Talk:A Girl, a Bottle, a Boat

Ping

@C.Fred: This page will need to be moved in order to preserve its edit history. And an article seems appropriate now that a release date, track listing, and cover art have been confirmed. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:31, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: Where does WP:NMUSIC mention cover art and track listings as indicators of significance? —C.Fred (talk) 18:34, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@C.Fred: I see this reasoning often when editors are deciding whether or not to keep or merge stubs for future albums. The album will be released in a few weeks; what's the harm in allowing editors to expand this stub now that details are confirmed? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving the page. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fake credits

MYSTERY SOLVED - see results below original conversation

The credits are fake.

You can see the full and correct credits here:

https://listen.tidal.com/album/69551903

Or on iTunes.

Coastside2 (talk) 19:56, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would love for you to expand upon your claim. Kellymoat (talk) 20:11, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you open the Tidal site and open the credits to each track you can see that the credits are incorrect on wikipedia. Coastside2 (talk) 20:51, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a Tidal subscriber. If I was, do I see more than what non-subscribers see?

And before you ask, nor do I use iTunes. Kellymoat (talk) 21:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You do not even have to be a subscriber. Just click the link above and you can access the information to each tracks by clicking the "..." next to the songs.

Coastside2 (talk) 18:35, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's good to know. Thanks. Kellymoat (talk) 19:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those are not fake credits. Those are simply another example of why WE NEED TO BAN ALLMUSIC AS A SOURCE. Of course, it is also a reason why we need to quit adding every single artist/album/song to WP the day we find out that it exists.

Those credits, which you deemed fake, and are not 100% accurate with what is now available elsewhere, were completely true and accurate at the time that they were posted.

HOWEVER, as had happened many times before, AllMusic posted credits and then they changed the credits later on - but after editors of Wikipedia copied them. Thus giving the illusion of fake credits.

Kellymoat (talk) 00:35, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? These credits are fake and they are still online on wikipedia. What a shame. If you buy the album and read through the booklets you will find out. But wikipedia would not accept the source "booklet of my copy" by a invidual.

Typically wikipedia - you rather have WRONG information on the site instead of TRUE information which is even CREDITED by the TIDAL site (official retailer). Check the link above. But I'm out of here. Coastside2 (talk) 12:19, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, not fake. Just not updated with current information. And, could change again - as they already have. Kellymoat (talk) 12:43, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Writing credits have been updated. And I say updated instead of corrected, because they were not fake. They were correct based on the information that was available when they were posted. Sources have updated their information, we have followed.Kellymoat (talk) 13:53, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]