Talk:Love. Angel. Music. Baby.: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:23, 24 January 2009

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

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

Love. Angel. Music. Baby. is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

Love. Angel. Music. Baby. is the main article in the Love. Angel. Music. Baby. series, a good topic. It is also part of the Gwen Stefani albums series, a good topic. These are identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve them, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 29, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 13, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
March 20, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
March 26, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
May 9, 2007	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
July 7, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
July 30, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
September 3, 2008	Featured topic candidate	Promoted
Current status: Featured article

Archives

/Archive1

Genre wars

Ridiculous. This album is now four years old and information about it should be well-established. Edit-warring about detailed definitions is disruptive to the the encyclopedia, let alone pissing me off beyond belief, and especially when sockpuppets keep on changing it to their own tastes. I've replaced the unreliably-sourced list with one that IS reliably-sourced. Having said that, there seems to be a confusion about the difference between genre and style; the album taken as a whole has a reliably-sourced genre, whereas individual tracks may exhibit variations of style within that genre. I'm not going to fully-protect this article right now, but if any more unreliably-sourced (and that includes completely unsourced) genres appear in the infobox, I'll lock it immediately. anyone changing the genre field without citing a source is liable to be blocked. --Rodhull andemu 21:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pissed off too. — Realist² 21:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's dance-pop, it should be done. It's not rock at all, so fuck that stupid article. Why are we basing Wiki pages around biased sources? Who cares if it's sourced, it doesn't mean it's true. The sky isn't pink just because a reliable source says it is. 71.59.189.46 (talk) 07:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 Ridiculous. This album is now four years old and information about it should be well-established. Edit-warring about detailed definitions is disruptive to the the encyclopedia, let alone pissing me off beyond belief, and especially when sockpuppets keep on changing it to their own tastes. I've replaced the unreliably-sourced list with one that IS reliably-sourced. Having said that, there seems to be a confusion about the difference between '''genre''' and '''style'''; the album taken as a whole has a reliably-sourced '''genre''', whereas individual tracks may exhibit variations of '''style''' within that genre. I'm not going to fully-protect this article right now, but if any more [[WP:RS|unreliably-sourced]] (and that includes [[WP:V|completely unsourced]]) genres appear in the infobox, I'll lock it immediately. anyone changing the genre field without citing a source is liable to be blocked. --[[User:Rodhullandemu|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#0000FF">Rodhull</span>]][[User_talk:Rodhullandemu|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#FF0000">andemu</span>]] 21:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 :[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music#Time_to_remove_genre_section_on_info_box.3F I'm pissed off too]. — [[User:Realist2|<span style="color:#4173E4">'''''Realist'''''</span>]][[User_talk:Realist2|<span style="color:#D80B0B"><sup>'''''2'''''</sup></span>]] 21:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
+It's dance-pop, it should be done.  It's not rock at all, so fuck that stupid article.  Why are we basing Wiki pages around biased sources?  Who cares if it's sourced, it doesn't mean it's true.  The sky isn't pink just because a reliable source says it is.  [[Special:Contributions/71.59.189.46|71.59.189.46]] ([[User talk:71.59.189.46|talk]]) 07:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)