Talk:Exposed (Kristinia DeBarge album)

Second Single

The second single is a double a-side release. Look at a high profile artist such as Leona Lewis, on her album Spirit the songs "Better in Time" and "Footprints in the Sand" were released as a double a-side. They have been listed as "Better in Time/Footprints in the Sand" in that infobox and the album has been praised for its high quality and standards. Listsing the singles together does not make the songs the same thing - the article and track-listing explain this significantly and the fact that "future love" is track 2 and "sabotage" track 5 is evidence enough that they are the same song. if you choose to revert again with discussion i will report you to administrators for WP:IDHT or WP:disruptive editing. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

Writing it as "Sabotage/Future Love" gives off the impression that they're being released to radio as a combined song. The songs may have been released as a double A-side, but the fact is that they are separate songs, released to separate radio formats (one to pop radio, one to R&B). If you report me and somehow manage to actually get me blocked, you will most likely get blocked as well. You're in as much of an edit war as I am, so don't try to act like you're so innocent. Pokerdance ^{(talk/contribs)} 20:35, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

a classic case of WP:IDHT, you don't seem to be bothered that even a high profile release such as Leona Lewis even states this. Your approach to editing is wp:disruptive and your language when discussing issues is verging on profane, it is not appreciated or needed. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:08, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

Same with Leona - they weren't released as a combined song. One article's error should not justify an error on another article. Just because I say true things that you don't want to hear, it doesn't make what I'm saying profane or disruptive. If you're going to get your feelings hurt over everything anyone says, then maybe you don't need to use the Internet. There are a lot ruder people than me out here. Pokerdance ^{(talk/contribs)} 22:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

you still fail to get the point my feelings are irrelevant to this discussion. believe me it takes a lot more than your comments to offend me i was merely pointing out that such language and failure to discuss/justify your edits can result in a ban from wikipedia. Listing the songs together with a '/' between them does not indicate that it was released as one single song. for the last time the article itself explains that it was a double single release and that one song was sent to pop radio whilst the other was sent to urban radio. why can't you accept that the fact that the songs appear on the track-listing individually and that it is CLEARLY WRITTEN/STATED in the article is sufficiant. for your information the article i referred to has been featured as an example to others. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:25, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

You're the one who cannot seem to calm down... I'm not doing anything that is against Wikipedia policies, but your overreaction is bordering on assuming bad faith, which is against Wikipedia policies.

Perhaps you only consider it an example to others because you're shoving it down people's throats like you are right now? And yes, it does suggest that they're being released combined. A good example of what the single section in the infobox should look like is I Am... Sasha Fierce. Note that the singles that came out on the same day are not combined. Pokerdance ^{(talk/contribs)} 22:34, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

your still failing to acknowledge the issue, "if i were a boy" and "single ladies" were actually released as DUAL singles not as a double a-side. a double a-side is where the CD features both tracks. Beyonce released her singles seperately i.e. both recieved their own CDs. the CD single version of "if i were a boy" did not feature "single ladies" and vise versa. that is the MAJOR difference between yours and my example. i have invited several nuetral users to mediate the situation Talk:Exposed (Kristinia DeBarge album)#talk page. and with regards to your language and personal comment "i am NOT shoving anything down anyone's throats" i am merely sharing what i have learnt through my own mistakes when editing. i am simply trying to make the article most accurate. it would be appreciated that you keep your personal problems to yourself, wikipedia is not a place to discuss problems with users, it us about discussing problems with the article, thats the major difference to my and your responses. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

First, would you please both make a statement of what you perceive to be the facts of the matter, and state briefly what you think is the appropriate thing to do based on those facts? Don't argue with each other for a moment, just lay out an argument for your side that you think will be convincing. For those of us coming to this argument late, it's a little hard to follow.—Kww(talk) 22:48, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Basically in the article in the infobox i listed single number 2 as "Future Love / Sabotage" because it is a double A-side release (both singles were sent to radio at the same time). the other editor wishes to list them seperately as single 2 and single 3. my argument is that leona lewis released "better in time / footprints in the sand" as a double a-side too but the other editor is using the example of beyonce's "if i were a boy" and "single ladies" which nowhere is referred to as a double a-side and has seperate CD singles. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:52, 30 July 2009 (UTC))

Looking over this discussion at the articles at hand, I perceive it as this: it seems that "Future Love" and "Sabotage" will be released as the second and third singles, respectively, on the same date as a double A-side. The arguments seems to be either separating or combining the two in the infobox. As far as I know, there's no rule for or against either, so I can't say one is wrong; considering I haven't dealt with anything like this, I can't say I can choose a side (this discussion may need to be taken to Template talk:Infobox Single). The fact that another article uses the format doesn't necessarily lay a blanket for the rest the articles to follow it—no two articles are the same. — Σxplicit 22:58, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Although I edit the Spirit (Leona Lewis album) article, I thought I would share my view on this: the infobox is for singles released from the album, rather than songs released as singles; a double-A side counts as one single rather than two. I think listing the single as "Future Love/Sabotage" makes it appear to be a medley of two songs, but listing them as "Future Love"/"Sabotage" should make it clearer that it's one single with two lead songs. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:38, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with AnemoneProjectors on this issue.—Kww(talk) 23:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree as well. Pokerdance ^{(talk/contribs)} 01:09, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I am happy that this is a good solution. Can we call this issue resolved? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:43, 31 July 2009 (UTC))

"Future Love" has been confirmed as a UK only single and "Sabotage" will be second worldwide single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Solotwilight (talk • contribs) 00:09, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Exposed (Kristinia DeBarge album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090629064117/http://www.britneyspears.com:80/2009/06/meet-kristinia-debarge.php to http://www.britneyspears.com/2009/06/meet-kristinia-debarge.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090706155232/http://www.britneyspears.com/2009/06/opening-act-announcement.php to http://www.britneyspears.com/2009/06/opening-act-announcement.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:12, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Exposed (Kristinia DeBarge album). 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:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/65EzyoJtf?url=http://www.aumreport.com/amr100.html to http://www.aumreport.com/amr100.html

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 08:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Exposed (Kristinia DeBarge album). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090611014720/http://www.seventeen.com/fun-stuff/17-buzz/kristinia-debarge-dishes-about-new-album to http://www.seventeen.com/fun-stuff/17-buzz/kristinia-debarge-dishes-about-new-album

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)