Talk:I'm Not Dead

Comment

The album is called "Long Way From Happy" so could someone please change this! My source [1] --L.a.m.b 18:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

The album has officially been titled "I'm Not Dead." My confirmation- [2]

I would like to know the source of the album cover.

Certification

For the US sales they have it listed as platinum, but it sold just over 900,000 copies which makes it a gold record. It may be near platinum, but it is officially gold.--71.235.94.254 18:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I know this is necroing, but certifications are given for albums shipped, not sold. The album was officially platinum at the time of the above comment. Phoenix1304 (talk) 06:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Infobox

Why was the infobox changed to...... well, not an infobox? An infobox looks much better and less messy (and not as US centric as this mutant one). Anyone else support changing it back? - ^Red_Hot 16:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Decimals vs. Commas

Why does a specific editor (who I don't know) insist on changing the commas with decimals? As far as I've seen across Wikipedia, there are VERY few pages that use this method of "numbering"...please stop changing it (unless it's proper "wikipedia" format...which I don't think it is) Vikramsidhu 03:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

awards

NO such thing as SILVER award for USA and platinum for UNITED WORLD CHART

Do we need 2

Whats the point in having the world album charts and the united world chart. Why cant we just have one. I'd prefer the united world charts as that is more reliable.

Charts

Why is the majority of this page chart trajectories? Is this really necessary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadowHalo (talk • contribs)

Whats wrong with having them there, why the fuck do you guys always delete shit that takes weeks to collect and. fuck i hate this place now

Yeah I totally agree with you!^^^^

I've re-removed the chart trajectory per the guideline at WP:CHARTS. —ShadowHalo 11:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Why don't we just have one chart trajectory? I've added the United World Chart again because I thinks it gives an overall good vieuw of the sales worldwide. Some people think is nice to know these things. Maybe Wikipedia doens't consider it as a reliable source but on every wikipedia pages from music albums its alout to do so. For example look at Back To Basics from Christina Aguilera or at B'day from Beyoncé. [[Electric Storm89]]

Why did you delete the United World Chart trajectory again?

Explanation for major cleanup

I've just performed a major cleanup of this article again. It was riddled with problems, including blatant inaccuracies; for example, it was released by LaFace Records, not Arista. Tables are not necessary for track listings; just because information can be put in a table doesn't mean that it should. And having in the article every cover for every single from the album is completely unacceptable in relation to the fair use criteria. Please, keep things in line with the policies and guidelines. Extraordinary Machine 18:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Additional information about UK bonus track

Right now, all I know is that UK get a bonus track. What about???? Can someone add this info.

Fair use rationale for Image:I'm Not Dead Australian Tour Edition.jpg

Image:I'm Not Dead Australian Tour Edition.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 Wikipedia: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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced chart and certification information

There was a lot of unsourced chart and certification information in the article that I've just removed. Please remember to cite reliable sources for all information—verifiability is very important. Extraordinary Machine (talk) 00:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Bot report : Found duplicate references !

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

• "MTVNews-Feb202006" :
  • Vineyard, Jennifer. [http://www.mtv.com/bands/p/pink/news_feature_060220/ "Pink: Not Dead, Not Stupid"]. [[MTV News]]. [[February 17]] [[2006]]. Retrieved [[September 22]] [[2006]].
  • Vineyard, Jennifer. [http://www.mtv.com/bands/p/pink/news_feature_060220/ "Pink: Not Dead, Not Stupid"]. [[MTV News]]. [[February 20]] [[2006]]. Retrieved [[March 30]] [[2007]].

DumZiBoT (talk) 00:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Genre

Since we must prevent edit warrings, we should discuss before genre changing. I think that we should avoid using the source from Rolling Stone for music genres [3] because there's just a vague mention of Pink's musical style ("Whether she sings rock, pop, R&B or her usual combination of all three, the twenty-six-year-old Doylestown, Pennsylvania, native is belting more urgently and taking more risks than her pop-radio contemporaries"). Blueberry72 (talk) 11:16, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

RollingStone's review is more credible than something that says pop-rock throne.Special:Contributions/2A02:C7F:70ED:C900:1010:E468:9643:B844|2A02:C7F:70ED:C900:1010:E468:9643:B844]] (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2019 (UTC) Blocked as a sock. - SummerPhD^v2.0 22:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

@2A02:C7F:70ED:C900:1010:E468:9643:B844: Ok, since you dislike the source from Sputnikmusic [4] and I do not approve your source from Rolling Stone [5], I suggest to remove both the genres from the infobox and discuss before adding any genre again Blueberry72 (talk) 22:41, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@SummerPhDv2.0: I think that MariaJaydHicky frequently targets this page, obviously changing genre. Could we discuss about it? Now the genres in the infobox are:

• pop rock: the source is Sputnikmusic, which says: "Pink returns to the top of the female pop-rock throne with an album that includes multiple hit [...] Ultimately, it results in one hell of a satisfying release that sees her return to the top of the female pop-rock throne"[6]
• R&B: the source is Rolling Stone, which says: "Whether she sings rock, pop, R&B or her usual combination of all three, the twenty-six-year-old Doylestown, Pennsylvania, native is belting more urgently and taking more risks than her pop-radio contemporaries"[7]

I think Rolling Stone's review does not establish a specific genre for the album. Maybe also Sputnikmusic's review isn't enxplict enough. We could remove both genres and add an hidden comment like "discuss before adding a genre". Maybe we could also use Entertainment Weekly's review in order to add pop [8]. Blueberry72 (talk) 18:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good, including the direct listing of the album as "Genre: Pop" in the EW piece. - SummerPhD^v2.0 22:17, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Perfect Blueberry72 (talk) 08:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)