Talk:Best & USA

Single

Took out the first single. Vivid was never stated to be a single in support of this album. It was stated by SM and/or Avex to be in support of the tour during that time. Please do not keep adding the single without a source saying that it was released in support of the best of compilation. The "Vivid" article itself states it was released in support of the tour. Danielquasar (talk) 05:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

No one said the single was to support the album. Vivid appeared on the album therefore it is a single from the album. Not once in the article does it say "Vivid was used to promote the album". ^~Moon~月と暁^~Sunrise~ 20:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

The column on the right side of the article lists "Singles from so-and-so album". Therefore each single listed underneath is considered "singles released in support of" so-and-so album. Vivid is NOT on the album in whole. Sparkling is the only song and it is only on one edition of the album. And if you were to read the Vivid article you would see that it states that it is in fact in support of the tour during that time. If we were to be that specific by saying since a song from the single appears on the album means it is in support of the album then you should put ALL of the singles on the list because they are ALL on the album as well. This is a compilation album so every song is a single in one way or another. You can't be specific to one song and not all. "Eien" is the only single released in support of this album. Do not add "Vivid" back in because it does not belong on that list unless you include all the singles from the album as well. Danielquasar (talk) 05:52, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Look at Shine We Are! / Earthsong. Are you going to say that it's not a single form Love & Honesty just because "Earthsong" is not included on the album? "The column on the right side of the article lists 'Singles from so-and-so album'. Therefore each single listed underneath is considered 'singles released in support of'", that's your opinion. Vivid belongs on the as a singles, whether or not all the songs appeared on it. ^~Moon~月と暁^~Sunrise~ 09:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I made some changes to the page. Before you get mad and revert please look at what I did. I gave each song a tag with what Album or Single it was on. This gives people more places to go and more articles to read. And I made the tracklisting easier to understand. I think this works very well and in both of our favors. Please at least consider it. If you don't like it then please let's try and make a happy medium. I do think this way better portrays the vastness of this collection. Let me know what you think. Danielquasar (talk) 10:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Tracklists

Two questions.

First, why does the track list for "Best&USA (2CD and 2CD+2DVD version only)" start with Track no. 10? Where are tracks 1-9?

Second, what is the unlabeled table of 11 tracks between the tables labeled "Best&USA (2CD and 2CD+2DVD version only)" and "DVD 1 (Best & USA 2CD+2DVD)"? TJRC (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The reason I didn't repeat tracks 1-9 in the "Best&USA (2CD and 2CD+2DVD version only)" because 1-9 are the same as the above list. Should I make a note that 1-9 are the same or repeat them? I think it may be a bit much if they were repeated again.

As far as the unlabeled 11 tracks. That is the "USA" portion. Should I label that seperately since it does fall under the main Best&USA (2CD and 2CD+2DVD version only) list? I think it works but I don't think an extra label would hurt. What do you think? Danielquasar (talk) 07:44, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I think that would be a good thing. It looks like a mere omission now, and I, at least, couldn't figure out what it was. I'm not so hot in the ways of this template, or tables in general, so I hesitate to try to fix it myself; the result will probably be pretty ham-handed. If you would take a crack at it, that would be great. Thanks a lot. TJRC (talk) 17:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Changes made and now it makes much more sense. Again good call! Danielquasar (talk) 11:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Best II

What is going on with all these "Best II" versions? Amazon.com shows 3x Best II albums with virtually the same artwork. Is "Best & USA" first and the "Best II" second, or the other way around? In ictu oculi (talk) 05:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Here's the Best II 2009 track listing:

BOA - Best II (Japan Best) Publisher: S.M ENTERTAINMENT MUSIC KOREA * Release: 2009.4.15 * CD: 16 Tracks * Detail: MADE IN KOREA Track List: 01 Universe Feat.Crystal Kay & Verbal (M-Flo) 02 Do The Motion 03永远 04七色 の 明日 ~ Brand New Beat ~ 05 Winter Love 06メリクリ ~ Best & USA Version ~ 07 Sweet Impact 08抱きしめる 09 Love Letter 10 Sparkling 11 Key Of Heart 12 Make A Secret 13 Everlasting 14 Lose Your Mind (Feat.Yutaka Furukawa From Doping Panda) 15 Believe In Love Feat.BoA (Acoustic Version) 16 Valenti ~ Best & USA Version ~

If that's correct then the 2009 Best II appears to be missing tracks 17 and 18 which are on the 2011 Best & USA In ictu oculi (talk) 23:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

the 2009 long box has the same 2 last tracks missing In ictu oculi (talk) 23:57, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

kpopmart confirms this, jmusicitalia also confirms this, Koreancravings discography confirms Best II was the original issue, doesn't mention Best & USA with tracks 17 & 18. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

I think I've figured this out. Best and USA is a Japan release (available elsewhere in Asia) tied to her American release, BoA (album).[1][2] In Japan, the American album was paired with a "Best Of" collection of her Japanese songs (hence Best & USA). This seems to have been considerably more popular in Japan than the BoA album was in North America. Evidently the Japanese songs were also released separately in some places; this seems to be what "Best II" or "BoA Best II" refers to, although this incarnation is comparatively obscure. I'll rewrite the article accordingly.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:47, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Fine but please give preference to Korean language sources over allmusic.com. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:34, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

If you have sources better than the ones I've included please bring them up. If they're just more retail sites there shouldn't be any "preference" over reliable sources.--Cúchullain ^t/c 03:44, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

If you intend to dispute the evidence of Korean-language music blogs and ko.wp article and Korean retail sites then the onus is on yourself to wade through 100s of Korean language pages and find contradicting information. In ictu oculi (talk) 22:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. If you want to make a change, you back it up with reliable sources. Your retail sites and self-published sources don't cut it, especially as their information (or your interpretation of it) contradicts what appears in reliable sources.--Cúchullain ^t/c 23:02, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I added to this article what was in the Korean article that Best II (BoA album) is the Korean edition of the Japanese Best & USA, released a month or so later, which it is, which sources support, and I'm not sure what it is that you want to change. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:51, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to change anything now that the article follows reliable sources. Your edits introduced evidently incorrect information attributed only to online shops. Best & USA is not "the Japanese edition of the second greatest hits album", it's a double containing both a greatest hits disc and the American album BoA. It doesn't consist "mainly of Japanese language songs", it consists of half Japanese hits and half new English songs. And it's misleading to say Best II is "the same album" as Best & USA, as it only seems to contain the Japanese hits. You say you want to "give preference to Korean-language sources", but the two sales links you gave are clearly either incorrect or you've misunderstood them. At this point most everything else is attributed to reliable sources; if you want to add anything else please find reliable sources to support it.--Cúchullain ^t/c 01:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)