Talk:I Wanna Be a Hippy
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on I Wanna Be A Hippy. 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:
- Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5hFf8iFDu?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishcharts.ie%2Fsearch%2Fplacement to http://www.irishcharts.ie/search/placement
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) 10:32, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Charts position in the UK
[edit]Currently, the peak position for "I want to be a hippie" is listed as position 77. That's not correct if I understand the charts information at https://www.officialcharts.com/search/singles/i-wanna-be-a-hippy/ correctly: It seems that it entered the UK charts twice, once in October 1995 and later in February 1996 (click on the "Chart Facts"-button on that page in order to have more details listed).
The highest position for the first run was indeed number 77, as currently listed in the Wiki page. However, the highest position for the second chart entry was number 6.
Hence, I think the charts infobox should be adjusted, provided I haven't been a victim of some misunderstanding on my part. 2A02:810B:4040:2A00:92E:F88:5538:E105 (talk) 00:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)