User talk:STATicVapor

The Game

Game is signed to Rolex Records and has left Interscope Records, where's your proof of his current label. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs) 21:30, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

See the "Other ventures" section, less than a week ago Rolex Records was renamed "The Firm" due to legal issues with Rolex. And he is in talks with resigning with Interscope, but if you want to move it to former labels that is fine. STATic message me! 21:36, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Where's your proof and if he's in talks he's still not resigned to them. Also what about Rolex Records why did you change that?— Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs)

Can you not read? Rolex Records is now The Firm, which is sourced in the section in the article which I just told you about. And in this interview he says he is having meetings with Interscope about resigning, that is why I said move it to former if you want to. STATic message me! 08:10, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

He's still not signed to Interscope so please move that back to former.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs)

But if he released a third single from Jesus Piece it would be released under Interscope not The Firm or any other label. And it is more than likely he will be resigning with them. STATic message me! 05:28, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

When there's proof of that you can do that but for now he's not apart of Interscope, and Jesus Piece was released under Interscope so therefore they'll release the singles from the album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACBContent (talk • contribs)

So that would imply that he still has a contractual deal with Interscope, but as I said before I will move them to former labels. STATic message me! 00:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Reason of deletion of article

I would like to know the reason of deletion of "XO & Co. Inc." It is a established Inc. with copyright and should have be granted a article on wiki.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shubvirk (talk • contribs) 03:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

That does not mean it is warranted a Wikipedia article (WP:GNG). The "label" has yet to release a single album, and the founder is the only artist signed to the label. There is also nothing that says the entire labels future acts will be distributed under Republic. STATic message me! 04:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Here are some links for the 50 cent

[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaberToothedCat863 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Another artist rename

Over at Talk:30 Seconds to Mars. Cheers! §FreeRangeFrog^croak 00:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

To undo edits for me

Hello STATicVerseatide,

I see you revert edits (Karma Chameleon for example) and you did it right because you have restored my correct revision. Is it possible for you to undo other edits for me please ? I need help. Here's the link where all the "current edits" has to be reverted because they've destroyed my improvements. (I can't undo these edits by myself because I will have problems)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/68.71.52.42 Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I am not going to go around and edit war for you, considering all your edits are not correct. I was just correcting the capitalization of "New wave". Some information for you would be that in Wikipedia numbers under 13 are spelled out, never put "st, th, etc" after numbers, and dates should be written Month, Day, Year. Not following that goes against the MoS. STATic message me! 15:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Breathe Carolina genre

I think you are wrong, the fact that you don't let me change the genres is ridiculous. First of all, one source is enough to change a genre and second, we are not talking about hip hop. Acording of what you are telling me, we should put Electronic * rock and this is not correct because that is not the genre, the genre is electronic rock and in the same way, electronica is more general and limited. So you should think more about the fact that this is not hip hop, the fact that one VALID source is enough to change the genre and that not necessarily this must have only one or two genres. Thanks. Justasaddream (talk) 10:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

One single source is definitely not enough to change the genre in the infobox. I am not telling you we should put Electronic * rock, I have been trimming it to electronic rock this whole time and you seem to agree? Again see Template: Infobox musical artist, there should not be 4-5 genres in the infobox only the genres that most reliable sources refer to them as, which is clearly electronic rock. STATic message me! 15:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

CTE World

I removed it because the ref you cited says nothing about a studio album...also several artists were signed to CTE and didn't have studio albums...also check iTunes, Gibbs and Scrilla both had studio albums. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAMM.CO (talk • contribs) 14:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

If you're referring to the roster changes...Wikipedia can email me directly and I will email them the release paperwork for each artists that was sent out in 2012. This is an edit handled by admin not a fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAMM.CO (talk • contribs) 14:58, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

It is a fact, Gibbs and Scrilla did not release a full length physical studio album while on the label. And if they did add it to the discography. An Admin of what? If you have a COI of CTE World you should not be editing the article. But if they were released provide a reliable source that says they are no longer signed to the label. STATic message me! 15:59, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Amazon.com

Dude, tons of websites have already reported the track listing like XXL, HipHopDX, Vibe. How are those not reliable you just sound foolish. Koala15 (talk) 17:11, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Alright, but i still can't remember Amazon ever being wrong. Koala15 (talk) 17:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj videography

I currently opened a peer assess for the article Nicki Minaj videography, I was hoping that you could take a look, leave feedback for improvement and contribute to the article where you see it's nessessary. If you can help it would be appreciated. :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Nicki_Minaj_videography/archive1 KaneZolanski (talk) 12:03, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Love More charts

I'm confused, but its okay! ChicagoWiz 16:35, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Like an example would be, the Billboard Hot 100 is basically a combination of the Digital and Airplay charts, so if it charted on the Hot 100 we do not list the digital or airplay charts. Just like the Hot R&B Songs chart is a component of the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Singles chart. If you understand now? STATic message me! 17:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh! You were saying if the song has charted on the Hot 100 already, then there is no need for the Digital and Airplay because they're basically "adding up to" the Hot 100! I might've confused you there, but I do understand what you're saying now! ChicagoWiz 22:35, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes that is exactly what I am saying, glad you understand now! STATic message me! 22:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Flat lists Don't Look Down

Although I agree the consensus for infobox album is a little muddled, in principle project access agreed that {{flat list}} is more accessible than a standard comma-separated lists. On the basis that I had already added {{flat list}} to Don't Look Down and there is no specific reason for their removal, I've reverted your removal of the template. On the basis that you have removed it because you dislike the template and prefer the way that comma lists look, yet time and effort was made to put the template in place so it shouldnt have been removed. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 21:13, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

The specific removal reason is that at Template talk: Infobox album#Flat lists there is more consensus for using comma separated lists rather than the flatlists. If you want to put your two cents in the discussion there go ahead. But have flatlists goes against the guideline of the template, "list items should be separated by commas." STATic message me! 21:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

A template which ignores WP:ACCESS, which is a proven benefit to disabled/less-able sighted readers and an accepted part of Manuel of Style. Just because the template guidance hasn't been updated doesn't mean there's no consensus to use it. The fact is that its inclusion makes no difference to your use of the article but its inclusion vastly improves the experience of others who might be hard of sight. Therefore its exclusion means someone loses out but its inclusion has no impact on users like you or I who are able-sighted. Thus one its in place WP:ACCESS changes should not be reverted. Its called being WP:BOLD and applying logic. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 22:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Where is this implemented study that it is a "proven benefit to disabled/less-able sighted readers". It is not just a routine update to be done in every template, and maybe the original discussion needed more basic thought into it. The real fact it that there is zero consensus on the talk page of the template to use it, effectively ignoring the templates guideline that entries are to be separated by commas. The loss is that it does not look very good, and it is harder to edit and put together as you said in your original post. Also, logic has nothing to do with this kind of debate. STATic message me! 22:45, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

If there was no use for the the template then why would the people over that WP:ACCESS create the template and promote its use? Its not harder to edit it makes no difference. As an able sighted reader you simply find the template ugly yet less able sighted readers, particularly those who use screen benefitting technology benefit massively. What you find as "looking ugly" is personal opinion but you are not personally disadvantaged by the inclusion of flat-list whereas someone using screen reader technology benefit from its inclusion. That's where the logic element comes in. (p.s. its already been implemented at {{Infobox single}} so it obviously does have a use) — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 23:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I never said it would not be helpful in different areas on the article, such as the tracklist looks good with the flat list. Funny how you claim it to be my "personal opinion" when many other seasoned editors at Template talk: Infobox album are stronger opinionated against them, then me and the consensus is clearly in favor of not including than in that template. Yes I know it was already implemented at Infobox single, but this is a case to case bases on usage in the particular template, which at the time does not include the use of flat lists in its documentation and has no consensus to add them, so they should not be used. STATic message me! 00:23, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Kanye

Great work with Yeezus. Are you planning on getting that to Good status soon, given it's the only album left to make a Kanye West studio albums Good Topic? igordebraga ≠ 02:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

I would definitely be happy to take it to GA status, however it is a bit WP:RECENTISM so maybe by years end i'll GAN it. If you could give it any cleanup it would be much appreciated! Or anything you could point out to me that I would need to do to the article before nominating it. STATic message me! 02:49, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Alchemist

Hey man. FINALLY someone gave Alchemist the picture he needed thank you! But I re-edited it and added back the upcoming projects section. Every one of them is true. Trust me Im a VERY VERY big fan of ALC. I follow him on Twitter with notifications on every Tweet he writs on my iPhone. I know. I even put reference to every thing. Untill now I did ALL of the Alchemist's page a lone. I rebuilt it, added a LOT of writing, wrote ALL the history of his collabs and more. You can look it up in the editing history. Do not come and delete whatever you want just because. It will be much appreciated. --Orr971 (talk) 13:42, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I just searched Wikipedia and it was there. The only reason I removed it as, it is WP:CRYSTALBALLing and unreleased albums are not usually kept in the discography section, and they are already covered in the body of the article. I know they are all true, and I am also a big fan, it is just that they do not need to be included in the summary of his works, till they are actually released. STATic message me! 13:37, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I get it now. But for some reason in this particular article I like to come and see everything, even the upcoming projects. I also like to move an album from the UPCOMING to it's rightful category as soon as it's out... so there is that... Can we just let it stay? --Orr971 (talk) 13:41, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, I guess as long as they all have release dates then they can stay, just in the future do not add albums that do not have release dates to the section. Anything else backed by a reliable source can be mentioned in the article body. I just do not want the section to turn into listing stuff like, "TBA featuring Action Bronson". You know albums they only mention once, but probably will not come for a while. STATic message me! 13:47, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Got it so I will remove that TBA thing. The other two will come out soon. One has a specific date and the other is about to be released in 2013 soon. And you're right about that list thing... bye man. ADDITION: The Boldy James album HAS a date, So it's there. I deleted the TBA Roc Marci, and added a note there in the Discography section that info about any collab without a date, cane be found in the "Collabs" section. --Orr971 (talk) 14:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Green Day

Hey why did you revert me. I was reverting him. He made an edit which was reverted, and instead of starting a discussion, he blatantly continued warring. Im not the one warring and It shouldnt be my place to start the discussion. If he wants the change made, then he should should start the discussion. I and three other people have warned him and told him to start the discussion. Either the page is supposed ti stay as it was while the discussion is going on. BlackDragon 18:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Because he is right, the song is not a single and has not received a retail sale release as a single. So unless you have a official reference of a radio, iTunes, or Amazon.com release as a SINGLE, do not add it. You have been told countless times to discuss, and it is time to start a discussion. Maybe 3 people have told him, but around ten have told you to start discussing now. You could have spent the time writing that message, towards leaving a message on Template talk: Green Day. But no you keep reverting. STATic message me! 18:21, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Alchemist - Discography

But what if there will be more upcoming albums with no date. I think that this note Should be there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orr971 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Then they can have content about them right in the section above, as long as it is backed by reliable sources. Once we have a title and a release date then they can be added to the discography. Maybe if the note was a hidden note, but just to have the big notice there does not look very good. STATic message me! 21:30, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit Hopsin and Unearth albums

Its not my opinion if you listen to the artists then you will realize why i changed the genres, just because there is no link does not stop what you hear. its not disruptive as there is no pop genre added to a metal band page, Hopsin makes positive, alternative and conscious hip hop that's why i added the genres. In the normal broad term hip hop is referring to radio hip hop and Hopsin is an underground artist. as for Unearth, they are not generally "Metalcore" they have thrash tendencies recently and have a metallic hardcore influence of Hatebreed. they have introspective lyrics that make you think, not what modern Metalcore means now talking about relationships and hearbreak. So why change it back when its clearly heard when you listen to them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Extremevic (talk • contribs) 18:55, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

So where are your reliable sources to support your opinions on the genres of the artists and the albums? Or are you just a WP:GENREWARRIOR? Calling Raw "positive hip hop" is just ridiculous and completely factually untrue. And genres on pages such as Hopsin should just have general genres, not list every subgenre someone thinks they are (Template: Infobox musical artist). STATic message me! 19:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

A link for Hopsin? here. And if you don't think "Raw" is positive, then you clearly cant hear. The track "Nocturnal Rainbows" is about being blind to the decay of society and against drug use, that is positive hip hop or Conscious hip hop.

That is very far from a reliable source by Wikipedia standards. You might want to see WP:ALBUM/REVSITE for examples of reliable sources for music. Yes I know the song, but are you now calling songs like "Sag My Pants", or "Kill Her" "positive" or "conscious hip hop". Again if you want to change the genre you need multiple reliable sources that call the album specifically one genre or another. STATic message me! 19:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Kid Ink "Money and The Power" Record.

Download" Money and the power" on Itunes. and go to info and you will see " Produced by N4, Ned & Jonathan lauture. "i hold a share of this record" Not sure why my name is not attached. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.82.94 (talk) 06:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Unless you have a reliable online source that credits you as a producer of the record, we cannot add it. I started the article and every place I saw just credited N4 and Ned. STATic message me! 13:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

What do you need? Who do you need to speak to in order for my credit to remain. I feel like Wikipedia & the ITUNES Download are that strongest source of information regarding my credit. Wikipedia is relying on other blog sites for their information but these blogs sites are missing info like my credit. I can a sure you that it wont be a problem having my name attached because i did produce this record, N4 and Ned know this. I own a Share of this record! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thatproducer (talk • contribs) 21:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

It is not mentioned in Wikipedia due to you not being mentioned in reliable sources covering the song. Wikipedia does not rely on blogs so you are wrong, from what it seems from a google search you are not mentioned in a single reliable source such as [2], [3] that discusses the song. We need proof so I know you're not just a fanboy/upcoming producer trying to promote yourself by being on Wikipedia. In no way am I trying to refuse giving you credit, it just needs to be verified in a way other than buying the song. STATic message me! 22:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

What would you need. Someone From the Label to contact you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.194.22.132 (talk) 06:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Mixtapes

Yo, so why can't I put mixtape articles up here. I've always looked at an artist's discography or whatever, seen that there mixtape doesn't have a page and wished that there was, so that I could see you know like who the producers are, the actual tracklisting. I mean Gucci Mane's comes out with a new mixtape his shit's on here, I don't see why Yelawolf's can't be. And the way I see it, isn't more information better? It's not like I'm deleting important album articles and replacing them with mixtape ones. But it's your call, much love brother.

Alright, I understand now, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChuckT187 (talk • contribs) 16:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Evil Dead (2013 film)

"So you made it longer?" isn't exactly as civil as you ask others to be in your "rules," but I will rewrite to keep it under 700 words. It's better to have a coherent synopsis than what was there. Could you please explain why you hadn't tagged it before now? It was too long according to the guidelines as it was then, too.PacificBoy 20:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I added it here and you removed it in your following edit. Also you are wrong again, before you edited it it was 718 words, after you edited it was 916 words, and much too detailed. You might want to read WP:FILMPLOT before continuing to adjust plots on articles. STATic message me! 20:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Dude, you won. Take yes for an answer. I said I would rewrite it to get it under 700 and I have. In fact, I had already said that I would when you decided to take me to task for it again. Also, condescending comments like "You might want to read xxx" are also against your own stated rules.PacificBoy 21:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hey I am just the one following the guidelines made by the MoS. It just needed to be under 700, that is why I added the template so someone would fix it you did not need to take it so personal. WP:AGF next time as I did with you, if I wanted I could have reverted back to the version before you edited but I didn't, because I knew you were improving it. STATic message me! 21:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Linkin Park

Hello,
I think you've misunderstood my point. I didn't claim that we should label these band pages as solely "rock". I just thought that your reason for removing the two other genres was the "aim for generality" issue. Thank you. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 18:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

X (Chris Brown album)

Hi, EleventhBlock. I am wondering whether you think it would be okay to remove the date "August 20, 2013" due to the fact that the date is a week away and a cover art and a track listing hasn't been released. Hall of Fame is being released two weeks from today and a track listing and a track listing has been released days ago. Sounds unrealistic.  11Block |talk 22:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

We might want to wait for an official announcement of a push back. Who knows what he is doing, but [4], [5], and [6] from a week ago say the album is coming out on the 20th. After the way promotion was done/or the lack thereof for Yeezus and MCHG anything can happen. STATic message me! 23:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request

Hello, I would like to message you in terms of an edit request on the Trap Lord article, the debut album from Asap Ferg. I am requesting if you would be able to add production credits to the track Cocaine Castle on the track list within the article. The song is produced by Subdaio and HighClassFilth. The credits are actually on Twitter you can search them. It would be great if you can do this simple edit. You can look up these two producers on Google etc, they are both accredited and well respected up-comers.

Twitter credits: [7]

I'm hoping to hear a response back from you soon, thanks!

Njdon89 (talk) 02:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Whoever that person is, ASAP Ferg does not even follow him and their twitter is not verified so there is no way we can use that as a reliable source for production credits. I just did a google search and found not one reliable source connecting these producers to the track. Do you have anything better than that random tweet? STATic message me! 02:36, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Here you go: https://soundcloud.com/subdaio/cocaine. Drum pattern was made by Subdaio. The synths were made by HighClassFilth. They both teamed up to work on the production. You can read it in the beat description. Njdon89 (talk) 20:24, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

SoundCloud is user generated and not a reliable source, per the WP:RS guideline. When I say reliable source I mean a magazine, or high quality professional news website. STATic message me! 23:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok cool, I guess we will wait til the album releases with the production credits in the booklet. Thanks. Njdon89 (talk) 17:37, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay thanks for understanding the rules. STATic message me! 17:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Here is another source, RapGenius is a very reliable source and it is posted here as well, please do take consideration in this because it is not fair for a producer to not receive the credit he or she deserves when they have put their time and effort to it. Thanks. RapGenius: [1] Njdon89 (talk) 17:51, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

RapGenius is user-generated and definitely not a reliable source. And if the producers are credited in the linear notes, the content will be added once the album is released in less than half a week. STATic message me! 18:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

LordQuest

Can you please instruct me on how to dispute this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/LordQuest ? I've spent weeks in the US landing placements with major artists for LordQuest he is verified by reliable sources according to Wiki standards why is there any question of deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Positivibes (talk • contribs) 04:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

If you work for LordQuest, you obviously have a COI and should not be creating or editing his page. As I explained before, just producing for "major" artists does not make him notable as a person, worthy for a biography in an encyclopedia. The way to contest it is just how you were doing it. But I reverted your comment on the page, because you refactored someone elses comment on the page. STATic message me! 07:54, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

UGHH

UGHH is always correct with producer credits it is a retail site that has the albums in advanced and it was correct with all the production credits that were already listed so how could they be wrong. Maybe Chad Hugo produced the song but just isn't credited in the booklet, where else would we ever find a source for these producers anyway until we do we should just keep the info. Koala15 (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Is Discogs reliable enough for you? Cause they have the same credits listed right here.Koala15 (talk) 17:43, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Again, UGHH is not a reliable source per WP:ALBUM/SOURCES if you wanna start a discussion on the WP:ALBUM talk page to add it to WP:ALBUM/SOURCES be my guest, and if it is added then we can use it throughout all album articles as a reliable source. I have trouble trusting a retailer where one of its main items for sale it graffiti tools. Always correct? There is definitely not true. We can always wait till the album releases, and use the information that is backed by undeniable reliable sources. Also Discogs is user generated, and just as reliable as IMDB, they probably copied the information from the article anyways. STATic message me! 17:55, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

We are never gonna get a correct source for the production credits, so what are we just gonna have to trust people that bought the album with adding the credits? I would rather just use the source. Koala15 (talk) 18:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

We could, it happens sometimes. Considering the page is protected till November a actual editor would have to add them (I assume someone will buy the album). We already have 90% of the credits backed by reliable sources including newspapers, with only three tracks that have no producers. It is no big deal that it is incomplete if the album is not released yet. I mean UGHH already got "Chum" wrong for sure and I have a feeling "Uncle Al" at least had some production by the The Alchemist judging by the name alone. We should just leave it blank till a reliable source reports those separate songs producers. If you are interested in taking UGHH to the WP:ALBUM talk page, I would love to see if anyone else thinks it meets the reliable source guideline, because I currently do not. STATic message me! 18:16, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Wiz Khalifa discography / Hate Bein' Sober

Thanks for this – I'd been humming and ha-ing about it for a little while, as those were singles all released when that was the primary format that Khalifa released his work in (similar to "Otherside" (Remix) by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis). However, I have one question: was "Hate Bein' Sober" actually a single? I can't find any digital download release, or radio release date, that suggests that it was. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 12:44, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome, I hate to see when someone just throws all an artists first few singles in a "promotional singles" section, only because they were just released to iTunes. It's like they expected them to be released to radio when they're signed to an independent label. And with Hate Bein' Sober, it is not in the FMQB archives but for all we know it could have been sent to urban radio, but not many sites report on that. Also maybe Interscope canceled its release after Keef did not show up to the video shoot, or Keef's jail sentence in January. I mean we are not short on sources that call it the third single from Finally Rich or a single. Such as [8], [9], [10], and [11]. STATic message me! 14:42, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Hrm. Interestingly, the Billboard reference is the most recently published of the four: as it says that a release date had not yet been decided, it renders the proclamations in the other, earlier sources that it was destined for a single release a little premature, so perhaps they're not the best sources to determine this point. As in the case of songs like "Pyro" by T.I., websites and magazines often say any new song released by an artist is a "new single" when a single release ends up not happening (I'm still not convinced "Diced Pineapples" was ever a single, as I never found any official release information). Although Billboard have revealed single release dates before, at least in this case they've confirmed that the release actually happened. I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 14:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I can see that the Billboard source says there was not a official decided radio add date. I have seen a lot of instances where the new leaked/released song is named a "single", but as far as I can tell "Hate Bein Sober" was universally reported as the album's third single. The funny thing about the "Black Skinhead" release is that it never appeared on FMQB, AllAccess, or any of the radio release websites. If Billboard had not reported that we would have never knew it had a release date.Back to HBS, the thing with radio add dates is unless FMQB reports it (and archives it), the information is kind of lost to never be found. For all we know it could have been posted by AllAccess or Frequency and someone missed it. There is also His latest single, The G-Unit general made a cameo on the recent Keef single "Hate Bein' Sober,", new single “Hate Bein Sober” that are even more recent then the Billboard source. STATic message me! 18:28, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

What I find quite confusing is that some radio release dates only appear on one or two of the sites mentioned above, when you'd think each one would pick them up (being an official radio airplay tracker). Actually, Radio & Records (which shut down as a magazine in 2009 but still tracks release dates) does use an archiveable system which is easy to search, but (ironically) they pick up fewer dates than any of the other sites. I can't find anything there, either. "Might have missed it" is not a decent justification to suggest it may have been sent to radio: I agree it well could have happened but if we don't have a reference, we don't have proof of a release. I tend to discount anything simply saying "new single" without any backing claim as publications, as I alluded to above, often incorrectly use the phrase to describe any new song that appears online. However, seeing as these are reliable sources that have widely made this claim, as you say, I'm not that inclined to be bold and revert it to being just a song: until one of us finds more decisive proof that it was absolutely and clearly not a single. Put it this way: should someone attempt to expand the article to GA status there is no way it could be shown as a single, but as that's not currently the case the search for a proper ref can remain ongoing before we make any changes ourselves.

(It's just occurred to me how odd it is how we're both spending all this time debating over one tiny aspect of a moderately well-known song when there are far more important articles on more widely discussed encyclopedic topics that could use our care and attention. But I just don't have the motivation...) I Am Rufus • Conversation is a beautiful thing. 16:21, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

PartyNextDoor

Thanks for correcting the article for PartyNextDoor, I didn't have time to finish it. I need to make an article for the self-titled mixtape as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jevon Tompkins (talk • contribs)

Vandal warning

This should really warrant a much stronger warning. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 18:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

My mistake, it was only his first edit that is why I only used the uw1 template. If he had made another edit or two like that, I would have quickly taken him to WP:AIV as a vandalism only account. STATic message me! 20:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

No worries at all, my friend. :) If you see someone write something really horrible, feel free to jump to the higher levels. What he wrote was definitely a "two strikes and you're out" situation. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I now see that he had vandalized the page again after I had reverted him. If I was online at the time I would have definitely reported him after seeing that. STATic message me! 20:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. I clicked his contribs a few times here and there to see if he'd persist. When I saw the second edit I blocked him on the spot. Pretty deplorable stuff he wrote. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Well that is the privilege of being an Administrator, or I would have immediately blocked him too. My favorite part was "He begun his career after fingering cats and young boys"... Sometimes the vandals make me lose faith in the future of humanity lol. STATic message me! 21:14, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Take it from Marvin the Paranoid Android, humanity has no future.

Jupiter says to Earth: "You look sick." Earth says "Yeah. I've got a bad case of humans." Jupiter says: "Don't worry. It won't last long." Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Ahaha nice reference, I had almost forgot about The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy I need to watch the movie again. :) STATic message me! 21:56, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

DMX Rapper

I saw you edits and edit comments and I had all the facts I just wasn't sure how to word it properly so it would sound right and not copy the source info, but next time I will include all the facts. Casey.Grim85 (talk) 21:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Your edit implied that the marijuana was found in his possession, that he was immediately guilty of the crime, and that he was the driver of the vehicle. Those are two major incorrect statements that completely twisted what really occurred. Keep in mind when editing sections such as legal issues anything stretching the truth or false, could be seen as a major WP:BLP violation and land you in hot water. Just take extra care next time. STATic message me! 21:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

TDPDH subgenres

If you are that much pinpoint then nowhere you'll find a professional reviewer stating "this is a stoner rock record" because that sounds very much inane and amateurish. And the latter review (of themusic.co.au) clearly states in the concluding passages that, "call it hard rock or sludge metal what you want.....". --Shallowmead077 (talk) 07:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

That indicates the musical styles of the album, which can be mentioned in the article. That does not imply that they are the genres of the album, not to mention subgenres should not normally be used in the infobox lets be general like we are supposed to be. We do not need to crowd up the infobox with minor subgenres that one reviewer compares their sound to. The way it is now is just fine. STATic message me! 17:06, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Rob Van Dam

My source is simple by watching Monday Night Raw and visiting WWE.Com it states that Ricardo Rodriguez is Rob Van Dam's new manager so I placed Ricardo Rodriguez under the correct section on Van Dam's page maybe instead of changing my edit you could take the time yourself to see if what I did was correct since you seem on making the decision on what I edited was incorrect JMichael22 (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia must always be verified, you might want to see WP:V and choose to add a reliable source before readding the content. It is the job of the person the adds the content to verify it, not for me to investigate and see if it is right. To avoid making this mistake in the future always cite your sources. STATic message me! 01:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Ramaj Eroc

Recently this article was nominated for deletion (as its indicated on the creators talk page). I added a reference to it, and I think its good to go now. If not, ping me and I will be happy to look for more references, although music is not my strength (at least not this type of genre).--Mishae (talk) 00:38, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

He does not look that notable at all, I think I am going to nominate the article for A7 speedy deletion, but it might survive due to the MTV bio. But I see nothing notable in a google search, and google news turns up nothing. Lets see what an administrator thinks. STATic message me! 01:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

M.O..

I left a detailed message at User_talk:Koala15#Album_notability demonstrating my point. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 23:47, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes I saw it, that is why I restored the redirect. When I actually reviewed the article more I clearly see why you had redirected it. Bold change, but ultimately makes sense. Sorry for the confusion from the revert. STATic message me! 23:49, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

It's ok. Koala15 is a good editor on the whole. I think he/she doesn't realise there are notability criteria long established before either of us joined wiki. → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 00:01, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Mhhm. Yeah and I would like to make amends for not being civil enough in our previous discussion, and do not want there to be any hard feelings between us. As the veterans in the music area of Wikipedia we should try to stay on the same page and work together :). STATic message me! 00:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

big sean hall of fame

there's absolutely no reason to have to cite the fact that Roscoe Dash in on the song "it's time"

listen to the song and you'll hear he's on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.23.68 (talk) 23:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes we do, see WP:V and WP:NOR. We need a reliable source that reported him having vocals on the song. STATic message me! 23:54, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

How are you going to deny Roscoe Dash's vocals on the song, when they can be CLEARLY heard. Again I say, listen to the song. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsaroce (talk • contribs) 04:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I could listen the song a million times, it does not change WP:V. If I had not reverted it, someone else would have removed it. Not only we need a source for him being on the song at all, we need a source that he is credited in the album booklet as having vocals on the song. I mean look at Cruel Summer his vocals were not credited at all. So unless you have a reliable source crediting that he has an appearance on the song, it can not be on the article. STATic message me! 04:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

MrColonelCortez

Big Sean's page says "Kanye West" why is that there? Please tell me that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrColonelCortez (talk • contribs) 02:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Snoop Dog

Hi, thank you for editing my edit on Snoop Dog page.
Like I said BMI^[12] and my other websites lists his first name as Cordozar while others, like IMDb, list him as Broadus. Although IMDb^[13] also lists his grandparent as Cordozar Calvin Broadus Sr., making Snoop's first name Cordozar.

Your comment was «BMI lists last name then first name.»
Songwriter/Composer: BROADUS (last name) CORDOZAR (first name) CALVIN (middle name)
Current Affiliation: BMI
CAE/IPI #: 280557260

Tell me your thoughts. :)
Filipe Barros 17:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkfreakxx7 (talk • contribs)

Lets use reliable third party sources instead, Bio, The Smoking Gun, TIME and Yahoo! all cite his first name as Calvin. I think you are just confused reading BMI and IMDB is not a reliable source. STATic message me! 18:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Stay Trippy

yeah you're probably right, maybe "Having Sex" was just on one of his mixtapes... but the CDQ of "One Thousand" and "Having Sex" are out, so why'd you remove the official times? Distortiondude (talk) 00:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

My mistake for removing the track times, my revert was focused on the producer credit. And I did check, that DJ does not produce records like that, he just hosted the tape. STATic message me! 00:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Berzerk (song)

meet me at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Berzerk_.28song.29_brewing_edit_war.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Please respond at my talk.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Survival

There is no reliable source that says "Survival" is on The Marshall Mathers LP 2. Neither Eminem or his label have confirmed that song to be on the album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bananasownapple (talk • contribs) 21:45, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Um, ABC News and The Detroit Free Press among others reported the song is from the album. Explain to me how those are not undeniable reliable sources. So unless a reliable source that reports the song is not on the album, then it will stay for the time being. STATic message me! 21:56, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Z-Ro Editing

Hello, Static the reason why I've edited the label, instruments, and website information is because I've researched that information. His album booklet contains the name of the record company the album is under. Also, he produces his own music from time to time, which was also confirmed in his album booklets and he even spoke about producing his own music in interviews on YouTube. Lastly, that wasn't my Facebook information, that is his Facebook. He has his Instagram and Twitter linked to his Facebook profile. So, when he tweets from his verified profile on Twitter, it is posted on his Facebook wall. Also, an in an interview, he said that his Facebook name was, at the time, Rother Vandross, but it has changed since then. I'm friends with him on Facebook and I also follow him on Twitter. I am not a vandal, I'm just editing the page with current and legitimate information because he is one of my favorite artists. Thanks and have a blessed day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RodneyP43 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

My mistake then, I assumed you were attempting to promote yourself, your label or something. But if his FaceBook is not a verified account we can not link to it, for what should be understandable reasons. Go ahead and add the record labels back, and record producer back though. STATic message me! 02:34, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

SGP

Pardon me? I have every right to change age, as SpaceGhostPurpp thanked me individually for it. I think you do not realize how serious I am about wikipedia, I wake up and I brush my teeth reading an article on the toothbrush, I get changed looking at an article on clothes.. You don't understand.. This website birthed me, and I'm doing everything in my right to keep it from vandals. The information is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staplemaverick (talk • contribs) 04:49, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

In regards to Same Love.

I believe you are mistaken. I did not add any content of any kind to the article, I actually deleted a statement that was not in accordance with Wikipedia's Assume good faith behavioral guidelines. I do understand the mistake however and forgive you for it. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Japalion9 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

RE: Commercial Performance

Alright i will do that though i don't think it really matters. Koala15 (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Ryback

I'm not sure why you think there is no other significant Ryback. See my oppose comment on the noteworthiness of the historian. Dovid (talk) 17:58, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

I saw it, but he is not just known as "Ryback", there will be a hatnote to lead to the disambiguation page. If someone is searching "Ryback" they are not looking for the historian. They would type his first name first. STATic message me! 18:43, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

That's presumptuous. SOmeone used to printed references thinks by last name. And who's this TAMM.CO cat below? Dovid (talk) 00:36, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

After no one that you said was on the CTE roster was on the CTE album...will you admit you were wrong? I'm gonna guess not, glad I know you are tho. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAMM.CO (talk • contribs) 03:01, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

MMLP2

Hi STATicVerseatide. I'm sure you meant best when reverting my edit of the heading "Confirmed tracks" to "Recorded tracks", but I kept "Recorded tracks" because I don't want this to be another Detox (seeing how many "confirmed" tracks were later scrapped). And something about the word "confirmed" seems crystal ball-ish and unencyclopedic. Maybe we can use just "Tracks" perhaps? I know a release date is given and there're only a few months left, but things can change at the last minute. "Berzerk" and "Survival" are most likely going to make it to the album, but just to be sure... —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 22:38, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Having recorded tracks is just going to open it up to abuse and more crystal balling. In the end "recorded tracks" are irrelevant, what is confirmed by multiple reliable sources to appear on the album is what is important. We should be telling our readers what has been confirmed to appear on the album, not what has been recorded. I can see the surplus of "TBA" featuring Kendrick Lamar, or "TBA" featuring Slaughterhouse, popping up as we speak. I mean if one song that was confirmed in the past, does not make the final tracklist it is no big deal in the end scheme of things. Think it is not a surplus of songs over years like Detox, it is just two songs that have been revealed in the last month. I was originally questionable of "Survival"'s appearance, but after ABC News, and The Detroit Free Press reported it, we need a reliable source explicitly saying that the song will not appear on the album. With "Berzerk" being the first single, that would make every song listed confirmed to be on the album. STATic message me! 23:59, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Alright, makes sense to me. Thanks. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 00:12, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources to avoid

Please check the text at WP:ALBUMS/SOURCES#Sources to avoid paragraph 3. "Online retailers such as iTunes and Amazon.com should also be avoided. ... Track listings, release dates, record label, album covers and track lengths can all be found at Allmusic.—Iknow23 (talk) 06:43, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Now, I see what you mean about Allmusic only listing CD here. They USED TO show Digital also. What happened? But if you really insist on WP:ALBUMS/SOURCES that's the one to use.—Iknow23 (talk) 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

"Should be avoided" is not the same as "proven unreliable". And even that wording needs discussion since iTunes is the best source when it comes to proof of single releases and such. It really says not to use them as a way to promote the subject, but iTunes is used throughout in many GAs. Either way your revert did not make sense as this clearly supports a release to CD format in three different formats. They do not really need to show a DD release, we have iTunes for that. I mean it is kind of a no shit type of thing when it comes to a US number 1 album being released in CD format. STATic message me! 07:03, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I still see Amazon used all the time. There is a discrepancy in it being listed in "List of unreliable sources (with link to relevant discussion)" as there is NO link provided to the "relevant discussion". Instead the link just goes to Amazon.com.

I'm not disputing that CDs exist, just that it is unsourced. How can we just assume that CDs were issued in all the countries? And CD and digital download dates are often different, here we are showing them to be the same. Example Magna Carta Holy Grail#Release history...UK has digital date of July 8, 2013 and CD date of July 22, 2013.—Iknow23 (talk) 07:33, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Just remembered about Import CDs. They show that they were not released in those markets. They are imported (just shipped in) from somewhere else that DID release it on CD. So some countries DON'T have a CD release, even though their iTunes is selling it digitally. iTunes can only source its own format (digital download). Thus if CD is listed for a country, it needs a different source for verification of the CD format....Well, after all that...A new thought...I think wikipedia should ONLY use "Limited release history" sections showing ONLY the country of First Release (to coincide with the infobox release date) AND the artist's Home Country. Is it really that notable to know the Release date per format of EVERY country??? Isn't that really an indiscriminate collection of information as in Excessive listings of statistics??—Iknow23 (talk) 04:01, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

You are right, I have always thought that too. See the release history of some pop albums such as Don't Look Down, where they have nearly every country that has an iTunes in the release history section. But if I am not mistaken, a good extensive release history is usually looked for when looking over an album for GAN. That is why I usually only bother looking up and adding major countries (Australia, US, UK, France, Germany etc.) you know the countries that usually get a CD release along with digital download release of major albums. STATic message me! 16:59, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

2013 in hip hop music

I am removing these refs because they are spam. If you continue to replace them we will be in dispute. Jodosma (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Wow, I am so scared. The citations are there to verify what record label the albums were released on and in no way are WP:SPAM, you cannot even directly buy the music from that source like Amazon, it is just an online reference for what is on iTunes. I will restore them again, so stop remove citations. STATic message me! 21:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

What a shame that you were so caring about the page that you couldn't be bothered to fix the errors on it. Jodosma (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Besides the errors made by Reflinks you have not fixed one thing. STATic message me! 21:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Ref 232 (Missing title). Jodosma (talk) 22:14, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Well thanks for fixing the citation mistakes, but as I have explained the iTunes citations were appropriate. STATic message me! 22:18, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Response to your message (NWTS)

That was a reliable source though (view tweet here: https://twitter.com/uugwuu/status/373525836105670658). He (Reggie Ugwu) works for Billboard and interviewed Drake for Billboard (see here: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/the-juice/5679937/drakes-nothing-was-the-same-the-billboard-cover-story) and he also works for Complex Magazine (you could've figured these things out if he read his bio or google him). Drake and Best Buy have already confirmed there is a deluxe edition of NWTS but I guess they haven't confirmed which one of the two belongs to which, so you can keep that as 'alternate cover' for now, but you need to add those three songs to the confirmed tracks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bowlerboy08 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

The writer's Twitter is not verified (having the blue check next to his name). Without the blue check there is no way knowing the twitter is real and a reliable source. Unless a reliable source reports about the tracks we cannot add them to the confirmed tracks section. And about the cover art, if you read the references in the "cover art" section of the article, you would know the covers alternate between each one in stores, it is not a standard edition and deluxe edition thing. So you were basically making that up. STATic message me! 00:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Cashis not part of Shady Records

You serious, right? Cashis is not part of Shady Records anymore! Also, County Hound 2 is his second EP, not his second studio album, stupid! This needs to be changed back right now!! That was not cool!!! Skylar3214 4:59, 1 September 2013

First all name calling makes you look illiterate. Second see this [14] as my edit summary said, he is still signing to Shady as songwriter. And what is your source for it being an EP? All sources have called it his second album. He has released four singles already from it, that is enough to already be an EP. Why would he really release more than half an EP ahead of time, that does not make sense. It is an album, not a EP. STATic message me! 00:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Chinx Drugz listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Chinx Drugz. Since you had some involvement with the Chinx Drugz redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). TCN7JM 01:04, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Junaid Khan

Hi, you got to the article as I was going to restore it to (actor). I think since the original move was from (actor) that probably is the default, but this may deserve a RM. Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Well it should be whatever he is best known as, I am not a big fan of the "entertainer" dab, but it is much better than having two. I am not sure why you reverted it if you agree though? STATic message me! 23:59, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Only because it's been bouncing around like a rubber ball Talk:Junaid Khan (actor), best to have a RM and get some stability. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Curse of Chucky

Hi, you reverted an edit I made -- are you saying that the IMDB.com is an unreliable source? Partyclams (talk) 22:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is based around user-generated content so it is one of the prime examples for unreliable sources. STATic message me! 22:34, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2013 in hip hop music (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hot 97

Digi+Phonics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Little Brother

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I Don't Know If I'm Still Neutral

Can you take a look at the articles that Billboarder22 has contributed/created? (You marked one of his/hers for speedy deletion.) They all have multiple issues - lots of smoke and mirrors. Several have already been deleted. I got so irritated reading them that I question my own neutrality. Thanks. RBDowing (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

I checked out and nominated a few, definitely looks like a WP:SPA to me. STATic message me! 16:47, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. JSFarman (talk) 22:38, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Adding a Pro Era wiki page.

Hey sorry to bother you but, please can you add a wiki page about pro era for example (Kirk Knight, CJ Fly or Nyck Caution, etc.) (9~6~13). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Og alchemizt (talk • contribs) 00:54, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, considering I like to take a lot of time and concentration when creating an article, I do not think I will get to a Pro Era article soon. A Chuck Strangers article might be on the horizon, but if you wait till you are WP:AUTOCONFIRMED you should be able to create the Pro Era article yourself. Just see Wikipedia:Creating an article and make sure to cite many reliable sources. You may wish to create it at Og alchemizt/Sandbox in the meantime if you like to avoid deletion. Also please sign your posts with ~~~~. $TATic message me! 01:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Credentials

What other way am I supposed to verify that I produced that beat if I wasn't credited? You have to understand that makes me really mad especially since this isn't a bias statement or a way of promotion. I'm actually telling the truth, if i went to court about this subject I would have all the right evidence to win the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mistamidnight (talk • contribs) 15:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

If it was notable and verifiable if a website posted the song and credited your production. It could very well be seen as promotion, since there is no source for you producing the song, you do not know how many times random producers try to add their name to Wikipedia. If you really produced it why were you not credited? And why would we at Wikipedia credit someone for producing/writing a song if they were not credited by the artist or label? STATic message me! 16:01, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I had no control over the credits, Chief Keef didn't credit me and I've already spoken to him about it. He said he would tell Lil Reese to change it but nothing happened. It isn't my fault why I didn't get credited. Try seeing things from my point of view. I'm getting no recognition for my hard work and it's not easy to get your music to a major artist either. Just look at this tweet he made about me, I'm not lying for exposure https://twitter.com/ChiefKeef/status/289685606169202689 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mistamidnight (talk • contribs) 16:24, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I usually would not let it pass with a random Twitter post, but I will let it go because I am leaning on believing that you did produce the beat, considering Keef is following you and he Tweeted about you. STATic message me! 17:10, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Can I ask you a question

Hello. Thanks for your greeting. Can I ask you a question? You are a WP:REVIEWER, but I have never seen infoboxes like one on the page ru:Очень страшное кино 5 (21 edits have not been reviewed yet) or ru:Caran d’Ache (this article has never been reviewed yet). Where can I see these infoboxes? Sergey Cepblu (talk) 18:06, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I am confused on what you are asking. Both of those pages have infoboxes and you liked to the Russian Wikipedia, when I do not understand Russian in the slightest. I would not really feel comfortable reviewing the changes due to the language barrier. STATic message me! 18:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I wrote translations in brackets.

• Russian: Текущая версия страницы пока не проверялась опытными участниками и может значительно отличаться от версии, проверенной 7 июля 2013; проверки требует 21 правка. ru:Очень страшное кино 5
• English: Experienced users haven’t reviewed the current version of the page yet, and it differ from the version that has been reviewed on July 7, 2013; 21 edits have not been reviewed yet.
• Russian: Текущая версия (не проверялась). ru:Caran d’Ache
• English: This article has never been reviewed yet.
• Russian: ru:Очи чёрные (фильм)
• English: An article is reviewed if it has no infoboxes.

You may read some information about flagged versions on Russian Wikipedia (in English). As I can see now, this proposal failed in English Wikipedia, also I found some articles (there were just 10 articles awaiting review—this is very few). Naya Rivera—the latest accepted version was accepted on 7 September 2013. There is 1 pending revision awaiting review. This is what I was looking for. Thanks. Sergey Cepblu (talk) 13:12, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Rick Ross discography

Can you point out for me where you see the No.59 for R&B chart in this source as you have indicated in this edit? When R&B chart peaks are selected on Billboard for Wale, there is no peak for "Poor Decision". What makes you assume that removing unverifiable peaks constitutes disruptive editing?--Harout72 (talk) 19:27, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

That source I just linked you to the Bubbling Under R&B/HH Songs chart, which shows a peak of 9 on the chart. Since the normal chart now only consists of 50 chart positions, 50+9=59. The peak is verified, I do not know what you are not seeing or not understanding. And continuing reverting after the facts have been shown is disruptive. STATic message me! 19:34, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

R&B chart has 100 slots as Hot 100. Look at the peak of Wale's single "Actin' Up", No.87. Your source, I'm afraid doesn't at all support No.59, therefore, we cannot have that peak in the table unless it does appear in Wale's R&B section. All of the peaks currently are meticulously supported, so should the peak for "Poor Decision" be, for verification purposes.--Harout72 (talk) 19:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Maybe you have not paid attention to music in awhile, Billboard downgraded the R&B Hip/Hop chart to 50 positions in October 2012. So peaks from before then still would be in the R&B section. I am going to restore it one final time, and it is time to stop. If you follow this link {{BillboardURLbyName|artist=wale|chart=Bubbling Under R&B/Hip-Hop Songs}} https://www.billboard.com/artist/wale/chart-history/bubbling-under-r%26b/hip-hop-songs, it takes you to the Bubbling Under R&B/Hip-Hop Songs section. STATic message me! 20:03, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

You are really not behaving as someone who's edited wikipedia for as long as you have. Even if what you're saying is true for R&B chart having been reduced by 50 slots, we should not have any Bubbling Under.... peaks in the column of R&B, because Bubbling Under... charts aren't considered part of the main charts.--Harout72 (talk) 20:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I am, your attitude and continued reverting even after sources were provided, is what is frustrating me. Yes it was cut back, just like the Rap Songs chart is only 25 positions now. Well maybe that is something you should take up with the wider projects, because bubbling under positions are always included. It needs a note to go along with it, but the position is definitely true and verifiable. STATic message me! 20:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Bubbling Under peaks can be included, but only in footnotes. WP:Record charts is explicit that the songs are to be listed as uncharted with a footnote indicating the Bubbling Under position. Bubbling Under charts do not extend the main charts. They are related, certainly, but they are not an extension.—Kww(talk) 23:46, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

User:Kww, It did not matter to me if it is was or not, the other editor just insisted on removing it even after a reference was clearly provided, and I am not knowledgeable on how to put together footnotes that well or I would have added one from the beginning. It is just my opinion that it does look better with the number, and if anyone is confused by the higher number the footnote is right there to explain it. And if they are not an "extension" of the chart, what could they possibly be? They are the songs, that are in order of closest to charting on the main chart. STATic message me! 23:50, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, they are the list of highest songs that would normally be eligible for the chart that have never been on the main chart. That's why the whole "add 25/50/100/whatever" thing doesn't work, and why they aren't an extension. If a song makes it to the Hot 100, and then falls to being the 101st most popular song, it doesn't show as number 1 on the Bubbling Under chart: it drops off both lists completely. The only time positions 1-25 on the Bubbling Under would ever actually be 101-125 on an "extended" chart would be if no song that had ever been on the Hot 100 at any time in history would have been in positions 101-125. I'm willing to bet that that has never happened on any chart.—Kww(talk) 00:21, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

In that sense, you are 100% right I had forgotten that it does not include songs that already had reached the target chart. STATic message me! 00:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Stub tag

Noticed you moved it to the bottom, is there a particular rule on this? I've noticed some pages have at the top and some at the bottom? KiraChinmoku _{(T, ¤)} 23:14, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Every article I have seen it is on the bottom, I do not know if there is some written rule on it though. I think it kinda looks weird on the top of the page. Also my bad for removing it the first time, I am trying to deal with the sockpuppet that is currently disrupting the article. STATic message me! 23:17, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

(Excuse me for barging in.) @Kirachinmoku: The instructions that say stub templates should go at the bottom of articles can be found at Template:Stub. —C.Fred (talk) 23:54, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah brilliant, thanks for clearing that up guys. Static that's cool mate, I did realise. KiraChinmoku _{(T, ¤)} 23:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

The Zone

What if i just identify it as a song instead of a single? Can i just count it as a promo since it has a music video and a cover art? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drizzy010 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Either way the song is still not notable per WP:NSONGS as I have explained. If you see you would know that if a song has not been significantly covered in reliable sources and has not charted it does not deserve a Wikipedia article. STATic message me! 19:36, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Can't i just identify this song as a promo at least since it has a music video and a cover art?Drizzy010 (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Having a music video does not mean a song is notable per WP:NSONGS, I get you probably like the song, but that does not mean it is notable for a Wikipedia article. Or if you mean the Drake discography it should not be listed as a promotional single unless reliable sources called it one, we cannot just make up things because there is a music video. STATic message me! 19:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Super Collider

Hi mate. You want to discuss your changes here or on the talk page?--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 19:40, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Is there anything to discuss really? It was unsourced and consensus on the talk page indicated that thrash metal was not a significant genre of the album. Not to mention the discussion on genres on the talk page is littered with WP:OR. Heavy metal and hard rock are good, we do not need and we should not list a bunch of subgenres. STATic message me! 19:48, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I've been editing that article quite awhile and I know what the reviews are. There are few reviews who indicate thrash (Loudwire, Spin and PopMatters). But I won't waste your time arguing for something not that important. My point was to discuss genre changes to talk page because they're a touchy subject.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, I had edited the article in its early stages and randomly just visited the article again. Since I saw there was an unsourced genre and more than two (there is no need for any more than three in the template. I had just assumed a random IP had added it or something since it was unreferenced. Then once I was that the consensus on the talk page was that the genre was not that significant I removed it. To appear in the infobox we should have multiple sources calling it a "-insert genre- album", not that certain tracks have an influence of it. STATic message me! 04:21, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Discography Rules

Ok befor eI edit further I just want to clarify something(s): Does the discography for an artist have to include all of their works with others such as a group or collaboration album? Also the rules behind the discography have been changed so many times. Are these rules voted adn then put into effect? Who exactly decides them? And I'm assuming the ideal discography sections should emulate the ones on Too Short and 50 Cent's articles? Banan14kab (talk) 06:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

If you see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works)#Discographies it is a list of the artists major works, this always includes all solo albums, and if a collaboration album is really significant such as Watch the Throne or the D12 albums to Eminem. If the artist is newer (has released less then three albums) then it is okay to include their very notable mixtapes (at the minimum they must have articles). 50 Cent and Too Shorts are not really correct, because they should just be lists rather then separating the solo from collaboration, like how Eminem's is currently done. STATic message me! 06:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

You may be interested

In expressing opinion at Wikipedia:BOTREQ#TedderBot_replacement. If enough people comment there, maybe something will finally happen. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:21, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Here's a recognition for your long-time service at Wikipedia. Dealing with all those harmful edits over the years deserves a proper award. Keep up the good work. Вик Ретлхед (talk) 07:17, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Вик Ретлхед! STATic message me! 15:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Expiration date for DNAU

Hi there - please discuss the expiration date from the DNAU template on Talk:Bradley Manning, before engaging in any further editing. That way we can all avoid an edit war. (: Thank you. CaseyPenk (talk) 21:36, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I actually mistaked that thread for another one, my bad. STATic message me! 21:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

You're Next

I don't care what you say. I will always leave order of death sections.

You claim its unpublished? I sourced (with two sources), my last one I did. You didn't accept them. Further, you say there is a ban on original research? Then how does any film have a plot. I checked the plot section for dozens of movies, none of which have citations. Show me where there are cites or "non-original" research in any of the plots, and I will concede this point to you.

Lists are not banned by Wikipedia rules (they are discouraged, but it does say that they are appropriate in some cases and I can point you to hundreds of lists on Wikipedia).

The Order of Deaths goes directly to the plot, so it is not "trivia."

You are also not the king of Wikipedia, and I will continue to do this. It is useful, relevant and properly included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.79.35.85 (talk) 23:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I believe WP:FILMPLOT covers that. It is WP:OR when you want to make unsourced trivial lists, which have always been removed. It has become beyond disruptive and it is just time to stop. It is practically the definition of WP:TRIVIA, and almost 5 different editors have reverted this order of deaths garbage, so it is not just me. Go ahead and try to continue, I am sure you will be blocked, probably not for the first time.STATic message me! 23:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Beautiful Onyinye

I need you to restore the Beautiful Onyinye single. You don't have the right to delete it. You are praticing vandalism. versace1608 22:28, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Speak english and see the definition of vandalism. The song fails WP:NSONGS as I pointed out in my edit summary. STATic message me! 22:31, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

---

How does it? You need to specifically explain that to me rather than just gave me that. According to Wikipedia, "Songs and singles are probably notable if they have been the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label." Here are several notable links: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lY2H2ZP56K4; http://www.okayafrica.com/2012/06/12/video-p-square-x-rick-ross-beautiful-onyinye/; http://www.bellanaija.com/2012/06/12/bn-video-premiere-p-square-feat-rick-ross-beautiful-onyinye-remix/

"1.Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts." African songs aren't popular like American and European songs and there's not a lot of information online. Also, there isn't a major music chart website like billboard. The closest thing to Billboard in Africa is Afribiz Top 100 chart, a weekly chart that compiles music from West, East, Central, and Southern Africa.

"2.Has won one or more significant awards or honors, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award." Again, something that's not known worldwide can't possibly get nominated for the aforementioned awards, can it?

"3.Has been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands, or groups." Beautiful Onyinye has been released as a recording. The track is on iTunes. Here's the link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/beautiful-onyinye-feat.-rick/id580462837?i=580462842

I've dissected Wikipedia's statements and don't see why "Beautiful Onyinye" doesn't qualify as a "notable song".

Wikipedia also states:"Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created."

According to the above statement, you don't have the right to delete the single because if it isn't "notable", the information should be "contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created."

Whatever angle you look at it from, you're wrong for deleting the "Beautiful Onyinye" article. I see that you've written numerous hip hop articles. How would you like it if I deleted your articles and tell you, "WP:NSONGS"? I'm pretty sure you wouldn't appreciate people who don't give 2 cents about your contribution to wikipedia. versace1608 23:07, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

---

P.S, there are numerous hip-hop, pop, country, and etc songs that haven't been nominated for any of the awards listed above. Yet, there are articles of them on Wikipedia. The last time I check, Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia aimed at educating the word through information. If articles about P-Square (one of Africa's biggest musical duo) and other african musicians aren't created, how can people who are trying to learn about these artists know about them?

All of those are not reliable sources, especially YouTube. So you admit the song has not charted on any major music chart, and has not been nominated for any major awards? Since all three of those points are not met the song should not have a Wikipedia article per WP:NSONGS. You are reading the policy extremely wrong in many places. Threatening me with deletion is laughable because you can't, and I make sure every single article I create undeniably meets WP:NSONGS, which you should do before you create an song article. STATic message me! 23:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

---

I am not threatening you. I only said you wouldn't appreciate it if someone else deleted your work. I can't delete your work and don't want to. I, unlike you, appreciate people's contributions to Wikipedia. "So you admit the song has not charted on any major music chart, and has not been nominated for any major awards?" There are numerous songs on Wikipedia that do not have chart singles and nominations. Why don't you delete them? Just because a song doesn't have charts information and nominations, doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to have an article. P-Square have other songs that have recieved accolades. Not every song an artist makes recieve nominations and awards. To say that an article needs to recieve accolades before its worthy to have a Wikipedia article is very bias my friend. If that was the case, all the tens of thousands of articles on Wikipedia should be deleted and you should delete them because you are the founder of Wikipedia and you made the rules. I am tired exchanging words with you. I am going to find an administrator who's not bias; moreover, someone who understand and can appreciate contributor's works.versace1608 00:34, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Then all those numorous songs should also be redirected as they would fail WP:NSONGS, unless they were covered in many notable reliable third party sources, which this one is not. Other songs by P-Square may be notable, but this song is not. STATic message me! 00:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

FYI: versace1608 (talk · contribs) posted a note on my talk page pointing me to here. I replied there. See User talk:Davidwr#Need help with restoring an article that was wrongly deleted (diff - 4 edits). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:29, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Herman Medrano

As I have already told you this article is not eligible for CSD#A7 as there is a "credible claim of significance or importance" namely the collaboration with other notable musicians and the release of a number of albums. GiantSnowman 13:42, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Just having a few songs with artists with questioned notability, and releasing a bunch of not notable albums on, not notable labels does not make an artist notable himself. The notability is not inherited from other artists by having them appear on his songs, or every single rapper that made a song with an artist with a Wikipedia article, would have a Wikipedia article. STATic message me! 13:49, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

As I've already told you - somebody being non-notable does not make them eligible for CSD. As A7 says, "the criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines." Aa this article has made a claim to notability - albeit one which may not pass our standards - it is not eligible for A7. GiantSnowman 14:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

More re: TopNotch

Please look at the article and see how notable it is: I think WP:BEFORE should have applied here. Same with Salah Edin, which I'm asking to be restored--he's got three albums, at least one with TopNotch, and there's plenty of news coverage. I consider both of these nominations a bit hasty. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:41, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I know much about the policies, such as WP:BEFORE. To be honest I had nominated it due to the lack of references and the amount of red-linked artists, and articles that had been A7ed for promotion/being not notable. But I have seen the expansion to the article you did, and it looks great now! Notability is not even a question. WP:BEFORE really only applies to AfD's, it is on the administrator to decided if the article is notable or not. I had been using User:AlexNewArtBot/HipHopSearchResult, since the bot had been down for almost a month prior (it is still down), and I was quickly skimming through them to get the many not notable ones, that probably would not have been noticed if I hadn't. STATic message me! 15:09, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, I don't care so much for the policy as for the thought. Overtagging when such is not necessary increases the workload for us admins, and it is good practice to do at least a cursory search. Yes, that's more work, and yes, most of the times it delivers nothing, but there was enough in Salah Edin to at least make a credible claim of notability. In other words, please don't be too quick on the draw. Drmies (talk) 18:43, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

The only significance the article implied when I nominated it, was that his picture had been shown instead of a murders on the news by accident. There was nothing in the article that implied his musical career was anything of significance at all. Which explains why an administrator origionally deleted it (could have been BLPPRODed too). That is why users that create articles need to create half decent ones so their work and the notability is never questioned. Why do you think every time I create a BLP, I take at least 3-5 hours straight creating and referencing it? Because that is how to create an article, it should not be left for someone else to expand, and make it suffice the notability guidelines. STATic message me! 18:47, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

loud like love

"Not sure what that is but it would need a reliable source."

is a picture take from placebo fans worldwide forum alright? cause someone posted a picture which shows the songs on the live at rak studios dvd. by the way, it from the digipak version and box set of loud like love. violetcries (talk) 21:33, 14 September 2013

A forum is not a reliable source in the slightest, for that kind of information we would need either a reliable third party source, a official source from the band or their website, or at the least a retailer that is selling the deluxe edition/box set of the album. You know, we just need to have it verified being official and not just a bootleg or something. STATic message me! 20:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Songsbury Page

Hi there,

I received a notification from you on the article that I posted about Songsbury. I am not quite understanding the reason for possible deletion as the article is unbiased and has valid references to support the items within the article. If you have detected any bias, would you be able to pinpoint the exact place as to where it is in the article and I'd be more than happy to rephrase it.

Thanks for your help

--Songsbury (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

It is a generic COI message, since judging by your user name, you are either the subject writing an autobiography of yourself, or someone representing the subject. Judging by your contributions you seem to be a single purpose account and would have a conflict of interest. The reason for possible deletion is the subject not being notable per WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO, but that is on an administrator to decide. STATic message me! 21:33, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

The article is not an autobiography and I do not represent the artist I'm writing about. I'm a fan of the artist and the band that he is in. I'm a little unsure about how the subject may not be deemed notable as I have provided the proper references. How does it work with the administrators? How long does it take for them to make a decision on the article? I'm new to wikipedia as a contributor and I have other articles and contributions to articles I'd like to make, so I'm trying to better understand how the system and format goes.

Thanks again

--Songsbury (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Well making your username, the name of your first article was not a very smart decision as any editor would have assumed you were the subject. It all depends when they reach the article, sometimes fast, sometimes will take a day. It might be declined due to the newspaper coverage, but that was about the band not the subject. Maybe try to work on other existing articles to get a grip on things, cleaning up and adding references, stuff like that, before creating a bunch of articles. STATic message me! 22:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm realizing that now...but it's a little too late to change. Although the articles were overall about the band, the artist was the one being interviewed and the journalist had asked questions about the artists music history and accomplishments. I thought that would've been an adequate reference to the details I posted. I will see what other reputable references I can find about the artist.

Thanks for your time and insight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Songsbury (talk • contribs) 22:17, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

If you are interested, you can see Wikipedia:Changing username to change your username. It looks like it will sneak pass A7, but there could be a future WP:AfD if additional references/notability is not established. And no problem. STATic message me! 22:22, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Perfect. I will do more digging and will request a name change as well. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Songsbury (talk • contribs) 22:42, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

RE:WP:RFPP

I have responded to your comment on my my talkpage. Regards, Woody (talk) 22:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Gudda Gudda

"Gudda Gudda (rapper)" is an unnecessarily long title per WP:PRECISION. Why don't you ask User:Courcelles to unsalt the original page so we can move it there? 2Flows (talk) 08:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah clearly, but it was the only way to get around the salting for the time being. That article had been in my userspace for like two years and I finally decided to complete it. I had already made a request at WP:RFPP when you posted this. If you have not noticed the move has already taken place. STATic message me! 14:44, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

BOATS2

It's from the actual physical copy that i have smh — Preceding unsigned comment added by JasonXXYoung (talk • contribs) 15:57, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries are your friend you know. When I have different IPs adding different unsourced credits every day what do you want me to think? Also I am not sure if that is a misprint, because Shawty Redd was widely reported having produced "I Do It". But if it is from the physical copy credits, i'll go ahead and readd. STATic message me! 16:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

hi, on 2chainz ft Fergie 'netflix' i am credited in the booklet as additional production and programming under DJA, as well as my writing credit under my real name Derek Allen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blkmsk (talk • contribs) 08:19, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Upon release of the single, C-Note and Diplo were universally the only producers credited on the track, by reliable sources including 2 Chainz himself. We do not credit programmers or other minor roles, in the production section of the tracklist. If credit is what you are looking for, I have been waiting for AllMusic to post the full personnel for the album so I can add a section for the album's personnel. STATic message me! 08:25, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Dimitsana

Hi, I used "Edit Beta" which probably messed up the source and I didn't realise that as I didn't even compare the changes. Re-edited it now by editing the source. Being a member of wikipedia for only the last 10 minutes, your message is clearly not what I was expecting :( Not the best way to welcome people, but hey...thats you!