Talk:Surprise album

Beyonce & Definition of "Surprise"

With these edits[1][2][3] StatsFreak has edited or reverted to a previous edit that (a) cast a light on other artists suggesting their albums were not true surprises only "loose surprises" which is not supported by any source, (b) suggested Beyonce is the only artist to ever release a true surprise album, (c) suggested that her surprise album is the reason albums are now released on Friday (this has nothing to do with the surprise nature of the release, just that it was released on a Friday, making this a totally irrelevant fact) and (d) in a very Kanye West move StatsFreak completely deleted Taylor Swift's entire paragraph without explanation despite her album Folklore being widely considered to be a significant surprise release.

StatsFreak's edit comments suggest a true surprise has zero mention prior to release. This strict definition would actually exclude Beyonce's 2013 self-titled album because she began talking about it a year ahead of its release[4][5] then Ne-Yo gave an update on the album in June[6] then MTV started putting the promotional pieces together about what Beyonce was up to[7] and Vulture even guessed she might release a surprise album the week it was officially released.[8] That doesn't sound very surprise-y to me. Instead, I think this page should adopt a less strict definition where an album sees minimal promotion or announcement (not zero) and we should just stick to what reliable sources say are surprises or not surprises. The "Reception" section currently includes commentary about how the term is ill-defined. Fezmar9 (talk) 20:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

StatsFreak is correct. It is questionable whether these albums can be considered a true "surprise album". There is a difference between an album that was announced ten days before release (e.g. In Rainbows) and an album that was not announced before release (e.g. Beyoncé). As Lindsay Zoladz for Vulture wrote here, "Artists like Radiohead and David Bowie had previously toyed with secret recording sessions and unconventional release strategies, but the day the bubble truly burst was December 13, 2013 — when Beyoncé “changed the game with that digital drop” (as she later put it in her guest verse on Nicki Minaj’s “Feeling Myself”) and released her blockbuster self-titled visual album with no prior promotion". If we are to leave these more grey-area albums in this article, then it needs to be explained clearly how they are surprise albums, what their release strategies were and why they are considered notable albums in the history of the surprise album.

Additionally, Taylor Swift's folklore is not a notable album in the history of the surprise album. There is no reason for it to be added in the history section. I get that if one really likes Taylor Swift they may want to write a lot about her where it may not be necessary or relevant, but we need this article to be neutral and for everything to be treated with due weight. Bgkc4444 (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444

It is your personal opinion that these other albums constitute a "grey area". All albums added here are well sourced as surprise albums. Fezmar9 (talk) 01:48, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

As the source I brought says, those albums had secret recording sessions and unconventional release strategies, not surprise releases. I personally agree that these other albums should be included in this article, but StatsFreak did have genuine concerns and it's best to gain consensus on this issue instead of edit warring with each other. Again, if we are to leave these albums in, we should be making it clear in what way they are surprise albums so readers can understand the evolution of the surprise album. Bgkc4444 (talk) 09:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444

According to how the lead defines "surprise album," there is no difference between an album that was announced ten days before release and an album that was not announced before release. "refers to the release of an album with extremely minimal or no prior announcement, marketing or promotion." isento (talk) 05:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

The Folklore paragraph might be a bit too long on detail for this article's focus - I'd ditch or condense the last two quotes. Otherwise, reliable sources seem to connect the release to the surprise-album phenomenon ("Taylor Swift Finally Abandoned the Traditional Album Rollout", Rolling Stone). isento (talk) 05:26, 4 September 2020 hutch

Isento! Curious to see you follow me to a third talk page discussion! Yes, that's what the lead said (before you changed it) but just because one editor added that doesn't mean that everyone agrees. Regarding folklore, the point of the prominent surprise albums section is to lay out the albums connected to the surprise-album phenomenon. This article should not contain puffery-filled advertisements for specific projects. I kindly ask you to stop making edits to material if we are in the middle of a discussion on that material. Thank you! Bgkc4444 (talk) 09:39, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444

@Bgkc4444:, Please stay on-topic and keep your personal quarrels on your talk page? BawinV (talk) 09:54, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Bgkc4444: I don't know why you would think you have a say in deciding which surprise albums are notable enough or not... That's the media's job. Not mine or yours. A multitude of news and media publications have labelled folklore a surprise album, with a huge media coverage of its announcement and release and eventually top the Billboard 200 for 5 consecutive weeks. So, please don't WP:SYNTH on its notability. The article was neutral and due-weighted until StatsFreak showed up and decided to turn it into a extremely biased, puffed, Beyoncé-centred article, synthesizing other albums are pseudo surprise releases. BawinV (talk) 10:02, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@BawinV: Woah neither of us is doing anything of the sort. Again, the source I brought says that Radiohead's (and by extension others') releases were more secret recordings and unconventional strategies rather than a surprise album per se. However, I agree with you that these albums should be considered surprise albums, but as we are aware that there is no consensus on the exact definition, we should be making it clear how the concept of the surprise album has evolved and why each album is considered a surprise album. I never said that folklore is not a surprise album so I'm not sure why you'd say that, and congrats on the number one but I'm not sure how that's relevant. There is a section specifically for listing prominent surprise albums, which for the reasons you stated, folklore belongs in. The history section is intended to relay the history of the surprise album, not the history of every album that is a prominent surprise album. If there is information in reliable sources about why the release of folklore is a significant moment in the history of the surprise album then please bring that here, instead of adding puffery to the article such as the "much acclaim" the album received, which again is relevant to the history of the specific album but not to the history of the surprise album. I also don't understand why you removed all of StatsFreak's additions, because there was some well-sourced and relevant material in there. Bgkc4444 (talk) 10:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444

1. "The history section is intended to relay the history of the surprise album, not the history of every album that is a prominent surprise album". The History of Surprise Albums itself is a cumulative story of how surprise albums came to existence by each of the surprise releases in the industry. I don't know how you find that irrelevant, because it's not like someone "discovered" Surprise albums, like Benjamin discovered electricity. It's a collective story, and every surprise album adds to the History.

2. "much acclaim" is literally two words. Puffery is adding "despite not being a surprise release" to Radiohead's album, creating a section separately for Beyoncé the album, and glorifying that specific album, while labelling the rest as either faux-surprises or as an outcome of Beyoncé, these are known as PUFFERY. 3. There wasn't any well-sourced, relevant material in StatsFreak's edit. It was all extreme puffery that is unsuitable per Wikipedia standards. BawinV (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Don't waste your energy on this person, BawinV. Their repetitive gobbledygook and toxic, condescending suggestions are of no consequence to this article. Let them get it out of their system and we can return to actually improving this article. isento (talk) 11:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

1. The history section is the collective story of albums that have shaped the concept of the surprise album throughout its history, not the history of every album that is a surprise album, as not every surpise album shaped the concept of the surprise album. This is comparable to a similar article about a music-related technique, backmasking, whereby the history section delineates how the concept of backmasking evolved throughout its history via the specific recordings which shaped the concept, while the use section delineates the different examples of recordings that use backmasking. If readers wanted to learn about specific surprise albums, there is a list of prominent surprise albums in this article with links to the respective articles. We need to keep this section relevant to the history of the surprise album specifically.
2. It doesn't matter that it is "literally two words", MOS:PUFF brings "acclaimed" as an example of puffery. Adding "despite not being a surprise release" is not puffery, but it should have been re-worded so that it is reads more neutrally. Explaining the differences between albums that are variably described as surprise albums or not and saying that Beyoncé is credited with popularizing the surprise album are not puffery either, and are actually necessary in this article for it to be encyclopedic.
3. Yes there was. For example, the "pulling a Beyoncé" phrase is a common term used to described surprise albums, and again is necessary in this article for it to be encyclopedic. Bgkc4444 (talk) 11:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444

Removal of sourced material

@Fezmar9: Why did you remove all the well-sourced infomation and re-add information that shouldn't belong in the article? I don't see how adding material that explains the history of various artists' surprise albums in an article about surprise albums cited to reliable sources can be considered as contravening NPOV and OR. Saying "these edits cast doubt on the legitimacy of other releases as true surprise releases and disproportionately boost Beyonce's prominence" doesn't make much sense because all material is cited to reliable sources; if reliable sources focus on Beyonce when writing about surprise albums and clarify in what way each album is a surprise, then that is what the article needs to include in order to be encyclopedic, no matter if you personally dislike those facts. Bgkc4444 (talk) 16:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

While reliably sourced, the framing of the information was being used to convey that most of these albums were not "true" surprises until Beyonce came along, which is not accurate. The term "surprise album" is ill-defined, so by suggesting you personally know which ones are true surprises and which ones aren't, you are applying your own original research that is not supported by any source. By re-writing this page to more than double the amount of content on Beyonce, it is no longer neutral it is a Beyonce fan page with an extreme Beyonce bias. One look at your edit history suggests your motivations in beefing up Beyonce content here are extremely biased based on your personal perception of the facts. The page already mentions Beyonce plenty as is, leave well enough alone. Fezmar9 (talk) 17:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

That's your personal reading of the text. Where does the material I added say that I "personally know which ones are true surprises and which ones aren't"? In what way is explaining the surprise album strategies of surprise albums unacceptable in an article about surprise albums? Why did you re-add material that is incorrect? It is strange for an editor to be removing such obviously relevant material because they personally don't like it and don't want to ascribe the surprise album trend to Beyonce when the reliable sources do. And you do not own this page so how dare you tell me to "leave well enough alone" because you personally don't want to accept or display these basic facts. Bgkc4444 (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

You specifically added details to each album prior to Beyonce's s/t album about when they were announced prior to release, which suggests to the reader that these are not "true" surprises. Then you start the Beyonce paragraph out with "unlike previous surprise albums which had prior announcements," which is taking the source out of context -- this sentence is referring to Justin Timberlake and David Bowie, who aren't even mentioned in this article. You have re-framed the information in the article to suggest no one ever released a true surprise album before Beyonce. The term "surprise album" is an ill-defined term that is not used consistently throughout the industry, some use it to mean an album with minimal promotion some use it to mean an album with literally zero promotion. Countless sources refer to In Rainbows as a surprise album. By changing this paragraph to say it was a surprise release BUT it was announced 10 days prior casts the information in a different light. And you're doing that intentionally to shine a brighter spotlight on Beyonce. And you're doing that because you're extremely biased. Fezmar9 (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Interesting that now you say that, but in the discussion above I said: "I agree with you that these albums should be considered surprise albums, but as we are aware that there is no consensus on the exact definition", and you said: "It is your personal opinion that these other albums constitute a "grey area"". Looking at the first edition of the article that you wrote highlights your contradicting views. Why is it ok for you to explain how Folklore and others were released (and spend most of the Folklore paragraph randomly explaining how it is acclaimed but I'm the biased one?), but not for me to explain how Beyonce and its predecessors were released? In order to relay the history of the surprise album, which is the sole goal of this section, isn't it obvious that we need to relate the evolution of the surprise album? In the version of the article before you removed all the material, it explicitly said multiple times that In Rainbows is considered a surprise album, so stop saying I want to put the opposite of that in the article. If you think that explaining the release of the album, "suggests to the reader that these are not "true" surprises", then that's your interpretation, but we shouldn't not be making articles encyclopedic because we personally don't want readers to know the full story.

"You have re-framed the information in the article to suggest no one ever released a true surprise album before Beyonce" - again, your interpretation, but feel free to reword what I wrote if you think it isn't neutral.

"By changing this paragraph to say it was a surprise release BUT it was announced 10 days prior casts the information in a different light." - Where's the "BUT"?? Again, your interpretation.

"Then you start the Beyonce paragraph out with "unlike previous surprise albums which had prior announcements," which is taking the source out of context -- this sentence is referring to Justin Timberlake and David Bowie, who aren't even mentioned in this article." - I didn't start the paragraph out with that? And again, just because you don't like the source doesn't mean it shouldn't be added. Other sources say the same, e.g. as I brought in the last discussion, Lindsay Zoladz for Vulture wrote: "Artists like Radiohead and David Bowie had previously toyed with secret recording sessions and unconventional release strategies, but the day the bubble truly burst was December 13, 2013 — when Beyoncé “changed the game with that digital drop” (as she later put it in her guest verse on Nicki Minaj’s “Feeling Myself”) and released her blockbuster self-titled visual album with no prior promotion"

It's funny looking at what you're trying to force into the article. You wrote "Beyoncé and Jay-Z are often credited for popularizing the release strategy through multiple solo and collaborative releases. Beyoncé's 2013 self-titled album Beyoncé became the next most prominent surprise release after In Rainbows." But the source doesn't say that. It says that after Beyonce, "the rules for how to release a record were rewritten literally overnight", and that since "she and Jay-Z have become masters of the form", with no mention to In Rainbows either. You wrote "David Sackllah of Consequence of Sound noted that while many major artists had attempted a surprise release, few had matched or surpassed the level of excitement of In Rainbows." But the source doesn't say "major artists", it says "rock bands", and in fact says Beyonce achieved what In Rainbows didn't and started the current trend of surprise albums. And then you revert my edits trying to correct these incorrect statements. Bgkc4444 (talk) 18:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Wow that's a lot of words. Let me see if I can simply this. Would you call it a bias if I tripled the length of the paragraph about Taylor Swift? And included a giant pull quote from Taylor Swift that was the length of her paragraph? And included a photo of Taylor Swift with a caption about her changing music overnight by releasing two surprise albums in one year? And went around to other paragraphs to add mention Taylor Swift? And then on top of all that, I added the following to Beyonce's paragraph:

Despite referring to the album as a surprise, there were several clear indications that she was working on a new album and was intending to release it soon. In January 2013, Beyonce announced she was working with Justin Timberlake, Pharrell Williams and Timbaland on a new album. In June 2013, album collaborator Ne-Yo gave an update on the progress of the new album stating, "I'm still putting stuff together for Beyonce's album. They're still trying to figure out what they want that to be, which I'm not mad at." By July 2013, MTV noticed Beyonce spent the better part of the year launching a promotional campaign that didn't seem to be promoting anything specific but could likely be the album her collaborators have been talking about, then the week of the album's release Vulture speculated Beyonce could be planning a surprise album release after casting doubt a statement from her record label.

According to your own arguments, none of this constitutes a bias nor is it re-framing information and casting it in a different light. It in no way will change the reader's perception of Beyonce's self-titled album being truly surprising, nor would it change their understanding of Taylor Swift. All I'm doing is adding sourced material to an article to explain the history of surprise albums. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Watch your tone, and it would be great if you stopped with the whataboutism and actually responded to my points. And well, no. As much as you'd love it to be the truth, Swift's albums aren't the main events in surprise album history like Radiohead and Beyonce's albums. Currently Taylor Swift's paragraph is too long compared to the rest of the article; it is good that commentary on the signifcance of her surprise album was included, but comments on its reception are irrelevant. Swift's paragraph is longer than that "shared" paragraph you made about Beyonce and Jay Z, despite Beyonce being universally credited with popularising surprise albums. It is also longer than Radiohead's article, despite In Rainbows being credited with being the first surprise album. "went around to other paragraphs to add mention Taylor Swift" - lol I corrected your intentional misrepresentation of a source and you're saying I'm wrong for that? And yes, you conducting your own original research and then synthesising it to form your own conclusion is unacceptable in this article, correct. If there are reliable sources saying that Beyonce's album was not a true surprise then please bring them here and we can provide that point of view in the article with due weight. Bgkc4444 (talk) 19:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

It's not a whataboutism, it's a hypothetical parallel situation to highlight your biases since you weren't getting what I was saying. By responding, "conducting your own original research and then synthesising it to form your own conclusion is unacceptable in this article, correct" you agree that what you are doing is inappropriate and does not belong on this page nor any page on Wikipedia. I have no further comments. Fezmar9 (talk) 19:27, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Again with the ignoring of my points? Ok... "Let me see if I can simply this." Yes, you can add sources which provide useful commentary about the surprise release of Beyonce. Conducting your own research and synthesising them to say "Despite referring to the album as a surprise, there were several clear indications that she was working on a new album and was intending to release it soon" is "conducting your own original research and then synthesising it to form your own conclusion". Quoting sources that state when an album was announced, like you did with Swift, is not "conducting your own original research and then synthesising it to form your own conclusion". Quoting sources that say that Beyonce's album dropped completely out of nowhere unlike its predecessors is also not "conducting your own original research and then synthesising it to form your own conclusion". I hope you're not refusing to engage in discussion, because this isn't your article, and you should want to reach consensus to ensure it is encyclopedic.Bgkc4444 (talk) 19:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Lol, this conversation had nothing to do with reaching consensus to ensure it is encyclopedic. Consensus was already achieved back in September between myself, @BawinV and @Isento through the talk page and edit summaries that these edits exhibit an extreme bias and the article is better off without them. You added content to the article that you knew was contested. This conversation was really about your inability to accept the outcome from a few months ago. Fezmar9 (talk) 21:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Please review WP:CON. Consensus is not three editors agreeing with each other and explicitly agreeing to ignore opposing views. Bgkc4444 (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I read this entire discussion, and I agree with @Fezmar9:. I think sources are being misinterpreted to make it look like other surprise releases aren't “legit”, when none of those sources imply so. This is a weird form of editorial gatekeeping. BawinV (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@BawinV: Thank you for your response. How do you think the material should be phrased then to ensure neutrality if simply stating the release schedule is misinterpreting the sources? Also in what way is this gatekeeping? I'm not the one reverting to force my contradictory opinions onto the page. Bgkc4444 (talk) 21:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Maybe a little more can be added about Beyonce, if the source establishes its pertinence to the theme of surprise albums, like the Billboard quote and the explanation of her intent, as Radiohead's intent was also mentioned. But the original addition as a whole seems excessive. isento (talk) 01:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Oh, and as for the concern about framing (or misframing) non-Beyonce albums with information about their teased announcements and whatnot, I would only think it appropriate if a source dealing specifically with the concept or history of surprise albums does so too. That would be faithful to the spirit and discretion of WP:STICKTOSOURCE, using the best sources available on the topic of the article, which is more the surprise album in general and less so specific examples. The DIY magazine source actually mentions the 10-day window of announcement in painting In Rainbows as "a pretty unexpected move". The others, like Channel Orange, maybe you can mention in a footnote. isento (talk) 02:04, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

"using the best sources available on the topic of the article, which is more the surprise album in general and less so specific example" - Yes, as I said above: "The history section is intended to relay the history of the surprise album, not the history of every album that is a prominent surprise album.", and yet you said: "Don't waste your energy on this person, BawinV. Their repetitive gobbledygook and toxic, condescending suggestions are of no consequence to this article. Let them get it out of their system and we can return to actually improving this article."

"I would only think it appropriate if a source dealing specifically with the concept or history of surprise albums does so too" - Again, as I said above: "As Lindsay Zoladz for Vulture wrote here, "Artists like Radiohead and David Bowie had previously toyed with secret recording sessions and unconventional release strategies, but the day the bubble truly burst was December 13, 2013 — when Beyoncé “changed the game with that digital drop” (as she later put it in her guest verse on Nicki Minaj’s “Feeling Myself”) and released her blockbuster self-titled visual album with no prior promotion"." Here's an article that literally goes through each example and explains how each is a surprise, e.g.: "Radiohead’s In Rainbows was self-released in October 2007... Except it wasn’t, in the truest sense, a surprise. The band’s guitarist Jonny Greenwood announced it was coming 10 days in advance on the Dead Air Space blog, with a link to a dedicated inrainbows.com site, where fans could preorder a deluxe physical boxset version or choose to pay what they liked for a low-res MP3 version... Of all the major acts that have subsequently leaned on this approach, only a handful could be classed as genuine surprises. Beyoncé’s self-titled album suddenly appeared on iTunes in December 2013, with a video for every track, making it the most ambitious surprise release to date.". But for some reason I'm told that by adding such material to the article, I'm forcing my biased personal opinions and original research onto the page. Heck, I didn't even add that In Rainbows wasn't a true surprise in my edit - I just said when it was announced, like with Folklore. But still that was removed.

"Maybe a little more can be added about Beyonce, if the source establishes its pertinence to the theme of surprise albums" - Beyonce's album is universally considered the prime example of a surprise release and the popularizer of it. The way editors on this page are trying to bury that fact by misrepresenting sources and hiding the significance of her album in a "shared" paragraph really isn't helpful. Bgkc4444 (talk) 11:13, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

You didn't use the best sources available on the topic of surprise albums in your edits. As we can see here, you used Radiohead's blog and Rolling Stone's report on an example album, and no source at all for Channel Orange, while removing "to much surprise among listeners and the music industry" from the sentence about Folklore. You also inserted a large quote box based on a Billboard report on the Beyonce album release and cited a YouTube video about it. None of these actions you made in your edits are researching the best sources available on the article's topic. isento (talk) 23:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

The sources you are referring to here now -- The Guardian article where the writer says In Rainbows "wasn't in the truest sense a surprise", and Vulture, where Zoladz says Beyonce "changed the game" -- do both discuss surprise albums. But they do not appear in your edits. Perhaps try using them in newer edits, while abstaining from the other changes I have mentioned earlier... isento (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Important note. While Zoladz in Vulture does confirm the existence of such a phrase as "pulling a Beyonce", she clarifies that the phrase is a "joke", "already old and the phrase misleading — the surprise album now comes in many shapes and sizes." So perhaps we should not give much credence to it either. isento (talk) 00:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

The comebacks

There's a section in the DIY article about comeback albums in 2013 being surprise albums -- David Bowie's The Next Day and My Blood Valentine's m b v -- both predating Beyonce. Making a note of it here for its inclusion into the article. isento (talk) 09:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

In 2020, the lesser-known acts Hum and X surprise-released Inlet (album)[9] and Alphabetland[10], each band's respective comeback of 20+ years. It could be framed as precursors to Beyonce, but it could also be its own paragraph that sometimes this release style is used for comebacks in general irrespective of the timeline. Fezmar9 (talk) 16:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Surprise album

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Surprise album's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Billboard":

• From Ghosts I–IV: Harding, Cortney; Cohen, Jonathan (March 2, 2008). "New Nine Inch Nails Album Hits The Web". Billboard. Retrieved March 2, 2008.
• From Nine Inch Nails: "Top Music Video – Beside You in Time". Billboard. March 31, 2007. Archived from the original on October 11, 2007. Retrieved September 28, 2007.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Surprise album

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Surprise album's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Variety":

• From Music to Be Murdered By: Chris Willman (January 16, 2020). "Eminem Pays Homage to Alfred Hitchcock With 'Murdered' Album Cover and Title". Variety. Archived from the original on January 19, 2020. Retrieved January 23, 2020.
• From Lemonade (Beyoncé album): "Beyonce to Release Audio of 'Lemonade' Film across All Music Streaming Platforms (EXCLUSIVE)". Variety. Retrieved 2019-04-17.
• From Toy (David Bowie album): Amorosi, A.D. (7 January 2022). "The Inside Story of David Bowie's Long-Lost 'Toy' Album". Variety. Retrieved 14 January 2022.
• From Disney Music Group: "Disney Music Group Launches Composer Podcast Series". Variety. August 20, 2019. Retrieved August 21, 2019.
• From Republic Records: "Billie Eilish Named Variety's Hitmaker of the Year; Will Be Honored at 3rd Annual Brunch". Variety. November 19, 2019. Archived from the original on December 8, 2019. Retrieved May 6, 2020.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 21:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)