Talk:Paradise (Lana Del Rey EP)/Archive 1

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 17:42, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:NCM makes no mention of using "EP" for disambiguation at all. It states: "When necessary, disambiguation should be done using "(band)", "(album)", or "(song)"." The naming convention only states "band", "album" or "song" should be used. Not "EP", "video" or "single". — Status (talk · contribs

) 22:29, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

So according to you just because "EP" was excluded from the page, "(EP)" dabs should disappear? Under this view (group) should be in band or (video), (soundtrack) or (film score) should be in album. Why instead of adding the term(s) to that page (in which everything is added without consensus), which I think were used only as an example of the disambiguation form and not as "you should only use these three terms", why you decided to move some pages out of hundreds, or search for a global consensus to move them freely? Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm just going by what

WP:NCM states. Just because it's used, doesn't mean that it should be used. If you think those should be added, feel free to to bring up a discussion there to include it. A soundtrack album is an album, just a type of album. As I said before, we don't say Born to Die (Lana Del Rey studio album) or Celebration (Madonna greatest hits album), so why do we say Paradise (Lana Del Rey EP)? — Status (talk · contribs

) 22:04, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

And as I told you before "Born to Die (Lana Del Rey studio album)" or "Celebration (Madonna greatest hits album)" doesn't exist, there is just one album released by those artists and it is unneeded to dab further, use a better argument than this one. You are enforcing a guideline as if it were a policy, and you never explain why with hundreds of articles disambiguated "(EP)" this is an exception. Your arguments belong to the WikiProject Albums, not this page. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 04:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Lana doesn't have a studio album called Paradise, so why does it needed to be dabbed further by using "EP"? Studio album, greatest hits, EP, etc... are all types of albums. — Status (talk · contribs) 05:35, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for proving my points. You a) are using your POVs to move articles you have a conflict of interests out of hundreds of pages titled in the same way, b) Del Rey's should be an exception out of hundreds pages, c) you don't have a real interest to get consensus to change hundreds of (EP) articles to (album), just those you have an interest, d) you don't explain why (soundtrack), (film score), (group) or (video) are not within your interests to move, when they are also other valid exaples. Really get a better reason other than your personal opinions on disambiguation terms that have existed for many years. Unless you can say why the EP by Del Rey is an exception to the common term for serch, that is "EP", you won't avoid the page to be moved to "EP", or if you want I can add a list of all the (EP)-dabbed articles. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per
  WP:NCM to include "EP" (in which we will also have to include "greatest hits album", "studio album" and "remix album", etc.), then I will obviously agree to the move. — Status (talk · contribs
  ) 05:58, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Good for you, but you don't make the MoS, long-term conventions and community does and it is written in MOSALBUM:

"the term (EP) should be used for EPs, (video) for video albums and (album) for other albums, e.g. Insomniac (album) and Gas Food Lodging (EP).". Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.

06:06, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Interesting to see a WikiProject style guide going against naming conventions. — Status (talk · contribs) 06:06, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

It is not going "against", MOSALBUM is an extension of ALBUM. The thing is that you are interpreting a guideline as a policy and therefore should be applied (exclusively to the artists you have interest, not the whole project). The day

WP:NCM says ""When necessary, disambiguation should be done using only the terms "(band)", "(album)", and "(song)"" you will have a point, but no, you are denoting more your lack of interest in the ambiguity eritten at NCM, and interpreting it as you want. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.

06:15, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

When did I say that I have no interest in other articles? I moved certain articles, yes, but I recall seeming open to discussing it somewhere in lengths, but for some reason, you continue here. — Status (talk · contribs) 06:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

"I moved certain articles", you found a loophole in

great champion. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.

06:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I didn't find a "loophole", I just read exactly what it said and how exactly it said it. Please review

WP:NOTPOINTy (or is that just another one of my "loopholes"?). — Status (talk · contribs

) 06:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

If you "read exactly what it said and how exactly it said it" why if there are many pages using EP, you just moved like 12 pages from EP to album, including a move-war at

WP:NCM to include "EP" ... then I will obviously agree to the move" and rather to do it, you decided the project to "contradict" itself ("Interesting to see a WikiProject style guide going against naming conventionsq), because at the end of the day, you are not interested in the project itself, but you reserve the right to allow these "contradictions" to favor your moves and comment "I followed what is written as it is written, regardless the ambiguity. I didn't write the guide, I just followed it". Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.

07:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

• Support - It is an EP, not a full length studio album and labeling it such is incorrect. So since it is not at NCM, we should not use "(rapper)" or "(musician)", or (entertainer)? Might as well move
  message me!
  12:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment: Then should the name simply be Paradise (EP)? We don't currently list any other EPs at Paradise (disambiguation), so there seems no need to use the artist name to disambiguate. I note that this would reverse a previous undiscussed move. Andrewa (talk) 17:42, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

• We have Paradise (The Insyderz EP), that's why I didn't request it to be there. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

• So we do!
  My bad, don't know how I missed that. Andrewa (talk
  ) 01:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

• Comment: An EP is an album. Titling the article
  Paradise (Lana Del Rey album), we are still recognizing the album's sub-categorization an EP. --Thevampireashlee (talk
  ) 05:20, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose - while
  WP:OTHERSTUFF. Last point, I wrote 99% of the article. All of the text was originally written by me alone. Not saying I own the article, but I have been deeply invested in it. tl;dr version: the distinction is unnecessary. EPs are albums. Only music enthusiasts are bothered enough to make the disambiguation. --Thevampireashlee (talk
  ) 05:12, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

• Did you read the whole discussion? You didn't give a new idea about this, just reworded what Status said.
  WP:OTHERSTUFF" is an essay about deletion of articles, not a policy about RMs. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.
  05:25, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your polite and swift response. Frankly, whether the discussion is listed elsewhere is irrelevant and does not make my opinion or vote any less valid. No, I did not read Status' comment. I wanted to give my own comment before reading what anyone else wrote, so that it was not influenced by what anyone else had to say. As far as

WP:OTHERSTUFF being an essay, I fail to see how that's relevant. Policy or some nutter's opinion is not important; simply, I think those words and that idea applies to this particular case, so I mentioned it. How is that harmful? Additionally, I do not care about the disambiguation policy for titles ending in (EP), as the discussion is about whether this article should include it, and I do not think it should; furthermore, I have no desire to debate whether it is wrong to use it on all articles. I only think it's unnecessary to label it for this article. I am fully aware of how you feel about that, and I disagree with your position. Good day. --Thevampireashlee (talk

) 05:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Further, there are multiple sources that claim the album as an EP. Billboard being one (1) and the official PR by Interscope also does (2). I'm sure there are many more in the article, but those were the first two I noticed right off the bat. And I will reiterate my point: an EP is an album. Simple. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 05:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Good night, in fact. First of all, I would recommend you to read what Status said and find the similarities in your views. Secondly, "

WP:OTHERSTUFF being an essay, I fail to see how that's relevant", it is supposed to be known by editors that essays are extension of opinions of ideas, they are just vox populi not rules. In some circumstances, they are used as if they were policies and guidelines, which is wrong--'ve found established users that don't like to be warned citing WP:Don't template the regulars

, but being established is not a justification to edit-war or what the warn is about.

Any essay begins with the note: "This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines." In this case you cited a subsection of the essay

occasional exception

" as required by any guideline. Those are some arguments I could remember while I was writing this.

Third, at the moment you say "does not make my opinion or vote any less valid" you can't say "Policy or some nutter's opinion is not important", first because this is not a

poll, and second because you can't make others' opinions less valid than yours, ironically. If you "do not care about the disambiguation policy for titles ending in (EP)", you shouldn't care about the dab style for this page, regardless how much time you've invested in the page, it is just a label, just a form of disambiguation, if the RM were about to move the page to Born to Die (Paradise edition)

you would have a point about being concerned with the dab style, but it is not the case. Titling "EP" is "jargony and an abbreviation", but "US, UK, R&B" and many others abbreviations are used throughout and there is no problem at all--even this article uses "EP" elsewhere and not "extended play".

As I asked to Status, I'll ask you the same, you have to find a better rationale to oppose rather than personal views on the topic, as Wikipedia is constructed with consensus, and personal views are not helpful in most circumstances. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 06:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to reiterate your point, but I am still of the same opinion I was originally. True, this is not a "poll", but we are looking for consensus about whether this should be moved. I see that you are adamant about lawyering the proposed move, and I understand that this would be ideal to establish congruency among articles of this type wiki-wide. However, I do not believe, as I have stated above that this article in particular needs to "abide by the rules", which can be overridden at any point if consensus permits -- which it seems to be doing in this situation. EDIT: Additionally, while I am fully aware that the

WP:OTHERSTUFF essay is written about deletion candidates, I believe the overarching spirit of the essay rings true for the situation of this article's titling, that being: just because other articles have the word (EP) as a disambiguator, doesn't mean its right or desirable for this article. --Thevampireashlee (talk

) 16:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not trying to change your point of view, as you may have thought about this ("And I will reiterate my point: an EP is an album. Simple."). What I've learn in RMs is that in some occasions, it doesn't matter how many users oppose a RM,

WP:IAR. Neither you or Status have said why Del Rey EP is an exception of the MoS, and you have never denied you have an issue with the page being labeled as "EP" for personal reasons. Yes, an EP is an album, but The Fame Monster is also an EP, and multiple anons decided it to change it to studio album, which is the reason why it was indef protected. If the EP qualifies as a studio album by its own, but it is too short to be clasified as a studio album, it is not up to us, that's not our problem. If you can't cite why this is an exception of what the MoS says, and why this undiscussed move is correct and should not be reversed, this discussion has no sense to continue as it is going in circles. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.

21:23, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

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

The following discussion is an archived 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: page moved. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:52, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

• Question what is the bright line between a single and an EP, and EP and an album? In ictu oculi (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

• In the United Kingdom, the Official Chart Company defines a boundary between EP and album classification at 25 minutes of length or four tracks (not counting alternative versions of featured songs, if present) [1]. A 12-inch 45 has 10-12 min of playing time per side, and a 7-inch 4-5 min. ^walk victor falk ^talk 15:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Then support per user:victor falk reply above/below: In ictu oculi (talk) 15:17, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

• Obvious support per my reply to In ictu oculi. 8 songs and 33:07 playing time is definitely not a LP (30+ min per side), it's actually a very typical EP. I have no idea how on how earth the previous RM could get so lost in such a whirlpool of meaningless discussion. Are really the fingers of all those people unsullied by vinyl? ^walk victor falk ^talk 15:06, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
• Support, per nominator. WikiRedactor (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

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.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The EP of new songs is one part of the re-release offering. Both topics can easily, and should, be covered in one article, as is currently done with the articles for similar albums

Strong oppose Merge The Paradise Edition into Paradise EP The EP contains original tracks and appeared on several charts. Besides, the two releases charted separately on a few charts (according to Australian Hung Medien, Paradise peaked at number 19, while the reissue charted at number 17). Therefore, Paradise should be a stand-alone article. The Paradise Edition of Born to Die is just a compilation of the two releases. Simon (talk) 06:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

The EP's new tracks are a part of the expanded album and we can include more than one chart table. I agree that the Paradise Edition is just a compilation. With little to no indication of its own individual importance, it is best merged with a discussion of its new material. –

Chase (talk / contribs

) 06:12, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

If so, I think the better opinion is to merge the Paradise Edition into Paradise EP. Simon (talk) 06:17, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

I don't have a particular preference as to which article gets merged into which, hence why I used the {{

Chase (talk / contribs

) 06:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, your explanation seems legitimate, but I stand my ground that the Paradise Edition should be merged into Paradise EP (just like Versus EP and Cannibal EP). Simon (talk) 09:32, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

This album was released independently and garnered a Grammy nomination. It was released with The Paradise Edition, but the EP was a standalone affair with a different tracklist. The merge would not be appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.71.19.220 (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. But put it with Born To Die because it is Born To Die: The Paradise Edition. | Graffiti Heart 11:05, 09 June 2016 (UTC)

Oppose. 70.215.71.77 (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Merge basically duplicate content. Needs to be merged. Karst (talk) 12:59, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.