Talk:Greatest Hits... So Far!!! (Pink album): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:47, 21 January 2016

Albums Start‑class

	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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Tag

The bot added the tag when I have a redirect on the other page. Just a mistake. PinkFunhouse13 (talk) 22:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Hits... So Far! → Greatest Hits... So Far!!! —

Correct title as can be seen on album cover in article, as well as artist's official site, label's official site, Billboard, MTV News, Amazon.com, etc. Couldn't move it myself because the new title is on a blacklist or something? Yvesnimmo (talk) 05:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I was going to request this myself. Correct title. --12345abcxyz20082009 (talk) 19:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose MOS:TM, decorative punctuation. Though the three exclaimation version can be used as a redirect. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 02:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not decorative; decorative would be like Se7en or "TiK ToK" or P!nk. There are many articles with multiple exclamation points, including a band called !!!, their eponymous debut album, albums like !!!Fuck You!!! and Then Some and !!Destroy-Oh-Boy!!, and combinations of punctuation like albums ?!, Summer Days (And Summer Nights!!), Get Happy!!, songs "Woo Hah!! Got You All in Check" and "What's It Gonna Be?!", and the documentary ¿¡Revolución!?. There is even a GA: Super Punch-Out!!, one in a series of similarly named games. This is the proper name reported by the record label and multiple other reliable, verifiable sources, some of which are given above. Yvesnimmo (talk) 03:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support. TBSfan1223 (talk) 07:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Track listing

As of now, only the tracklists of the Australian CD and the deluxe edition bonus DVD have been officially confirmed. Apart from the tracklist announced on pinkspage.com, which is specifically for the Australian edition, I have seen at least two different CD tracklists that appear to be official.--130.226.70.114 (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

Shouldn't the name of the article be "Greatest Hits... So Far!!!" and not "Greatest Hits... So Far!" ?? that's the way it is written on the album cover. MariAna_MiMi (Talk) 21:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The proposal is above. :) Yvesnimmo (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Most Girls

Why wasn't Most Girls included? It wasn't exactly a flop. Tooironic (talk) 22:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Track Listing

Tracks 14 and 15: "Funhouse" and "I Don't Believe You" aren't on my edition of the CD i bought. Which version is this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.99.187.80 (talk) 10:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've the got the same thing. I updated the page to reflect this error.

Looks like my copy is the international version without Hearthbreak Down and my DVD copy is the american one.... WTH?!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.149.137.143 (talk) 01:18, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 01:35, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Hits... So Far!!! → Greatest Hits... So Far!!! (Pink album) – Predictably, as happens with all generic song/album titles, someone else released a similar product with name indistingishable to the common reader: Greatest Hits So Far. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:39, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support the stylisation is not sufficient to distinguish. Gregkaye ✍♪ 18:59, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. When someone else releases an album under the same title, we can move the article, but right now it's the only specific name of an album and there is no need for that. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 19:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tomica. This is not only article with this title , please see dab page. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose like Tomica said, only article with this title. Too early for a move. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:32, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:SNUGGUMS. This is not only article with this title , please see dab page. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The only one with !'s, though. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:44, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:SNUGGUMS so how is the common reader meant to know that !!! = Pink, and no !!! = Zac Brown Band. This is just decoration on the album cover. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:48, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support You've got to go by the name over stylization. Also recommend moving the PIL album article since "the" is not much of a disambiguator. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:08, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support moving this and the PIL album per User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. — AjaxSmack 02:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per the nominator's rationale. ╠╣uw [talk] 09:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 19 January 2016

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

– This title contains elipsis before "So Far" and is then followed by THREE exclamation marks, whilst the Zac Brown Band album solely has elipsis at the end of the full title. No one in their right mind is going to type in three exclamation marks and expect to end up anywhere other than at the Pink album. Unreal7 (talk) 21:43, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; I'm thinking that the names are similar enough that the parenthetical disambiguation is a good idea to avoid confusion. Not everyone is a big enough pink fan to know how many exclamation points the title has. InsertCleverPhraseHere ^{InsertTalkHere} 23:39, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose per ICPH above. MOS:TM playful punctuation differences should not be used. These should all redirect to Greatest Hits So Far, and "The Greatest Hits, So Far" should be moved to add parenthetical disambiguation as well. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:57, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose totally anti-User. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I, like the great majority of readers, have never heard of these two albums, and should I ever be interested in one of them I will rely on sources to find, but would I count or even notice the number of exclamation marks? Would the exclamation marks be on the source? Wouldn't I, like everybody else, go to the ZB album first, even though I am looking for the Pink album? Let's get people to the article they want. I also note it's only three months since the RM that moved the article to this title and the result was quite convincing then--Richhoncho (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. We distinguish some titles by capitalization differences alone, and rightfully so. These are two topics each with a similar but unique title. Since they are unique, no matter how similar, there is no justification for disambiguation. Whether you or anyone else has "heard of" these albums is irrelevant. These are the titles used in reliable sources; that's all that matters. It's not our fault that they are relatively obscure, nor is it our job to address this by adding descriptive information to the titles. --В²C ☎ 20:23, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose These are only unique based on stylization not on the title itself. A disambiguator is quite helpful in these cases. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Per WP:SMALLDETAILS policy, "small details are usually sufficient to distinguish topics". How is a disambiguator "helpful" when the two titles are unique? WP:DISAMBIGUATION is for disambiguating titles that are identical, not titles that are similar, even if the only distinction is stylization. --В²C ☎ 00:38, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - It also says this is for "when typographically near-identical expressions have distinct meanings". That doesn't apply here as these both fall under the same topic of music albums, thus not a distinct meaning. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:37, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Sorry, but I disagree with your interpretation. The bottom line is that the only reason for WP:DISAMBIGUATION is because WP articles must have unique titles for the technical reason that we use the titles as part of the URLs (which must be unique) to access the articles. If not for that technical reason, we would not need to disambiguate at all. The planet and element Mercury could both be titled Mercury, for example. But in this case we already have unique titles; therefore no reason whatsoever to disambiguate. --В²C ☎ 03:02, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that WP:SMALLDETAILS "policy" (?) has been messed around by a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS of 2 or 3 editors to say the opposite of what most of Wikipedia actually does, which is not to include stylisms as the more normal titling behaviour noted by User:Richhoncho,User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars above. It probably needs an RFC to restore WP:SMALLDETAILS so the article corpus dog is wagging the guideline tail rather than vice versa, the current misleading state of WP:SMALLDETAILS is potentially destabilizing. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 85: / Line 85: @@
 ***It also says this is for "when typographically near-identical expressions have distinct meanings". That doesn't apply here as these both fall under the same topic of music albums, thus not a distinct meaning. --<font color="blue">Star</font><font color="orange">cheers</font><font color="green">peaks</font><font color="red">news</font><font color="black">lost</font><font color="blue">wars</font><sup>[[User talk:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars|Talk to me]]</sup> 01:37, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 ****Sorry, but I disagree with your interpretation. The bottom line is that the only reason for [[WP:DISAMBIGUATION]] is because WP articles must have unique titles for the technical reason that we use the titles as part of the URLs (which must be unique) to access the articles. If not for that technical reason, we would not need to disambiguate at all.  The planet and element Mercury could both be titled '''Mercury''', for example.  But in this case we already have unique titles; therefore no reason whatsoever to disambiguate.  --[[User:Born2cycle|В²C]] [[User_talk:Born2cycle#top|☎]] 03:02, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
+:::Note that [[WP:SMALLDETAILS]] "policy" (?) has been messed around by a [[WP:LOCALCONSENSUS]] of 2 or 3 editors to say the opposite of what most of Wikipedia actually does, which is not to include stylisms as the more normal titling behaviour noted by [[User:Richhoncho]],[[User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars]] above. It probably needs an RFC to restore [[WP:SMALLDETAILS]] so the article corpus dog is wagging the guideline tail rather than vice versa, the current misleading state of [[WP:SMALLDETAILS]] is potentially destabilizing. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 08:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)