User talk:STATicVapor

Template:Machine Gun Kelly

Hey, sorry I messed up the MGK info box. I'm alright with the template being deleted but can you add some of the stuff I added to it; regarding the mixtape section and the addition of "Alone" by Sleeping With Sirens to the Featured Singles section?ThaPhenom (talk) 06:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

My purpose for removing them was due to WP:NAVBOX, which means if the song/mixtape/album does not have a Wikipedia article that can be wikilinked then it should not be included in the template until then. I believe that Template:MGK needs to moved to reflect the correct name, and I will redirect it once the other template is deleted, if it has not been already. <unreleated> I listened to "Alone" and I do not know why but the song seemed kinda awkward to me, I liked the song on Black Flag with Kellin much better lol I do not know if you agree.</unrelated> STATic message me! 06:38, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I prefer the song from Black Flag as well, it seems less forced than "Alone" did. Sorry for being such a hassle the last few days, I'm kinda new to making edits on Wikipedia. "Alone" doesn't have it's own page yet, that's why I linked Feel instead, and the mixtapes were just put on so more people would be aware of them, Rage Pack isn't even mentioned on the page. Thanks for not being rude about all this.ThaPhenom (talk) 06:45, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Yeah exactly what I was thinking, I felt like Kelly did not fit in the song at all. No hassle at all I can tell you were editing with good intentions from the beginning and you were not fully knowledgeable to all the relevant policies. Yeah that is kind of the point tho, if the song/mixtape it does not need to be included in the template as it is used to navigate between the articles related to Kelly and as far as I can tell "Alone" is not mentioned much on the Feel page anyways. What needs to be done is the template needs to link to his discography page so readers can find the information about the mixtapes there. I will go ahead and add that right now. STATic message me! 06:55, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for understanding. Would his other mixtapes be able to have pages made, since a majority of them have at least one professional review (as individual mixtapes) and interviews about them?ThaPhenom (talk) 07:02, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

I mean WP:NALBUMS is pretty strict in that articles on mixtapes should not really exist unless covered by reliable sources outside of trivial coverage. I found [1] for Rage Pack, nothing for Lace Up, not much at all for 100 Words.... and [2] for EST 4 Life. I mean when it comes to mixtapes it is usually just the trivial announcement of its release and not many reviews them. STATic message me! 07:26, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok. Tomorrow I'll do my own research, make an article on sandbox, and then share the link with you so we can collaborate on the article like I did with Black Flag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThaPhenom (talk • contribs) 07:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Ok sounds good to me. And on the topic I believe Black Flag will become notable, we just need to wait till a couple reliable sources review it. STATic message me! 16:25, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey man, Black Flag (MGK Mixtape) was approved as a C Class article on the fourth of July and I was wondering if you would be willing to add it to the MGK page.ThaPhenom (talk) 21:36, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me! I will give it some cleanup for you, do not be offended if I remove the "free album, second album" stuff because it is a promotional technique, and his next album will not be referred to as his third album.. we both know that. What are you asking me to do though? STATic message me! 22:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Maybe just link it within the black flag section of the article, and put it wherever else you think it should be added to. And can you please leave the "promotional" stuff about it being an album? I'll edit it out when it's revealed to be otherwise. ThaPhenom (talk) 22:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Thats the thing, this is not the first time a mixtape has been called a album, but it all boils down to that mixtapes are free and albums are sold for retail. If a project is not made available for retail sale it is not a studio album. An example would be that Yelawolf called his last mixtape "Trunk Music Returns" a "free album" but on Wikipedia we do not consider it his second album. Also I do not remember the name of the page you originally created Black Flag at but that page needs to redirect to the current page I had it moved too Black Flag (mixtape). STATic message me! 22:52, 6 July

Okay thanks.

Yeah glad you understand now :) STATic message me! 03:37, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeezus

Only reason you won't find Gigwise on Metacritic or ADM is because they don't give any scores in their reviews; it'd be impossible for a review aggregator to use them. 2.127.89.190 (talk) 02:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

That is not correct as newspapers such as Los Angeles Times and the Boston Globe do not always give scores and they are still included in Metacritic. Please stop edit warring as I do not see what point you are trying to prove. STATic message me! 02:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

OK fair enough then, I didn't know that. Still, have a read of Wikipedia:MOSALBUM#Critical_reception. Gigwise fits the criteria. Also I'm not affilated with Gigwise in any way, please don't be so quick to jump to conclusions, they are a large site and commonly referenced on Wikipedia (they even have their own Wikipedia page). Also, why did you revert my changes to the last paragraph in the first section of the Yeezus article? What exactly were you unhappy with? I kept the "rave reviews" bit and used sources for my changes. 2.127.89.190 (talk) 02:23, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Not the first time you did not, and again I explained multiple times it was the third highest selling album of the year so public reaction was not mixed. When it all comes down to it projections are just that projections so it does not matter if it sold 200k less then someone thought it would. You also removed the fact it was the third highest debuting of the year, overlinked Def Jam and changed "on July 4" to "in July 4". It is not a quick jump when you constantly continue to add it without discussing and leave false edit summaries. STATic message me! 02:31, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

You simply cannot gauge public reaction through record sales. Many of the people (a majority, even) purchasing the album first week would have not heard the album before buying it. Even though I think the method of using sales to describe public reaction is flawed, if we were to use them, relative sales would be more relevant than absolute sales (for obvious reasons). Plenty of reliable sources have stated that initial fan reaction to the album, in contrast to the initial critical reaction, was mixed. I am willing to defer on all the other edits I made, but I do not see why my sourced sentence on public reaction was removed. 2.127.89.190 (talk) 09:45, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Well now it is protected again (thank God) so oh well. STATic message me! 14:25, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

You are completely justified in your changes, but I don't see how 'Yeezus' can be classed as Hip Hop.... it's Glitch-hop at best... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.172.6.204 (talk) 10:01, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

X

Not really original research, if it was really releasing in 2 weeks then wheres the pre orders, track list or cover? The date was announced in April and i think its safe to say its not happening. Koala15 (talk) 15:20, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Kik

Sorry STATic, I'm a new Wikipedia user and I was just playing around. I did that because I did not think anybody would go on Kik Messenger. LOL. I am not gay, do not have a Kik account and made that up. Jakesthebest568 Jakesthebest568 (talk) 23:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Young Money

Lourdes Rodriguez is apart of Young Money. She's working on a project with Reginae. It's on twitter if you need proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniquelymadeee (talk • contribs) 02:08, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I added it back with a reliable source. Next time provide one so I do not think you are someone trying to add false information. STATic message me! 02:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Can you show me the italics...

...in this (my edit) please?  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:55, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

You are missing it, as it does not affect the template. The album infobox template automatically makes the TITLE of the article in italics as does the film infobox template. So by removing the little template there you made the TITLE of the article Untitled Nas Album instead of Untitled Nas Album like it was before. Look at this and this, if you cannot see the difference I do not know what else to tell you. STATic message me! 05:07, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Run the Jewels

In reply to what you said here the Run the Jewels is available for free download on the record labels website but you can order a physical album here and the album will be released to retail on July 30, as you can see here. So it wouldn't be correct to call it a mixtape since it wasn't released to DatPiff or Livemixtapes. Koala15 (talk) 03:17, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I would not have changed it if you provided one of the last two sources from the beginning. I assumed they were calling it a "free album" as a promotional technique some artists use for mixtapes nowadays after I saw it was on DatPiff. You might want to add it to the 2013 in hip hop music page. Which might need a little bit of fixing btw since for some reason some IPs decided to add mixtapes and not notable artists to the Released albums section, but I think I got them all. STATic message me! 03:29, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

J Cole "Crooked Smile" Sample

J.Cole's Manager "IB" discusses the sample being Jennifer Hudson's.

Link: http://jcolenation.com/board/index.php?/topic/1947-ib-ibrahim-hamad-breaks-down-born-sinner-track-by-track/

Now at least can we agree on it being an uncredited sample by her?

Go ahead and add it then. In the future though keep in mind forums are nowhere near to reliable sources. STATic message me! 07:58, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

You're right. I'll change the source to the direct Interview from Vibe Magazine:

http://www.vibe.com/photo-gallery/tale-tape-dreamville-president-ibrahim-ib-hamad-breaks-down-j-coles-born-sinner/?page=1

Christian Music Zine

The criteria states exactly this: "Professional reviews may include only reviews written by professional music journalists or DJs, or found within any online or print publication having a (paid or volunteer) editorial and writing staff (which excludes personal blogs). The standard for inclusion always is that the review meet Wikipedia's guideline for reliable sources and that the source be independent of the artist, record company, etc." So, it has a writing staff with an editorial team in place, and it is independent of the artist they review. I am not going to stop using the site nor others' like it because the WP:ALBUM/REVSIT is outdated and not current, and it should not be sited to restrict because it is not a policy nor a guideline rather an essay. By the way, REVSIT is greatly discriminatory and biased towards Christian magazines even CCM Magazine, Christianity Today, HM, Worship Leader are not on it, so I do not trust REVSIT, when it comes to the Christian genre in the least. Also, is webzines like Jesus Freak Hideout, New Release Tuesday, Indie Vision Music on this list? Nope. Christian Music Zine is not a personal blog in the least!HotHat (talk) 02:21, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is outdated but it is not an essay in any way as you think it is for some reason, it is apart of WP: WikiProject Albums which governs all album articles. I just saw a bunch of non notable reviewers and I removed them. If you disagree with that one go ahead and readd it. It had actually slipped my mind that ABR was a Christian band as I do not follow their music that much or with Christian magazines. STATic message me! 03:10, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I reverted at least one of the reviews. Did you see non-notable reviewers, non-notable publications or something else? Are you using the term "notable" in Wikipedia terms or something else? Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I meant publications that are not notable as album reviewers, and not found on WP:ALBUM/REVSITE or would seem to be included anytime soon. I am not that familiar with Christian magazines so if I was wrong I was subject to some being added back. STATic message me! 04:05, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that the some of the publications do not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines and I'm not entirely sure that they would qualify as review sites either, which is why I only restored one. I'll see if anything is happening at the project page later.

Thanks again, and I hope it doesn't seem like you're being ganged-up on. As the Monty Python sketch states "nobody expects the Spanish inquisition", and I certainly don't mean to throw one! Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:56, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it is all good, glad you agree! STATic message me! 05:06, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I have started the discussion, so lets talk if you want.HotHat (talk) 07:57, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

RE:

Thank i taught since it doesn't matter to put the internet champion i go stay their and thank o and when i make my favorite wrestlers to WWE TNA ROH u can be the first to message me or message me on my talk or user talk page so when i make it i go make sure u the first one to review or tell me about it Thanks! STATic Verseatide Dyorkerman (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Canvassing

Hi STATic Verseatide. I know you've been around here quite a while, but I'm not sure if you're aware of Wikipedia's guideline regarding canvassing...? Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:54, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

It was an attempt to notify the voters at the Deadmau5 debate due to it being the same issue. So I would rather achieve consensus then only have a few people see the debate. I did not tell anyone how to vote, just to provide their two cents but I was not surprised they were in agreeance. STATic message me! 18:00, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that you're really making me spell this out to you, STATic Verseatide. But here goes: Your behaviour is not in keeping with the community's expectations regarding inviting others to a dispute resolution process. If we consider the table at the bottom of Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification, your messages are problematic in at least two, possibly three of the realms (scale, message, audience, and transparency).

• Scale: Notifying 13 users is somewhere in between appropriate and inappropriate, as it is bordering on mass posting.
• Message: Your message is not neutral where it invites the user to comment "to overturn another horrible move based on a name no reliable sources refer to the subject as". There's just no way to read that as a neutral invitation.
• Audience: You invited everyone from the Deadmau5 discussion that supported the similar position you are holding with respect to Tech Nine, and you invited no one who held the opposing opinion. So it was a fully partisan audience you invited. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 21:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

The only reason I was inviting anyone is, because as far as I can tell there is no template to put on the article page to notify anyone passing by it that a RM discussion is currently on going. It is a name the subject is not known as, so it is a horrible name just like Deadmaus. I did not just invite supporters, I also invited people that showed concern in the Tech Nine name in the past and another supporter of the move also indicated that the Deadmau5 RM participants should be notified. Maybe my message was not as neutral as possible, but it would be best to WP:AGF, I am not trying to push my vote or side just want to achieve proper consensus. It would be worse if I was the nominator but I am just a supporter of a better encyclopedia. If I would have not invited anyone it would have just been the MOS warriors pushing their bureaucratic barrage across the Wikipedia again. Do not make it out like I sent it to every single supporter of the other move, which I did not and other editors not involved in Deadmaus/5 also voiced their support for Tech N9ne. If it makes you feel better I did not know about Canvassing prior to this discussion, and I also planned to post it at the WP: WikiProject Hip hop but it is not very active. STATic message me! 22:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh I don't doubt at all your intentions are to improve the encyclopedia. I was assuming good faith right from the start. People often have the best of intentions but still run afoul of guidelines about dispute resolution processes here. The thing is, I can't quite reconcile your comments "I am not trying to push my vote" with your multiple messages inviting people to comment "to overturn another horrible move". (And your dismissal of certain editors as "the MOS warriors pushing their bureaucratic barrage across the Wikipedia" actually makes this worse, not better.) Can we find a way forward here? Would you be willing to post neutral messages on the talk pages of editors who had the opposite position at Deadmau5/s as your own? Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 22:26, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

I think if you were more familiar with the artist you would understand my passion about the discussion as many were with the Deadmau5 move, which I barely even had discussion in. I would but the only opposers outside of two random IPs have already commented at Talk: Tech Nine so there would be no point. Also keep in mind I only invited some supporters among one or two uninvolved editors. STATic message me! 22:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Passion is fine; sometimes in discussions heated passion can give the impression (intended or not) that one does not respect the opinions of other editors opposing one's own.

You have notified 13 editors who support your own position on Deadmau5 and would be expected to support your same position on Tech Nine. This is a problem; you are pulling in a biased sample, or at least it has that appearance. I see that in the discussion at Talk:Deadmau5/Archive 1#Requested move 1 there are still quite a few editors who hold an opinion different than yours who could be invited. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 23:01, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Note that I am opening a discussion at WP:ANI but I emphasize this is not with any intent to punish or embarrass you. I take you at your word that you had not previously seen WP:CANVASS, and I do believe you are attempting to improve the encyclopedia. But I need guidance from other people about how to handle a discussion (Talk:Tech Nine#Requested move 2) when this kind of canvassing has occurred. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:42, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

In all civility you have to be kidding me? There is not need for a big old drama filled discussion. If you want me to apologize I will, and in hindsight I should have not done it, but it was just an attempt to notify members of the community that would not have previously seen the discussion. Should I have chosen my words better? Yes, but do not drag my name through the mud and make me go through that process -.- I was not even around for the origional move discussion, and it was not even on the talk page anymore so I had not seen it. STATic message me! 01:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

("In all civility"—I like that!) No, no, I'm not trying to pressure you to apologize. I really went out of my way to word my opening comments in the discussion to avoid any impression that I am trying to drag your name through the mud. The intention with the canvassing guideline is to ensure that when there is a dispute that a fair sample of the community shows up to offer their perspectives on the dispute, and my intention here is only to resolve my concern that it is a biased sample that is showing up at this particular move request. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

That is not true however, I invited them to vote and they could have voted however they want. Only about six I think even commented on it so it is not that big of a deal. I did not even nominate it for the move. STATic message me! 02:09, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Certainly they could vote however they want; the issue is that they were very likely to hold a similar position on Tech Nine as they did on Deadmau5. And six is more than enough to sway a consensus. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:13, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

All it takes in common sense, or should we use a name for the article the subject has never been referred as? Since you know that make sense.. If it is the right policy backed name then it is not swaying consensus. More voters would still be in support even if I did not notify the others. STATic message me! 02:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Big Sean's album

Switch Up is not a single, google it. It was a promotional non-commercial song put out just for his fans, hence why it never charted on the hot 100. So i'm not sure why you changed my edit when it was correct.

He announced that he released it as the second single off the album, and it did chart hence the reason it has a Wikipedia page. The song was sent to retail so yes it was a single and he has not even said Beware is the second single, it was called the third. You have not provided any reliable source for your change. STATic message me! 19:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

No it did not chart on the hot 100, it charted on the irrelevant hip hop rap songs chart an i'm not sure why you think i'm making this up, leave my edit. He tweeted that Switch Up is not a single off the album. Proof: https://twitter.com/BigSean/status/320652626431709184

Just because a song did not chart on the Hot 100 does not make it a single, and I would seriously refute your proclaimed irrelevance of the chart. Was it released to iTunes for retail sale? Yes? Then it is a single, many reliable sources call it the second single off the album and "Beware" the third. See the article for Promotional single, they are released for free. Thank you for providing a source but he can call it whatever he wants, see the article for single. STATic message me! 00:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Just because a song is released on itunes doesn't mean it's a single...have you heard of promotional singles? It's 90% of the time when a single flops (see Love This Life by T.I. (hence does not chart well on the hot 100...(aka only chart that matters realistically). Also, a majority of people barely know anything about the album so of course they call it the 3rd single. The artist himself tweeted that the song is not an official single so i don't know why you insist on being bitter about this.

I already fixed it so I am not sure what you are complaining about. I gave you the link to what a promotional single is, you are just making up a definition for it. Just because you think a song flopped does not make it a promotional single. See the link, what does it say? "Switch Up" (featuring Common) - Single. STATic message me! 06:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Last time i'm gonna bother replying to this denial. Every single song that comes out before an album is released is labeled as a "single" by iTunes...they're not gonna put "promotional single" in front of the songs name. My source was literally straight from the artist himself so refuting it is just childish.

You are the one acting childish and making up definitions of words to try to push your opinion. Again, the article has already been changed to reflect this so stop complaining. STATic message me! 06:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Good evening. Till I Die also flopped, but that doesn't mean that the song is not the third single of Fortune. Switch Up is the same; it was released as the second official single, deal with it. Greets --188.109.161.47 (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Dyokerman

Thanks for spotting Dyorkerman's obvious gimmick infringement on my user page.

I have a sneaking suspicion this guy may be WWEJobber under a sock puppet name, and if it is, he shouldn't be here because he's been banned for mulitple Wiki sins.

Vjmlhds (talk) 14:45, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I do not think so I mean if you remember WWEJobber had much better spelling and grammar so I would not suspect him. Maybe he's just a young wrestling fan that does not know much about Wikipedia. But it is kind of surprising to me that he has not created a sockpuppet to mess with the project again. STATic message me! 17:10, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

The fact that he straight up copied my user page just raises red flags. And Jobber didn't always use perfect spelling/grammar. He also has used a sock puppet before (Nomelck). Maybe I am barking up the wrong tree, but something's just fishy here. Vjmlhds (talk) 17:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey

Hey,

Just wondering, how did you get the message to pop up on your talk page as people leave a message? -- MisterShiney ✉ 19:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

The edit notice? To be honest I put it there over a year ago and I forgot how. I think you create it at User:MisterShiney/Editnotice and I am not sure if it will pop up automatically or you have to do something. STATic message me! 20:00, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks :) -- MisterShiney ✉ 20:02, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia: Editnotice might also help. STATic message me! 20:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Done it...I think lol. -- MisterShiney ✉ 20:13, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah it is there now, glad you grasped how to do it since I completely forgot lol. STATic message me! 20:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Niteshift36 (talk) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

---

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Seriously, I agree that whole thing went way too far, way too fast. I've seen your edits elsewhere and at AfD and we are usually in agreement. I apologize for my part in how out of hand that got. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

I mean come on dude you sent me like the same message a year ago, there is no need for these little squabbles and WikiDrama. I am not some fanboy trying to add unverified content, I am just trying to expand the encyclopedia. Next time we have a disagreement, lets limit it to 1R and just do our best to discuss out the issue, especially as small and minor as this was. The "gay" comments were just ridiculous and uncalled for, I do not know how you think that was gonna get the discussion anywhere. But yeah I apologize too and lets not let this happen again. STATic message me! 20:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

• And you couldn't just go "ok, cool, let's do this....." without rehashing the "gay" comments, as if they were somehow so much worse than "retarded monkey" or "I assume the closest thing you've gotten to getting some is with your hand underneath your batman bedsheet"? Man, I try to make peace and you want to keep poking at it. Whatever. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh nooo do not take it that way man, I admit I was in the wrong too. Do not take what I said as trying to rehash anything, lets just be at peace. STATic message me! 21:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Tech N9ne

I just replied to the talk page, thanks for bringing it to my attention, I think me personally have his name AUTOGRAPHED TATTOOED on my arm, makes proof enough for it to be moved over, but just in case, i brought up a few points. 2BARQUACK.COM (talk) 16:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Taylor Gang

I run web for Taylor Gang Ent. it's not Taylor Gang Records

If the correct path is to create a page for taylor gang ent and redirect taylor gang records to ent I will.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thunkele (talk • contribs) 20:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I need reliable third party sources that call it "Taylor Gang Ent." I just searched for some and did not find any. There are references in the article that call it Taylor Gang Records. STATic message me! 23:05, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Spring Breakers genre

Hey there. You tell me "There are many many sources that call it that, but thanks for your opioion." but on the Talk page of the film's article you say "A wide variety, if not the majority of these sources do not cite the movie as a comedy at all". Contradicting. Your own research backs my edits, so would you please revert them back? It's very much questionable that the film is a comedy, however it is not questioned at all that's a drama. Presence of humor alone is not a enough to define a comedy as such and that's why most reliable sources (i.e: IMDB) call it a drama. Cataloging it as a comedy will make people come across this movie when looking into, reading about or referencing comedies, and this would be a mistake. Thank you. — Santiago Mendez 06:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkian (talk • contribs)

See the whole conversation and the sources provided by both sides in that discussion. IMDB consists of user generated content, so it is very far from a reliable source. AllMovie among other sources call it a comedy, which it clearly is in part. Your WP:OR that the movie is not a comedy is not going to cut it. STATic message me! 10:57, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

It's not clear to me at all that's a comedy, just as it's not a thriller or a suspense movie, even though it has elements of both. But don't take my word for it, here is the film file from one of the movie's production companies: http://annapurnapics.com/main/springbreakers.html#synopsis designating it a drama. Does it get any more official than that? The other sources are either critics or movie sites, this is the people who made and financed the film. If anything, the article should at least first call it a drama, and then either in parenthesis or a comment, let know that certain cited sources also call it a comedy. Yet not include it in the comedy category. — Santiago Mendez 16:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkian (talk • contribs)

Sorry, we go off of what critics and other reliable sources call the movie, not what the production company wants to designate it as. In the lead it can say it is a "drama and comedy film.." but that really does not make a difference. STATic message me! 16:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Would you care to elaborate why critics and other sources are more reliable than this? I'd like to think it's not just your opinion. — Santiago Mendez 17:23, 15 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkian (talk • contribs)

It is not very hard to understand, we at Wikipedia use reliable third party sources not self published sources or sources that come directly from the subject/its associates, especially when it comes to genres. My opinion does not matter, that is why I am not giving it. See the discussion here if you wish to continue this discussion. STATic message me! 17:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

??????

Get out of here with that minor edits crap Static. It was a minor edit and you know it. MsScorpioMoon (talk) 18:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Only we can have a dispute without getting caught :) MsScorpioMoon (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Joey Bada$$

Hey Static, I am Joey's publicist. I asked Jason to make the change, as I am not a member on Wiki. His last name is not Scott. Just Virginie. If you can kindly fix, it would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.84.33 (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Static,

Thought I gave reason when I made the edit but it's possible it didn't go through. His last name isn't Scott. It's Virginie. This was misreported in a few places and has now "stuck." Let me know if you'd like me to restore the edit or if you would prefer to. Thanks!

How do you know? What is your source that the information is incorrect? Billboard reports that as his last name, which is referenced in the article. They would not post a false name. STATic message me! 01:05, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Policy development

You are more than welcome to comment on Ground rules.HotHat (talk) 07:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Template:Money in the Bank winners

Are you okay with the current version of Template:Money in the Bank winners, or should it be reverted back to before the IP's edits yesterday so consensus can be reached about what to change before it's changed? —C.Fred (talk) 00:09, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

The way it is right now looks just fine. STATic message me! 00:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, STATicVapor. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Mark Arsten (talk) 03:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Re:Cvlwr

Oh, you bet, that's him. In the last month or two, I've seen him active on a few pages I watch, but they weren't vandal edits so I didn't pursue further blocks. But it looks like he's back on the warpath. Tokyo-area IP editing on American hip hop pages, especially discographical information. Chubbles (talk) 05:33, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

At first I was all confused on who this was lol. Yeah I have been going through hell with him the last week or so, but now there is a range block on some of his IP addresses and a few others that were also blocked. STATic message me! 05:35, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Not the first time he's been rangeblocked; have a look at the sock case if you like, I suppose there's no good reason why you couldn't reopen it if you wanted. Chubbles (talk) 12:52, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

RE: AGF

I assumed CritaCal was just some vandal cause i remember a few months ago he was trying to add himself to No Love Lost (Joe Budden album) as you can see the odd message he left on Talk:No Love Lost (Joe Budden album). Koala15 (talk) 00:48, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't add it cause he tends not to receive credit as he told me a few times. Even though i haven't seen the linear notes i would assume if he was credited someone would have added it before today. Koala15 (talk) 00:58, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Beat Assailant

Given the sources, I'm surprised that you decided to CSD A7 this, rather than bring it to AfD. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 07:18, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The only reliable source in the article is the AllMusic biography, which is not even used to verify any of the content, and not to mention the article is less than a stub. STATic message me! 07:24, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

You do realize that notability does not rest on (a) whether reliable sources are used to verify content in the article or (b) the article's length? Please re-review the deletion criteria before tagging more articles for speedy deletion. Should I have been a new contributor, I'd be extremely put-off by now—especially because I wouldn't know that the deletion criteria don't hold what you say they do. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 08:25, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

I know what I am doing, on quick glance he did not look notable at all and I had no realized he was an international act (that may be why). No reason to not act civil, just expand the articles you make past two sentences, and you won't have this problem in the future. STATic message me! 13:37, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

message

Dr. Dre really is 48 years old -- born February 18, 1965? He has a lot of associated acts. Just saying though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrColonelCortez (talk • contribs) 17:00, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

RE: Year of the Dragon

The album was released to Google Play as a promotional technique kind of similar to Magna Carta Holy Grail but it wasn't released in stores. It's been stated several times that this is is ninth album but Google Play wanted to release it for free as a promotional technique [3]. Koala15 (talk) 18:45, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Tech N9ne

I just wanted to let you know that in an interview MTV Hive Tech N9ne stated his next album was indeed titled 'Special Effects'. I don't really know how this whole Wikipedia thing works. Sorry for not doing it right the first time. Thanks. -Mitchell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitchell McGuire (talk • contribs) 23:15, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the Switch Up. :)

I thought that "Switch Up" wasn't a single due to the fact that it hasn't charted well and was never serviced to rhythimic, mainstream radio. Sorry :). Please accept my apology.

No worries, as long as a song is sent to just iTunes as single by itself (not just with the pre-order for the album) and still appears on the standard or a widely issued deluxe edition (ie. not one for just Best Buy or Wal Mart) then it is a official single. Otherwise we can call it a promotional single. And not to mention, Sean has said multiple times the song will be on the album, and a music video was shot. We can not just detonate a song a promotional single just because some people didn't think it charted well, and the artist says it wasn't a "single". He released it for retail sale by itself, which makes it a single. STATic message me! 19:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Mac Miller: Associated Acts

Instead of deleting my edits with the justification of "uhmm no", which is just downright disrespectful, how about you actually give a reason for your disagreement with my edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icniv (talk • contribs) 19:03, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

See Template: Infobox musical artist, Earl is not significant to Miller's career as they have only released two songs together. Also you just rearranged them to your own opinion on who he is more associated with. It goes groups he has been apart of first (Ill Spoken), and then the rest are in alphabetical order. STATic message me! 19:10, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Joey Badass

Moved to User:STATicVerseatide/Template:Joey Badass. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:45, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! STATic message me! 00:03, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Asher Roth - Rawth(ER)

Hi, why do you think that Nottz' Instagram is not a reliable source for the announcement of the project? L225 (talk) 08:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Either provided a reliable source, or link directly to Nottz' instagram/twitter. STATic message me! 15:02, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Machine Gun Kelly Discography

Some people have been editing MGK's discography page as well as the Black Flag (mixtape) page. I fixed the Black Flag page, but the discography page has had so many edits done that I don't feel confident enough to differentiate good edits from misinformed ones. To summarize the edits: People (mostly unregistered users) are changing Black Flag's status from mixtape to studio album. I tried to explain why i reverted the edits in my latest edit of Black Flag so maybe it will b less likely to happen again, but idk. The discography page still needs editing though, so i'll leave that to you bro. Thanks 4 teaching me this stuff earlier so I could fix it now.ThaPhenom (talk) 07:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Okay thanks for letting me know, I got in some work last night, but as I can see they did not come back after that. If there is enough vandalism, then I could get them protected shortly. And no problem dude, always good to help. STATic message me! 16:32, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Waka Flocka Flame

According to Waka Flocka Flame's main facebook page, the Flockaveli 2 promotional cover has both the BSM and Atlantic Records logo on it. And the page is also verified, just so you know. That's why I put Atlantic on there.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jevon Tompkins (talk • contribs)

Waka still owns stake of 1017 Brick Squad and Brick Squad Monopoly is a subsidiary of 1017 Brick Squad which is now distributed by Atlantic Records. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jevon Tompkins (talk • contribs)

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

[4] — 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!