Talk:Narada Productions/Archives/2014

This is an archive of past discussions about Narada Productions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Untitled

Is Narada (record label) same article? Can they combine?"D" 16:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion moved from Talk:Narada (record label)

Is Narada Productions same article? Can they combine?"D" 16:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal.

The articles are identical, the only real question is whether we use the apparent legal title Narada Productions, which can be found in the titlebar and the footer of the page, or simply "Narada" as they use it throughout their webpage, and in their logos. I think that if they spend all their time calling themselves Narada, not Narada Productions, that's what we should call them too. - BalthCat 17:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the article should be named after their official name. I don't think either article name in use now lends itself to a search. -Freekee 04:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

As a listener of world music I didn't even know the official name was "Narada Productions". Most people will simply search for "Narada." That's all the logo says on the back of the CDs. It's the fine print that says "Productions." So I'm not sure what you mean by saying it doesn't lend itself to a search. - BalthCat 04:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

What I meant (and didn't say well) was that neither Narada Productions nor Narada (record label) will be specifially searched for. People will only find it by following the link at the top of the Narada article, like I did. If Narada (record label) was a term that many people would think of to search for, I'd recommend merging to it. But I don't think that's likely. Narada Records seems a likely name, but it's not accurate. Simply Narada would be the best, but it's taken. Anyway, since neither of the two article names is likely to be searched for, I think that using the company's official name is the way to go (and there's certainly a precedent for that). Especially since the other existing title will remain as a redirect anyway. -Freekee 04:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I generally view the (disamb) tails as silent, so I think I would prefer it Narada (record label), but according to WP:DAB#Specific_topic, it should likely be Narada Productions. - BalthCat 04:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

DONE. - BalthCat 04:45, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed links

I removed these links to artists whose articles do not even mention reference to the label Narada Productions. Please add back in when a cross-reference (proof) can be obtained. Cricket02 13:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Links to be added

I gathered this list from the Narada various artists compilation albums listed in WP, so obviously these artists are or have been with Narada. Please add links to article page as they are created. Cricket02 19:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Shakti Records redirect

I found this reference on the disambig page for Shakti (disambiguation), "Shakti Records, a music label of Narada Productions [1]". I created a redirect but only one artist and 2 respective albums link to it: Johnny Kalsi, so unsure of the validity and correctness of the redirect. I will leave his name here until additional verification can be found. Cricket02 14:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I answered this question in my edit of the main article today. It was a short-lived sub-label of Narada. They had a handful of releases according to [2]. I checked one of them, the David Sylvian release, and found it is now available only on EMI International as an import. I checked on Amazon for the record you asked about, and it does not seem to be available in their system. I remember seeing the Shakti Records project when Narada was doing it, because I like that kind of music, but then it just disappeared and now is clearly defunkt. Parzival418 01:43, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and research on this. I didn't know where to start. Cricket02 03:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

change from stub-class to start-class

It seems to me this article is now more than just a stub. I suggest we change it to start-class. If anyone else has an opinion on this, please reply here. I don't know the Wiki procedure for making this change. I see it can be edited in the template, but I would like to have consensus first, or at least better understanding of the process. Parzival418 02:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not part of that workgroup, but in actuality anyone can edit the ratings, especially "stub" or "start", so I went ahead and changed as it is clearly not a stub anymore. Any ratings higher than that would have to be done by someone not significantly involved in the writing of the article, which is a good and fair policy. Again, thank your for your time and research. Cricket02 03:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for making that change and for the explanation. That's interesting about limiting the higher levels of ratings to editors not directly involved in the particular article, makes good sense to have that additional perspective. Parzival418 06:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)