Talk:Shakira (album)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Shakira (album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Shakira High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shakira, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Shakira 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.ShakiraWikipedia:WikiProject ShakiraTemplate:WikiProject ShakiraShakira
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Albums

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

Colombia Low‑importance

	Colombia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Colombia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Colombia-related 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.ColombiaWikipedia:WikiProject ColombiaTemplate:WikiProject ColombiaColombia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pop music Low‑importance

	Pop music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music 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.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

NEW Official album cover

@Status: @WonderBoy1998: Here. Prism △ 22:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In Venezuela this album is #1 (in this moment) http://www.recordland.com/tienda/v2/top40.php?top=01 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.205.215.117 (talk) 03:34, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Song redirects

I've created the following song redirects now that the track listing has been confirmed:

Hopefully we will be able to begin articles on all of these tracks in the near future! WikiRedactor (talk) 22:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eponymous vs. homonymous

The responsibility of a formidable editor should be the correct transmission of information, taking into account the correct use of language from the synthesis of its components. Otherwise, the information would be apocryphal and the implausibility of this media will continue to increase. Thank you! . 64.237.227.58 (talk) 17:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)64.237.227.58[reply]

1) Clarify what you're saying because you're not making sense whatsoever. 2) Taylor Swift (album), Blink-182 (album), and Pearl Jam (album) are good article status and none of them has the "nth eponymous and nth studio album" because it's not notable and it's pointless. Even No Doubt (No Doubt album) just uses the term "self-titled" which is also fine. So, stating this is Shakira's first eponymous is not needed at all. Erick (talk) 07:26, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When a disagreement of this nature is unleashed, the dialectic must be used properly, grounded with laconic and logical arguments to keep concordance with the substance of the issue. So defend your thesis using the structure of others items that are open to the opportunity of free development as fundamental base, makes your arguments to be completely trivial, and therefore, makes you be a dilettante. Remember that the point of this conversation is the correct use of linguistics, not the methodology used by other publishers under their own standards. 64.237.227.39 (talk) 18:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)64.237.227.58[reply]

This is simple solved as this: eponymous: "(Of a person) giving their name to something"; homonym: "Each of two or more words having the same spelling but different meanings and origins". For the second edit-war, the article uses English structures, therefore, it is not incorrect to use "eponymous tenth studio album", although if it is too confusing it can be reworded. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 01:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 June 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 10:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shakira (album) → Shakira. (note the period) – The title of this album, by all indication from the artist and her record label, is Shakira. with a period at the end. The album is listed with this title at iTunes (1 2) and Amazon, and the punctuation is clearly present on the album cover. This minor punctuation detail is ignored by many reliable sources that have reported on the album, which would make this proposal seem to fail WP:COMMONNAME.

However, that leaves the common name for this album as Shakira (no period), but we obviously can't point the article to Shakira, because the singer is the primary topic. Presently, this is remedied by using the parenthetical disambiguation "(album)". But if we moved the article to Shakira. (with period), we would be using natural disambiguation (with a less common but not obscure title) and disambiguation using minor details ("Shakira." is already a redirect to this article, so this is presumed not to cause confusion with the singer's article). Not to mention, "Shakira." is more concise than "Shakira (album)". –Chase (talk / contribs) 07:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support WP:NATURAL disambiguation. Regards, Sovereign /^Sentinel 17:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and move to Shakira. (album) per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:31, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:NATURAL. Calidum T|C 22:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and move to Shakira. (album) per WP:SMALLDETAILS. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:NATURAL. No need for extra disambiguation. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and move to Shakira. (album) per WP:SMALLDETAILS. O N R (talk) 02:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Chrishonduras (talk) 02:38, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Chrishonduras -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 04:21, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those opposing on the basis of SMALLDETAILS: how likely is it that someone would explicitly search for "Shakira." with a period at the end while trying to reach the singer's article? The proposed title is currently a redirect here because of the presumption that they're looking for the album. (If for some reason they were looking for the singer, her article is linked in this article's first sentence and towards the top of the infobox.) SMALLDETAILS actually supports the idea that adding a period is sufficient disambiguation. –Chase (talk / contribs) 04:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- It is highly likely to copy and paste the end of a sentence with the period attached. (or to write an article and link into a period) -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - It is also highly likely that the majority of readers know how to spell and type Shakira's name. As a reader, I have never had to copy and paste her name, nor most people's, into the search bar and I have very rarely seen instances where periods are inappropriately wikilinked (and this is usually fixed very quickly). Regardless, even if this were to happen, the hatnote pointing readers to Shakira (disambiguation) would remain and the singer's article is linked very early into this one. –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose inclusion or usage of a period. This reminds me of Janet (album) vs Janet. debate, and I never thought it extend to this. --George Ho (talk) 07:11, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: We should avoid unnecessary decorative stylizations, and this is too small a detail to use for identifying the topic (and unlikely to be consistently followed by sources). Linking to the suggested name in other articles would also introduce punctuation errors and confusion into those other articles. —BarrelProof (talk) 08:27, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not decorative stylization, it's punctuation. When titles of works include other forms of punctuation, such as exclamation and question marks, we typically honor those. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. (Per WP:BANDNAME, which states "Do not replicate stylized typography in logos and album art,...") Might as well move Kesha to Ke$ha. This is just a stylization on the creative aspects of the album title. Raykyogrou0 (Talk) 11:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Punctuation marks are not stylizations. A dollar sign replacing a letter is not the same as a punctuation mark that ends a sentence. With your logic, we also need to move Help! and "Oops!... I Did It Again". –Chase (talk / contribs) 18:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, there is no need to move Kesha because disambiguation is not required (primary topic). This isn't the case here, where the album is not the primary topic of Shakira (without period). In this case, WP:NATURAL and WP:SMALLDETAILS support the move. Sovereign /^Sentinel 13:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever closes this discussion should note that several editors who oppose the move to Shakira. support a move to Shakira. (album). This should be taken into consideration somehow. Chase (talk | contributions) 03:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Shakira (album). 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.centrodedesarrollodigital.com/amprofonanual/100.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 21:29, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Shakira (album). 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140707080716/http://www.radioairplay.fm/RadioDate/PublicDetails/61970 to http://www.radioairplay.fm/RadioDate/PublicDetails/61970
Added archive https://archive.is/20141222151436/https://www.capif.org.ar/ to https://www.capif.org.ar/rankings.aspx
Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6Ix1EB7ZM?url=http://www.capif.org.ar/rankings.aspx to http://www.capif.org.ar/rankings.aspx
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150113005101/http://www.fimi.it/5233 to http://www.fimi.it/5233
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.centrodedesarrollodigital.com/amprofonanual/100.php

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) 19:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]