Jump to content

Talk:Kanye West

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.122.211.205 (talk) at 03:03, 18 September 2009 (→‎staged controversy?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleKanye West has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 27, 2008Good article nomineeListed

Single with Kid CuDi

I think someone should add that he featured on Kid CuDi's new single "Make Her Say" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.141.176.204 (talk) 21:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Political Views

In 2005 West blurted out on live TV that "President Bush doesn't like black people!" on NBC's A Concert For Hurricane Relief . On ABC's Nightline, he followed up these comments by saying that these comments "changed my life for the better. I think people understood me a little bit more." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.236.215.78 (talk) 17:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From the article: In the song "Crack Music", Kanye West rapped, "How [did] we stop the Black Panthers?/Ronald Reagan cooked up an answer," a reference to the conspiracy theory that the Reagan administration intentionally placed crack cocaine in the ghettos of the United States.[68] It is not fair to assume Kanye actually believes this because he rapped it. Especially on a song like this. Later, he suggests George Bush gave Saddam Hussein anthrax. It's certainly possible he believes this, but that's not really for us to decide.--68.56.17.70 (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confused about Alexis Rainey and Alexis Phifer

It would be helpful if someone could edit this article to clear up a point of confusion. Could there be some text added explaining that Alexis Phifer and Alexis Rainey are two different people (if, indeed, they are)? In the Graduation section, it states that Kanye broke up with Alexis Rainey in May 2007. In the following section, Glow in the Dark Tour, it states "Kanye West and designer Alexis Phifer ended their 18-month engagement in 2008. The couple had been dating on and off since 2002." Was he dating Alexis Rainey while he was engaged to Alexis Phifer? Are they the same person and the dates are incorrect?

Thank you for your consideration.

71.56.35.54 (talk) 05:42, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

.. Well, my level of consciousness has since raised. And I actually think that standing up for gays was even more crazy than bad-mouthing the president. In the black community, someone could label you gay and bring your career down. But that was me showing what black people are really about today, or at least what we need to be about.[70]

Article is from February 2002, not October 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.49.152 (talk) 02:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does Kanye Redirect here?

Why on earth does Kanye redirect here? That's absolutely ridiculous. This man doesn't just use his first name like Madonna or Jewel. There's no reason for it. I believe the town and the name have been around a lot longer than this guy. Sixthcrusifix (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, moved it to redirect to disambiguation. Mfield (Oi!) 00:26, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well it's been changed again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.13.137.159 (talk) 07:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article mistakingly says Blueprint 2 instead of Blueprint

Under Early career it says "West’s sound is featured heavily on Jay-Z's critically acclaimed album The Blueprint 2, released on September 11, 2001." But the 2 shouldn't be there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.31.28 (talk) 08:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The change was made by an editor who has been vandalising a number of articles. I have fixed the problem. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:21, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Jack Beatz presents: Kanye West - The Winner

Recently I came across this CD in a discount bin. It sounds like it was genuine Kanye West rare stuff (freestyle, interludes, skits, etc; 18 tracks altogether) but the whole packing and design are a bit hokey. It was released by The Hip Hop Village but at this moment the "products" section on their web is under construction so I can't check. The product bar code is 5060160720519. Any idea what this is? Is it real or fake? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.173.30.81 (talk) 11:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Single Street Lights

You guys should add it because i don't know how to but its out with the cover here http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6lV5hzNR1fU/SS-4TpCNyEI/AAAAAAAABlw/EHiUgNfUc88/s400/street+lignts.jpeg and with the video on youtube. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WildWolf012 (talkcontribs) 02:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC) WildWolf012 (talk) 02:54, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Voice Type

I think someone should add his voice type to main section. Anyone have any idea what his voice type is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.253.76.110 (talk) 20:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Camp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.176.203 (talkcontribs) 07:39, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mother's Death

Is it really necessary for the Mother's Death section, I mean you don't see Father's death on Jay-Z' Wikipedia page... Although it's widely known that he was very close to his mother and her death may have had a big impact on his new style of music it's kind of weird to include it in his biography.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.176.203 (talkcontribs) 07:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's worth a mention at least. --24.46.21.197 (talk) 05:31, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems a little odd to have its own section. I think a short mention it in the "life and career" bit would suffice. Crashandspin (talk) 22:04, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First major label song produced

The article states that Kanye's first major label production was on Beanie Sigel's The Truth album, which was released in 2000. However, the Jermaine Dupri album Life in 1472 features a track credited to Kanye, and that was released in 1998 by Columbia Records, so that would be his first major label song in actuality. 98.210.151.12 (talk) 05:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kanye West Late Registration 2

Kanye West Late Registration 2 - 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.49.111 (talk) 21:41, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone proofread...

Could someone proofread this page? I've noticed a few errors that were easily filled with a spellchecker, and while not necessarily incorrect, they weren't correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.255.64.7 (talk) 20:19, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone rewrite this sentence? It's great that it contains so many facts, but is terribly difficult to follow: "He handed the mic back to an apparently distraught Swift who was unable to finish her acceptance speech during the live broadcast after West received a negative reaction from the audience." Nikki0x4d (talk) 02:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, Nikki0x4d. Flyer22 (talk) 02:56, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ghostwriters

I've heard that many of West's songs are ghostwritten. Can anyone confirm this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamie3039 (talkcontribs) 14:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes his songs are mostly written by Casper, Slimer, and Hamlet's father.--98.125.188.151 (talk) 03:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

^ Good one! . . . . Not. I have heard the same though. 98.196.78.26 (talk) 03:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You need a reliable source. Rumors aren't enough. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Full protection

Enough is enough. The article was already semi protected for unconnected vandalism and that should have been enough to prevent this drive by vandalism, but multiple established editors have been engaged in extreme violations of our BLP policy, repeatedly posting content that is defamatory and attacks the subject directly. Please note that the WP:BLP policy applies also to talk pages and posting of such content here or anywhere else will not be tolerated. The full protection can be dropped back to semi once the next big story comes along and people forget about this/calm down. In the mean time use {{editprotected}} to request changes. Mfield (Oi!) 05:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa. I understand Wikipedia is not censored, but your introduction is quite unnecessary. There is no need to take that attitude (you know this as an established editor and administrator) with what you know is a controversial page at the moment. If anything, you could've been nicer about it. I do agree with protection, however. —Mr. E. Sánchez (that's me!)What I Do / What I Say 07:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
An IP editor had altered my comment hence the introduction you saw. Mfield (Oi!) 15:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article states that Kanye appologized via his blog. This sentence is currently unsourced. I was going to add a cite to a reliable source: Kanye West Apologizes To Taylor Swift For VMA Rant, but the article cannot be edited. Instead of blanket protection of an article, why don't we topic ban editors who are unable to abide by policies? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 12:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It has been cited now, thanks. I think protection is the best course of action here. There were multiple established editors posting, there is no way to predict which editors would add the defamatory content and so we cannot topic ban anyone before they edit. As such, there was always going to be defamatory and extremely unsavoury material on the page. The only answer was full protection. Woody (talk) 12:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about assuming good faith until an editor violates the rules and then topic ban the editor? I've never had a WP:BLP violation against me so I don't see why I should be punished for the actions of others.
Also, isn't the type of editor who can't follow WP:BLP on this article the same type of editor who's inclined to violate WP:BLP on other articles? If their actions aren't specifically addressed, then aren't they likely to simply do it again some other time? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 12:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming good faith stretches only so far, the horrific page history is a testament to this. The editors making the violations were not the usual candidates which is why the protection is the only option. If the page is unprotected, no doubt it would have BLP violations on it for half the day, the other half spent reverting them. Until flagged revisions is implemented this is the only option. Woody (talk) 12:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the page should be semi-protected. Vandals can be dealt with (warnings, banning, etc.) and those making a mistake with good intentions can be showed what they did wrong. Vandals will vandalize a page at one time or another. People violating WP:BLP will violate it some place else, possibility without being seen. I think people are watching this page enough so violations will be reverted within minutes (if not seconds). There are always some people who want to make it better. NeoJustin (Talk page) 21:16, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kanye Drunk at 2006 VMAs

Shouldn't the article note that West admitted he was drunk during his rant after losing at the 2006 VMAs? Here's the link from MTV: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1544794/20061103/west_kanye.jhtml --Mikeman67 (talk) 06:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy's Page?

This is just an idea. Maybe, we should just create a page with all of his controversies on it. NeoJustin (Talk page) 06:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a bad idea, but I don't think it would fly because it would be kinda difficult to write a page about his controversies without it havin' a point of view. Just my opinion though. Crash Underride 07:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the controversies pages have been AFD'd into more of a neutral "Public perception" page. However, I really don't think there's enough to warrant a separate page for him. What probably needs to be done is more summarizing and cutting down some unnecessary details. For example, is it really that relevant that Kayne didn't win the 2006 Grammy but U2 did and he opened for them? In retrospect to his entire career, that's a pretty minor point. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That he did not win the Grammy for Album of the Year seems important...since he said he would "really have a problem" if he did not win that award. Flyer22 (talk) 22:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about a controversy section? Currently, there is a section titled "Awards and controversy" or something to that effect, but only spans the time around 2006. To find more current stuff, you have to scroll down to a section with a title that does not say anything about controversy. This should all be grouped into a "Kanye controversy" section, in order to make the page more navigable. ---Debollweevil (talk) 14:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
These are discouraged in biographies (see Wikipedia:BLP#Criticism_and_praise), as they tend to be places where people tend to want to add POV criticism. The preferred way to document this type of information is to work it in to various places in the article. Kanye is not known for his criticism, he's known for being a recording artist and producer. — Mike :  tlk  18:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that they are discouraged, but the point I'm disagreeing with is that he is not known for his controversy... The article just had to be locked within the last 24 hours due to his most recent bout! Maybe this is the exception to the "generally discouraged" rule? The criticism/ praise guidelines say that notability is the concern, and I certainly think there are plenty of sources available to show he is notably controversial.---Debollweevil (talk) 20:40, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I for one, will agree, he's known for controversy. The only reason I visit this article is to check for facts and updates about the next stupid thing he does. Last time I was here was the South Park episode, before that his last stage outburst, before that Hurricane Katrina... Today, Taylor Swift. That's at least 4 times controversy has sent me to the Kanye article, and a big fat zero times that any of his music or "talent" has. Frankly, I was upset to find the "controversy" section removed from this article. When his controversies are what one wishes to read about, integrating them into the regular biography just makes the article harder to navigate.67.173.38.15 (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there should be a big Controversy section. Miley Cyrus has a ton of controversy listed, I don't see why Kanye shouldn't have one. Not only is he known for being a musical producer but a big piece of shit. Someone963852 (talk) 21:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I too only visit this "" artist ""'s page only to find out about the self-absorbed arrogant blunders and temper tantrum he has committed or to find out what other people loathe his ear raping musical artifacts, ( seriously what he did to that daft punk song is heinous, and he even rhyme a word with THE SAME WORD, how insanely lame is that ) I just want a confirmation that I am not the only one to think he is such an untalented hack and plain bad person fully deserving all the vitriolic hate he gets ! wikipedia at domn dot net 207.253.74.149 (talk) 21:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the number of hits for the article this month... Notice it jumps 666% from the 13th to the 14th. ---Debollweevil (talk) 02:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
nothing wrong with structuring an article so that people can find the information they're looking for. Not good to "hide" controversy in very lengthy sections with generic headings. --345Kai (talk) 22:04, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kanye's 2009 VMA Blog Entry

The apology Kanye West made has since been removed from his blog. However, it was preserved here. MatthewKeys (talk) 07:31, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A citation has now been added, thanks. Woody (talk) 12:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shame they didn't keep the shitty spelling and CRUISE CONTROL. 86.144.148.55 (talk) 17:14, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's remarkably unusual that an artist as controversial as Kanye has no controversy page. Reading this Wikipedia entry looks like the Internet equivalent of a Celebrity headshot. Lots of good stuff, Philanthropy and history that touches on Kanye's hardships and timeline, but not one lick on assorted outbursts, controversy, arrogance or disrespect which precedes the artist. Lack of a controversy page is an afront to Wikipedia. It seems as if the wiki-mods/administrators charged with keeping this page have perverted Wikipedia's high minded goals by failing to make mention of anything which could be construed as negative. That's unfortunate because it cheapens Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.168.231.245 (talk) 17:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; as I was discussing above, a section for the heaps of controversy he has spawned is certainly in order. I would personally Be Bold and do it myself, but I can't now, since the article is completely locked... ---Debollweevil (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There definately used to be a controversy page here, I looked it over back when South Park did the Kanye episode... truth told, I'm guessing the Taylor Swift incident just brought the Pro-Kanye fans here to defend him, and it probably got fudged out of existance sometime in the last 48 hours. I'm too lazy to dig through the history to verify that though. In any event though, I'll agree that the controversy section either needs to be restored, or given its own page. 67.173.38.15 (talk) 21:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the Taylor Swift incident brought you and I as well... I'm sure a heap of others also. There's a way to see how many hits this page has; if someone could point out how to do this, I would greatly appreciate it.
Also, concerning notability, here is the first thing Google gives me when I enter "Taylor Swift Kanye West", and it starts out with the line, "No one should really be shocked that Kanye West ruined Taylor Swift's MTV VMA victory"... So he is notorious for this, undeniably. ---Debollweevil (talk) 21:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this 100%. Someone should also point out that what he did with Taylor Swift can be seen as a racist action especially after his comment about how Goerge W. Bush doesn't like black people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.83.49 (talk) 06:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And for doing the exact same thing at the 06' Europe music awards. It was a white group that won the award.

More on VMA

Hello, I know that this article is about Kanye West, but there is some information on the Taylor Swift page that I think would improve this article. I'm quoting it below so that it can be added once protection is removed, if you think this is good to add:

When Beyonce later won the award for Best Video of the Year for "Single Ladies," she called Swift up on stage so that she could finish her acceptance speech.[1]

Maybe in a shorter version. LovesMacs (talk) 07:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC) I'm thinking this is a one time thing? Nooot. Belonging to the NAACP I believe I can say this; You can take a punk from the ghetto, but you can't take the ghetto from the punk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobofnaples (talkcontribs) 14:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some mention should also be made for Mr. West's emotional apology on Jay Leno's show on 14 September 2009.75.84.93.124 (talk) 04:45, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kayne's opinions (on music video style, concept, movement, and etc)

I am interested in Kayne's thoughts on why he thinks Beyonce's "Single Ladies" video is the best video of the decade or ever especially in comparison to Taylor Swifts' "You Belong to Me." I am interested in if this is related to some kind of artistic movement whereas less, in pose of time, direction, and settings, as well as adding more sex appeal is better than artistic approaches of Taylor Swifts' video. Is Kayne subscribing to some form of post-modernism or some view that focuses more on short messages or flashy appeal? I think his artistic approach is thus more so with simplistic is better ? What artistic movement is this part of? Sp0 (talk) 06:55, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:TALK. This talk page is for discussion about the article itself, not general discussion. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:46, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After some thinking, with regard to artistic videos, I think Kayne appreciates or has more inclination towards short but flashy video visuals. We could further develop or expand this to its relation to types of artistic movements. IE, we could try to understand his thinking as well as artistic approach and opinion as an artist. Supporting this, is that he preferred or liked flashy-ness of "Touch the Sky" video; however, I that video is more complex. Thus, how much flashiness regardless of visual content, whether simple (like "Single Ladies") or complex (like "Touch the Sky"), might be his more directual approach or interests. Therefore, from this, he might like more special effects that give flashiness or whatever gives flashiness rather than non-flashiness. The whole point is understanding his views, expanding on his theories and opinions, and relating it to artistic movements as a whole. Sp0 (talk) 16:43, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

o u 86.144.148.55 (talk) 17:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VMA's

When Taylor Swift won for best female video at the 2009 VMA's he got up on stage and took the spotlight away from Taylor by saying Beyonce had one of the best videos of all time, and pretty much that Beyonce deserved that award more than Taylor Swift. For the rest of the show he was booed when his name was brought up, and twitter, myspace, and facebook were flooded with updates about his obnoxious display. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.228.2.126 (talk) 02:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a little blurb about what recently happened at the VMAs. I am having a bit of trouble with the formatting. If anyone can help me fix it I would appreciate it. I have a citation going to TMZ's article, but I royally screwed up the citation for it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Areusche (talkcontribs) 03:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

== Kanye West bkgo

He recently apologized to Taylor Swift and her mom according to Kanye's blog MatthewKeys (talk) 12:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now cited thanks, Woody (talk) 12:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apology means nothing if he keeps doing his stuff. Media executives with any level of sanity would ban him from public award shows and media appearances in general. --Matt57 (talkcontribs) 14:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

98.88.73.158 (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)If you would call any statement he made an "apology" then you might as well write in Donald Duck as a candidate for President of the United States. According to the same news source, he removed the blog posting where he apologized. That should be added since it shows how serious he was with his "apology". "West's blog entry has since been removed from his website."--Matt57 (talkcontribs) 15:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently a source cloe to Taylor Swift's mother has said that Kenya West made no such apology to the mother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.193.128.193 (talk) 02:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing separate section for media interruptions

The record of Kanye West's past incidents needs to put in a separate section on his page. The section could be called "Interruptions during Media performances" or something like that to make it prominent. --Matt57 (talkcontribs) 16:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gretchen Wilson

Why isn't Kanye's comments about Gretchen at the 2004 Grammy's listed here? this isn't a first for Kanye... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.10.215.230 (talk) 15:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incredibly bad writing

(Disclaimer, I didn't know who Kanye West was and came here to find out. So I'm not a hater nor a lover of Kanye, actually pretty indifferent).

That said, this article reads like a fan magazine (Kanye is making his "very first animated television appearance" this fall? Gosh!)

Also, what about all the dated references? "West and Crowley are expected to be arraigned on April 14, 2009". "In September 2005, West announced that he would release his Pastelle Clothing line in spring 2006.... The current status of this project is unknown."

Seriously, fawning crap like this article does not belong in an encyclopedia. Maybe the editorial staff can condense this down to what makes this person important (without the fluff it should make for a very short article). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stewartjk1 (talkcontribs) 16:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not his first animated appearance as he was already on South Park! Faethon Ghost (talk) 17:42, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't his voice. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:39, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tour With Gaga

The Fame Kills Starring: Lady Gaga dn Kanye West Tour —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bdhnvegas (talkcontribs) 22:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

President Obama called Kanye West a "jackass."

Source: Politico Grundle2600 (talk) 02:09, 15 September 2009 (UTC) RS. Nevard (talk) 09:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies

Cant we club all his controversies under one heading? Just like it is for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Vick#Incidents.2C_criminal_troubles?

--Jayanthv86 (talk) 04:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello, there is no single tab which clubs all his controversies under one. I am not talking about one specific controversy, i.e 2009 VMA awards. I am talking about putting all his controversies, his bush comment, previous VMA controversies all under one. Did you guys even read the example I have given?

--69.143.235.193 (talk) 04:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I AGREE with previous comment. i was surprised there wasn't such a section. Please add 64.113.101.29 (talk) 06:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you read my comment above, there is a ton of discussion on this going on a little higher up on the talk page, and that's why this is more or less getting neglected. If you look at the topic under this one, I'm discussing adding this to the locked article with an admin right now. I'll add this to the consensus... ---Debollweevil (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologized now

{{Editprotected}} FWIW, he's officially apologized to Taylor Swift personally now, after her appearance on The View. Ref: Taylor Swift: Kanye West Called, 'Was Very Sincere in His Apology'. For those allowed to edit this article. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 18:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin here. Can you be specific about the change you want to make? Is it simply "West apologized to Swift at location X at time Y.[ref]"?  Skomorokh  23:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How long is this article going to stay protected for? If you look at the recent discussion on this talk page, there are some meaningful changes that are being discussed, and I am afraid that people are going to lose interest if the article remains locked every time they check back... ---Debollweevil (talk) 02:08, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please work out a consensus as to what you want done to the article, and then place an editprotected tag up. Thanks. Hersfold (t/a/c) 02:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus that is being agreed on with this article is that it is difficult to navigate to the controversies started by this man, and while there is a general dislike for making a section just for controversies (note: multiple ones) on Wikipedia, the argument is that this man is actually very notable for the controversies he has started, as I and others have given plenty of evidence towards in above sections. The exact edit to be done, therefore, is somewhat complex, and hard to direct a third party to do. If you'd like to take a shot at it, by all means, many people are looking for this to happen! (Just look at all the comments from the past few days!)... Otherwise, as I said earlier, people are going to get frustrated and lose interest in the article due to it being completely locked and not letting any input on the subject other than on the talk page. ---Debollweevil (talk) 13:56, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just to point you in the direction of all the discussion of this, check out here, here, here, here, and here, just for the main discussions... ---Debollweevil (talk) 14:29, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
{{editprotected}} ---Debollweevil (talk) 19:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings. I have reviewed the discussions. In order to overturn a firm guideline on keeping an article neutral, especially in the case of a biography of a living person, there needs to be strong and well-reasoned consensus that it is an exceptional case, which I am not seeing here by a long shot. In future, please request edits to protected pages when there is a complete and specific description of a change that has clear consensus. You can request unprotection of the article from the protecting administrator or at WP:RFPP. Sincerely,  Skomorokh  20:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Not seeing here by a long shot"?? Did you look at this talk page? Can we perhaps have another admin with more time to look into this? How much more clear can the consensus be than this? I thought I was going overboard with all those links, and it wasn't enough??? ---Debollweevil (talk) 21:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I want to add that I stated that this change would be hard to direct someone else to do, so when such a problem arises, it really can't be dealt with differently "in the future"... ---Debollweevil (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obama's comments

Why is there no mention of Obama's response to this?[1] Richard (talk) 06:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if Obama's comment is particularly relevant. Obama is a famous politician. But as far as music and other people go, he's as good a judge as anyone else. He's not a music critic or a psychologist. JBFrenchhorn (talk) 08:27, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Famous Politician" LOL! Obama is probably the most famous living man in the world right now. If he's not the first, he's definitely in the top 5. (but just so we are clear, I don't like him) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.192.64 (talk) 19:04, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's as relevant as any other celebrity's comments which are fair game. I'll add it if nobody else does when this is unprotected. Brianrusso (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's not a "famous politician," he is the president of the United States. There are few people who are more notable than that. Maybe if the Pope commented on this. Xizer (talk) 15:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To everyone above, we do not have it in Taylor Swift's article...but we do point to it from there to the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards article. As for this article, the information about West's outburst at the Video Music Awards should resemble Swift's article...minus Swift saying what was going through her head when the outburst happened (unless, of course, consensus is to include that as well). Flyer22 (talk) 15:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should probably be included in both articles. It shows the extent of incident and has become part of it. There is no hurry here, and I don't want to include too much recency bias, but I think it will become and remain clear that this is an essential element of the incident. Savidan 16:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to mention this drama at all, it's at least worth a mention that the POTUS commented on it, and this was reported on the BBC. --92.12.10.108 (talk) 19:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, Savidan. You have me considering just a little that it should also be in Swift's article. If I add it there, though, it will simply be a quick mention that West was also criticized by President Barack Obama in an off the record comment...since I feel that the simple "jackass" remark requries expansion (like the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards article) and since Swift's article points to the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards article for readers to get the details on this matter anyway. Even a small mention of this remark should mention that it was "off the record" as to not give the impression that Obama spoke out publicly or rather "officially" about this. Flyer22 (talk) 21:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Pop Culture Section

Shouldn't there be an "In Pop Culture" section that discusses references to Kanye West in other pop culture areas?

This would at least include the South Park episode and his response.MattThePuppetGuy (talk) 19:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Return to semi protection

The full protection is due to expire in a few hours but I will drop the protection back to semi now so that established editors can work on it per the above indicated consensus. Please note that this will only last IF there is not a resumption of the torrent of slanderous, racist abuse being added to the article by long time/autoconfirmed editors. Also no one wants to see an edit war develop over what is likely to be a controversial section. Care must be taken to adhere to WP:UNDUE and disputes should be worked out here.

Once again, as ever BLP violations and attacks can and will not be tolerated, the rights of the article subject not to be defamed will and must always trump the rights of editors to edit this page, and re-protection will be the likely outcome. Mfield (Oi!) 22:14, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a version regarding information about West's verbal outburst at the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards that I feel just about satisfies everyone. But it seems that we do need a Controversies section in this article. Heck, Miley Cyrus has one (though some of her less notable controversies have been removed). With West, for example, the Awards and controversy section, which documents 2006, is basically a controversy section anwyay (it is mostly about controversies). This is why its lead cannot specify, because it involves a few of his controversies. I specified the title of the section containing his 2009 MTV Video Music Awards outburst, but it makes it seem even more as though all his controversies should be in one section. Flyer22 (talk) 02:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Creating the controversy section

Alright, first things first, since this is going to be quite a project... I'm going to list all the controversies that are scattered through the article here, and we can take it from there. There are a lot, so I need some help with what exactly should go in the section, what should stay where it is, etc. Also, as pointed out above, the article is somewhat structured around the controversy at points, and some of the sections are going to be renamed, combined, or something. I want opinions on this before I make any drastic changes. ---Debollweevil (talk) 13:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Public Controversies

Kanye West has had a number of controversies in his career. On September 2, 2005, during a benefit concert for Hurricane Katrina relief on NBC, A Concert for Hurricane Relief, West was a featured speaker. Controversy arose when West was presenting, as he deviated from the prepared script.[34] The actor Mike Myers, with whom West was paired to present, spoke next and continued to read the script. Once it was West's turn to speak again, he said "George Bush doesn't care about black people." At this point, telethon producer Rick Kaplan cut off the microphone and then cut away to Chris Tucker, who was unaware of the cut for a few seconds. Still, West's comment reached much of the United States.[35]

In January 2006, West again sparked controversy when he appeared on the cover of Rolling Stone in the image of Jesus wearing a crown of thorns.[38]

Later in 2006, Kanye had his first of a number of incidents involving anger over not winning awards for his work. After the 2006 Grammy nominations were released, West said he would "really have a problem" if he didn't win the Album of the Year, saying "I don't care what I do, I don't care how much I stunt — you can never take away from the amount of work I put into it. I don't want to hear all of that politically correct stuff."[40] On November 2, 2006, when his "Touch the Sky" failed to win Best Video at the MTV Europe Music Awards, West went onto the stage as the award was being presented to Justice and Simian for "We Are Your Friends" and argued that he should have won the award instead.[43][44] Hundreds of news outlets worldwide criticized the outburst. On November 7, 2006, West apologized for this outburst publicly during his performance as support act for U2 for their Vertigo concert in Brisbane, Australia.[45] He later spoofed the incident in the season premiere of Saturday Night Live's 33rd season. Next, on September 9, 2007, West performed at the 2007 MTV Video Music Awards. On that night, he lost all 5 awards that he was nominated for, including Best Male Artist and Video of the Year. After the show, he was visibly upset that he had lost at the VMAs 2 years in a row, stating that he would not come back to MTV ever again. He also appeared on several radio stations saying that when he made the song "Stronger" that it was his dream to open the VMAs with it. He has also stated that Britney Spears hasn't had a hit in a long period of time and that MTV exploited her for ratings.[61]

In December 2006, Robert "Evel" Knievel sued West for trademark infringement in West's video for "Touch the Sky." Knievel took issue with a "sexually-charged video" in which West takes on the persona of "Evel Kanyevel" and attempts flying a rocket over a canyon. The suit filed in federal court claims infringement on his trademarked name and likeness. Knievel also claims the "vulgar and offensive" images depicted in the video damage his reputation. The suit seeks damages and to stop distribution of the video.[46] Knievel eventually settled the suit in November 2007, just days before his death.

June 15, 2008; West was scheduled to perform a late night set at the Bonnaroo Music Festival. His performance started almost two hours late and ran for half of its alloted time, angering many fans in the audience. West later wrote an outraged entry on his blog, blaming the festival organizers as well as Pearl Jam's preceding set, which ran longer than expected.

On September 13, 2009, during the 2009 MTV Video Music Awards (VMA's), while Taylor Swift was accepting her award for Best Female Video, West went on stage and grabbed the microphone to proclaim that Beyoncé's video for "Single Ladies", nominated for the same award, was "one of the best videos of all time". This caused a negative reaction from the crowd; West handed the microphone back to a stunned and reportedly upset Swift, who did not finish her acceptance speech. He was subsequently removed from the remainder of the show for his actions.[77][78][79] When Beyoncé later won the award for Best Video of the Year for "Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)", she called Swift up on stage so that she could finish her acceptance speech.[77] West was criticized by various celebrities for the outburst,[80][81][78][82][83] and by President Obama, who pronounced West a "jackass" in an "off the record" comment.[84][85][86][87][88] West posted two apologies on his blog, one the night of the incident and the other the same day he appeared on The Jay Leno Show, on September 14, 2009, where he apologized again.[81][89] After Swift appeared on The View two days after the outburst, partly to discuss the matter, West called her to apologize personally. Swift said she accepted his apology.[90][91][92]

Arrests West and his road manager/bodyguard Don Crowley were arrested at Los Angeles International Airport September 11, 2008, and booked on charges of felony vandalism after an altercation with the paparazzi in which West and Crowley broke the photographers' cameras.[66][67] West was later released from the Los Angeles Police Department's Pacific Division station in Culver City on $20,000 bail bond. On September 26, 2008 the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office said it would not file felony counts against West over the incident. Instead the case file was forwarded to the city attorney's office who charged West with one count of misdemeanor vandalism, one count of grand theft and one count of battery and his manager with three counts of each on March 18, 2009.[68] West and Crowley are expected to be arraigned on April 14, 2009.[69][70]

West was arrested again on November 14, 2008 at a hotel near Gateshead after another scuffle involving a photographer outside a nightclub in Newcastle Upon Tyne. He was later released "with no further action", according to a police spokesperson.[71]



I just added a reference to Jimmy Carter's criticism of West's actions at the 2009 VMA ceremony, after the reference to Obama's criticism. Hard to know if this is sufficiently important to keep. Let's see what others think. But being criticized by one current president and one former president seems noteworthy to me. How many pop stars have received such attention?? Omccreary (talk) 14:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bullet-style section: I'm thinking of actually taking this list as it is here, with the bullets, and using that as the bulk of the controversy section, then removing the sections from their respective current places in the article. (Some minor editing to this list as it is now is needed, obviously)... This way, we keep the good information, sources, and wording from the article, while reformatting the article to suit the controversy section. Thoughts on this? ---Debollweevil (talk) 14:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I say go ahead and create the controversy section. It is needed in this case. But I suggest naming it "Controversies"...and I would rather it not be in bullet-point style. It may seem as leaning "too much" toward WP:UNDUE to structure all the controversies as subsections, but this is a controversial figure; he is known as much for his controversial actions as he is for his music. Perhaps that is the better route to go in this case? If we can do it with the Miley Cyrus article, we can surely do it with this one. Sure, Kanye West has more controversies than Cyrus to list, but he is the far more controversial figure out of the two. Flyer22 (talk) 01:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If bullets are used, I can guarantee it will be at GAR quick smart. Aaroncrick (talk) 01:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so out with the bullets. I thought it might look too long like that! (though it would be easy to see all the different cases)... So, I'm now condensing it into a few paragraphs, but anyone should feel free to make edits to the text above in the meantime, as it will eventually be the "Controversy" section.
As an aside, what is GAR? ---Debollweevil (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

staged controversy?

This is kind of interesting. It says Taylor and Knowles have the same agent and insinuates that the VMA interruption was a publicity stunt. It compares the incident to the earlier supposed quarrel between West and 50 Cent. Believe me that I know absolutely nothing about this stuff and had no idea who these people were before the ruckus broke out, but a little bit of web searching corroborates the 50 Cent story, probably enough to mention in the article. 67.122.211.205 (talk) 03:03, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Szalai, Georg (2009-09-13). "Kanye West causes VMA controversy". Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 2009-09-14.