Talk:X (Chris Brown album): Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 60.234.214.63 - "→Personality: " |
|||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
Yes, I apologise I did become subjective. But I disagree with you as to whether my point falls over, because I believe it still stands. Now, I will warn you, this is going to become rather subjective again, however, this does ultimately relate to the article, and that is how Chris Brown should be presented then regarded within it. This is a man who is no better than a con-artist with none of his own original ideas, it is called creativity. Creativity is something that is vital as an "artist". Thus, he should be regarded as not an artist, but as a personality, within the article. I would rather see him being regarded as a personality not artist but if you have the one other majority then I think we will leave it that fair and square. I still, unfortunately, disagree with you. Thank you and hopefully the album will be a success for everyones sakes. If not, I'm pretty sure some people are going to be held liable without a doubt but then we get in to the businsss end of what they do and your every day music fan is typically ignorant to that aspect of their work. Thank you again and have a nice day or night. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/60.234.214.63|60.234.214.63]] ([[User talk:60.234.214.63|talk]]) 05:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Yes, I apologise I did become subjective. But I disagree with you as to whether my point falls over, because I believe it still stands. Now, I will warn you, this is going to become rather subjective again, however, this does ultimately relate to the article, and that is how Chris Brown should be presented then regarded within it. This is a man who is no better than a con-artist with none of his own original ideas, it is called creativity. Creativity is something that is vital as an "artist". Thus, he should be regarded as not an artist, but as a personality, within the article. I would rather see him being regarded as a personality not artist but if you have the one other majority then I think we will leave it that fair and square. I still, unfortunately, disagree with you. Thank you and hopefully the album will be a success for everyones sakes. If not, I'm pretty sure some people are going to be held liable without a doubt but then we get in to the businsss end of what they do and your every day music fan is typically ignorant to that aspect of their work. Thank you again and have a nice day or night. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/60.234.214.63|60.234.214.63]] ([[User talk:60.234.214.63|talk]]) 05:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
I will go away and find out what I can do as in research I might need about two months oh and by the way, I wasn't actually being accusatory to Chris Brown. Like I wouldn't be accusatory to only Obama for being a terrible president and joined together like siamese twins to Ford. Okay, until next time now. |
Revision as of 23:33, 5 May 2013
Albums Unassessed | |||||||
|
Confirmed/Recorded tracks
I don't think we can say any tracks are as yet confirmed. The album comes out in 5-6 months and I doubt that the final album track list has been created. In an interview ([1]) there was said to be up to 50 candidate songs that may make the final album cut. So my point is that we should rename the section Confirmed tracks to Recorded tracks until we get an official track list. It's just not correct to state "Confirmed" at this time. --2nyte (talk) 02:24, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- I say check the tracks that are currently there. If it says in the source that the song will be on X or anything confirming it to be on the album then it should stay. Anything else should be removed. A recorded tracks section would be irrelevant as artists will sometimes record up to 100 songs in the development of an album. The only relevant songs would be the ones specifically stated to be on X. Also its more like 3 months not 5-6 so not as far off. STATic message me! 03:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- I can't see in any of the sources that the tracks were "confirmed" to be on the album. If you don't agree to change the title then I think we should remove the section because it is rather misleading. --2nyte (talk) 12:56, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- "He plays tracks from his new album including "X" and "Add Me In". He also says "Home" will be a bonus track. He also says "Feel That" is on the album. That is all from just this source [2] STATic message me! 16:31, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- I can't see in any of the sources that the tracks were "confirmed" to be on the album. If you don't agree to change the title then I think we should remove the section because it is rather misleading. --2nyte (talk) 12:56, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Album release date
I think the album release date is incorrect as I can't find any source that says it will be released in June. I have found many saying July/August/September, some included in the article. --2nyte (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- From just a couple days ago. Watch the video if it does not say it in the body of the article. [3] STATic message me! 16:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Edited article
eh? i don't understand? i come back to show friend but all the details have changed!!! is he really collaborating with lionel richie? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.91.195 (talk) 21:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Personality
I consider Chris Brown to be more of a music industry personality than a music industry artist. My girlfriend told me she read on dxhiphop.com that he was or still is currently, secretly recording with Lionel Richie. I think because he can dance but make quite simplified music however generally be quite talented on the street, he should be regarded as more a personality than artist in the article. I will propose that edit now but I think I will be declined as you probably find it offensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 19:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
I see my edit has once again been reverted. In that case then, can you please explain to me how exactly Chris Brown should be regarded as an "artist" rather than personality, in my mind, because he is clearly plagarasing other peoples work and getting extremely rich off of it. So rich in fact, he must have made Forbes magazine, then, I think worst of all, has the absolute arrogance to shove it in our faces. I might as well follow him to the bank with him high on laughing gas. We just want a valid explanation as to how you see Chris Brown. and why, without just, if I may, reverting our edits without saying a word. If you want to join me and discuss this in the talk page then I am quite willing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 03:54, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- You have no sources to back up your statements. What you are saying is completely subjective and it sounds like you're just being accusatory to Chris Brown. When editing on Wikipedia, a neutral approach should always be taken, and from a neutral perspective Chris Brown is considered a recording artist. I think that is why STATicVerseatide has undone your edits. Also, thanks for coming on the talk page to discuss this. If you have something further to add I'll be happy to respond. --2nyte (talk) 04:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- Just like 2nyte said, you have zero sources to back up your conspiracy claims, and frankly they do not belong on Wikipedia at all. Brown is clearly a recording artist, not whatever a "recording personality" is. See WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:RS before continuing to edit Wikipedia. STATic message me! 04:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I apologise I did become subjective. But I disagree with you as to whether my point falls over, because I believe it still stands. Now, I will warn you, this is going to become rather subjective again, however, this does ultimately relate to the article, and that is how Chris Brown should be presented then regarded within it. This is a man who is no better than a con-artist with none of his own original ideas, it is called creativity. Creativity is something that is vital as an "artist". Thus, he should be regarded as not an artist, but as a personality, within the article. I would rather see him being regarded as a personality not artist but if you have the one other majority then I think we will leave it that fair and square. I still, unfortunately, disagree with you. Thank you and hopefully the album will be a success for everyones sakes. If not, I'm pretty sure some people are going to be held liable without a doubt but then we get in to the businsss end of what they do and your every day music fan is typically ignorant to that aspect of their work. Thank you again and have a nice day or night. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 05:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I will go away and find out what I can do as in research I might need about two months oh and by the way, I wasn't actually being accusatory to Chris Brown. Like I wouldn't be accusatory to only Obama for being a terrible president and joined together like siamese twins to Ford. Okay, until next time now.