Talk:List of 2024 albums

Cole Bennett/Lyrical Lemonade

The source Mister Pizza Man used to add the Cole Bennett/Lyrical Lemonade album (which is also the only reliable one I could find) calls it a Lyrical Lemonade album more than a Cole Bennett album. To my understanding, LL is the name of a brand, not an artist, so it sounds like this would be functioning closer to a V/A comp which Bennett is curating and LL is releasing as the label. I can't say I'm 100% either way though, so best to bring it to discussion here. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 07:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

First an inquiry into a term. What is V/A comp? Google did not help me define it. Mburrell (talk) 19:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

"V/A" is various artists, "comp" is compilation album. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Now I understand what you are saying. I agree. Read with your comments in mind, the news source basically states this is a compilation album by various artists. Sounds like it will be notable, but instead of listing it as artist being Cole Bennett, it should be listed as artist is Various artists. Mburrell (talk) 23:23, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

In that case, I will remove it until the album is given its own article (there is currently a redirect to Bennett's page and nothing else). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 23:38, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

@QuietHere, in the intro, part of it says no compilations. Even if it does get an article, it shouldn't be listed. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 20:52, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Mr. C.C. but they're all original songs for this album. That exception is for greatest hits albums where the majority is previously released, things like that. We have several label comps listed, they just need their own articles since we can't rely on an artist link. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Ed Sheeran Album

Ed is hinting at releasing a new album called Play this year [1]https://www.instagram.com/reel/C1iO9b2NWDd/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== 86.40.48.32 (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Add it to the TBA section. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 20:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Reference fromatting

Every time I format a reference they I usually do it gets changed. It's the most insignificant things too. Accessdate is changed to access-date. The way I format the writer, author, or journalists name is changed from last=|first= to author=. Publisher is changed to work. Was there any discussion where consensus was reached? If not, why does it matter how references as formatted as long as it's correctly formatted? Having references formatted all the same is tedious and redundant. The way I format it is fine. No need to change it. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 20:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I change the format of the reference to be consistent with all the other references for the whole List of 20xx albums series. Every single reference is the same format. Again how does it matter how as it is formatted, as long as it is consistent. As for accessdate to access-date, at least a year ago, I got warnings that accessdate was incorrect, and that access-date was the method to use. It seems that has reverted to a general acceptance of both listings being acceptable, but again, consistency. No talk page consensus was reached, but a consensus has been reached by informal acceptance via edit summary and also user talk page discussions. Mburrell (talk) 20:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

I think I was wrong, there might have been a discussion in one of the List talk pages, I am just not willing to hunt it down. The discussion was about the benefits of consistency of reference citations. In November 2022 or around then, the List of 2022 albums grew large enough that there were too many citations and it triggered a technical failure. One of the Wikipedia admins or techies or gurus applied a technical fix that bypassed the large amount of references templates by doing something, but the fix was only applied to the citations with the same formatting, which was about 99% of the citations. Keeping a consistent citation format allows for easier fixes from the gurus. I think there was a discussion in one of the talk pages sometime after that about formatting reference citations, and that issue was brought up, but I am just not feeling it to go look up what the fix was, when the fix occurred, and if there was a discussion. Just saying there is a benefit to consistency and it might have been brought up before. Mburrell (talk) 23:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

@Mburrell, it would be helpful to see if a consensus was reached. But by your explanation, I take it as a no and it's just done from a technical standpoint. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 09:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Why on Earth are these not listed in alphabetical order?

All of these lists of albums are not in alphabetical order. It's maddening. I fixed some of these, but please, as you're adding entries, put them in actual alphabetical order. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:52, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

They are alphabetized by first name. That's always been the case with these lists. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

That is not the standard on Wikipedia. We use standard alphabetization. You haven't provided a reason, just restated the problem. Is there some reason why albums in lists would break a convention in virtually all of English? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

You have claimed that it is a problem, but you're gonna have to provide evidence for that first, because I don't believe so. So long as it's in alphabetical order, regardless of it being first or last name. And adding the sorting templates wouldn't make a difference since none of the tables are sortable, and aren't particularly designed to be. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

(Actual, standard) alphabetical order is possibly the least controversial way of organizing things I can imagine. The Manual of Style recommends (proper) alphabetization in several places, but it doesn't explicitly call out album list articles. The argument in favor of proper alphabetization is to find things rationally. I didn't think I'd ever have to defend using alphabetical order. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm not arguing against alphabetical order. I'm only telling you that our lists are already in alphabetical order, just by first name for real names rather than last. When you've got a mix of real names, pseudonyms, and band names like we do, it's easier on the brain to just stick to one thing, and the first letter (minus articles, of course) is quickest to pick up on. I don't see anything improper about that. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

That's not actual alphabetical order. We could alphabetize based on the last letter of the term, but that also wouldn't be actual proper alphabetization. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Please also readd the cited entry that you removed. You have orphaned a page. Why would you do that? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

That was an accident. You didn't mention it in your edit summary so I assumed you had only changed the order and nothing else, and I didn't see it or the caption. You can readd it. Apologies for the confusion. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Much appreciated. To be clear, I have an editing restriction to not undo anyone's edits, so even if solicited to do so by someone, I want to be extra conservative, so I'll have to ask you to please re-add it. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

It has been readded. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Merci. Sorry for introducing the overhead due to my stupidity. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 11:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Not a problem; I worked quickly without checking everything first, so it's both our faults. Just next time, if you add an entry, please include that in your edit summary so nobody misses it, and keep major edits like changing list order separate so they can be cleanly undone in the matter of a dispute. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@QuietHere, or you could have reverted your wrongful removal instead of telling someone else to do it. Then again, I shouldn't have to do that since you know to do that. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 18:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mr. C.C. "You can readd it" doesn't mean "do it for me", it means "you're allowed". Plus, you're ignoring the fact that I did readd it myself. And why are you complaining about a month and a half-old comment anyway? The matter was already settled. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 18:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Grammy nominees

Moved this article discussion from my talk page to the list talk page:

Hello, can you please see below and let me know if Grammy nominees can be restored to the list of notable albums, regardless of media coverage. It says it only has to meet one criteria (major award nominee). Thank you.

Wikipedia:Notability (music)

Specific to recordings, a recording may be notable if it meets at least one of these criteria: 4. The recording has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. TheWikiCurmudgeon (talk) 13:17, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

In response to this query, I would like to link to a talk page discussion about this subject, Talk:List of 2023 albums#Selection criteria, where the album selection criteria for the lists was discussed and defined. The results of that discussion can be found at the top of every album list page, where it states:

The following is a list of albums, EPs, and mixtapes released in 20xx. These albums are (1) original, i.e. excluding reissues, remasters, and compilations of previously released recordings, and (2) notable, defined as having received significant coverage from reliable sources independent of the subject.

The lists are not controlled by notability as listed by Wikipedia:Notability (music), but by its own defined defined criteria, as required by WP:LISTCRITERIA. Once we set up a criteria, we should abide by the criteria rather than make exceptions for apparently notable albums that fail to qualify per the set criteria.

I do believe that a Grammy-nominated album should be included in the list, but just like any new album from a notable artist, we just have to wait for sufficient news and review articles are written about the album. I don't see how an album that is nominated for a Grammy doesn't yet have sufficient coverage, but I trust the publication industry will notice an under-reported-upon album that was nominated for a Grammy, and that journalists will publish reviews of the album over time. Mburrell (talk) 22:40, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mburrell, just seen this, but do you know the article is "List of 2024 albums," right? Albums being the operative word. When each year's Grammy Awards have their own articles, why add it to a list that is strictly for albums? It's redundant to do what you suggested. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 18:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I feel we are talking at cross-purposes. The original creator of this section wanted to add Grammy-nominated albums to the album list, proposing that they satisfied Wikipedia:Notability (music). I disagreed, stating that for albums to be added to the album list, the albums must comply with the criteria listed out at the top of the list. I then stated that any Grammy-nominated album that did not have significant coverage from independent reliable sources were most likely to acquire significant coverage just by the fact that they were nominated for Grammy awards, and people who write reviews and news articles for albums tend to write about albums that have some sort of notability. All I stated was for us to wait until several news and reviews were written about the Grammy-nominated albums that at the time of the comment had very little coverage. At no point was I proposing that the album list call out awards nominated for an album. That is beyond the scope of this list. Therefore, I think we are in agreement, that we want the same thing. Please elaborate if I have misunderstood what is being stated above. Mburrell (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Liquid Mike

Scrolling to do see if an album was added (just to make sure, I presumed it would be), I came across and entry where the artist has no article, but the album does. As the title says, it's an artist by the pseudonym Liquid Mike. I never come across any of these lists I've edited. I would think that the artist needs an article before an album. Since I've never this before, I don't know what there is on this and what the next step is if any. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 18:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

The album lists require either the artist or the album have a Wikipedia article, but does not require both, providing that the album satisfies the lists notability requirements. Occasionally, we have soundtracks or compilations, and they are described in the artist column as Various artists, with no link. That is one reason we should not deny an album listing just because the artist does not yet have an article. I personally find it weird, as my tendency is to create an artist article first and album articles second, but that is not the way everyone operates. It could just be the nature of the available citations. Sometimes there is insufficient news coverage to develop an article for the artist, but there is several good news and review articles for the album, allowing for an album article to be developed. Mburrell (talk) 23:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mburrell, you can't compare compilations and soundtracks with various bands and artists to an album in an artists discography. But still, there should be an article created at for the artist at some point. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 05:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Go ahead and create the articles. Wikipedia is open to everyone to edit and create, and if you see a need, please dive in and tackle it. If you see albums that have articles and bands or artists that don't, please go ahead and create articles for the bands or artists. It will improve Wikipedia, and satisfy you, so a win all around.

Not sure what you are saying about an album in an artists discography. I apologize, but that sentence didn't track for me. Could you elaborate? Mburrell (talk) 10:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

If the artist is notable, then yes, there should be an article, but albums can be notable entirely independently of the artists behind them. Sometimes coverage exists for albums but not anything that specifically discusses the artists. This is the case with Butter 08 and Demon Queen, both one-off projects by otherwise notable artists, where the coverage I could find (I made both album articles) only discusses within the context of the album itself. There just wouldn't be enough material to make a separate article that wasn't a stub/wholly redundant. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)