Teflon Peter Christ (talk | contribs) |
|||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 33:
# It doesn't matter that it is "literally two words", [[MOS:PUFF]] brings "acclaimed" as an example of puffery. Adding "despite not being a surprise release" is not puffery, but it should have been re-worded so that it is reads more neutrally. Explaining the differences between albums that are variably described as surprise albums or not and saying that Beyoncé is credited with popularizing the surprise album are not puffery either, and are actually necessary in this article for it to be encyclopedic.
# Yes there was. For example, the "pulling a Beyoncé" phrase is a common term used to described surprise albums, and again is necessary in this article for it to be encyclopedic. [[User:Bgkc4444|Bgkc4444]] ([[User talk:Bgkc4444|talk]]) 11:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
== Removal of sourced material ==
{{ping|Fezmar9}} Why did you remove all the well-sourced infomation and re-add information that shouldn't belong in the article? I don't see how adding material that explains the history of various artists' surprise albums in an article about surprise albums cited to reliable sources can be considered as contravening NPOV and OR. Saying "these edits cast doubt on the legitimacy of other releases as true surprise releases and disproportionately boost Beyonce's prominence" doesn't make much sense because all material is cited to reliable sources; if reliable sources focus on Beyonce when writing about surprise albums and clarify in what way each album is a surprise, then that is what the article needs to include in order to be encyclopedic, [[WP:NPOV|no matter if you personally dislike those facts]]. [[User:Bgkc4444|Bgkc4444]] ([[User talk:Bgkc4444|talk]]) 16:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
|
Revision as of 17:05, 10 December 2020
Albums C‑class | |||||||
|
Beyonce & Definition of "Surprise"
With these edits[1][2][3] StatsFreak has edited or reverted to a previous edit that (a) cast a light on other artists suggesting their albums were not true surprises only "loose surprises" which is not supported by any source, (b) suggested Beyonce is the only artist to ever release a true surprise album, (c) suggested that her surprise album is the reason albums are now released on Friday (this has nothing to do with the surprise nature of the release, just that it was released on a Friday, making this a totally irrelevant fact) and (d) in a very Kanye West move StatsFreak completely deleted Taylor Swift's entire paragraph without explanation despite her album Folklore being widely considered to be a significant surprise release.
StatsFreak's edit comments suggest a true surprise has zero mention prior to release. This strict definition would actually exclude Beyonce's 2013 self-titled album because she began talking about it a year ahead of its release[4][5] then Ne-Yo gave an update on the album in June[6] then MTV started putting the promotional pieces together about what Beyonce was up to[7] and Vulture even guessed she might release a surprise album the week it was officially released.[8] That doesn't sound very surprise-y to me. Instead, I think this page should adopt a less strict definition where an album sees minimal promotion or announcement (not zero) and we should just stick to what reliable sources say are surprises or not surprises. The "Reception" section currently includes commentary about how the term is ill-defined. Fezmar9 (talk) 20:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- StatsFreak is correct. It is questionable whether these albums can be considered a true "surprise album". There is a difference between an album that was announced ten days before release (e.g. In Rainbows) and an album that was not announced before release (e.g. Beyoncé). As Lindsay Zoladz for Vulture wrote here, "Artists like Radiohead and David Bowie had previously toyed with secret recording sessions and unconventional release strategies, but the day the bubble truly burst was December 13, 2013 — when Beyoncé “changed the game with that digital drop” (as she later put it in her guest verse on Nicki Minaj’s “Feeling Myself”) and released her blockbuster self-titled visual album with no prior promotion". If we are to leave these more grey-area albums in this article, then it needs to be explained clearly how they are surprise albums, what their release strategies were and why they are considered notable albums in the history of the surprise album.
- Additionally, Taylor Swift's folklore is not a notable album in the history of the surprise album. There is no reason for it to be added in the history section. I get that if one really likes Taylor Swift they may want to write a lot about her where it may not be necessary or relevant, but we need this article to be neutral and for everything to be treated with due weight. Bgkc4444 (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
- It is your personal opinion that these other albums constitute a "grey area". All albums added here are well sourced as surprise albums. Fezmar9 (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- As the source I brought says, those albums had secret recording sessions and unconventional release strategies, not surprise releases. I personally agree that these other albums should be included in this article, but StatsFreak did have genuine concerns and it's best to gain consensus on this issue instead of edit warring with each other. Again, if we are to leave these albums in, we should be making it clear in what way they are surprise albums so readers can understand the evolution of the surprise album. Bgkc4444 (talk) 09:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
- It is your personal opinion that these other albums constitute a "grey area". All albums added here are well sourced as surprise albums. Fezmar9 (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- According to how the lead defines "surprise album," there is no difference between an album that was announced ten days before release and an album that was not announced before release. "refers to the release of an album with extremely minimal or no prior announcement, marketing or promotion." isento (talk) 05:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- The Folklore paragraph might be a bit too long on detail for this article's focus - I'd ditch or condense the last two quotes. Otherwise, reliable sources seem to connect the release to the surprise-album phenomenon ("Taylor Swift Finally Abandoned the Traditional Album Rollout", Rolling Stone). isento (talk) 05:26, 4 September 2020 hutch
- Isento! Curious to see you follow me to a third talk page discussion! Yes, that's what the lead said (before you changed it) but just because one editor added that doesn't mean that everyone agrees. Regarding folklore, the point of the prominent surprise albums section is to lay out the albums connected to the surprise-album phenomenon. This article should not contain puffery-filled advertisements for specific projects. I kindly ask you to stop making edits to material if we are in the middle of a discussion on that material. Thank you! Bgkc4444 (talk) 09:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
- @Bgkc4444:, Please stay on-topic and keep your personal quarrels on your talk page? BawinV (talk) 09:54, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Bgkc4444: I don't know why you would think you have a say in deciding which surprise albums are notable enough or not... That's the media's job. Not mine or yours. A multitude of news and media publications have labelled folklore a surprise album, with a huge media coverage of its announcement and release and eventually top the Billboard 200 for 5 consecutive weeks. So, please don't WP:SYNTH on its notability. The article was neutral and due-weighted until StatsFreak showed up and decided to turn it into a extremely biased, puffed, Beyoncé-centred article, synthesizing other albums are pseudo surprise releases. BawinV (talk) 10:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- @BawinV: Woah neither of us is doing anything of the sort. Again, the source I brought says that Radiohead's (and by extension others') releases were more secret recordings and unconventional strategies rather than a surprise album per se. However, I agree with you that these albums should be considered surprise albums, but as we are aware that there is no consensus on the exact definition, we should be making it clear how the concept of the surprise album has evolved and why each album is considered a surprise album. I never said that folklore is not a surprise album so I'm not sure why you'd say that, and congrats on the number one but I'm not sure how that's relevant. There is a section specifically for listing prominent surprise albums, which for the reasons you stated, folklore belongs in. The history section is intended to relay the history of the surprise album, not the history of every album that is a prominent surprise album. If there is information in reliable sources about why the release of folklore is a significant moment in the history of the surprise album then please bring that here, instead of adding puffery to the article such as the "much acclaim" the album received, which again is relevant to the history of the specific album but not to the history of the surprise album. I also don't understand why you removed all of StatsFreak's additions, because there was some well-sourced and relevant material in there. Bgkc4444 (talk) 10:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
- 1. "The history section is intended to relay the history of the surprise album, not the history of every album that is a prominent surprise album". The History of Surprise Albums itself is a cumulative story of how surprise albums came to existence by each of the surprise releases in the industry. I don't know how you find that irrelevant, because it's not like someone "discovered" Surprise albums, like Benjamin discovered electricity. It's a collective story, and every surprise album adds to the History.
2. "much acclaim" is literally two words. Puffery is adding "despite not being a surprise release" to Radiohead's album, creating a section separately for Beyoncé the album, and glorifying that specific album, while labelling the rest as either faux-surprises or as an outcome of Beyoncé, these are known as PUFFERY. 3. There wasn't any well-sourced, relevant material in StatsFreak's edit. It was all extreme puffery that is unsuitable per Wikipedia standards. BawinV (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Don't waste your energy on this person, BawinV. Their repetitive gobbledygook and toxic, condescending suggestions are of no consequence to this article. Let them get it out of their system and we can return to actually improving this article. isento (talk) 11:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- The history section is the collective story of albums that have shaped the concept of the surprise album throughout its history, not the history of every album that is a surprise album, as not every surpise album shaped the concept of the surprise album. This is comparable to a similar article about a music-related technique, backmasking, whereby the history section delineates how the concept of backmasking evolved throughout its history via the specific recordings which shaped the concept, while the use section delineates the different examples of recordings that use backmasking. If readers wanted to learn about specific surprise albums, there is a list of prominent surprise albums in this article with links to the respective articles. We need to keep this section relevant to the history of the surprise album specifically.
- It doesn't matter that it is "literally two words", MOS:PUFF brings "acclaimed" as an example of puffery. Adding "despite not being a surprise release" is not puffery, but it should have been re-worded so that it is reads more neutrally. Explaining the differences between albums that are variably described as surprise albums or not and saying that Beyoncé is credited with popularizing the surprise album are not puffery either, and are actually necessary in this article for it to be encyclopedic.
- Yes there was. For example, the "pulling a Beyoncé" phrase is a common term used to described surprise albums, and again is necessary in this article for it to be encyclopedic. Bgkc4444 (talk) 11:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
Removal of sourced material
@Fezmar9: Why did you remove all the well-sourced infomation and re-add information that shouldn't belong in the article? I don't see how adding material that explains the history of various artists' surprise albums in an article about surprise albums cited to reliable sources can be considered as contravening NPOV and OR. Saying "these edits cast doubt on the legitimacy of other releases as true surprise releases and disproportionately boost Beyonce's prominence" doesn't make much sense because all material is cited to reliable sources; if reliable sources focus on Beyonce when writing about surprise albums and clarify in what way each album is a surprise, then that is what the article needs to include in order to be encyclopedic, no matter if you personally dislike those facts. Bgkc4444 (talk) 16:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)