Talk:Lemonade (album)/Archive 1

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2019 and 17 March 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Eringrigsby1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:02, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Lemonade (film)
The short film is definitely notable enough for its own article. kencf0618 (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * IMO A section covering directors and concept would be enough. All the songs are from the album. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 17:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Lots more going on than that, so I've put up the article. Cheers! kencf0618 (talk) 18:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think this and this source might help you to write the article. Gaga Nutella talk 01:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but the article was peremptorily merged back. Someone else is welcome to take a shot at it, though. kencf0618 (talk) 02:19, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's definitely worthy, it's as worthy as the page for MIA's Born Free music video, as it's sparked conversation about womanhood empowerment and the Black Lives Matter movement, as well as the fact there's a whole slew of cameo appearances. --Matt723star (talk) 05:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The Beyoncé article's subsection on Lemonade is almost entirely about the concept music video, not the album itself. I think we have enough notability for the film to stand on its own now, so have at it! kencf0618 (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * While this article does well in talking about the background of the music and the statistics of sales, it does not do much when it comes to delving into the actual visual album. Each video in Lemonade had deeper meanings that could be analyzed and had recurring themes that would do well to be talked about. Because this article is about Lemonade the album, there should be a part that talks more about the visual album as opposed to just talking about the separate songs. The video as a whole was told as a story and this should be noted and celebrated, seeing as through every bit of the videos were carefully selected to express a certain theme.Asanyal4 (talk) 20:02, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The videos in Lemonade showcase a message that has so much meaning to it, and it told a specific story that Beyonce wanted to get out. It can be considered a completely different art form than just the music of Lemonade.  Both are recognizable as notable, and the message in the videos showcase women empowerment and the Black Lives Matter movement, which is something not many artists do. Chantellerodis (talk) 23:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok then Mahcreeps (talk) 23:16, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Samples
Can someone change who wrote "When the Levee Breaks" because Led Zeppelin covered it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.232.2 (talk) 18:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

The track listing for "6 Inch" states that the Issac Hayes song "Walk on By" was used. This is incorrect, as it uses Hooverphonic's 2 Wicky for the sample, which DID sample the Issac Hayes song. I have no idea how to correct the page to reflect this. 98.117.63.201 (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Also: "All night" samples "SpottieOttieDopaliscious" by OutKast. גיאחה (talk) 10:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

It states that "Lemonade" samples Court of the Crimson King... but there is no song called "Lemonade" on the album. I find that information confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:CC:8000:481:75BF:5332:D1E4:550 (talk) 17:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

More reviews
Reviews are pouring in from media outlets all over, and they need to be added. Also, I added a review from Rolling Stone, but it was deleted I think because it was a part of an unsourced paragraph about a "world renowned critic" and it needs to be reverted back, albeit without the unsourced material I just mentioned. --Matt723star (talk) 05:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Introduction Correction
Please correct the misplaced modifier in the following sentence in the 4th paragraph of the introduction: "The record has since garnered viral and staggering acclaim from many music critics, and was a surprise release by many."

The misplaced modifier (italicized) makes it sound like the album was released by many people. To add clarity, you can revise the sentence as follows: "The record has since garnered viral and staggering acclaim from many music critics and was considered by many to be a surprise release."

Spareleverage (talk) 04:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done SST flyer 05:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

warsan shire's poetry
i can't find warsan shire credited anywhere in this article, despite the fact that she wrote the poetry that is spoken throughout the film. can someone add a note to the "film" section? -anon86.2.39.56 (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg The Cross Bearer (talk &#124; contribs) 17:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Genres
Most of the genres in the infobox belong to each song, not a whole. Is a collection of every genre present. However, I'm not sure which ones should stay. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 17:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * All of them are sourced with them referring to them in the context of the album as a whole. Entertainment Weekly backs up the country music genre, for the album not just a song.The Cross Bearer (talk &#124; contribs) 22:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit request for introduction
The text currently reads "It was later launched to the iTunes Store and physical retailers on April 25 and May 6, respectively." Because May 6, 2016 has not passed, the album can not have been launched there then. It should read "It was later launched on the iTunes Store on April 25th, and is scheduled for release to physical retailers on May 6." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Granuale (talk • contribs) 18:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Separate article
Can someone explain to me why there isn't already a page for the HBO special, or at least a mention of its broadcast on this article? The album and special are two different things with separate content. The ratings it attracted in its broadcast should be noted, and such. --Matt723star (talk) 02:52, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Commercial performance
The album sold 20,490 digital copies in australia to debut at no.1 and make it her third album to reach the top spot. In canada the album debuted at no.1 with 33,000 digital copies. You may also want to include the number of streams it pulled as she broke the record for highest first week streams for a female act. YelloWiki (talk) 18:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Also under chart it debuted at no.1 whoever is blocking us from putting the correct numbers may want to add that as well, and like i said it debuted with 20,490 copies in australia not 20,499 YelloWiki (talk) 12:29, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Featured topics/Beyoncé studio albums on retention
Just a friendly reminder that Featured topics/Beyoncé studio albums is currently on retention, and the grace period to get this article added to the topic will end on July 23. Failure to do so will result in the topic's delisting.--  十  八  00:15, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Hold Up was released as a single
In Europe, Germany (Westdeutscher Rundfunk May 12, 2016), Italy May 27 , and UK playlist. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 02:01, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Daddy Lessons as a single.
Daddy Lessons was not a single! It was not sent to radio or anything of the sort. If anything it was a promotional single! So please stop putting it as a single! Thanks! iTunes puts every song sold individually as a single. These sources show All Night as the fifth single
 * It is a single https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/daddy-lessons-feat.-dixie/id1178163399, and this is a better source than Direct Lyrics and Idolator. Itunes don't put every sond individually as a single like that: with a cover-art and own page. Btw, there's a guideline against assuming is it something (promo single) just because is not the other (single). Btw, it is also on Spotify as a stand-alone release. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 17:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)


 * It is a promotional single, Wikipedia defines a promo single as "A promotional recording, or promo, is an audio or video recording distributed for free, usually in order to promote a recording that is or soon will be commercially available." Daddy Lessons was released on SoundCloud, Beyoncé's site and the Dixie Chicks site for free on November 2nd, 2016 Not being available for purchase until much later which is what happens to promotional singles. The source of Wikipedia's own definition of a promo single is much more reliable.

Accolades organization
The accolades section, more specifically the paragraph of year-end lists, is looking very messy. I would like to organize it better in the form of a table/list, which would look clearer to find information. What do you guys think? Jimoincolor (talk) 21:10, 21 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I think it would make the information much more easy to read. Willondon (talk) 14:51, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Afrofuturism in Beyonce's Lemonade
I believe it is important to include a short section about the afrofuturist influence in Beyonce's Lemonade. This should include the different afrofuturist motifs that pop up, like water, the transatlantic slavery, apocalypse, voodoo, and more. Also, it should be noted that Beyonce re imagines a world in which black lives matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emitnick (talk • contribs) 18:53, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * That sounds like fancruft to me. Because first of all, the part you added is unsourced. And secondly, that part has nothing to do about this album. Also, please note that Wikipedia is not where you write your own commentary and your own personal analysis. Rarity dash  ( talk ) 22:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lemonade (Beyoncé 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/20160207064001/http://www.nme.com/news/beyonce/91295 to http://www.nme.com/news/beyonce/91295
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160612172248/http://www.amprofon.com.mx/top-album.php to http://www.amprofon.com.mx/top-album.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161230202617/http://hitlisten.nu/top2016.asp to http://hitlisten.nu/top2016.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170426063757/http://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2017.pdf to http://www.ifpi.org/downloads/GMR2017.pdf

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) 20:08, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lemonade (Beyoncé 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/20160721034246/http://www1.wdr.de/radio/funkhauseuropa/musik/neuinfhe/beyonce-hold-up-100.html to http://www1.wdr.de/radio/funkhauseuropa/musik/neuinfhe/beyonce-hold-up-100.html

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) 08:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Lemonade's Worldwide Sales
Lemonade has now passed the 3 million mark worldwide. According to the Global Music Charts, Lemonade's sales are 3,007,000. Here is the link for the document. http://www.mediatraffic.de/index.htm

Regards (190.80.50.137 (talk) 10:38, 2 June 2017 (UTC))

❌ Mediatraffic.de is unreal per WP:BADCHARTS. Chrishonduras ( Diskussion ) 15:46, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

The Length of Lemonade (Visual)
The length of the Lemonade visual is actually 65 minutes, and 50 seconds long. I have checked both Tidal (where it was first uploaded), and iTunes (where it was uploaded days later) and have found that there is a five second discrepancy between the two-- Tidal saying 65 minutes and 50 seconds, while iTunes said 65 minutes, and 55 seconds. Since tidal is owned partially by Beyoncé herself 65 minutes and 50 seconds long seems more appropriate.

Best, Kgazoo (talk)

XXXTentacion's ?
I wanted to add this sentence to the chart section:

"Following XXXTentacion's death, ? reached new peaks in the Netherlands (No. 1), New Zealand (No. 1) source, Switzerland (No. 4) source and Austria (No. 5) source."

Is that OK? --2A02:B98:473F:B20C:35AC:E352:66D4:CC4D (talk) 10:05, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Please discuss first or request at Talk:Lemonade (Beyoncé album), thanks Hhkohh (talk) 10:14, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Redirected from Hhkohh's site... Please respond! --2A02:B98:473F:5FB4:456E:FC9F:1DB1:798F (talk) 13:46, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Leave other people comment Hhkohh (talk) 15:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Lemonade (Beyoncé album)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Lemonade (Beyoncé album)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "bpi": From Live at Wembley (Beyoncé album):  From The Carters:  From Drunk in Love:  From Beyoncé discography:  From XO (song):  From MNEK:  From Florence Welch:  

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Chronology
Everything Is Love, officially credited under the name The Carters, is not included in the chronology of Beyoncé's solo work. The album is not a collaborative album, as it is not credited as Beyoncé and Jay Z. This is the same reason it was agreed to be removed from the Beyoncé discography article. The continuous inclusion of this album in this article is inaccurate and creates inconsistency with the rest of the chronology. --StatsFreak (talk) 06:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Reverting and talking through edit summaries does not constitute a discussion or agreement or consensus. As of now, there is no determination of consensus over this content. Please stop reverting to your preferred versions after they have already been disputed by multiple editors (WP:BRD). isento (talk) 16:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Possible OR/POV violation
has added content that cites this Refinery29.com article and uses it to say the author "suggests that Taylor Swift may have copied from Lemonade for her album Reputation [and] noted Reputation was being marketed in a similar way to Lemonade, with Swift mirroring Beyoncé's approach by attempting to use her album as a tool to address personal issues solely through the medium of music." However, nowhere in the author's article is there text supporting this suggestion or conclusion. The only relevant text in the author's article is the following: "It’s [Swift's] side of a bunch of stories that people have already read about her in the press. And in this way, it is very much like Beyoncé’s Lemonade — the singer’s latest album, which many people have interpreted as a narrative about the effects of infidelity on her and Jay-Z’s relationship. Like reputation, Lemonade acted as an official statement about the artist, from the artist. It’s the hottest tea, straight from the source." Bgkc4444 has apparently violated WP:NOR by inserting a novel analysis of the source material based on his/her point of view (WP:NPOV), specifically the following guideline:

Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication. Take care not to go beyond what is expressed in the sources, or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context ... if you use it out of context, or to reach or imply a conclusion not directly and explicitly supported by the source, you are engaging in original research. (WP:STICKTOSOURCE)

Following WP:BRD,, you should proceed with a discussion here in defense of your revision, rather than restoring the article to your preferred state. isento (talk) 10:01, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for using the talk page for a discussion to try resolve this dispute. However, I do hope you would have followed the rules of WP:BRD and not imposed your skewed viewpoints on the material and not reverted my good-faith edits just because you don't like them, which are certainly not what BRD is. I am happy that you now seem to have looked at the rules for resolving disputes and are making an effort to solve the problem instead of the mocking attacks you made at me.


 * To break down the material I added and compare it to the original source:


 * "Sesali Bowen for Refinery29 suggests that Taylor Swift may have copied from Lemonade for her album Reputation" is taken from the headline of the article, written for Refinery29 by Sesali Bowen, "Did Taylor Swift Reputation Album Copy Beyonce Strategy"
 * "noted Reputation was being marketed in a similar way to Lemonade" is taken from the sentence "Swift’s latest album, reputation, was being packaged in a way that felt a little familiar to fans of Bey"
 * "with Swift mirroring Beyoncé's approach by attempting to use her album as a tool to address personal issues solely through the medium of music" is taken from the sentences "[Swift's] days of directly addressing the public about her controversies are over. Her music, reputation, will speak for her... It’s personal. It’s her side of a bunch of stories that people have already read about her in the press. And in this way, it is very much like Beyoncé’s Lemonade... Like reputation, Lemonade acted as an official statement about the artist, from the artist. It’s the hottest tea, straight from the source."


 * I hope this clears things up. If you have any questions or suggestions for how the material can be improved further, please let me know. Otherwise, I hope the material can be re-added to the article.


 * Thank you, Bgkc4444 (talk) 12:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444


 * Ignoring your toxic insinuations, I will speak strictly on your arguments: Speculative paraphrasing doesn't belong in a section titled "Impact and legacy". Accusing someone of "copying" is an exceptional claim that requires a better source than a sensational shallow headline. All the author is saying is that Swift's album may be like Lemonade in addressing public stories about her. The paraphrase that Swift or Beyonce "solely used the medium of music" to address personal issues is unfounded in the source, especially given that the author mentions Swift using the album's digital booklet to write a letter confronting this issue. And writing letters is not the medium of music. isento (talk) 12:16, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I think I at least partly agree with Isento. From the perspective of sourcing, this is certainly not as strong as I would like for a claim like this. Refinery29 is a great source for noncontroversial claims, but this kind of controversial would require something more robust. Indeed, inclusion of this material in general might not be reasonable. I tried to find other sources making this claim, but I could find almost exclusively those terrible articles that just use Twitter threads to fill out their contents: . The source suggested here does not sink to that sad, sad writing style, but it seems to come out of the same social context and make the same points.
 * Given this, I have a few thoughts: 1) Is this the strongest source you have for this claim? 2) Are there any articles that mention this at a later date? All of the current sources are clustered in late 2017, and a later story picking up the narrative would make it much more weighty. 3) It doesn't seem like the cited article is talking about PR, but rather about the thematic/visual content of the album. 4) Let's avoid using headlines to support claims. Headlines are usually not written by the author and usually don't have the same standards as article contents. This is an essay I agree with. Jlevi (talk) 12:33, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for your reply. To your and Isento's point, I did not "speculatively paraphrase", or write "Swift definitely copied Beyoncé" as a fact and then cited the source. I explicitly attributed it to the opinion of Bowen and wrote "Sesali Bowen for Refinery29 suggests that Taylor Swift may have copied from Lemonade for her album Reputation" as an opinion and then cited the source (unlike what Isento claimed). From my research, there has been no significant opposing view, controversy or public debate from "the other side" on this issue; if there were, then of course varying opinions would have been represented fairly. As there are not, and the opinion is written as an opinion, the content is certainly neutral and not biased as was claimed.
 * On your third point, the article is talking about both. Bowen's opinion is that Beyoncé's strategy with Lemonade was to address personal issues as themes in the album, and that subsequently Swift used the same strategy.
 * To add that the two sources you linked are focusing on a different issue. Those are more about the imagery whilst this article is about the strategy and themes. I agree that those sources are just quoting several social media users' opinions that Swift ripped off Beyoncé and should not be included in this article. Unlike the claim in those sources, the claim in question is not a derogatory, accusatory or controversial one.
 * Thank you for that note about the headline. How would you suggest the phrasing should be then? The article is saying that Swift used Beyoncé's strategy. I originally used the softer "inspired by", and Isento deleted the whole sentence. I then changed it to "copied from" to match the source, and Isento deleted the whole sentence again. Furthermore, Isento is uncomfortable with me using language not explicitly used in the original article. Do you have any suggestions about the best way to write it? Do I just say something like that Bowen believes that Swift "used the same strategy" as Beyoncé?
 * And to what you said that the material is "unfounded in the source", Bowen doesn't write that the booklet is the addressing of personal issues itself, but instead clearly writes that the booklet is the thing that announces that Swift is now using "her album as a tool to address personal issues solely through the medium of music", writing after quoting the booklet: "The message is clear. Her days of directly addressing the public about her controversies are over. Her music, reputation, will speak for her." This point is then repeated in the conclusion of the article.
 * I'm sorry that I cannot seem to be clearer. Bgkc4444 (talk) 13:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444


 * She doesn't suggest Swift imitated or copied it; if the headline is hers, then she is asking if Swift did so. And she doesn't arrive at an answer to this in the article. Her conclusion is just some neurotic vapid lecture about Swift "oversharing", and how she's not as cool or "mysterious" as Beyonce. However you spin paraphrasing this, including it in this article would undermine the encyclopedic tone expected from Wikipedia. It just isn't a serious piece of commentary. isento (talk) 13:49, 17 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Bowen does suggest so. She asks the question about if Swift copied Beyoncé. The article concludes that Swift does attempt to market her album as one which addresses personal issues in the style of Beyoncé and Lemonade, however her method of doing so is not subtle because of the passage in the digital booklet, so she certainly does reach an answer.
 * So do you agree with my last point, that the material is in fact found in the source? And you're just uncomfortable with the phrase "suggests that Taylor Swift may have copied from Lemonade for her album Reputation"? That can be edited without a problem. Please let me know the phrasing that you prefer.
 * Furthermore, you dismissing this article by saying "it just isn't a serious piece of commentary" because the work of a black female writer "is just some neurotic vapid lecture" sounds extremely misogynistic and racist. Bgkc4444 (talk) 16:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Bgkc4444
 * Damn buddy :/ No wonder you can't paraphrase accurately. isento (talk) 17:31, 17 July 2020 (UTC)