Jump to content

Talk:High by the Beach

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

Genres

[edit]

Hey guys! I just added genres to High by the Beach. It's definitely a pop song with trap and hip hop influences. It could be considered PBR&B too. It's not a pure hip hop song, so please don't put that one as the main genre - it's pop. Pure hip hop (or alternative hip hop) songs by her are Off to the Races and National Anthem.

Genres need to be reliably sourced in order to be displayed in the infobox and should also be mentioned in the prose. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:37, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that it's PBR&B, it cannot be added without a source that mentions it. Trip hop and trap-pop are the only two specific mentions we have thus far. ---ilovetati91 — Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious about the "chillwave" and "trip hop" genres being removed, particularly the former. It seems like a specific reference by the journalist from Under the Gun (http://www.underthegunreview.net/2015/08/11/review-lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach/). "The hypnotic tune meshes the hip-hop inspired groove of Born To Die with the storytelling precision of Ultraviolence to create a new, yet altogether familiar hypnotic sound you won’t be able to put down. It’s audio crack for people who like chill wave tracks about blowing off the people who make you feel small and embracing the simplest pleasures in life for no other reason than the fact it’s the best thing you could possibly do with your time." He's quite clearly describing the attributes of the song. ---ilovetati91

Under the Gun is not a reliable source. See WP:ALBUM/SOURCES. Abi-Maria (talk) 19:46, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. I was thinking of Under the Radar, which counts for MetaCritic.Thanks. ---ilovetati91 — Preceding undated comment added 20:17, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't these references to "trip hop" concrete enough to include the genre. I feel there were too many references to it to exclude it as a main genre. http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/article/single-review-lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach "As promised, the song skews more toward the slick trip-hop of Born to Die than the rootsy rock of last year's Ultraviolence, featuring crisp, clear vocals atop an even crisper, clearer trap beat and a hypnotic, percolating synth line." https://i-d.vice.com/en_au/article/lana-del-rey-released-a-new-single-and-the-world-swooned "It taps into the trip-hop sound which pops up in Lana's catalog every now and then." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovetati91 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, but we would need a reliable source which explicitly calls it a trip hop song/track/single/jam/etc, deducing otherwise is original research. Abi-Maria (talk) 21:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

[edit]

---Another Believer (Talk) 16:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Linking "trap-pop"

[edit]

Per WP:RS, we should not interpret a source by linking these terms this way. If they wanted to say trap and pop separately (which are users are doing by linking them) then they would have done that. We can not assume they are exclusive things. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:12, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Andrzejbanas, I don't see anything in WP:RS which states that terms should not be linked that way. I find your argument rather petty, when it's obvious what the source is referring to are the trap and pop genres, what else could the source be referring to? It's not an assumption, it's plain common sense. Not linking the terms hinders reader understanding. Abi-Maria (talk) 12:20, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The source isn't obvious because there is no definition of the genre. You can use it as a source, but linking the individual terms does not help readers here in understanding what it means. I think it's more appropriate to link to trap for the trap beats section. Linking them on their own isn't as appropriate.Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Trap-pop is not a definitive genre yes, it's a combination of two genres. Just like the likes of electro-R&B or EDM-pop for example. In this case it helps the reader understand that the song is a combination of genres, hence why both are linked separately. Much better than not being linked at all, if a reader comes to this article and does not know what trap music is for example. Abi-Maria (talk) 12:26, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No it's not good to have them linked as it's presuming that this is what the genre means. As there is no definition of what it is, we shouldn't assume it. That's against wikipedia rules. If they don't know what trap is, then you can link them at the trap beats. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:38, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not "assuming". The source clearly refers to the trap and pop genres, what else could it be referring to? Would you mind highlighting where in WP:RS is states that conjoined terms may not be linked? Abi-Maria (talk) 12:49, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not specifically stating to not link conjoined terms, but it does say we can't interpret what they are saying like that. If they mentioned them seperately, link them, but they are treating it like one word. It would be like linking Ant-Man when the source says Ant-Man. The average user wouldn't expect them to be link to seperate things and this goes the same here. I don't think we need to argue further as we aren't bringing up new points. Let's wait for others to chime in to get consensus. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Songs about drugs or Category:Songs about cannabis?

[edit]

Currently, the article is in Category:Songs about drugs, but much of the article's prose suggests the song is about cannabis. Should we move the article to the subcategory, or should a song more obviously be about cannabis to be included? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The only source I recall referring to cannabis is the Out source albeit mildly as a "420 anthem". Most sources refer to it in part being simply about "getting high"/recreational drug use, or to contain drug references (State source). Unless, there's sources that explicitly state it as referring to cannabis, then only we should include that category. Abi-Maria (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. I think I was focusing on "420 anthem" and the reviewer who said LDR sounded like she "vaped a gram of Girl Scout Cookies before her vocal take". ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pop ballads or Category:Synthpop ballads?

[edit]

Is the song synth enough to move from Category:Pop ballads to the subcategory Category:Synthpop ballads? There has been much discussion re: genre(s), so I thought it best to discuss before re-categorizing. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have a source calling it synthpop so at the moment I'd say no. Abi-Maria (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I wasn't sure if "synth-led" and "synth beeps" qualified. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:40, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the genre should be synth-pop & trap

[edit]

The song is clearly a pop, trip-hop, and trap song with a heavy use of synthesizers. This article called it a "synth-led new song" (http://m.digitalspy.com/music/news/a662805/lana-del-rey-premieres-her-synth-led-new-single-high-by-the-beach.html#~plbLHqFKaAX8xT), so I think it would be appropriate to add "synth-pop" to the genre. Jamesmills014 (talk) 22:41, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We don't interpreet genres that way. If they say synthpop, it's synthpop. If they don't, we can't state that. We have to match the content of the article is saying and not just interpret information from it.Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:13, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The song is obviously not synth-pop, that's a completely different genre. "Born to Die" heavily uses a string section but it doesn't mean it's classical music. --Matiasojeda07 (talk) 01:26, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We would need a reliable source which explicitly calls it a synthpop or trip hop song/track/single/jam/etc, deducing otherwise is WP:OR. Abi-Maria (talk) 08:43, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

This article has an 'advertisement' tag on top. I am not sure who placed it there, but can we discuss which specific text is problematic? ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the tag, but am happy to discuss further. ---Another Believer (Talk) 19:34, 18 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so we've established

[edit]

This song has a trap beat and have reliable sources for it. This song is a pop song and have reliable sources for it. Therefore, it's a Trap, Pop song, correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aleccat (talk • contribs) 22:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC) edit::::: http://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.htmlhttp://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.htmlhttp://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.htmlhttp://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.htmlhttp://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.htmlhttp://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.htmlhttp://www.vulture.com/2015/08/lana-del-rey-high-by-the-beach-hip-hop-influence.html that is THE ref[reply]

I'd lean towards no still. Only because that's interpreting what multiple sources say into one item, which is not what we do on wikipedia per WP:STICKTOSOURCE, which states "Best practice is to research the most reliable sources on the topic and summarize what they say in your own words, with each statement in the article attributable to a source that makes that statement explicitly. Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication. Take care not to go beyond what is expressed in the sources, or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context. In short, stick to the sources." Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on High by the Beach. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:40, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good article?

[edit]

This article seems pretty developed. Any page watchers interested in nominating the article for Good status? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:16, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:High_by_the_Beach&oldid=1205589316"