned in other sections of the article anyway and does not need to be mentioned twice. The lead is now at a more reasonable and appropriate length. Alialiac (talk) 12:11, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 October 2023

[edit]
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. (closed by non-admin page mover) — MaterialWorks 14:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good for You (song) → Good for You (Selena Gomez song) – Per WP:DABSONG, disambiguation is required if more than two songs share the same name but are recorded by different artists. RMXY (talk • contribs) 14:04, 25 October 2023 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Good_for_You_(Selena_Gomez_song)&oldid=1207321648"