Talk:Lana Del Rey: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
KyleJoan (talk | contribs)
Line 72: Line 72:
*'''BCDI'''. [[User:jumpropeking([[User talk:jumpropeking]]) 11:10 12 October 2019 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/104.138.226.213|104.138.226.213]] ([[User talk:104.138.226.213#top|talk]]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*'''BCDI'''. [[User:jumpropeking([[User talk:jumpropeking]]) 11:10 12 October 2019 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/104.138.226.213|104.138.226.213]] ([[User talk:104.138.226.213#top|talk]]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
*'''BCDFI'''. [[User:ilovetati91|ilovetati91]] ([[User talk:ilovetati91|talk]]) 03:14, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
*'''BCDFI'''. [[User:ilovetati91|ilovetati91]] ([[User talk:ilovetati91|talk]]) 03:14, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
*'''ADBIF'''. Prioritize the general genres, then get more specific. [[User:KyleJoan|<span style="font-family:Consolas; color:#CD8C95">'''K'''yle'''J'''oan</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:KyleJoan|<span style="font-family:Consolas; color:#8B7D7B">talk</span>]]</sup> 10:35, 14 October 2019 (UTC)


===Discussion===
===Discussion===

Revision as of 10:35, 14 October 2019

Template:Vital article Template:Not forum

when should the Norman Fucking Rockwell redirect be removed and the article be recreated?

so far 3 songs from the upcoming album have been released. i think there is enough coverage to redo the article for the album, even as as a stub. the track list section would be difficult though, because the full list has not been confirmed by Lana (social media) or anywhere like itunes and spotify. im asking here because NFR currently redirects here. thoughts? Melodies1917 (talk) 17:16, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

She might release the long player as a gift for her 34 birthday. Most likely when the article gets resurrected from a vanishing nonexistence. It will make sense that her ahem unofficial debut under her birth name of Lizzy Grant began the string of decades known as the 10s. Lastly Adele's fourth will end the decade namely December 27.

Night,

67.81.163.178 (talk) 22:32, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2019

<! genre= baroque pop. Stupidpianist (talk) 22:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done That genre is already present. General Ization Talk 22:40, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'Queen of Indie Pop

Is it really justifiable- right at the top of the article, no less- to state 'the media' considers her 'the queen of indie pop', simply on the basis of one provided source (and, at that, not a particularly high-level one; a Singaporean fashion magazine? It'd maybe be a little different if it were the New York Times, or something!)? I mean, I get this article was probably mainly worked on by people who like her rather than hate her, but still... The total Google search results for this phrase in conjunction with LDR number three; I note one article from a similarly minor source from the two days ago referring to her in the same way; the problem is journalists look at Wikipedia articles as a source, and thus a 'title' like this gains traction. Or was this all a clever tactic by her management? ;) At any rate, 'the media' is a considerable exaggeration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.112.43 (talk) 00:28, 15 February 2019 (UTC) And looking at the social media linked at the top of the magazine's website: under 20,000 followers on Facebook; under 20,000 on Instagram; under 6,000 on Twitter; 310 on YouTube. Hardly a major publication by any measure, in this modern age where numbers are what matters. Compared to the nearly 6 million population of Singapore (say 3 million female), this is not particularly impressive, and even less so considering the site is in English and thus accessible to all English-speaking countries. This is simply insufficient as a basis for claiming that 'the media' call her by this name, and, frankly, insufficient to justify its inclusion here (how would one phrase it? "In May 2017, an online Singaporean fashion magazine referred to Lana Del Rey as 'the queen of indie pop', since when two other minor media sources have used the same name"? Ridiculous, no?). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.112.43 (talk) 00:49, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, doesn't that kind of constitute quite the exaggeration? "The media" really ought to reflect widespread (or at least significant) usage; some random fashion site doesn't cut it, surely? If they'd started using it, and it'd caught on, then fine, but as it stands I couldn't find any major media using the "title" either... It does kind of make you wonder why the emphasis is being put on it; I mean, like you said, I doubt her management would have any complaints if it became widely used. RBWhitney12 (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bloated article

I added a few more typical headings, but this article is super bloated, especially given she's an artist with only 8 years of career. To have a legacy section is just a bit outrageous. I am not NOT a fan, but this page is just in dire need to trimming and clenaup. She's got a new release but even that information is buried under the deluge of nonsense on this page. The volume is in the way of actually conveying information. If she was someone with a 20 or 30 year career it would be one thing, but egads. I mean, 294 citations, and not all of them crucial / the highlights. 1940CStreet (talk) 22:44, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold then. (I do agree the legacy section is ridiculous. Give it another 10 years.)Trillfendi (talk) 23:02, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I am going to work on trimming this thing down. Too many extraneous details, plus a notable overabundance of references that repeat the same information. I will start working on making this a bit more palatable and less bloated with trivial information. --Drown Soda (talk) 01:49, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If there are sources supporting a legacy, I don't know why the length of her career should be a reason to remove all of that. Sure there are some pieces of the article that can go, but I wouldn't say that part. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 02:06, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I’m putting an overly detailed tag. Trillfendi (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lana Del Rey infobox genres

What should we put as the main infobox genres? Choose from the following genres, listing them in order of preference. Binksternet (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Straw poll, no discussion

Discussion

Four years ago there was a discussion on this talk page about Del Rey's genres, archived at Talk:Lana_Del_Rey/Archive_1#Genre_warring. No clear consensus emerged, but Baroque pop, dream pop, rock, trip hop and indie pop generally stayed in the infobox for the next three years, despite bouts of genre warring, especially involving sadcore. The guideline for Template:Infobox musical artist#genre says we should "aim for generality" and that two to four genres should be displayed in the infobox, not the five or more that has been so commonly seen here. Of course, all the other genres can and should be described in prose in the article body. The discussion four years ago and the edit summaries from recent genre warring make me think that not enough of us are trying to figure out what genres are most commonly found in the media sources. Let's drop the personal viewpoints and examine the sources to choose four main genres. Remember that song and album genres are not necessarily the genre of the musical artist. We should be looking for media sources that are describing Del Rey the artist or her music in general. Binksternet (talk) 20:35, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it acceptable that an anonymous user votes pretending to be a registered user? Blueberry72 (talk) 18:57, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]