Talk:Bleeding Love

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

Self Harm[edit]

I have seen a lot of online discussion in which fans seem convinced that this song is supporting self-harm or "cutting." If someone has any reference material that can debunk or support such an argument, it would be helpful information to include in the article. john factorial (talk) 14:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use of sheet music?[edit]

Doesn't fair use of an image under copyright mean you have to illustrate something essential to the article which would have no free use alternative?- I don't think sheet music qualifies for this, its presence is definitely not essential to the article; every other pop-song article seems to manage without.

plays[edit]

The articles says 1.5million plays on the internet. The youtube video has 51,668,765 plays alone. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF84pIhP5UM 90.194.133.46 (talk) 19:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

iTunes[edit]

Number two in the iTunes chart tonight. Notable? — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 00:08, 22 October 2007 ( BLEEDING LOVE LEONA LEWIS NUMBER ONE ITUNES CHARTS APRIL 30 2008 4:46 PM EASTERN TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Charts table[edit]

I just want to explain my last edit to the charts table, as my edit summary wouldn't fit! I removed Croatia as the reference only says she's number 1 in the UK. D-z chart had no source and I have no idea what it is or if it's important (it was removed by another user as I was editing and caused an edit conflict). The wrong Eurochart was listed, it should be the Billboard one. I linked the Polish chart ref to an archive page showing the song at its peak, as it was linked to before (making it easier for verification after it's left the chart). The Turkish chart listed is one radio station's chart so not official. The UK and Ireland download charts are not component charts, and the UK R&B chart isn't needed. anemone│projectors 19:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

anemone - I've changed the Hungarian peak position back to number 1. It entered at 1 on 8/12, dropped to 5 on 15/12 then back up to 2 on 22/12. Leipzigger98 (talk) 02:06, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that, I've changed the link to an archive showing it at number 1. anemone│projectors 13:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On Sweden, Denmark and Norway: was on Billboard.com last night and did a search on Bleeding Love and it came up with these three peak positions respectively #1 (Swe Dec 15 AND Jan 12), #2 (Den Dec 15) and #4 (Nor Dec 15). There's also Finland #10 (Jan 5th). Worth investigating? Leipzigger98 (talk) 14:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a quick look and can see what you found. Billboard obviously use different charts to aCharts. I think Billboard make their own whereas aCharts uses official charts. I could be wrong, but if I'm right, we should keep it how it is. Probably something to bring up on WT:CHARTS. anemone│projectors 14:16, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I had changed Sweden last night then thought like you it was best keeping it as it is now, so changed it back. I wonder if Billboard is using digital only charts in those countries, or as you say just their own internal charts which may include airplay? Leipzigger98 (talk) 15:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware of how hugely popular the track has been but surely there has to be some kind of moderation on Wiki with regards to the charts on the page. I think everyone would agree that it is ridiculous and in serious need of a cleanup.Reqluce (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are way too many. WP:CHARTS suggests a max of 20. There is currently 40+. The less notable ones should be taken out. Also, why are there two Belgian charts? SKS2K6 (talk) 15:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One of the charts is for the Dutch-speaking region of Flanders, and the other is for the French-speaking region of Wallonia. Frcm1988 (talk) 19:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US Charts[edit]

The article has changed release dated for the single in the USA over two occasions, however both of these dates are in the past, and there seems to be no sign of how bleeidng love has charted in the States, is this a mistake, or has the single simply not charted at all in the country?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.161.122 (talk) 12:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Germany[edit]

Is the German CD release date correct? It's entered the chart with the issue date 1 February, so it seems unlikely that it was released on 11 January. anemone│projectors 20:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed by a source I just found. anemone│projectors 16:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spain[edit]

I requested some info re: the Spanish charts.

Q: Can someone clear up a question for me? What is the official Spain singles chart? Such that when someone says Rihanna hit #1 in the USA, UK, Germany and Spain with Umbrella, which Spanish chart do they refer to?

I've found what seem to be three main charts:

a) Promusicae Top 20 Singles y Maxis b) Promusicae Listas De Descargas De Canciones (Downloads) c) Los 40 Principales Lista 40

Any help appreciated.

A: Both Promusicae are official, one is for the physical sales and the other is only for downloads. The most important is the downloads chart since the physical single market is dead. The most popular chart in Spain is "Los 40 Principales", though it is not what it used to be anymore. It is based on votes of users.

As such I think we should concentrate on the Promusicae download chart. Unfortunately they only publish a top 10 on their site and on Los40.com. Top 20s are published elsewhere such as on the forums at ukmix.org. Leipzigger98 (talk) 16:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can list one chart until it enters the more official one. anemone│projectors 20:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We'll stick with the Los 40. Leipzigger98 (talk) 16:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

South Africa[edit]

I've enquired re: South African charts and received this reply:

"SA only has an official albums chart which can be viewed here: http://www.rsg.co.za/musiek_top20.asp

Because physical singles usually aren't sold here anymore and digital sales are still relatively small, there is no official singles chart. An airplay chart is used by the music industry in SA but it is usually not published publically."

Thus I have deleted the SA Airplay entry for now unless we get a definitive source for the airplay information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rushian77 (talk • contribs)

Netherlands[edit]

"we should use the official chart - (as they are doing on Dutch Wikipedia http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Love)"

The chart we were already using, the GfK Top 100 is one of the three official charts in the Netherlands.

The Dutch Top 40 is airplay and sales and chart rules.
The Mega Top 50 is airplay and sales.
The Mega Single Top 100 is official sales only.

The Nederlandse Top 40 (Dutch Top 40) has some extremely arcane chart rules, but is broadcast by Radio 538 and used by TMF. The GfK Top 100 (formerly the Mega Single Top 100) is the music industry chart and the one used by the Dutch version of Top Of The Pops.

I say we go with the latter because of its sales only format, and its recognition by the music industry.

Whether the person who wrote the Bleeding Love page on the Netherlands wiki agrees is irrelvant. Leipzigger98 (talk) 18:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise, I got the impression you changed the chart because it was sales only, not because it was official, but I was wrong. If you haven't already, feel free to change it back. anemone│projectors 18:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

acharts.us[edit]

Out of interest why are all the charts being referenced to this source? Surely it would be better to reference the official chart sites in each case, many of which update faster than acharts? It's just a fan site from what I can tell, and thus their choice of chart (for example in the Netherlands, Spain, Italy etc) is arbitary. Leipzigger98 (talk) 18:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really matter if we don't reference the official sites as aCharts uses them itself. Also, many official sites don't have archives, which are helpful for verification. aCharts has trajectories, so you can easily verify lots of information from just one page. aCharts is used to reference a lots of Wikipedia articles, including featured articles, so if you have a problem with it, I suggest you take it up at WP:SONGS or somewhere like that. anemone│projectors 21:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
To illustrate my point is today's update of the Italian chart to an acharts reference. acharts doesn't state which chart they're using, but it is definitely the Musica & Dischi chart where Bleeding Love is number 1 for a second week. This isn't the official FIMI chart which we previously referenced where Leona was number 4 last week and is number 3 this (not updated yet on the FIMI site). Leipzigger98 (talk) 14:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you about Italy and have reverted the change. But in most cases, we know aCharts uses the official chart and it's handy for the trajectories etc. anemone│projectors 16:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree entirely with that, but always worth keeping an eye on which chart they're using in case they sneek in an unofficial one. In the two competing Netherlands charts Leona is #3 this week which helps ;-) Leipzigger98 (talk) 02:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's a list of charts they use at the side of their website, so they're unlikely to sneak in any new ones. anemone│projectors 10:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's just a list of countries in most cases - they're not specific as to which chart they're using in each country hence the Italian confusion where they use the alternative Musica E Dischi chart. They don't specify as they need permission from each of the publishers to post the charts. Leipzigger98 (talk) 14:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But we should be able to work out which charts they're using so we'll know where we can use aCharts as a reference and when we can't. anemone│projectors 15:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mexico[edit]

Does the Mexican Hot 100 even exist? The México Top 100 (here) doesn't mention Leona in its chart. I can't find a chart on the website listed on Mexican Hot 100, although I don't speak Spanish so I don't know where to look. Anyone know? anemone│projectors 21:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to post the same having spent half an hour looking for it - all the links on the wikipedia page are bogus. Should have checked here first! I recommend we delete it. Leipzigger98 (talk) 12:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We should remove it from here, I'll tag the articles as possible hoaxes. anemone│projectors 13:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mexican Hot 100 for the deletion discussion. --Stormie (talk) 04:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Italy[edit]

Are we using a digital download chart for Italy? Do they have a singles chart that includes physical sales? anemone│projectors 10:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The FIMI Top Digital Download Chart replaced the abolished FIMI Mix E Singoli chart at the start of 2008 as Italy's Official Singles Chart due to the decrease in sales of physical single CDs and vast increase in downloads:
http://www.fimi.it/classifiche.asp?idtipo_classifica=3
There's an article in Billboard confirming it:
http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/search/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003696014
There is an alternative chart which is considered important and combines airplay and sales. It is compiled by:
http://www.musicaedischi.it/
Leipzigger98 (talk) 12:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I thought that might be the case. anemone│projectors 13:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

United States[edit]

I am pretty certain that the song has been released in the Unites States, but I cannot see Bleeding Love listed in any of the charts, has it not been made fully available for purchase yet, is it climbing the charts (like the Canadian Hot 100), or has it not managed to chart at all. I have seen many reviews by profesionals and the public in the USA, all positive, so if it is getting such rave reviews, then why has it not managed the Top 100, can someone please clear this up User:Stevvvv4444 (talk) 21:36, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was released to download in December 2007, and had a major radio launch about a week or so ago. Someone keeps adding that it's number 111 in the Billboard Hot 100 but really they mean 11 in the Hot 100 Bubbling Under Chart or whatever it's called. But I can only see the top 10 of that chart so can't verify it. anemone│projectors 21:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recording quality of this single[edit]

Is there currently any reference on quality of the samples used in this song? The vocals are very good, but seriously someone must have commented before on the clipped baseline? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.84.249.129 (talk) 00:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish/Hong Kong Airplay charts[edit]

As we appear to have no way of updating these chart placings (the reference is to Leona Lewis's official site and hasn't been updated in a number of weeks) I recommend we remove both charts. Leipzigger98 (talk) 17:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good idea to me. anemone│projectors 18:30, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Now removed. Leipzigger98 (talk) 02:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch Top 40[edit]

I understand that you are using the Mega Singles Top 100 for the Netherlands chart position but why do you removed the category "Number-one singles in the Netherlands", because that category is clearly applied for the songs that reached the top of the Dutch Top 40. Frcm1988 (talk) 05:36, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The Dutch Top 40 is definitely the main singles chart in the Netherlands, while the Mega Single Top 100 is only a component chart, and component charts should be avoided unless the song failed to chart on the main chart. Using the Mega Single Top 100 instead of the Dutch Top 40 is the same thing as using the Hot 100 Singles Sales instead of the Billboard Hot 100. Funk Junkie (talk) 19:28, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've argued strongly for the Mega Single Top 100 but my resolve is weakening - what do Dutch wiki users consider the official chart? Is there any dispute between the two over which is "official" or is there no argument that everyone considers the Dutch Top 40 to be officially recognised? Leipzigger98 (talk) 20:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Dutch Wikipedia article for Bleeding Love uses the Dutch Top 40. I'm starting to agree that we should use it instead of the other one. anemone│projectors 15:13, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, it appears to be number one in both charts anyway so it doesn't matter as much now ;) anemone│projectors 15:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dodgy 'German Special Edition single'[edit]

Someone has added a 'German special edition single' with a supposed B-side 'You Bring Me Down', but there is NO CATALOG number to justify it exists, and the deceptive citation takes you to a German Amazon page which has NO TRACKLIST information. Who else is in favor of its removal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reqluce (talk • contribs) 11:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me. I already removed it. anemone│projectors 13:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, "You Bring Me Down" is the B-side to "Better in Time". anemone│projectors 14:00, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Hot 100 Airplay[edit]

Does anyone know how the song is doing in the Billboard Hot 100 Airplay chart? anemone│projectors 13:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Bleeding Love" hasn't charted there as yet,[1] but as it has already charted on the Billboard Hot 100, the Hot 100 Airplay should not be added. Funk Junkie (talk) 19:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was sure to have charted there as it's position in the Hot 100 is based purely on airplay at the moment, is it not? I don't want to put it on the chart list, I know it's a component chart, but I wanted to mention it in the airplay section. I've checked that link many times before but I just noticed the list of charts it's been in at the side of the page - very handy, thank you. anemone│projectors 21:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wait, I forgot it's already available to download :) anemone│projectors 21:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What is available for download? The song? Funk Junkie (talk) 17:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "Bleeding Love" was released to U.S. iTunes in December. anemone│projectors 18:17, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hungary[edit]

We're currently using the VIVA chart for Hungary, but this is a TV station. The official Hungarian charts are compiled by Mahasz and searching their archive shows "Bleeding Love" peaking at number 26 in their radio chart, but nothing for the singles chart. I suggest changing it in the article. anemone│projectors 18:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Single Chronology, etc[edit]

Why is there 'Leone Lewis single Chronology', 'Leona Lewis unofficial single chronology', and 'Spirit track listing'? So redundant, and what's the point of it? Also having track listing order is sooooooo useless, I wonder who invented it, cos it appears on so many wikipedia pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zone (talk • contribs) 13:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it's not needed, you should probably bring it up on another page. Maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs. But not here. anemone│projectors 18:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Airplay[edit]

As there are so many charts listed in the table, would anyone object to the removal of the airplay charts? The informaion would not be totally lost, as I would use that information to expand the airplay section. anemone│projectors 10:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

in Thailand this song was successful

this song become hit when it peak #1 at MET107 and Eazy FM 2 Biggest English song radio in thailand

she Preceded Apologize by Timbaland & OneRepublic both

and Succeeded by Low - Flo Rida feat.T-Pain in Eazy FM

and Succeeded by Place In My Heart - David Jordan in MET107

but she still keep #2 for many weeks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.174.146.11 (talk) 13:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Official remixes[edit]

I just think that an official remixes section shoul be made. I'm not a fan, have no clue what was released...

If you are not a fan it should not bother you in the first place unless you're out on a mission to put offical remix sections to all wikipedia song pages. The fact that you also have no clue highlights the futility. In any case there is only ONE official remix, the Jason Nevis Extended Mix and it does not warrant its own section. Reqluce (talk) 12:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's four other official mixes: two by Moto Blanco and two by Shapeshifters. All 5 (incl. the Jason Nevins mix) appear on a promotional CD in the USA aimed at Dance stations and DJs. Leipzigger98 (talk) 15:25, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

India airplay[edit]

Lewis's Bleeding Love has been getting immense airplay in India too...D'you think it merits an add here "Bleeding Love" was a hit on radio stations around the world, reaching number one in the airplay charts of the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Germany,[74] France,[75] Australia,[76] New Zealand, Croatia,[77] Slovenia,[78] Luxembourg,[79] Latvia,[80] Slovakia[81] and Estonia.[82] ?? 122.161.21.184 (talk) 06:53, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Japan Billboard Hot 100?[edit]

???? What is that? The only Japanese official chart is Oricon... That Japan Billboard Hot 100 might be one of those charts created by Billboard that measures the airplay and sales of some countries, but that is NOT official... This should be changed or replaced by official information... McMare's (talk) 05:48, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here. Billboard Japan Charts began on February 18 of this year.　It is updated on every Wednesday in Japan(here), and it is updated in the billboard.com/Tsutaya Online on every Thursday. Thank you.--Tsukamoto (talk) 03:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Songwriters[edit]

Where can it be varified that Hilary Duff co-wrote this song? I could not find that in any of the sources and it shocked me to see that? Khanyisagantsho (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fast Version[edit]

On XM Channel 21 (Kiss), I heard a fast, sped up version of "Bleeding Love". Did anyone else here this?Cssiitcic (talk) 18:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hemophiliac?[edit]

"The song is about being a hemophiliac." - Surely this is pointless? I think it's obvious that the lyrics are metaphorical for love, and are definitely not about actually bleeding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.217.184.88 (talk) 10:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Its confusing because the opening says it was the bestselling song in the us in 2008, however the year end section states it was the 2nd. Should this be cleared up or is me simply missing something. Many Thanks.90.208.209.137 (talk) 15:57, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"nd or 1st best selling?[edit]

Hi there. Its confusing because the opening says it was the bestselling song in the us in 2008, however the year end section states it was the 2nd. Should this be cleared up or is me simply missing something. I remember seeing the run up on billboard.com in January and Flo Rida's Low was number 1, which fits with the table. I cant find this page anymore. Which is correct? Many Thanks Jambo-numba1 (talk) 10:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/yearend/chart_display.jsp?f=Hot+100+Songs&g=Year-end+Singles - This is the page. Bleeding love wasn't the biggest song of 2008 in the US. This needs removed from the opening. Thanks. Jambo-numba1 (talk) 10:59, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Song Structure[edit]

I wonder if the person who wrote the explanation of the song's meaning in "Song Structure" has actually listened to/read the lyrics. It strikes me that he/she derived it from the music video rather than the actual lyrics. I think the song pretty clearly is about the positive influence of the lover on the singer's life - she was "frozen", she kept the "pain all closed in", etc. To be "cut open" in the context of the song is a good thing since the result is that she "bleeds" love. Nothing in the lyrics suggest that the experience is a painful one, but rather is welcome and wonderful. Granted, the image of bleeding and being cut open otherwise suggests pain, but it's obviously a metaphor in this song. (Of course, it would be hilarious if the explanation was actually written by the lyricist and this is totally wrong!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhenrichsen (talk • contribs) 19:16, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The song is exactly what's written in the article. The song is definitely about pain and getting hurt: McCartney said so himself:
"McCartney insists the song is very personal, as he wrote it about his longterm girlfriend - who he nearly gave up his pop career for.
He says, "I originally wrote it for my own record. I kept thinking about being in love so much that it hurts...." ""I was so in love that it was painful. It was like bleeding, it cut me open. That's how my head was and that idea just really fit the song." http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/article/mccartney%20wrote%20bleeding%20love%20about%20girlfriend_1067039
And Lewis DOES know what she is talking about.

Midnightgarden (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added that source to the article. But I'm not 100% sure that what Lewis said in the interview cited has been correctly interpreted in the article. But what I feel the song is about is someone who feels unable to love due to her past (bad) relationships (she's frozen), but she finds a new love (who melts her heart) and can't stop loving him (she bleeds love). But perheps she does love him so much that it hurts. She certainly hasn't been warned off her current lover by her friends and she's not "blinded by love". AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music structure and lyrics[edit]

I have tagged The darker quality of superimposing the second half of the verse, as well as the final chorus over this VI chord progression, in addition to resolving the song on this relative minor, enhances the intensity of the pain and pathos of the song. as a POV statement. I would have removed or rewritten it if I actually understood it. The line In "Bleeding Love" the turn around from the common I, vi, IV, V (F, Dm, Bb, C) progression used exclusively up to the bridge for both verses and choruses shifts to focus on the relative minor: vi, IV, I/V, V (Dm, Bb, F/C, C). needs a citation, but again, to me it makes no sense. Could it be expanded and explained? AnemoneProjectors 19:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, the chord progression of the song changes from a major to minor key. If you superimposed the first chorus on top of the final chorus, you would get dissonance. Although the melody remains the same, the chord progression changes. Songs written in major keys, by convention, always back "happy" songs, whereas songs written in minor keys back painful, sad, or solemn songs. Because of the chord progression shift, the song switches from F major to D minor ("happy" to "sad"). If you pay attention to the backing track, you'll hear that the song ends in a darker tone than it began, even though the melody is exactly the same as it began. This is because of the shift... I think that's the best way I could explain it. Sorry if it just made it worse. Midnightgarden (talk) 14:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense, yes. I had noticed the shift though it doesn't feel "sad" :) AnemoneProjectors 16:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a 6 interval raise from major to minor. The 6th is crucial to this song..the verse melody is based on an alternating octave/6th (22 measures are just the octave and the sixth). This interval is the one used by the old emergency services siren,...making the metaphorical connection to the song lyrics. Clever stuff really. 81.146.61.89 (talk) 13:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancies[edit]

-The Sales Performance section says that BL has sold 940,000 in the UK, which would be 3x Platinum. However, the WikiChart Certifications in the Chart section below says "United Kingdom: Platinum"...?? -Plus, the same chart says 2x Platinum for the USA, however the Discography page says 4x Platinum. And i clicked on both of the references and neither actually say how much the song has sold.....calvin999 10:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)

I have removed the unsourced sales figures from this article. The song is only 1x platinum in the UK. Also I believe the source on the discography page confirms 2x platinum in the US, not 4. It's slightly unclear as it lists the song as Gold twice and Platinum twice. Does that mean 2x platinum? AnemoneProjectors 12:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1x platinum is just 'platinum' on its own. No, i said the chart on the Bleeding Love page said 4x, not the discography. Plus, this link http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/55025/week-ending-june-6-2010-surfs-up-and-wipe-out says (if u scroll about halfway down next to the pic of leona) that she has just passed 4 million sales in the US and this link http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=9094 says 750,000 in the UK. calvin999 16:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)
You said "Plus, the same chart says 2x Platinum for the USA, however the Discography page says 4x Platinum." The sources on both articles are the same, but the actual source is confusing because it says Platinum twice, but not 2x Platinum. AnemoneProjectors 17:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
oh yer my bad. but i did find a link saying US = 4 million. And what do u mean platinum twice? calvin999 17:42, 26 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)
I've added the 4 million downloads to the article now. Look at this link. It says Bleeding Love was certified Gold on 04/24/2008 and platinum on the same date, the further down says it was certified gold on 07/30/2008 and platinum on the same date. The only difference is the top two say "type DI" and the bottom two say "type MT". It's confusing. AnemoneProjectors 17:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, someone might have meant that it was certified Gold on that date and now it is Platinum? calvin999 22:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)
BTW, the Certifications WikiChart on the Bleeding Love page still says 2x Platinum for USA when it is 4x! lol calvin999 22:41, 26 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)
I know, I didn't change it because it's unclear what certification it actually has! The source just says "platinum" twice. Is there another source? AnemoneProjectors 23:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
yes this source!!! the one i posted about in like the third paragraph of this thread!! here it is: http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/55025/week-ending-june-6-2010-surfs-up-and-wipe-out (scroll down to the pic of Leona, it says how she has now surpassed 4 million)calvin999 00:14, 27 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)

(←) It says it's sold more than 4 million copies, not that it's been certified 4x platinum. We need a source that says it has been certified, not sold a number that is equal to a certification. AnemoneProjectors 00:20, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lol sorry i just had to mention this: The infobox single section says the song is Platinum in USA, the WikiChart in the Chart Section below says 2x Plat., then the main discography page says 4x Plat. They need to be changed to the correct certification as all three say different certifications! calvin999 21:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)
Yes but which is correct and is there a source for it?! AnemoneProjectors 21:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, in the States, certifications are not automatic. Sales numbers may exceed the certification for a certain level, but it's up to the label to submit for certification. So it's possible the certification's much lower than the actual sales number. SKS (talk) 21:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I Don't know! but how has three different certifications been on here unnoticed for so long! i never noticed lol. With the impact she had it must be more than just Platinum. calvin999 23:54, 29 July 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin999 (talk • contribs)
Well we need to find out what the actual certification is and then change the articles accordingly. AnemoneProjectors 02:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
RIAA says 1xplatinum only, for both the digital single and the ring tone. See this search.
Yes that's the page I was looking at but it wasn't clear what it meant because of the two types, there is no key. Thanks. AnemoneProjectors 14:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles with dead external links Hide-&-Seek Answers[edit]

For anyone looking to fix/remove the dead external links the marked references are numbers 17, 52, 83, 85, 131, 134, and 135. --vgmddg (look | talk | do) 00:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bleeding Love US certification[edit]

You can see in the source that it is certified 4xPlatium in the US. I do not know why someone changed it to Platinum. —Preceding comment added by wiki4tune 14:33, 9 December 2010

You are misreading the source. It says the Digital single (DI) was awarded GOLD, and then PLATINUM, both on 04/24/2008, and the Mobile RINGTONE (MT) was certified the same. Ringtone charts don't count, so it's only single platinum. AnemoneProjectors 15:54, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jesse Mccartney's Version[edit]

Perhaps it's unnecessary, but shouldn't there be a section about Jesse Mccartney's version of the song? After all, he did help write the song. How come there's a section about Tom Dice's version (I'd never even heard him before), but not Jesse's? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.140.204 (talk) 20:46, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Russian Meteor Event citations.[edit]

The song happened to be playing on the car radio in one of the best Russian dash cam videoes of the event. Trivial exposure, but there are no WP copyright concerns re linkage inasmuch as copyright has not been asserted. http://perezhilton.com/2013-02-15-meteor-explodes-over-russia-leaving-almost-1000-injured#.USSj0H25du0 http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-meteor-videos-that-prove-russians-dont-give-f2340k/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZxXYscmgRg&feature=player_embedded

Genre in lead[edit]

I know nobody will probably read this or bother to comment but I would like to see the genres left in the lead section here and in other songs, where they have been removed. The reasons are: the lead summarises the entire article so because it's mentioned in the article is a good reason to have it in the lead, not a reason to remove it from the lead; a genre of song is a very important part of that song - it gives readers an idea of what the song is about, and is therefore very helpful to include in the lead section; and other song articles may not include the genre in the lead but many others do, and you shouldn't remove something just because another article doesn't have it - it would be better to add it to article then remove it from them. –AnemoneProjectors– 14:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've always included the genre(s) in the lead.  — ₳aron 15:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any problem with them being left in the lead; I used to remove genres from lead sentences but stopped because there is no consistency whether or not to remove or include them there...half of song articles have them in and half don't. To include the genre in the lead sentence doesn't put a non-neutral spin on the article like "Grammy-award winning" or "unsuccessful" does. The only thing I'd do is have them unlinked, as they are common links. Acalamari 15:04, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good, I did get replies after all :-) This also applies to Better in Time where the genre was removed. I've reinserted it in both. –AnemoneProjectors– 11:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree because the genres are listed under the genre section itself so why include them twice? --Onlythetruthisappropriate (talk) 16:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What genre section? The genre is discussed under "Composition". Per WP:LEAD: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the topic is notable, and summarize the most important points" - that would include a song's genre. –AnemoneProjectors– 22:11, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Bleeding Love. 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:

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 06:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Bleeding Love. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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 IITalk to my owner:Online 15:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Bleeding Love. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 04:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Bleeding Love. 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: 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) 06:59, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on Bleeding Love. 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: 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) 02:57, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bleeding_Love&oldid=1206334047"