Talk:Planet Her
 | A fact from Planet Her appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 July 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
Did you know nomination
edit- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: by SL93 (talk) 01:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
* ... that Doja Cat has alluded to TOI 1338 b (pictured) being a visual interpretation of the fictional planet which inspired her album Planet Her? Source: Doja Cat tweeting "TOI 1338B" before retweeting a reply saying "is this the scientific name of planet her"
- ALT1:... that Doja Cat based Planet Her on her own fictional planet at the center of the universe on which all species of space exist in harmony? Source: Event occurs 3:36-3:51 in this video: "So basically Planet Her is the center of the universe and its where all races of space exist [...] All species can be in harmony can be in harmony there... that's kind of the lore."
- ALT2:... that by naming her album Planet Her, Doja Cat was "just trying to be cute" and was not promoting a feminist agenda nor a planet exclusively for women? Source: Event occurs 3:13-3:36 in this video "It's not like a feminist thing... It's just like I'm really just tryna be cute and that's all it is. Its not a planet for women, I know I've gotten questions about that."
- ALT3:... that Doja Cat ensured all music videos associated with her album Planet Her took place on different locations across the titular fictional planet and explored each aspect of those respective locations? Source: MTV 0:40-0:50: "Every video for Planet Her will be an exploration of each aspect of the planet" Audacy: 4:16-4:35 "I'm trying to like create a story as it goes and with the next couple visuals I wanna bring people to different locations of Planet Her and show them how people are there and how the different races and species connect with each other..."
- Reviewed: Stina Quint
Draft created by Cybertrip (talk) and moved to mainspace by VersaceSpace (talk). Nominated by Cybertrip at 10:57, 16 June 2021 (UTC).
This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline and any of the hooks could be used. The image is in the public domain, the article is neutral, and I detected no copyright issues (a high reading (84%) on Earwig seems to be another site copying Wikipedia). A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:51, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Returned from queue per talk. —valereee (talk) 18:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Promoters: check article for stability before promoting, and a full recheck of the hook and source would be advisable as the article has been massively edited since it was nominated. —valereee (talk) 13:24, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
The article needs to be reviewed again: the review was made just before the album was released, and the article has quadrupled in size since then, meaning the vast majority of it has not been checked. I don't know whether original reviewer Cwmhiraeth would be willing to do a completely new review of the article as it is now, and check to be sure the hook facts for the three ALT hooks remain in expanded article. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
- I think I will leave it to someone else. It's not my type of article at all and I can't think why I reviewed it in the first place. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:19, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: Second review, the article appears well sourced and neutral. Earwig only picked up false positives for copyvio (direct quotes and song titles). The hooks still hold up, are cited and appear in the article. Only one sentence in the body of the article was uncited, so I added sources to that. The rest of the article is meticulously cited, and the lede contains only info expanded upon in the body. The page also appears stable, no real changes since the 17th (and I doubt there's much left to add). With a little more polish, I think it could also be a good candidate for a GA nomination. BuySomeApples (talk) 03:34, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Single release date of "You Right"
editMedia coverage was referring to "You Right" as a single on June 25th alongside the album release, but was sent to Radio on June 29th. I personally think the release date should reflect when it was sent to radio. Media coverage will oftentimes say a song is a single before it is actually released as one and I think this is an example of that. What does everyone else think? Tree Critter (talk) 00:19, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- I agree. I think it would be better if the release date was when the song was first released in a single format, similar to Cardigan (song), where the listed release date was the date that the song first got sent to radio. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 00:22, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Release date
editI'm unfamiliar if this has been talked about before but the album was released into the public on June 24th per apple music.[1] I think that should be reflected in the article despite what kind of version it was. Tree Critter (talk) 07:28, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Tree Critter: The album was released locally, which means that it was released at midnight, June 25 in every country. Basically, it was released to some countries every hour when that country's clock turned 12am. It was then officially released at midnight UTC−04:00 (also known as the Eastern Time Zone in the Americas), which means that, for people in the Pacific Time Zone (UTC−07:00), it was 9pm June 24 when the album was released. Knowing this, since majority of the world was in June 25 for the official release, we should list the release date as June 25, per WP:DUE. I hope this made sense. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 13:08, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- Do we know for a fact that that is the case. Like did Doja or anyone say that it was in fact released at midnight? Because apple music does give a different date for the clean standard and the explicit standard. Which means they were released at different times. Otherwise they would reflect the same dates. Tree Critter (talk) 21:32, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- I know for a fact that the local release was true and can attest to it, but I don't know if any sources picked it up. They are pretty common, though (Chromatica, Sour and Confetti were released locally), and some labels, like Interscope Records and RCA Records do them often, which is what happened here and with all the listed examples. Apple Music dates aren't always the most reliable. For example, the deluxe version was released all at once, but it was 11:59pm Eastern Time (where I live) on June 26 when it was released, so this explains the June 26 release date listed on Apple Music, even though it was officially released on June 27. This is also probably what happened with the clean and explicit versions. Someone probably pressed the "publish" button 30 seconds too early. Another example of this is "Renegade", which was released at 11:50pm Eastern Time on July 1, but the release date is listed as July 2. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 02:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- This edit that I made at 12:07 UTC on June 24 (12 hours before the official release) has the New Zealand version of the album on Apple Music. At that time, the NZ version was released, but the English version, the American version and the Canadian version weren't released yet. This is a local release. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 02:28, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- That makes a lot of sense. Thank you! After all, I suppose it is best to go with the the dates everyone including Doja is saying it was released / supposed to be released. Its still a little confusing though... Tree Critter (talk) 06:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- You're welcome! I agree, it's probably best to go with what the sources are saying. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 12:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- That makes a lot of sense. Thank you! After all, I suppose it is best to go with the the dates everyone including Doja is saying it was released / supposed to be released. Its still a little confusing though... Tree Critter (talk) 06:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Do we know for a fact that that is the case. Like did Doja or anyone say that it was in fact released at midnight? Because apple music does give a different date for the clean standard and the explicit standard. Which means they were released at different times. Otherwise they would reflect the same dates. Tree Critter (talk) 21:32, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Edit warring over "Need to Know" single status
edit@2601:180:8200:63D0:142F:757B:ED82:8C64: There's somewhat of an edit war going on at the moment involving myself and User:2601:180:8200:63D0:142F:757B:ED82:8C64. You can check the edit history, but the gist of it is that the user is adding "Need to Know" as a single based off this tweet. I'm not familiar with this account, but given it's unverified, I presumed that, per WP:TWEET, it was not an acceptable source, so I reverted it. The user claimed that the account works with Mediabase in an edit summary adding the single claim back, leading to me reverting it, asking the user to provide a source for that claim on the talk page. The user then reverted that, saying that "sources for other sources aren't necessary".
To avoid violating WP:3RR, I've not touched the page since, and instead left a message on the user's talk page asking them to stop adding "Need to Know" as a single, which they have now reverted withour responding to. I'm not entirely sure what to do here. I cannot find any reliable sources that say that "Need to Know" is a single myself, and I can't find anything that says that the USRadioUpdater Twitter account is affiliated with Mediabase. What should be done? --LivelyRatification (talk) 06:36, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- This situation about its single release reminds me sorta to the situation with Olivia Rodrigo’s single, Traitor, which was also sent to pop radio. I would say wait for a reliable source stating it’s going to be sent to radio; I have no idea how people figured this out about the song being sent to radio in the first place, I only heard the news on a Chart page on Instagram. PopLizard86427 (talk) 09:24, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Let me break down the sides:
- I am honestly very confused at this point, because, on one hand, we have three reliable sources calling the song a single, and a potential radio listing (but that cannot be confirmed), and on the other hand we have the artist and the label not calling the song a single. However, in order for the song to get promoted to radio, the label would have had to send that song to radio, so that is equivalent to the label calling the song a single. So, if the song gets promoted, it's everyone against Doja Cat herself. This is why I am confused. As well, please see the discussion at Talk:Need to Know (Doja Cat song)#Single??? from a couple months ago. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 14:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Those sources were from when the song was out. They called it a single because they thought the song was one, but Doja Cat later stated at Need to Know isn’t a single on her Twitter, so those sources were mistaken. Then, it was reported that the song was gonna be sent to radio on August 30 as the 3rd single from planet her. I first got the news from Instagram, and people have stated on Twitter that it’s true, however that could do a lie, as no one from a reliable source (such as Billboard) has stated that. Let’s just wait until we can find out if it’s true or not. PopLizard86427 (talk) 17:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- @PopLizard86427: While I do acknowledge that the articles were published before Doja clarified, they wouldn't have mistakenly called a non-single a single like that out of nowhere, especially not Billboard. As well, I would do anything but trust social media. For example, I've seen that "I Don't Do Drugs" and "Ain't Shit" were supposed to be promoted to radio as the third single, but neither followed through. But, I agree when you say that it's best to wait until a radio listing can be sourced. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 19:19, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- Those sources were from when the song was out. They called it a single because they thought the song was one, but Doja Cat later stated at Need to Know isn’t a single on her Twitter, so those sources were mistaken. Then, it was reported that the song was gonna be sent to radio on August 30 as the 3rd single from planet her. I first got the news from Instagram, and people have stated on Twitter that it’s true, however that could do a lie, as no one from a reliable source (such as Billboard) has stated that. Let’s just wait until we can find out if it’s true or not. PopLizard86427 (talk) 17:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
- At some point, it should be discussed that every song added to Spotify's TTH playlist is a single. Records labels add songs weekly to promote them. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- That wouldn't make sense though. Using Bieber as an example, "Peaches" and "As I Am" were both added to TTH at the same time, but only the former was actually being promoted as a single, with it getting a music video and being sent to radio stations. I don't think Def Jam would try to push two singles at once, especially since "Hold On" was just released two weeks prior. ThedancingMOONpolice (talk) 04:27, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
@Doggy54321, PopLizard86427, and LivelyRatification: The specific origin of the rumour that the song is impacting radio arose from a screenshot of a (now-deleted) Instagram DM conversation between a fan and a radio manager at RCA Records in which he confirms it. I trust that it's true but we obviously can't use this yet as per WP:OR and all other obvious reasons (but I assume user USRadioUpdater and those other Twitter accounts based their facts off this screenshot). Need to Know has always been a promotional single since its release hence RCA's use of the word "track" and not "single" in that press release, unlike on KMM (see my last comment here). Also, for the sake of simplicity in their articles or because they simply don't know/care, writers at blogs and publications will write "single" when talking about promotional singles bc the general public doesn't really know or care either. This song will obviously be promoted as a single in the next couple of weeks, but we'll just have to wait for the AllAccess update as per usual. —cybertrip👽 ( 💬 • 📝) 08:33, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Cybertrip: Thank you for clarifying! As per the email I got last night from Joel, Ed and Dave (the Top 40/M editors at AllAccess), "Need to Know" is starting to be added into rotation, with 15 stations already playing it as of yesterday, which is what I think is a good indication that it will be promoted in the coming weeks, if it hasn't already (I'm not an expert at radio, so I'm just guessing). Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 10:37, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
AllAccess has "Need To Know" being sent to rhythmic radio on August 31st. This is official confirmation that it is a single. https://www.allaccess.com/top40-rhythmic/future-releases ELEMONATED (talk) 18:32, 25 August 2021 (UTC)