Talk:Headstrong (Ashley Tisdale album)

Misc
Recently User:Metros232 removed nearly all the content on the grounds that it was uncited. I think this is counter-productive. Normally articles develop with content being added first (often by inexperienced users) and references coming later (often as more experienced users come across it and try to bring it up to Wikipedia standards). If everything is deleted before it can be cited, then it will take a long time for the article to grow. For good reason we don't go around removing uncited content just because it's uncited; if we did, the encyclopedia would be crippled, because most of our content is uncited. If you're concerned about the content, look around and try to cite it yourself, and if you can't verify it, then removal is more acceptable. Everyking 12:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And I did try to verify it on my own. I tried her myspace, I tried her official website, I tried Disney's site, I tried the label's site.  About the only thing I was able to confirm is that the first single will be "Last Christmas".  So unless it's floating around a fan message board, I don't know where this track listing is coming from.  Metros232 13:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. 1. Last Christmas is her HOLIDAY single. It will NOT be on her album. 2. At Ashley's Street Team (which you can find here:  www.ashleymusic.com -> Click E-team)  Fans were asked to pass out promotion booklet at the High School Musical concert that each is going to. In the booklet, at the very last page, Warner Bros. released the tracklisting. This is where the tracklisting is currently coming from. 3. All the information about "Be Good to Me" and others could be found at www.ashleymusic.com (the Message Board) from a reliable source. (Namely Bree and Bob, the two moderators of the forum.. )(Still not convinced? Check Ashley's myspace and you will see Bree on her TOP 8)

Important and referenced informations must still
Look. I think that album sales, re-releases, chart performances, Target exclusive (CD+DVD) information and production credits must still in the article and not be removed. Why? Practilly all this informations are referenced and are important to still in the article and there's A LOT OF albums's pages on Wikipedia with the same kind of information. Voices4ever 15:57, 2 July 2008.

Singles
Okay, "Suddenly" and "Not Like That" don't have a official date to will be released yet. Because this, I put "2008" in the release date. It's confirmed that "Suddenly" and "Not Like That" will be a OFFICIAL single? MSoldi 10:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

HELP
It says there that some of the tracks are leaked, yeah but where do you get them?? User:Alex Ray. Ramirez

Fake Single Covers.
Would users please stop creating fake or self made single covers for Headstrong Tracks. It is recommended that these please be tagged for deletion. Thanks. Gatojo 12:36, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * User made singles covers might lead readers to believe that this is authorized artwork when it isn't. The copyrights listed for these images are also defective.  Rklawton 12:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Chapter II

I say that are many fake covers to singles of Headstrong and these are fake covers and please, users, delete that covers.

--Pedrovip 00:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip

Deluxe Edition
There is no confirmed tracklisting to the Deluxe edition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Password-forgetter (talk • contribs) 01:21, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
 * I can find no evidence that a re-release is even being planned. Is there any? Everyking 01:55, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind, it looks like there is going to be a re-release, and I added a source for that. Still haven't found a tracklist, though. Everyking 02:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I have a question does can anyone find out if the re-realse will also be coming out in Canada as well? Headstrong 345 23:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345
 * It probably will come out in Canada, and It's the Way was just a rumored, then disproved song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.165.20 (talk) 01:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

First there was a tracklisting for the re-realse and then it disappeared. I mean is it coming out or not please make up your mind before writing something that isn't true and make sure you have sources. Cause when you do this it confuses people like me. Headstrong 345 02:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345

The tracklisting that is on here is that confirmed or not? 99.251.146.182 22:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345

So far as I can tell, the deluxe edition is some kind of hoax. I didn't rip it out of the article, but I don't think it should go back in until someone can point at an official source of its existence, much less its tracklist.Kww 01:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

so what you are saying is that the Deleux edition is not real? Well I think waht you are saying is right and that we probably should not say anything about it until we find out for sure if there is going to be one. The thing is though sometimes I come to see this page one day and it says something about the Deleuex edition and then the next day when I come back it is always changed or gone I just wish people would stop doing this cause it gets really anoying. Headstrong 345 16:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345


 * I've become convinced it's a hoax. I've submitted the album cover image for deletion, because it seems to be a Photoshopped modification of the cover to one of her singles. Take a look at the hoax cover and cover to "He Said She Said". The editor that kept putting things back in after they were deleted has been banned from Wikipedia for two weeks. Hopefully, he'll be better behaved when he returns.Kww 16:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The Holiday Edition (or Deluxe Edition) is confirmed now, incluing the cover. The source is here http://www.ashleymusic.com/holidaypromo. MSoldi 20:31, 1 December 2007

is it really true this time because last time it was hoax. but when is the exact date. cause christmas 2007 isn't really sourceful I mean people would want to know the actual date that the album comes out. Headstrong 345 19:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345

Album Sales
It is ridiculous that the source for the US album sales is an internet forum. This really proves how Wikipedia will never be a reliable source of information. Caribbean1 20:18, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

R&B?!
I nearly reverted on the basis of vandalism, but then decided it might be a generational problem. When I think of R&B, I think of Otis Redding and Etta James. What part of this album could anyone consider to be R&B?Kww 15:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I totally agree. A few users keep adding R&B to many Ashley Tisdale-related articles, and her music has no significant R&B influence at all. Funk Junkie (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Second Album?
On the High School Musical 3 article, there's a reference confirming Ashley Tisdale's return in HSM3, and it also confirms a new album on the way...should it be added?

Fair use rationale for Image:Headstrongholiday.jpg
Image:Headstrongholiday.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:46, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Headstrongpink.jpg
Image:Headstrongpink.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BGTM.ogg
Image:BGTM.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re-release (true?)
The section of Headstrong (album) "Re-release" its true that gonna be a headstrong re-release?

Pedrovip —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedrovip (talk • contribs) 17:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well it was gonna have a re-release but they released "There's Something About Ashley" instead. ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 06:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Calliegal

Too Many Alternative CD Images
I think that all those international covers and DVD covers are just a waste of space because it's basically the same picture, with the background changed or with a sticker on the cover. Also, the DVD cover is just very identical to the original one, so I suggest removing that and pershaps some other ones? Any other suggestions?? ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 06:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)Calliegal

Accuracy
The article was filled with fake references and fake positons the editor who did that was blocked for not responding to edits and submitting fake references and text even soemtimes the user who is by the way dienaked, reverted and posted non free images not to mention reverting most of the brenda song article and posting more fake references. In that result dienaked was blocked. That user received several warnings about that article. I have discussed this with other admins and that resulted to a block towards dienaked. And now fans are reverting the edits because they think it is not fair. Well hiw about reveiving the article first. It took me 2 hours for reveiving and over 30 mintutes for removing false references and fake chart postions not too mention 3 kiloybytes of trivia and fake sales. Most of the references were from fansites or forums which is not exceptable. Dienaked was blocked in that result. I am not a Brenda Song fan that is categorizing a trusted user as a strategy. Fotesh is now accusing me of being a vandellism user, he or she does not know why and seems to stick to the conspiracy theories made by Dienaked. I doubt that Dienaked is not connected with Fotesh. Your so called brother was blocked for removing text with no reason given, submitting fake references and text eg fake chart positions and then vandellising several pages after being given several warnings. And doubt that you arent Dienaked.

I have warned several admins on wikipedia about this and after that they blocked Dienaked. I have removed the text that was trivia, fake or fan based from the article with reasons given in the history page while Fotesh just reverting my edit with no reasons and started accusing me of being a crazy brenda song fan rekated with some ip address when my real ip is 81.155.226.185 and here is proof. 

Have you even considered looking at the references posted in the old revision. They were all forums and fansites, and some of them were in different languages i translated the brazil newspaper it does not even mention headstrong's sales. They are fake and the user was blocked. Some of the text was just downright fake claiming that the album sold over 1 million and adding a fansite reference as a source. And then adding a billboard best album award reference. And the international sales links were forums in some areas and they did not even mention the album's sales/ And in soem cases we had refereneces that did not say anything about the album or included any thing about it. Dienaked though he could get away with posting fake references. And the critical reception was very fan based. Some of the reviews were made by fans and had several typos and they were not referenced and that is why we removed them and then we had about two referneced that stayed. I doubt that this user isnt Dienaked sinc ethe spelling errors, timing and opinions are exaclty the same. IntoCreativeJan (talk) 08:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not putting my side, Dienaked and Fotesh are connected and Dienaked was blocked for reverting my edits, submitting fake references and text and then removing large amounts of text without any reason and now his so - called sister is defending him and reverting my edits. Dienaked was blocked for doing that, he/she was vandellising and submitting fake references and text not to mention uploading non free images for that article. The images that were non free are now set for deletion. There arent any sides this is a matter of vandellism and inaccuracy made in that article. The article is now fine not a mess. I made sure that everything is accurate well nearly everything. The Brazil one about sales may not be accurate. But the reast is very accurate. That issue was not the only problem because Dienaked also submitting befor ebeing blocked a fansite link in the external link and i am quite surprised that users can get away with doing all of that and still get defended or may be sockpuppets there is a high possibility that Dienaked and Fotesh are sockpuppets or may be just relaitives like what Fotesh claims. IntoCreativeJan (talk) 2:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I did not release the singles. The singles were repeated two times and the target cover was exacltly like the original cover. So i did not earease your brothers information. If i did that with no reason i would be blocked like your broter. Do you ever wonder why you brother got blocked. For god sake. He got blocked for submitting fake references hot about looking at those references and the fake chart positions and sales, anotehr note how about looking at that. And he also submitted a fan site reference for god sake fan site references are not reliable they are fan based and the critical reviewes were fan based with typos and by the way that fan site exernal link was against wikipedia rules. DO you not understand what i am saying. Seems like another sockpuppet case.IntoCreativeJan (talk) 3:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the Target cover must be stay because its an alternate cover, and i say that one user go to the Headstrong (article) and on "alternate covers" title, on that part of article, we must put that title. And, some times ago, users make pages from every tracks of Headstrong. Still well that they had eliminated these pages. And why that appear so many fake, fake covers? Pedrovip (talk) 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:SomethingHeadstrongcover.jpg
The image File:SomethingHeadstrongcover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --03:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Headstrong (Ashley Tisdale album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090817201520/http://www.blender.com:80/guide/new/54418/headstrong.html to http://www.blender.com/guide/new/54418/headstrong.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:48, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Headstrong (Ashley Tisdale 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/20130225031458/http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH_RESULTS to http://riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH_RESULTS

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:01, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Headstrong (Ashley Tisdale 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.billboard.com/bbcom/yearend/2007/readers/index.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100602155951/http://www.upstartmag.co.nz/Ashley_Tisdale_Interview_81.aspx to http://www.upstartmag.co.nz/Ashley_Tisdale_Interview_81.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110727024320/http://www.wildcat.arizona.edu/2.2288/ashley-tisdale-headstrong-1.173882 to http://wildcat.arizona.edu/2.2288/ashley-tisdale-headstrong-1.173882

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)