Talk:Boom Boom Boom

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Boom Boom Boom article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

On 5 April 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to Boom Boom Boom (Outhere Brothers song). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Fair use rationale for Image:Boomboomboomalt.jpg[edit]

Image:Boomboomboomalt.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Boomboomboom.jpg[edit]

Image:Boomboomboom.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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:58, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

explain[edit]

The video for Boom Boom Boom, cost $2 and showed a high school gym with a basketball team dunking in a lineup. explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.46.141.14 (talk) 18:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true. I'm watching the video as I type and while the brothers are wearing basketball shirts, there's just a bunch of stock footage of cartoons and various other things in the bg. I expect that's original research though. 81.153.38.225 (talk) 11:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 3 external links on Boom Boom Boom (Outhere Brothers 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: 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) 00:18, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 April 2023[edit]

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: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 21:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

– Insufficient disambiguation. 162 etc. (talk) 22:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nomination. Hyphens and exclamation marks are indeed insufficient to disambiguate among the three entrees. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 01:16, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. Well spotted. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:44, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect baseline to similarly titled articles, see Boom Boom. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:45, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the 1st is likely primary with 1,268 views compared with 18 for the Rina Aiuchi song and 74[[1]] for the album, the 2nd may be unambiguous though I'd be less sure since hyphens are frequently interchangeable and oppose the 3rd per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Relister comment: Relisting to elicit further discussion on whether any of the articles should be considered the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The first is the clear WP:primary topic with 94% of the pageviews. The other two are covered by WP:SMALLDETAILS since anyone bothering to type hyphens or exclamation points probably wants those specific topics, respectively, rather than the primary topic. The current setup is fine. Station1 (talk) 06:30, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:SMALLDETAILS and precedence set at Talk:Tik Tok (song)#Requested move 19 April 2019 supporting the status quo. Steel1943 (talk) 18:51, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, that RM was between "Tik Tok" and "Tic Toc" - distinct spelling. These three differ only by punctutation, which is a much smaller detail. 162 etc. (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not particularly, since each of these titles are still distinct. Hatnote s are sufficient here if need be. Steel1943 (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.