This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Headlines! article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was recently redirected to band article, The Saturdays. [1] I'm unaware of any consensus for this merge, so I'm initiating a discussion here.-- Pink Bull 16:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Isn't the title of the EP "Headlines!" with an exclamation point?
Yvesnimmo (
talk)
12:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
On The Saturdays official website, they are calling it a 'mini-album' not a EP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.123.165 ( talk) 14:32, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I've changed it to studio album because the length of the album is 28 minutes. MatthewWaller ( talk) 22:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Headlines (EP) →
Headlines! (EP) — Despite the label referring to the release as Headlines
[2] a number of other reliable sources called the album Headlines!. These include the
BBC Music,
[3]
Digital Spy,
[4] Entertainment Focus,
[5] and
MTV
[6] . Plus the actual cover itself makes use of the exclaimation mark. --
Lil_℧niquℇ №1
(talk2me)
00:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Isn't the reception section a little bit too long and draggy? For example, half a paragraph is wasted on the teentoday review, which shouldn't even be included in the first place. One or two quotes that summarize the article's content should be enough to get a general view of the editor's opinion, otherwise it gets unnecessarily long and tiring to read.
I also found these reviews by Daily Express ( http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/192847/CD-Reviews-Legally-Blonde-Iron-Maiden-and-the-Saturdays/) and Daily Mirror ( http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/the-ticket/2010/08/the-saturdays-cd-of-the-week.html) that I haven't added to the reviewbox yet because the reception needs to be sorted out first. Spacealigned ( talk) 13:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I've changed it to mini album because that's what the label calls it. And according to the Official Charts Company an EP (maxi single) contains no more than 4 original songs. Therefore this cannot be classified as an EP because an EP would NOT be able to chart on the UK album's chart. It is incorrect to call it a studio album because the label and group have confirmed that it is the bridge between the second and third studio albums. Rather than reverting discuss it here. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 17:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
However per the articles on wikipedia and the rules according to Official Charts Company a release of songs where there are more than four original songs (i.e. more than four songs with no remixes) and where length exceeds 25 minutes (i think its this long) then the collection is classified as an album. If you think logically some single releases are classified as EPs because they exceed the requirements of being a single (2-3 music recordings or 1 recording and 1 video). -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 14:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Per the discussions at Talk:The Fame Monster I am changing this album to an EP as it is more like an EP than studio album and precedes the release of the group's third studio album per the sources given. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 20:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
It's length make it qualify as an album, the album booklet says it's their 3rd studio album (read it or look for scans if you don't have it). So let's stop editing this article as an EP, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.232.112.244 ( talk) 13:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Headlines!. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:26, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Headlines! article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was recently redirected to band article, The Saturdays. [1] I'm unaware of any consensus for this merge, so I'm initiating a discussion here.-- Pink Bull 16:07, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Isn't the title of the EP "Headlines!" with an exclamation point?
Yvesnimmo (
talk)
12:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
On The Saturdays official website, they are calling it a 'mini-album' not a EP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.16.123.165 ( talk) 14:32, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I've changed it to studio album because the length of the album is 28 minutes. MatthewWaller ( talk) 22:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Headlines (EP) →
Headlines! (EP) — Despite the label referring to the release as Headlines
[2] a number of other reliable sources called the album Headlines!. These include the
BBC Music,
[3]
Digital Spy,
[4] Entertainment Focus,
[5] and
MTV
[6] . Plus the actual cover itself makes use of the exclaimation mark. --
Lil_℧niquℇ №1
(talk2me)
00:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Isn't the reception section a little bit too long and draggy? For example, half a paragraph is wasted on the teentoday review, which shouldn't even be included in the first place. One or two quotes that summarize the article's content should be enough to get a general view of the editor's opinion, otherwise it gets unnecessarily long and tiring to read.
I also found these reviews by Daily Express ( http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/192847/CD-Reviews-Legally-Blonde-Iron-Maiden-and-the-Saturdays/) and Daily Mirror ( http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/the-ticket/2010/08/the-saturdays-cd-of-the-week.html) that I haven't added to the reviewbox yet because the reception needs to be sorted out first. Spacealigned ( talk) 13:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I've changed it to mini album because that's what the label calls it. And according to the Official Charts Company an EP (maxi single) contains no more than 4 original songs. Therefore this cannot be classified as an EP because an EP would NOT be able to chart on the UK album's chart. It is incorrect to call it a studio album because the label and group have confirmed that it is the bridge between the second and third studio albums. Rather than reverting discuss it here. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 17:53, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
However per the articles on wikipedia and the rules according to Official Charts Company a release of songs where there are more than four original songs (i.e. more than four songs with no remixes) and where length exceeds 25 minutes (i think its this long) then the collection is classified as an album. If you think logically some single releases are classified as EPs because they exceed the requirements of being a single (2-3 music recordings or 1 recording and 1 video). -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 (talk2me) 14:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Per the discussions at Talk:The Fame Monster I am changing this album to an EP as it is more like an EP than studio album and precedes the release of the group's third studio album per the sources given. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 20:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
It's length make it qualify as an album, the album booklet says it's their 3rd studio album (read it or look for scans if you don't have it). So let's stop editing this article as an EP, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.232.112.244 ( talk) 13:05, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Headlines!. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:26, 31 October 2017 (UTC)