Talk:Bound 2

Bound 2 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
Date	Process	Result
June 21, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Hip hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

James Franco and Seth Rogen's Parody.[edit]

Source: http://www.tmz.com/videos/0_hbj61qmw — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.110.9.105 (talk) 20:34, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, perhaps RoosterTeeth's "Bound 4" parody of the above video should be mentioned? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLW9uEU8xoI)LilSweden (talk) 16:51, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Real cover?[edit]

Is there any proof that is the real cover? It looks fan made to me. Koala15 (talk) 20:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See [1] and [2]. A google images search turns up no results leading to forums or any other postings of the artwork claiming to created my the poster. STATic message me! 21:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think those sources are reliable enough cause just by scrolling down the first page i can see atleast 2 fake single covers. Koala15 (talk) 21:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The original post of this artwork was 5 months ago. Sure, this looks professional but it's not guaranteed to be official. DJUnBalanced (talk) 22:06, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a very strong arguement Koala15, but I did the leg work and found that it was posted on a fan-made cover thread on KanyeToThe six months ago. I am going to go ahead and remove it now.STATic message me! 22:12, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where is all the talk about the negative reception?[edit]

Sure, critics may have liked it, but why is there no discussion about how absolutely horrible most people find this song and its accompanying video to be. The YouTube dislike/like meter tells a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.58.125.20 (talk) 01:08, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Calling YouTube commentators professional critics is like calling Simple Jack the best film since Titanic. STATic message me! 04:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems biased towards glorifying this song. I'm pretty sure there are plenty of critics who dislike this song and it needs to be put into the Critical Reception section to make the article more neutral. 14.2.56.11 (talk) 10:54, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling[edit]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change Eric danchild to Eric Danchick, it was misprinted in the first edition of the credits.

Shintzel (talk) 12:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done STATic message me! 17:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disc photo[edit]

Are we seriously using a photo of a promo disc? The infobox is for single covers not discs. Koala15 (talk) 23:48, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quit the attitude if you do not know what you are talking about dude. Are you so stuck int he present you have never seen an article for a pre-internet single such as Rapper's Delight? Should we remove the image for all pre-internet singles too? If the only image available is of a official CD then that is what we should use. STATic message me! 03:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well i can see using it for a song that was released 1979 cause they had physical singles back then, but for a song that was released in 2013 it just doesn't make much sense. There is no art on the disc either to make it worth using. Koala15 (talk) 04:33, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think physical singles no longer exist? They are still released all the time. If there is no fancy single cover released online via digital download retailers and this is the only thing we have, then it should be used. Better then having nothing at all and it still illustrates the cover for the single. Not to mention, the minimalism is the goddamn point if you know anything about the idea and promotion of Yeezus. I guess we should just remove the cover of Yeezus too since it is just a blank CD right? This cover has more imagery and design on it then the album cover. STATic message me! 05:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Physical singles are rarely ever released in 2014. This looks like a promo single given out at the label, way different than the cover of Yeezus. The photo is very amateurish also. Koala15 (talk) 14:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well you are just wrong then. They still are released all the time, Linkin Park and Coldplay released physical singles in the last 30 days. Again, you said it yourself, it is an image of a official single given out by the label, so no reason we should not use it. Okay that's nice to hear your opinion, I will be waiting for you to find it and take a picture of it. Or do you plan to just complain about it? Better then having nothing. STATic message me! 00:47, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bound 2. 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) 01:44, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception?[edit]

I know this was discussed above but that was years ago so time to bring it back: Where is the mention of negative reception? It's got more dislikes than likes on YouTube and is often considered one of the worst songs of all time; I agree the critics are biased. --Solitude6nv5 (talk) 09:40, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have referenced the YouTube likes and dislikes in the music video section with a source. --Kyle Peake (talk) 09:11, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know that this is considered to be one of the "worst songs of all time"? Can you give some sources? Lags331 (talk) 04:45, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]