Talk:Pretty Hurts

Debut in Germany

Please note that this song has debuted at number 83 in Germany. As I am having a few issues with my mouse, I am unable to post the link. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 13:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Done :) Mayast (talk) 00:21, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Chloe and Halle Bailey Cover Beyonce's 'Pretty Hurts'

• [1] Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:33, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

For expansion

• [2] Jivesh1205 (Talk) 07:50, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Single

Just a note to any editors watching this page, HitsDoubleDaily has suggested "Pretty Hurts" will be the next single from Beyoncé, serviced next week. Obviously there should be no change to the page until an official announcement has been made but this is just a heads up. Cheers, —JennKR | ☎ 19:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Vevo just released it officially <3 204.57.81.11 (talk) 15:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Her TIME article also states it is a single, she has introduced a new website/campaign called "#WhatIsPretty" and it will be impacting pop radio in May. It's a single --Lolcakes25 (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Is there a label or other industry source confirming this? At the moment the article is looking a bit crystalline. Adabow (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the single statements. Please provide reliable (industry) sources verifying any single release. Adabow (talk) 10:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

According to Hung Medien websites (like the Dutch one), the single was released by Columbia digitally on May 15, with this image as a cover. — Mayast (talk) 13:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Just curious, is there a reason the above linked image has not been added to the inbox as cover art? --Another Believer _(Talk) 19:03, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I was waiting for some kind of reply from other Contributors to see if the proposed source would be accepted. Since there is no objection, I'll add it now. Mayast (talk) 20:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Like The article looks great! Are none of the songs eligible for articles of their own? I would think other songs have also received a lot of coverage. --Another Believer _(Talk) 20:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes Another Believer. I am planning to create an article for every song on the album during this summer after I finish improving the already published ones. My love is love (talk) 22:05, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

About the source Mayast, Hung Medien websites are very unreliable for cover artworks. But since I think I've seen that this image is also used in the album's liner notes, it should be used. My love is love (talk) 22:07, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, I've been arguing on some talk pages that those pictures from the liner notes shouldn't be added as covers just because they look like ones, and we need some better sources. ;) I'm not sure how I feel about Hung Medien, though. The cover they uploaded for "XO" is very different from other pieces of Beyoncé album artwork.
As for quality of articles for the songs, I'm thinking about nominating "Flawless" for GA, but it would be my very first nomination and I'm not sure if there is anything missing, etc. — Mayast (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm generally a bit more conservative when it comes to adding cover art. I would like to see the release that is accompanied by that cover before I endorse its addition. Same thing for the digital release. Hung Medien is generally reliable for chart data only. Adabow (talk) 23:31, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Radio add date

According to this source Pretty Hurts is being sent to US mainstream radio on June 3, 2014: http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=16691 - Is the release date still as it is now when it premiered on VEVO, or would this be a more accurate release date? --Lolcakes25 (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

The June date is definitely the single release date. Adabow (talk) 09:18, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Daily Mail

I have a question. Should I use Daily Mail as a source for the song's video or critical commentary about it? I can see that it is considered as an unreliable source lately. My love is love (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

It most certainly should not be used. Very unreliable source. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: I don't know why the Daily Mail is categorized as an unreliable source. Simon (talk) 03:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Because they are notorious for fraud and have been scrutinized repeatedly for it. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 05:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 28 January 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:31, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

---

• Pretty Hurts (song) → Pretty Hurts
• Pretty Hurts → Pretty Hurts (TV series)

– I believe that the song should be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. As shown by the pageview analysis, the Pretty Hurts (song) article receives an average of 3,813 pageviews. This is compared to the TV series' 141 pageviews. When using a Google search URL that eliminates personal bias, the results are also overwhelmingly dominated by the Beyoncé song. The TV series has also existed only two years longer than the song, which means that there isn't much long-term significance to speak of. TheKaphox T 12:07, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

• Support, although creation of a disambiguation page with no primary topics would be even more preferable. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 02:34, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support per nom. A dab page is not necessary with only two topics. Station1 (talk) 08:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support; clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in a WP:TWODABS situation.--Cúchullain ^t/c 16:39, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
• Support per above. Mymis (talk) 22:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

---

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.

Undiscussed moves

I've twice reverted Anthony Appleyard's move of this article back to its former title, apparently in response to technical requests. This article is not eligible for technical requests (especially not after the first one was challenged and reverted) as the present name was chosen in the most recent RM above. As such, it shouldn't move again without a new consensus that Pretty Hurts is the better name). To move the article, please open a new WP:RM.--Cúchullain ^t/c 20:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Anthony Appleyard: please take a little bit more care over these sort of entries at WP:RMTR. We all appreciate the great work you do there, keeping the page well pruned and the backlog down, but moving the same article again after an earlier move was already reverted is not something that should be happening. And in this case, the prior RM was indeed a blocker for it being technical requested. I think your judgement between move vs. discuss is normally fine, but sometimes maybe taking a closer look at the subject is necessary to make that call. Thanks!  — Amakuru (talk) 22:50, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 24 July 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 ^{(talk, contribs)} 23:42, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

---

Pretty Hurts → Pretty Hurts (song) – I admit to being the one who made the technical request to move this song twice in the first place, and I sincerely apologize if that shocked or upset anyone. However, I would like to get my point across on why it should be moved where I would like it to be. I request this per WP:TWODABS. Compared to previous Beyoncé songs, this song failed to make the top 40 on most charts worldwide. I wanted a disambiguation for this and the former Logo TV series; as that series was not much of a success, I felt as if there was no primary topic between the two. So to avoid further conflict, I want to set up this move request to help make a decision. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:E559:381A:F74C:F65B (talk) 22:25, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. Top 40 or not, the Beyonce song completely dominates the search results in Google, as indeed it dominates the page views on this subject. The TV series seems to be of very borderline significance, and the Beyonce song is primary over it by long-term significance and common usage.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:54, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment – Yes, but I feel that is a result of WP:RECENT, as this song came out 3 years ago compared to the Logo show which aired 6 years ago. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:E559:381A:F74C:F65B (talk) 23:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. As in the last RM, this is clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC in a WP:TWODABS situation. It receives *96.9%* of the page views compared to the TV show,[3] which seems to be of rather marginal notability. Subjects do not reach primary topic status by achieving a certain chart position, they do it by being more likely to be sought, or having more long-term significance, than all other topics of the same name. That appears to be the case here.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose. As previous nominator, the same reasons named in that discussion still apply. TheKaphox T 14:14, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

---

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.