Jump to content

Talk:Davido

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


Davido Citizenship

[edit]

Why is this article saying "Nigerian American". Does he hold a US passport? Or is that what he calls himself?--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Jamie Tubers: Davido's official website states that he was born in Atlanta, Georgia to Nigerian parents. MTV Base also states that he was born in Atlanta, Georgia. (source:[1]). This makes him a Nigerian American since Nigerian American means an American of Nigerian ancestry. Akon is a perfect example of this. He was born in America to Senegalese parents, thus a Senegalese American. I hope you understand the concept. If Akon and Davido were born in American to non Nigerian and Senegalese parents, they would simply be Americans. According to this source, Davido holds both Nigerian and American passports. versace1608 (talk) 00:50, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to add. By American law, once someone is born in America, that person is automatically an American. versace1608 (talk) 00:58, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well.... As I understand Nigerian American to mean, it means someone who has both Nigerian and American Citizenship. OR the person himself claims he is Nigerian American. A perfect example of this is Chiwetel Ejiofor and Lupita Nyong'o. They are both born in diaspora to their african parents. But while the former claims he is just british, the later claims she is Mexican Kenyan.
BTW, I just searched and I see the article is onpoint. --Jamie Tubers (talk) 01:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Take it eazy oo 

Aishat muhammad (talk) 17:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 17:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of material

[edit]

I removed material on bar fights Diff of Davido. WP:BLPCRIME calls for the exclusion of such material unless charges have been laid. Comments are welcome. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:03, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Bar fights are not necessarily a crime. Why should they automatically be classified as crimes if no one was murdered? The incident at the bar gained a lot of media attention in Nigeria. If it wasn't important, it wouldn't have garnered so much media attention.Versace1608 (Talk) 18:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The section "Controversial incidents" was 600 words on a thousand word article (60 per cent of the total article!), giving these two incidents undue weight. The second incident had only one source. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Diannaa: 60 percent of an article is a lot. Again, I don't understand what you meant by undue weight. The second incident had 3 sources, not one. [2] [3] [4] I told you already that I will remove comments made by Davido and his publicist. Apart from that, I don't see any other reason why the section can't remain. The first section is notable enough to be included in the article; a bar fight is not a crime and shouldn't be treated as such. The second section is also notable to be included in the article because it is backed by reliable sources. Versace1608 (Talk) 19:04, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What I mean by undue weight is if these two incidents consume 60% of the article it means that these incidents is what the fellow is most known for, as opposed to his music career. Remember we're writing an encyclopedia, not a gossip column or tabloid newspaper. Will these two incidents still be considered noteworthy and remarkable five years from now? Ten years from now? -- Diannaa (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Diannaa: This incident is not what the artist is known for. This incident has significant coverage in reliable sources, and this is why it is important. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have gotten so much coverage. As the years go by, this article will expand, and this incident will not make up 60% of the article. It will still be considered noteworthy. While many people will remember Davido for his music, he will also be remember for this incident. A perfect example is Michael Jackson. Many people know him for his music, and others know him for the child abuse allegation. Now to what I was writing before you posted. I just read the copyright section you left prior to leaving the "Removal of material" section. Other than adding the comments of Davido and his publicist, I didn't violate the sources I cited. All of the information I added was written by me. The copyright infringement note you left earlier doesn't corroborate with the statements I just made. I want to clarify what you meant. Are you saying that in addition to adding quotations, I violated Wikipedia's Copyright policy by adding contents word for word? On the contrary, are you saying that the sources I quoted cannot be used? Is that why you said that the incident only had one source? If you don't count the Punch source, there are more sources online. There are too many sources on this incident. [5] [6] [7][8]. I wanted to add the section again just now, but I don't want to risk getting block by you or by another administrator. I want us to talk about this and get to the bottom of this. Versace1608 (Talk) 20:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if you misunderstood. The copyright content referred to in the section above was the material removed in this diff, which was found in conjunction with this copyright investigation. There were three phrases copied directly from the source, which I removed.

Regarding re-adding the content, once material has been challenged, you shouldn't re-add it unless there's consensus to do so on the talk page. Re-adding material once it's been challenged is (as you probably know) called WP:edit warring, and it's something you can be blocked for. Edit warring to restore contentious material on a biography of a living person (BLP) is definitely something you should not do. Please read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more information on Wikipedia's policies on BLPs. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask you this. Apart from the quotations (which I said that I will remove), is there any other problem you have with the section? And If there are, list them here. If there aren't, there's no reason to label the section as "a challenged material". Versace1608 (Talk) 21:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The section you're referring to has nothing to do with the controversial incident section. Versace1608 (Talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: I am still waiting for a response. I am not satisfied with where we're at. If you don't respond, I will be taking this to an administrative noticeboard. Versace1608 (Talk) 22:34, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have already listed the problems I have with the section both here and on my user talk page. Here's a recap:
  • The section "Controversial incidents" was 600 words on a thousand word article (60 per cent of the total article!), giving these two incidents undue weight. What I mean by undue weight is that when these incidents the article is not balanced and neutral, and gives the impression that these incidents are what the fellow is most known for, as opposed to his music career. Remember we're writing an encyclopedia, not a gossip column or tabloid newspaper.
  • The fact that other biographies contain BLP violations is no reason to include them here.
  • The fact that you're able to source negative content on a living person does not mean it automatically qualifies for inclusion in their article.
  • We don't base content decisions, especially in our BLPs, on what would be "fair" to the real world persons involved. We do however especially with our BLPs, strive to avoid doing real-world harm to living persons.
  • Material that's been challenged, especially contentious negative information on a BLP, should not be re-added unless you get consensus on the talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of the article. let me just drop my comment. I understand the angle Diana is coming from. That controversy section just keeps staring at my face anytime I am reading the article. I wanted to comment on it before but probably ignored it.

But I still feel it would be very appropriate with Wikipedia policy and guidelines to dedicate a sentence or a line of text of the incident in the article. Darreg (talk) 09:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: The section should stay: Everyone knows that Davido bullies people. I just think the section was too detailed for unfiled cases. It truely looked like some gossip stuff. It shouldn't even contain subsections IMO. The section can be summarized into few lines with summarized sentences on the notable incidents and several references.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is definitely not gossip. The references that I added, and the ones that I mentioned on this talk page are all reliable sources. Diannaa said that it is "poorly source". I don't know how The Punch, Premium Times, Global Excellence, and allAfrica are all "poor references". These are some of the best newspapers in Africa. Maybe if the NY Times had reported on the incident, the content won't be consider "poorly source" in Diannaa's opinion. Versace1608 (Talk) 12:22, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jamie! I don't think that these two incidents belong in the article at all. In the first incident, in November 2013, members of Davido's entourage were involved in a bar fight. Davido was not involved in the fight, though he was present in the bar that night. This incident, which is not even about Davido but about members of his entourage, is not significant enough in my opinion to include in his biography. The activities of his entourage should not be placed here, in his WP:BLP. It's negative information about someone else that could give a negative impression of the subject of this article. That's not allowed per our BLP rules.

In the second incident, we have newspapers reporting that someone made accusations toward Davido in 2012, accusations which he later denied. Stuff like this does not belong in the Wikipedia article per WP:BLPCRIME, which states that we should not include material about possible criminal activity until and unless a conviction is secured, no matter how good the sourcing. I can see that both of you believe these incidents are starting to give the man a reputation for violence, but unless you have a reliable source saying that, I think it should stay out of the article. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:30, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first incident is a bit trivial and if it doesn't get added back, it will be because of that. Now to the second incident. An incident doesn't always lead to a conviction. OJ Simpson was acquitted and didn't get a conviction, yet information about the incident are part of his biographical article on Wikipedia. The same thing goes for Bill Clinton who was also acquitted in the Monica Lewinsky's sex scandal. The point that I'm driving at is that not all incident will lead to a conviction. One cannot diminish or dismiss an incident just because it didn't lead to a conviction. The incident is very important. If it wasn't, it wouldn't have gotten so much media attention. You are entitled to your opinion, and so am I. I do not agree with what you're saying, and no matter what the outcome is, some people will know Davido for this incident as well as for his music. Also, this incident will in no way overshadow his music career. People generally like musicians for their music, and not their personal lives. A perfect example of this is Michael Jackson, the legendary King of Pop who will always be remember for his music first and foremost. Versace1608 (Talk) 19:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that, unlike the persons you mention, Davido was never even charged, whereas the cases you mention were all the subject of very high profile trials that were heavily covered in the press for months or even years. According to this article in the Premium Times, he went to the police station and gave a statement, and the police were satisfied with that, and the matter was dropped. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:03, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to take sides with Davido and his camp, go ahead. I have said enough. From my point of view, this incident is notable enough to be included in the article. Not including it in the article doesn't take away from its notability and significance. I rest my case. Moving on. Versace1608 (Talk) 22:58, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Rich and Mighty are NEVER convicted in Nigeria for assault!, especially when its an uneducated cab driver that is involved. Darreg (talk) 19:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You can say that again. Dianaa obviously doesn't know what goes on in Nigeria with regards to this situation. @Darreg: and @Jamie Tubers: I am going to write the second incident over and add it to the talk page. If you guys agree to what I write, the second incident can be added back to the article. Another user told me that the second incident can be added if a consensus is reached. I wasn't able to get much help from the noticeboards. Versace1608 (Talk) 20:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Improper use of phrase

[edit]

i have changed the phrase 'Baby mama' to 'Baby's mother' as the latter sounds more formal. Baby mama really?! come on people. This is wikipedia, not a blog.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Davido. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Davido. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Davido. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:45, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Error adding citation

[edit]

Tried adding citation to attest to the fact that Davido has 2 dynamix awards but I got error message while trying to save the edit. Kindly help Princeborex (talk) 22:25, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Davido/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MonkeyStolen234 (talk · contribs) 17:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    It is written in a matter-of-fact way with no biases to the article subject
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
    Photos used are under the Creative Commons and are taken by the uploaders
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
    It features a "pending changes" lock to block situations like this. There is, however, a permanent dead link notice within one of the citations, but I don't believe that it affects the entirety of the article.
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    There are only two on the page, however. One for the infobox at the top.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Comments

[edit]
  • This review seems incomplete @MonkeyStolen234:, and doesn't have many comments. I'm also concerned about some of the comments you have left - you note the permanent dead link but say that it's fine. It's not: it means that there is some information that cannot be sourced. Your assessment of the illustration use also seems to overlook charts, and it doesn't mention if there should be more than two images? Would you be able to expand on these comments, and perhaps add some more detailed ones to explain your overall assessments, too? Kingsif (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MonkeyStolen234: Let me know if you're done reviewing the article. I just replaced the dead link source that was in the article.  Versace1608  Wanna Talk? 14:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Versace1608:, yes I'm finished. Thanks. —MonkeyStolen234 (talk) 14:33, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MonkeyStolen234: Thanks for reviewing the article. Since you're done, you can closed the review by following the instructions outlined in step 4 of WP:GAREV.  Versace1608  Wanna Talk? 14:41, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Further review

[edit]
  • Images free, infobox fine, singles chart fine
  • Is the bottom banner for the Next Rated award a common banner - i.e. is it used for everyone who wins it?
  • Shouldn't List of awards and nominations received by Davido be mentioned in the text - presumably both the lead and main body?
  • Ignoring the sources copying from Wikipedia, copyvio check is clear
  • Sources all seem reliable
  • Prose:
  • As an overall question, is the article using American English or Nigerian English? There's a mix of spellings and date formatting.
  • Why would going to Babcock honor his father? Did his father go there or something?
  • Davido plays a poor farmer who falls in love with the prince's fiancé - is it a man or a woman? fiancé is male, fiancée is female.
  • In its second verse, Davido addresses his arrest and Caroline Danjuma's role in fueling the rumor he was involved in the death of Tagbo Umenike - It would have been nice if either of these immensely important things had been mentioned before!
  • Remove capital for 'it' in Davido released "Assurance" on April 30, 2018; It samples Paw Paw's "Biggie Biggie".
  • Add capital for 'He' in he dedicated the track to his girlfriend
  • Subsection headers could use work, e.g. "If", "Fall", "Fia" and "Assurance" - these are almost all singles from the same album. Just use the album title.
  • How would a Guardian article be evidence that a concert didn't sell out? Did it have pictures with empty seats or something? I don't doubt that critics might use something like that, but could this be explained in the article so it doesn't seem so strange?
  • These three sentences about the O2 London concert selling out are all cited to the same source - since none of the sentences has a direct quotation from the source, an inline citation only needs to appear at the end of the three, not at the end of each (preventing OVERCITE).
  • Remove "Blow My Mind" contains lyrics are about a girl who blows Davido's mind simply - unnecessary (and awful grammar, as a side note, so it may have been randomly added by a not-main editor)
  • who asked Davido to appear on his 2018 single "Dun Rich" - so did he feature on 'Dun Rich' or not?
  • said the album will feature - change tense/phrasing now that the album is out
  • Personal life section not long enough to warrant being separate - it could be added to an 'Early and personal life' section if the article were to have a bit of restructuring (this could also help coverage issues)

Overall

[edit]

Well it's well-written, the content of most of the writing is a long prose list of his singles. A bit of his cultural impact, traveling, music tours, and whatever this arrest and murder business is (!) should be included for suitable biographical coverage. At the moment, the article could be accurately retitled 'Description of singles and albums by Davido'. Kingsif (talk) 14:30, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Versace1608: Can you respond to the above? Kingsif (talk) 12:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Versace1608: Hey, can you respond? I have enough concerns that I'll have to open a GA review if they're not addressed, but I've given you over a month so it seems fair. Kingsif (talk) 01:04, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Kingsif, I guess you never got a response? Ohnoitsjamie, I don't see how this is a GA--Kingsif's assessment is pretty accurate. User:Versace1608? Drmies (talk) 16:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'd agree it needs more work to qualify as a GA; did not realize it had GA status. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:37, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

David adedeji adeleke

[edit]

Where's davido from. Wiki DRIZ (talk) 10:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Atlanta Georgia. USA 🇺🇸 Sunnywestczar (talk) 09:10, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Davido married

[edit]

Davido reportedly married choima after his son's death 41.86.1.102 (talk) 16:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still not confirmed. What Wikipedia does in this situation is to wait. There is no rush. Better when an encyclopedia is truthful (factual) but needs update than for it to try to be complete but ending up being fictitious.HandsomeBoy (talk) 21:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of "With four baby mama."

[edit]

Paragraph one of § Personal life reads, "Davido has four children; two boys and two girls. He confirmed his marriage to his partner Chioma Rowland in March 2023. With four baby mama." I do not understand the last sentence, nor the reference adjacent to it, whose abstract seems like cultural jargon. The sentence was first added without any reference by Pretty-Mercy02, after which it was removed by Framawiki. Pretty-Mercy02 then readded it with the reference, after which Curious fairy added a period to the end. I am creating this discussion to avoid an edit war, and I am pinging the three aforementioned users because they each have seen the sentence and hopefully can offer insight regarding its meaning. If no one replies to this discussion with an explanation for the sentence's existence within the next few days, I will probably remove it. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | contribs) Don't be afraid to ping me! 18:27, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CopperyMarrow15: Thank you for initiating this discussion. A quick search reveals multiple references with these terms, see [9] and [10]. But the reliability of these websites is unknown for me.
I also agree that the current reference in the article does not seam linked, and Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons asks us to only add such statement with reliable source. This statement will have to be removed if such reference is not provided. Thanks, Framawiki (please notify me when you reply) 21:42, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Framawiki, those websites seem unreliable per WP:SENSATIONAL. Plus, they contradict eachother; they both list "Sophia Momodu", "Amanda", "Larissa Lorenco", and "Ayotomide Labinjo", but the former lists "Chioma Avril Rowland" while the latter lists "Anita Brown". I now understand that the sentence is trying to say, "He has four baby mamas.", and since you agree with me that the reference does not support the information, I am removing the sentence. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | contribs) Don't be afraid to ping me! 13:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added American

[edit]

Davido is an American born to Nigerian parents. He was born in Atlanta, Georgia. Eugenebenji (talk) 10:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's already in "Life and career." Please read MOS:CITIZEN before editing again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 12:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Davido&oldid=1224172589"