Talk:Childish Gambino discography

This article is within the scope of the Discographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's collection of discography articles and lists. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to discography-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page.DiscographiesWikipedia:WikiProject DiscographiesTemplate:WikiProject DiscographiesDiscography articles

Hip hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

mc DJ info please?[edit]

He was also known as "mc DJ"[[1]] and had a few albums .. titles that I know off are:

Illin-Noise! The Sufjan Stevens Remix Album - 2005
Utterances of The Heart - 2006
New Year's Eve Extravaganza Mix - 2006
Love Letter In An Unbreakable Bottle - 2007
A Charlie Brown X-Mas EP - 2008
The Works: The Remixes Vol. 01 - 2009
Fuck Yaselves!
Apple Sauce: Fiona Apple Remix Album

I have the tracks, but I know nothing much about them (got them from a friend who's a bigger fan than I am).. to here's the track listing that I have on pastebin (delimited with two 'Tabs' Track_Title Track_Number Album_Title Year_Released Pastebin - mcDJ aka Childish Gambino

The Great Gambino / Mystery Team EP[edit]

Why are they not here?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.149.79 (talk) 10:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too many tags[edit]

WP:OVERTAG, WP:RESPTAG, WP:TAGBOMB. Much better to use the talk page to point out issues and add tags only for the most important issues. Please be responsible in tagging, as excessive tagging discourages rather than encourages improvements. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 08:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jax 0677 has been warned about this before, and he still continues to do it everyday. Like you said @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: it's not improving Wikipedia itself to tag things. It's just telling others the editor who did it is unwilling to improve it themselves. Jax has also proven that he will edit war with others when he thinks he's right in tagging, even though it is discouraged by Wikipedia consensus, if not direct policy. I've seen people reported on Wikipedia for doing less in disregarding what other users have repeatedly asked to them over the course of years, and that's not to overtag. I'm thinking only a direct warning from an admin would actually discourage him from it. Ss 112 09:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Articles should be properly referenced in the first place. When an entire section has zero references, I often use {{urs}}. When an entire article has zero references, I use {{nr}}. If I put {{+r}} on a large article, or put {{+rs}} on a large section, it leaves people to guess exactly where the issue lies. I have been warned for putting {{ods}} or {{otd}} without specifying where the issue lies. Some pages are archived very frequently, which would move a discussion about the references onto a different page. WP:OVERTAG, WP:RESPTAG and WP:TAGBOMB are essays, and not policy. This section begs the question, why do we have {{urs}}, {{+rs}}, {{ods}} and {{cn}} in the first place? --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:50, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I love it when something benefits your way of thinking, you have no problem referring to an essay that backs it up, but if an argument is against you, you pound "they are only essays, not policy" over everyone's heads. Just because they are essays doesn't mean they should be ignored. They represent common sense thinking and general rules of thumb. It's not that they shouldn't be used, but that they should be used in moderation. Numerous and repeated tags make things annoying for readers and discourages editors from fixing them. Your efforts should be to make the encyclopedia better. Being a tag-bomber doesn't do that. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - I prefer to tag the material, and leave it on there for at least one month. After that time, some of the stuff that does not get a reference will be deleted. I feel that this is better than deleting the material outright. With some document revisions in industry, the phrase "extensively revised" should not be used unless the listing all of the changes that the document needs is too cumbersome. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:37, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's again another double standard, considering pages you have created yourself (particularly discographies) are pages you basically never delete information from, but when it comes to other pages you apparently now have no qualms removing unreferenced material. An administrator's word needs to be asked for on this, because you always ask the same circular, inane questions like "why do we have all these things if not to use them?" and then essentially it goes nowhere you go right on doing the same things people have asked you not to do. This page and many of the others I have seen you tag bomb are honestly not that long that people would not be able to find where the unreferenced material is. Experienced editors are generally the ones who will come along and potentially fix the issues of their own accord, and they don't respond that way because of you thinking you're helping by overtagging. Ss 112 20:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - Looking at Brave Enough, it is difficult to know exactly where additional references are needed, which is where {{cn}} comes in handy. My placing {{urs}}, {{+rs}} and {{cn}} tags on this article caused another user to add several additional references to this article. If I have "added unreferenced material to a new article", it is because it is a size split, with material that I did not initially add to Wikipedia, but that someone else added to the encyclopedia without proper references. I added {{+R}} to Ras Kass discography, because it is extremely obvious where the errors lie. This is a volunteer project, therefore, I am not required to add tags to articles to which I do not wish to add them. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:31, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Those other pages do not have any bearing on your overtagging of this article. The fact is you do overtag, and to paraphrase WP:OVERTAGGING, it's not helping out, it's an unwillingness to do anything substantial about it yourself (even though you're not obligated to, you still take issue with it but seemingly can't fill out refs or find them yourself) and it just as often annoys users. Frankly, I don't care about the articles or issues you don't wish to tag; I care about those you do overtag, and I and several other editors have taken it up with you and you just repeat the same things you told me on your talk page however long ago. It's gone on long enough. You don't listen to anybody else and it's about time an admin was informed of this issue. Ss 112 16:42, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My objection is that the overtagging is excessive and redundant when one tag will do. The other issue is that you add the tags without any explanation. I don't have as much as a problem with the {{citation needed}} tag as it is placed at the actual statement where a citation is needed and, for the most part, self-explanatory. Just plastering general ribbon tags up and down a page without identifying why you have an issue with it is considered drive by tagging. Limit the number of tags on a page and use the article's talk page to make other editors aware of specific problems throughout. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Childish Gambino discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:10, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Feels Like Summer[edit]

iTunes says it's a single.^[1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogibeera (talk • contribs) 05:27, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://itunes.apple.com/za/album/feels-like-summer-single/1410352782

iTunes is not a reliable source in differentiating singles and promotional singles. Hayman30 (talk) 08:38, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why "Bambino X" era is absent?[edit]

Amazing songs like "Girls Look Better" and others should be included. 93.185.17.151 (talk) 21:14, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://itunes.apple.com/za/album/feels-like-summer-single/1410352782

[1]