Talk:4 (Beyoncé album)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

"1+1" Promo Single

Can someone add this in please, seeing as my edits get removed. It's been released on iTunes as a promotional single, not as the second single. I think this should be mention. Angelic-alyssa (talk) 12:10, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Like I said before when I reverted your edit, its already been mentioned in the 'Release and promotion' section. That's where promotional singles go. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 11:12, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

1+1 a official or promo single?

I'm confused. I've been told before that promotional singles are those part of an "iTunes Countdown" to the release of an album or songs that are released for download in one country only. But "1+1" has also been released in Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Just saying. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 05:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

Click on it. It will not open but rather re-direct you to another page. As i said, "1+1" is just a promo sinlge in the US for now. If it charts well, it may be released as a worldwide single. Jivesh • Talk2Me 05:48, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
It redirects into iTunes (only if you have it installed on your computer) but ok then. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 05:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I have to disagree. AOL calls it one, and MTV (a very reliable source) calls it "the second officially released single from her album 4". That seems concrete to me. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:00, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Adabow, i know fansites are not welcome but we both know whatever they said about "Run the World" from the music video shot locations, forthcoming album etc turned out to be true. They are all calling "1+1" a promo single. I also have a source for Digital spy calling it a promotional single for the time being. Jivesh • Talk2Me 06:03, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I have seen the Digital Spy article, but MTV News is much, much more reliable than DS and any fansite. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:18, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Let us not forget that MTV also called "End of Time" beyonce second single! We clearly can NOT rely on internet sources for the destiny of wikipedia articles... "1+1" is paving the same path as "Roman's Revenge" when it was released for download once Pink Friday was pre-ordered... And SonyMusicGlobal itself tweeted "hi there! it's a song from her new album. Not an official single at this stage". Type that into your google search and find it on the official facebook and twitter. Theuhohreo (talk) 13:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
OK Magazine also calls it one and MTV UK says it has been confirmed as the second single. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 06:54, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
The MTV News and MTV UK sources make a solid case to me. Boldly changing. Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
I've reverted it as Sony Music themselves have stated that the single is not the second single, but in fact a promotional single. http://twitter.com/#!/SonyMusicGlobal/status/73768782304264192 Angelic-alyssa (talk) 18:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much for finding it! :D And besides, the official second single has been confirmed to be "Best Thing I Never Had". You're welcome. Theuhohreo (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
That source is not reliable. "the record company just sent us an email". Doesn't sound trustworthy to me. Why is it the only website (which doesn't look reliable like MTV, Billboard etc.) reporting it. There is nothing to support it apart from what this website merely claims. calvin999 (talk) 00:04, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Um that source is from a radio station website, so it is reliable. Its blog sites and social networking sites (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) that are not reliable. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 02:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
How can someone who claims to say "the record company just sent me an email" be reliable? Where is the email? That is the source of info, not what a website claims. And why is this site the only one reporting it. Surely you should wait until a more concrete one surfaces? calvin999 (talk) 10:43, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Other sources are beginning to report about it like this. That source was also the first to report that the "Run the World" video would premiere on American Idol. A radio station wouldn't lie. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 10:49, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm not saying radio stations lie, it was just the nature of it that I didn't think was reliable, after all anyone could say "I've just had an email from the record company". If there are others starting to report the same thing then fine, because there is now more than one. calvin999 (talk) 11:00, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

According to MTV UK, "1+1" "has been confirmed as Knowles' second single from 4". We have conflicting sources here, so we should wait until a release/radio add date is announced or a press release straight from Columbia/Sony is found. I will remove BTINH as the second single, until such info is found. The same goes for "1+1" and EOT. We are not a crystal ball; it is better to wait and be correct than be very early but wrong. Adabow (talk · contribs) 02:44, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

I remember Billboard saying that "1+1" won't be sent to radio hence they deduced it wasn't an official single. — Legolas (talk2me) 13:56, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Worth adding?

Sony to ship 1 million copies. Jivesh • Talk2Me 16:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

It's a very legit source and the information does seem necessary... I think it should be included, but I'm not sure were... Maybe the "Release" section?? Theuhohreo (talk) 16:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
The album has leaked. Jivesh • Talk2Me 04:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I personally feel that the album leaking should not be mentioned in the article as it is bad publicity, and puts wikipedia on the same level as a gossip site... But we can use the source provided to begin a Critical Reception section. Theuhohreo (talk) 15:39, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Release And Promotion - Beyoncé Responds To Leak Of New Album '4' - "My music was leaked and while this is not how I wanted to present my new songs, I appreciate the positive response from my fans. When I record music I always think about my fans singing every note and dancing to every beat. I make music to make people happy and I appreciate that everyone has been so anxious to hear my new songs." http://www.beyonceonline.com/us/news/beyonc%C3%A9-responds-leak-new-album-4

My cent is if the leak was faced with strong reaction from both media and artist, seems like the case here, then it is worth mentioning in two-three lines. A "leak" is not unusual these days and is certainly not encyclopedic, just in this case Knowles made it so by making a statement. Lol. — Legolas (talk2me) 13:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Reviews popping in

Jivesh • Talk2Me 12:47, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

These seem to be more useful as analytical prose about the album's music ("Composition" section), rather than to be incorporated into the "Reception" section; other than the Slant review, Rolling Stone and NME will issue their official reviews later. Dan56 (talk) 19:01, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
I will expand the article myself after the 20th of July when my exams are over. If anyone does it in my place, please go ahead. I do not own this article. Feel free to add constructive information. Jivesh • Talk2Me 04:43, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Blacksocialite, 9 June 2011

| writing_credits = yes | title1 = 1+1 | note1 = | writer1 = Beyoncé Knowles, The-Dream, Tricky Stewart[1] | extra1 = The-Dream[2] | length1 = 4:35

Blacksocialite (talk) 18:38, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. - Happysailor (Talk) 21:30, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Add

Please add vi:4 (album của Beyoncé Knowles). Thanks! Beyoncetan (talk) 03:52, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

plus Added Thank you. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Beyonce-4-deluxeedition.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Beyonce-4-deluxeedition.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

deluxe edition cover

why cant we add the deulxe edition cover , its completly different...???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathiassandell (talk • contribs) 19:45, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Whoiscncdotcom, 25 June 2011

Release date says June 24th, 2011 Checked http://www.columbiarecords.com/ and http://www.beyonceonline.com Both sites show an album release date of 6.28.11

Whoiscncdotcom (talk) 00:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

 Not done. Other nations like Australia and Austria have the album releasing on June 24, 2011, by Sony. The first release date is added in the infobox and June 24 is the first one. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:46, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

COMPOSITION

“When I played Etta James it was the most I’d learned about myself until the recording of this album. When I went into the studio I used the same passion, honesty, and approach with my vocals I channeled as Etta James. It does not sound like the vocals on my past albums. It’s a lot rawer. It comes from a deep place.”

“For the first time in my life I was able to travel the world, hear different influences, see different types of dance and choreography and taste different types of food. It was important that I was able to digest everything. It inspired purity, more heart and more love.”

“I really want people to think when they listen to my music. I want it to help them through their painful memories, their painful moments, and their most happy moments. I want it to be a conversation.”

"The album is definitely an evolution. It's bolder than the music on my previous albums because I'm bolder. The more mature I become and the more life experiences I have, the more I have to talk about. I really focused on songs being classics, songs that would last, songs that I could sing when I'm 40 and when I'm 60."

"'4' takes on matters of the heart with a mixture of ballads, mid- and up-tempos, all built around classic songwriting."

"'4' is a twelve-song collection born of the diverse sounds and sights Beyoncé experienced during her year-long time away from the spotlight. It is her self-described musical gumbo. Much like the dish, the album serves as a melting pot of musical styles punctuated by her undeniable vocal abilities."

http://www.beyonceonline.com/pt/countdown — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.201.94 (talk • contribs) 2:34am, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Critical Reception

"Beyoncé's new album 4 is a change of pace for the R&B queen. While her first three solo albums were full of blockbuster jams, 4 is a more relaxed, personal set that emphasizes ballads over bangers and showcases the singer's nuances; it's very much the sort of album a pop star makes when she doesn't feel like she has anything to prove." - Rollingstone http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/beyonces-4-a-track-by-track-breakdown-20110608 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.201.94 (talk) 00:35, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

"She strips away the much of the musical pyrotechnics that have anchored some of her biggest solo jams for an album more heavy on ballads, and danceable hits that charm, instead of strong-arm, their way into your psyche." – Associated Press http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MUSIC_REVIEW_BEYONCE_GMUS-?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.201.94 (talk • contribs) 11:40 pm, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Keep posting the reviews. Much appreciated. Jivesh • Talk2Me 05:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Future if album flops

This source has nice commentary regarding the different ways Knowles can adopt if 4 flops. This can be a nice addition after the commercial viability of the album is established. Keeping it here. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:43, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Pitchfork quote

"In Beyoncé's more-than-capable and still-in-love hands, a relationship that lasts can seem as complicated and rewarding as anyone would hope." --OK, so the quote I suggested is best suited elsewhere. But read the above aloud. What exactly does this say, and what does it have to do with the album as a piece of criticism/appraisal? Is this seriously the best summmary line that one can extract from the entire Pitchfork review? Orane (talk) 07:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, how about "the lion's share of the album-- along with its excellent deluxe tracks-- has one of the world's biggest stars exploring her talent in ways few could've predicted, which is always exciting"? Dan56 (talk) 07:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
That works. I was searching through the article to see if i could find other lines, but I couldn't. Although (!), it doesn't have to be an exact line from the review. You could say something like, "Pitchfork Media's Ryan Dombal complimented the album's "carefree retro sensibility" comparing '1+1' to Adele's 'Someone Like You' and "Love on Top" to the works of Whitney Houston, Michael Jackson, and Stevie Wonder ...blah blah." whatever you want to do. I just think that the first quote is a comment about her relationship, and not an appraisal of the album. So anything else works. Orane (talk) 07:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

More

UK Sales (1 day)

I am not very active on Wikipedia these days. That's why i am posting this information here. Please put it in the article.

  • Following her Sunday night headline appearance, Beyonce’s newly-issued fourth RCA-handled solo album 4, has sold around 32,000 units, according to Official Charts Company Data, which is more than the combined sales of its three nearest challengers. These are led by XL act Adele’s 21 and also take in Interscope/Polydor’s Lady GaGa with Born This Way and Adele’s first album 19.
  • Beyonce is also just outside the new chart week’s 10 top-selling singles with Best Thing I Never Had showing up presently as a new entry at 11, while sales of Run The World (Girls) are 88% up on the week and Irreplaceable is set for a Top 40 return.

Source.

Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

About the Piers Morgan Show

  • Beyonce wows surprised shoppers in London. Fresh from her exhilarating performance at the Glastonbury Festival, Beyonce stunned surprised shoppers in London when she arrived to purchase a copy of her own album.

The 29-year-old arrived with CNN's Piers Morgan at London's Harrods department store to film a portion of an upcoming edition of "Piers Morgan Tonight."

[ Source].

Jivesh • Talk2Me 11:26, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

4 is GOLD in Poland

10,000 copies sold in less than one day (or 6 hours).

Source 1

Soruce 2.

Jivesh • Talk2Me 14:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Reviews

Jivesh • Talk2Me 14:12, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Allmusic Review

here it comes as same as the other albums. 3.5 out of 5.

http://allmusic.com/album/4-r2213783 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.99.228.133 (talk • contribs) 9:38 pm, 29 June 2011

Predictions

Not sure if this should be added but according to industry prognosticators, 4 is expected to debut at number one on the Billboard 200 with first-week sales predictions of 300,000. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 00:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Yep, useful, and then we can compare to actual sales. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

A bit more about what inspired the record.

Here.

Jivesh • Talk2Me 16:13, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Promotion???

Is it? Jivesh • Talk2Me 06:15, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

any appearance by Yonka at present will of course be associated with 4, so I would say ya, that appearance was promotional as well. — Legolas (talk2me) 07:53, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

New entry under RELEASE HISTORY

Request to add a new entry under the release history:

Region: Hong Kong Date Format: July 27, 2011 Label: COLUMBIA Edition(s): Standard, deluxe edition

Source: deluxe edition: http://www.hmv.com.hk/product/dance.asp?sku=220510 standard edition: http://www.hmv.com.hk/product/dance.asp?sku=220201

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasparlam (talk • contribs) 16:55, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Release and Promotion

Last night, Beyoncé appeared on the NBC broadcast of Macy’s 4th Of July Fireworks Spectacular, performing her hit single "Best Thing I Never Had," followed by "God Bless The USA". Her audience on Liberty Island was made-up of service men, women, their families, and one special woman: the Statue of Liberty. An additional 8.6 million viewers watched the spectacular from home, the most viewers for the special since the turn of the century.

http://www.beyonceonline.com/us/news/beyonc%C3%A9-soars-4th-july-spectacular — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.195.60 (talk) 22:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Chart Positions

Album 4 Numer ONE in Brazil: http://nacaodamusica.virgula.uol.com.br/materias/beyonce-lidera-venda-de-discos-no-brasil-com-o-album-4/

Album 4 Numer ONE in French Albums Chart: http://www.chartsinfrance.net/Beyonce/news-74406.html

Album 4 Numer ONE in UK Digital Albums Chart: http://www.theofficialcharts.com/digital-charts/

Album 4 Numer ONE in Switzerland Album Charts: http://hitparade.ch/weekchart.asp?cat=a

Album 4 Numer ONE in Singapore and Taiwan: http://www.beyonceonline.com/us/news/beyonc%C3%A9s-4-tops-album-charts-around-world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.195.60 (talk) 23:32, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

"4" sold 511.000 worldwide: "No surprise, Beyoncé's new effort, simply titled as '4', starts easily on the top spot of our global album chart this week after first-week sales of 511.000 copies." http://mediatraffic.de/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.195.60 (talk) 00:41, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Never thought of this

Beyoncé has promoted her latest album 4 by projecting images from the LP across London.

The singer, who topped the charts with the record last week, cast the album's artwork on a number of the city's landmarks, including Madame Tussauds and Battersea Power Station.

Source. Jivesh • Talk2Me 10:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Commercial performance section

According to The Official Charts Company data, 4's opening day sales were more than the combined sales of its three nearest challengers, being Adele's 21 (2011), Lady GaGa's Born This Way (2011), and Adele's first studio album 19 (2008) for that day.
Three nearest challengers? WTF? I just checked the chart, and Adele's 21 is #2, Lady Gaga's Born This Way is #12 & Adele's 19 is just #34. So only Adele's newer album one of three nearest challengers. 82.141.94.80 (talk) 00:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Check well, then come back. I will be very happy to reply you back. Jivesh • Talk2Me 06:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
I just realized this refers to UK sales. Well, the first sentence could be rephrased. There is Poland, Brazil and UK mentioned. And in the sentence I referred there is no mention about UK, had never of that "The Official Charts Company", though in next sentence UK is again mentioned. 85.217.40.238 (talk) 15:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay. It does not matter. We all can misinterpret sometimes. Jivesh • Talk2Me 22:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Album artwork

To expand this section, here. Jivesh • Talk2Me 15:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I think if we discuss the deluxe cover it should warrant inclusion in the infobox. —Andrewstalk 18:56, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Wow i am so happy. I love that cover. Jivesh • Talk2Me 03:59, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
Even more

Jivesh • Talk2Me 14:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

UK third week sales

4. Jivesh • Talk2Me 15:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Complex Magazine cover story

A three page story including the inspiration for 4. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 05:28, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I read about that yesterday. Amazing!!! Jivesh • Talk2Me 12:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Question

Can this be added in the promotion section? Jivesh • Talk2Me 07:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

No. It is not at all notable. WP:INDISCRIMINATE. —Andrewstalk 08:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Section heading

About these two revisions, all these section headings seem to be with respect to the album and not Beyonce; ex. (the album's ) "Reception". "Self-management" seems more appropriate if it were about Beyonce and not the album. Dan56 (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

4 song articles

Considering the number of songs from the album that have their own article, why don't we use the full track listing in the {{Infobox song}} template? I Help, When I Can.[12] 22:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

That would be really nice but should we use the standard track-listing or the deluxe one? Jivesh • Talk2Me 08:58, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
Standard... duh. Well, I guess it's not so simple. I Help, When I Can.[12] 21:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
I will choose the standard. It is the only track listing with articles. Plus, it is the basic option. I Help, When I Can.[12] 20:55, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Proof "Party" was cancled

I need it, please. I Help, When I Can.[12] 04:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

CANCELLED SINGLES

Why is their no mention of "Party" being sent for adds to URB August 30?

And WHY are there no mentions of "Love on Top" being pulled from adds to POP, URB, and RHY on originally scheduled for September 20, 2011?

I just saw the edits on the page removing "Love on Top" as the THIRD 3rd single. (1+1, Party, and then Love on Top)

This is getting ridiculous

__________________________________

"Love on Top" was listed on the following OFFICIAL radio sites prio to 9/16/2011

http://gfa.radioandrecords.com/publishGFA/GFANextPage.asp?sDate=09/20/2011&Format=1

http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases#09/20/2011

Beyonce's camp was very slick to remove it so quickly from her website AND her Facebook page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.58.55 (talk) 01:19, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

_______________________________________________

Here is a screenshot of the cache from the news on Beyonce's offical site, Beyonceonline.com naming "Love on Top" as her new single

http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x214/chriscrocker/beyonceloveontopsinglerelease.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.58.55 (talk) 02:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Everything has been discussed on the respective talk-page of each song. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 03:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but it should be mentioned as part of the albums promotional release. This is the 3rd time a single has been demoted to a promo or cancelled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.58.55 (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay. I now understand what you mean. You want to say that we should mentioned that these song's releases were scrapped. Jivesh 1205 (talk / Make sure you give 4 a try!!!) 19:21, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


Yes! It's withholding information. --70.113.58.55 (talk) 05:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
But those sources are not automatically archived and that's the main problem. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 05:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Tour

Is there any need for this subsection? There doesn't seem to be enough info support itself, plus, I highly doubt she will be touring being 4/5 months pregnant. Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 16:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

There was a confirmation that there will be a tour. There has been none that the tour will not occur. So, let's wait. If Beyonce can still make videos, sing in televised shows while being pregnant, we never know. And 4 is not an album for which she will have to perform heavy dance routines for all the songs. The majority are mid-tempos. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:08, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I just don't think it warrants it's own subsection, it's been like that for months now. And I can't see her touring. She likes to fill the set with dance routines, and she can't do that being this far along. Plus, she isn't going to tour after having her baby. Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 18:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree that it may not merit a sub-section. However, Beyonce said that she will not take a break and that she will even carry her baby with her everywhere she will go, including her tours. (Search on web) So, you may have understood. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:46, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Although I don't think she should, her baby should come before her career, I think until more information is available, it should be merged into another section, as it makes the article look weaker and lacking in info. Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 11:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Okay i think it should be merged but may i clarify that the article is not weak. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 14:28, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
I didn't say the article is weak, I said it makes it look weaker, as there is effectively no information about the tour in that section. Calvin • NaNaNaC'mon! 14:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Calvin, i hope you did not take me seriously. Lol. You know how i am. I was being sarcastic. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 14:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

So that i do not forget

July 2, 2011

  • 2: Best Thing I Never Had "  Done
  • 3: Love On Top "  Done
  • 25: 1＋1 "  Done
  • 26: End Of Time "  Done
  • 29: Party (Feat. Andre 3000) "  Done
  • 34: I Miss You "  Done
  • 35: I Care  Doing...
  • 40: Countdown "  Done
  • 43: Start Over  Doing...
  • 44: I Was Here "  Done

August 6, 2011

  • 1 : Lay Up Under Me

Not charted

  • Rather Die Young
  • Dance For You  Doing...
  • Schoolin' Life

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:26, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone know whether "Rather Die Young" charted in South Korea or on any other chart? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:31, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Awards nominations

  • 2011 American Music Awards – Soul/Rhythm & Blues Music: Favorite Album [1]
  • 2011 Soul Train Music Awards – Album of the Year [2]
  • 2012 People's Choice Awards – Favorite Album of the Year [3]
Oh my goodness, this is so good to see. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Elements of 4

She just does not stop. — Status {talkcontribs 02:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

A DVD??? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:54, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

DVD

BEYONCÉ TO RELEASE “LIVE AT ROSELAND” DVD

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.186.93 (talk) 23:31, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Marketing

Knowles appeared on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon and performed "Countdown" with The Roots

Beyoncé was back on “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” for the second time. Backed by The Roots, Queen B nailed her performance of “Countdown,” looking gorgeous in a little black dress. If you’re wondering why she doesn’t look pregnant, that’s because the appearance was taped in July before she announced her pregnancy.

http://www.rap-up.com/2011/11/11/beyonce-performs-countdown-on-late-night-with-jimmy-fallon-video/ http://thatgoodhit.com/?p=10617 http://ultimatebeyonce.com/wp2/2011/11/12/countdown-performance-on-jimmy-fallon/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.200.163 (talk) 18:05, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

It will be added soon. Thanks. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

‘A Night With Beyoncé’ which airs Sunday, 4th December 2011 from 9:00PM – 10:15PM

Global superstar Beyoncé stars in a one off special on ITV1. A Night With Beyoncé, recorded at London's Fountain Studios with host Steve Jones, sees the superstar perform some of her greatest and best known hits as well as tracks from her new number one album, "4" including the chart topping smash Best Thing I've Never Had, which has dominated airwaves in the UK for the last 5 weeks. The exclusive performance was recorded in front of an audience of the singer's biggest fans with Beyoncé engaging in an interview session with fans in this unique and spectacular show.

http://atrl.net/forums/showthread.php?t=158295 http://iluluonline.com/a-night-with-beyonce-to-air-in-december/ http://digiguide.tv/programme-details/ITV1+Anglia/4+December+2011/21:00/A+Night+with+Beyonce/Music/ http://pryncepality.com/2011/11/15/beyonce-a-night-with-beyonce-for-itv/ Image: http://pryncepality.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/A-Night-With-Beyonce.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.200.163 (talk) 19:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)


Beyoncé's DVD Live at Roseland: Elements of 4 comes out on 11/29! Let us know what songs you're most excited to hear on the DVD by checking-in to Beyoncé on GetGlue to unlock a free sticker and enter for the chance to win tickets to a special screening with Beyoncé on Sunday 11/20 in New York City.

http://popcrush.com/win-tickets-new-york-premiere-beyonce-live-at-roseland/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.200.163 (talk) 23:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC) https://www.facebook.com/GetGlue?sk=wall#!/beyonce — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.200.163 (talk) 01:21, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:57, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


For the UK

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

"Love on Top" release date

Was it not October 28, 2011, when the song impacted in Italy? —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 12:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

A radio release anywhere except the US =/= Single. The US is the only country which counts airplay. With at least, 230 million AI, you can reach number one on the Hot 100 without a single download. This is impossible anywhere else. By the way, LOT is only for the UK. (You can trust me as long as i am talking about Beyonce. Lol) ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:39, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I see... We have a "Dance in the Dark" situation here... —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 13:10, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Yes... Except that "Dance in the Dark" got a promotional release in Belgium. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 14:04, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Parkwood Entertainment

Parkwood Entertainment is not a (the) label. It is Beyonce management and they are truly bad. Jivesh 1205 (talk) 18:04, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Sales

As of November 25, 2011, the album has sold 907,000 copies, according to Nielsen SoundScan. Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/27/arts/music/new-concert-dvds-from-beyonce-and-adele.html My love is love (talk) 19:06, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

 Done Dan56 (talk) 19:09, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

No citations for intro?

Just was stopping by this page and I noticed there's a lot of stuff in the intro paragraphs which has no citation. For example: "Knowles' main objective was to bring back the emotion, live instruments and soul music, which according to her, were missing out of the music industry." Just to make sure it's on your guys' radar! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandermiller (talk • contribs) 04:08, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

There is no need for citations in the lead section, if the information is verified elsewhere in the article (which it is). Oz talk 04:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Archive 1 Archive 2

Confusion over Singles

Why is "I Care" not listed as a single even though it was released in Italy, and similarly "Party" was released in the United States yet its not a single? Lots of singles in the US particularly R&B ones are sent to radio-only. They're still singles. Equally "End of Time" shouldn't be classified as a single because there's no such thing as sending a song to radio in the UK, labels can make songs available but its upto UK stations to playlist them. That's a huge difference to the US. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 01:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you. I tried so many times making "Party" a single because obviously it is, it received a digital download service. But Jivesh reverted me... the fact is though it is a single. — Tomíca(T2ME) 08:10, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Then how does "I Care" become a single? I don't remember it being sent to US radios? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 04:15, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
[4] Google translates as ""I Care", the new single by Beyoncé from the album "4" will be on the radio from 23 March in Italy!". Seems to be an Italy-only single. Adabow (talk) 04:18, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Since when Italy started counting airplay while compiling its singles chart? And there is no evidence of "Party" being sent to radio as far as I know. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 04:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Beyonce's official website states that it is a single in Italy. In my opinion that is concrete. Adabow (talk) 04:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Jivesh, you know there's evidence of "Party" being sent to US radio. And I am not getting into that again.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
At Party (song) it states "The album version of "Party" was lined up for adds on United States Urban contemporary radio on August 30, 2011.[10] However, its release was scrapped, with several websites reporting that "Countdown" would be released as the album's US third mainstream single". I don't see how the urban release of "Party" and the mainstream release of "Countdown" are mutually exclusive. Is there a source for the scrapping of "Party"'s release? It did very well on the US urban charts... Adabow (talk) 04:29, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
No, there's no source stating that the release was cancelled. That stuff right there is WP:OR.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Even "Dance for You" did very well. Does that mean it was release? What kind of logic? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 04:44, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
That's not the logic... the logic is that there's a source that says it was sent to radio. I don't believe there is one for "Dance for You".  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion, Jivesh. What I mean is there seems to be no evidence that the urban release was scrapped, especially considering it did well on the urban charts. You're right, the performance alone does nothing to indicate a release or not, but it doesn't inspire confidence in me that it was indeed dropped. Adabow (talk) 04:50, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Jivesh, I have discussed this with you over 1000 times. A promo single by definition is an audio or video recording distributed for free. That's not what "Party (Remix)" is. A song does not need to be both sent to radio and made for digital download for to be a single, being allowed to buy the song digitally it makes it a single already. If the song have a poor commercial performance, that does not allow you to remove it and make it a promo single. — Tomíca(T2ME) 08:35, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Promo singles don't have to be free, see "The Silence (song)". Alexandra herself stated that it was a promotional single for the re-release of her album and for Christmas, so it is listed as such. It's also possible that "End of Time" got given Impact day release in the UK, like Rihanna's "Stay" and Leona's "Lovebird".  — AARON • TALK 10:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
"Stay" was later released digitally, meaning it was obviously a single. What I am talking about, Beyonce never stated that "Party" is a promotional single. Her label added it to the radio and later made it available for digital download, making it an obvious single. The thing it was not successful, does not make the song a promo single. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:25, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
  • No one has yet answered my question: "Since when Italy started counting airplay while compiling its singles chart?" And Tom, please don't tell me promo singles have to be free. We are no longer in the 1980s.
  • And Beyonce confirmed "Countdown" as the third single by the end of September. As far as i know "Run the World (Girls)" was the first single and "Best Thing I Never Had" was the second one. So where is "Party"? Is it the 2.5th? Lol. Two more, [5] [6] Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:19, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Then puke on Wiki's definition for promo single. (which I believe it's true) Beyonce doesn't need to confirm the single, it's obvious. Lol, the song is a single, you want or not. — Tomíca(T2ME) 18:23, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
I neither know nor care whether the Italian Singles Chart includes airplay; Beyonce's website states the Italy single release. "Party" only got an urban release, so it doesn't surprise me that mainstream media are reporting "Countdown" as the third single. It's irrelevant; they are both singles. Adabow (talk) 20:14, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
IMO "Party" and "I Care" are both singles. Both were serviced to radio. Any kinda service to radio (unless explicitly stated to be promotional) counts as a song being released as a single if coverage clarifies it as such. "End of Time" can't have been sent to radio cause that just doesn't happen in the UK, labels promote songs and then radio stations choose to pick them up. Sometimes instead of a digital download release, they're given an impact date such as Lovebird by Leona Lewis was and Wet by Nicole Scherzinger. Songs such as "New Day" by Alicia Keys was released to radio in France, that's a single from her album. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 21:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
So how can "Countdown" and "Party" be third singles at the same time? 4 was not promoted in the same wayI Am... Sasha Fierce was as far as I know? And does all this mean that "End of Time" was not a single? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 08:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
"Party" is the third single. "Countdown" is the fourth single, and the third mainstream one. Adabow (talk) 09:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
But don't the sources say "third single"? They all quote "third official single". Calling it the third mainstream single is WP:OR. None of them say "mainstream single". Jivesh1205 (Talk) 09:43, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Jivesh, how many times should we explain to you that for a song to be a single, we don't need a source saying "it is the fourth urban single" or "is is the fourth official single". The prove is: 1) the song [Party] (original) was sent to radio; 2) the remix was digitally released making it the song a single. Better than that, here it's a source saying that "1+1" is a single!, according to our policy, is it? — Tomíca(T2ME) 09:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

"1+1" is not a "single" but a promotional single. Do you have a source calling "Party" the third single? I have at least 10 reliable sources calling "Countdown" the third official single. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

See, that's the point. We have confronting sources: MTV News calls "1+1" a single, while according to Digital Spy it is a promotional single, which in this case is right because I couldn't find any digital download date or a radio add date. Jivesh, why for instance don't you try to listen to other people? Adabow said to you, that "Party" is an urban radio single (also a digital counting the remix); sometimes there isn't a need for confirmation by music websites that the song is a single, because simply it is! I will quote Adabow now, "Countdown" is a mainstream single, while "Party" is an urban single. That's my point and I have told that like 342423 times! — Tomíca(T2ME) 10:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
MTV News later corrected itself when it called "Best Thing I Never Had" the second single. So it contradicted itself. The difference here is that no one even called "Party" a single let alone the third single. Everyone wrote "third official single" with reference to "Countdown". Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Stubbornness again! I will tell you ones more and bold it too: There is no need for music website to call the song a single! If there is a digital download date or a radio add date the song is a single. "Cockiness (Love It)" (Remix) flopped, so what? Nobody called it a single, but we have a digital download date, meaning it is a single, we can't just randomly make it a promo o.O. "Party" has both radio add date and a digital download date... result = an obvious single, wanted you or not. — Tomíca(T2ME) 10:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I am not talking about "Cockiness" or whatever. I am talking about "Countdown" and "Party". They can't both be third singles. And who is Wikipedia to decide what is a single? Has it become a music label? It should go by what sources say and not only form its own views and opinion and publish it. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
"Cockiness" was an example, stop with the stupid delusional behavior. If you don't respect Wikipedia's policies Ok than, go through thousands of songs which were not announced by music websites as singles (but were indeed released!) and change them. Bye from me here, the discussion is obviously pointless because you don't accept our opinions. — Tomíca(T2ME) 10:41, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
This is not about respecting a policy or not. Wikipedia policies are not always correct. A policy cannot be followed blindly. I am discussing the facts and I have sources that back them. If whatever you are saying "according to Wikipedia policies" is true, so I don't see why "Why Don't You Love Me" was changed from "promo single" to "single" yesterday? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the discussion except to say that editing must be based on consensus and that wikipedia policies are there for a reason. Talk pages not just another place to argue back and forth. If you don't have consensus for the edit, then don't make it. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:01, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Greetings. Do you mean we should vote? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 11:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
No. Read consesus building. If you can't get others to see your point of view then just leave it and edit something else. There are plenty of pages to edit and improve, you don't need to win every time. Flat Out let's discuss it 11:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a battlefield for me wanting to win something here. I just want to correct something which is wrong. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:09, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

It isn't wrong, as stated here to you by four different people. Let me put things in perspective. Bionic (Christina Aguilera album) was cited as being her fourth album - despite the fact that it's her sixth - by both her label and media outlets. Her next album, Lotus (Christina Aguilera album), was cited as her fifth album - despite being her seventh. The same is said for her older albums, Stripped (Christina Aguilera album) and Back to Basics (Christina Aguilera album) have been cited as her second and third albums, respectively. Does this mean, her actual second and third albums, Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christmas are "promotional albums"? Of course not! Do you even have a citation calling "Party" or "I Care" promo singles? You can bring all the sources you want calling "Countdown" the third single, it has nothing to do with this discussion. We can do our own simple math here. Here, we have formed, through a lot of previous discussion what a single is.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Frankly telling you, I don't see why Mi Reflejo and My Kind of Christmas are considered as her studio albums. Christiana Aguilera is not even Spanish. And the second one is obviously a Holiday album. And releasing two studio albums in three months interval? Even Rihanna is slower at that. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:25, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Because there's no such thing as a "Spanish" or a "Holiday" type of album... We have several types of albums: studio, compilation, remix, etc. Now, I'm convinced you're just arguing to argue now because what does Christina being Spanish have to do with anything? (She is Latino...) And what's the purpose of that little dig on Rihanna there? What does that have to do with the singles from 4? You clearly don't want to discuss the facts and again, four people have tried to explain them to you.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I really can't digest the fact that you are all ignoring so many websites calling "Countdown" the official third single. If this is being ignored, then we do we need to source the information we add around Wikipedia? We should all write whatever we want, shouldn't we? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
And I can't digest that you're ignoring the fact that Beyonce's website called "I Care" a single and that "Party" was sent to urban radio (you deny this even happening). Numbering on the release of albums/singles =/= writing whatever you want on a project.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Here are a few sources calling "Party" the third single.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I can't get an archived link, but with a Google Search I found there was an article on BeyonceOnline talking about the premiere of the "Countdown" video saying: "King B will premiere the video for the fourth single off of her 4 album on MTV this Thursday." Yikes. Even Beyonce's site calls "Countdown" the fourth single.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
First of all you brought Christina Aguilera here and Tom brought Rihanna here. I didn't. I just replied to both of you. My question still remains, why do so many websites contradict you? Why isn't "Party" known as the third single if it really is? There is a big difference between "set to be" and "is" (with reference to this). Same with "scheduled" (with reference to this). Last but not the least, Idolator quotes, "'Party' has been tapped as Beyonce’s third single off of her latest album 4." And then, it later says "Many, many delightfully-dressed variations of Beyonce are featured in the singer’s colorfully cute new video for 'Countdown', the official third single from 4." And you can't find that link because it simply does not exist. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:46, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
You weren't talking about Rihanna's single releases, you made a little dig about the speed in which she releases albums. You didn't respond to any of the comparisons made at all. You only just denied two of Christina's album's being studio albums (with no logical reason what-so-ever). Do you have any evidence that the "Party" single was cancelled? And I can't get an archive link because BeyonceOnline.com now redirects to Beyonce.com and the archive website just redirects to the new one. But I just so happened to find a cached version of the article. Looking pretty non-existent to me. In the end, that doesn't matter, as, we all know, 1+1=2. We don't need a citation to do simple math for us. Besides the point, "Love on Top" came out before "Countdown", making "Love on Top" the fourth single.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:54, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
We didn't bring them up just for the sake of it, Rihanna and Xtina are both singers as Beyonce, aren't they? They also release singles and albums, but they do not need music websites to announce them so we can make them singles. — Tomíca(T2ME) 16:51, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Let's not go off-topic again please. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:53, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
So now you are using Beyonce's website. I guess you will do the same to other artists as well as "[they] also release singles and albums, but they do not need music websites to announce them so we can make them singles" (as Tom wrote). So Jennifer Lopez will have only five albums and same for Christina Aguilera as their websites say so, right? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:59, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Let's not go off-topic again please, says the one who makes stupid and senseless digs. — Tomíca(T2ME) 17:01, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Tom, mind your language. I have never used such unpleasant words towards you. And this is not the first time you are doing so on the same page. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
It's quite clear there's no having a conversation with you about this. "Party" and "I Care" are singles. Deal with it. That is all.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 17:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Fine. Do whatever you want. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't use them to you, you are using them on yourself, making such ironic comments, which are not funny indeed. — Tomíca(T2ME) 17:08, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Also, "Love on Top" (track #8) has the wrong length (4:27 as opposed to 3:05), or does the album feature a more extended version than the single does? --Fandelasketchup (talk) 10:16, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Review/comments

  • The first section I read was the critical reception section. I find the sentences to be a bit repetitive and one-note: "X of Rolling Stone said abc." "Y of AllMusic wrote 123." "Z of New York Times stated wxy." However, I cannot fault the article on this, because I find that many articles here follow the same repetitive structure. If that section were really well written, it would probably group the reviews on similar themes, and provide a summary of the reactions to the album. As in, "Knowles' vocal performance was cited as a highlight of the album. Jody Rosen of Rolling Stone found her singing expressive and emotive, while Kitty Empire of The Guardian also complimented the singer's "nuanced delivery and her expansive range, stating..." Knowles' exploration of various genres was applauded by X of Entertainment Weekly, who wrote... Y also found her exploration of '70 soul a refreshing change from... etc." On the other hand, not all critics were impressed with the musical direction of the album. Adam Markovitz of Entertainment Weekly felt that its first-half is marred by boring ballads..."
    I don't know if I'm being clear. But I think, again, that the purpose of the article (i.e Knowles explores genres, stretches her vocals) should always be in the back of your mind when you write, and every section should, in some way, trace back to that. But it's up to you, since, as I've said, other articles never go this far.
  • Let me for the record state that I absolutely hate that table in the Accolade section. It's unnecessary and would sound better as prose.
  • Commercial performance:
  • "On its first day of sales"--did you mean on it's first day of release?

That's all that jumps out at me right now. And, as always, if you have questions, just drop me a note. Orane (talk) 02:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Using Discogs as a source

A problem that I brought up in 4's FAC: the article uses the Discogs page as a source for recording and song credits. Being a website that is largely based on user-generated content (including the 4 page), what makes it a high-quality RS? Let's not forget that this article is now an FA (which is a well-deserved recognition). prism△ 10:17, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

I have replaced all the relevant Discogs citations with the CD liner. Adabow (talk) 23:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Genre

There has been discussion here on whether or not pop should be included in the infobox. Entertainment Weekly has been used before in several articles for genres. Let's discuss it here to find what is most appropriate before we go into an editwar. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:30, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas: Entertainment Weekly is fine as a source, it's the aspect of the source you're using that is not. The source lists it as a genre in the same way as most media sites use tagging to sort their articles in order for users to click on them and explore other articles of a similar nature. I find listing an album genre in this way as rather crass: The Guardian tags it as "pop and rock"—should I be including rock as a genre here too? What is worse is that the EW source doesn't discuss 4 as a pop album in the actual review (the most important part!), so where is its basis as a pop album indicated? The genre field should reflect the genres that prevail the most in reliable sources. As can be found in the Composition section: The album consists mostly of mid-tempo R&B songs, with 1970s funk, 1980s pop and 1990s soul retro influences. The sources clearly present pop as an influence or element in some of the songs, along with funk and soul; the sources do not present pop as the album's genre nor does the article talk of 4 as a pop album. Pop should not be included in the infobox for this very reason: the infobox serves to present the article's most salient points and must not include claims that are unsubstantiated later in the text. Best, —JennKR | ☎ 02:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
fair enough, I'll look into it a bit more. Slightly unrelated, can we rephrase "1990s soul retro influences." I keep reading it and I don't even know what it's trying to say. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Yep—removed "retro" as it appears to the problematic word here. —JennKR | ☎ 22:26, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I regret to digress with you, Andrzejbanas, but EW is NOT a reliable source, since it centers more around entertainment in general (including TV, radio and movies) than it does in music. Two good sources for music-centered articles are Billboard and Rolling Stone magazines (remember you need two reliable sources, not just one, in order to comply with Wikipedia's verifiability policy. That's why I'm citing both magazines.) --Fandelasketchup (talk) 10:26, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Caption for album cover in infobox

Re:this – I can see why JennKR reverted this, as this is not common in many album articles. However, I don't think it should be reverted solely on the basis that it is not implemented in many other articles; that becomes almost a matter of WAX and IDLI. The caption reduces any potential confusion that may be had by someone who purchased/recognizes the album with different artwork. Including it does no harm and has the potential to assist readers. Excluding it follows current precedent (that could, and in my opinion should, change) but the possibility of confusion remains. –Chase (talk / contribs) 05:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree, particularly in this case, since 4 not only had a deluxe version, but also had a repackaged standard version with the deluxe cover. pedro | talk 11:47, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. Given the circumstances, it might even be beneficial to include the deluxe artwork as an alternative cover. Might. There do appear to be some sources discussing it as well, so it wouldn't be purely decorative. But that's another matter. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:30, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Chasewc91Prism In light of Prism's comment, I'm actually going to restore the caption as they are in correct in saying that the deluxe edition cover is now that used as the cover of the repackaged standard edition in US markets. As for your precedent Chase, I think that you could have some ground in the album infobox guidelines where it stipulates that the version can be noted where relevant. I'd be cautious about using this across lots of articles, especially where there is only one signficiant cover, (it would be redundant, I think, to put "Album cover" under an album cover) but I also think, as you say, it could be useful where there is a possibility of confusion. As for including the deluxe edition cover, I'm not sure whether that would satisfy the criteria for miminal use of free-content when the covers are essentially the same, except for a different pose/look. —JennKR | ☎ 21:08, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Also, just to note, I've avoided using brackets as its such a short caption, and one where the information in the brackets is the most pertinent. —JennKR | ☎ 21:13, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Should the deluxe artwork be included? It somewhat violates the non-free content criteria, as the images could easily be explained through their differences in text? livelikemusic my talk page! 02:57, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

It's not just artwork for the deluxe edition. The 2013 re-issue of the album uses that cover art, so that is the official cover art for the album as of now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.38.92 (talk) 05:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes it should, as it serves to differentiate the Standard Edition (which only has one 12-track disc) from the Deluxe Edition which has an additional disc with 6 more tracks, for a total of 18 tracks. Furthermore, since the tracks in the bonus disc are already present in the "Track liw5ing" section, it could (and would) be helpful for editors to also have the Deluxe Edition cover image so when they buy the album they can make sure to get the correct edition, be it Standard or Deluxe. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 10:41, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Regardless, it violates the non-free criteria; the standard used in the opening of the box is the more recognized artwork, therefore it is the one that should remain. Any alternatives can be described, within the article. livelikemusic my talk page! 16:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
For you, not for everyone. Someone who bought this album after the re-issue might be confused as to why the article shows a completely different image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.38.92 (talk) 19:15, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Not just "for me", for the website's policy on non-free critera. I take it you didn't even look at the page I linked where it states: "Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information.". The only difference is the pose which Bey is posed in... a.k.a., it should be described in text-only. The image fails per NFCC. livelikemusic my talk page! 02:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:04, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

☒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.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:22, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

☒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.

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 17 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 03:28, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 23 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:08, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 00:39, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 14:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 4 (Beyoncé album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:48, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference 1+1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Jones, Anthony (May 26, 2011). "Beyonce debuts new single "1 + 1"". All Headline News. Retrieved May 27, 2011.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:4_(Beyoncé_album)/Archive_1&oldid=1144183902"