Talk:Control (Janet Jackson album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleControl (Janet Jackson album) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 4, 2014.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 7, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
September 16, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed
October 14, 2009Good article nomineeListed
November 10, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Concept album?[edit]

This article is included to "Concept album" category. Are there any reliable sources that classify this album as "Concept album"? If there are none, it should be excluded from the category. Netrat (talk) 22:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Control (Janet Jackson album)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    In the Release and promotion section, "title-track" ---> "title track". In the Critical reception section, why is Annual capitalized? Same section, is there supposed to be space with ---> "[ Minneapolis sound ]"?
    Check.
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    In the Background section, please link "Jesse Johnson" to its correspondence article. In the Composition and production section, shouldn't the the Dave Marsh book be "The Heart of Rock & Soul: The 1001 Greatest Singles Ever Made", instead of "The heart of rock & soul: the 1001 greatest singles ever made"? Same section, "...technology has altered the form, shape, scale and even the meaning of popular music...The album wasn't created by a studio band" ---> "...technology has altered the form, shape, scale and even the meaning of popular music ... The album wasn't created by a studio band". Do the same with any quotes with the ellipses. In the Release and promotion section, it would be best if "Recording Industry Association of America" was followed by ---> (RIAA), I mean, I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader. In the Legacy section, shouldn't "Funk: the music, the people, and the rhythm of the one" be "Funk: The Music, The People, and The Rhythm of The One"? If so, please fix this. Do the same with the Rolling Stone issue and the Anthony DeCurtis book. Please have all the book titles properly formatted. Ex: "She's a rebel: the history of women in rock & roll" ---> "She's a Rebel: The History of Women in Rock & Roll".
    Half-check. Can we do it for the refs. as well?
    Check.
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    You might want to add accessdates to References 10, 31, and 56, per here.
    Check.
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:37, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All issues have been addressed I believe. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 06:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You did, though, there a couple more. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the citations. As for putting (RIAA) directly after "Recording Industry Association of America" - I don't find it very significant - I've written and seen FA articles that don't bother. I think it would simply make it seem more cluttered. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:48, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
True, but would you want to follow that style? I know I wouldn't. Besides, not everyone is familiar with music related info., that's why I said that maybe adding the acronym after the name would help, per here, that particular reader. A good example of this is the "4 Minutes" song article, which recently passed FA. Overall, this is a good article, and has a big chance of being an FA. I won't hold it against you, maybe they will. Anyways, thank you to Bookkeeperoftheoccult for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:02, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I guess I had overlooked Wikipedia:MOS#Acronyms and abbreviations, I didn't realize it was an official policy. I still think its clutter personally, but I've changed it to comply. Thanks! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Control (Janet Jackson album)[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Control (Janet Jackson album)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "bpi":

Reference named "RIAA":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Control (Janet Jackson 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.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:54, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Control (Janet Jackson 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) 07:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I John F. Wilson produced Janet Jackson's vocals on " Start Anew " Not McCarthy or Toriyama..I produced Janet's vocals at A & M records in Studio "A" in Los Angeles. I was In-House producer for Joe Jackson Prod. My name is on the single and the album[edit]

I John F. Wilson produced Janet Jackson's vocals on " Start Anew " Japanese version.. NotMcCarthy or Toriyama..I produced Janet's vocals at A & M records in Studio "A" in Los Angeles. I was In-House producer for Joe Jackson Prod. My name is on the single and the album — Preceding unsigned comment added by John "Sly" Wilson (talk • contribs) 19:49, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. You have a conflict of interest and cannot edit this article.
2. Wikipedia uses sources, not testimonials.
Kellymoat (talk) 00:36, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Control (Janet Jackson 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) 17:52, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Control sales[edit]

This album didn't sold 8 million copies outside the US. It's chart performance and certifications are too low to put that amount of 14 million copies worldwide. We all know that Billboard is not a reliable source to worldwide sales, and even past Janet websites claimed this album sold 8 million copies worldwide. It seems like the Thriller case, when the media begun to publish that it sold 100 million or more records.--88marcus (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

With its mediocre chart runs outside the United States and only four available certifications (5P in US, P in Canada, P in UK, and G in NZ), the 14 million figure looks very much inflated. With only 5.4 million certified units, 10 million is already generous enough for this album. It obviously didn't sell more than The Emancipation of Mimi. Bluesatellite (talk) 21:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I found some sources about it: (Sources, listed chronologically)
  • (Certified sales: 5,407,500 worldwide till 2017)

Sales worldwide:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Control_(Janet_Jackson_album)&oldid=1206781377"