Jump to content

Talk:Beautiful (Mariah Carey song)

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

Wrong Pitchfork Source

[edit]

In the "Critical Reception" portion of this article, you are not referring to Carrie Battan's actual review of the song. The article you are paraphrasing and to which you're linking simply announces the song's release. The following link includes Battan's full review of the song which discusses much more than just the hash tag in the title and Miguel's inclusion in the song.

http://pitchfork.com/reviews/tracks/15399-mariah-carey-beautiful-ft-miguel/

R&B/ Hip Hop Chart debut

[edit]

the song debuted at #39 on the R&B chart, please add this to that charts [1]

Sources

[edit]

Background

[edit]

Release

[edit]

Artwork

[edit]

Reviews

[edit]

Music video

[edit]

 — AARON • TALK 11:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination

[edit]

Order of writers and producers!

[edit]

This is the order of the writers and producers Written by: Miguel Pimentel, Mariah Carey, Nathan Perez and Brook Davis Produced by: Miguel and Mariah Carey Co-Produced by: Happy Perez

It's done by who did the most work. Mariah's name is not first and you cannot take of Perez and Davis because you feel like it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.153.254.17 (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced for Perez and Davis, no one has reported that. And no, order of writers is NEVER by who did the most work. Don't be ridiculous, that's such a stupid thing to say.  — AARON • TALK 14:24, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes they are. That's the general rule of thumb. It certainly isn't alphabetically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.153.254.17 (talk) 18:16, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not, and it's not alphabetical either. We always follow the order of the album booklet, but as there is no booklet yet, we list it as sources report. Mariah comes first, it's her song primarily.  — AARON • TALK 18:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
disagree. they should appear in the order of the source theyre taken from, in this case its About.com. And as an alternative alphabetical is always the preferred standard.--— Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 21:46, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard or done alphabetical. Sources always list Mariah first anyway.  — AARON • TALK 21:50, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Its standard legal, professional and academic practise to use alphabetical order. Ascap and BMI both use alphabetical order as its the standard for indexing and searching. But that's a separate issue... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 10:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adult Pop Songs

[edit]

Is Adult Pop Songs a component chart of the Pop Songs? I don't want to keep removing unless I am sure! Jayy008 (talk) 12:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. See WP:USCHARTS, Adult Top 40 and Adult Contemporary (chart).  — AARON • TALK 12:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy response. It's been a while and I couldn't remember! Jayy008 (talk) 12:19, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New sources

[edit]

Radio spins record?

[edit]

Can it be added somewhere in the article about how #Beautiful broke the record for most radio spins in ONE day? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.55.52.9 (talk) 04:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No third party reference and Mediabase spins are not counted by Billboard, which uses Nielsen BDS. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 04:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Croation airplay chart

[edit]

I have removed the current listing as it's not archived and represents only one radio station. The official Croation chart that is allowed per WP: Record charts takes me to a dead website which my computer tells me is extremely high risk to visit. Jayy008 (talk) 20:38, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Song name

[edit]

2013

[edit]

The song isn't called "hashtag beautiful", in the chorus Mariah Carey sings "you're beautiful" not "you're hashtag beautiful". The inclusion of # is so to encourage the song to be mentioned on twitter and therefore trend. As its not a spoken part of the title its purely stylistic. No one, vocally refers to the song as "hashtag beautiful", the only place this is relevant is in written form. its quite different to say the Kelly Rowland song which is actually called number one and written/expressed as "#1", where the # is actually spoken as "number". — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 11:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC) [reply]

The title of the song doesn't have to be in the song in order for it to be the title of the song. For example, There is a Wikipedia article for Empire State Of Mind not Now You're In New York. There is a Wikipedia article for Hot N Cold not You're Hot Then You're Cold. There is a Wikipedia article on We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together not We Are Never Ever Ever Getting Back Together. Wikipedia has an article on Ho Hey not I Belong With You You Belong With Me You're My Sweet. Wikipedia has an article on Party Rock Anthem not Party Rock Is In The House Tonight. Wikipedia has an article on Dilemma not No Matter What I Do All I Think About Is You Even When I'm With My Boo Boy You Know I'm Crazy Over You. Wikipedia has an article on Party Rock Anthem not Part Rock Is In The House Tonight. I could probably go on for longer, but I only happen to have three CDs on the desk in front of me. Wikipedia's policy even expands to strange incorrect spellings the artist chooses to use for the title. For example, How Do U Want It, I Luv Your Girl, Tha Crossroads, I Gotta Feeling, Not Gon' Cry, Hot In Herre and Gangsta's Paradise. Once again, my examples are limited to the few CDs I have on my desk now, I'm sure there are others. Billboard, iTunes, and the CD itself all refer to it as #Beautiful. Why would Wikipedia change the name of the song? TBWarrior720 (talk) 20:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Then why does iTunes label the song #Beautiful (featuring Miguel) - Single? I think this is a simple math. She doesn't need to sing "hashtag beautiful" for a song to be called like that. — Tomíca(T2ME) 11:18, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree, its a pure stylistic interpretation. If we are not speaking of an unguent or pronouncing it, then its not part of its main spelling, except stylize it and in this case, promote it on Twitter as Lil-unique said. IIRC, we dont say Ke-dollar-ha or P-exclamation-nk, neither should this. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 12:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agreed that sometimes songs are called different things such as "The Ketchup Song" where the artists don't actually sing the words "the ketchup song" but a hashtag is a symbol or shorthand for the word number. The stylistic inclusion of hastag is for twitter promotion. Of course iTunes will label the song as #Beautiful because that's how its been written and released but the hashtag is effectively silent, its an omission from the song title. iTunes isn't the be-all and end all. People need to hop off Apple's back. Retailers have never been a reliable source for genres and styles etc. Its actually common sense, the song is stylised with a hashtag but the name of the song is beautiful. Carey, Ryan Seacrest, GMA - in every bit of promotion the song is called "Beautiful" not "hashtag Beautiful". — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 12:46, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
At a quick glance, the only source that names the song as "Beautiful" is Wikipedia. It appears that the majority of sources title it as "#Beautiful". I tend to agree with Tomica that the track should be called "#Beautiful". WikiRedactor (talk) 20:45, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The song is introduced as "Hashtag Beautiful" when she sings it live. Even a reviewer confirmed that it includes the hashtag.  — AARON • TALK 10:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree... # has two meanings, uts either an abbreviation for the word "number" or its a social media mechanism, primarily used on twitter. the word use of # has a meaning, while the social media mechanism doesnt have a meaning thats why the context makes a difference. if you still disagre Aaron, we should open a WP:RFC. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 22:18, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it on the artwork then? And everything official to do with the song? It's fact that the song is introduced with the hashtag and it's fact that everyone refers to it as "Hashtag Beautiful". Can't believe this has even been bought up. It's what the song is called. Wikipedia isn't here to service our own interpretations, it's here to provide fact.  — AARON • TALK 23:05, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ummm the question here begets, why isn't it sung as "hashtag Beautiful" by Miguel in the song then? And it is fact. A stylization present on an artwork doesn't deter from what it is, a stylization. And it has no place to be in an encyclopedia when it is just a promotional tactic. As I must have iterated somewhere, we don't call the following as P-OMG-nk, Ke-dollar-ha, Yo-umlaut and I, or A-dollar-AP Rocky. Off the top of my head, the only difference here I recall is Mötley Crüe where the umlaut is stressing a different pronounciation. So, well, this song is just "Beautiful" like the rest of the precedents and is just a victim of its stylization. —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 10:13, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rihanna doesn't sing the 101 bit on "Rockstar 101" but that's what the song and article is called...  — AARON • TALK 11:48, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And there are songs where the title of the song isn't in the lyrics at all, but this is stylization pure and simple for marketing purposes only. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 00:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The song is legally registered under the title "Beautiful", not "#Beautiful". Bluesatellite (talk) 04:09, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2014

[edit]

@Lil-unique1, TBWarrior720, Tomica, IndianBio, WikiRedactor, Calvin999, and Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: @Bluesatellite: Sorry to rehash (no pun intended) a nearly year-old discussion, but if the song is officially titled with a hashtag on the single cover / liner notes of Carey's album (which it is), most commonly referred to in reliable sources with a hashtag (which it is), and listed as such at retailers such as iTunes (which it is), we have absolutely no right to dismiss a part of this song title as a "marketing ploy" - which it very well might be; however, titling a song after a repeated phrase in a chorus like many hit singles is also a marketing gimmick and we respect that. The word "hashtag" does not have to be explicitly sung in the song for "#Beautiful" to be the title as evidenced by the examples given by TBWarrior720 above. And IndianBio, the key difference between this and Ke$ha/P!nk is that those two artists are commonly referred to as "Kesha" and "Pink" in reliable sources. This song is not commonly referred to as simply "Beautiful" in sources. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:15, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you put #beautiful in the search bar it takes back to the main page of wikipedia. What bothers me more than what you are saying is the omission from the lead, infobox and prose in general. It should be "#Beautiful" is a song recorded by..... not "Beautiful" is a song recorded by......  — ₳aron 22:48, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article cannot be moved as the # sign is not allowed in articles as a technical restriction. But a hatnote can be added to the top of the article addressing the correct title as is done at another Carey-related article, Number 1's (Mariah Carey album). But, yes, I agree with you that it is inappropriate for the information about the hashtag to be completely omitted. Editors who cite stylization policies for omitting the hashtag should be aware that inventing new titles not commonly used in reliable sources is inappropriate. –Chase (talk / contribs) 22:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Chase is right that the song is formally titled "#Beautiful", however pointless and tragic that may be (although Miguel claims that the hash symbolises the preceding expletive in the chorus). The majority of reliable sources refer to it as "#Beautiful" and those that don't probably don't because they find it annoying or technically difficult to work with, just as we do. Adabow (talk) 13:35, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the song should be referred to as "#Beautiful" throughout the article. While the hashtag may be a nuisance from a technical purpose, it would be inaccurate to exclude it because it is indeed part of the song title, as demonstrated through several third-party sources separate from Mariah and her team. "#GetItRight" and "#thatPower" use their hashtagged titles throughout their articles, and I don't see why this page should be an exception. WikiRedactor (talk) 15:57, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's absolutely no discussion needed for this... it's obvious that the hashtag is part of the song title, despite being pointless just like Adabow said. See Number 1's (Destiny's Child album) (this article should begin with an introduction explaining what is the correct title for the song) pedro | talk 20:01, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to take the multiple supports for this as the go-ahead to change this throughout the article. Any editor who disagrees may feel free to follow the second and third steps of WP:BRD. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:12, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mix FM Lebanon

[edit]

Is the official radio top 20 RADIO songs in Lebanon and its Legal so you all can check its article on Wikipedia. We use it in Lebanon as a credible official radio airplay chart alongside The official Lebanese Top 20 thanks Fidel 16:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Brazil & Rhythmic

[edit]

Hi, could somebody restore Billboard Brazil's Hot 100 Airplay and US Billboard Rhythmic Top 40, I have access to neither sources. Jayy008 (talk) 12:22, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

45th Hot 100 entry

[edit]

http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/1562713/weekly-chart-notes-mariah-carey-adds-to-hot-100-legacy  — ₳aron 17:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gold in Denmark

[edit]

[2] I'm not good at the certification table, so I'm posting this here for someone else to update. — Status (talk · contribs) 16:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

plus Added with a sales amount of 15,000 per IFPI Denmark#Singles. GoingBatty (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

# 1 in 40 Countrys?

[edit]

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/news/a513143/mariah-careys-beautiful-certified-platinum-picture.html

2013 Year-End position

[edit]

http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2013/hot-100-songs?page=8

  1. Beautiful charted #81 on the 2013 Year end charts.


-stellards20 , 12/14/13 10:17PM (UTC +8)

2013 Year-End position

[edit]
  1. Beautiful charted #81 on the 2013 Year end charts.

[1] 112.198.82.52 (talk) 14:19, 14 December 2013 (UTC)stellards20 , 12/14/13 10:17PM (UTC +8)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2013/hot-100-songs?page=8
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Beautiful (Mariah Carey song). 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:27, 29 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Beautiful (Mariah Carey song). 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:54, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Beautiful_(Mariah_Carey_song)&oldid=1206211113"