Talk:Willow Smith/Archive 1

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

Edit request

Born in 1988 would make here 22! According to Will Smith's wiki page she was born in 2000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.55.27.57 (talk) 15:57, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

"One of the youngest solo artist in history to" missing an s there on artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.253.98.30 (talk) 03:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Done - thanks for pointing it out! Active Banana (bananaphone 03:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

What is the Nobel Peace Price Concert Willow Smith attended in that picture? 72.229.127.70 (talk) 17:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

See Nobel Peace Prize Concert. Mhiji (talk) 22:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 67.110.176.68, 4 January 2011

Not done:


If her birthday is correct, she should be 11 not 10.

67.110.176.68 (talk) 16:24, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I think you should check your math. Active Banana (bananaphone 16:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 99.111.234.188, 8 March 2011

File:Willow-Smith-at-Grammys-435x580.jpg{{edit semi-protected}} Updated image from 2011 Grammy Awards

99.111.234.188 (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done: Image deleted. —GƒoleyFour— 13:34, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 71.14.75.198, 28 March 2011

In the following sentence-- in the "Personal Life" section-- there should be a semi-colon between "Smith" and "both." The current sentence contains a comma splice at that location. willow is so hottt

"She has two older brothers, Jaden Smith and Trey Smith, both are also child actors."

71.14.75.198 (talk) 04:05, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Done --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 04:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Unique1.4Lyf, 11 July 2011

I Think This Picture Would Be Better Because Its A More Resent Picture . http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.monstersandcritics.com/people/Jaden_Smith/images/group15/ABE-007876.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.monstersandcritics.com/people/Jaden-Smith/pictures/2011-BET-Awards-Press-Room-633046&usg=__wsmK3xtUGabXBGRsvqv1C03Mlns=&h=600&w=399&sz=57&hl=en&start=24&zoom=1&tbnid=8wZriMl7iUfZsM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&ei=BosaTo6cMaHc0QGTv-iWBQ&prev=/search%3Fq%3Djaden%2Bsmith%2B2011%2Bbet%2Bawards%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7ACAW_en___US411%26biw%3D1366%26bih%3D627%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=534&vpy=129&dur=661&hovh=275&hovw=183&tx=77&ty=162&page=2&ndsp=28&ved=1t:429,r:22,s:24&biw=1366&bih=627 Unique1.4Lyf (talk) 05:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. FREYWA 08:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Album title?

As far as I know, the album is called "Knees and Elbows"... not "Willow: Blah Blah Blah" — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAmJayDO (talk • contribs) 01:02, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Fireball

Just because Fireball (Willow Smith song) doesn't get its own page, that does not mean that you put what would have been that page on this page. There should not be a whole section on the single on this article and it should not be put there, again.—Ryulong (竜龙) 08:13, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Creation of section "Fireball"

Since Willow Smith's single "Fireball" does not yet fit the requirements for WP:NSONGS, I have merged the former "Fireball" article with this one. It is a sub-section of "Singles". All of the information about the former "Fireball" article is included in the sub-section (including the info-box, release history, etc.) Once there is enough notability about the single, a separate article should be created.

Sc135 (talk) 20:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Album Release

It says Willow's will be released in April 2012, as far as I know it has not been released and we are already in May 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.64.67 (talk) 23:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Fireball (Willow Smith)

Fireball is a song by American recording artist Willow Smith, that features Trinidad artist Nicki Minaj.

Composition The song was written by Omarr Rambert, who helped write 21 Century Girl, Marc Kinchen, Lazonate Franklin, and Nicki Minaj, credited as Onika Maraj. It is produced by Marc Kinchen, credited Marc Kinchen.

Live Performances Willow performed the song on X Factor the results, without Nicki Minaj.

"Music Video" The music video was shown on 106 & Park in November. It shows Willow and Nicki Minaj on the streets of a city. It was directed by Hype Williams/

Critical Response The song failed to chart, on all but one chart. It charted at 121 on the US RnB.

Single by Willow featuring Nicki Minaj from the album Knees and Elbows Released October 8, 2011 Format CD single, digital download Recorded 2010 Genre Hip hop, R&B Length 4:08 Label Columbia, Roc Nation Writer(s) Omarr Rambert, Marc Kinchen, Lazonate Franklin, Onika Maraj Producer Stoopid Boots Willow singles chronology (2010) "Whip My Hair" (2011) "21st Century Girl" (2011)- (2012) "I Am Me" — Preceding unsigned comment added by EAG123 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Singles

i don't think most of her newest releases qualify as singles just because they were released onto her soundcloud.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:James Mackenzie (actor) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 11:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

vanity name

Until the majority of reliable sources start referring to her solely as "Willow" as they do "Madonna" or "Prince", she is "Willow Smith" and needs to be referred to that way throughout the article. Active Banana (bananaphone 22:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah that's fine. I agree she should be referred to as Willow Smith throughout the article. However the infobox is for her as a musical artist. As a musical artist, her music is credited as simply "Willow" (see Whip My Hair). Therefore in the infobox name should be Willow. Agreed? (I can't now revert due to WP:3RR.) Mhiji (talk) 22:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
No the info box is about HER the subject of the Wikipedia article. Active Banana (bananaphone 22:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
No. If it were about her we would use Template:Infobox person. Template:Infobox musical artist is about her as a musical artist. As a musical artist she is known as Willow. Mhiji (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
LOL. No. The name of the info box template is irrel. Active Banana (bananaphone 22:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes what the infobox is called is irrelevant... The point is {{Infobox musical artist}} is for information relating to a musical artist. Just in the same way {{infobox website}} is for information about a website and {{infobox actor}} is for information about an actor. The name at the top should reflect the name the artist records under. Just the same as the name at the top of {{infobox actor}} should be what the actor is credited as in their films. The name at the top of Katy Perry's infobox isn't "Katheryn Hudson". The name at the top of Demi Moore's infobox isn't "Demi Guynes Kutcher". How's this any different to Rihanna or Eminem? Their infoboxes don't have "Robyn Fenty" or "Marshall Mathers" at the top of them?! And in one of your edit summaries you said this is not supported by reliable sources. Look at the references and external links. This is supported by loads of reliable sources... Mhiji (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
The infobox is about the subject of the article, which as you have agreed to above is the person Willow Smith, who has released ONE product under a vanity performance name. And yes there are sources that confirm that the song is release by "Willow", but very very very few of them do not go on to identify the performer as Willow Smith. It it not at all like any of the examples you are providing where the name in the infobox is the same as the vast majority of reliable sources refer to the performer SOLELY by the stage/vanity name and not the birth name. Active Banana (bananaphone 03:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
And many of the "reliable sources" used in are article even state that the damn song is performed by "Willow Smith" NOT "Willow". [1] [2] [3]

Edit request from 99.111.234.188, 8 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please add Image Award (winner) in the Awards and Nominations catagory. [1]


99.111.234.188 (talk) 03:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

It's there in the article now. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page. You might instead want to put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk, or put the {{edit semi-protected}} template back up on this page and either way someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 07:07, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ . Los Angeles Times http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gossip/2011/03/willow-smith-video-21st-century-girl-tyler-perry-naacp.html. Retrieved 8 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Edit request from 99.111.234.188, 8 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please create a link for Willow Smiths' latest song "21st Century Girl" The song is apart of her discography as a single and should be represented individually just as "Whip My Hair" is. BELOW IS: Information conataining release date (March 1, 2011, NOT February 3, 2011 as stated in her main page), and information on the music video. Thank you [1]

[2]

Vidoe stars Cicely Tyson [3]

First Live Perrformance of the song [4]

99.111.234.188 (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The page already exists but it redirects back to the Willow Smith article. Feel free to create a song page on that page for 21st Century Girl -- I would suggest using Whip My Hair as a guide to creating a 21st Century Girl article. It didn't quite do as well as Whip My Hair, though, so it will be more difficult to find good references for 21st Century Girl (it's less notable). Also, do we need a list of every place that each song is performed at? I trimmed the list of places the first song was performed at and added the second song in the prose section. If you'd like any further help, contact me on my user talk page. You might instead want to put a {{help me}} template up on your own user talk, or put the {{edit semi-protected}} template back up on this page and either way someone will be along to help you. :) Banaticus (talk) 07:23, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ . Rolling Stone Magazine http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/digest-willow-smith-to-release-new-single-on-monday-kanye-west-pulls-all-of-the-lights-from-youtube-20110225. Retrieved 8 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  2. ^ . OK Magazine http://www.okmagazine.com/2011/03/watch-willow-smiths-21st-century-girl-music-video/. Retrieved 8 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  3. ^ http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2011/03/yes-thats-cicely-tyson-in-willow-smiths-21st-century-girl-video.html. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  4. ^ . Billboard.com http://www.billboard.com/column/viralvideos/willow-smith-introduces-oprah-viewers-to-1005054542.story#/column/viralvideos/willow-smith-introduces-oprah-viewers-to-1005054542.story. Retrieved 8 March 2011. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Edit request from 24.141.23.84, 14 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please add this paragraph underneath the heading "Music career". I believe that the fact she has received criticism due to her being a minor has really been a huge part of her career. However, she has remained determined and this characteristic is extremely admirable especially because she is so young in age.

Despite the fact that Willow is extremely talented, there are still some that are unable to overlook the fact that she is only 10 years old. Upon release of her smash hit, “Whip my Hair”, critics were quick to comment on her age and Will and Jada’s parenting skills were put into question. Although her song is very innocent and does not contain any sexual content, many feel as though her parents should have waited a few more years before allowing her to become a pop star and that her education should be first priority. The Internet went ablaze after the young superstar commented on her current schooling situation: “I never really get to go to school because I am always on tour or with my father. There is a tutor most of the time, but usually I am working so I never get to do the lessons. The worst thing about maths is all the kids are ahead of me because they go to school.”[1] In a poll conducted by the Washington Post, 47% of voters feel as though she is too young to be a popstar.[2] It remains a controversial issue within society as to whether or not she should be excepted as she is the child of two successful Hollywood celebrities or if she should be viewed as a regular 10-year-old child.

  • She is not extremely talented, they auto-tuned her to death. She got to where she is because of her parent's money, power and connections and does not deserve any of it. THAT should be more important-who cares whether this is good for her or not, she said so herself she wanted it, and they bought it for her regardless of the fact there are plenty of kids out there who are better than she is busting their asses that can't get anywhere because their parents aren't Will and Jada. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.104.78 (talk) 19:13, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Cjordan2011 (talk) 04:24, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Not done. First off, half of this is original research, so anything unsourced gets thrown out right off the bat. Second, the first source is to a gossip blog and shouldn't be included. If she actually said those things, there are far more reliable sources out there that would have covered it. Third, the second source, the poll, can't have conclusions drawn from it and placed here as something with valuable information, as it is not scientific in nature. Fourth, the tone of all of this feels more like a worrying mother, as opposed to a formal encyclopedia.
Keep in mind that this is an article about a living person. Because of that, the reliability of sources to verify all information, especially information critical of the subject, should be extremely exceptional sources. --ICYTIGER'SBLOOD 00:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I will also note that if this information, as presented, were to be added to the article, it would be the longest section of prose we've got, which places undue weight on the topic. --ICYTIGER'SBLOOD 00:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

[3] == Edit request from 99.111.234.188, 7 March 2011 ==

{{subst:edit semi-protected}} Please add Image Award winner under the Awards and Nominations catagory.


99.111.234.188 (talk) 00:52, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Yves (talk) 00:54, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://thestir.cafemom.com/entertainment/113664/willow_smith_skips_school_for
  2. ^ http://voices.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2010/10/too_much_too_young_nine-year-o.html
  3. ^ Felton, Alex. "'21st Century Girl' Willow Smith wins new-artist NAACP Image Award [Music video]". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved 8 March 2011.

Rockstar

"Rockstar" is a song by American recording artist Willow. The song is the thrid single from her yet-to-be-titled debut album release.

Background Willow has given out snippets that can be found on Youtube. Angelo Stusan, new to the musc indusrty, says 'he will make a remix to Rockstar'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EAG123 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of paragraph

I propose the deletion of the paragraph about the poem written about her. Apart from being badly written, it is not of any note and seems to be advertising for the poet. HonkyTonkHarlot (talk) 08:39, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Willow Smith. 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) 04:08, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Willow Smith. 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) 04:46, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

More recent pic?

She's not an 11 year old kid anymore. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit request

I've never heard of the MP3 Awards, and a quick search shows that it's a made-up award show on a YouTube channel with fewer than 2000 views. Don't think that's particularly relevant here.--74.64.109.204 (talk) 01:59, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Why aren't you in TV 🤔

Please 41.114.101.193 (talk) 09:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

New photo

The photo looks like the subject of the article is exposing her breasts. If the date is correct, she was only 15 at the time. Please consider a new photo that does not suggest child sexualization. 71.204.20.213 (talk) 18:08, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Agree Adam Friedland's Soiled White Pants (talk) 12:46, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I also agree, by checking on Commons we don't have any images later than the current infobox image yet. I am hopeful one day there will be a photo which is under a free licence in the current days so we don't have the current photo as to what the IP address said above. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 17:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Why not just mirror an image under private licence and use that? We could argue that it's sufficiently different from the source image if the lawyers come knocking. Adam Friedland's Soiled White Pants (talk) 10:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Coping Mechanism (album)

The album now has a stable article, no need to keep discussing this. Discussion of that article belongs at Talk:Coping Mechanism (album). —Compassionate727 (T·C) 15:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support split - Album is covered in multiple reliable sources, and should have its own article entitled Coping Mechanism (album). -- Jax 0677 (talk) 08:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

  • Oppose split until someone drafts up an actual acceptable article. Your proposed draft was awful. You didn't even bother writing in paragraph form. And the "critical reception" section completely misrepresents the source material - none of the sources used are "critical reception". They are not album reviews. They just various quote from various articles about it. I'm open to changing my mind if someone puts together something better, but I'm 100% against publishing that. Sergecross73 msg me 17:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
    Gonna have to second Serge here. I'm sure the album is ready for an article, as you said there's plenty of coverage, but the writing needs significant work and you didn't even follow basic manual of style rules like MOS:TITLECAPS, MOS:CURLY, MOS:MAJORWORK, or MOS:MINORWORK. Heck, you didn't even add an infobox and your lead includes a past-tense "released" for a date that's over a week in the future. When you don't have even those things down, your article's never gonna look very impressive, at least in my opinion. QuietHere (talk) 17:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
    • Reply - This is a forum to discuss whether or not AN article should be created, that's all. This is not the appropriate place to discuss the article that I originally put forth with an under construction tag, which should not have been moved to draft space twice. Not everything needs an infobox. In fact, I have seen an infobox removed from an article in recent history. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
      Well, what else are people supposed to go by? You didn't present any sort of real argument or even actually list any sources. You just opened a thread and said "There are sources." If you want better answers, ask better questions. Sergecross73 msg me 00:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
      • Reply - There are 3 sources in the Willow Smith article, Kerrang!, Loudwire and Nylon. Billboard talks about her transition into rock music. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
        Neither Serge nor I said there wasn't coverage available, we were talking about the quality of the article as written. You listing off available sources doesn't help your case. QuietHere (talk) 05:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
        • Reply - "This is not the appropriate place to discuss the article that I originally put forth". --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
          But you requested a split based on the article you made, no? Otherwise what is there to split off? The Willow Smith article only has three sentences in it, that doesn't make an article. If you think there's a better article to make then make one (perhaps as a draft), but you can't propose a split when there's no existent material on this site to make an article out of at the moment. QuietHere (talk) 15:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
          • Reply - I made the split based on the "Coping Mechanism" section of the Willow Smith article. That article actually has over 30 lines in it, probably more. Wikipedia has many stubs, and the three lines under the "Coping Mechanism" section each have a reference. The udiscovermusic track listing, which I did not want to put in the Willow Smith article, would make four. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
          My personal standard for when to make an album article is when I've got 4-5 dedicated sources and I'm about to write a coherent article that is out of stub status. (Personal stance - over 5k in data.) Because your question is still overwhelmingly vague, my personal stance is all that I can go off if, and my thought is that this isn't possible and a split isn't warranted yet, and I'm sticking with opposing for now. I'm more than happy to be proven wrong with a draft proposal though. Sergecross73 msg me 15:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
          It's also worth keeping in mind that this album is releasing a week from Friday (assuming there's no last-minute delays) so reviews should start coming in next week, and knowing how popular the artist is I'm sure there will be plenty of coverage to work with soon. And you could always start a draft based on what you've got so far and build it out as more comes in. That's what I usually do with albums I suspect will be notable by the time they're out. QuietHere (talk) 15:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
          Very true. Actual, real album reviews will probably start dropping early next week. Sergecross73 msg me 15:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
          It won't delay again due to the SNL performance. The article will be (rightfully) re-created within a week or two so I find this discussion pointless —VersaceSpace 🌃 22:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Jax, nobody here ever opposed the existence of a competently made article about Coping Mechanism by Willow. The issue is that the version you created was awful. —VersaceSpace 🌃 21:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
    • Reply - I am completely aware of the fact that "nobody here ever opposed the existence of a competently made article about Coping Mechanism by Willow". As I said before, "This is not the appropriate place to discuss the article that I originally put forth". An article that is split off can be added to. I never suggested that my original article be split off. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
      Right, so why is this a discussion when nobody was against a split to begin with? —VersaceSpace 🌃 22:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
      @Jax 0677: the issue in the article you created was low quality prose. Now you've taken that low quality prose and moved it here, which is wholly undesirable. Why are you unable to understand the issue here? —VersaceSpace 🌃 23:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
      • Reply - Please read WP:POORLY, the issue is whether or not there are enough reliable sources to create an article, not the quality of the page. And now, there is an article, my original goal. Wikipedia articles are often created by people adding on to what other people have done anyway. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
      Can I ask where you're going with this? I am against splitting. But let's say hypothetically, everyone said "Yes, let's split it right now". What then? You say this isn't the place to discuss your draft, so that must mean you don't intend on publishing that, or discussing that wouldn't be off the table. And you seem unwilling to write a better draft, or you would have done that instead of arguing about it these last few days. So where are you even going with this? Sergecross73 msg me 00:16, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
      • Reply - I was discussing creating the article using the sentences that were in Willow Smith for that album. And now, there is an article, my original goal. Wikipedia articles are often created by people adding on to what other people have done anyway. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Echoing the sentiments of everyone else, I'm also confused about the point of all this considering there was/is only a handful of lines (5?) about the album in the article. The more logical thing to do would have been to 1) just go ahead and create a stub (I did something similar for Proof and it was accepted, granted that album received significantly more coverage prior to its release than Willow's but I digress) and link it in the relevant section, which would then only need one or two lines stating the singer's upcoming album titled X (and linked to stub) will be released on Y date, or 2) wait until the album comes out then put together a decent start class article and build on that. Usually when someone suggests a split of this nature, it's because the main contains a significant bulk of information about the album that would be better suited in its own article. That was not the case here. There really was no need for a split tag/proposal for 5 sentences, see my point #1. While all the comments above are 100% right about the draft being poorly done, the bones are there for a useable stub at the very least. Keeping in mind the various policies/guidelines others have linked, you can easily get it where it needs to be. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 07:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

  • I've recreated the article. Notability is borderline (for the album at least, plenty to go off of for the singles), but my Rolling Stone magazine arrived and there's a full length review in there I intend to use (no link until it's published online). Thus I'm removing the merge template (it was inappropriate to begin with). —VersaceSpace 🌃 03:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
    pinging Sergecross73 since he had some objection to the creation —VersaceSpace 🌃 03:41, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
    This version is pretty brief too. But at least it's written in paragraph form and doesn't misrepresent the sourcing. I'm more okay with leaving something like this in the public to be improved over time. Sergecross73 msg me 13:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Reply - Having the "bones" of a stub is what I have been saying all along. And now, there is an article, my original goal. Wikipedia articles are often created by people adding on to what other people have done anyway. I wanted to at least have the discussion about whether or not there should be an article, instead of having the page unilaterally redirected. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can we remove the infobox image?

Reading the archive, apparently that photo was taken while she was underage. Now I don't think you need to have an infobox photo if the only photo you have is a kid wearing an inappropriate shirt. Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 09:08, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Willow_Smith/Archive_1&oldid=1183416639"