Talk:List of most-liked tweets

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because every single tweet has been sourced. Many news websites regularly publish articles listing the most-liked tweets (answers the notability remark) and sources were given so the content can be verified. I, for one, don't care at all about BTS so don't tell me it is "Unsourced WP:FANCRUFT". As a data scientist, I needed information about the kind of events people react to in large numbers (natural disasters, terrorists attacks, etc. : e.g. Ariana Grande's tweet happened after the Manchester Arena bombing and Obama's last tweet happened after Kobe Bryant's tragic helicopter death). It is important to know what kind of events provoke spontaneous emotional reactions in large numbers. I could not find data on Wikipedia about the most-liked tweets ever, only the most retweeted ones. The most retweeted ones are often tweets where the retweets were actively looked for ("retweet so I can get free nuggets"). Likes are often more organic than retweets so you get better knowledge by studying them. Given the fact that Twitter is today regarded as one of the main ways to learn about what's happening around the world, this page is important and I don't think it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucfberrada (talk • contribs) 00:39, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Ucfberrada: As far as I can tell, the large majority of the tweets are sourced to the tweet in question. For a list to be notable we either need each to be individually secondary sourced, or a secondary source that talks about the group. Since the former looks unlikely, which source(s) cover the group as a whole? Nosebagbear (talk)

Related to that, this is facing a speedy deletion because the article is very similar to that deleted (albeit a little more recent), including in sourcing (not because you yourself are being accused of FANCRUFT etc). For it not to be speedy deleted you will have more success if you show a change (if you can show some secondary sources from 2019 covering the group that would solve both problems at once. Nosebagbear (talk) 10:22, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

@Nosebagbear: As asked, I added secondary sources (Business Insider, TechCrunch, Variety, etc.) that all talk about the group as a whole, including more recent ones. Those different sources complement each other but some are longer and more comprehensive than others. Therefore, if you want the list reduced to only 10 tweets, I am fine with that... But the list in itself, whether is it with 10 or 20 tweets, is notable. Ucfberrada (talk)

Description of the tweets

It might be useful to include a description of the context surrounding each tweet like on List of most-liked Instagram posts, especially since half of the tweets are in Korean 2.26.20.249 (talk) 11:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Update the list based on recent events

This tweet, posted May 28, already has 2.3M likes. There might be more tweets on this topic. 80.95.103.242 (talk) 07:43, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Top 30?

Should we expand this list to Top 30? I mean, they do top 30 over at List of most-retweeted tweets, so. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs)

@Nahnah4: Agreed, especially with the pandemic boosting the average engagement of tweets as of now. Out of the current 20, 13 are already post-quarantine and 9 are from over the past month, 3 of which are related to the George Floyd protests. Blatherson (talk) 03:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

How should tweets with the same amount of likes be ranked?

I was asked by @Ucfberrada: to order the ranking to make the highest ranked tweet with identical like counts the most recent of them. For example, if 3 tweets all have 2.7M likes, make the most recent one the highest ranked. What do people think of that idea? Deldred (talk | contribs) 11:17, 02 June 2020 (UTC)

@Deldred: I think it's a good idea. The tweets are already arranged numerically so when there are those that have the same # of likes it makes sense to arrange them in date order. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 16:40, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

It's worth noting that exact like/retweet counts can be found via inspect element, so we could still order them by those. Blatherson (talk) 10:06, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@Carlobunnie: As Blatherson said, you can check the exact number of likes so arranging them by chronological order doesn't make sense to me. For example BTS's tweet has 31000 more likes than the Taylor Swift one yet it is ranked lower. We could add another number after the decimal point so people can see the difference. So instead of 2.2 it would be 2.26, and so on. Ivanacccp (talk) 12:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@Blatherson and Ivanacccp: the page already states how the number of likes for each tweet are rounded up and then ranked accordingly on the list. It makes sense. Otherwise the entire list would have to be reordered by the exact number of likes which changes way too often. The likes were formerly displayed at a point in time the way you are claiming is better and it was decided that rounding up to how it is now is a much better way to maintain it. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Biden tweet incoming

Biden's tweet acknowledging his victory has like 2.2 million likes in an hour, so it's very likely gonna make it onto this list. Just a heads up. Stavd3 (talk) 19:05, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Also this is now on 2.6M. Bondegezou (talk) 10:05, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! - Ïvana (talk) 12:24, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Top 100?

Seeing as most of the top most-liked tweets is BTS (around 17-19 of them out of the top 30), it seems like there should be more of a way to show the top tweets since the BTS accounts will obviously be in the top of this list. There are a ton of other tweets that have millions of likes as well that I think should be on here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustinVD (talk • contribs) 03:29, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The list ranks the most-liked tweets, not the most-liked non-BTS tweets, so the fact that they appear a lot is irrelevant. They average more than 2m likes per tweet. Expanding the list to top 50, 100 or 200 will not change the proportion of BTS entries. - Ïvana (talk) 05:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Punctuation in Biden tweet

This is a nitpick, but here we go.

In the original tweet sent out by Biden—'It’s a new day in America.'—For the 'apostrophe', he used the Unicode character 'MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE', HTML Hex entity &#x2bc. In the entity shown in this article, however, it is replaced with the proper Unicode character 'APOSTROPHE', HTML Hex entity &#x27. With this in mind, should we change the character to be what was originally posted in Biden's tweet? Or is this so banal that it really doesn't warrant changing? --SgtShyGuy (talk) 22:12, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@SgtShyGuy: it's actually in line w wikipedia's mos to use ' instead of ’. There are even bots whose functions include making the change/correction on articles where the latter still exists. So it's not incorrect as presently noted and doesn't need changing. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

How useful is this page, if Twitter's "liked" numbers are unreliable

I am not going to link to a tweet that I know is affected by this, as that might derail this talk / discussion. I am serious: If we go by the number of likes on a tweet, but Twitter reports that number erroneously, does this page make any sense?

If you are unaware of it, certain tweets appear to be throttled in some way so the number of likes stays within a range. This is not something Twitter has acknowledged in any way so the question should be dealt with in two parts:

  1. Is it true that some tweets are "throttled"?
  2. If true, should we do something here (mention it, delete this page, anything)?

(1) is probably not fit for discussion here so my question relates to (2). HMJust (talk) 12:13, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

@HMJust: It would actually be useful to see the tweet you're referring to, so I can see the problem. How can you determine that Twitter shows the wrong number? I take the number of likes directly from the tweet, I don't use an external API. The likes may fluctuate and most likely decrease after a while because accounts get deactivated but that's it. As far as I know that number is correct, so the discussion is useless. Can you show any kind of proof that supports your claim? - Ïvana (talk) 14:08, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ïvana: I understand, it's just that it is a, in the twitter-verse, rather controversial tweet so I'd prefer not to. It's also rather famous for people having had to go back and re-like it because every time they checked, their like had somehow disappeared. For many months there has been a steady flow of retweets going "I just had to like this again, my like had mysteriously disappeared. Again". I am unaware of any coverage outside of Twitter of this. - HMJust (talk) 14:14, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

@HMJust: I have tweets I've liked and when I go back to them, the heart is no longer red. I also have tweets in my 'liked' list that appear without the red heart but are nonetheless still there. So there's no way to know what's the problem (if the likes actually get deleted, if it's only a frontend issue, etc). Until Twitter adresses this, or there's a significant coverage by reliable sources, there's no reason to mention it in this article because it would be speculation. - Ïvana (talk) 14:35, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

@Ïvana: OK, thank you HMJust (talk) 15:42, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

Tweet about the queen's death

This tweet from the official royal family account got to a million likes in about a half hour and is steadily approaching 3, it's very likely to make it in here xxriaa (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

@Xxriaa: Hi, yes, I've been keeping an eye on it. It is currently at 2.4m and it needs at least 2.8 to make it to the list, but if it surpasses that threshold it will certainly be added. - Ïvana (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Rounding up

With numbers like these where hitting milestones is often important, would it not make more sense to round down?

e.g. if a tweet has 4.95 million likes it is misleading to say it has 5 million - 4.9 is the much more useful figure because the tweet has actually hit 4.9 million likes, and is still short of 5 million. PolishQuotation (talk) 19:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@PolishQuotation: I agree and that's what we currently do. Tweets usually lose likes after a while, so if a figure now is incorrect then it should be updated. - Ïvana (talk) 21:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

"the total number of likes rounded to the nearest hundred thousand"

I took this to mean that sometimes numbers would be rounded up, is that not the case? PolishQuotation (talk) 22:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@PolishQuotation: Mmmh not necessarily.. The rule for rounding to the nearest ten thousand is to look at the last four digits. Actually maybe that bit about rounding shouldn't be included since all of the figures here are in the realm of millions and we look at the first two digits. A 4.95m tweet will be listed as 4.9. A 4.89m tweet will be listed as 4.8. - Ïvana (talk) 00:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Greta Thunberg

Please do keep an eye of the latest tweet by Greta Thunberg which is soon likely to be on this list. Appu (talk) 11:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

@Appu: Noted, thank you! - Ïvana (talk) 14:34, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Greta has another tweet at 2.6M now. Might enter the list soon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:9E8:432D:2400:A92B:B3D:AF60:60D1 (talk) 22:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

The tweet in mention has now reached approximately 2.9M likes now. Someone should update the chart, thank you very much. CorrinaCorrinaCookies (talk) 23:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

The tweet is still at 2.7m likes. Once it reaches 2.8 it will be added to the list. - Ïvana (talk) 23:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

That's strange, it definitely says 2.9M on my end. Maybe, it's a Twitter issue or something? Regardless, I do see the case for postponing adding it to the list. CorrinaCorrinaCookies (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

It says 2.8M right now. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 00:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

@Valjean: Yes, and it was added to the list more than an hour ago. - Ïvana (talk) 01:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Precission

Today there have been several edits to add decimals to Greta's and sourronding tweets. Up to now the consses was to have one decimal (hundreds of thousands) and order ties by date, most recent first. IMHO these changes should be undone because: - There's no reference to the information source (and at least I can't see that precission on my android-chrome-web client). - Will make maintainance of this page hard as hell (these tweets can earn "thousands of likes" every few minutes). - If kept, should be added to the entire list, and not only to Greta's and sourronding tweets. Lamberete (talk) 10:56, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Already ammended by User:Mikelan98.Thx! Lamberete (talk) 12:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

On desktop (I'm on Windows 10, Firefox), if you expand the tweet and hover over the X.XM Likes, it'll show an alt / tooltip with the exact number. Obviously reporting and then maintaining the exact number would be silly but it could be used to break any ties. AsmodeanUnderscore (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

@AsmodeanUnderscore: Yes, I'm aware of that. Displaying the number as it is shown on Twitter is less confusing for the readers, not to mention majority if not all of the news reporting on specific number of likes/records do that as well. With the issue of ties, the system we have right now (ranking per recency) seems like the easiest one to maintain. Tweets lose likes after a while. Anything that takes into consideration the exact number will have us dealing with dozens of unnecessary edits, specially for viral tweets. I think it is ok to sacrifice a bit of precision for commodity. - Ïvana (talk) 00:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Statistical Significance

This is how likeable it is times their number of followers. You have to divide by the number of followers to show how likeable it is. Of course, this might get a little tricky - a small account might be able to fix the number. HOWEVER, you COULD add that as a column.

V Is the Most Tweeted Member of BTS. It Clearly states 3.2 Million in the Description But you have him with only 3.0 in the Likes Column Please Amend.

Amend List - It is well known among fans that V has 3.2M not 3.0M likes You also have 3.2M in your Description. 2403:4800:843E:C478:D5FC:8EE3:80E:9DD1 (talk) 03:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

The actual tweet has 3.0 million likes. Tweets always lose likes after a while. - Ïvana (talk) 13:18, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

When update?

As of march 2023? It's Dec 2023 2603:6011:9600:52C0:4444:50C1:6E0D:2DF0 (talk) 02:59, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

You can become a diligent contributor and update the information yourself :) --Thas (talk) 14:01, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Don't demand that editors solve the problems they identify. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)