Talk:Between You and Me (DC Talk song)

Between 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
Date	Process	Result
November 12, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Christian music Mid‑importance

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

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Which version do I have?

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]

External links modified

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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110323103415/http://www.doveawards.com/history.php?x=artist to http://doveawards.com/history.php?x=artist

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

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]