Talk:Headstrong (Ashley Tisdale album)

Misc

Recently User:Metros232 removed nearly all the content on the grounds that it was uncited. I think this is counter-productive. Normally articles develop with content being added first (often by inexperienced users) and references coming later (often as more experienced users come across it and try to bring it up to Wikipedia standards). If everything is deleted before it can be cited, then it will take a long time for the article to grow. For good reason we don't go around removing uncited content just because it's uncited; if we did, the encyclopedia would be crippled, because most of our content is uncited. If you're concerned about the content, look around and try to cite it yourself, and if you can't verify it, then removal is more acceptable. Everyking 12:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

And I did try to verify it on my own. I tried her myspace, I tried her official website, I tried Disney's site, I tried the label's site. About the only thing I was able to confirm is that the first single will be "Last Christmas". So unless it's floating around a fan message board, I don't know where this track listing is coming from. Metros232 13:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

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

Important and referenced informations must still

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

Singles

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

HELP

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

Fake Single Covers.

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

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

Chapter II

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

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

Deluxe Edition

There is no confirmed tracklisting to the Deluxe edition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Password-forgetter (talk • contribs) 01:21, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

I can find no evidence that a re-release is even being planned. Is there any? Everyking 01:55, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, it looks like there is going to be a re-release, and I added a source for that. Still haven't found a tracklist, though. Everyking 02:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I have a question does can anyone find out if the re-realse will also be coming out in Canada as well? Headstrong 345 23:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Headstrong 345

It probably will come out in Canada, and It's the Way was just a rumored, then disproved song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.165.20 (talk) 01:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Album Sales

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

R&B?!

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

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

Second Album?

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Headstrongholiday.jpg

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

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Headstrongpink.jpg

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

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

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

Fair use rationale for Image:BGTM.ogg

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

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

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

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

Re-release (true?)

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

---

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

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

Too Many Alternative CD Images

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

Accuracy

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

I have warned several admins on wikipedia about this and after that they blocked Dienaked. I have removed the text that was trivia, fake or fan based from the article with reasons given in the history page while Fotesh just reverting my edit with no reasons and started accusing me of being a crazy brenda song fan rekated with some ip address when my real ip is 81.155.226.185 and here is proof. [1]

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

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

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

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

Image copyright problem with File:SomethingHeadstrongcover.jpg

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

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

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

GA Review

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

Reviewer: --CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 20:03, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Lead

• via -> by is better.

Very common word meaning "by way of."

• The first installment of -> You only mentioned 1 film, how could there be a first or second. Either change it, or say film series.

Only the first installment was out at the time of album release.

• The singer -> Tisdale

It is understood Tisdale is "the singer" and the word is used as stating Tisdale again would be repetitive.

• introduce herself as a personally -> ? - Personality?

Removing "as a"

• it incorporates hip hop beats and some tracks -> fix
• the album. The album -> reads weird.

Done

• Whearas the album debuted at number five on the Billboard 200 -> Whereas not a good word.

definition - "In contrast or comparison with the fact that." It's not really out of the ordinary. It charted blalbahblabkh in the US in contrast to the international positions.

• RIAA and IRMA -> spell them out. Also, would be best to make like two sentences out of this info.

Done

• were released to certain -> in

Done

• charted in the top half of -> re-word

How else? It's really no other way this can be stated. Candyo32 00:49, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Background and development

• Tisdale got her start on charts -> re-word

Done

• in history do debut -> typo

Done

• Tisdale called the feat "crazy," stating, "When I think about artists like Madonna and Beyoncé...it’s surreal. I seriously can’t comprehend it. -> what does this have to do with the section?

Really filler information to add to Tisdale's reaction to her being the first on Billboard for that feat, which is vital to the Background section of her starting her solo career.

• About the previous statement -> regarding

Done

• "Don't Touch (The Zoom Song)" are both covers -> you only mentioned one song.

Done

• The singer -> She or Tisdale.

Done, although I don't see what's wrong with "the singer" as it is understood it is Tisdale unless noted otherwise.

• collaborated with Rotem on "He Said She Said" as well did Ryan Tedder, and Evan "Kidd" Bogart. -> confusing.

Done

• does not contain and credited -> typo

Done. Candyo32 00:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Composition

• the genres of dance-pop, electropop, and R&B -> ' genres

I don't understand the problem in question here. Removing "the"? I don't think that would make sense.

• It carries many elements of hip pop itself compared to the music of Gwen Stefani -> re-write.

Done

• The next few lines are too successive. This song, this song etc. Try and tidy that up a bit.

Done

• according to Gary Graff of Billboard, is also liking Stefani. -> ?

Mean to say "liking to Stefani."

• please fix up the end as well.

What problems are in the end?

Done. Candyo32 01:07, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Critical reception

• Phares also said that -> you wrote "said" already, try commented.

Done

• but critiqued -> criticized.

Criticized and critiqued are about the same word, both common, with critiqued meaning, "Evaluate in a detailed and analytical way: "the authors critique the methods used in research" What the problem with the usage here? Candyo32 01:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Chart performance

• Recording Industry Association of America -> (RIAA)

Done

• for shipments -> denoting.

I've been told in like ten GA reviews and a FA review that use "shipments" for certs.

• As it peaked at 155 on the UK Albums Chart, Headstrong reached sixteen on the Irish Albums Chart. -> separate, so you can include Irish certs in same sentence.

Done. Candyo32 01:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Singles

• Overall, the article has allot of overlinking. You linked "He Said She Said" many times. Fix in many places.

I thought it wouldn't be such a problem if the linking were in separate sections (which it is only linked once in each sec.) is it still a problem?

• at eighty -> number

Done

• while reaching sixty-seven in Austria and fifty-seven in Germany -> you have 3 in one sentence. Split up.

Since it was only three countries I thought listing them together would cut down on the wordiness, so it wouldn't be so many excessive sentences.

• It was later certified Gold in the United States by the Recording Industry Association of America for shipments of over 500,000 copies. -> provide RIAA source.

Done.

• which select European markets also received -> fix.

Problem here? Candyo32 01:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Promotion

• performing the singles, "Be Good to Me" and "He Said She Said" On -> period and the end of of the sentence needs re-wording.

Period, but how else could be stated?

• The following day when the album was released, she performed on Live With Regis and Kellywhile on February 8, 2007, she appeared in the studios of WPIX and KTLA for their respective morning news shows. -> typo, re-wording etc.

Done

• The singer -> Tisdale, She.

Done, but as stated above, don't see the problem with "the singer" as it is understood it is Tisdale unless otherwise noted.

• She also appeared to perform -> sounds like your saying "she looked like she was"

Done. Candyo32 01:18, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

• Well Candy, I'd have to say you've got quite a bit of work here! Let me know when its fixed :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 20:30, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Almost there

• Hi Candy, you still got some things. I don't see the use of "The singer" as proper. Show me 1 GA that does that. For me, I say she or Carey, there is nothing else. I mean imagine this "The singer wrote the song with Walter Afanasieff." It doesn't read well.

Discipline (Janet Jackson album), It's About Time (Christina Milian album), Taylor Swift (album), just to name a few. Candyo32 23:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

• "Commenting that the album garnered its title from her personality, Tisdale said she wanted to use her first album to formally introduce herself personally, and as not one of they characters she portrays." not a good start. Should begin, "Tisdale commented ...."

I will if you insist, but all the sentence is is the topic and verb action is being stated first. If Tisdale started with Tisdale commented, it would be a run-on sentence because, ex. "Tisdale commented that the album garnered its title from her personality, and she wanted to use her first album to formally introduce herself personally, and as not one of they characters she portrays." Candyo32 23:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

• Fix these and we'll pretty much be done!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 06:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

• • I personally don't think its proper, but I won't let it stop the nomination. Good job! :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 09:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)