Talk:X (Chris Brown album)

Confirmed/Recorded tracks
I don't think we can say any tracks are as yet confirmed. The album comes out in 5-6 months and I doubt that the final album track list has been created. In an interview there was said to be up to 50 candidate songs that may make the final album cut. So my point is that we should rename the section Confirmed tracks to Recorded tracks until we get an official track list. It's just not correct to state "Confirmed" at this time. --2nyte (talk) 02:24, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I say check the tracks that are currently there. If it says in the source that the song will be on X or anything confirming it to be on the album then it should stay. Anything else should be removed. A recorded tracks section would be irrelevant as artists will sometimes record up to 100 songs in the development of an album. The only relevant songs would be the ones specifically stated to be on X. Also its more like 3 months not 5-6 so not as far off.  STATic  message me!  03:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I can't see in any of the sources that the tracks were "confirmed" to be on the album. If you don't agree to change the title then I think we should remove the section because it is rather misleading. --2nyte (talk) 12:56, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "He plays tracks from his new album including "X" and "Add Me In". He also says "Home" will be a bonus track. He also says "Feel That" is on the album. That is all from just this source  STATic   message me!  16:31, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I read on a hip hop website that Chris Brown will be releasing an exclusive download, a special Japanese bonus track titled "The Whole Of My Heart". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 20:00, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Album release date
I think the album release date is incorrect as I can't find any source that says it will be released in June. I have found many saying July/August/September, some included in the article. --2nyte (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * From just a couple days ago. Watch the video if it does not say it in the body of the article.  STATic   message me!  16:22, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Edited article
eh? i don't understand? i come back to show friend but all the details have changed!!! is he really collaborating with lionel richie? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.238.91.195 (talk) 21:58, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Personality
I consider Chris Brown to be more of a music industry personality than a music industry artist. My girlfriend told me she read on dxhiphop.com that he was or still is currently, secretly recording with Lionel Richie. I think because he can dance but make quite simplified music however generally be quite talented on the street, he should be regarded as more a personality than artist in the article. I will propose that edit now but I think I will be declined as you probably find it offensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 19:03, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I see my edit has once again been reverted. In that case then, can you please explain to me how exactly Chris Brown should be regarded as an "artist" rather than personality, in my mind, because he is clearly plagarasing other peoples work and getting extremely rich off of it. So rich in fact, he must have made Forbes magazine, then, I think worst of all, has the absolute arrogance to shove it in our faces. I might as well follow him to the bank with him high on laughing gas. We just want a valid explanation as to how you see Chris Brown. and why, without just, if I may, reverting our edits without saying a word. If you want to join me and discuss this in the talk page then I am quite willing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 03:54, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You have no sources to back up your statements. What you are saying is completely subjective and it sounds like you're just being accusatory to Chris Brown. When editing on Wikipedia, a neutral approach should always be taken, and from a neutral perspective Chris Brown is considered a recording artist. I think that is why STATicVerseatide has undone your edits. Also, thanks for coming on the talk page to discuss this. If you have something further to add I'll be happy to respond. --2nyte (talk) 04:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Just like 2nyte said, you have zero sources to back up your conspiracy claims, and frankly they do not belong on Wikipedia at all. Brown is clearly a recording artist, not whatever a "recording personality" is. See WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:RS before continuing to edit Wikipedia.  STATic  message me!  04:53, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I apologise I did become subjective. But I disagree with you as to whether my point falls over, because I believe it still stands. Now, I will warn you, this is going to become rather subjective again, however, this does ultimately relate to the article, and that is how Chris Brown should be presented then regarded within it. This is a man who is no better than a con-artist with none of his own original ideas, it is called creativity. Creativity is something that is vital as an "artist". Thus, he should be regarded as not an artist, but as a personality, within the article. I would rather see him being regarded as a personality not artist but if you have the one other majority then I think we will leave it that fair and square. I still, unfortunately, disagree with you. Thank you and hopefully the album will be a success for everyones sakes. If not, I'm pretty sure some people are going to be held liable without a doubt but then we get in to the businsss end of what they do and your every day music fan is typically ignorant to that aspect of their work. Thank you again and have a nice day or night. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 05:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I will go away and find out what I can do as in research I might need about two months oh and by the way, I wasn't actually being accusatory to Chris Brown. Like I wouldn't be accusatory to only Obama for being a terrible president and joined together like siamese twins to Ford. Okay, until next time now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 23:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I have to back you up on this one 60.234.214.63, her boyfriend is also guilty of this arrogance. If you can get the evidence and present it to us in a way that follows Wikipedia policy then please do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.123.21.98 (talk) 21:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Huh? What you say makes no sense? Do you mean Rihanna? If you did, yeah I agree with you she is a total diva now what happened to the nicer girls like Vanessa Hudgens and Hilary Duff. As I said, will try and research then get back to you I might make headline news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 02:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Look what I found, according to this report by MSN he has been not using his own original ideas by plagarising house music from other smaller time recording personalities. Here is the link... http://social.entertainment.msn.com/music/blogs/blog--chris-brown-and-william-accused-of-plagiarism .... What I would like to do now I have ran it by all of you is probably add it to the Chris Brown article where it will be most appropriate, not here. I can do it, but not right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.123.21.98 (talk) 04:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Lionel Richie
I read he is collaborating with Lionel Richie, I have a source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.54.157 (talk) 23:11, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

"Pop star"
Actually I think Chris Brown should be regarded as a pop star in the article. Recording artist, that title, I don't believe he deserves. Recording personality is a bit out of left field, so I think pop star is a better suited title for this star. Do the caretakers of this article agree or shall we just leave it at recording artist? -- (60.234.54.177 (talk) 11:23, 6 June 2013 (UTC))

I agree I will try and change the description to pop star. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.150.51 (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Page is protected. Can the caretaker of this article please speak up instead of remaining reclusive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.150.51 (talk) 21:02, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Pop star is a very subjective description, it's a good thing the article is protected. Recording artist is the proper term.  STATic  message me!  21:05, 9 June 2013 (UTC

How is that subjective? Pop star means exactly how it reads, in Chris Browns case, a personality who is in popular music or in other words, the top forty. Actually I think you are being a bit ridiculous STATicVerseatide.


 * Pop singer would the correct term, but still inappropriate for an encyclopedia. A pop star could define any "popular" celebrity not necessarily someone in music. Not ridiculous just logical.  STATic  message me!  21:38, 9 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Agree with STATic on this. I don't think there is any reason to change. Even so, this topic should be discussed on Chris Brown. --2nyte (talk) 03:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I liked recording personality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.117.222 (talk) 16:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with, it is a bit far fetch calling him a pop star, recording artist or singer is much more suited. Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ (talk) 18:19, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Released?
What? Why does the initial information of this album on the article page on the far right say "Released"? This is incorrect, that should read something different but not that, because that is describing something in the past-tense and July 16th is a way way away yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.117.222 (talk) 06:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Please go to Template talk:Infobox album to resolve this issue. --2nyte (talk) 09:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Scandal
I read Chris Brown has delayed his album to January 13th next year.


 * According to what reliable source? I seriously doubt he would push it back that far.  STATic  message me!  05:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Vote and debate
Could we please have a vote and debate on the correct description for Chris Brown? I am happy with either pop singer or my original idea, recording personality. The case I have against recording artist is that I don't consider FruityLoops or Anvil Studio to be art. Furthermore he is a singer more than anything else, then personality, and if at all, artist third. I just want this cleared up and I think it should be done so appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 14:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It is encyclopedic tone, he records music and music is a form of art, ie. "Recording Artist". Pop singer and recording personality are both unencyclopedic and incorrect. Wikipedia does not change to fit your atrocious point of view.  STATic  message me!  17:33, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * : Yes, perhaps it would change if we had something called co-operation but I submitted my proposals and you considered them I am sure, so that is good enough for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 17:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Love More
Brown's third single "Love More" has a digital and a radio release with cover art and all, but has no charts yet! So would it be okay to create the article even if its not charted, but has release history?! ChicagoWiz 00:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Not really, it would most likely be redirected by not being notable according to WP:NSONGS. Just because a song is released and by a notable artist does not necessarily make the song notable. As soon as it charts an article can be created for it.  STATic  message me!  00:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but I did find the sources for the igital and radio releases! But I'll wait for the rest of it! ChicagoWiz 01:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Yes I see that the song was released to iTunes and the radio, but better songs still did not chart with both releases. It is just better to wait for its charting so there will be much less reason to dispute its nobility. If you want to you can work on it here! or here!, and just copy and paste the content to article space once it charts, you can do that too.  STATic  message me!  01:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

"Pop star" 2
I would like to re-iterate changing "recording artist" to pop star please. Because I think I am right with my description and why is because he can dance well as well as be a talented vocalist and program music, essentially making him a computer programmer as well - thus, finally, pop star, not recording artist. Please get back to me soon about this article caretaker as to whether you will give in and we can run with my suggestion for the latter part of this articles better quality of life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 11:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Do have any reliable sources that discuss this album and that label him a "pop star"? Is he labeled a "pop star" on any other album of his? No, and "pop star" is such a horrible term to use in the infobox. He is a singer and a rapper, "pop star" could mean any popular celebrity and since "Chris Brown" is a popular name, we have to be precise and call him a "recording artist".  STATic  message me!  16:36, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Okay so where are your sources that you can provide me with to prove to me that he is a singer or a rapper or especially a more pretigious artist. Go over to the Rihanna article dude it is full of it, completely full of it, full of mental masturbation tripe she must read herself as her guilty pleasure to stroke her own ego.  I will tell you who has to be precise, people who are loyally working absent heartedly for Chris Brown and Rihanna Incorporated..  Do you want me to provide you with sources?  Well then I will try my best!  How about cutting out the bi-ist despicable false attitude.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 17:25, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

singer, singer, singer, singer, rapper, rapper, rapper, recording artist. The terms are used everywhere, we will not be changing it to "pop star". Thank you.  STATic  message me!  17:53, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

No, get it right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.214.63 (talk) 08:42, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Music Genre
I Think If Someone Is Going To Add A Music Genre They Should Only Put R&B. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MRivera25 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Release date
Amazon.com removed the December 3rd release date, so i'm guessing it's pushed back. So should we remove it? Koala15 (talk) 01:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Maybe we should wait and see if HitsDoubleDaily removes it, then we would know its official. I honestly would not doubt it one bit, with all his legal issues theres no way the label would release the album now.  STATic  message me!  01:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

"Loyal"
I'm pretty sure "Loyal" is a single from this album, if it does not end up on the tracklist it is just a promo single. Koala15 (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Since there is no timetable on the album how do we know if it is a single from this album and not just a one off single? Are there reliable sources that call it the album's fourth single? On top of that, what version would be then single then since there are two versions?  STATic  message me!  05:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Well when an artists has an album coming out soon and they release a new single it is presumed to be on the album. And i didn't look that hard but i found a source that says it's on the album . Koala15 (talk) 05:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Read your response back to yourself, Wikipedia does not run off you presumptions and you obvious have not paid attention to music for very long. To say every song released to iTunes in the months/years leading up to an album's release, is always featured on the album is preposterous. Especially with all the legal issues Brown is going through right now, who knows when the album is going to be released, especially if he goes to jail after all. Also from the source you cited, ""Loyal" is expected to be featured on the controversial singer's upcoming album, X." We cannot go off of yours or their speculation, and that sounds nothing like confirmation to me.  STATic  message me!  14:51, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Well i didn't say my opinion was fact i just said we usually assume its going to be on the album. But hey i really don't know anymore about this song then you do. Koala15 (talk) 15:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


 * That is the point I am trying to get across, we do not know, you do not build a reputable source of information online with assumptions, speculation or guesses, we have to go back the actual facts. Thank you for taking this to the talk page though, it needed to be discussed by now.  STATic   message me!  17:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

album NOT out
It says that album was released May 5th 2014, well, it's way past May 5th 2014 now, and the album has not been released. Someone should remove that before an edit war happens! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.138.180.140 (talk) 01:42, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Brandy
On the track listing, when "Brandy" is clicked on, it goes to the beverage, not the singer. Shouldn't it redirect to the Brandy Norwood page? Someone obviously forgot to do that 108.46.195.106 (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2014

 * title13 = Do Better
 * note13 = featuring Brandy
 * writer13 =
 * extra13 =
 * length13 =

YoungScuba (talk) 16:59, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: I don't think you meant brandy as in the drink... could you provide a reliable source to verify that there is a guest singer for this track? Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 04:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

The reliable source can be found here: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/the-juice/6229176/chris-brown-x-track-list-kendrick-lamar-r-kelly-trey-songz-akon-brandy 69.113.200.35 (talk) 00:52, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on X (Chris Brown 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/20131106082214/https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/dont-think-they-know-feat./id662959690 to https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/dont-think-they-know-feat./id662959690
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130915021857/https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/love-more-feat.-nicki-minaj/id669505193 to https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/love-more-feat.-nicki-minaj/id669505193
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140514234941/https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/loyal-feat.-lil-wayne-tyga/id847671212 to https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/loyal-feat.-lil-wayne-tyga/id847671212
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140709040843/https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/new-flame-feat.-usher-rick/id893384015 to https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/new-flame-feat.-usher-rick/id893384015

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 13:59, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on X (Chris Brown 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6EpG7cN3E to http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=16691
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6EpG7cN3E to http://www.fmqb.com/article.asp?id=16691
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/62A3WwePt to http://www.allaccess.com/top40-rhythmic/future-releases

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:38, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Spotify Streams
X Album Currently has 1.1 Bilion Streams on the Streaming  platform Spotify, its 1 of 3 of his recent albums to achieve this, This needs to be added on this page. KamKamanga (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Opening discussion on vandalism, cherrypicking and editorial bias on this article
There is a pattern of blatant vandalism and cherrypicking on this article whereby conseriable sourced content is being removed without justification or any sound explination. Moreover, cherrypicking is being done to selectively highlight only negative reception, thereby violating WP:NPOV. It's quite sad to see this kind of editorial biased, which is consistent with the editorial bias present on other album articles of said artist. Failure to provide justification for all these changes on this talk page will result in the article being reverted to its prior state before the vandalism occured.

“Positive Reviews” and lack of NPOV
This: “The album received positive reviews from critics, who celebrated Brown's performances, the record's clean and diversified sound, and the writing style of different songs. The album was considered a big improvement compared to its critically panned predecessor Fortune.” Is nothing short of fancruft and is a completely false assessment of the album’s reception. The album has a 63 on Metacritic, which barely meets the threshold for positive reviews. That said, it also holds an equal 8 positive reviews and 8 mixed reviews, with many of the positive reviews critiquing parts of the album and a plethora of the mixed reviews leaning negative. To remove any and all criticism of the album and only include the positive reviews in the reception section is just vandalism at its most obvious, and the fact that I’m dealing with a Chris Brown superfan who’s threatening me with admin intervention and being forced to create this talk page, of which will likely get zero traction, it’s ridiculous. Regardless, open for discussion. Aardwolf68 (talk) 13:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Yes, we must factor in all the reviews rather than whitewash the topic and look only at the positive. I think we should summarize the reviews by saying "mixed-to-positive". And of course we should tell the reader what negative points were made. Binksternet (talk) 15:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Was the 2nd last sentence directed at me? If so, you should have tagged me in the discussion, as I was polite enough to do so on the F.A.M.E album article earlier. Or perhaps it was directed towards the blocked Italian editor with whom you're always engaged in an edit war with. Ironically, the 1 recent revert I have on this article was to restore a 22 August 2023 version by user: Binksternet after you and the aforementioned Italian editor were yet again engaged in an edit war pushing your own narratives. I see Binksternet who you often mislabel as an admin to push certain edits has already replied to you above about that version of the article. As for me being interested in admin intervention, that's more so related to a long list of infractions on several articles (including this one) as opposed this one edit war you were in with the blocked Italian editor.


 * Also as time permits I will look closely at the critical reception section from the most recent edits and see if the content presented is an accurate representation of cited content. If not I'll add to to the discussion here, not for the sake of traction on this discussion, but rather for the sake of presenting an accurate critical reception to readers of this article. On quick glance I can already see that a rating of 2 out of 5 from New York Times has been added to the article, which doesn't even exist in the cited source. Try to look more closely at the material in the cited sources. Not 3rd party misrepresentations that aren't present in the actual source. That way you won't implicate yourself more as a vandal, by misrepresenting sourced content. But you have inadvertently raised an important issue about aggregate scores based on non-ratings that aren't present in the cited reviews. I will also look more closely at this issue and make a case as to why aggregate scores on certain articles need to be thrown out immediately. Thanks. Instantwatym (talk) 00:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)