Talk:Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album)

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

Kiss & Tell Mexican Edition[edit]

Well, first of all Hello and then is a Mexican edition for the album??? there is no reference of it and it has months of been there, Should I delete it??? Love Selena!!

Other songs[edit]

Shouldn't the section under "Confirmed songs" have "Disappear" "Magical" and "Magic?" I kinda watch tv a lot and she mentions that she did those songs. Just a thought. Alfred Lau 14:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I confused myself with the soundtrack and the actual album. Alfred Lau 14:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beautifully Disturbed[edit]

Selena did not write any songs for the record. Selena said the only song she wrote for the record was "Beautifully Disturbed" and it was left off of the album for unknown reasons. 74.140.128.208 (talk) 05:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Selena DID write "I Won't Apologize" per [1] at 2:27 - 2:43 -- Iknow23 (talk) 00:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is true, but that is a copyrighted video and the Youtube user does NOT own the copyright, not to worry however because there are other refs that say this. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 09:12, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fefe Dobson cover[edit]

Does anyone have CONFIRMATION that Track 9 "As a Blonde" is a cover of the Fefe Dobson song from her unreleased album, Sunday Love? -- Iknow23 (talk) 04:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She definitely covered it, The sampler of the album leaked http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qo6en_6-Nq0. QuasyBoy 15:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
THANK YOU, I've been checking everyday to see if it's out.
Iknow23 (talk) 20:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No Problem. QuasyBoy 16:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Track listing[edit]

EXAMPLE: The track listing from Jordin Spark’s albums are listed in a numeric list. See Battlefield (album) Furthermore WP:albums clearly states that numeric lists should be used except for where the track-listing is complex e.g. many features guests, many samples, many producers etc. There is no proof that the track-listing will be complex and is therefore perfectly fine and correct as a numeric list instead of as a chart.

Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums

Track listing

A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list.
1. "Complete song title" (John Doe, Brian Smith) – 4:23
2. "Complete song title" (Doe, Kelly Kalamazoo) – 3:24
3. "Complete song title" (Doe, Kalamazoo, Smith, David Whitman) – 2:34

Also once someone is credited, on subsequent mentions [as shown above] just their last name is used. Of course if there is multiple people with the same last name then put First Initial and Last Name if that will distinguish them apart. -- Iknow23 (talk) 18:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is INCORRECT, the numeric list format can be used but other chart formats are acceptable as per WP:ALBUM#Track listing. The other one is ultimately more organized and more visually appealong it, so I will change it along with other things. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 01:37, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
per WP:ALBUM#Track listing
"A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list." This is NOT "a more complicated situation" -- Iknow23 (talk) 03:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. Let's leave it as a numbered list until ALL writing credits are revealed. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
User 98.232.58.47 has constantly been altering the track listing format and I agree. The other version is hard to read, visually unappealing and bad. Battlefield is not example to follow because it is not a FA or GA article. Look at The Fame, Love, Angel, Music, Baby, True Blue and many more. That track listing format is NOT used, and it is clearly NOT A VIOLATION. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 09:21, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We should put it to vote for a few days. Write if you oppose or agree below and your reason. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 09:30, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree: I agree with Ipodnano05. I too am modeling the article after The Fame article and many other pop albums. Most the articles for pop albums now no longer uses the standard format for track listings. If other pop albums are using the new format, Kiss & Tell shouldn't be treated any differently. Foodcritic35 (talk) 09:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I vote for using the Wiki standard:
  1. The Fame - repeats Lady Gaga THROUGHOUT, poor example
  2. Love, Angel, Music, Baby EXAMPLE does not apply here. It HAS the extra level of complexity in listing the Producers per song as well as the songwriters.
  3. True Blue Also does not apply. Also has complexity in listing the Producers.
Kiss & Tell may have this complexity at a later time in which chart would be appropriate. But we cannot WP:crystal that at this time, so the numbered list is appropriate at this time.
There is no "new format" for pop albums? Foodcritic35 aka 98.232.58.47 says do not use the wiki "standard format for track listings." ?? huh??
Iknow23 (talk) 09:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is debatable, wait and see what other, non-significant contributors, say. Please leave as is until gaining consensuses. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 09:40, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No reason not to use a plain, numbered list: easier to read, less distracting background color changes and the accompanying contrast reductions.—Kww(talk) 17:17, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary it is harder to read. Readers may not understand the writers or the length if it is not explicitly labeled. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 17:21, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The closer we get to black text on a white background, the easier it is to read. The more people insist on using colors and backgrounds, the harder things are for the visually impaired.—Kww(talk) 01:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me RESTART from the beginning of this TALK section..."EXAMPLE: The track listing from Jordin Spark’s albums are listed in a numeric list. See Battlefield (album)..." THIS album was released recently AND THIS SAME ARGUMENT OCCURRED THERE! Actually that is HOW I LEARNED about ALL this and thus chose it as the example. It EVEN has extra info on two tracks, being one is a cover and one has song samples. But that info is listed underneath the INDIVIDUAL tracks. A table with a column titled "NOTES" was NOT necessary as it would be blank for ALL the OTHER songs; that is, a column is not necessary for just two of the twelve tracks. However if MANY of the songs had ADDITIONAL info, it would be understandable to have a chart with a SPECIFIC column to show ALL THAT DETAIL.
Iknow23 (talk) 02:06, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • I also I agree with Ipodnano05 the template is much easier to read, and is more visually appealing. The numbered list is very cluttered and harder to pull specific information from. - Sunshine ☼ (talk) 02:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those who vote and delete their page, or try to mask their identity should NOT be counted.
    Iknow23 (talk) 02:30, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The user did not delete his user page, look at the revision history (he made it with that). As for masking himself/herself, the link was going to take you to the real info, so... And Battlefield is not example page to follow, per WP:ALBUM#Infobox, the critical reviews are supposed to be references (not links), and other problems. Oh, and The Fame is a good article, worthy of example. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 02:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UNtrue see the ORIGINAL Revision as of 05:35, September 6, 2009 reveals that 98.232.58.47 ACTUALLY posted the "Foodcritic35" item and remained as such until they then later RENAMED themself, "Foodcritic35" Revision as of 05:55, September 6, 2009 [see compare selected revisions between "05:53, September 6, 2009 & that of 05:55, September 6, 2009 as when this is where they changed their name.] I am ONLY referring to [using] the Tracklist section of Battlefield as germaine to the discussion here.
Iknow23 (talk) 03:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I did not know. That user will not be counted, currently a tie (2 to 2). -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 03:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. It's just that I've been called, "Mr. DETAIL" haha. I knew I remembered matching THAT post to your mention of them at 09:21, 6 September 2009, and then seen it change from the former numerical designation to an alpha name page that does not exist!
Iknow23 (talk) 04:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just jumping in here, but I support the current version. I'm assuming it is either this or the type used on Battlefield (album). If so, the current version is better as it is simpler, and the info we currently have easily and legibly fits in the alternating colors table. Battlefield has bonus tracks and additional notes, and therefore needs a more complex table. Since Kiss and Tell does not, lets use the simplest and neatest.Liquidluck (talk) 18:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You said, "Battlefield has bonus tracks and additional notes, and therefore needs a more complex table. Since Kiss and Tell does not, lets use the simplest and neatest."
But Battlefield being "more complex" does NOT have a table. Kiss & Tell being simpler has a table though? WP:albums states that numeric lists should be used except for where the track-listing is complex, so by your own words you should support the use of a table for Battlefield but NOT for Kiss & Tell.
Iknow23 (talk) 21:19, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I should have defined my terms better. I'm using "table" in the general sense- a header followed by formatted text in rows rather than prose. I confess I didn't realize there were guidelines on tracklisting. However, I've now read it and template:tracklist, and I still support using this alternating colors table.
Since simple and complex are subjective for anyone (including me- I would say this table is way simpler than the other), I went by the examples given. It appears that the numbered lists are used when there are solos, samples, and other information. The parameters given for the table are title, writer, lyrics, music, length, and notes- which is all the information we have for Kiss and Tell. Granted, we do not provide lyrics, but Kiss and Tell isn't free-use. Just by looking, it appears the info given in this table is very similar to the tracklist table examples, while Battlefield is more similar to the numbered lists. Unless there is more information provided for Kiss and Tell that simply isn't being given, I still support this format. Liquidluck (talk) 02:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You said, "The parameters given for the table are title, writer, lyrics, music, length, and notes- which is all the information we have for Kiss and Tell. Granted, we do not provide lyrics..." ??I don't see separate columns denoting writer and music for Kiss & Tell. Or a column for notes. It has ONLY 3 parameters (currently): Title, Writer(s), and Length. The examples show 4 columns [parameters] in use, Smile by L'Arc-en-Ciel and Yeah! by Def Leppard. The OTHER example, Greatest Hits by Queen meets the complexity standard for TABLE use because even though only 3 columns are used, the TITLE column includes parentethical notation on EVERY track of its original album source and date.
Iknow23 (talk) 22:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
INCORRECT, we do have notes. "New Version" for "Tell Me Something I Don't Know" (that is not part of the title and is in notes). The number list does NOT have a notes column, so how would you add it there without putting it as part of the title and not getting it confused with writers because of the parenthesis?-- Ipodnano05 (talk) 22:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that is an important distinguishing identifier. But it is the only track that has additional info and only two words. Battlefield has much more complex additional info on two tracks and still was not necessary to use a table.
Iknow23 (talk) 22:35, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Battlefield is not even a great example; this article is in better shape than that one. In my opinion, I wouldn't look at the track listing section because it is so cluttered and confusing. Find an FA or GA article that has a numeric list and then it will make more of a valid argument. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 22:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The very first one on the list at Category:GA-Class Album articles, "Weird Al" Yankovic (album) shows additional notes on EVERY song and still does not use Table.
Found this on its TALK page: "...I really don't like the table-formatting for a track listing. Nor does WikiProject Albums, their stylature guidelines for track listings (here) says that numbered lists should be used. Not only does it take a lot more space for the same information, but only 6% of Wikipedia's Featured albums have tabled track listings, the other 94% of them all use numbered track listings. Per precedent and guidelines, I would really like to know what necessitates we use tablature for this particular article. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 02:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)"[reply]
Iknow23 (talk) 23:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Despite that that GA album is in a numbered list, a tracklist format is better due to clearer visibility and other reasons. Mainly, I think that was used as such because it was an old album, a "record." With a side one and a side two and explains more of each song. We cannot do that here, however. That is one GA article, check:
  1. 21st Century Breakdown
  2. A Weekend in the City
  3. Ray of Light
  4. FutureSex/LoveSounds
  5. True Blue (album)
  6. No Doubt (No Doubt album)
  7. No Line on the Horizon
  • and many more (mixture of both old and fairly new) -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 00:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continues, Reset to left margin. For ease of discussion, I changed your bullet points to numbered. NO OTHER CHANGES MADE. Feel free to confirm by reviewing the "Compare seleted revisions" history.

  1. I am dumbfounded. ONLY 2 columns, yet they use Table! ONLY track 17 has added info. How can they make the argument that "the track-listing is complex"?
  2. ONLY 2 parameters. How can they make the argument that "the track-listing is complex"? In my opinion, the "Bonus tracks" section would be better if they made sub-headings for each of the other versions.
  3. AGREE. 4 columns, Table is appropriate. [But they do continue to often use FULL name after FIRST mention.]
  4. TOTALLY AGREE.
    • Standard edition 4 columns, Table is appropriate. [But they do continue to use FULL name, Justin Timberlake after FIRST mention in the Producer(s) column)]
    • Standard iTunes edition. 2 parameters, no table.
    • Deluxe edition. Often 3 parameters, no table.
  5. AGREE. 4 columns, Table is appropriate. [But they do continue to often use FULL name after FIRST mention.]
  6. 3 columns, not very complex but still used Table?
  7. ABSOLUTELY AGREE. 5 columns, Table is appropriate.

With the plethora of Music Albums out there, examples can probably be found of every permutation possible. Even though you found examples of UN-complex listings that use a Table, do you in good faith feel that they are eligible under the "complex" use rule?

WP:albums clearly states that numeric lists should be used except for where the track-listing is complex. Thus numeric lists IS the default use. It should be used unless a case is made that the track-listing is complex. Some have argued that a TABLE is "more visually appealing" but that is NOT the Wiki standard for Table usage.
Iknow23 (talk) 01:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we all have our arguments and opinions. It is currently under voting (with 2 to 3, favoring the tracklist template).
Example 3. REVISIT. I thought I'd make a quick stop by there, to correct the FULL name repetition issue...just discovered something even more of concern. Even though a Table is used, they ALSO have an "Additional notes" section. That in itself is OK, but they do NOT show any indication at the appropriate items above to look there.
Iknow23 (talk) 07:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, just took care of it and other page cleanup.
Iknow23 (talk) 07:44, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Edited Examples 4 & 5. Example 5 also had the "Additional notes" section problem as in Example 3.
Iknow23 (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: Battlefield (album) now has a Table. A fourth parameter, Producer(s) has been added thus increasing complexity.
Iknow23 (talk) 01:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I now AGREE that Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album) should have a Table as a fourth parameter, Producer(s) has been added thus increasing complexity.
Iknow23 (talk) 23:05, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recorded songs[edit]

Should we add that she recorded songs like Beautifully Disturbed and I'm Sorry that got left of for some reason, like in the Demi CD? -- 74.140.128.208 (talk) 04:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might be appropriate in Background section as long as proper references are shown. -- Iknow23 (talk) 21:56, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think those songs are going to be released as bonus tracks in international releases of the album because on ustream, Selena said there will be some songs that will only be released internationally. So that can be added later on when the tracklist of the international release of the album is revealed. -- 98.232.58.47 (talk) 06:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

it think "i'm sorry" is the original title of i won't appoligize. read the lyrics, and it would make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicetr (talk • contribs) 01:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Genres[edit]

Section to discuss the general genres of the album, in order to not cause an edit war.

Currently listed as the genres in the infobox are pop and electronic rock. I however disagree:

  • there are NO citations that claim it as the genre, and since the all of the songs in the album are not available it cannot be said.
  • as of now the only song actually heard is "Falling Down," and it is NOT electronic rock. In Miley Cyrus' The Time of Our Lives, "Kicking and Screaming" is described as "synth-rock" (the same thing and it is sourced). "Falling Down" sounds nowhere near it.
  • Gomez never stated that her album will have electronic rock; she said it will be influenced by dance, which was listed prior to that.
  • And last, sub genres are not supposed to be in the infobox for albums.

With these points I hope that with consensuses, it may be removed. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 09:08, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that user pages are being created for one-time edit use and then being deleted! In other words, VANDALISM!!!
Iknow23 (talk) 03:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, but what does that have to do with the genres?? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 04:33, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to alert you that this is occurring. SEE: Demi1993
Iknow23 (talk) 04:44, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. I understand now, I would recommend to leave a message on their IP and user talk page. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 04:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if that is really effective as that page no longer exists [red name indication]? And I'm content to let you moderate this issue. There is only so much that I can do, but I did want to let you know in case it would be helpful in your efforts.
Iknow23 (talk) 05:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
O.K. Since you're writing in the section, what is your opinion in regards to the genres? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 05:31, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I AGREE with your section start. I would say to call it per reference ONLY by ADDING ref to genre area. pop rock is listed at the allmusic ref on the single page, so why not use it. Can't WP:crystal what genre the UNheard songs might be [also as you state.] ADDITIONAL genres may be appropriate for them LATER WHEN KNOWN but would suggest to continue to list genre by ref ONLY. If ref is required there can be no room for personal interpretation or dispute.Iknow23 (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great then lets remove it. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 02:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox found to have Dance added. Quote from Ref given: "It's fun pop rock, and it has a dance beat to it," Gomez, 17, tells me. "I've been working on it for two years, so let's hope that it's good."
Does JUST having a dance beat MAKE IT DANCE MUSIC??
Iknow23 (talk) 02:10, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Separate column for References in Release History chart?[edit]

I have never seen this done before except at their single page, "Falling Down". I have only seen the ref incorporated INTO the other material as is done in the "Charts and peaks" section chart at "Falling Down" without a separate DEDICATED column for ref.
Iknow23 (talk) 22:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter and other things[edit]

User:Juanacho has removed several things and I re-add them and he deletes them again.

  1. Twitter can indeed be unreliable per WP:SYNTHESIS when it does not accurately describe what is occurring. But in all of these tweets that are used as references Gomez clearly describes she is recording the last song from the album and so on...
  2. More than one source for a thing is acceptable. Check GA articles, like The Fame, or WP:REFERENCE.
  3. Also, her transition from a recording artist that occasionally appeared with Disney covers to her own music should be stated. Look at The Fame. It explains that at first she was just a backstage writer and now she is performing her own music.

Hopefully, this can help settle an agreement. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 01:42, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: if the only source you have for something is Twitter, it isn't important enough to mention.—Kww(talk) 01:45, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Songs" Section Should Be Turned Into "Critical Reception[edit]

It's basically a compillation of how the critics are describing the album. Therefor, it might as well be a section for "Critical Reception." Foodcritic35 (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done.
Iknow23 (talk) 03:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Concert Photos[edit]

Have any photos of Selena's first concert released? If so, we should add a few to the article, especially the "Promotion" section. Foodcritic35 (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Album Chart[edit]

The peak position for the Argentinian Albums Chart is the OFFICIAL from CAPIF. ArgentinaTop100 JUST archieve the weekly chart. Do not remove this information, thanks. --HC 5555 (talk) 14:14, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArgentinaTop100 is not associated with CAPIF. CAPIF archives its monthly chart at http://www.capif.org.ar/Default.asp?CodOp=ESCM&CO=6. It does not archive its weekly chart. This album has notrevised made the monthly chart. There are no known reliable archives of the CAPIF charts. I'd be inclined to accept ArgentinaTop100 as an archive if it didn't archive known bad charts as well.—Kww(talk) 15:46, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Corrected earlier statement: it has not made the monthly chart.—Kww(talk) 21:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the Billboard 2010 end of year chart Kiss & Tell Is listed as no.47.

natrually[edit]

natrually debuts at 39 on the hot 100 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.109.15.166 (talk) 00:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Change of Scenery????[edit]

it says after Kiss and Tell 

The second album is called Change of Scenery But there is no refrence!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.27.4.48 (talk) 00:00, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Change of Scenery[edit]

There is no refrence that Change of Scenery is the second album 96.27.4.48 (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed it.—Kww(talk) 00:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gold in Argentina[edit]

http://www.ciudad.com.ar/musica/77864/selena-gomez-me-encantaria-grabar-un-tema-con-el-grupo-aventura They gave her the Gold record when she was there these days. You can see her holding it on the picture :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WinterWonderland22 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album). 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:

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.  Stick to sources! Paine  02:42, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album). 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:

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.  Stick to sources! Paine  02:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:35, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2016[edit]

Why is "Tell Me Something I Don't Know" is the lead single? I read the whole article about Kiss & Tell and it saids the lead single is "Falling Dawn", not "Tell Me Something I Don't Know". Can you please remove "Tell Me Something I Don't Know" and change it back to "Falling Dawn" as the lead single and "Naturally" as the second single on "Singles from Kiss & Tell" section? Because according to "Tell Me Something I don't Know" main page is that this song is the lead single from the soundtrack called "Another Cinderella Story", not from the album "Kiss & Tell". 2605:E000:1609:40D6:A0E6:3F9A:91E3:9A7B (talk) 23:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The section you want changed is by release date, not by lead single sequence. If you read the article you'll find that "Falling Dawn" is called the lead single in most countries. Remember: The sequence in the information box is by release date. Welcome to this encyclopedia!  Stick to sources! Paine  02:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No it's not right. Every other album pages are not like that. And besides "Tell Me Something I Don't Know" is just a song by Selena Gomez and it's a promotional single, not a single. Whatever song is the lead single from any album should be listed first along with release date just like every other album pages. 2605:E000:1609:40D6:81C6:AABE:4DD3:C11C (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album). 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) 19:21, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Kiss & Tell (Selena Gomez & the Scene album). 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) 08:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deluxe Edition[edit]

Are you there is no (official) deluxe edition? SamieFrost22 (talk) 10:51, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure * SamieFrost22 (talk) 10:52, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kiss_%26_Tell_(Selena_Gomez_%26_the_Scene_album)&oldid=1204844980"