Jump to content

Talk:Lorde discography

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured listLorde discography is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic starLorde discography is part of the Overview of Lorde series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 6, 2014Featured list candidatePromoted
May 18, 2015Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured list

First New Zealand Artist to have No.1 on US Billboard

[edit]

The article claims Lorde to be the first New Zealand artist to reach number one on the US chart, but I think it is recorded on Wikipedia that OMC hit #1 on US Billboard for airplay (Mainstream 40). --86.54.181.194 (talk) 15:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the citation that supports that statement (from Lorde). [1] It says she is the first NZ solo artist to top the US chart.Dwpaul Talk 15:05, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I added the word solo and included the cite. Dwpaul Talk 15:41, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Mainstream Top 40 is airplay-based; "How Bizzare" was not available for purchase in the US, so it didn't chart on the Billboard Hot 100. I will adjust the article to reflect this. Adabow (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Worldwide sales of Pure Heroine

[edit]

Chartnews is a reputable source for chart and sales information https://twitter.com/chartnews/status/401477557381365760 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.111.52 (talk) 23:37, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: It may be an accurate estimate, but is not a WP:RS. According to the Twitter bio given, the user is "just a chartfreak" who compiles data and sales info from other sources.
Also, the 72,000 total you mention for Pure Heroine's most recent sales week matches mediatraffic's total for the same week. (Mediatraffic is listed among the Twitter account's sources)
We can't use mediatraffic. See here for more info on what constitutes a reliable source.
One of the only reliable, accurate sources there are for current worldwide album sales are the yearly IFPI Digital Music reports, for example the 2013 report (see page 11) based on sales from 2012. --Mαuri’96 “everything and nothing always haunts me…” 08:16, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lorde_discography#Singles dashed cell clarification

[edit]

I've replaced the "Royals" x Aus cell's dash for an {{N/A}} ({{Nonfree}} might be more apposite, but red-ish colour seems unsympathetic – assumedly a warning colour stemmed from use in software releases).

Now that wrinkle's out of the dashes, I'm wondering if the remainders are all "not released in that country" (would be good to eliminate "failed to chart", if not an actuality).

Might this tech' be propagated to dashes on other Lorde discography tables?   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 16:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The standard text seems to be "denotes a recording that did not chart or was not released in that territory." Is there any reason why that couldn't be used here? It seems to be a good catch-all. Robyn2000 (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I support N/A. I dislike the phrase "— denotes a recording that did not chart or was not released in that territory" because of its ambiguity: what about songs that were not released as singles in some territories, but charted there nonetheless? "— denotes a recording that did not chart in that territory" is less ambiguous and to the point. N/A works for "Royals" because in this instance the EP was counted as a song, and I think it's important to note that. Adabow (talk) 04:26, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When's the 1st "Royals" could've been considered a download single?

[edit]

Given ...

  1. Single_(music)#Culture: "On 1 January 2007 digital downloads (including unbundled album tracks) became eligible from the point of release, without the need for an accompanying physical."
  2. The Love Club EP's self-released complimentary SoundCloud download set (inherently more unbundled than "unbundled album tracks")
  3. The main subject of the Lorde_discography#Singles table is musical artworks (some of which may chart), not expressly sales/chart results of some products.
  4. and, to come extent, WP's parlance of merging the meanings of songs, singles and tracks.

... it seems misleading if – "then a miracle occurs" – a single's the main deal, glossing over pre-history to the SoundCloud The Love Club EP set and how that somehow wasn't in any respect a single.

Thus, the choice seems to be to treat it as a track (and re-edits/mastering thereof) throughout, or consider "Royals" a sort of single from the self-release – more succinct, than brief/terse vis its article. I've expressed the latter in the Lorde discography Lead and in a Lorde_discography#Singles tabulation which includes The Love Club EP as a contributing release (right col') and taking history back to Nov 2012 – latest 07:14, 5 Jan revision.

@AJMarks4, Adabow, and HĐ: and folks – Any refinement(s) or alternative(s) to solving this approach/conundrum?

Happily, weather SoundCloud derived track or single, the row-span tech' used in the table can be expanded to merge the stray Lorde_discography#Promotional_singles, both placing them more clearly in context an saving space/mess.   – Ian, DjScrawl (talk) 07:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That quote from single (music) relates to tracks' eligibility to chart on the UK Singles Chart only. Billboard found a way around the confusion by renaming their charts from "Singles" to "Singles & Tracks" and finally to "Songs" charts; most (probably all) "singles" charts are really "song" charts. Therefore, the statement for unbundled song releases (i.e. downloading a track from an album, as is available for 99% of albums released digitally) being eligible to chart is completely irrelevant. A single release is only when a song is released by the label for sale or by sending to radio playlists. It is an independent product from the albums. I don't understand how you think the "Royals" release could have been in 2012 at all. Adabow (talk) 08:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Also "Royals" was available freely on SoundCloud in 2012, while a single is available for sales — Simon (talk) 08:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additional column in "Other Charted Songs."

[edit]

According to some sources, the song "Glory and Gore" has recently entered the United States' Bubbling Under charts at number 25; therefore, I believe another column for the Billboard Hot 100 should be added in the "Other Charted Songs" section to fill this updated information into this article. 67.141.222.230 (talk) 22:07, 6 February 2014 (UTC) A Wikipedian viewer[reply]

"Royals/White Noise" no longer a single

[edit]

The iTunes link for the single release is dead so it is now only a promotional single. — Simon (talk) 13:21, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response, but I'm still curious as to where you got the notion that a release automatically loses its status as a single/becomes a promotional single if it's taken down from iTunes. Are there any discussions which resulted in this consensus? I would understand listing "Buzzcut Season" and "Ribs" as such – but those were released for free before they were taken down, which seems to satisfy the definition of a promotional single based on its Wikipedia article. I don't see why "Royals/White Noise" should become a promotional single – it wasn't a release issued for the sole purpose of promoting the artist/building anticipation for an album, but was a purchasable charity single meant to raise funds for War Child. Are charity singles really considered promotional singles? Pardon my confusion, these single/promo singles discussions have been gone over so many times in the past that it's really been so muddled. Holiday56 (talk) 17:25, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused with "Bravado", too. It was not available for free, but how could it be a promo? — Simon (talk) 03:29, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I see what you mean – already elaborated about that on its talk page but didn't get much response. Holiday56 (talk) 10:23, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The song Daddy by Beyonce was also released onto iTunes Store (prize $0.99) but it's still a promo. — Simon (talk) 02:50, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that the "Daddy" article merely lists it as a song (though the discography does list it as a promo single) because some editors disagreed on whether to list it as a single or a promotional single. There was a short discussion on the talk page about this which never really got resolved. Holiday56 (talk) 11:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Really, the main point I'm trying to raise re. the Lorde release is that I disagree with charity singles being listed as promotional singles. Charity singles like "What More Can I Give", "We Are the World 25 for Haiti", "Just Stand Up!", "Ronan", etc. are all represented as normal singles with single infoboxes in their articles, and on most discographies charity singles aren't listed under the promotional singles section (i.e. Beyoncé discography). Holiday56 (talk) 11:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But the point is that the links for the songs you pointed still lasts till date (ex. "Ronan"). But the link for "Royals/White Noise" is no longer available. And that's the difference. Simon (talk) 14:25, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That kinda brings me back to the first point I raised – is there actually any consensus (or even a source) which states that a single becomes reclassified as a promo single if the label takes down its download listing? Holiday56 (talk) 06:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This reminds me of what used to happen with physical singles in the ol' days – after a certain amount of time, they were "deleted" and new copies were no longer distributed. This was an extremely common practice and the public would have to wait for re-releases for the single to be available again as a separate song. However, the deletion didn't stop it being considered a single by the record labels if it had been released physically (back before all the confusion we have now a promotional single was usually a record just said to radio that was marked as such on the vinyl – as we know, anything sold for retail was a single). Is this not a similar sort of thing? I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 14:30, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good point – I had wanted to make an analogy re. albums/singles going out of print but couldn't really word it properly, so many thanks for bringing this up. Holiday56 (talk) 03:51, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Holiday56: I just noticed that Sia's most recent single "Chandelier" is also a single that has dead iTunes link. Sorry, my bad . Simon (talk) 07:48, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@HĐ: Oh, no worries – thanks for taking the time to reply to my points throughout this discussion. Holiday56 (talk) 09:06, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lorde new album: X-posed

[edit]

Amazon release (15 April 2014). Tracklist at AllMusic. However I don't know what type of album is this? — Simon (talk) 11:31, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@HĐ: If I may answer this query: X-posed, if I'm not mistaken, is a collection of interviews with artists. Those albums have been released for Katy, Rihanna, etc. prism△ 18:21, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So it's not a music album. Okay, thanks! — Simon (talk) 03:30, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Piece of Mind

[edit]

Hey, Lorde also appears in the song Piece of Mind by the band And They Were Masked. Available to hear here: [2]

Surely that should be mentioned? Gottistgut (talk) 00:51, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Pt. 1 Soundtrack

[edit]

if the Fifty Shades of Grey soundtrack is in Beyonce's discography when she contribued two songs and the Home soundtrack is in Rihanna's when she contributed three, shouldn't the Mockingjay soundtrack be in hers when she contributed 3/4???

She is not even credited on the soundtrack. Some new users have changed such articles. HĐ (talk) 14:02, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Extended content

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Lorde discography. 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) 17:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
Extended content

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorde discography. 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) 12:18, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
Extended content

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorde discography. 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) 12:19, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Melodrama's worldwide sales

[edit]

https://twitter.com/theRonPerry/status/922935415421788160 Can this be a reference?

First of all, Twitter is unreliable itself and the source of the alleged 1 million WW sales is not given; the credibility is even questioned by people in the comments of the Twitter post. Also, if we think logically, Melodrama couldn't have sold 1 million copies worldwide. Let's say it sold 300,000 in the US, but where should the rest of 700,000 copies come from? With this being said, the provided Twitter post can't be used. Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:59, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Extended content

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorde discography. 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) 05:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Hunger Games soundtrack is not by Lorde

[edit]

The Hunger Games soundtrack is by various artists, not Lorde. It shouldn’t be included in her discography just cause she produced it and had a few songs on it. Ss112 said "Lorde curated the soundtrack, just like Beyonce did for The Lion King: The Gift and Kendrick did for Black Panther". But the difference is, those artists are actually credited as an artist on the soundtrack. Lorde isn’t. 𝔹𝕚𝕝𝕝𝕚𝕖𝕜𝕙𝕒𝕝𝕚𝕕𝕗𝕒𝕟 💬 23:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Solar Power Sales Figures

[edit]

Why were these removed? I know sales weren't that great, but removing them when the other albums list their sales figures feels like a whitewash. 2001:5B0:47D7:C968:2CF9:99FB:6D92:B13E (talk) 00:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lorde_discography&oldid=1208345223"