Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exodus+

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was DELETE. DanielCD 03:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exodus+

[edit]
Exodus+ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Reason the page should be deleted Uthipratuma 03:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Reasons for Deletion:

This album is clearly a fake,or unofficial copy with the following reasons:

1) The album has not been on any official sources/announcements such as on Utada's homepage, or any branch of Toshiba-Emi-including Foozay Inc. Or has been announced on Utada's English Record Company- Island Def Jam.

2) The album's track listing is faulty, the "Hotel Lobby" Remix, is a Fan-made remix provided by a fan from Utada-online.net

3) The picture used for the "cover" of the album, was used for promotion of other materials back almost 2 years.

4) The actual official album Exodus was released almost 2 years ago.

5) This album has already been re-released, did not sell in America, there would be no point in re-re-releasing and unsuccessful album.

6) I have been a fan of Utada since 2003, I have kept up with her most recent materials to date, which would be Flavor Of Life- I have never heard of, nor rumor of "Exodus+ " until I saw this clearly fake article.

7) All of Utada's materials have released on the day countries normally release music, as for US and Japan it's Tuesdays/Wednesdays, this "album" appears to be released on a Monday.All the following was by --Uthipratuma 03:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • In response to those claims (in order)

1. Yes it has. I uploaded a screenshot at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:UtadaExodusPlusNews.PNG oh, and PLEASE, Utada Hikaru's official page on wikipedia has SEVERAL missing citations, so should we delete her page too?

File:UtadaExodusPlusNews.PNG
News Confirming "Exodus+"

2. Maybe she got a copyright or permission to use the remix, That has happened before in some of her singles (You Make me Want to be a Man is an example)

3. She's probably using old promotion beacause it's a speacial edition of an old album; Many artists use old promotion art for re-releases of old albums.

4. Yes, we all know that, it has nothing to do with the special edition re-release.

5. No, it was re-released for japan. Even if it was re-released for the U.S., making a special edition of an album would make dedciated Utada fans buy the album again, so it's actually a very smart marketing tool. Edit: I MEANT EXODUS, NOT EXODUS+

6. I'm glad your a fan, so you should know artists CAN keep information from leaking. Albeit strange that information wasn't available, it would still make sense because she obviously meant this album to be special release; like a "golden ticket". Releasing information as soon as the album comes out might be odd, but is perfectly believable.

7. Remember, it was not "released" on January 28, it was made available with certain copies of Exodus, so maybe editing the article to say "made avaialble January 28" instead of "released on Januray 28" should be done; deleting the article is completely opposite.

I can't speak for Utada, so if she decides to make a special edition of an album, only able to get through certain copies, that's her business. I do think the article needs some editing, but deleting is not one of those edits. --Artistthatneverwas 02:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


  • Important response

In response to your claims:

Nope, stop with this FALSE information, you just have a bad bootleg then, because I just checked the official site, you, or someone else, just edited that "source". The exact same REAL site has none of that on it, link below. Also having spelled "Certian" and "Januray" wrong. Also to mention the grammar is horribly set with random capitalizations.

As to the comment on Utada's Wiki....at least it has citation's on at least 90% of the article, your Exodus+ article page on the other hand, does not.

"5. No, it was re-released for japan. --Artistthatneverwas 02:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)"[reply]

You also said it was only re-released for Japan, if so, why is it on the USA site- to which you gave this as a source, which is proven fake.

http://www6.islandrecords.com/utada/site/news.php --Uthipratuma 22:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


  • This release is crap. Completely false, untrue, just get rid of the page.

'Screenshot' of the official site was clearly tampered with. There is nothing like that on the official site. And actually, the newest bit of news on the official site says "Japan Tour Confirmed!". That appears in the spot where the 'apparent news' of this 'release' is seen on the 'screenshot'. Clearly, the screenshot was taken from the site, then the "Japan Tour" news tidbit was edited out, and this 'new news' was edited in. If the site was actually updated with news of any new release, the "Japan Tour" news would have been shifted down to where we see "Utada Featured in American Magazine", like all the news updates have done since the site opened. Sora-kara


http://www6.islandrecords.com/utada/site/news.php --Uthipratuma 22:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Important

  • I'm not exactly sure what to say. The screenshot above is an OBVIOUS fake, none of hikki's websites have any information on it, and the person who started this article (Artistthatneverwas) has also started other meaningless articles, like Emily Grutz (which was deleted) and has uploaded copyrighted photos and pictures that aren't used at all, which have also been deleted. So, when I saw that this user made this page, I would be quick to delete it. The only problem is that one of my friends who recently ordered Exodus also got a different album with it, with the cover art as shown, labeled Exodus+. Now, I'm not saying that the Exodus+ page isn't a hoax, but I don't think that the article should be deleted just yet. I actually went back to the post office where my friend's copy of Exodus+ came from, and they said it came directly from the sender (at amazon.com). I'm confused. Is this, or isn't it a hoax?

--Omoidaseba 02:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And your only contributions to this project are to this page. See also WP:SOCK and/or WP:SPA Rklawton 02:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I guess I am a WP:SPA as you say, because I only made an account so I could put my input on this page. That still doesn't answer my question. Where did the apperently fake copy of Exodus+ come from? It still can be fake, I would agree with that, I just want to know how it's possible for a bootleg to enter the amazon.com system. --Omoidaseba 02:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have checked Amazon Japan,Yesasia-Asian Media,CDJapan,HMV Japan, even Google Japan and Google- all reliable sources for info, and purchases of Asian/Japanese media, none of them had one single reliable result on the Exodus+ So is it telling me Google, especially the Japanese one- to which the 'album was re-released in', which has no results on Exodus+, is false? I think not.
You're forgetting that the album ONLY COMES WITH CERTAIN ORDERS OF EXODUS!!! It is not for sale individually. And you checked all the japanese sites anyway, EXODUS is an American album, so you wont find it on the japanese sites. Exodus+ is like Willy Wonka's Golden Ticket, it comes as a special album with a 20 page booklet inside. featuring lyrics, and additional pictures. I can scan the back of the album and take pics. would you like me to? It will show the copyright info. THEN they're will be official proof that it exists. Unfortunately, I won't have acess to a camera/scanner until after 3:00 (I'm at school right now). So, I WILL HAVE PROOF SOON ENOUGH. --Artistthatneverwas 10:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Exodus was a Japanese,American, and UK release, and you mentioned earlier Exodus+ was only released in Japan, Exodus has already been released there twice, a third wouldn't be necessary. Your information seems to be inconsistent. Simply taking a picture of it wouldn't be up to Wikipedia Standards, Wikipedia:Image use policy, also the Willy Wonka analogy is a bad one, The Golden tickets were heavily promoted, and in this case 'Exodus+' is not.--Uthipratuma 19:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now you're putting words in my mouth. I NEVER SAID THAT IT WAS RELEASED IN JAPAN. In fact, I stated clearly that it was an American-only album. --Artistthatneverwas 2:09, 1 February, 2007 (UTC)
Please excuse me, I misread statement 5. --Uthipratuma 21:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, I realized it's misleading and I fixed it. --Artistthatneverwas 2:09, 1 February, 2007 (UTC)
  • My friend (artistthatneverwas) was on a school computer, which allow VERY limited editing programs - the screenshot couldn't have been tampered with - at all. Heck, those computer don't even have Photoshop. As for the meaningless article, 'Emily Grutz', he was only testing it and did it in the 'sandbox'.

Also, the CD is all...er...'fancified'. You know, with designs on it, and not just a silver disc that anyone could get. And I'm pretty sure you can't make a fancy CD design with a sharpie marker and a blank disk. ~~Jessica C. Duck~~

Point is, the source that he/she showed above, IS FAKE. Here's the real site for the 3rd time: http://www6.islandrecords.com/utada/site/news.php --Uthipratuma 15:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'tis not fake. You just haven't seen the news post - however, I'm afraid that the screeshot is the only evidence me and artistthatneverwas (let's refer to him as 'Jacovie' for now) have. Jacovie checked the site just this morning - and the page he took a screenshot of was gone. Of course, he was indignant, as that was some of his only proof, besides his own copy of Exodus+ (which he now keeps in a glass case). And besides, Jacovie isn't skilled enough to tamper with a screenshot - I know this for a fact. As skilled as he is, he's not good enough to do that. And the school computer he used had practically no extra programs at all.

~~Jessica C. Duck~~

Really? Why would there be information on a Japanese release on her English site, and not her Japanese? --Uthipratuma 19:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
BECAUSE ITS AN AMERICAN ALBUM!!! --Artistthatneverwas 2:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
And you just admitted that there was information in the first place. --Jessica C. Duck 2:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
I said no such thing. I am disproving the information on the picture of "news" by basing it on the FAKE picture. The real site has no such information, except the "Stay Tuned" .--Uthipratuma 21:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • How odd that the comment, "My friend (artistthatneverwas) was on a school computer, which allow VERY limited editing programs - the screenshot couldn't have been tampered with - at all. Heck, those computer don't even have Photoshop. As for the meaningless article, 'Emily Grutz', he was only testing it and did it in the 'sandbox'. Also, the CD is all...er...'fancified'. You know, with designs on it, and not just a silver disc that anyone could get. And I'm pretty sure you can't make a fancy CD design with a sharpie marker and a blank disk. ~~Jessica C. Duck~~", which was quoted/edited by 'Jessica C. Duck' is done under Artistthatneverwas. --Uthipratuma 17:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know, me and Jessica use the same account (Artistthatneverwas is used both by Jessica C. Duck and Jacovie Rodriguez). We really don't need two seperate accounts. She signs her name under ~~Jessica C. Duck~~ or ~~7lu~~. I go under --Artistthatneverwas 1:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about that. --Uthipratuma 20:30, 1 February 2007 (UTC) 20:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're finally the only other sensible person on here. We'll just wait for more sources to come out, then we'll re-up the page with sources. --Artistthatneverwas


  • Proposed Decision Maybe this should be merged into Exodus. We need to stop fighting!!! Merging it into Exodus would be best, after the proper citations surface. --Artistthatneverwas
I'm sorry, but I have changed my mind, after reading through the whole debate again. We will just see what happens once the conclusion has been reached according to the deletion process' once the 5 days are up. --Uthipratuma 21:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you mean Exodus (Utada Hikaru album) and not Exodus. I don't think Moses wrote the songs on this one. What you are suggesting is the same thing I proposed above. If we can all agree to delete this and mention it at the album's main article, we can get this done (aka end this early if it's clear what needs to be done). I don't see any KEEP votes at all. Is anyone arguing to keep this? --DanielCD 21:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should be deleted, even if it's real/official/unofficial, the "additional tracks" are explained in the singles, to which they come from, except for the Hotel Lobby FANMADE remix- which has no single/proof of copyright.

--Uthipratuma 21:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since there are no keep votes, if the author requests deletion, I can go ahead and close the debate here. There's no real argument I can see about actually keeping this article. The debate about what to do with future information can be moved to the talk page at Exodus (Utada Hikaru album). --DanielCD 22:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We can delete this entire article, and mention Exodus+ on Exodus (Utada Hikaru album), ONCE proper citations have arrived. It's settled!--Uthipratuma 22:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well let's hear from the author. That's all we need now. --DanielCD 22:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm the author Artistthatneverwas. I guess I have to agree. After proper citation reveals itself, it should be added under [[Exodus {Utada Hikaru album)]]. Until then, delete Exodus+.

Case adjourned (hehehe... i just felt like saying that.) --Artistthatneverwas 16:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Exodus%2B&oldid=1070583788"