Jump to content

Talk:Wild!

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Alb974.jpg

[edit]

Image:Alb974.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:59, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unverifiable statement?

[edit]

Not sure about this, and think it should be modified/removed: "Although the album did not generate any entries on the Billboard Hot 100, Wild! is highly regarded amongst Erasure's fanbase as one of their best albums, containing now-classic songs like "Drama!", "Blue Savannah" and "Star." ". Any album can be described as 'highly regarded" by fans. "Chorus" actually gets more respect I think, but I don't think such statements should be included here. Can't be backed up, and it's just opinion. Also, where is it defined that these are "classic" songs? Opwerty (talk) 13:29, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: uncontested move. DrKiernan (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]



– Fails WP:CRITERIA, unreasonable to expect readers to remember number of !. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:41, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 20 July 2022

[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)Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


WP:SMALLDETAILS. Also, the title without the parenthectical redirects to a title with a parenthetical? No. I've already requested these moves. The way it is now is completely backwards. Tree Critter (talk) 08:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Content immediately below this notice was copied from WP:RM/TR Polyamorph (talk) 20:22, 20 July 2022 (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.