Talk:Nightride (album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mixtape or album?[edit]

There seems to be some disagreement on whether Nightride is a mixtape or album. Personally, I believe it is an album, per many of the sources.

Thanks, TheKaphox T 21:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe that it is a digital album.

Seems that the initial categorization as a mixtape is being corrected by Tinashe's team, judging by the recent edits to "digital album." It's also a bit dodgy to refer to something released by RCA, on major streaming sites, and for money on iTunes/Amazon as a "mixtape." — Preceding unsigned comment added by ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another Rolling Stone article (written to parallel their interview and to announce Nightride) referring to it as an LP: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tinashe-releases-15-song-new-project-nightride-w447708

contribs) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another: http://www.hotnewhiphop.com/tinashe-nightride-video-new-video.38977.html This was originally "mixtape," but changed to "album" and then tweeted by Tinashe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
More sources referring to it as a mixtape:
And there's countless more. In addition to the four additional sources, that makes 12 WP:RS sources that refer to Nightride as a mixtape. TheKaphox T 21:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that the recent sources are saying "digital album" and major ones, such as Billboard and Rolling Stone, have both corrected themselves to say that as well. It appears the original report of a "mixtape" last night was incorrect and is being corrected as evidenced by sources. https://twitter.com/NicolaRoberts/status/794624716002721792 - from a collaborator on the album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
They are all from the same date, November 4th. There is no difference for the reliability of the sources. I have updated the article with the references I have given thus far. Thanks, TheKaphox T 22:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the number of sources is not the determinate. It's contingent on contemporaneity and relevance. As Billboard and Rolling Stone are major sources and have both edited recently to reflect the artist's wishes, they are the most relevant sources we have to go by.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/entertainthis/2016/11/04/surprise-tinashe-new-album-nightride-joyride/93281482/ USA Today also confirmed Rolling Stone interview in calling it a double-LP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
MTV has updated in response to the interview as well: http://www.mtv.com/news/2951699/tinashe-nightride-short-film/
Fuse has also updated to call it the sister project of Joyride: http://www.fuse.tv/2016/11/tinashe-nightride-lyrics?campaign=scl%7Ctwt%7Cfsc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 22:47, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is just a mixtape, not an album. A mixtape for purchase like If You're Reading This It's Too Late. — MUST BE Love on the Brain. 15:01, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RfC[edit]

Should Nightride be labelled as a mixtape or digital album (or similar)? TheKaphox T 22:24, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

  • Summoned by bot. After a perfunctory search I found the work appears to be mostly referred to as a mixtape. Thake that as you will. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 20:54, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Credible sources coming from label/singer interviews seem to refer it as the first LP of a double-album. ilovetati9101:27, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Album - Summoned by bot. Although reliable sources refer to it as both a "mixtape" and "album", we should use the latter. Meatsgains (talk) 04:58, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Threaded discussion[edit]

Discussion doesn't work like this. We must agree and also support contemporary and relevant sources as well as respect the artist's input. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 22:30, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How are you trying to tell people how to discuss properly when you can even sign your comments or indent your responses correctly? Its perfectly acceptable to do an RFC on this. People can look over the sources presented above and give their opinion on the matter. Sergecross73 msg me 00:52, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Resorting to personal comments only makes the flaws of an argument more apparent. And of course I wasn't saying that people aren't allowed to discuss/respond to sources. I was saying that you cannot determine the answer to the question of mixtape vs. album based on a "survey" of responses. The majority opinion is not the determinate, but the consensus with respect to relevant and updated sources...as well as the artist's input. And in this case all signs point to album following the Rolling Stone interview and revised articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that you need to slow down and learn the basics before you go lecturing about whether or not an RFC/survey is appropriate. Because your advice isn't helpful. Creating RFCs are encouraged when there's conflicting views on how to present content in an article. So please, stop complaining, and focus on reiterating your stance here. Sergecross73 msg me 02:50, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've been editing for years...I understand the basics. Whether or not I let a bot sign for me is irrelevant to this discussion. Again, I agree that requesting for comments is a valid response. I have said three times now that it's simply the survey section of this particular one that cannot be used to determine the result. Majority opinion on a piece of objective information/content does not work and attempts to implement subjectivity into Wikipedia's objective-as-possible approach. The bottom line is that she spoke with Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tinashe-releases-15-song-new-project-nightride-w447708), dubbed the project an album, and they have since been referring to it as an LP along with her wishes (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/tinashe-releases-15-song-new-project-nightride-w447708). Stating facts isn't complaining just because they don't align with your personal opinion. ----Ilovetati91 (talk 23:04, 4 November 2016 (EST)
A survey section is merely where people separate their ultimate stance from all the rambling discussions. It makes zero sense to say that an RFC is valid but a survey section is not. It's just there for the sake of readability. The consensus is still read from the entire discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 11:19, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Genius' use as a source[edit]

There is a question over the use of Genius as a source. While I am sure there are others that are more reliable per Wikipedia's standards, until they can be cited, Genius should remain as the suitable source, unless there is discussion otherwise. livelikemusic talk! 19:16, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable FOR CREDITS per Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Anonpediann (talk) 19:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I might have just to as well agree with Livelikemusic there that "Genius" can be used as a source and having the sources that you posted below are not reliable sources and they cannot be used per WP:NOTSOCIALMEDIA. Musicedit98 (talk) 19:49, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, I have just registered an account on the website, and I don't seem to be able the credits anyway. I can edit descriptions, but you seemingly need to be a "reliable" or "trusted" editor to edit the actual credits. Moreover, none of the credits had any citations when I added the Genius citation - so it's better than not having anything. TheKaphox T 19:52, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unreliable due to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums#Genius as a reliable source. Anonpediann (talk) 20:04, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unreliable also due to Wikipedia:RS. If there's no answer i'll suppose you agree and have no point on deffending this. Anonpediann (talk) 21:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@TheKaphox: Do you know where they get their info? Usually, credits don't need to be cited as such because they will be in the liner notes. Are they this time? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:03, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are no liner notes, as this is not receiving a physical compact disc release; it is a digital-only release. livelikemusic talk! 22:05, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: And digital credits are wrong because some of the songs have different writers as noted in the past release of the same songs. I tried to link them to the Twitter confirmation of the verified producer, but they say it can be used without a solid fundament. You know about it? Anonpediann (talk) 22:18, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: and ASCAP or BMI credits from the few songs registered are in the record are also different from Genius ones, which proofs Genius is wrong and unreliable. See Sacrifices on BMI. Anonpediann (talk) 22:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonpediann: Usually we don't use self-published sources but strictly speaking, they aren't always inappropriate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:47, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: it is a fact that genius is edited mostly (i mean, some confirmed verified artist explain there their lyrics and how they made a song) by random users that aren't music journalist or that have no knowedge in who produced or written tracks that aren't completly credited anywhere. There's no debate in here, Genius is unreliable. Anonpediann (talk) 16:40, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf: proof:
Company credits according to Qbuzz
Tinashé, Associated Performer, Main Artist - Terius Nash, Composer, Lyricist - The-Dream, Keyboards, Programmer - Terius "The-Dream" Nash, Producer - Mischke, Vocal Producer - Nathaniel Alford, Recording Engineer - Jeremy Brown, Assistant Engineer - Fletcher Vaughn, Assistant Engineer - William Lovely, Assistant Engineer - Jaycen Joshua, Mixing Engineer - Maddox Chhim, Assistant Engineer - Dave Nakaji, Assistant Engineer
Company credits according to Genius
Written by The-Dream, Tinashe
Produced by Makeba Riddik & The-Dream
Anonpediann (talk) 16:51, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Anonpediann: I agreed with you on WT:ALBUM--we are on the same page about Genius. I meant Twitter--we generally don't use self-published sources, but they are not entirely forbidden. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:53, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Album credits per Twitter confirmation[edit]

These cannot be used, as per WP:SOCIALMEDIA, if the tweet(s) in-question mention third-parties, they cannot be referenced. livelikemusic talk! 19:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Liner notes, by definition, are included in the packaging of a CD jewel case. I don't understand what you mean. TheKaphox T 19:48, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Anonpediann: Could you please explain how you found these credits via iTunes? Thanks. TheKaphox T 20:06, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Especially since Tidal only lists Tinashe for the entirety of the credits. livelikemusic talk! 20:07, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's what i mean, credits are messed up. In Tidal Tinashe is even credited as the only composer in tracks registered in ASCAP or previously released with correct credits. The only way to put them up is using producers Twitter confirmations. Anonpediann (talk) 20:10, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
They cannot be used per the linked policy on social media accounts. livelikemusic talk! 20:17, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're not reading it correctly. Social media, and first party sources in general, can be used sparingly, to detail basic, objective facts. Things like a release date, for example. Is there something particularly subjective or controversial about these credits? That would probably determine its usability here. Sergecross73 msg me 20:54, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73: yes. The credits of the album are messed up. I mean, all credits Tinashe as a composer while in other credited releases of some of the songs in it others authors were noted. The album is not planed to be released physically anyway. Some of the producers confirmed, as i noted above their envolvement in the album. Could this be used as a source? Thank you. 21:47, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As long as we know that these are definitely the respective person's Twitter accounts, and there's nothing directly contradicting it (not the lack of listing, but someone, like the artist literally saying it's not true) then I'd support using it temporarily, with the hope that third party sources or notes directly from the release artist confirm it as well. Sergecross73 msg me 22:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
TIDAL is directly contradicting any of those tweets; they merely list Tinashe as the only composer/author of these songs. livelikemusic talk! 22:38, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
While ASCAP or BMI notes that, for example, Sacrifices, Touch Pass or previously released songs with correct digital credits as Company or Party Flavors have different songwriters, which mean digital credits are wrong. Anonpediann (talk) 22:43, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The absence of info isn't necessarily direct contradiction. Some credits are merely less in-depth. Sergecross73 msg me 13:21, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not in this case because, Tinashe didn't wrote Company according to the revealed credits on Deezer of the digital release of the song. Anonpediann (talk) 16:47, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not the 2nd album, just a mixtape[edit]

Available for only for digital download, no CD release, no promo. A lot of reasons why this is just a mixtape. — MUST BE Love on the Brain. 02:55, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no strong thoughts on whether it's an album or mixtape either way, but just saying: an album doesn't need to be released physically to be a studio album. That might give credibility to that claim, but that's like saying that songs have to be released physically to be singles. The music world has moved on from a "physical is the main form of consumption" standpoint. Ss112 20:39, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's just like Back to the Woods (album). — MUST BE Love on the Brain. 16:23, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney buses[edit]

The bus service is more notable than this album in books. In ictu oculi (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nightride_(album)&oldid=1220599962"