Mandy Moore is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
Please do not add personal details for non-notable children. This is a BLP privacy issue. It is not necessary to a reader's complete understanding of the subject to know the name or exact birth date of a non-notable child of the subject of a BLP. Meters (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:BLPNAME, part of the WP:BLP policy: "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject." Meters (talk) 20:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The "I Wanna Be with You" album - a compilation rather than a studio album
I've been pondering over if the I Wanna Be with You album should truly be considered a studio release. It appears to have been marketed as a second studio album from Moore, at least in the US, but its contents - five of which previously appeared on So Real, in addition to a few remixes, lend it more to being a compilation or reissue. Only six of the twelve tracks on the album were new recordings (one of those being a remix of a new recording). In Australia, the album was released with a nearly identical cover to that of the original US release of So Real, and in certain territories, the album was released alongside all of the songs from So Real. In this MTV article, [1] Scott Carter, senior director of product marketing for 550 Music, seems to be aware that it isn't a typical release, calling it "something special". I was going to alter the page and Moore's discography page to reflect it being a compilation, but given that it's been listed as a studio release for so long, I wanted to see if anyone had opinions either way before I did so. Breaktheicees (talk) 01:47, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think I Wanna Be With You should still be listed as a studio release. I also feel the MTV article linked above confirms it's not a typical release. Urbanracer34 (talk) 03:29, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I did a little bit more digging and found this page directly from Moore's website at the time of release, which describes it as "a new version of Mandy's debut" [2]. The European edition of the album in particular feels the most like a reissue/compilation - it doesn't have the remixes, and the majority of the album (over half) contains songs from So Real. Either way, with this uncovered info, I feel comfortable switching the page to reflect its status as a compilation rather than a studio release when Moore herself wasn't marketing it as a new album. Breaktheicees (talk) 07:32, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know I’m obviously late to this but wouldn’t it sound wiser to classify it as a reissue rather than a compilation album? I did find this article from MTV that states it’s a re-release. [3] especially if it’s being stated as a “new version of her debut”, would make more sense as a reissue of her debut album. @Breaktheicees:@Urbanracer34:Pillowdelight (talk) 21:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Pillowdelight: , you bring up some good points and I considered this when I first thought about making the change. If it were merely the international versions of the album that were released, I'd feel more comfortable marking it as a reissue. However, being that the US edition of the album is quite a fair bit different than So Real, with only four songs being directly lifted from that album, and two being remixes from that album, I thought it was more suitable to label it as a compilation. Other releases marked as reissues that I've found aren't nearly as transformative, unless you can find any examples. The title, album art, and the majority of the content is new to the release... but it isn't enough to constitute an entirely new album, either. It's a weird set, that's for sure, but I think it is best classified as a compilation. Breaktheicees (talk) 03:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well I wouldn’t think it’s a compilation as she only had one album previously released. Especially since her website claimed this was a “new edition of her debut album” along with the MTV article I attached stating it’s a re-release — no other sources are calling this a compilation. Pillowdelight (talk) 04:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
True, but the question isn't if sources refer to it as a reissue but rather if it actually fits the definition of a reissue. A number of sources refer to it as her second studio album, which isn't accurate either. The international version of the release certainly could lend more to a reissue and very well could have been what her website was referring to when they called it "a new version of Mandy's debut", but still described it as her second studio album a year later. Like I said, it's a confusing, complicated release and hard to classify, but I think considering everything, compilation fits best. Can you find an example of a release definitively labeled as a reissue on Wikipedia that was changed as drastically to establish precedent? Breaktheicees (talk) 19:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well I would say if most markets are labeling this her second studio album it would probably make sense to label it as a studio album but include in the longtype as a reissue, example could be Reclassified as it has 6 new songs and 6 previous songs from The New Classic on Reclassified’s page it can be noted as including all of the tracks (24 total) in the Japanese bonus track edition. Another example could be The Fame Monster which is labeled as a studio album / reissue / EP of The Fame, and was as well released with all tracks from both in certain markets. Same way I Wanna Be with You is with is with having all tracks from So Real. We also don’t go by what we believe should be labeled, as like you stated sources are calling this her second studio album along with the source I provided that states this as well as a reissue but none are calling this a compilation album. It merely isn’t a compilation. @Ss112:, @Tbhotch:, @Binksternet: — Could I please get your opinions on how this should be labeled? You guys have a lot of expertise. Pillowdelight (talk) 02:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, really. I could see it being both a reissue or a compilation. It just depends on what editors interested in topics have decided to label things. It was a tactic for several decades for albums to have different track lists in different markets (this practice is kind of obsolete in the digital age). There are certain early Beatles releases that technically could be considered reissues or compilations when they were later released in the US, and the same with If You Love Me, Let Me Know by Olivia Newton-John, a North American release, which was considered a studio album here for a while until it was changed to a compilation because all but one(?) of the tracks had previously been issued elsewhere in the world. My point is, that album wasn't a compilation to North Americans but was marketed as a studio album there, and it's only with the "benefit" of hindsight that we can take on a whole-world view and say all of that material was previously issued elsewhere so it's technically a compilation. If I had to choose anything, even though I was informed of this discussion by Pillowdelight, I'd probably say it feels more like a reissue than a compilation as I'm swayed by the point above that it's hard to "compile" material from a career that at that point consisted of only one studio album released in one part of the world. Seems kind of like a reissue retooled for different markets, but that's my own feeling irrespective of sources. It appears unfortunately that sources are saying different things, so there's different opinions and I can see why editors have their approaches. Sorry if this isn't of much help. Ss11207:57, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pillowdelight I never said it should go by how we believe it should be labeled, rather if it fit the definition of what we are going to be labeling it as. You bring up a good example with the Reclassified album, which is the most similar release I've seen thus far. However, even that one is 50% new, 50% old, and Mandy's release has more new material - 66% unreleased material if we are counting the remixes as "new". The thing that makes me most question if it should be regarded as a compilation rather than a reissue is the inclusion of those remixes - which aren't on the international releases - alongside the five new tracks. However, I do notice that the US edition includes the subtitle "Special Edition", which the reissue article notes as a common addition to reissues. That being said, I'm okay with it being classified as as a reissue as it does appear to fit that definition in some ways - though it's by far the most changed "reissue" I've ever seen, and it still also fits the definition of a compilation. Also, thank you for the input @Ss112, as I appreciate any new insight! Breaktheicees (talk) 22:38, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. Most are referring to it as a studio album along with an MTV article I attached above stating it’s a re-release of her debut album So Real, along with her website calling it a new edition of it. Pillowdelight (talk) 20:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to say Reissue is more accurate. The album would not be eligible to chart on the Billboard Compilation charts album. There is specific criteria. Also the fact is charted in the UK as a separate listening from Moore's album helps to demonstrate its still a studio album. Unless a source calls it compilation it should not be classified as such. The exceptions to this rule were the two Michael Jackson compilation albums - but lets not drag that one up. ≫ Lil-Unique1-{ Talk }-20:19, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Years active should say present and not through 2022
While Moore is unsure if she'll return to acting, she is about to go on her In Real Life music tour, so she is still very much an active singer, not retired or inactive — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.33.115.24 (talk) 02:08, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
