Talk:Kiki (album)

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 May 2022. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

R&B and Soul Music

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Kiana Ledé Releases Deluxe Version of New Album. Beyond the Stage
Kiana Ledé Finally Feels Whole Again. Elle
Kiana Ledé Delivers Debut Album Kiki. New Wave Mag
Kiana Ledé Releases Deluxe Edition of Kiki. Rated R&B
Kiana Ledé Drops "Forfeit" Featuring Lucky Daye, Announces Debut Album. Rated R&B
"I Tried to Take Down Those Walls" Clash Meets Kiana Ledé. Clash

sample credits

i don’t know why whosampled isn’t considered a reliable source. (i read the terms for wikipedia) buy the information given for the sample credits is 100% accurate. can you please at least check out the website and HEAR the samples before deleting? PopFreakNena (talk) 22:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Because the information is supplied by users and anyone can add whatever they want, so it fails WP:USERG. There's no way of checking that the information supplied is accurate, except by "listening to it". Richard3120 (talk) 23:51, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLOWITUP?

While the recent AfD discussion regarding this article was ongoing, I had a thought in my mind. Given this article is drenched with primary source stink, might it be easier to just grab the couple good refs and torch the rest? I haven't had a thorough look over every line of the article to see what's worth saving/can be backed up by the good sources (including the list above), but part of me wonders if it'd be simpler to just skip that step and start over. Don't wanna do anything too brash though. Pinging TenPoundHammer, Superastig, and SBKSPP since y'all participated in the AfD and may have already looked over the article more thoroughly/may have thoughts on this proposal. QuietHere (talk) 11:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, gave it a bit to see if anyone was gonna respond and given the silence I'm just gonna be bold and do the thing myself. QuietHere (talk) 05:45, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]