Talk:Wild!

Fair use rationale for Image:Alb974.jpg

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)

Unverifiable statement?

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)

Requested move 21 January 2014

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. DrKay (talk) 18:44, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

---

• Wild! → Wild! (Erasure album)Wild! (Erasure album)
• Wild!! → Wild!! (Terry Silverlight album)Wild!! (Terry Silverlight album)
• Wild (album) → Wild (Inkubus Sukkubus album)Wild (Inkubus Sukkubus album)

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

• Support per nom. I hope that the existence of both Wild! and Wild!! could sway some usual opponents of semi-superfluous disambiguators. —  AjaxSmack  04:35, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
• Strong support people use or drop extra punctuation at a whim. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 05:46, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
• Comment we really should change the guidelines, they seem to condone this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.120.175.135 (talk) 23:30, 24 January 2014 (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.

Requested move 20 July 2022

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)

---

• Wild! (Erasure album) → Wild!
• Wild!! (Terry Silverlight album) → Wild!!

– 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)

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)

• • @Tree Critter: There was a consensus to move these to the current titles. Talk:Wild!_(Erasure_album)#Requested move. Please raise a move discussion to seek for a new consensus. – robertsky (talk) 09:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose ambiguation is just making life difficult for readers for no good reason. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:47, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Wild! leads to this page. It makes absolutely no sense to have the page WITHOUT a parenthetical be the redirect to a page WITH the parenthetical. "Me!" (Taylor Swift song) leads to "Me!", because if it were backwards that wouldn't make any sense. Tree Critter (talk) 08:35, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
• Support Pretty cut and dry case of WP:SMALLDETAILS. There are no other pages that could realistically be at the title "Wild!" and any rare user who accidentally added an exclamation point can easily get where they intended using hatnotes. Given the suggested title already directs here, it's a pretty straightforward case. While I understand the view of the !oppose vote that all pop culture subjects should require additional parenthetical information, even when there is no competing claims to the base name, that is not consistent with our title guidelines or the intention of disambiguation.--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:30, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

• Also, Wild!! should obviously be moved as well, no clear reason why there would be parentheticals needed when the base name already goes there.--Yaksar (let's chat) 16:31, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

• Support unless others use exclamation marks. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:55, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

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.