Talk:Radioactive (Imagine Dragons song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Radioactive (Imagine Dragons 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

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Radioactive (Imagine Dragons song). Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Radioactive (Imagine Dragons song) at the Reference desk.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Alternative music High‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pop music Mid‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rock music Mid‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music 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.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Electronic music Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic music 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.Electronic musicWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic musicTemplate:WikiProject Electronic musicelectronic music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

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

Disputed promotional single listing

Not all singles are purchasable physically or digitally, with the primary example being radio-only singles. Examples include the "Birthday Cake" remix, "Hot Tottie" and "Raining Men", all of which are listed as singles on their respective articles despite only receiving radio releases.

Consensus based on a number of major discussions brought up in the past on WP:SONGS and article talk pages has determined that radio add dates determine official single releases in the United States. Take a look at the discussions: 1, 2, 3). Based on the consensus from these past discussions, "Radioactive" should be listed as a single as well.

The radio release of "Radioactive" is sourced in the article. Just because an artist or label has not acknowledged a single release does not automatically mean that a song has not been released as a single. Holiday56 (talk) 14:33, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Promotional recording, Promotional recording#Promo single, Promotional recording#Radio outlets (most important) and Single (music), once again.

Let me teach you the difference between a single and a promo.

The word 'single' is all in the name. A release that is the shortest form of a recording, comprising of a single track. A single is usually released to not only promote the album, but to generate additional sales on top the album sales. Singles have been universally defined throughout history as a back catalouge (discography) release comprising of 3 tracks or less. A discography is a history of releases by a band or artist. Releases are assorted pieces of music released for commercial sale to generate revenue to a parent artist and label.

A promotional single, for a start, cannot generate revenue to a parent artist and label. They can only promote a parent album. The phrase 'promotional single' has been around as long as the word 'single'. A promotional single is a single not immediately available to the general market for consumers to purchase to add revenue. Promotional Singles are purely promotional. They are not for sale, and are labelled as so on old 7" promotionals (example: "The Dogs of War") and on the back of or on stickers slapped on modern CDr promotionals. (example: "Hurts Like Heaven") They are sometimes even labelled not for release as single (example:"My Sharona"). Modern uses of the phrase "promotional single" are single releases exclusive to one seller, (example: "Hair"), or limited in the number of copies. (example: "Up with the Birds")

Let's relate this to "Radioactive", the song you reverted back as a single, "Amsterdam", the song you reverted back as the third single, "Round and Round", the song you removed from the promotional section of the Imagine Dragons discography, and "White Shadows", in which you should know already.

"Radioactive" immediately does not qualify as a single because a) it is not commercially available and b) nobody ever said it was a single besides you and two other users. Those same users tried to list "Demons" as a single if you check the edit history of that page! "Radioactive" is a promotional single because a) it only has a release on radio and b) no major promotion, besides a music video. But that music video was evidently made because of how popular the song has become on the strength of downloads from the Continued Silence and Hear Me EPs and Night Visions respectively. Word of note - it was first released on April 2. I am a massive Imagine Dragons fan and I have the promo cd that says the April 2 date on it.

"Amsterdam" fails more as a single because a) it was an iTunes exclusive for seven days, and then it was taken off, and b) it was released for free. This is an obvious promotional single because a) it's exclusive to a single seller, and then no longer available, and b) not even a radio release. The one thing you care about the most, Holiday, and it ain't even a radio release! This should fail as a single in your point of view as well!

"Round and Round" is just an absolute clone of "Amsterdam". iTunes single of the week, free download, only on iTunes. fails as per "Amsterdam".

"White Shadows". Released only in Mexico, more obscure than a needle in a haystack, and one of the most rarest items in the history of music. This cannot be in any way, shape or form be a single. This song fails because of the sole fact that this single was cancelled! (much like "Birthday Cake" (remix), eh?) It's radio release in Mexico was exactly that. A radio release. Was there an official single release? Nope. Just a lone track playing on the airwaves of Mexico. Hell, apart from it's evident chart impact, there's no evidence that a White Shadows promo even exists! Let alone be a promotional single at the least. We do know the thing exists, and it's one of the modern treasures of the music industry. This fails as a single because a) even the promo CDs were limited, b) it's official single release in countries like Australia and the Asia pacific was cancelled by EMI and c) no commercial release. Even the guys on Coldplaying.com took a whole year to realize that "White Shadows" had been released as a promo! Coldplay don't even list in their discography, so that's an obvious heads up, isn't it?

Here's the part where I get really serious. Wikipedia consensuses are no more than just a group of Wikipedia users agreeing on something. That doesn't mean that consensus becomes universal law. The promotional single does not suddenly become singles just because a group of internet users, most of which are not in the music industry themselves, said so. I am not claiming in anyway that I am a paid professional either, and neither should you when you claim an article for a consensus. While nearly all of us are not eligible to change the structure of the music industry, we can reference it. We can look at an industry structure that has stood for nearly 60 years strong. Promotional Singles (non-commercial, exclusive, or limited), Singles (commercial), Albums (commercial), EPs (commercial), Short-Form Videos; other wise known as just the Music Video (non-commercial) and Long-Form Videos (commercial). Wikipedia really shouldn't implement and manipulate information just for the sake of organizing the website better, if the site is going to stand by it's pledge of being a free encyclopedia. If Wikipedia is an encyclopedia dominated by the user, why are there forced guidelines like the one you keep enforcing on obvious promotional singles like "White Shadows" and "Radioactive". Shouldn't the user have the say on what's right and what's wrong? Not closed cabinets like the people at WP:SONGS? No, the real question is - Shouldn't higher authorities like employees at radio stations, record labels or even The Academy of Recording Arts have a say, since this is supposed to be a factual encyclopedia? They do in Britannica, so why not the wiki above all wikis?

In conclusion, the promotional single is a step lower than the single. The single is a commercial release. The promotional single is a promotional, non-commercial release. Promotional singles are "Radio singles", exclusive releases, and limited-copies. "Radioactive", "Amsterdam", "Round and Round" and "White Shadows" are promotional singles according to how this industry works. Finally, there do not exist higher authorities like The Academy of Recording Arts on wikipedia, and consensuses are agreements of a minor group, not the United States congress or the European parliament. Consensuses are not referendums, and should just be recommendations.

RazorEye ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 18:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary sources: 1 2 3 4 5 6

NOTE: This discussion was started at a time when "Radioactive" was NOT a single, but only a radio release. Some of the views expressed in this argument may have changed. Please read my response to Wikipedia:Promotional singles to read my current views on how Singles and Promotional singles should be defined. The basics, however, remain the same: Radio releases are NOT singles.

Possible reference?

No doubt this is impossible to find a reference for but could the bear's laser vision be a reference to the infamous "care bear stare"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.38.10.6 (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Remix charting

The song's re-entered the UK Singles Chart at number 32 this week due to sales of the Kendrick Lamar remix. Do we want a separate section/infobox for the remix or is this not necessary as it accounts for combined sales? --UnBalanced 16:48, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I've been planning to create subsections of the article for the Lindsey Sterling / Pentatonix version for a long time now, and one for the Kendrick Lamar remix recently. Keep them separate, but don't be surprised if it appears somewhere else later on! ;)
RazorEye ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 17:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Radioactive (Imagine Dragons 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) 19:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

alternative rock? really?

how in the world is this alternative rock? alternative to what? this IS the rock, it's a pop rock band that released a pop rock song. UlyssesYYZ (talk) 02:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]