Talk:Cheek to Cheek (album)

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:

• Irving Berlin (1888-1989) circa 1940.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Should this be considered Gaga’s fourth studio album?

I ask this question because Watch the Throne, a collaborative album by Jay-Z and Kanye West, is not listed as part of either rapper’s studio album discography. So which is it? If you ask me, both this and Love for Sale were marketed as Tony’s albums. They are on streaming services with Tony listed before Gaga. Therefore, I believe they should be listed as part of Tony’s studio album discography, but not Gaga’s. Thoughts? 2601:48:8100:B6A0:DFA:EA02:5A1E:AF4A (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Also, if you check out Kanye’s discography page, his two collaborative albums aren’t included as part of his studio albums. Yet for some reason Gaga’s are. So again, which is it? 2601:48:8100:B6A0:DFA:EA02:5A1E:AF4A (talk) 14:52, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Marketing can sometimes be misleading when it downplays past works. Don't let it fool you here. This is both a Gaga and Tony album. As for Watch The Throne, I would say that counts as a Jay-Z album and a Kanye album. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 17:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok then you have some work to do on Kanye’s discography page, as currently it doesn’t list Watch the Throne as part of his studio album discography. 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 18:30, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a legitimate rationale or argument. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:06, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

This is literally the same thing though. Both are albums by two singers, however, inexplicably, only one is being described as part of the singers’ main discography, while the other isn’t. That’s plain hypocrisy. 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 19:32, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

If they are the same thing, then, can you explain why Watch the Throne is listed at Wikipedia:Featured topics/Kanye West studio albums? If you continue edit-warring, I'll have to request your IP range to be blocked. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:40, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

And for the last time Whataboutism is a fallacy not an argument. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok but then if we are supposed to consider Cheek to Cheek to be Gaga’s fourth studio album, why isn’t Watch the Throne considered to be Kanye’s sixth? That’s the hypocrisy I’m talking about. We either need to make changes to Kanye’s pages, or to Gaga’s. 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Once again, calling me a hypocrite won't make me a hypocrite. I didn't write the article of Watch the Throne, therefore you can't claim I'm a hypocrite for excluding him there, but including Gaga here. Now you understand why this is a fallacy? As much as you think this is the same issue, articles are independent of each other. And even if there is a consensus to exclude West from that page, there is no consensus to exclude Gaga here. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I never claimed that you wrote that article. I am talking about the concept of collaboration albums, which both Cheek to Cheek and Watch the Throne are. If you are telling me that Cheek to Cheek should be considered to be part of both Gaga and Bennett’s discographies, then surely you must believe the same for Watch the Throne, no? They are both the same kind of album, so how can you possibly believe one thing for one, and another for the other? How is that not hypocritical? 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 20:02, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Every article is written by independent people that mostly use the given Manual of Style, but in the end, everyone has the right to use the style they better feel comfortable with (this is why articles about the same topics differ from one to another). And lastly, if you continue calling me a hypocrite against the no personal attacks policy, I'll have to report you. Comment on content, not on contributions. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Alright then. Exactly what is the reasoning that Wikipedia had decided that this album should be included in both Tony and Gaga’s list of studio albums, and why they haven’t decided that about Watch the Throne? Looking at the talk page, I can’t find any explanation as to why it was determined that this should be considered to be Gaga’s fourth studio album, so I would love for you to clear that up for me. 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 20:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

"Wikipedia" is not doing anything. People build Wikipedia and they adapt things according to what sources say. If you check them you will read these instances: and her fifth studio album, "Joanne" was released in 2016, her fifth studio album, Joanne, Her fifth studio album, Joanne, Lady Gaga has finally shared the name and release date of her fifth studio album. It’s called Joanne, concludes her fifth studio album, Joanne, including, in 2016, the title track of Lady Gaga’s fifth studio album, Joanne. But we also have: Mark Ronson, who executive produced her fourth studio album, Joanne, Lady Gaga's fourth studio album 'Joanne', Perfect Illusion is the lead single from Gaga's fourth studio album Joanne. This is not "hypocritical" thinking. Merely, this is is not a black-and-white situation as collaborative albums tend to be seen as Christmas albums, which are commonly excluded from the artists' discographies solely for commercial purposes. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 20:46, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

So how exactly is the decision supposed to be made then if even sources contradict each other? I apologize if this question doesn’t make sense, or if I haven’t been clear with what I’ve been asking, but the point I’m getting at is that there should be some kind of consensus as to whether collaboration albums should be included in their respective artists’ main discographies. My opinion is that they should not, but of course I don’t expect Wikipedia to go off of just my opinion. I believe we should try to get a consensus from other users.

However, my other point is that whatever the decision is, it should clearly go for both albums, as they are both collaboration albums. I understand they are not the same album, but they are the same kind of album, so I’m not sure how it’s unreasonable to expect that the same rule should apply to both of them. 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 20:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

WP:Consensus is the only solution. 10 years ago we had the same problem with The Fame Monster, where users commonly changed it from "EP" to "studio album" to "EP" (refer to the multiple discussions at Talk:The Fame Monster/Archive 1). The consensus then reached was that it was an EP as Gaga called it an EP. At some point the consensus changed to its current style, a reissue EP-length album by Lady Gaga. The same thing has to happen here: "If reliable sources disagree, then maintain a neutral point of view and present what the various sources say, giving each side its due weight". As there are sources that also call Chromatica Gaga's fifth/sixth album and some sources for Love for Sale avoid calling it her seventh but just refer to it as her "second collaboration", this discussion also affects them. The current consensus seems to be that Cheek to Cheek is the fourth, Joanne the fifth (and so on), but if you think that both collaborative albums are to be excluded from her discography (which indirectly should also affect Bennett's discography) then this discussion has to change its scope to that. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:14, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Ok well that is the position I hold, that both collaboration albums should not be considered as part of her main studio album discography. And unless anyone can give a valid reason as to why that shouldn’t be the case, I don’t see why that position can’t be upheld. 2601:48:8100:B6A0:B435:22AF:C973:92A9 (talk) 21:20, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

So let me get this straight. If no one ever discusses this with me to come to a consensus, my belief doesn’t get to be put on Wikipedia, even though no one has proven that it’s wrong? 2601:48:8100:B6A0:28A9:9060:BA38:FE13 (talk) 03:45, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

"no one has proven that it’s wrong", are the links I provided above inexistent or what? I highly recommend you to read Wikipedia:Tendentious editing as you are reaching that level at this point. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 02:58, 12 December 2021 (UTC)