Talk:Bad (album)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Happy anniversary

Bad was released exactly 20 years ago now. [- What relevance has this to an encyclopeda?]

--yeah. I've heard that a french news said that they will re-release Bad. Don't know if it's true. fallenscholar 09:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Recording dates?

This album could not have been recorded completely in 1987. "Another Part of Me" was heard in Captain EO, released in 1986. Anyone have more accurate recording dates? Theswillman 22:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

They changed the another part of me song a bit in 1987. So altogether, the recording dates started in 1987.(72.142.237.25 12:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC))

Then surely the following ought to be deleted? : '...except "Another Part of Me", recorded 1985' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.124.249 (talk) 23:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

The Bad video was filmed in late October 1986; the 'short film' dramatic elements of the video had to have been written months in advance, and the actual dance performance to the song had been choreographed and rehearsed for weeks prior to that date--and the song already had been around long enough for there to have been some attempt at negotiations for making it into a 'duel'/duet with Prince (early 1986), who was sent a tape of the track for review. Smooth Criminal in its basic tracks was recorded in late 1985 per an interview with some of the session musicians, and as such is a remarkable piece of technical studio craft and production for its time of recording. 'Just Good Friends' was also recorded in late 1985, along with 'Get It' which would appear on Wonder's own 1987 'Characters' album. Liberian Girl is mentioned in a mid-1984 private home movie with Jackson; the song as it appears on the album has Jackson's more nasal, higher-pitched 'Thriller' era-esque vocal stylings (most of the Bad material has a markedly harsher vocal interpretation and quality), and there is a prominent analogue synth, the use of which was nearly out of fashion by the time the Bad album was commercially released in late 1987; the basic tracks from this song are probably from 1984/85, with some substantial updating (drum machine programming, digital synth overdubs, more vocal overdubs and female vocal overdubs, etc.) at a later point; the album outtake 'Fly Away' would also appear to have been recorded around the same time for similar reasons as mentioned. 'I Just Can't Stop Loving You' was known to be floating around for a good year to eighteen months while trying to secure a strong female co-lead vocalist (Houston, Streisand, etc.) before Siedah was chosen (track likely completed in early 1987); the basic tracks and Jackson's own vocals are probably from 1985. 'The Way You Make Me Feel' started off as 'Hot Fever', which has a copyright date of 1985 (the track as it appears on the album also features analogue synth, which again was a more common production choice in the early and mid-1980s rather than the late 1987 release date of the album, which serves as a clue to its original time of recording); presumably the version that appears on the album was reworked from or based upon these tracks. Captain Eo was filmed early summer 1985; obviously, 'Another Part of Me' had to have been recorded prior to filming; the song was reworked for the 'Bad' album (speeded up and cleaned up a bit, new synth bass line, etc).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.113.198 (talk) 01:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Multi-disc set-source?

Jackson wanted Bad to be a multi-disc set with 30 tracks? What's the source? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.220.197.34 (talk) 19:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC).

If he did want it to be as long as that why did he agree for it to be cut right down to 10 tracks when 12 would not be outside of the norm?- Picnico

If you have the limited edition of the bad album there is an interview with Quincey jones on it. He said Jackson wanted all 28 songs included because he had become attacked to all of them, however quincey had the final decision as producer to cut it to 10. This would probably have been for the best. you can see when he left quincey jones on Dangerous album 1991 he almost completely fills it at 74 mins long!!!!!!! Although the album was good and lyrically better than the bad album it did have some unneccesary songs. If he had left off 2 or 3 songs from Dangerous it would have been amazing, however he didnt which is a shame. Also note Quincey jones did not want smooth criminal on the album at all, michael had to fight to keep it.Realist2 21:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I would really like to know what the 19 lost album tracks are. Could they be found off of "Dangerous"? Or are the songs he included in "Captain EO" and "Moonwalker" part of the missing tracks too? Please send me a private message letting me know about this. -luckybolt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.189.227 (talk) 21:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit control: Bad page looks more like a fan page

Sorry but I had to take all that extra stuff out. If you wanna re-include information about at least when Michael began recording for Bad, put it in where it says "Recording". Also, I didn't think the Captain EO, Moonwalker and Bad Tour should've been included since it has its own respective pages. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 04:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately it was all merged here via a consensus , i reverted your edit but i do agree this isnt the best place for them. I suggest we creat an article for them to go on. Realist2 (talk) 15:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Rolling stone poll

I removed the following text,

In 1988, despite the success, the "TIME" stated that the album have been received poorly by the public opinion::

"Bad, as all hipsters know, can also mean good. But when it comes to Michael Jackson, a lot of music fans think Bad is positively the worst. In a poll of 23,000 readers released by Rolling Stone this week, the Gloved One hit rock bottom in eight categories, including "worst male singer," "worst dressed," "worst album ((Bad))" and "worst single ((Bad))." The backlash has more to do with the singer's quirky personality than his music, says Rolling Stone Music Editor David Wild: "People are responding negatively to his image and to the hype. The category he should have won is 'worst image' or 'least understood.' " Even so, Jackson's album has sold 4 million copies and spawned three Top Ten singles, which isn't half bad."

Basically, the poll isn't appropriate for a number of reasons

• The album sold 25 million copies worldwide, this poll is on 23,000 people, it has little relevance
• It's a US only poll, only giving a US perspective. Only 33% of Bad's sales came from the US.
• Much of this is about public image, not the album
• It's WP:UNDUE WEIGHT.
  • — Realist² 21:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Good point, but surely the article should make note of the basic fact that 'Bad' - given the enormous challenge of following 'Thriller' - was a flop, or at least as much of a flop as it could have been, given the publicity around it. 'Thriller' had sold 20 million copies in the US, making 'Bads sales paltry by comparison. Pointing this out could also lead to a discussion of the relative success of 'Bad' in the UK and Europe, where if often out-sold 'Thriller'. If Wikipedia entries on MJ and on 'Thriller' and 'Bad' don't convey the singular popularity of 'Thriller' in the US, then - as is so often the case - this "encyclopedia" ain't doing its job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.152.227.244 (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Rolling Stone Poll

Hello Realist2, I'm Rockwell13 and I'm sincerely sorry to don't reply sooner, but I'm really not very familiar with the talk page of wikipedia, I would like to know why do you don't let my article about the Bad album ? I give you my source and change the text in the last article for to fit more to the reality, in fact I have already said that the album have success, but I give also a new info done by professionnal about a huge poll of 23,000 readers of Rolling Stone magazine, lot of people dislike that and the poll is a big proof of lot of music fans have received poorly his new style "with Bad", not everybody have loved this and it would be more honest to show that in the wikipedia article about the album, I hope you give more explanation for to know what can I do for that you accept my edit (sorry for my bad eglish).

You said the pool proof nothing because it's just about 23,OOO readers, but it's the utility of a pool to try to have with a small numbers the reaction of a larger numbers, because it's not possible to do that with everybody.

I don't say that Bad is not a good success, I just say that lot of Music fans are not happy with the quality of the album "Bad" and the singer in this time, I don't know what you dislike about that and why you don't want that in the wikipedia page, TIME think it was more because of the public image, but it was just the opinion of TIME about that and has not really proof about the pool, the pool have talked about the singer and his public image, but also about the quality of the album in a separated category, the two are not linked, at least in the pool.

The pool is about worst singer but also for the worst album for "Bad" and worst single for the same album, I don't make any mistake because it's about the album "Bad".

Thank you for advance and sorry again for not to reply of your last comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockwell13 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I reinserted it, giving it the appropriate weight ans correcting the tone. It reads as follows;

Despite the records success, in a poll of 23,000 US citizens, released by Rolling Stone, Jackson won "worst album" for Bad and "worst single" for "Bad". TIME gave the opinion that the singer was suffering a backlash in certain parts of the US. The publication suggested that the singer's media image was triggering the poll, not the music.

— Realist² 15:24, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

UK sales

I remember reading that in the UK, Bad outsold Thriller - and was about the only country in the world where it had. Amyone know anything about this - or have a ref for it so it could be added - I would say it's a noteworthy fact.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 01:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Bad

It's true that Q said Prince said the song would be a hit without him, but Prince said he didn't want to do the song cause Michael won't change the 1st lyric, "Your butt is mine" 67.84.164.119 (talk)Santos89

Liberian Girl

This link claims to know what the Swahili lyrics mean. I think it's worth adding. http://www.glcom.com/hassan/swahili_history.html 67.84.164.119 (talk)Santos89

Almost all the songs in "Bad" became singles

You forgot to mention the fact that Bad is the only album in which all its songs except "Just Good Friends" became singles. Everyone loves that trivia fact, it could be listed in the Guiness Book of World Records! --Angeldeb82 (talk) 21:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Not more records than Thriller in the UK

Hi, yeah thought this was wirth mentioning, according to an article on wikipedia Bad is not Jackson's biggest selling album in the UK of his, it's Thriller then Bad, but nit by much just by about 20,000. So I changed it, oh and here's the link as proof. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_albums_in_the_United_Kingdom —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.144.230 (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

John... John who?

In the I Just Can't Stop Loving You credits: "Vocal arrangement by Michael Jackson and John" ... is this John Barnes? Or is this the "John" that everyone knows  :) I don't have the booklet. Keraunoscopia (talk) 05:47, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Ordering of sections

My edit to bring the tracklisting nearer the top was reverted. The way I see it, an article should tell thde reader what the subject is, before going off to describe and explain supporting information. The way I see it, the album IS the songs on it. Anything a magazine said is consequental, and should come afterwards. Having the tracklist near the bottom, after a thousand words of text kind of makes the whole section academic, as by this stage we have already had a blow-by-blow account of each track. I'd concede that you'd need a paragraph or two of historical background, and any other special information, but then the tracklist (and then personnel, which also defines the album) should come right away, long before awards or press cuttings. Without simply providing a link, does anybody have any comments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.22 (talk) 17:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

• see WP:ALBUMS or any other GA / FA Album Article. Tbhotch^{Talk2 Me} 18:05, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

• Well, (1) that link makes no mention of the order in which sections should appear. (2) any link you can provide, I can just provide a link to the page that tells you to ignore/break the rules. (3) what's the point of providing a tracklist after every song on the album has already been discussed? Getting back to my point, the album is the tracks on it, along with the cover artwork and list of writers/musicians/producers. Before explaining the importance of something, you always need to say what it actually is. Arguably, anything else does't matter, and should come afterwards. Please can somebody explain why this is not the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.22 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

• This is a album featured article -- In Utero --, as you can see, the track-listing is just two sections before the article finish. what's the point of providing a tracklist after every song... -- the thing is any article should be interesting for the reader, See Wikipedia:Lead section (yes, it talk about how must be the first paragraphs, but it is a useful aid). Many people, most of the time, only search a track-listing and they some times not read the rest of the article, that's one reason for why the t.l. doesn't appears at top of the article. Tbhotch^{Talk2 Me} 01:30, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Comparison to Thriller

"Despite the album's commercial success, it has been viewed as a relative failure when compared to the sales of Thriller."

Because this statement is unverified and contains no citations, I think it would be appropriate to delete (the status of Bad as a "failure" is an opinion and not factual or citable). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 11achitturi (talk • contribs) 01:10, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bad (album)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Absolutely well-written all over. I have gone over the prose a couple times and see no mistakes at all. There is sufficient weight on all of the major topics, clearly describing everything that should be mentioned in a substantial album article. I think that the article goes into a very high level of detail regarding every possible aspect that should belong in an ideal article on an album. The conception, history, sounds, critical reception, awards and legacy are all written on at great length without feeling overlong or trivial, and everything matches up to a source. All of the source links check out, and every citation used appears reputable.

There are only a couple of minor points that I would like to make before passing:

Stuff I changed

• I removed the Rhapsody and Virgin links from the reviews as they did not look reliable. I also reformatted the reviews table so that it used inline refs instead of "[link]." The Yahoo! Music review didn't look reputable or substantial either (not to mention its placeholder date of 1/1/1987; clearly it wasn't written then).
• The names of the individual Grammy awards didn't need to be in quotes, so I removed them.

Stuff still needing change

• Personnel needs a source (ideally the liner notes). I also linked the first instance of each instrument name.

 Done Crystal Clear x3 [talk] 01:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

• Last sentence of "Release and marketing" needs a source.

 Done Crystal Clear x3 [talk] 01:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Once this passes, you might want to consider nominating this for Featured Article.

Reviewer: Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 01:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

• The two tiny issues I had have been resolved, so this is now good to go. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 01:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Minor issue

One wonky bit of prose that possibly came about due to vandalism - "Sigerson commented that we a "filler" content in Bad..." Can someone who is familiar with Sigerson's comments please fix? Orderinchaos 01:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The two versions of Bad

An interview with holophonics developer Hugo Zuccarelli was recently released in an argentinian magazine, which explains the different mixes of the album.

After being used by Pink Floyd and almost being used by Paul McCartney, Jackson wanted to use that technology for Bad, so he hired Zuccarelli and Ringo (his head-shaped holophonics recording device) for working on the album. Following its release, he and the producers wanted to acquire the patent for the holophonics technology for near U$S 100,000. Zuccarelli rejected the offer, and the producers decided to remix the album omitting the holophonic sections, which happen to be the ones listed below the track list on the article. The only sound mantained in both versions is the initial motorbike sound in "Speed Demon". The original mix was only present in the first 2 million copies of the album.

This is an important aspect of the album's production history, and I noticed there was no word about this yet in the article. I hope it can be expanded with this information (I'll see if I can get a web source of the interview) --BrowndRemastered (talk) 16:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Producer/Co-Producer

I REALLY wish someone would re-edit the page to indicate that Michael Jackson was the CO-PRODUCER, not the producer. Only Quincy Jones was the producer. This may seem unimportant or irrelevant to others, but it just irks me everytime I see Michael's name in front of Quincy's in the Producer label in the infobox. This is why I really wish there was a separate label for the co-producer. Luminoth187 (talk) 21:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)Luminoth187

Leave Me Alone is a bonus track

Hi, track 11 on the album ("Leave Me Alone") was actualy a bonus track on CD copies, and it does not appear on any other version like vinyl or cassette. There's even a giant red spot on the cover telling us of the "BONUS TRACK". This also means it is the first bonus track on the 2001 Special Edition. Of cause i can't do anything myself, it's semi-protected, but it would seem normal to write down it's a bonus track to CD and Special Editions respectively.--77.99.231.37 (talk) 19:10, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011

Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 2 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the {{Allmusic}} template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:

• http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=A7cu1z85ajyv6
• http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=Aoe6cmpe39ffo

--CactusBot (talk) 09:42, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Singles Summary

The article state that "One of the singles charted within the top-ten, and another charted within the top-twenty on the Hot 100." This isn't quite accurate, since seven of the album's singles charted within the top 20 and six of them reached the top 10. It would be more accurate to state that five of the album's singles reached #1, a sixth reached the top 10, and a seventh reached the top 20.Ww adh77 (talk) 03:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Using quotes for titles in the possessive form

I think it would be better to italicize the title of a song and leave the possessive unitalicized rather than use the following type of construction:

"Man in the Mirror"'s

For more info, see:

http://painintheenglish.com/case/669

Sorry that all I can do right now is bring this issue up. Thanks! --Geekdiva (talk) 22:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Bad (album)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

Article requirements: Y All the start class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details Y At least one section of prose (excluding the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians Y Categorisation at least by artist and year Y A casual reader should learn something about the album. Andrzejbanas (talk) 07:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC) ==Re-assessment== ==Re-assessment== Start class: Y A reasonably complete infobox Y A lead section giving an overview of the album Y A track listing Y Reference to at least primary personnel by name (must specify performers on the current album; a band navbox is insufficient) Y Categorisation at least by artist and year C class: Y All the start class criteria Y A reasonably complete infobox, including cover art Y At least one section of prose (in addition to the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs Y A "personnel" section listing performers, including guest musicians. B class: Y All the C class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians Y No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources. Y No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS Y No Trivia sections. The recording paragraph has only one citation in it. while marketing has none at all. The charts section also lacks citation. Fix these up to have the album up to a B-status! Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 09:53, 16 February 2010 (UTC). Substituted at 14:19, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Is Speed Demon a single ?

When I look at the song it says Single of Michael Jackson from Bad and on the album list Speed Demon is not listed as a single — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.155.222 (talk) 23:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Because it is not a single, it is a promotional single. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

(I know it's late) This is it is a promotional single and its on here. --LilShootDawg (talk) 02:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Michael Jackson Bad Album Cover.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Michael Jackson Bad Album Cover.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Michael Jackson Bad Album Cover.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:39, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Bad has new sales...

The bad album has moved 45 million albums:

http://theurbandaily.com/1921261/pepsi-plans-michael-jackson-bad-25th-anniversary-campaign/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.87.203 (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

BAD has sold 45 million copies worldwide!

"Released in 1987, it is one of the greatest selling albums of all-time and sold over 45 million copies worldwide." by: taletela.com

Sources:

• http://www.taletela.com/news/15380/michael-jackson-partners-up-with-pepsi-again-30-years-later
• http://thatdame.com/headlines/pepsi-prepares-michael-jackson-bad-25th-anniversary-campaign/
• http://uptownmagazine.com/2012/05/pepsi-teams-with-michael-jackson-for-25th-anniversary-of-bad/
• http://www.thegrio.com/entertainment/pepsi-plans-new-campaign-for-michael-jacksons-bad-25th-anniversary.php
• http://theurbandaily.com/1921261/pepsi-plans-michael-jackson-bad-25th-anniversary-campaign/
• http://thatgrapejuice.net/2012/04/major-pepsi-michael-jackson-bad-2012/
• http://360mediauk.com/blog/2012/05/02/pepsi-sign-post-humous-deal-with-michael-jackson-estate/

--77.86.202.210 (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

You are not showing any official sources. According to the RIAA, Bad was certified 8X platinum in 1994. That is the last entry they have for the album. A platinum record certifies 1 million copies sold. Source: [1]. Just because a blog or website says 45 million copies were sold doesn't make it so. Most of the refs you produced are to the same story. Since we're not sure where the figure originated with, we can't say it's a WP:RELIABLE source. Regards, --Manway 18:42, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Does the RIAA include non-US sales? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:17, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

No, they never do. Other countries have other entities and associations that certify sales, like the BPI (UK), the CRIA (Canada), the ARIA (Australia), the BVMI (Germany), and the SNEP (France).

If the certifications Bad has in all those and other countries is added, you still only get 17,875,000 copies certified, less than half of the supposed 45 million.--Mauri96 (talk) 00:07, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Then if it only adds up to roughly 18 million, go to all of MJ's pages and put your original research as the number on his worldwide estimated album sales. Then go to every artist page of the last 65 YEARS, (Elvis,Beatles,James Brown, Rolling Stones, U2) scroll down to all the albums that they have put out and just disregard the estimated sales of their albums and put the certifications as their worldwide estimated album sales. Estimated and Certified are two different things though some try to link the two. An accepted reliable source like Yahoo Reuters is still acceptable regardless of what some may see as inflated. Most albums certification DO NOT, (parrot mode) DO NOT add up to their estimated amount but it is what it is as Wikipedia allows for reliable sources to be the backbone of all articles of their web pages despite what some may believe as exaggerated, or recycled misinformation. Yahoo Reuters is reliable until a later article of the same page can prove to it to be otherwise. The Almighty King (talk) 10:34, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

BAD 25

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MAY 21, 2012

25th ANNIVERSARY OF MICHAEL JACKSON’S

LANDMARK ALBUM BAD CELEBRATED WITH SEPTEMBER 18

RELEASE OF NEW BAD 25 PACKAGES

MICHAEL’S PERSONAL VHS COPY OF HIS JULY 16, 1988

PERFORMANCE AT WEMBLEY STADIUM UNEARTHED FOR THE RELEASE

NEWLY DISCOVERED OUTTAKES AND DEMOS FROM BAD ALBUM RECORDING SESSIONS TO BE RELEASED

New York, NY – Twenty-five years after the phrase “Who’s Bad” became a generation’s cultural catchphrase, Epic/Legacy Recordings, in collaboration with the Estate of Michael Jackson, will celebrate the legendary album and record breaking BAD tour on September 18, 2012 with the release of a deluxe package, BAD 25, which includes three CDs, two collectible booklets, and features the first ever authorized DVD release of a concert from the record breaking BAD tour.

“The era of BAD represented Michael’s creative ‘coming of age’ as a solo artist in charge of every aspect of his career – from recording to touring to endorsements to merchandising. This was the first album on which nearly all of the songs were written by Michael. It was also was the first album in history to produce five consecutive #1 singles and it took 2 ½ decades for another artist to match that success. It was also the first time Michael would tour as a solo artist - his vision, his decisions on what the show would be. The enormous success of the BAD album and tour was a pivotal moment in Michael’s growth as a composer, performer and producer cementing his role as the King of Pop. We are thrilled to celebrate such an historic era in Michael’s career with this release”, stated John Branca and John McClain, Co-Executors of the Estate of Michael Jackson.

The BAD 25 anniversary deluxe edition will feature three CDs and 1 DVD as follows:

• The highlight of the package is the DVD of Michael’s legendary July 16, 1988 concert at Wembley Stadium. The concert is not a compilation of performances, but rather one complete show, exactly as Michael performed it for Prince Charles, Princess Diana and the 72,000 fans who were in the audience for that night’s sold out show. This show was one of the record-breaking seven nights played at the venue attended by more than half a million people – three times that many people tried to purchase tickets. The DVD was sourced from Michael Jackson’s personal VHS copy of the performance as shown on the JumboTrons during the concert. This footage was only recently unearthed and is the only known copy of the show to exist. The visuals have been restored and the audio quality enhanced so that fans can share in the excitement of that famous night

• A CD of the re-mastered original BAD album

• A CD containing previously unreleased material recorded in Michael’s personal studio at Hayvenhurst. This material includes early demo versions of songs from the album as well as demos for songs not included on the final album. All of this material is being released as it was recorded during the BAD sessions. Nothing has been added. In addition, this CD will also include new remixes from internationally renowned DJ/producers

• A CD showcasing the audio from the sound truck recordings of the July 16th Wembley performance. The first-ever live Michael Jackson CD to be released, this is the only concert from the BAD Tour known to exist on multitracks This magnificent 3 CD/1 DVD box set will also include two extensive booklets with yet unseen photos from the recording sessions, video sets and the concert tour, the original BAD cover art, a two-sided poster and more. A BAD 25 two CD standard edition featuring the original album plus the CD of demos and new remixes will also be made available as will a stand alone edition of the DVD and a picture disc of the original album.

On June 5 in the U.S. (June 4th ex-U.S.), Epic / Legacy Recordings will re-release the original first single from the album "I Just Can't Stop Loving You" as a CD Single with a previously unreleased bonus track from the BAD sessions, "Don't Be Messin' 'Round (demo)." This is a Wal-Mart exclusive CD single in the U.S. and will not be available digitally.

On June 26 a replica edition of the original 7" vinyl of this single with the original B-side "Baby Be Mine" will be made available to the world. The first single for BAD, “I Just Can’t Stop Loving You,” was originally released on 7" vinyl in 1987. The 7" single edit of the song has only been available on that original 7" vinyl until now.

Recently, Pepsi announced an exclusive global partnership with the Estate of Michael Jackson as part of its new “Live for Now” campaign. Starting this month, Michael Jackson and Pepsi fans in more than 20 countries around the world will experience this partnership in a variety of ways, including a retail campaign featuring one billion special edition Michael Jackson Bad 25 Pepsi cans, live events, and opportunities for fans to access special edition merchandise and new music from BAD 25.

The BAD album was the third Michael Jackson album produced by Quincy Jones and was originally released on August 31, 1987. It was monumental in many ways; Michael wrote nine of the album's eleven tracks and received co-producer credit for the entire album. The album was #1 around the world, made history with five consecutive #1 singles on the Billboard chart, produced ten chart-topping singles, nine ground breaking short films and to date, the Bad album has generated over 45 Million units in sales. BAD was nominated for six Grammys and won two; the album earned Michael the first-ever Video Vanguard Award at the MTV VMA Awards. Songs on the original album are: “Bad,” “The Way You Make Me Feel,” “Speed Demon,” “Liberian Girl,” “Just Good Friends” featuring Stevie Wonder, “Another Part of Me,” “Man in the Mirror,” “I Just Can’t Stop Loving You,” “Dirty Diana,” “Smooth Criminal,” with “Leave Me Alone” added to the album once released.

The BAD World Tour was Michael’s first concert tour as a solo artist. The legendary tour included 123 concerts attended by more than 4.4 million fans over sixteen months. When it concluded, the tour had shattered all previous touring records for attendance and total gross revenue adding three new entries in the Guinness World Records for the largest grossing tour in history, the tour with the largest attended audience and the most sold out shows at Wembley Stadium.

More details on this and other exciting projects relating to BAD’s 25th anniversary will be announced soon.

www.MichaelJackson.com

http://www.facebook.com/michaeljackson

1. WhosBAD

A Bad 25 article has been set up. MLVD (talk) 13:05, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't see why it needs a stand-alone article. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:09, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Bad 25 needs own article like Thriller 25 in 2008. --88.112.152.225 (talk) 18:51, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Bad 25 is similar to Thriller 25, which is a significant different re-issued box-set, which deserves an independent article. 219.216.100.16 (talk) 01:38, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

As of right now, the article is a stub with only one source. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 05:59, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The article was only created less than 24 hours ago. You can't expect it to be a world class article in such a short time span. Anyway I am actively working on the article (it now has multiple sources). MLVD (talk) 07:19, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Reuters: BAD has sold 45 million copies!

""Bad" won two Grammy awards and sold more than 45 million copies around the world, fueled by the popularity of singles such as "Dirty Diana," "Smooth Criminal" and the album title track, "Bad.""

Source: http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/05/21/michaeljackson-bad-idINDEE84K0BS20120521 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.202.210 (talk) 13:41, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

• Considering all of the 2012 sources cite in excess of 45 million sales (which seems more accurate considering the stagnant 30 million that's remained for years) should this not be stated as the official figure in place of the range? All the 30-35 million sources are older publications based in outdated data. Mc8755 (talk) 00:08, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Working with a range is more suitable since the 45 million is introduced by the record label (which is of course unreliable). See the earlier discussions in this regard. Christo jones (talk) 10:49, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Wording

"Bad itself has sold around 30 million copies worldwide, shipped 8 million units in the United States alone"...

Saying 'around' seems somewhat misleading- somewhat implied lower + it's a little too vague. I think that this should be altered to "Bad itself has sold over 35 million copies worldwide...". The 30 million copies has remained stagnant for years now. Considering that the figure hasn't changed since 1994 and factoring in record breaking posthumous sales/digital copies, I think it's safe to assume that the figure is well over 30 million. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VoguePlease (talk • contribs) 06:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with above poster...The 30 million is well stagnant and it has gone way past this figure now. Not only are there sources with higher numbers, but also the BAD documentary states the same as these sources. I notice that whenever it comes to Michael Jackson, there are some wiki users who play around with the rules...Being flexible for certain other artists and yet, when it comes to MJ, inflexible. The so-called rules seem to be different when it comes to MJ, not matter what legitimate sources are posted. Just look at some of the general wiki articles for MJ...The pages are often full of posters complaining about figures that, in their opinion, should be lower and asking either for more or different sources...These are sources that are more often retrieved in the same way and from the same places as for other artists...Yet, nobody complains on those pages...It goes on and on. There is definitely a bias with some wiki article creators and wiki posters, whenever it comes to Michael Jackson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.76.164 (talk) 08:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Proposal to recreate Just Good Friends (song) article

I know it was deleted in 2008 because the song was not a single. But it has had substancial coverage in reliable sources, see Google search, google books, google news.

I was going to go right ahead and do it (considering the recent trend of Britney Spears, Katy Perry and Lady Gaga song articles being created on every single song per album - with many non-singles becoming GA), but decided to have a discussion first.

Thoughts?

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Bad (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.vh1.com/news/articles/1615214/20090702/jackson_michael.jhtml
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6EEYfYVwc?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bpi.co.uk%2Fcertified-awards.aspx to http://www.bpi.co.uk/certified-awards.aspx
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.yahoo.com/25th-anniversary-michael-jackson-landmark-album-bad-celebrated-140242006.html
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/5hFf8iFDu?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishcharts.ie%2Fsearch%2Fplacement to http://www.irishcharts.ie/search/placement
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1001beforeyoudie.com/qssUS/us_1001_albums.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/5938174/the_rs_500_greatest_albums_of_all_time/3
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mtv.co.uk/channels/vh1/chart/greatest-albums-ever
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.abpd.org.br/noticias_internas.asp?noticia=173
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.infodisc.fr/B-CD_1987.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029202201/http://it-charts.150m.com/numeriuno-a-1980.htm to http://it-charts.150m.com/numeriuno-a-1980.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111015223243/http://austriancharts.at/80er_album.asp to http://austriancharts.at/80er_album.asp

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

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:15, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

"Suck-my-cock" "Like shit" Are these appropriate quotes?

Assuming that the article wasn't vandalized to add these, are the quotes with "suck-my-cock" and "like shit" really necessary or appropriate for this article? 173.2.64.195 (talk) 19:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Checking the source, the quote as we have it is accurate (the longer original includes a "damn" and a "fuck" for good measure). Wikipedia is not censored, so there's no reason to remove the quote based on some of the language being offensive to some readers.

Robert Christgau is one of the few notable music critics, so I'd say quoting him is appropriate. I don't see a particular reason to quote a different section. - SummerPhD^v2.0 02:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I didn't ask if cursing was allowed or if it was accurate. I asked if it was *necessary* or *appropriate.* For one example, including the extra sentence "like shit" at the end of the quote adds nothing to it. It's already clear that he doesn't agree with Jackson's Moonwalking because he said "he claims." 173.2.64.195 (talk) 09:48, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

How would it be "inappropriate"? To me, that means you feel it is "improper" for the situation. Given that your question focuses entirely on phrases that would be censored elsewhere, it seems that removing wording you consider to be offensive is your goal. The situation, incidentally, is an uncensored encyclopedia that includes photos of women with their hair uncovered, video of Ejaculation and a substantial article on the word "Fuck". Like shit. - SummerPhD^v2.0 12:48, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

It would be inappropriate because this is not an article about ejaculation, pubic hair nor vulgarity. And it would be unnecessary because the phrase "Like shit" does nothing to improve the quote. Again, you tried to argue that the phrase was *allowed* and not that it was *necessary* or *appropriate*. Do you think it would be appropriate for someone to quote a political commentator saying "Barack Obama should suck my dick" in an article on the 44th President, especially when it wasn't necessary to establish opinions on the President and there were other more professional quotes to use? 24.184.166.109 (talk) 22:59, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Ann Curry, among countless articles, is not about a woman's hair. Yet, there it is, fully uncovered for all to see. Several cultures find that vulgar and inappropriate. You do not. What you feel is "inappropriate" (i.e., it offends you) is culturally bound. This encyclopedia is not specific to your culture.

The words and phrases you find offensive are integral parts of the quote. None of the photos in the article are "necessary", and they are vulgar graven images. In the opinion of the editors here, the photos add something to the article. The editors at the Village Voice determined that the phrases that offend you have meaning. Hell, the more I look at it, the more I think we should add "This is a record that damn near wrecks perfectly good dancin' and singin' with subtext" (yes, even though dancing is vulgar and inappropriate). - SummerPhD^v2.0 23:46, 21 January 2018 (UTC)