Talk:Plata O Plomo

Content of unrelated interview

An editor has added a three paragraph-long section about Remy Ma's prison sentence and other topics barely related to this article about an album. The editor has reverted its removal. The source cited for this unrelated content is an hour-long YouTube interview with Fat Joe. The input of other editors about the appropriateness of this content would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:00, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

If you can explain why you feel it is unrelated that would be appreciated. As it stands, it serves to give the reader of the page background information on how the album came to be. The interview referenced in the article (which includes the time in the video where it is in reference to) should be considered relevant as the reason for the interview was to promote the (at the time) upcoming album. If you take a look at other artist's album page background sections they do the same thing, why is this album any different? Smush123 (talk) 13:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

YouTube used as source

This material was restored in violation of WP:BURDEN; the source is YouTube and is not suitable.

I'm preserving this material by providing this link: diff. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@K.e.coffman: Forgive me if I sound ignorant, but I do not see YouTube as an unsuitable source on WP:BURDEN. I understand Wikipedia has policies but I think it can perhaps be followed too rigorously. The YouTube video in question is easily verifiable as the interview contains Fat Joe himself discussing the album. Smush123 (talk) 13:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

We have a certain standard of what we call "reliable sources" and this video on youtube is essentially a self published source. We do not use these. You may find it a bit too strict, but reason for this is WP:BLP, which is one of our most important policies. Any claims involving a person needs to be reported in a reliable secondary source with a reputation for fact checking. In this podcast, while multiple claims are made about a certain person, there doesn't seem to be any independent verification of the facts. These should not be added to the article. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

In addition, WP:COMMONSENSE: No one should have to commit to watching an hour-long video in order to verify that it supports claims made in a Wikipedia article. General Ization ^Talk 00:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@Lemongirl942: @General Ization: I understand that it is not viable to have someone sit through the entire video to verify it hence why I included the video times in the reference. Do we at least agree that as the background stands now is incorrect? The reference given makes no mention of the album. Yet no one seems bothered by that, only my edits seem to be a problem.