Talk:Between You and Me (DC Talk song)

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Gen. Quon in topic Reference formatting
Good articleBetween You and Me (DC Talk song) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 12, 2012Good article nomineeListed

Which version do I have?

edit

On the version of the single that I bought, it has the "Radio Edit" of "Between You and Me" and "So Help Me God". Therefore, it isn't listed on the page. Thanks. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 01:05, 26 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Between You and Me. 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) 05:37, 19 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Reference formatting

edit

Lawrencekhoo (talk · contribs) reverted my correct removal of forced columns for the references claiming it was no improvement. I beg to differ. The footnotes sub-section was already using multiple, responsive columns because it was being forced to. Now, at least, it's being done correctly. The bibliography sub-section, was being forced to two, and exactly, two columns. By allowing the reference template choose when it should or should not have columns, and its default is ten items, it is in a single column which looks better on all possible screens. How is this not an improvement? Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:28, 25 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Walter Görlitz: You are definitely correct in this regard.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)Reply