Talk:Jennifer Lopez/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Unsupported claims

The citation for the claim that Jennifer is appearing in an episode of Glee is NOT substantiated by the citation, which says only "The 40-year-old actress - who is rumored to be appearing on an upcoming episode of Fox's Glee as the "cafeteria lady"..."

Anything can happen in terms of timing, availability and negotiations. Having this rumored appearance in a filmography -- which by definition is a factual list of appearances -- is shoddy and violates Wikipedia guidelines. -- 207.237.230.157 (talk) 18:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

The claim that "she became the highest paid Latina actress in Hollywood history" has a citation to AskMen.com that does not say this. This article appears to be rife with unsupported claims. --207.237.230.157 (talk) 16:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Yet another. NOTHING in the two citations for People magazine supposedly paying $6 million for baby pictures ACTUALLY SAYS THAT.

Yet another -- footnote #1 itself. Not only is the original article not there, but neither is the archived version.

Why is this article protected? What's it being protected from? Accuracy? Citations that actually say what they claim? --207.237.230.157 (talk) 20:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Try this: "The trade magazine Advertising Age reported that People magazine was prepared to negotiate between $4 million and $6 million for exclusive U.S. rights to the first photos of the expected twins." Source: Ives, Nat. "How Much for That Baby on the Cover?", Advertising Age February 18, 2008 -- 207.237.230.157 (talk) 20:49, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

And here's a reliable source citation for Glee -- from Warner Bros. TV itself: "Jennifer Lopez to Guest-Star on 'Glee'", ExtraTV.WarnerBros.com, January 18, 2010. NOTE: It says nothing about any confirmed specific role. --207.237.230.157 (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Great, you found citations for undisputed material. As for "highest paid latina actress", the cited source says that she was the first latina actress to demand $1M for a film. That would make her, at that time, the highest paid. The article at one time specified "first $1M" but someone insisted on changing it. If you really want to improve the article, you can register an account. Gimmetrow 21:52, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Does it matter? Get a grip.

Date discrepancy

In the lead it says "She gained her first regular high-profile job as a "Fly Girl" dancer on the television comedy program In Living Color in 1990.

In the filmography, it says 1991-1993. --207.237.230.157 (talk) 16:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

1990 is incorrect. That's when the series began, not when Lopez began. Lopez was not a member in season one (beginning April 1990) or season two (Sept. 1990-Sept..1991) per Lovece, Frank, ed. The Television Yearbook: Complete, Detailed Listings for the 1990-1991 Season (Perigee Books, 1992). In Living Color entry, pp. 135-136. ISBN-10 0399517022, ISBN-13 978-0399517020 --207.237.230.157 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC).

Lopez's Pasadena, California restaurant Madres closed July 2008. http://www.hollywood.com/news/Jennifer_Lopezs_Restaurant_Closes/5271003

What exactly is your point? Sego Lily (talk) 07:32, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Bill Cobbett, 8 July 2010

Would like to see the following added at the end of the section Human rights advocacy as a second paragraph to reflect current events.

Citing Sources: http://www.facebook.com/pages/AGAINST-JENNIFER-LOPEZ-PERFORMING-IN-OCCUPIED-CYPRUS/129154837124167 http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/anger-as-jennifer-lopez-set-to-rock-north-cyprus-2020327.html

{{editsemiprotected}} Lopez caused controversy in July 2010 when plans were made public for a visit to the area of Cyprus held by Turkey since a war in 1974, which drew world-wide condemnation and which included the formation of a protest group on Facebook that attracted in excess of 17,000 members.

Bill Cobbett (talk) 13:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Partly done: Added to the 2009 – Present section instead. AJ Cham 17:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Jennifer's album and record sales

Hi everyone. I am presenting a case for discussion regarding Lopez's sales. The article currently lists her sales at 50 million albums, with this Rolling Stone source. Now, looking at Jennifer's certifications in the United States equal around 12.5 million copies. In the UK her certifications equal around 1,400,000. In Germany, her certifications equal around 750,000. Now, those are her top 3 markets and they equal to only around 14.6 million. Adding the other markets Australia, France and any other small markets (where her albums don't even chart) and they don't equal 20 million certifications in albums, singles and videos (records). Now find the 50 million albums claim ridiculous, even if it were records. I have 3 other sources, 1 that should suffice on its own, that claim her sales are "17 million records" according to Reuters, 25 million albums according to Contact Music and 25 million records according to The Mirror.co.uk. Now "Rolling Stones" claim of 50 million albums is just so far out of reach for Lopez, and so impossible according to her certifications, that I would like to demote it and use these sources. Please express you opinions.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:03, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I could not agree more with Petergriffin, Lopez has most definitely not sold as many records as 50 million. That is a figure tossed about by her record company to possibly promote her upcoming material. I have presented figures of her certifications at the discussion page of Jennifer Lopez discography here. And the total of her certified sales would never even make up 25 million. And her actual sales in its turn would never turn into even 40 million. So, yes, as pointed out above by Peter, her sales figure should be corrected and the source(s) replaced. Perhaps, if there is a reliable source which claims that Lopez has sold 35 million records (Albums, Singles, Videos), that would make sense; however, if we are to focus on her album-sales only, then, it should not be more than 25 million.--Harout72 (talk) 02:42, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Lopez' former record company generally said >25 million albums. Her bio on Sony UK and US seems to be gone, but for instance [1] lists Sony's view of worldwide sales for albums: 7M for On the 6, 8M for JLo, 3M for Remixes and 5M for This is Me at the time Rebirth was released (2005). Gimmetoo (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

As I said, 25 million albums, or 35 million records sounds passable, but 50 million albums is just no way, not even records.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:26, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

50 million is too much. 20-25 w/reliable source I say is fine. Jayy008 (talk) 12:03, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Agree -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 15:44, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

You agree? If you agreed Unique we wouldn't be here in the first place. You obviously don't and didn't agree, just you realize there is a nice consensus already formed.--PeterGriffin • Talk 15:55, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

If you bothered to read the last message on you're page I said "I was playing devils' advocate" to ensure that the most factual info is left on the page. I have since done some research into the claims of Rolling Stone magazine and I agree with the opinions been given about. that's why on your talk page i said "they probably mean records (albums and singles etc.)". Seesh! I am human, we are allowed to get things wrong, we are allowed to make mistakes. One has been made and I'm correcting my view. Heck Peter anyone would assum that you've never got anything wrong before the way you've just spoken to me. Do not make assumptions like You obviously don't and didn't agree, just you realize there is a nice consensus already formed. I have explained why I changed my mind and that should be good enough. You seem to have a problem seperating the editor from the edits and seem unable to be critical of the edits without assuming bad faith on the editor. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 16:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I am not accusing you of anything. You did not vandalize, the only thing I asked is why we went through this whole thing (per your request) if you agree with me. I didn't accuse you of anything wrong. And, yes I know I have made mistakes, thats not a problem. From what I see, your taking offense to my question, there is no hostility on my part. And please Unique, don't talk about bad faith, considering you only last week accused me of sock-puppetry.--PeterGriffin • Talk 16:15, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

When I'm wrong, I say I'm wrong and that's exactly what I've done here. I said sorry on second thought's I might be wrong about the JLo sales. That should be end of the discussion. But by making comments like You obviously don't and didn't agree, just you realize there is a nice consensus already formed you are trying to drive the situation into something else and it is shows that you don't assume good faith. I'm continuing this conversation on your talk page. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 16:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

It was as suspected, she has sold, 55 million records worldwide. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 22:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Honestly Unique, that number is very inflated. I mean the site is trying to boost up her image so people will watch the show. They want to hype it up and make it like J.Lo actually has something to do with music. So I think the number is very inflated. Secondly, why does the American Idol site have, as you say, authoritative music background and opinion? Do they track music sales etc. I would personally vote to leave as is, she did not sell 30 million singles.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 23:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Well i thought it might coincide with Rollingstone's report? Nay? Ok well I'm certainly not an expert hence that's why I asked here before someone else tried to add it... -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 23:35, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from an expert in this area, but I just don't see how she could have sold so much, judging from reputed sales/certifications. This is just an editors opinion, it could very well be right.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 23:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

55 million in sales for someone like Lopez is as incorrect as it can get. As pointed out correctly above, certifications don't like, they are a solid way of determining whether the claimed figures could be close to an actual sales, and in the case of Lopez, they suggest that Lopez's actual sales could not be more than 35 million in record-sales. 55 million is simply a promotional figure to make Lopez's participation as a judge in "American Idol" more impressive. I think we all would agree that inflated figures are nothing new, they have been serving as marketing tools for quite sometime now. But that doesn't mean that we should blindly believe them.--Harout72 (talk) 00:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

This is about Jennifer Lopez records sales, I've trying to edit Lopez records sales to more than 50 million several times providing reliable sources with recent dates, but you refuse to make those changes and keep that amount of 25 million.

I don't agree with the reason you gave me, ...someone here said that she doesn't have enough certificaciones, .... in the USA only she has 11 million certified copies (actually she has sold more than 14 million if we count the non certified sales), you can even see that amount on the RIAA website: http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=3&table=tblTopArt&action=

also she has certificacions in the UK, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, CANADA, Australia, Japan, some of the countries in Latinamerica and Asia, rest of the countries of Europe (including Turkey, Russia), etc. .... make a search for each country and you'll see all these certifications.

You said her albums don't chart in France, Australia, well let me tell you, they do chart and she even has certifications in those markets for most of her albums.

Also, last week on 09/22/2010 Fox Broadcasting Co had a Press release where they confirmed sales for more than 55 million records for Lopez, There is a bunch of articles with the same information in this link, you can see a search: http://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=webhp&source=hp&q=Global+Superstar+Jennifer+Lopez+Joins+Fox+Family%2C+Launching+First-Look+Deal+with+Fox+Films+and+Joining+Fox+Broadcasting%27s+American+Idol+as+New+Judge&rlz=1R2SNNT_enUS376&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=c47c3091c3ffe420

But I can also give some of this links: http://www.wikio.co.uk/article/jennifer-lopez-joins-fox-family-judge-216703717 http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2010/09/22/global-superstar-jennifer-lopez-joins-fox-family-launching-first-look-deal-with-fox-films-and-joining-fox-broadcastings-american-idol-as-new-judge/20100922fox02/ http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/09/22/global-superstar-jennifer-lopez-joins-fox-family-launching-first-look-deal-with-fox-films-in-addition-to-joining-american-idol/64660

Fox Broadcasting Co is getting that data from sales from the Label Company, of course they don't have knowledge of records sales but they have access to OFFICIAL Sources, contrary to some of you here, you DON'T have any access to Official information. you're are only guessing here, ....so who has more credibility? you or the people from Fox?

What they said in that article from Reuters is ridiculous!, how in the world Lopez has sold only 7 million more records than Marc Anthony, everybody knows than J.Lo is a bigger global star than Marc Anthony! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunca2 (talk • contribs) 13:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Brunca2, please read the entire discussion, I have a link above to Lopesz's discography discussion, where I have all her available certified sales posted. Well, here they are once again below, I copied and pasted the same part of the discussion also here.

US certified sales: 11 million albums, 1.6 million Singles, 400,000 Videos

UK certified sales: 1,060,000 Albums, 200,000 Singles

German certified sales: 700,000 Albums, 250,000 Singles, 25,000 Videos

French certified sales: 1 million Albums, 575,000 million Singles

Canadian certified sales: 1 million Albums

Australian certified sales: 245,000 Albums, 805,000 Singles, 7,500 videos

Dutch certified sales: 260,000 Albums, 40,000 Singles

Brazilian certified sales: 100,000 Albums

Swedish certified sales: 70,000 Albums, 15,000 Singles

Argentinean certified sales: 50,000 Albums

Finnish certified sales: 39,594

Norwegian certified sales: 20,000 Albums, 20,000 Singles

Swiss certified sales: 220,000 Albums, 70,000 Singles

Austrian certified sales: 65,000 Albums

I also looked at the entire European Continent's certifications. Since some countries in Europe don't offer a certification database, I subtracted the figures that I have already found in each available market's database from the figures I found in IFPI's (Europe) database in order to avoid double counting. For On the 6, after subtracting the figures, there is 275,000 units remaining. For J.Lo after subtractions, there is 940,000 remaining.

As one can see, when looking at Lopez's certified album sales, there is only 17 million certified album-units (from the available markets above which should represent at least 80-90% of global markets), this could never reach anywhere close to 30 million in actual sales, let alone 50 million. Lopez's certified singles make up 3.6 million, and even this combined with albums sales would never pass the 30-35 million in actual sales. --Harout72 (talk) 15:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I really believe that she has sold over 50million albums, not only because she is a Global Star, but mainly because most numbers aren`t current, for example these numbers shown here are from the release year of her albums, this is the case of J.LO. Do you really think that people only bought the album in 2001 when the cd was released? No, but this is the certificates the sites have, the certificates of that year, they do not worry with updating information and check every year about how much old albums sold in the past year. Put brazil in the list is totally fail, first of all here the site that counts the certificates is hardly updated, second, in fact the only album of hers that got certificate here is J.LO, but J.LO is from 2001 and in 2001 to have a Gold Certificate you needed to sell more than 250k, not 100k as mentioned above. In brazil for example, every album has a shipment code behind which shows how much was sent to the stores, if another code is released it means that the past code shipment was totally sold, and counting with all the shipment codes she has sold over 500thousand. You can not doubt of sources like Rolling Stones and Fox, first of all Rolling Stones has nothing to do with J.lo, she is not hired or work for the magazine, which is such a very reliable mag and Fox is a very important channel, they would not lie, actually, since last year they say she has sold over 50million records, when she wasn`t even hired to participate of American Idol. You can check her New Year's performance and you will see that Ryan Secreast when starting to introduce her says she has 4 number one hits and also has sold over 50million, so, how can you say Fox wants to lie and make people think she is important to participate of A.I having in mind that since last year they say it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellyver (talk • contribs) 01:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

News services normally do not tend to lie about record sales, and we are not saying that. What we are saying is that those figures that they print are given to them by artists' record companies, and where the news services fail is that they do not analyze the figures before publishing them. As for Brazil's certification-award-levels, you might want to refer to their criteria for all periods here, having said that, Brazil's certification-award-level for Gold album has never been 250,000, it initially was 100,000 both for domestic and international releases. ABPD, however, reduced the levels of international releases to Gold=50,000 and Platinum=125,000 in January 1, 2001, from the previous Gold=100,000, Platinum=250,000. Lastly, when albums/singles reach the next required certification-award-level, the music associations (RIAA, BPI, or ABPD for example) send the artists' record companies a notification after which the record company submits an application along with a fee (the fee is not expensive, in US it costs $350,00 per release-title for a single-sales-level or multiple-sales-level). And 90-95% of the records do eventually get certified, it may take some time for some releases to appear in the certification-databases but they eventually do, when reached the required levels.--Harout72 (talk) 16:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 108.10.224.105, 4 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} You guys seriously need to have a accurate number of albums sales....even you guys know that JLO has sold more than 25 million.. American Idol just recently posted a biography on her and it mentioned that she has sold including single sales and albums sales more than 55 million records

here is the source

please fix this!!!

http://www.americanidol.com/news/view/pid/3732/

108.10.224.105 (talk) 06:30, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: see the section above which is about the sales number of her records. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 07:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Wellyver, some of the certifications are not accurate, first of all because some are too old and they are not updated since a long time ago, and another thing is that if you try to add up all the certifications for ANY ARTIST (for example Christina Aguilera, Britney, Ricky Martin, etc, etc) you NEVER going to to come out with the same numbers as the media and other sources provide, ...so why are you questioning ONLY Jennifer Lopez sales?. And for Sony I gave you a Link with a report of Lopez's sales from 2005, at the moment she launched her album "Rebirth" she had sold MORE than 35 million records, here is the link: http://www.dualdisc.com/press-content08.html , ....so that's what Sony claimed she has sold BEFORE Rebirth so is possible that she sold 20 million + in 5 years and today in 2010 her total sales are more than 55 million records, ...PLEASE check this link from Sony.

And as for certifications Harout72 you missed certifications and sales for JLO in Japan and other countries (Spain, France), I believe Japan and many other countries didn't start certifications programs until recently, so for instance in Japan she has a GOLD certification for Rebirth (more than 100,000), but all her previous albums also had sales and charted in the top 20 in Japan according to Oricon, here there is a link: http://tieba.baidu.com/f?kz=307815934

Jennifer Lopez's sales in Japan:

Jennifer Lopez [Albums] 1999/06/23 On the 6 # 20, 11weeks, 114,120 ....http://www.oricon.co.jp/music/release/d/235806/1/ 2001/01/24 J. LO # 14, 20weeks, 128,510 .....http://www.oricon.co.jp/music/release/d/232891/1/ 2002/11/27 This is me then # 9, 31weeks, 135,693 .....http://www.oricon.co.jp/music/release/d/494190/1/ 2002/02/20 J to Tha LO!: The Remixes # 44, 4weeks, 16,860 .....http://www.oricon.co.jp/music/release/d/470043/1/ 2004/02/04 Reel Me [EP] + [Bonus DVD] # 13, 12weeks, 51,371 [Single] 2002/11/13 Jenny From The Block # 95, 3weeks, 4,260

http://tieba.baidu.com/f?kz=307815934

"Rebirth" #3, 26 weeks was certified Gold with more than 100, 000 units sold. http://www.oricon.co.jp/music/release/d/579353/1/ .....

"Brave" #6,10 weeks was not certified but sold about 75,000 units ...http://www.oricon.co.jp/music/release/d/730787/1/

so TOTAL sales in JAPAN: MORE than 621,554 ALBUMS.

About sales in the USA, the kast number provided by Billboard according to Nielsen SoundScan as on 10/01/2010: http://www.billboard.com/column/chartbeat/ask-billboard-analyzing-american-idol-1004118716.story#/column/chartbeat/ask-billboard-analyzing-american-idol-1004118716.story

Here is a recap of Jennifer Lopez's top-selling albums in the U.S., according to Nielsen SoundScan:

3,790,000, "J.Lo," 2001 2,808,000, "On the 6," 1999 2,593,000, "This Is Me...Then," 2002 1,496,000, "J to the L-O! The Remixes," 2002 740,000, "Rebirth," 2005 207,000, "Como Ama Una Mujer," 2007 166,000, "Brave," 2007

Lopez's career U.S. ALBUM sales TOTAL 11.8 million. (this number does NOT include singles, or video Longform)

I have a link from a french website with TOTAL sales per artist in FRANCE (Albums and singles)and this is the information about Jennifer Lopez's sales: http://www.infodisc.fr/Artiste_Ventes.php

258   Jennifer LOPEZ   2 527 819   1 584 519   943 300

So according to this Lopez's TOTAL sales are 2.527,819+ records ( 1.584,519 singles) in FRANCE.

For Sales in SPAIN I have another link for certifications by artist: Jennifer Lopez's certifications in Spain: (the number next to her name is the # of platinum certif. for each album)

Jennifer Lopez

384 On the 6 / Jennifer Lopez 2 2000 1226 Como ama una mujer / Jennifer Lopez 1 2007 1017 Jlo / Jennifer Lopez 1 2001 1106 This is me...then / Jennifer Lopez 1 2002

Total : 5 PLATINUM

Lopez's total certifications in Spain: more than 500,000 ALBUMS. In 2007 (Barcelona, Spain) The Spanish Asociacion of Phonography presented an Award to Lopez for more than 700, 000 albums sold: http://www.jenone.com/gallery3/gallery82/page3.html

Lopez's has also certifications and sales in Italy, Mexico and other countries in Latinamerica, Turkey, Middle East, Phillipines and other small countries in Asia.

I want to make clear that certifications only reflect a PART of the total sales, since many albums that not reach a certain level of certification have also sales added up to the real Total numbers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunca2 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

This is the link for "Rebirth" certification in JAPAN: http://www.riaj.or.jp/data/others/gold/200502.html

Please add this certification in the page for Rebirth certifications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brunca2 (talk • contribs) 14:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Discography format

Since there has been an edit war between two editors about their preferred version of the discography format in the article, I am starting a discussion here per WP:BRD. I urge both editors to discuss here instead of reverting in hopes of coming to consensus. I would like to see both editors' opinions so that I, and hopefully other editors, can give additional opinions to reach this consensus. Aspects (talk) 14:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Simple answer is Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines. Seems as if the editor who keeps reverting my edits doesn't understand the concept of guidelines. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT 21:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Your first edit to change the format, had the edit summary of "Studio albums go here only per Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines." User:Gimmetoo then reverted the change with the edit summary of "undo, link doesn't have the word "studio", and leave year first please", which is correct because nowhere in the guideline does it state only studio albums belong. Since the guideline does not state this, you will need to provide more than a simple answer to from a consensus, especially when that guideline provides a link to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works)#Discographies, which states that "Items may also be divided into sub-sections, e.g. singles, albums, dvds." Aspects (talk) 22:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Me, changing it was the correct thing. It links to GOOD EXAMPLES, and none of those show such a thing. Studio albums only go here, per EVERY SINGLE other article out there. Nothing is necessary to be different here. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT 22:44, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Looking through the American Idol singers, I found three that list more than studio albums, Jordin Sparks, Mandisa and Clay Aiken. Most of the other singers either have only had studio albums or do not have a separate discography article, so a percentage out of the total would not be that accurate, but three is enough to show that not every article uses just the studio albums. Also you failed in any way to refute what the Manual of Style states. If anything a MoS holds more weight than a WikiProject guideline. Aspects (talk) 22:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

What does American Idol contestants have ANYTHING to do with this? And none of them are GA articles either, while as Britney Spears, for example, is one, and only lists studio albums. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT 23:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

You stated "Studio albums only go here, per EVERY SINGLE other article out there." so I provided three examples. You did not state GA, but I know two FA's I have worked on in the past have more than just studio albums, Ayumi Hamasaki and Kate Bush, so not every single GA, let alone FA article uses the format.

As for the placement of the years, if this were a table I would agree that the years should be at the far left, but as a list I feel that the album titles are more important and the years should be placed after them. Aspects (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

There are two issues here, content and format. Ending-start linked to Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians/Article guidelines, which just suggests that when there is a separate discography article, "the musician's primary article should also provide a basic summary of the musician's work. In most cases this can done using a simple list of their albums." I might be persuaded about DVDs, but 1) a remix album is still an album and fairly significant, 2) if presented in two columns, listing a few other works takes no additional space and might be seen as visually appealing by some. So I don't see a problem with [2]. The second issue is format. This article uses YYYY: Work, and as an issue of style, there is no reason to change that format to Work (YYYY). Indeed, the first discussion on the talk page of the link above, [[3]], seems to have people who prefer YYYY: Work, and a comment that "both are fine". This has long been understand as one of those style issues that you should leave alone, especially when someone objects. Gimmetoo (talk) 20:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Would User:Ending-start care to respond at some point? Gimmetoo (talk) 22:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Studio albums are only to be included in the discography. Care to take a look at every single other artist page on Wikipedia. J to tha Lo is not a studio album - it is a remix album. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 22:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Two issues. One, there are two issues, and you only responded about one of them. Second, your response is factually incorrect - there are indeed other musician pages which list other-than-studio albums. Gimmetoo (talk) 22:37, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, of course, inconsistencies are everywhere, but only studio albums should be in the discog section. The format seems perfectly fine and shouldn't be changed without a real reason. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 22:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree, This format is fine and doesn't need changing. No "real reason" has been given to switch away from YYYY: Work. Gimmetoo (talk) 22:58, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

As I said on Gimmetoo's talk page, all I take from this is: WP:OWN: "An editor disputes minor edits concerning layout, image use, and wording in a particular article daily." All I've been trying to do was fix it to the suggested look. And he hasn't given me anyreal evidence that the suggested style shouldn't be used here. ℥^nding·start 22:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Am I to understand that you just made an accusation? Could this perhaps be a violation of WP:NPA? I don't know, but I have told you very clearly what the two issues are, and you have not responded to either of them here. Gimmetoo (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

No personal attacks, it's just an observation. I was trying to better the article, and I've tried before, and you were the one who reverted it and acted as if you're the boss of the article and it will look how you want it. No input from no one else whatsoever. There is no final decision in this discussion, with only two people saying it's fine the way it is, and two (now) saying no it isn't. You're on talk pages telling me where to comment, as if you are the boss of me as well. All I was trying to do was fix it the way that pretty much every other article is. And you have to make a huge deal out of it. Just do whatever the hell you want; I won't bother trying to better this article any more. ℥^nding·start 23:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

There is a broader issue. There are many acceptable ways to do things on the Wiki, and that means it is not automatically a "fix" to change an article from one way to another way. You're quite right - I could have not made a "huge deal" about it, and then what - but you would have had your preferred format in the article, and you would presumably be happy - that is until the next person comes by and changes the article to their preferred format. And it keeps happening over and over again. One thing that stops the process is to observe, as far as possible, the existing style of the article. That's primarily what I'm advocating here (though to be clear, there are other factors, too). I'm not saying you are in this category, but don't you think those who edit large numbers of articles to change style issues over objections are displaying a fairly damaging form of WP:OWNership? Gimmetoo (talk) 23:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I understand what you mean. I'm sorry for gassing the flame. And no, not really. I don't think ownership can happen in a stretch of more than one article. I mean, it can happen with more than one article, but it's more or less of the article has to be the exact way (in everything) the one person wants it to be. But that's irrelevant here. I'm sorry again for saying that to you, it just looked kind of odd to me at the time. It looks kind of funny now actually. Edit warrings are... interesting. ℥^nding·start 23:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)