Talk:E=MC² (Mariah Carey album)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cleanup Taskforce article This article is being improved by the Cleanup Taskforce to conform with a higher standard of article quality. It is likely to change frequently until completed. Please see its [[Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/{{{1}}}|Cleanup Taskforce page]] for more details.

[[Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/{{{1}}}|Cleanup Taskforce page]] → Edit | Purge

{{Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce/{{{1}}}}}


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the E=MC² (Mariah Carey album) article.
Article policies


Contents

[edit] "That Chick?"

Oh you foolish Mariah fans. The title isn't even official yet and you already screwed up the Wikipedia article by calling it "That Chick" indefinitely. "That Chick" is really just a working project title sort of like "Blue Harvest" or "Paradox".

Titles of articles can be changed quite easily, as has just been demonstrated. Phoenix1304 (talk) 12:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Release Date

According to this page the release date is set for some time in February of 2008; however, several Billboard articles are stating a springtime release, most recently referenced in an article concerning Janet Jackson's forthcoming album. Perhaps, the release date should be changed here as well.--71.192.212.187 (talk) 04:54, 28 November 2007 (UTC)


that reference doesnt say anything about a june release date,please someone fix it..thats if that claim is true.Brexx (talk) 13:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I Feel It

We still dont now whether I feel It will be in the album You should put it on the possible tracks part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.179.168 (talk) 11:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nelly removed

Just removed this section from the article:

[edit] Nelly and Janet Jackson

“ Nelly's got a crazy collaboration he's trying to put together, which is him, Janet and Mariah Carey all on one song. [...] He wants Janet to rap a 16-bar verse, he wants Mariah to sing the hook and he's gonna do two verses.[1] „

—Jermaine Dupri

The linked MTV News article does not mention for which album this proposed collaboration would be recorded (it says Dupri is working on albums by Nelly, Carey and Jackson), and seems to imply that it would appear on Nelly's. Extraordinary Machine 16:22, 25 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Um...

IT'S NOT CALLED SWEET SOUL ODYSSEY! —Preceding unsigned

the title hasnt even been released good one though........

comment added by 81.145.240.71 (talk) 13:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalism

Somebody return the actually with the information please. Charmed36 01:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mariah Journal

I know that they said that the song's called Heat, but for wikipedia a fansite like Mariah Journal isn't a reliable site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reidlos (talk • contribs) 00:57, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia itself isn't reliable. Mariah Daily/Journal has an excellent track record, thus being reliable. They may get the news before its officially announced, but it is always correct. I believe they have access to Mariah's camp. Mariah has mentioned them before; she knows.

[edit] Not Enough Information

This page should be deleted until there is adequate information on the album. I will be recomending it for being deleted until there is further information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.168.222.72 (talk) 13:43, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rumoured songs

Please read WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:RS before adding any more song titles that you read about on unofficial fansites/blogs/message boards. As per WP:DEADLINE, there is no need to scoop anyone with 'facts' of questionable accuracy. We need to wait until the tracklisting or song titles have been officially announced by Carey or her people or have been referenced in a reliable, third-party source. It may very well be the case that the song titles are correct - but inclusion in WP requires concrete proof. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 11:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Album title

Has it been confirmed that the tile is That Chick? If so then the re-direction of Sweet Soul Odyssey needs to be moved.86.152.250.173 (talk) 16:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. I've also deleted three variations on "Illusions: The Butterfly Within" that redirected here. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:06, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] For Real, For Real

i think the song is "for real, for real", not only "for real". all the reviews said that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.108.97.59 (talk) 12:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] ALBUM COVER

The album cover with the title is a fan made !!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by F9o0oly (talk • contribs) 23:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You sure? I was looking at that myself the other day and wondering the same thing. Uploading fake covers for upcoming album releases does seem to be quite a common method of sneakily vandalizing WP. Do you have any actual proof that it's fake (like a link to the original picture that they photoshopped it from), or a link to the genuine cover? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
A guy from FOMM made it (It's his signature), here is the real album cover —Preceding unsigned comment added by F9o0oly (talk • contribs) 01:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Link me to a specific thread/post, if you could, please. I need to see this for myself. The user in question may have just used the WP image for his .sig... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 03:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I can't link you a thread, cause it was by PM. But you can see the source that was added with the cover ::::HERE isn't the one with the title!
By the way, there's no reliable sources for the one with the title, but the one without the title has some reliable sources for it. [1] [2] --F9o0oly (talk) 19:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure if that one is the album cover either (neither article states specifically that it is). It's just as likely that the image in question is just a publicity photo from a press kit. I think that we should wait until the album cover is officially revealed in an announcement from Carey's record label before we add any pictures. It's better to be cautious than to display information to the world that later proves to be false (as I have seen happen on many occasions with music-related articles). --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 00:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


according to many sources,this is the album cover....and should stay for the time being.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 14:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Which sources? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 18:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


For example,about.com  says its the cover...and its not the kind of website that puts untrue or unconfirmed information just like that[3]... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 20:18, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

also,its shown here[4]


Isn't that the one that you claimed was fan-made? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


the cover with the title on it is not fan-made,its official...as you can see on the site.if it was fan made,it wouldnt be there...so that cover should be put instead of the one without the title —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 20:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

My apologies. I was confusing you with the other user above (F9o0oly)... --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you tell me where did (about.com) get the picture (with title) from? none of the ones who attended the listening party posted that picture with the title, and I don't recall one of the posters in (about.com) went to the listening party. That happened to "TEOM", they told them in listening party that the album title is "Joyride" (if I remember correctly) and sorry for my bad English.--F9o0oly (talk) 20:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Tell you what, lads - how about *no* album cover until there's a picture of the thing up on MC's own website? --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 21:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I told you "Kurt Shaped Box" that the album title isn't "That Chick" and that image is a fan-made. --F9o0oly (talk) 16:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is that really Mariah on the album cover?

Is that really Mariah on the album cover? She still looks like Ru Paul on that cover. Are you guys sure that it's gonna be the final cover?  :-( 24.225.92.93 (talk) 02:17, 22 January 2008


Mariah Does Not look like ru paul u fool.........


I believe the unidentified person above who claims that Mariah looks like Rupaul is refering to the cover of Rupaul's Supermodel (You Better Work). Though I digress. Rupaul may look like Mariah in her No. 1s and Emincipation of Mimi album covers, but Mariah's definitely hotter! Diphosphate8 (talk) 03:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] For real,For real & Heat

Those 2 songs have been previously reported,so they will most likely be on the album and they should stay on this article....billboard only put the 10 songs that were played at the janet/mariah party....so,that doesnt mean that only the songs that billboard put are the only ones to be on the album......so please keep them for now.....

and its also mentioned on mariah daily.com,which is a reliable source,and they dont write anything thats untrue.

Fansites are not generally considered to be reliable sources for Wikipedia articles - see Wikipedia:SELFPUB#Self-published_sources_.28online_and_paper.29. WP:V also states that "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". It may be the case that mariahdaily.com is correct - but we need to wait for an *official* announcement or a write-up in a reliable publication. It's often the case that tracks are recorded (and leaked) that never actually see the light of day on the final album. There is no harm in omitting questionable information until its status is clarified. Writing WP articles is not a race. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 19:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


Please keep those 2 tracks for the time bieng,for the links i provided are more than enough evidence that they are confirmed and will be on the album....they were played on the janet/mariah listening party.....[5]

So says someone on a fan forum who read it on a fansite. That's not good enough, I'm afraid. Wikipedia reports solid, verified, verifiable *facts* - not internet rumours masquerading as facts. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 14:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

ok,whatever you say...........but when the album is released,those 2 songs will be on the album....i think by then you will realize your mistske of not keeping them...btw,by not putting them,readers will be confused;not vice versa...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 14:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


I think there should be a compromise.....i think they should be put...but as unconfirmed tracks...ok... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 15:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

No. Everything written in WP has to be verifiable, as I have now explained several times. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source". There is *never* any justification for adding lists of 'unconfirmed tracks' or 'stuff I read on some guy's forum' to WP album articles. WP is not, nor has it ever been a breaking news service. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 15:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What the hell

What the hell is wrong with wikipedia.....i created a page for "touch my body" and they say that its not accurate and that i need references that the info is true....its confirmed that its the first single,and i put references on the page,and they still are not satisfied...so they deleted it......unbelievable....im appalled....please someone with logic,recreate the page...somebody put some sense for wikipedia....sometimes wikipedia can be to strict,which makes it almost immpossible to edit....and they should ban the person who deleted touch my body article...cause obviously he/she is not wikipedia material..


[edit] The Runners

Production Duo "The Runners" were supposed to be on this page as well,it's also been confirmed on several sources,including their official myspace page (that they are working on tracks for mariah), but several days ago someone deleted their name from the "producers" section,along with the reference. could someone add it back please?

[edit] is the title definite?

there is absolutely no way that mariah carey would ever make an album titled "that chick"!! i mean her previous albums were titled "the emancupation of mimi", "butterfly", "Rainbow", "music box", "daydream", "emotions" and stuff... i dont think that we should believe that the album will be called that chick... BE SERIOUS!!! (I hope that it spawns 2-3 #1s so that she could tie The Beatles (thay have 20 #1s and she currently has 17 #1s) will it be as succesful as the "emancipation of mimi?" i hope that it will go 8-10xPlatinum.... —Preceding

--Mysterious Spy (talk) 19:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


What's the big deal if she produces 3 more number one singles? I mean even if she ties the Beatles for the "singles only chart record," Mariah will never be in the same ballpark as the Beatles, Elvis, Madonna, and Michael Jackson. Though I hate to admit it, she may have 17 #1s now IN AMERICA, but that's it! She has never sold as many albums and singles as the 4 aforementioned artists, both in the U.S. and worldwide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.92.93 (talk) 17:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
  • i agree... her sales cannot be compared with their sales but think about ! wont it be nice!? mariah carey: the artist with the most #1s in the us hot 100!!!

--Mysterious Spy (talk) 19:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah 17 No. 1 singles ONLY IN THE U.S. but up to now, Mariah has never made herself an icon despite being in the business for 18 years already. I wouldn't be surprised to know and see in 10 years that Beyonce would achieve an "icon" status way ahead of Mariah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.92.93 (talk) 23:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok what u said now is not logic. Mariahs debut went 9xPlatinum in the US and it shipped 17.5 millions(4 #1's 1990) then emotions went 4 times plat. and shipped 12.5 millions worldwide (#1,#2,#5 1991). mtv unplugged became the best selling mtv unplugged ever with 9-10 million copies worldwide (3 millions in the us + 1 #1 1992). Music box went Diamond in the us (10xPlat) and has sold an astonishing 30 million copies worldwide (a massive hit in europe and everywhere) (2 #1s 8 weeks and 4 weeks respectively 1993). Her merry christmas album became the best selling christmas album with 16 million copies shipped (5 millions in the us)(classic:all i want 4 christmas is u). her Daydream album sold well over 10 million copies in the us (diamond) and over 25 million copies WW (3 massive #1s, 8 wees, 16 weeks, 4 weeks the two first #1s debuted at the pole position!). Butterfly 1997) spawned two top 1 hits went 5xPlatinum in the US and sold over 15 million copies WW, #1's (1998) went on to become one of the best selling albums ever in japan with 17.5 million copies worldwide and 5 million of them in te us alone. rainbow (1999) produced two more #1's for carey sold 4 million copies in the us and sold over 10 million WW. OK then she released glitter (2001) with one #2 hit ( the rest of them flopped) sold about 1 million copies in the us and sold 4 millions ww, greatest hits (2001) went Platinum and sold 4 millions charmbarcelet (2003) also flopped with 1 million copies shipped in the us and 4 million ww which was followed by the unsuccesful remix album "the remixes" (2004) which sold some 1 million copies ww. in 2005 she released her massive comeback album the emancipation of mimi which went 6xplatinum in the us and sold 11 millions ww ( 2 #1s produced, 14 weeks, 3 weeks and one #2 which stayed there for 7 weeks behind her 14 week-#1 we belong together). Now beyonce sold 8 million copies ww with her debut album dangerously in love (4 millions in the us) numbers which cannot even be compared with mariah 30, 25 abd 17.5 million sellinf albums. her second album went 3 times Plat. in the us and has sold 7 millions ww going slightly worse than her debut. mimi also has enjoyed MASSIVE succes in japan (5 of her albums are in the best selling album list in japan) (three of them in the top 10) she has sold over 200 million copies through her succesful cerrer and has had 17 us #1s . she might never become as succesful as madonna or michael jackson or the beatles but she will NEVER be surpassed by the Beyonce whos sales never sirpass the 8 million mark. Mariah is an icon ok beyonce is NOT an icon!!! end of discussion

--Mysterious Spy (talk) 10:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


But hey, I agree with you! Mariah should not be compared to the young fresh Beyonce who's only 26 and has just started in the music business. Mariah is OLD and she's already near her 40s!!! So it's understood that she has sold more than Beyonce but I bet that in 10 years time, the real-looking lady Beyonce will outsell Mariah, not only in the U.S. but worldwide as well where Mariah hardly sells. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.92.93 (talk) 17:27, 17 February 2008 (UTC)


Im a lamb! =D but why is everyone comparing mariah to beyonce or christina or whitney... even tho im a fanatical mariah fan i can still see that beyonce, christina and whitney and leona all have great voices. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.45.218 (talk) 10:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


Actually Beyoncé started in 1997 with "Destiny's Child", so that means she's been in the music business for a decade now. If you added Beyoncé + Destiny's Child album sales it will be less than half what Mariah's album sold in a decade. Mariah won't stop recording music, so that means, it's IMPOSSIBLE for Beyoncé to surpass Mariah's sales. By the way, Mariah's last album "The Emancipation of Mimi" sold approximately 5 million albums worldwide (without the U.S sales) and it's more than what Beyoncé's last album sold worldwide (without the U.S sales). so that means Mariah still sell well outside the U.S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.31.242.53 (talk) 13:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Touch My Body

Anyone who thinks there should be a page created for touch my body,please say it here.....i think there should,there have been several sources,which are reliable..janet song Rock With U doesnt have any reliable sources and is not confirmed as a single,and is kept,and not bieng deleted....i dont get why touch my body is bieng deleted...all access confirms it and several radio stations and l.a reid said he asked the staff which song they want,and touch my body was the final choice...and also fmqb.com confirms its going to be released to radio airplay on feb 11.......i dont understand why its being deleted when its confirmed by many sources its the first single......why should rock with u stay,and both songs are in the same situation...if one stays the other should...and vice versa............ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 08:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] E=MC²

whats with that title written on the page???........is that the new title??.......has it been confirmed??......isnt "that Chick" the official title??


and if it is the official title,whats does the "E" stand for.....

E=MC² was announced today. "That Chick" was obviously fake or has been changed. Should be moved to E=MC² (Mariah Carey album) Save-Me-Oprah(talk) 16:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
It's annouced on Mariah's officail website. See [6] BratBoyz (talk) 16:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Going for adds?

When speaking about the single being released, the article contains the line:

"Touch My Body" will officially go for adds on February 19th

I must admit that I don't know what going for adds means so I worry that there may be other readers scratching their heads over that line as well. Can someone explain on the talk page what that phrase means or maybe reword the particular sentence in the article so it's clearer for those of us who are not as hip with the music industry jargon as the editor who contributed that sentence.
Thanks. SWik78 (talk) 16:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe it means it is released to radio stations, being added to their playlists. Save-Me-Oprah(talk) 17:31, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Redirect This Page

Redirect this page to "E=MC²". E=MC² was free, so put all the information about the album there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.224.48.29 (talk) 21:27, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cri$tyle

I removed her name b/c it contradicts what Mariah's official press release says for who wrote and produced "Touch My Body".

I did read the article on which her name was mentioned and it was written as if Mariah doesn't write her own material (except for the alleged Mariah quote). That takes away credibility.

Also, reviewers have not mentioned her, but they mentioned everyone else. And again, Mariah's official press release contradicts Cri$tyle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 22:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Like,Helooooooo

Lovin' you long time and loving you too long are the same song...isn't it obvious.....its still not confirmed which one is the official title of the song... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brexx (talk • contribs) 16:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Lovin' You Long Time is confirmed. Who the hell put Loving you too long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 18:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The song is "Lovin' You Long Time", DJ Toomp (he produced the song) said that! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WGHYNUBPXA

[edit] Stop removing the producer and writer list

Stop removing the producer and writer list. It is accurate, so what is the point. What needs to be removed are all the outdated facts from 6 months ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeVante' (talk • contribs) 18:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] chart positions in europe

Here is a great site page for finding chart positions in europe. Its blank at the minute but when the album starts selling it quichly fills up. Check it every few days as it continually updates itself. Realist2 (talk) 18:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] "Touch my body" versions

Who keeps putting that the current version of "touch my body" is a radio edit..is there any proof for that claim......for the time bieng i put a citation needed template until a reference is provieded to support the claim....if there is no reference in the coming days...the [radio edit] thats written will be removed......cause the song's lengh is 3:28,and it is the full album version of the song theres no longer album version...nobody mentioned anything about a radio edit.......Mimibianca (talk) 15:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I think whoever is saying it's a radio edit is probably right. If you listen to the end of the song, you get the feeling that there is more to it and when she performed it live there was more substance.---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 18:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


umm,ok....i dont know what u mean when u said "there was more substance"....u mean there were more lyrics when she sang it live???...if u want add it..but i think that we should wait till the album comes out for us to be sure 100%.....if we write it now,we wont be verifiable,and we dont have a reliable source,so we will confuse readers if it turn out to be false....we need 2 be 100% sure be4 we write something.............and when i listen to the end song i dont feel that theres more to it....i feel nothing more can be added....cause theres the verses and the hook and the chorus,and the belting...what more could there be?? ...Mimibianca (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

...It is the radio edit and i have evidence: 3:27 [radio edit] http://www.mariahdaily.com/news.shtml#newsitemEkpVEVpuFueNWEYuWp Make Sure you look at the pictures of the CD single...um...whistle register notes!!! More!!! I like your name...Mimi vs. Bianca...lol---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 03:19, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] PLEASE DONT REMOVE

Who keeps removing bryan michael cox from the producer section of the song "For the record"....the source given is reliable...the radio that previewed the album clearly states that B.cox is the producer of the track... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.42.21.53 (talk) 21:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


and,dont remove the "M" fragrance section..the radio that previewed the album also clearly states that the music used in the commercial is for the track "For the Record"...it is notable and should stay there.....


if u have a problem with the above,dicuss here FIRST,before taking action.......thats why theres a talk page,so u can discuss first...Mimibianca (talk) 10:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

In the case that an editor should discuss everything before removing it, as you suggest, I will also politely ask you to discuss everything before you add it into the article. Surely, you can agree that it wouldn't be fair that you can insert something if you feel that it does belong in the article without discussing it but somone else can't remove it without discussion if they feel that the same piece of information does not belong there. SWik78 (talk) 16:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)


AGAIN:Please don't remove Bryan Michael Cox from the producer section of the song "For the record"....the source given is reliable...the french radio station that exclusively previewed the album [7] clearly states that B.cox is the producer of the track...there is no reason what so ever for it to be removed.....


Wikipedia:Verifiability#Non-English_sources!!!!!!!!! Reidlos (talk) 12:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Current album cover

Is that the official album cover..i like it....but still,please put a reliable source.....form where did u get it from....cause if its not official then it should be removed......J.looo (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree ... that cover screams fan-made. Phoenix1304 (talk) 10:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No it's not the official cover, the picture was taken from the Butterfly era (1997-1998). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.31.178.121 (talk) 12:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Whoever put it back up, stop it. Phoenix1304 (talk) 17:00, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The cover that was added today is the official cover! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.31.218.130 (talk) 14:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Second single

As of yet, there seem to be no verifiable sources confirming a second single so please don't keep adding Migrate as a confirmed release just because she performed it on SNL. According to this interview, she expressly denies the song will be released as a single. Either way, until there is a reliable source verifying the release, please do not reinsert it. It's pure speculation at this point.
Thanks. SWik78 (talk) 15:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Mariah stated in an interview on Ryan Seacrest's Radio show, in a conversation with Perez Hilton, that 'Migrate will not be the second single. She also stated that she is not dumb (for no apparent reason...probably because she is known for her vocal range being shown most in her ballads and because she was first known of as a 'ballad qeen' in the beginning of her career) and her second single will be a ballad. She then went on to say that she isn't even considering releasing 'Migrate' as a single.---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 17:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] E=MC²

It should be mentioned in the intro that its a play on the famous formula by einstein. Realist2 (talk) 16:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jermaine Dupri is not featured on Last Kiss

JD is not featured on "Last Kiss" http://mariahcarey.com/news/news.php?uid=2118

Her site does not have him listed —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeVante' (talk • contribs) 21:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rumours about a new single...again

Please stop inserting rumours about a new single until it's confirmed by a reliable source which, by the way, MariahDaily.com isn't.
Thank you! SWik78 (talk) 18:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Mariah implied it herself. Mariah Daily just posted her saying it. She said a ballad she did with Johnta Austin and Stargate. Bye Bye is the only song that fits that description. Also, Mariah Daily may be a fan site, but they report like they are official. If something is uncertain or a rumor, they make that clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeVante' (talk • contribs) 23:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Listing Bye Bye as the next single because it's the only song that fits that description qualifies as WP:OR and MariahDaily.com, no matter what they say is certain or uncertain, fails WP:RS. SWik78 (talk) 13:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is a link of Mariah saying that Bye Bye is the next single: http://www.zshare.net/audio/969663254eb3eb/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 21:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

we need written, official confirmation. Say, if her official website announces it, or if Billboard mentions it, or something. At this point, her saying it isn't enough (although it IS something) to justify a page on Wikipedia. SKS2K6 (talk) 20:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

WTF is that? The artist making the songs saying what is it isn't enough? She is the first to know! Can you please justify why that isn't enough and not with b.s. rules of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 23:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


There are no reliable sources for Bye Bye and no sources whatsoever for Migrate. This article is being treated as fan forum by many anonymous IP editors by posting these unconfirmed announcements. Wikipedia's purpose is not to be the primary source for announcements of when a song is being released or when the video is being shot or who Mariah Carey is dating. This is an encyclopedia and encyclopedias do not spread rumours or speculate. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bye Bye (Mariah Carey Song) and also WP:RS to see what constitutes a reliable source. SWik78 (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
And also, the thing is that even when an artist (or band) says that a certain song is going to be a single, it may change down the road. With Emancipation, Mariah herself said that "Say Somethin'" would be the lead single from the album. However, it became its fifth. People change their minds and plans frequently, so until it's in writing somewhere, it should be considered unconfirmed. Please see Wikipedia's policy on "crystal balling" for more information. SKS2K6 (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cri$tyle and Da Brat

On many radio interviews, Mariah stated that she wrote OOC with Da Brat. She also said that she wrote Side Effects with Cri$tyle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeVante' (talk • contribs) 23:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Start date of release

im not sure if the earliest release date of the album is April 11...cause i think the russian release date of the album is April 8, 2008......according to this site:[8]


now,here's whats confusing...there's 2 dates on the site above:April 8 and April 11

i dont know which one is the correct one.......can someone explain.......i dont know maybe someone who speaks russian,can explain and tell us which one is the correct one.....

and if the correct one is April 8,then it should be put as the start date of release instead of April 11.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.96.227.72 (talk) 21:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] PROMOTION

I think we should delete the Promotion part.Reidlos (talk) 23:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


Why? It has to do with the success of the album and is a part of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 01:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Leaked on the Internet

Why was this removed(and added then removed and then added then etc, etc, etc)? Does it have to be officially leaked onto the internet? This also relates to the release date, because I have seen pictures of the full album with people handling it. Somewhere it was released today, April 6th 2008. Sivart7555 (talk) 20:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

it's such a shame that such an awesome album leaked...OMG I love the songs and I'll be sure to buy the physical release on April 15th...God Bless you Mimi.---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 00:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Stop posting links to the album. that's illegal. Charmed36 (talk) 01:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is illegal so please stop it...---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 01:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

We are not allowed to state that the album has leaked until the release date has passed. It is illegal to promote illegal spreading of Copyright music.---¤÷(`[¤*M*¤]´)÷¤- 01:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone being funny then, look under the SINGLES section and you find this squeezed in "The album leaked onto various peer to peer sharing sites on April 6th, 2008." I don't want to touch the article but someone should delete it. And Yes I have already pre-ordered the album through Amazon for about $9.00.Sivart7555 (talk) 03:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

HELP! It is an ongoing War or people adding that it was leaked then me or someone else deleting it! People just listen, that does not belong on the page.Sivart7555 (talk) 06:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Follow these simple steps and you can stop the problem yourself.
1) Identify who added the "leaked" text. (The last four were User:Juan 12 s, User:58.69.71.104, User:Jason Kleeberg and User:189.147.15.32)
2) Warn them that they are going against consensous.[9] Your first warning should be friendly, they might not know. The second warning should mention a block being a possible remedy. The third warning should threaten a block. Cite the guideline each time: WP:ALBUM#LEAK. (I have just warned the four mentioned above.)
3) If anyone goes past that third warning, notify WP:AIV for a block.
4) If the violations are from an ever changing list of IP addresses (rather than registered users, as for semi-protection on the article.
5) Registered users who don't stop end up blocked. If IPs are doing it, the article won't be editable by unregistered/newly-registered users. Problem solved. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 12:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'm That Chick

This song samples Michael Jackson's "Off the Wall". [10] PhoenixPrince (talk) 23:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm going to add it as soon as possible.Reidlos (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bye Bye has hit some radio stations

Again, someone was stupid to delete it. It is being played on radio stations now and Mariah said it was the 2nd single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk • contribs) 01:55, 8 April 2008

[edit] Why was the promotion section deleted?

This album especially, has alot of big things happening promo wise and they should be mentioned —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 04:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sales

Dont you guys/gals think its time to get a sales chart together soon, some big figures are gonna start adding up. Realist2 ('Come Speak To Me') 05:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


Definately and can someone put the promotional section back up. As long as they stay accurate, its fine. If you check her discography and individual album pages the sales listed are always changing by drastic numbers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.200.240 (talk) 22:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How Come

How come nobody knows the writer(s) and the producer for the song "4real4real"........can someone find out that info and put it....213.42.23.71 (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ireland release date

The link you provided for the Ireland release date isn't very reliable as HMV is a UK shop. It is more likely to have been released on April 11, as that was a Friday, the day music records are usually released in the country.

666ph666 (talk) 19:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Track listing format

From WIKI:ALBUMS

Track listing A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list.

"Complete song title" (John Doe, Brian Smith) – 4:23 First verse: Name of rapper Second verse: Name of rapper Samples: Name of sample source (preferably including artist, song, and album) "Complete song title" (Doe, Kelly Kalamazoo) – 3:24 "Complete song title" (Doe, Kalamazoo, Smith, David Whitman) – 2:34 Track names should be in quotes in the track listing and in the rest of the article. A track that is a medley of multiple songs should be inside one set of quotes, like this: "Song 1/Song 2". Untitled tracks should be listed as Untitled (without quotes). If a track has an article of its own, the track name should link to that article.

Note the standard method of attributing songwriters—write (and link) the full name the first time it appears, and then just give the last name (unless the first initial is necessary to disambiguate it, as in the Gallagher brothers of Oasis). If all songs were written by the same person or team, this can be stated at the top as "All songs were written by Gordon Gano." If several songs were written by the same person or team, this can be stated as "All songs were written by Gordon Gano, except where noted."

Track lengths should be included for each track. Use a spaced en dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) as a dividing horizontal punctuation mark before the track length. (Note that they may both look the same in the edit box.) You can insert it from the special character list below the edit box (see Help:Special characters) or copy and paste it from here. You can also add it by writing – HTML entity to the edit box (like this "–") but this makes the code less readable. If you think that this is too difficult, you can still use a hyphen, and hope that someone is going to change it into a dash. This holds true both in "Track listing" and "Personnel" sections. See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Dashes.

Particularly for hip hop albums, it is helpful to list which members of a group (or guests) rap on which verses as well as mentioning sampling sources. This can be done in a nested list, as in the example above. Using a table is recommended in more complicated situations (see Before These Crowded Streets for example). If a table is used, it should be formatted using class="wikitable", using column headings "#", "Title" and "Length" for the track number, the track title and the track length, respectively.

The track listing should be under a primary heading named "Track listing". If there are significantly different track listings for different editions, these can be listed under sub-headings. If the album was released primarily on CD and spans multiple discs, these should be listed separately under sub-headings named "Disc one", "Disc two" and so on. Albums originally released primarily on vinyl or cassette should similarly list the tracks of each side separately under sub-headings named "Side one" and "Side two".


At no point in the above are producers notable as track by track information. Reqluce (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Promotion section

Can anybody explain to me why the promotion of this album is relevant. It's nothing outstanding. In my opinion there is no need for it and don't tell we should include it because people want it there. Reidlos (talk) 10:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Some album pages do contain promotional sections, but not to this extent. It is ridiculous the amount of space it takes up on the page with subsections within the section, and definitely not in line with WP:ALBUMS. The editor who keeps adding it seems to be a fan who is intent on using Wikipedia as a publicity spot, evident from ignoring my previous messages to use "Carey" instead of "Mariah" as per WP:SONGS that I pointed out. Lines such as "performed in front of hundreds of fans" do not help either. It has to be condensed or removed completely.Reqluce (talk) 13:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It's like reading a list or information on a fan site. The sentences are weak and why is it important that she has performed on Oprah, American Idol etc. It's not like she's the first person promoting her singles/album on these kind of shows. Reidlos (talk) 13:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I fully agree. I have done my best to rectify the extremely poor writing. If you look at that user's "contributions", its a whole list of irrelevant orphaned images and fan info. I've also tagged the "E=MC2 promo tour" page they have created. Seems like a fan bent on their own promotional campaign here on wiki than actually creating a good wiki page.Reqluce (talk) 13:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I tried my best to fix it. To be honest, I don't think it deserves more than a few sentences at best. But it seems as though a couple of editors really want this information in here.... SKS2K6 (talk) 15:47, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Why do we have to keep it, when the persons who want it in the article don't even argue? Reidlos (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
That is because the "editor" who wrote it in the first place has now been permanently blocked from Wiki for being a sock puppet of a banned user. Just as well, his/her edits were painfully childish and quite frankly s.h.i.t. Reqluce (talk) 00:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I have removed that section since it seems as though we're in agreement about its purpose (or lack thereof) in the article. Please let me know if you disagree. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Empire State Building

Mariah isn't the first singer to be honored with "their colors" lighting up the Empire State Building. I don't know if he's first, but Frank Sinatra definitely came before Mariah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.135.58.53 (talk) 20:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)