Talk:A Public Affair

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Pop music Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Very subjective statement[edit]

"The album was poorly received by fans and saw very low sales." Very low sales compared to what? A very bias statement. Maybe something like "The album was poorly received by many fans and saw very low sales in comparison to her other albums." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bassguiboy (talk • contribs) 23:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Between You And I[edit]

I can't believe she could name a song this. It's between you and me, at least among anyone who's completed high school. I haven't seen such a prominent case of this dumb mistake since the Backstreet Boys sang in their song Darlin' in their self-titled album, "...that it can be for you and I". (In that case, it should have been for you and me, and as a free bonus, me would then rhyme with be!) Reswobslc 21:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The discussions pages on wikipedia are used for users to talk about the page, like how it can be improved and problems. This is not a discussion board and not used for personal opinions Generation talk123 02:25, 31 December 2006

If that's even true, then I suppose my talk page, and not this page, is the correct place to assert a rule you don't even follow yourself. (example example). But I suppose you're right - my comment about her song title can't make it or the article any better, as the blunder is set in stone on her CD, and there's not much more anyone can say about it. Reswobslc 03:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that was times when I just started using wikipedia and was not completely clear on the rules, I did not turn this into an arguement. I was just providing information, so if you want to argue go somewhere else, I am just making it clear that I am only replying to a message that needs commenting on. Have a nice day. Generation talk123 23:18, 1 January 2007

Sources[edit]

Where does it say "Fired Up" will be the third single as there doesn't seem to be a reference [proof] to this being the third single. Also is it necessary to include the lyrics? Generation talk123 02:29, 31 December 2006

== It is not her highest chart position In This Skin is and she is recording a new album.

add the hebrew wikipedia[edit]

there is a page about this ablum of jessica at the hebrew wikipedia too...you should add it... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.109.39.143 (talk) 17:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Orphaned references in A Public Affair[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of A Public Affair's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Slant":

From Do You Know (Jessica Simpson album): Slant Magazine review
From A Public Affair (song): "Jessica Simpson: A Public Affair - Music Review - Slant Magazine". Slant Magazine. Cinqueman, Sal. 25-08-06. Retrieved 07-02-14. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |date= (help)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 11:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on A Public Affair. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20121024210234/http://australian-charts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Jessica+Simpson&titel=A+Public+Affair&cat=a to http://australian-charts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Jessica+Simpson&titel=A+Public+Affair&cat=a

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 19:29, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on A Public Affair. 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) 01:54, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]