Talk:Hip hop music

Archives
Archive 1	Archive 2

Archived

I archived this monster talk page to Talk:Hip hop music/archive 2. CredoFromStart ^talk 13:56, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

History

The history section is neither coherant nor chronological. It jumps directly from the 1970's to references to 2000. Cadentsoul 00:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Added Cite Tag to Islam section

I added a request for citations to the section identifying a number of rappers as Muslim in a list without any further supprt - uncited material like this could be contentious and I'm not sure it fits WP:BIO. If no cites are added I will remove these refs in a few days. CredoFromStart ^talk 13:59, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Which persons are you asking for a cite for? Arabic Pilot 17:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

hip hop post-modernism?

the current "summary" section at the end of the article asserts that hip hop is the only thoroughly post-modern genre. this is an interesting argument, one i've actually heard before, but it seriously needs citations as it currently lacks any. Anarchocelt 15:19, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

this article is way incomplete

no mention of cool herc, grandmaster flash in the history. television gives way too much credit to BET and doesn't mention 'Yo MTV Raps' with Fab 5 Freddy and later Dr. Dre and Ed Lover. Also The Lockers appeared on Saturday Night Live in 1975. They were arguably a hip hop dance group.Get it together people. this page makes Wikipedia look real bad. (Denverjsmith 00:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)denverjsmith)

Yea, it's insane that there's no mention of Fab 5 Freddy and Yo MTV Raps. That was HUGE in popularizing rap to the wider community! I mean it was friggin MTV playing rap every night! They've finally got mention of Grandmaster Flash & Melle Mel and DJ Kool Herc. They got Kurtis Blow, but he was in an ad campaign and came later. How can there be no Yo MTV Raps though. Wow, talk about ignorance about the more contemporary spread of rap! The late 80s and early 90s was when rap truly spread to the masses. The 90s section currently in the article is only for mid-late 90s and gangsta rap -- pretty pathetic. Where's Pete Rock and CL Smooth, Brand Nubian and all of the other great early 90s rappers that got "the messege" out? The early 90s coverage here is just non-existent! Pretty paltry article if you ask me. I'm amazed it was actually permitted to be a Featured Article.ask123 16:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

The decline of Rap Sales?

I think this article should incorporate how the sales of Rap CDs are declining. heres an interesting article..

http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2007-06-14-rap-decline_N.htm 69.138.209.159 23:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

RE: this article is dumb

this article is dumb because there are stil hip hop and hip hop culture pages wasting peoples efforts. someone tell me to merge these article and i willCosprings 02:21, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Hip hop music is just one aspect of hip hop culture. These should remain separate. bikeable (talk) 02:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. any one that suggests hip hop is about the music is severly lacking in understanding of the meaning and history of "hip hop". CheShA. 09:02, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

If the articles are to be merged, the title should be Hip Hop Culture, or simply Hip Hop, not Hip Hop Music. Music is a subset of culture, not vice-versa. Without commenting on whether such a merge should happen, I say the standard should be length vs. duplication. If the combined article would be too long or disjointed, the articles should stay seperate and be fixed up. If seperate articles would include too much duplicated material, the articles should be combined and fixed up. But they should not be combined under Music. A combined article's title should be broad enough to span all the topics. --Loqi T. 03:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you're totally off base. Hip Hop Culture should be a basic, fairly short article with short sections on Rap Music and all the other areas of hip-hop. In each section should go a link that says, for example, For Main Article, see: Rap Music, or For Main Article, see: Hip Hop Fashion, and so on... This way there will be specific articles for Hip Hop Fashion, Rap Music, Graffiti, etc. But Hip Hop needs to be separated into more detailed sections or it will be unwieldy.

And, further, the "everyone's attention is divided" excuse isn't very compelling. I'd jump in and fix things myself if I wasn't already focused on another article. Maybe I'll come here next. ask123

Feminism Quote

"The small presence of women in hip-hop can be blamed on many things, including women's inability to break into in an all-male environment to learn electronic machinery and MCing. " I just found this really offensive, (I'm a guy) can understand if it isn't meant to be, but... some stuff just needs to be reworded..—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.238.7.124 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC).

I agree so I've removed it. It's unsourced and doesn't represent a neutral viewpoint. If anyone wants to re-instate that section it's still in the history, but the onus is on whoever adds it to source it: who thinks this? where did they say it?, otherwise it will be removed again. Regards. Escaper2007 10:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I put the feminism section back in and fixed it up a little and add a sources...leave it so people can improve it!Cosprings 17:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry Cosprings, you have NOT cited it, and it's still not neutral: Hip-hop music is overwhelmingly dominated by male artists and therefore represents a masculine point of view. Says who?. This is a long article and it's attempting to use the Harvard referencing system in places. This section especially needs referencing. Some of us want Wikpedia to aspire to the highest standards, and these conventions are Wiki-policy. See: [1] this makes the policy more than clear. Regards. Escaper2007 11:12, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Do you listen to hip hop? Then you, like everyone else, knows, observes that most, many, a disproportionate number of rappers are male. How can this need a source?

Strangely enough I do - not that I need to justify that here. Do you read Wikipedia policies? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia it has certain conventions for the quality, standard and reliability of articles. Here's an extract from the policy on original research: [2] or see WP:NOR Wikipedia is not the place for original research. Citing sources and avoiding original research are inextricably linked: the only way to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic of the article, and to adhere to what those sources say. So by all means include a section on feminism (or I think what was intended was a section on sexism) BUT provide sources. If it's YOUR opinion, or what people "observe", then that's not good enough. Regards Escaper2007 10:47, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Of course, hip hop has many more males than females, but it has nothing to do with women's ability to use electronic equipment! That was the insulting part. Of course there's no source for such a ludicrous comment! This is a neutrality issue, not a sourcing issue! My gosh, people, stay on point! ask123 16:31, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge attempt

I just reverted an edit redirecting this article to hip hop and attempting to create a "main" "hip hop" page. This is way too big an organizational change to make unilaterally and without discussion. Get consensus on this page before reorganizing like that. As I have said before, I think hip hop music and hip hop culture deserve separate articles. bikeable (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is way too big a change to do unilaterally. But, I don't think there should be one "hip hop" page. Like editors do for media, there should be a relatively short main hip hop page with links in each sub-section to a more detailed page. So, for example, on the main hip hop page, there would be a link in the Rap Music section to a "main rap music" section. Same for all other major aspects of hip hop. Hip Hop is just too unwieldy for one article. ask123 16:43, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Clean up

I've added a clean-up template to this article. It's not intended to undermine the work of any particular editor, but to attract more editors to help with citing sources and and general copy-editing issues. an article this length needs many more than six sources, the article currently raises more questions than it answers. Escaper2007 10:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hyper-Masculinity

"Because hip hop music almost always puts an emphasis on hyper-masculinity". Bullsh*t! De La Soul, A Tribe Called Quest, and even pop acts like Fresh Prince would probably not be described as 'Hyper-Masculine'. The anti-gay bit should be put in the ol' Gangsta Rap Section, in my opinion.

Well, yes, there are rap acts that aren't as hyper masculine as most, but, by and large, there is a strong point of masculinity in rap music. That's why the first few female rappers were so masculine (see MC Lyte; Da Brat; Queen Latifah; and Boss, one of the great female rap groups of all time in my opinion). And, regarding anti-gay stuff, yes, most gangsta rap heavily used anti-gay ideas, but the ideas were in rap music before gangsta rap was even called gangsta rap. It's just like misogeny; gangsta rap was, at many times, heavily misogynist, but there were misogynistic themes in rap way before gangsta rap hit the scene. (Violence too, of course.) ask123 16:56, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for Comment on Merger of Hip hop Articles

Found at:
Talk:Hip_hop#Request_for_Comment:_Merger_of_Hip_Hop_Articles
-Robotam 14:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

To help editors' efforts to resolve the merger issue, and the clean-up of this article it's probably best to vote on the hip hop article via the link above. Escaper2007 16:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracies, POV and OR.

• "the openly gay hip hop and rap artist Caushun" Caushun was exposed as a prank gone arwy [3]

• There are other inarrcuracies, will post them when I find them. Zazaban 02:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

_______________________________

• "Because hip hop music almost always puts an emphasis on hyper-masculinity, even those lyrics not explicitly hateful toward gays have been said to reflect a homophobic mindset. As in any profession and especially the performing arts, it is often suspected that there are a great number of gay or lesbian hip hop musicians who do not come out of the closet, for fear of the impediment to or decline of their career."

• I don't know where to begin here. Firstly, there is not a single source here, making it completely OR.

• The claim that "hip hip ALMOST ALWAYS puts an emphasis on hyper-masculinity" thus making basically every song "said" to "reflect a homophobic mindset" is inherently POV. Why not condemn every song by Elvis? I seriously doubt he had a pro-gay mindset.
• " it is often suspected that there are a great number of gay or lesbian hip hop musicians who do not come out of the closet" A lot of things are often suspected but that doesn't make them so. Zazaban 03:03, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Hindu music??

Panjabi MC is Sikh, NOT Hindu. Yeah, he's Indian, but that doesn't mean he's automatically Hindu. I don't think his music qualifies as religious. I don't speak Punjabi, so I don't understand everything he says. There might need to be a section distinguishing religion from cultural identity. Mochamalu 04:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Merged

Appropriate portions of Hip Hop now merged to Hip Hop Music-Robotam 15:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I still think this is totally stupid-just make ONE page called hip hop, and include everything in the culture and music pages. Why complicate things so information is redundant? Cosprings 17:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It's silly to have what, 3 or 4 pages about one thing? Zazaban 17:56, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Didn't we just spend a week talking about this? If you guys want to discuss it again, we can reopen that conversation, but otherwise, could we move on, please? bikeable (talk) 18:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I respect anyone's personal opinion regarding redundancy. HOWEVER--the pages were seperated in a way that clearly showed that the material was not, in fact redundant. Hip Hop is not the only subject on Wikipedia that has to be broken up to correctly discuss. After the consensus and changes, the edits done here by the complaining editor have resulted in the above claims of "redundancy."
No one person owns an article, Wikipedia operates by consensus. All of the above arguments were presented and voted upon, with the vote publicized and left open for a considerable time. The above opinions were rejected by a clear majority. The vote itself brought even more comments arguing that the edits to Hip hop music that replaced the formerly Featured Article page were improper. The cutting and pasting of material into hip hop music (much of it violating NPOV) led to the article being demoted from FA status. The only thing left to do is to respectfully request that people stop reverting the articles simply to prove a point. I will gladly discuss any more personalized issues on individual talk pages. Let's get these articles to FA status!-Robotam 18:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I myself haven't reverted anything. Zazaban 19:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I hope I didn't imply that you did--I look forward to working with you (and anyone else) on the articles!-Robotam 19:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, thought that was directed at me. No worries. :) Zazaban 19:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

GA Nomination

OK, I nominated for GA status; hopefully we can get some input on elevating this article back to GA and FA status. The article as is has incorporated text from when article WAS was originally FA status.-RoBoTam^ice 20:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• I've quick failed this article because it lacks citations; these are expected for most good articles these days, particularly long ones. See here for how to cite statements in the article. Teemu08 20:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

"Hip Hop" vs. "Rap" -- They are not synonyms!

What's up with the title of this article? It's been said before, but I'll say it again: rap is a type of music whereas hip hop is a sub-culture that encompasses rap music, break dancing, graffiti art, DJing, fashion and more. The phrase "hip hop music" is a bit of a misnomer. Maybe usage is changing the definition of "hip hop," but the aforesaid taxonomy has been around since the 80s and is only confused by the mis-informed. I'm sure this isn't new to a lot of you. KRS-One helped propogate this taxonomy before music scholars were even thinking of how to categorize rap within the larger category of "popular music."

I read the explanation for the title of this article in the article lede section, but is that original research? "Rap music" has always encompassed actual rapping along side "DJing." And, of course, both the act of rapping or the act of DJing may be performed alone. It is correct, as noted in the article, that "rapping" is a component of the music, but it is "rap music" that is the combination of rapping and DJing. "Hip hop," on the other hand, is the wider category (encompassing rapping and DJing), but also fashion, art and more. This was the taxonomy that I have known listening to rap music for the past 30-odd years and was instilled in me by friends in the music business and music academia. Maybe this has been discussed and settled already. If so, what's the deal here? Is there a title problem? ...Many thanks! ask123 21:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I would like there to be a separation between hip-hop and rap, because there is a huge noticeable difference. Hip-hop is more expressive and poetic, and it has a meaning to it. Rap on the other hand, is just pointless rhymes; words without meaning placed over a beat. Thanks 70.21.210.76 01:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Those may be your personal definitions of rap and hip-hop, but I don't think they go beyond that. For a long time in the hip-hop community, rap has meant the "rap music," and hip-hop has meant the wider culture that includes rap music, breakdancing, grafitti and turntablism. It is a taxonomical difference and has nothing to do with being poetic or expressive. "Poetic" and "expressive" are subjective words anyway -- one person's poetry is another's cacophony and vice-versa. Cheers, ask123 13:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Why "Hip hop music" and not just "Hip hop"?

There's no other meaning for "Hip hop" so why the long title? — ciphergoth 16:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

We just had an extremely long discussion about exactly this over at Talk:Hip_hop#Request_for_Comment:_Merger_of_Hip_Hop_Articles. The short answer seems to be that Hip hop is a culture, Hip hop music one of the elements of that culture, and Rapping a particular style of music which constitutes a great deal of hip hop music. The terms are certainly a little slippery, but that seems to be what we've settled on. Note also the discussion immediately above this one -- certainly "hip hop music" can't be simultaneously equivalent to "hip hop culture" and to "rap", so we've got separate articles on each. bikeable (talk) 17:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

hmmm... actually, Hip hop is a sort of disambiguation article, and hip hop culture is separate. yeah, it's a little confusing. bikeable (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

there once was a boy by the name of jack ass —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.63.249.31 (talk) 16:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

IP 207.63.249.31, You're comments will be signed by a bot, even if you leave them unsigned when you post them.If you continue to attack other editors, you will be blocked from editing on Wikipedia. ask123 19:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Bikeable, thanks for answering ciphergoth's question. Yes, you are right as to why there are separate articles for the sub-sections of the larger category of "Hip-Hop culture." However, I am clueless as to why this article is called "Hip-Hop Music" and not "Rap Music." I tried to pose this question in my above post but haven't received an answer yet. The taxonomical sub-categories within "Hip-Hop culture" (the parent category) are "rap music," "grafitti," "breakdancing," "turntablism," etc. So this article should actually be titled "Rap Music." "Hip-hop music" is a misnomer used primarily by those uninformed of the actual taxonomy. Perhaps there's an explanation for this, but I haven't heard one yet... (By the way, I saw the article rapping, but it still doesn't explain the title here. Rapping is a characteristic of the vast majority of rap music -- the only exceptions I can think of are interludes on albums. The point is that words/phrases "rapping" and "rap music" have different definitions.) Do you have any insight here into the choice of title for this article? Thanks. Cheers, ask123 19:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

How come ther's no criticism on triviality of hip-hop, atleast for this generation. I can't turn on mtv and watch three video's in a row without seeing a million slow motion scenes mixed with , hearing a chorus effect in most all of the vocals, and hearing egotistic rhymes laced superficial materialism or misogyny or overall degradig talk(with the imagery to back it up)- these are only a few of banal traits that permeate the genre. The lingo used in this culture is amorphic and is changing all the time, as for the music itself.

I remember hearing a famous producer on the red arpet talk about how the producers have been "running the show" instead of the rappers, suggesting that the music is being controlled.

Mainstream rap in general seems to be a genre that degrades values from language to morals to appearance- Can we find a way to put this on there?