Talk:SZA

The opening sentence descriptor seems to have changed a little over the years but singer and songwriter seem to have consistently been non-hyphenated (2017: singer and songwriter, 2018: singer and songwriter, 2019: singer and songwriter, 2020: singer, rapper and songwriter, 2021: singer and songwriter, 2022: singer. There hasn't been much change in how she has been marketed between her albums, and the usage of "singer-songwriter" (link to Wikipedia article) is inaccurate since she does not provide instrumental accompaniments to any compositions, including the new album. Among her contemporaries, Doja Cat is referred to as a "rapper and singer" despite also taking on vocal and songwriting roles on her last album. Ping major contributors mediafanatic17, FrozenIcicle, Your Power.--NØ 06:26, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

:@MaranoFan: thank you for inviting me to this discussion. Re. my thoughts, she's been referred to in reliable sources as a singer-songwriter for as long as she's been making music:

:* We have [https://www.npr.org/2014/11/18/364980330/sza-sobriety NPR] and [https://www.thelineofbestfit.com/new-music/song-of-the-day/sza-feat-rashad-warm-winds-150925 Line of Best Fit] and [https://consequence.net/2014/04/album-review-sza-z/ Consequence] in 2014

:* [https://www.vibe.com/features/editorial/sza-coachella-interview-416959/ Vibe], [https://www.spin.com/2016/04/kendrick-lamar-full-credits-untitled-unmastered-thundercat-anna-wise/ Spin], [https://slate.com/culture/2016/01/rihannas-new-album-anti-a-track-by-track-breakdown.html Slate], and [https://hiphopdx.com/news/id.41474/title.sza-still-not-confident-about-future-of-music-career-after-i-quit-tweet HipHopDX] in 2016

:* the [https://www.ft.com/content/74de679e-ea9b-11e7-bd17-521324c81e23 Financial Times], [https://www.vogue.com/article/sza-birthday-scorpio-camouflage-pant-heels Vogue], [https://www.billboard.com/music/rb-hip-hop/sza-ctrl-new-album-7832727/ Billboard], [https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/jul/01/why-i-love-sza-bim-adewunmi the Guardian], the [https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-sza-20171020-story.html Los Angeles Times], [https://www.avclub.com/thank-god-sza-finally-released-ctrl-1798191606 the AV Club], and [https://www.vibe.com/music/music-news/sza-kendrick-lamar-doves-in-the-wind-517612/ Vibe] and [https://www.npr.org/2017/12/18/571211664/the-10-best-r-b-albums-of-2017 NPR] again in 2017

:* [https://pitchfork.com/news/sza-announces-ctrl-deluxe-edition/ Pitchfork] and [https://www.pastemagazine.com/music/sza/watch-paramore-perform-mashup-of-their-song-grow-u Paste]) and many more in 2018...

:... I can go on and on with the more recent stuff . Easy to find those sources if you look it up . We don't refer to Doja Cat as a singer-songwriter because a large chunk of RS, upon which we must base all information in our article, out there do not refer to her that way. With SZA, however, that is not the case. And you would be wrong to say someone needs to provide "instrumental accompaniments" (what I assume means they have to play instruments) for someone to be a singer-songwriter; all they need to do is compose melodies and/or lyrics. Going off the sources we have for the making of "Kill Bill", for example, there is reasonable evidence to see she can write melodies and lyrics for her own music. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "Will you call me?"}
_{📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?"} 08:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

::@FMSky: I see you have changed almost all of the SZA-related articles such that "American singer-songwriter SZA" becomes "American singer SZA". Pointing you to this previous discussion that established there was strong sourcing enough to keep the former wording; note as well that two SZA-related articles passed FAC with this wording. Please discuss here further if you disagree. ‍  Elias 🪐  (dreaming of Saturn; talk here) 12:15, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

:::I mainly made the changes on the basis of her songwriting credits (or lack thereof) from her album pages. She doesnt seem to have written any song on her own and only has co-writing credits. --FMSky (talk) 12:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

::::That's because producers are often credited as songwriters (at times they ask to be credited, even if they've never touched the lyrics). See the case of "Kill Bill" where the two producers are credited as songwriters because they made the instrumental, but SZA wrote the lyrics and melody all on her own [https://variety.com/2023/music/news/sza-kill-bill-snooze-stories-behind-1235815786/]. Same thing with "Snooze" [https://twitter.com/SZACRAVE/status/1730241653384851859] (Twitter faux pas, I know, but focus on the interview clips). ‍  Elias 🪐  (dreaming of Saturn; talk here) 10:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I noticed that most of the sources out there say or indicate that she was born in 1989, however some of them, particularly AllMusic, says that she was born in 1990. Is there any reason for this? NintendoTTTEfan2005 (talk) 09:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|SZA|answered=yes}}

Request a better picture from 2024 to represent SZA. Her current photo is barley recognizable. 108.48.181.224 (talk) 00:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. To what? We can't just use any picture off a google search, see WP:Image Use Policy Cannolis (talk) 02:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

::Are you comeing 92.28.17.195 (talk) 17:36, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Requesting there to be a Personal Life Section. 142.114.86.163 (talk) 04:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

:{{done}}, I've created the section. Feel free to add more relevant details (with valid sources of course). jolielover♥talk 16:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello! Recently, @750h+ has endeavored to bring this article to GA or FA status. Expect a greater volume of edits than usual. I have decided to tag along a bit as well; feel free to do the same! Elias 🦗🐜 ^{[Chat, they chattin', they chat]} 11:27, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

:Hi {{ping|PSA}}, I've done quite a lot on the article, I haven't completely finished (I haven't added much on her public image) but what are your current thoughts? 750h+ 08:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

{{Talk:SZA/GA1}}

{{Wikipedia:Peer review/SZA/archive1}}

@750h+, I will have to disagree with some of your changes to the article. First, with regards to merging these paragraphs, I believe they should be separated. The first one discusses why SZA is passionate about writing songs; the second discusses how SZA uses songwriting to reflect. That seems like disparate-enough themes to me.

Second, I also see you used the refn template to replace the topic sentence for the genre paragraph. I understand this was done to not clutter the prose with a bunch of references. Regardless, I am curious if we need five references just to show critics have always said she's an R&B singer-songwriter. The succeeding paragraph already implies that the narrative comes from the media. Additionally, "singer-songwriter" is not needed here because it has to be discussed in the succeeding "Songwriting" section. Currently, the topic sentence is unnecessarily unwieldy, and I think these editing choices have something to do with that. Elias 🦗🐜 ^{[Chat, they chattin', they chat]} 06:22, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

:Just seeing this, my responses will be listed below. 750h+ 06:32, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

:okay, if that's what you think about paragraphs then we can unmerge them, i think for the most part i needed a bit of clarification on this one considering both sentences have pretty similar starting points.

:in regards to your second concern i think we could reduce the number of references and remove "songwriter" but i do think we current sentence structure is superior, especially considering "for years" is somewhat vague, but i hope we can come to a consensus 750h+ 06:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

:{{ping|PSA}} what do you think about the current state of the article (given your changes to it)? i think it is much better now, but do you think your concerns have been addressed? For the most part your changes look really good, i feel like this will easily pass FAC. 750h+ 13:18, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

::@750h+: no. Some things are still missing; for example, you removed these details from the lead about SZA exploring certain genres for which projects, which does not abide the structures of already-existing musician BLPs like Taylor Swift or Lady Gaga. For a lead that says she incorporates multiple genres and has influenced R&B, I think it is fair to explain what sounds she has explored across her discography. Elias 🦗🐜 ^{[Chat, they chattin', they chat]} 05:53, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

:::thanks for bringing your concerns to the talk page

:::the thing is, with articles like Taylor Swift and Lady Gaga, they have around one to three words explaining their genres of each album in the lead. sentences like "With the three projects, she explored psychedelic and lo-fi music, resulting in what she called 'glitter trap'." as well as "Disillusioned with being reduced to R&B by the media, she experimented with a large range of genres which included rock, hip-hop, and pop." are not included in their article otherwise the leads would be far too long. i don't think belong in the lead (as per MOS:INTRO, "greater detail is saved for the body of the article").

:::i'd be happy with any shorter alternatives, where we can include both some genres while not making the lead excessive in detail and size. best, 750h+ 06:23, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

::::@750h+, considering you were the one to revert, what would you suggest as an alternative then? Elias 🦗🐜 ^{[Chat, they chattin', they chat]} 03:34, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{ping|PSA}} think the current size of the lead is somewhat okay. However, i think we can remove a bit of info and add genres to not make it too long. I'll make some edits to it and you can tell me if you like it or not. 750h+ 08:41, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

{{Template:Did you know nominations/SZA}}

:{{ping|B33net}} i was the one who brought it to GAN, not {{u|Tomobe03}}, and you are not a major contributor, may I ask why you are nominating this? 750h+ 02:26, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

::@750h+ The person who improved it to Good Article status was Tomobe03. While you nominated it, the DYK nomination specifically asks for the reviewer who assessed and upgraded it to that rank. I nominated it because it was one of the most recent GA articles. Per DYK nomination rules, an article must be newly created or recently upgraded to GA, among other criteria. This nomination follows those guidelines, as it is a newly assessed GA article. Hope this clarifies things. 🐝 B33net 🐝 03:26, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

:::{{Ping|B33net}} please show me where it says that. Because from what I know you must be the one who brought the article to GA status to nominate the article for DYK. I, the main contributor and the one who brought it to GA status, had absolutely no knowledge of this being up. I see on the articles Naide Gomes and Seokjojeon that the GA nominators are the same people who nominated it for DYK so I'm very confused as to where your version came from. Also pinging coord {{ping|AirshipJungleman29}} for his say on this. 750h+ 05:25, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

::::Thanks for your response. According to WP:DYKELIG, an article qualifies for DYK if it is either newly created, newly promoted to Good Article status, or expanded fivefold within the past seven days. There is no requirement that the same person who nominated it for GA must also nominate it for DYK—only that the article itself meets the criteria. In practice, many DYK nominations are submitted by users who did not write or review the GA but noticed that it meets eligibility. That being said, I understand your concern, and if you’d prefer to handle the nomination yourself, I’d be happy to step aside. 🐝 B33net 🐝 06:06, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::{{u|B33net}}, while you are correct that you can nominate articles expanded by others. It is polite to ask the other editor(s) before. Please do so in the future. In this case please withdraw from the nomination and let 750h+ take over. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:10, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::@AirshipJungleman29 @B33net @750h+ I do not get the impression from the DYK Nomination form that the GAN reviewer should be listed at the "Improved to Good Article status by ...". While it seems obvious to me that the primary author of the article (usually the GAN nominator) should be listed, it is not specified either. Could you clarify? Tomobe03 (talk) 08:37, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Sorry, I missed that bit. Yes, 750h+ should be listed as article improver. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:41, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

::::::i'm happy to let the nom continue, i was just confused as to why a DYK was put on an article i took to GA. 750h+ 09:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Sorry for the confusion. I will happily accept this advice. 🐝 B33net 🐝 15:39, 2 March 2025 (UTC)