Jump to content

Talk:Tupac Shakur: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Leethal (talk | contribs)
The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory did NOT sell 28 million.
Line 252: Line 252:
:Is platinum not 1 million records? There is a wiki article on this somewhere. Which makes 2pac 7x platinum on All Eyez on Me. I think eminem is the best selling rap artist ever with over 10 million sold of The Marshall Mathers LP - Neilz - 19th October 2006
:Is platinum not 1 million records? There is a wiki article on this somewhere. Which makes 2pac 7x platinum on All Eyez on Me. I think eminem is the best selling rap artist ever with over 10 million sold of The Marshall Mathers LP - Neilz - 19th October 2006
::Platinum does equal 1 miliion unless you release a double disc album. The RIAA counts that has 2 albums, so techincally it would be 500,000. As for selling 7 million copies, we need to tred carfully on this. If we can find a reliable source (and possibily a back up source) then it should definalty be put in. At the same time you should mention that technically it is neither diamond nor 14 times platinum since the RIAA has to certify it. --[[User:Ted87|Ted87]] 19:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
::Platinum does equal 1 miliion unless you release a double disc album. The RIAA counts that has 2 albums, so techincally it would be 500,000. As for selling 7 million copies, we need to tred carfully on this. If we can find a reliable source (and possibily a back up source) then it should definalty be put in. At the same time you should mention that technically it is neither diamond nor 14 times platinum since the RIAA has to certify it. --[[User:Ted87|Ted87]] 19:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

== The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory did NOT sell 28 million. ==

The citation is completely unreliable. It estimates around that, and like I said, unreliable. If it was RIAA certified 7x platinum and sold in total 4x that worldwide, that would be a record. This would also make this one of the best selling albums of all time, which has never been indicated by any record company, nor by any certification. I am removing worldwide sales until proper citation used.

Revision as of 12:09, 20 October 2006

WikiProject iconBiography: Musicians GA‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as High-importance).

Template:GA-musicians Template:Stablenotice Template:Todo priority Template:Maintained

WikiProject iconHip hop Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:V0.5

Warning Please read and understand Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Citing sources, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources before making additions to this article, or making suggested additions on this article's talk page. Additions made without references which meet this criteria may be deleted as vandalism. Blogs, emails, fansites and statements made on the radio do not meet this criteria.

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.

Previous discussions:

The Lawsuit against Suge/Death Row/Kenner

The text of this lawsuit is online somewhere, I don't remember where, but it maintains (and the court agreed) that the money alleged by Knight to have been for Tupac's bail (1.4 million), was not paid in full by Knight or Death Row, but by Interscope Records, with a 300 thousand dollar payment and the potential earning power of Shakur as collateral. Knight's assertations that he or Death Row bailed Tupac out of jail in return for the 3 album deal were and are the beginning of the basis of the lawsuit the estate filed.

LoganRage 11:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)LoganRage Oct.12 4:05AM[reply]

Tupac's birth name

I think your idea is ridiculous and dis-repectfull to his mother, yes Tupac was not born with such a cool name but his mother changed it and you are no-one to suggest that we revert back, are you his mother ? I think that is the only person with the authority on making a decison on what the world called Tupac was Afeni. I see it as a inherent right of a mother to name her child and no-one has the right to change it, including that person. 07-22-2006 Mizpac

I agree completely—it's up to his mother to say what the right answer is. What do you propose? Do you think an e-mail to Afeni or 2Pac Legacy would be useful? -Mysekurity 03:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

"It has been rumored that Shakur's birth name was Lesane Parish Crooks, but this has been proven false."

Should that statement be removed? The source is "Holler If You Hear Me" but in that book I do not remember them mentioning "Lesane Parish Crooks". Has this been proven false or has it just not been proven true?

Rephrase, not remove. So far as I know there are no reliable sources supporting this but it has not been proven false. KillerChihuahua?!? 10:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I found some sources. answers.com seems to be the best one though. I think it's true
http://www.answers.com/topic/tupac-shakur
http://www.secondhandsongs.com/artist/11224.html
http://www.nndb.com/people/548/000024476/
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/music/tupac-shakur/
http://www.studentcentral.co.uk/unsolved_murder_lesane_parish_crooks_more_widely_4318/
http://www.popstarsplus.com/music_tupac.htm
Jowan2005

Althought that would have been great a few months ago, it has already been confirmed and included License2Kill 21:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has not been included. I added it and it was taken out by Mysekurity. I did a quick few-minute google search and quickly I am able to find 7 sites all saying that Lesane Parish Crooks was his true birth name. and Mysekurity says "very few websitesm, and even fewer notable sources, list Lesane or Parish as his name" OK well I proved that wrong. If I can find 7 sources before going onto page two of google then it's not "very few website" I'm sure I could probably find hundreds. The only thing I made a mistake one was how to cite the source, that does not mean it should be removed, that means someone should fix it. --Jowan2005

I changed it back and sourced it correctly. I think it should just say "Name" instead of "Birth name" because that could confuse some people into thinking "Tupac Shakur" was only his stage name. His real name was Parish Lesane Crooks and that is confirmed in Tupac Shakur Legacy an official book a much better source then some fansite that is probably making a mistake that they found on some other site License2Kill 03:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know how you could change the "Birth name" to "Given name"?

One would have to change the template, which would affect every article the template is used on. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible for one to create a new template? License2Kill 05:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be deleted as duplicate effort, a type of fork. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to say, but seven sites is not a substantial number to back up a fact like this. I've got nothing against the name, it's just I would like a little proof. Is anyone who has Tupac Shakur Legacy willing to look this up? and perhaps cite the book properly (page number, etc.) with {{cite book}}? The reason I'm skeptical of those unnoficial sources is that his official website mentions nothing of the names Lesane, Parish, or Crooks (click 2Pac in the main window). Anyone else have any thoughts to add? -Mysekurity 03:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Not entirely sure on the best method to resolve this, but as it stands something is listed as fact, but the page doesnt provide anything to convince me that it's the case, in fact im decidedly sceptical. The referenced source is a book without an ISBN or page number, and even if this is stated in the book referenced, are biographies by fans sufficient sources to reference, if they dont cite a source themselves? Dont want to edit, because im not too sure what's better, but "Out of fear of someone hurting her son Afeni Shakur put the name Parish Lesane Crooks on the birth certificate, but changed his name one year later" need to change. Provider uk 17:01, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a fan made biography, it's an official biography License2Kill 19:05, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite it correctly, then. And if possible, show where in the text it says this. Until it has been corroberated by an outside source (maybe try e-mailing Afeni?), the dubious tag will stay up. -Mysekurity 01:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I fixed the citation. It's on page 9. License2Kill 02:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spreading Tupac's ashes in South Africa (again)

This discussion is continued from the archive because apparently we haven't finished it.

I deleted, for a third time, the unverified and unsourced statement that "Family and friends plan to spread the remaining ashes during a ceremony in Soweto, South Africa, where Nelson Mandela will be attending." There is absolutely no evidence to support the statement that Nelson Mandela will be attending the ceremony. User License2Kill has added the statement about Mandela back three times now and has not provided a reliable source for the statement. The user has given this as a source: http://www.allhiphop.com/hiphopnews/?ID=6135. Yet a reading of the source reveals that there is nothing to support this statement. The source states "During the eight-day trip, Afeni Shakur was scheduled to meet with leaders like Nelson Mandela, Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, Miriam Makeba and others." That says nothing about Mandela being at the spreading of Tupac's ashes in 2007. I have surveyed the South African media and have found no evidence to support the assertion. I suggest that the statement read: "Family and friends plan to spread the remaining ashes in Soweto, South Africa, on June 16, 2007 which is Shakur's 36th birthday" which is verifiable with the source provided. Can others please add their thoughts on this here so that we can resolve this issue. Thank you. Lionchow 20:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it deleted. L2K, find a source and post it here on TALK for discussion, or drop it. Edit warring over this is not helping the article. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/arts/articulate/200609/s1739745.htm License2Kill 23:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a post from a public user - anything under the "articulate" header is like a blog. Not a RS. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, what about Pretoria News? Anyone know anything about this source? [1] KillerChihuahua?!? 23:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"during a ceremony attended by the country's former president, Nelson Mandela." http://www.smh.com.au/news/music/his-life-after-death/2006/09/12/1157826940955.html License2Kill 23:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok we now have the Sydney Morning Herald and Pretoria News. IMHO we add it, and add both references. KillerChihuahua?!? 23:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you read the Sydney Morning Herald closely it says "That new reputation will be reinforced today when his remaining ashes are scattered at a sacred site in Soweto, during a ceremony attended by the country's former president, Nelson Mandela." The 'today' that it refers to is the date of the article, Sept 13, 2006. As we now know, this did not happen. There is no article that says anything about Mandela being there in 2007. We should not assume that he will be there in 2007 from this one article, this is an encyclopedia, and we should have pretty strict standards. If you read the Pretoria News article, it says nothing about Mandela. Also, why is it that only one Australian newspaper has this mention of Mandela being present, and not a single South African newspaper does, or any newspaper anywhere else for that matter? I live in South Africa and have been following this in the media, and there has been no mention of the Mandela being at the event. Below are 8 different articles from South African newspapers, none of which mention Mandela. When doing research and writing a summary of that research, one should not get an idea in one's head of what should or shouldn't be included and then seek out sources to confirm one's own belief, but should rather survey a wide variety of sources and summarize the overall findings. Again, I suggest that the statement read: "Family and friends plan to spread the remaining ashes in Soweto, South Africa, on June 16, 2007 which is Shakur's 36th birthday" which is verifiable by multiple sources. Lionchow 07:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


http://www.capetimes.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3428027 http://capeargus.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=49&fArticleId=3427833 http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3427783 http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=283305&area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__national/ http://www.pretorianews.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3427610 http://www.dispatch.co.za/2006/09/07/SouthAfrica/atupac.html http://www.tonight.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3354561&fSectionId=431&fSetId=251 http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?from=rss_South%20Africa&set_id=1&click_id=&art_id=vn20060907093729790C168915

Concur, the statement in the article must reflect what the sources say. KillerChihuahua?!? 09:20, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I edited the Mandela thing out until we can source it, also changing the postponed date from 1996 to 2006. --Guinnog 09:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nicely done, also appreciate the date fixes. KillerChihuahua?!? 09:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Makaveli clothes

I'm surprised there isn't at least a mention of the Makaveli line of clothes Afeni released. I'll have to do some further investigation. As a side note; I have a Makaveli hoodie that's black with a gray carpeted Makaveli M on the front, covered in red, white, and blue paint. The first day I wore that to school, a friend commented that it looked like someone had thrown up the flag on me. That was the last day I wore that to school. --Mysekurity 03:44, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Forget what your friend says, Makaveli Branded clothing is top stuff.--Easy duz it 10:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a great idea. There should definitely be a section for Makaveli Branded. I wear a lot of MB clothing. I'm interested in helping develop this article, so I'll do some studying and we can make this section. Jacon Himself 12:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2Pac and Biggie share same lyrics

"2 of Americas Most Wanted" by 2Pac has a lyric "if you got it better flaunt it" this is interesting because Notorious B.I.G used the same set of lyrics in his Hit song "Hypnotize." I find this interesting because these Rap/HipHop succeses did not llke each other, but by "chance" they used this same idea around the same time. Any thoughts?

It's a simple phrase License2Kill 13:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

^^ He means common. It's a common phrase. I wouldn't look to deeply into it myself. --King Bee 14:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it really matter, but they were indeed friends at one time. Lots of rappers use lines other rappers have used. That phrase is common in quite a few raps by quite a few rappers. That is basically the main idea behind rapping. You are always trying to out do the rapper before you. Rap is all about flauting what you have, or in most cases what you want people to believe you have. You might be surprised to find out that a lot of rappers don't actually own the cars and other things they show in their videos.The Real Stucco 15:38, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stretch

There should be a section on Tupac's relationship with Stretch (from the Live Squad).

He was a great friend before and during the Thug Life-time. He was also friends with The Notorious B.I.G.

Stretch was at the sceene the first time Tupac got shot and robbed. 2pac said that Anthony Stretch Walker was involved in planning this backstab-move, while Biggie and Puffy defended their friend.

Pac said in the song Against All Odds: "And that nigga that was down for me, restin dead Switch sides, guess his new friends wanted him dead"

I've read this in a lot of places, that Stretch was brutally killed by multiple Shotgun-shots exactly, on the day, one year after the 2pac-robery.

There is no reason for the section, you can't make a section for everyone of his friends License2Kill 22:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, it wasn't just any friend. He was accused by Tupac himself to be involved in his first shooting. And he was killed exactly one year after the shooting. Also he had a big role in all albums before, and including, the Thug Life-album. Liquid Corpse 17:06 24 September 2006 (CET)

So was Jimmy Henchman and Walter "King Tut" Johnson but we don't have sections on them License2Kill 16:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is a correct identification. You should do something about that. It's an online dictionary, if you know anything about it you should put it out there. /LiQ

Keep this artical we need as much information about Tupac's life we can get.--Easy duz it 10:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tupac's 1995 mugshot

In the picture here of pac's 95 mug shot, on his left cheek, theres a noticable streak going down the side of his face. Is this a scar?

I think it's just the photo. License2Kill 04:37, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has to be fake. He never has any scars like that in any other picture seen of him. And make-up couldn't even cover that up. --Ted87 22:15, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you never seen Resurrection?? He talks about those scars and shows them in an interview with a lady. They are from when he got into a scuffle with the off-duty atlanta cops, and they slammed him on the ground.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.97.229.193 (talkcontribs)

No it's not. That happened 4 years before the photo as taken License2Kill 20:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use on Album Covers

We can use them solely to illustrate the album in question. That is, it's okay to display them here, on the Tupac Shakur discography page, and on the album's page itself. It is not fair use to display them on your user page, say. As such, I will remove them from the "to do" list. --King Bee 15:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well the album covers for "All Eyez on Me" and "2Pacalypse Now" are being used to illustrate the the album(s) in question, because they are both used in the sections were it talks about the respective albums. --Ted87 06:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Religious beliefs?

I wonder why this article doesn't mention his religious beliefs? He often mentioned Jesus in his lyrics, and he even had Tattoo of a huge cross on his back. Doesn't that count for anything? EliasAlucard|Talk 17:38, 30 Sept, 2006 (UTC)

I think the reason his religous beliefs aren't included n the artice is because it isn't that relevent to the article. Plus there is some confusion by some people has to what his religon/religoius beliefs were (which may actually be good reason to include it in the article). In his songs and other places he talks about God all the time, but in one or two he down plays religon all together. --Ted87 01:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual assault trial

Is there any source (other than an interested one) for this:

"There is much controversy to the ruling of the case, the judge said that he did not think Tupac was guilty but sentenced him because of all of Shakur's recent run-ins with the law."

Instead, in the February 8, 1995 newspapers:

The New York Times reported that:

Justice Daniel P. Fitzgerald said, "This was an act of brutal violence against a helpless woman." He said that Mr. Shakur had been the "instigator" of an "arrogant abuse of the victim" which culminated an escalating display of arrogance as he pursued his career.

The Washington Post reported that:

A New York judge characterized the crime as "an act of violence against a helpless woman," Reuter reported, and added that the rapper "must bear full responsibility for the assault.

The LA Times reported that:

Fitzgerald turned down requests to allow the two men to remain free on bail pending appeals. In pronouncing sentence, he said Shakur's "arrogant abuse of his victim follows a pattern of escalating violence as his career progressed."

I didn't see anything suggesting that the judge did not think Tupac was guilty; I am going to (try to) change the article. If there is a news or other original source for the current version, we can revise. Cka3n

Although the prior version referred to a book, it did not have a page cite and it somewhat implausible (a trial judge sentenced a defendant in a high profile case while publicly admitting he did not think the defendant was guilty?).

I will add all three full newspaper citations to the article. Anyone who has a contradicting source, please feel free to provide a citation and a quote (and if the source's source is not apparent, please provide any citations given by the source itself) and then we can resolve any actual conflicts. Cka3n 23:53, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My sources say "arrogant abuse of his victim follows a pattern of escalating violence as his career progressed." It's from a documentary, not a book.License2Kill 00:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That quote you have just provided does not say what you claim the judge said in the article. That quote says just what I said the NY Times reported. The judge thought that Tupac was guilty. The documentary you refer to is available on youtube, etc. I just watched the portion linked on the prior discussion of this section here. It did not say anything remotely like "The judge thought Tupac was not guilty." Indeed, Tupac's attorney spoke at length about the possibility of a government informant, but never suggested any such wild error on the part of the judge. Please, then, provide the part and the time of the documentary so that this can be verified.Cka3n 00:37, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That video is for another thing I mentioned in the thing. That's just a video clip on YouTube, not the full thing. I don't know what section of the documentary it is, but just watch the DVD and it's on there License2Kill 00:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to buy and watch a whole DVD just on the off chance that the judge said something I know he didn't say. This is true especially where the DVD was produced by his mother and it (allegedly) directly contradicts three major newspaper accounts written at the time.

I am not going to revert the article back to the newspaper version right now, and I hope that someone other than you and I can offer an opinion. However, if you have the time and/or the inclination, it would be great to know what was actually said on the DVD and who said it (e.g., was it a video clip of the judge himself, was it an eyewitness report, etc.?). Also, the business about forensic evidence is probably not needed - if the article says he disputed the claims, that is probably enough. This is an article about him, not about the sufficiency of the evidence standard for criminal charges (especially since the lack of forensic evidence marks many, many such cases everywhere except on CSI).Cka3n 00:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter anyway, documentaries can't be used as sources on Wikipedia License2Kill 01:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Murder: Government speculation/conspiracy

One conspiracy about the murder of Tupac is that the Government played a large role into the assassination of Tupac Skakur. His Mom, Dad and Aunt were all Black Panthers and were being hunted down by the CIA. His Aunt currently lives in exile in Cuda due to "apparently" killing a cop(s). Tupac was in the mist of it all, an emerging artist that spoke the truth. He was investigating the Freemasons and the Illuminati in his younger years and even colaberated with The Notorious B.I.G. to open the worlds eyes about The New World Order. The CIA began investigating Tupac Shakur and planned for his murder. Tupac stated in many of his songs that he was under surveillance by the government

The CIA had a program called COINTELPRO which was apparently only active from 1956-1971 but are said to be still active today. They targeted radical organisations such as the Black Panthers, KKK and American Nazi Party.

The CIA divised a plan to turn The Notorious B.I.G. and Tupac Shakur against each other. Their plan succeeded and was known as sparked the "The East West Beef". Various members of Tupac's ontourrahj said they could identify the killers but again were murdered a few days later.

Tupac was murdered on Septemember 7th 2006 returning from the MGM Grand in Las Vegas by a unknown assailant who may have been hired by the government. The car which housed the murderers amazingly vanished in the a city that was surrounded by a desert.

The Las Vegas police did quite a shoddy job in finding Tupac's assailant but managed to blame a crip who goes by the name of "Baby Lane", he later died in a unrelated shooting. Instead of closing off the crime scene they followed the black BMW which contained Deathrow CEO and Tupac that was heading for the hospital. Some accounts state that Tupac was air lifted to hospital by helicopter.

This story can be related to such figures as Martin Luthur King Jr., President JFK and Malcom X which some claim may have been murdered by the Government.

--Easy duz it 10:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but before inserting this into the article, could we please get a look at those reliable sources, in keeping with WP:V? It's important that everybody be able to see these sources for their own research. Thanks in advance. Luna Santin 19:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It definately should be added, since a lot of people believe it License2Kill 01:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of people believe in a lot of shit, L2K, you know that. Its no reason to clutter up this article with unfounded rumours and urban legends. KillerChihuahua?!? 03:56, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Songs/albums/lyrics relating to conspiracy

  • "Killuminati" - before Tupacs death he wrote this song where he raps about the Illuminati

Tupac - Killuminati Lyrics

  • Tupac made an album known as "The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory" which means "I'm The Don, I Will Kill The Illuminati" or something similar. "The 7 Day Theory" relates to how long it took to make the album.

Amazon.com: The Don Killuminati

--Easy duz it 10:24, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sources:

--Easy duz it 10:24, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alleyezone.com, aka 2Pac online, is a poorly sourced fan site. They also have an article titled "Tupac is alive"[2] so please don't suggest using that site as a source. They do not meet Wikipedia criteria for reliable sources. KillerChihuahua?!? 03:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change the name of "2pac tba"

to "pac's life" which is tha name of the new album


That is not confirmed License2Kill 04:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead or Alive?

Is Tupac Shakur dead or alive? It says that Tupac Shakur died in Friday the 13th September 2006. But they say that he is still alive though because there are songs by Tupac Shakur that came out after he died. Like Elton John's song Ghetto Gospel featuring 2pac- SCB '92

He's dead. Due to the miracles of modern recording, an artist's work can be released after death, or incorporated into new works (such as Natalie Cole's duet with her long deceased father, Unforgettable.) There are a number of people who persist in the rumour that he is alive. There is no rational reason to believe such a claim. KillerChihuahua?!? 11:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RIAA

Did you know that All Eyez on Me sold 7 million copies (Found this info in Source)? Meaning it would be 14 times Platinum (Diamond) if the RIAA updated it. That means that it would be the best selling rap album ever if the RIAA updated the sales. Is there a way this can be mentioned? I can get the exact page for the sourcing. License2Kill 03:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is platinum not 1 million records? There is a wiki article on this somewhere. Which makes 2pac 7x platinum on All Eyez on Me. I think eminem is the best selling rap artist ever with over 10 million sold of The Marshall Mathers LP - Neilz - 19th October 2006
Platinum does equal 1 miliion unless you release a double disc album. The RIAA counts that has 2 albums, so techincally it would be 500,000. As for selling 7 million copies, we need to tred carfully on this. If we can find a reliable source (and possibily a back up source) then it should definalty be put in. At the same time you should mention that technically it is neither diamond nor 14 times platinum since the RIAA has to certify it. --Ted87 19:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Don Killuminati: The 7 Day Theory did NOT sell 28 million.

The citation is completely unreliable. It estimates around that, and like I said, unreliable. If it was RIAA certified 7x platinum and sold in total 4x that worldwide, that would be a record. This would also make this one of the best selling albums of all time, which has never been indicated by any record company, nor by any certification. I am removing worldwide sales until proper citation used.