Talk:Butterfly (Mariah Carey album)

worldwide sales

it is 15million this reference assures it but someone keeps on deleting it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.206.65.107 (talk) 22:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

This link is hyper inflated in all the sales reported. It goes against all Official reports, even one from MC herself (refer MC Discography). In 1998 at its peak it sold eight million [1] according to Sony. There is no evidence from any other reports that is has managed to double sales since its peak. And although a fansite, probably the only one that uses Official sources to gather detail specifies 10 million. [2] Eight88 (talk) 01:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree completly. The article on Undercover.com.au is adding to every album few millions and there is absolutely no other source to prove these high numbers. Butterfly didn't even sell 12 millions, but I'm leaving this number and its source [3] till I find a better one with more realistic number. Max24 (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

References

Extraordinary machine

Why did you just randomly go and delete half the page? I have put it back and it would be nice if you put a reason next time (as I don't doubt that there will be a next time). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.133 (talk • contribs) 18:08, 7 March 2006.

1. You did not cite your sources. Statements such as "is considered Carey’s most personal, best critically received and a fan favourite" and "It is thought that this decision was taken because Carey's ex-husband Tommy Mottola felt it was too personal" need references to support them. Extraordinary Machine 18:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
2. The item about "Butterfly" originally being conceived as a house record was mentioned twice.
3. It doesn't make sense to title a section "Album information", when the whole article contains information about the album.
4. Wikipedia:Guide_to_layout#Structure_of_the_article states: "sections and subsections that are very short will make the article look cluttered and inhibit the flow". It also says "Articles generally comprise prose paragraphs, not bullet points...Bulleted lists should not be overused in the main text".
5. Trivia sections are also generally avoided.
6. Abbreviating the numbers in the chart trajectory saves space and bytes. Extraordinary Machine 18:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I was basing the page on Madonna's Ray of Light, you may want to change that too.

Worldwide sales

Anon editors were changing the worldwide sales figure without citing a source, so I removed it. Please cite reliable sources for information like this. Extraordinary Machine 17:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Butterfly-austriacdalbumbookletfront.jpg

Image:Butterfly-austriacdalbumbookletfront.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

There are no co-writers!

Only mariah was credited with writing butterfly, it's in the offical booklet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.230.62 (talk) 13:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

You are......Wait for it.....almost there....totally.....WRONG!!! They wrote it together buddy. Now run along and stop being disruptive!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 13:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Copy-edit

Just a few queries so far:

• The background section does not say when Carey began work on the album, which may be a nice starting point.
• How reliable is the story of the argument between Walter Afanasieff and Carey (it originally said "reportedly")? I've altered it, but if the source is not reliable, it may be better left out.
• As the change of direction was obviously a big thing, is it worth commenting on the direction of her previous albums? (This seems a reasonable and independent summary) --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:18, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
• "Butterfly proved to be Carey's most expressive and mature album at that point." Took this out of composition section as it is a little POV, even if it is referenced, and does not really fit here. May be better in critical reception. --Sarastro1 (talk) 10:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
• In the composition section it talks about a remix for Honey. Was this a previous release or is it on the album twice?
• "and was described as "street Hip-Hop music, with a booming bass." Who described it like this? It should be attributed in the text.
• "The song's melody was driven by Q-Tip's drum programming and Stevie J's keyboard notes." Drum programming seems a little vague here. Could we be more specific, for example drum beat? Not too sure of the technical expression.
• "Combs's production gave the song a "light and airy" effect": Again, needs attribution. Also, "was described as a "[song with a] catchy chorus,...""
• "keyboard notes" By this, do you mean a piano or a keyboard programmed to make guitar sounds? --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:04, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
• "the album's European release": Does this mean it was the only song released in Europe or that it was only released in Europe? I think it needs tightening a little. --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:05, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
• "but was said to be "less straight-forward, with more of a swing and even a touch of class."" This does not really say very much and for an FA standard article would need to be much more specific. What does "more of a swing" mean? Does it mean the song has swing music influences? And "a touch of class" does not really work, unless it was moved to the critical section, but even then it is too vague. I've removed this for now.
• "The next two tracks on the album, "Breakdown" and "Babydoll", were described as..." Attribution.
• ""Babydoll" was described as "a vocally driven piece", with some "inventive drum programming" provided by Rooney." Again not sure about drum programming. Also, are most songs not "vocally driven"? I think if this is to remain it needs specifying how this is different to how other songs use vocals.
• "which were personally important to Carey" Can we say why?
• "it was intended to be a house music record": Forgive my ignorance, but what does this mean?
• Similarly, I don't understand "Carey expressed a desire to feature her concept both on the house record, alongside the ballad that would become "Butterfly"".
• ""propelling some inventive keyboard and vocal work, and showing yet another new facet of Mariah."" Took this out as it reads like POV and a little too much like fluff.
  

Sorry for the slow progress so far. As usual, revert anything you are not happy with. --Sarastro1 (talk) 11:20, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Critical reception:

• "The album received generally positive reviews from music critics, who praised Carey's musical transformation and direction." Ref is given to allmusic but this does not entirely support the sentence as written: it just seems to be a one off review and so really the sentence should simply say that Stephen Thomas Erlewine said this, rather than critics in general. Altered this to fit, and also cut down on the over use of quotes in this section; kept content but paraphrased much more of it.--Sarastro1 (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
• For this to do well at FAC I think this section needs more "heavyweight" reviews. I'm by no means a regular music FAC reviewer, but I think the regulars expect the big names in review sections. This is what I have found and most looks very useful:
  • this is the original Rolling Stone review.
  • NYT original review with some good background detail.
  • This gives a bit of background to the album in terms of competition with others. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Chart performance:

• The information about what platinum/gold/etc means (in terms of shipments) interupt the flow of this section and may be better removed altogether or into a note. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:29, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
• "In Europe, the album experienced moderate success, peaking within the top-five in most European countries." Which ones? How many? If we are saying most, we need to know that lots of countries had good sales, not just the two given. Need precision here if we are to be comprehensive. And the statement needs sourcing. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
• This section may need a little more work as it is quite repetitive, repeating the same phrases for each country. Some of the phrases are a clunky too, so it does not flow. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Singles:

• I'm slightly worried by the refs in this section. Several of them do not support what is written and need checking. As such, I have not copyedited this section until this has been looked at. If I have missed something on the linked page which gives the information (it has been known!) it needs clarifying in the ref.
• What are "airplay-only singles": Seems fairly straightforward, but a brief explanation would be good, for example why were some released in this format?
• And reiterate what I said about platinum, etc, from previous section. I'm inclined to put it in a note so that the information is there but does not distract from the article.
• ""Honey" was well-received, with critics complimenting its catchy sound and clever fusion of pop and R&B sounds." This is not supported by the ref to allmusic.
• ""Butterfly" served as the album's second single, but it was released as an "airplay-only" single due to Carey's conflict with Sony." Nor is this supported by the ref.
• "Though not being released commercially by her label, "Butterfly" reached number seven on the Hot 100 Airplay, as well as the top-twenty in New Zealand." Needs a ref.
• ""Breakdown" was the third single released from the album. The song received a limited release throughout certain countries, such as the United States, where it peaked at number four on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs." This does not appear to be supported by the ref.
• "While not one of Carey's best-known hits, "Breakdown" remains one her most praised songs, receiving acclaim for assisting Carey's transition into the R&B market." Not supported by the ref.
• Some of the detail and analysis from the Slant review may be beneficial to add to the other parts of the article such as composition or review. --Sarastro1 (talk) 13:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Promotion

• Date for Saturday Night Live?
• "alongside "Honey"": I read this to mean she sang both songs at both appearances. Please correct if I'm wrong.
• "and prior to that, she had already successfully toured through Europe and Asia with the Daydream World Tour" Not sure that I see the connection between this and her initial unwillingness to tour, as the reason already given was the mixed reception to her last tour. I've removed it for now, but if there is another reason for this sentence, please put it back.
• "many fans asked Carey to tour": Can we be more specific? Who asked her? How did they ask her? For example, did lots of fans write letters? --Sarastro1 (talk) 13:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Awards

• Are we refering to the single Butterfly or the album in this section? --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Reaction to Honey and Music videos

• Hip-hop and R&B linked here, which is too late. I've unlinked them but they need linking in their first mention after the lead. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
• I'm not sure about these two sections. The videos section does not seem to add to the information about the album and does not really comment on them. It simply related what happens in each vidoe. Are they necessary? --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

General

• I think some parts of this article are a little too pro-Carey. I've taken out some of these parts, but it may be worth looking closely at the two main print sources. Are they a little too favourable towards her? If so, it doesn't mean they can't be used but they may need tempering with some other sources, particularly ones which are a little more critical or independent. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:21, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
• I didn't ce the lead as the article might change, but it also needs looking at. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

that crap about those real butterflies that's fake right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.241.165.74 (talk) 22:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Commercial Success

This album was obviously commercially successful, along with its two chart-topping singles. However, it represented a great drop from the 20+ million selling Daydream album. This album barely sold/shipped 10+ million globally.

I think the success section is written beautifully and the chart info is very concise, but there surely should be some sources commenting on the beginning of a downward trend in Mariah's career compared to her early-mid-90's heyday. This drop in album sales in the latter half of the 90s was also accompanied by a drastic drop of support by mainstream radio (reflected by her singles staying at #1 less, fueled by sales instead of radio). The wiki articles about her singles used to talk about this issue but it has since been less covered/removed.

Do you think this issue is worth talking about or not? I mean this album was by no means a disappointment, it did like over 11-12 million, but I still think it would make the article reflect a more accurate picture of the commercial transition that MC was going through.

--Blamestars (talk) 04:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The album sold closer to 15 million, but yes a big drop from her last two albums. There isn't a problem with making an addition like this, but you would need to cite critics that noted this as well. Otherwise it would come off as your own original research.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 15:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Lead contradicts self?

Both of these lines appear in the lead section (albeit in different paragraphs):

Butterfly garnered generally positive reviews from contemporary music critics,

and

Butterfly was acclaimed by critics

The first line indicates a more tepid response than the latter, and while these do not constitute a particularly egregious contradiction, they nonetheless do not appear to reflect the same reality. 50.193.171.69 (talk) 01:52, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Mariah started recording Butterfly in 1996?

The article says that she began recording Butterfly in 1997, but in a Rosie O'Donnell episode, dated 21 November 1996 she says she had already begun recording (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tEQAfrLk-w @ 6:21) . She also says that she's preparing for her first upcoming World Tour, which is strange since at that point she just completed the Daydream Tour. Wonder why she doesn't consider that a World Tour... Anyway, according to that interview, she started recording in 1996. Anyone know a source which points to her starting the album in January of 1997?

Wizlardo (talk) 13:02, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

The cover art is incorrect, it is actually a reissued cover art.

The cover art File:Mcbutterfly.jpg used in the infobox for the album's article is, very incorrect because this is the cover art that was used on a 2005 reissue for a Australian CD, seen here at Discogs and you can also compare it to a original Australian 1997 pressing right here. Amazon seems to be also using the reissue cover art, but if you click the Audio CD Option, it will show the standard/original cover art as it was first seen (and marketed, and pressed) in 1997.

The original cover art is the AMERICAN 1997 original release seen here,here,and here I do not see any other American 1997 pressing that uses the artwork in the infobox other than the American Represses.

This situation is also similar to Madonna's studio album Bedtime Stories (1994) and Madame X (2019) and Lil' Kim's The Naked Truth (2005) where the submitter(s) would change or alter the cover art in the infoxbox, just because they saw the cover art on digital or streaming services. These problems have since been resolved.

If there are no objections or no update regarding this inquiry in the next four days, I will insist on submitting the correct artwork myself.

the other ryan (talk) 04:07, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Please, do it! I'd prefer the other cover, it's better to my taste (this one), but change it for the right one that you posted above.--88marcus (talk) 04:48, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

It's the fourth day, preparing. the other ryan (talk) 15:51, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Done. --the other ryan (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2020 (UTC)