Talk:These Words

These Words 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
May 17, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
February 14, 2010	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

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

Pop music Mid‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

"not about sex or relationships"?

Isn't it a bit strange to claim that a song that has "I love you" in its chorus that often (and even in its American title) is "one of the few songs of popular music in recent history to deal with a very sensitive subject that is not about sex or relationships"?! --Fritz Saalfeld 11:03, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The song is not about sex or relationships. "I love you" is the only term in the song that relates to anything in the "romance" area. Also, the lyrics are clearly about writer's block, but "I love you" just happens to be the words Bedingfield comes up with. Otherwise, nothing in this track relates to sex or love. --Winnermario 20:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good article

I am happy to report that this is a good article. Congrats to all the editors.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 18:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -- Underneath-it-All 18:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Addition

Should something be added about the fact that Bedingfield has confused what a romantic poet is in her lyircs? It is kind of funny.

Now I think about it something should be added about the entire concept of the song - that notion that saying "I love you" is not worth of writing, it means the most to someone, but to the third person it means nothing. Disco 06:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- or perhaps that the song is about her not being able to write a song, when the song itself was written by quite a few other writers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.23.56.12 (talk) 00:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperbole

Each time I insert a paragraph about the mispronunciation of "hyperbole" in the song, and references to the discussion this raised in written media, it is erased. Is this not an interesting/important point? Thedoctor98 (talk) 03:59, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on These Words. 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) 10:41, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on These Words. 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) 12:16, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]