Talk:The Weeknd: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:23, 22 May 2021 editTheWeekdayz (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users634 edits →Photo of Tesfaye ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:36, 22 May 2021 edit undoWalter Görlitz (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers294,571 edits →Photo of Tesfaye: rNext edit →
Line 219:		Line 219:
	: Copyright issues. If you can find any photos that meet Misplaced Pages's copyright requirements, they could be uploaded and used. ] (]) 23:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)		: Copyright issues. If you can find any photos that meet Misplaced Pages's copyright requirements, they could be uploaded and used. ] (]) 23:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
	:: I've found one which I believe is copyright-free. ] (]) 05:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC)		:: I've found one which I believe is copyright-free. ] (]) 05:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
			::: No. It's a Getty image: https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/the-weeknd-at-the-premiere-of-a24s-uncut-gems-at-the-dome-news-photo/1193417257?irgwc=1&esource=AFF_GI_IR_TinEye_77643&asid=TinEye&cid=GI&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=TinEye&utm_content=77643 ] (]) 06:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 06:36, 22 May 2021

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Weeknd article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

African diaspora Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Canada: Ontario / Toronto / Music Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Toronto (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canadian music.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

R&B and Soul Music High‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Weeknd article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 2 times. The weeks in which this happened:

August 30 to September 5, 2015 (19th)
February 7 to 13, 2021 (2nd)

This page is not a forum for general discussion about The Weeknd. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about The Weeknd at the Reference desk.

Template:Vital article

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on February 16, 2021.

Associated acts section

Yet again https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Weeknd&type=revision&diff=1002930775&oldid=1002930314 No, they do not belong here. How is each one's individual involvement this subject's career both significant and notable to his career? The case is not made and Benarnold98 is doing nothing more than pushing a WP:POV. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

And for the record, it would be sorted "Del Rey, Lana" not "Lana". At least he admits she was an influence, but with only one work, why was she both significant and notable to his career? The article just does not support the claim. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

There has not just been one work, as I detailed below, they have collaborated FIVE TIMES. This is clearly significant to his career. Please stop bullying me by undoing my constructive editing. Benarnold98 (talk) 01:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I believe the following artists should be added to The Weeknd's Associated acts section. I have attached various links proving their significance to The Weeknd's career.
Illangelo:
Long-time collaborator, has produced and written a vast number of songs with The Weeknd.

https://en.wikipedia.org/Illangelo - "long time collaborator of The Weeknd"
https://genius.com/artists/Illangelo - "long time collaborator of The Weeknd", and shows the vast number of collaborations with. The Weeknd

Lil Uzi Vert:
Many collaborations, have toured together. Lil Uzi Vert's hugely famous song, XO Tour Llif3 is titled after The Weeknd's tour, and The Weeknd appears in the song's accompanying music video.

Nav:
Many collaborations, have toured together. The Weeknd has executive produced Nav's albums. Nav is signed to The Weeknd's label.

Benarnold98 (talk) 19:51, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

But again, this article does not support the claims. And two associations are not usually enough. I am willing to take this to an RfC since you have not accepted the opinion of several senior editors in the music project. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:32, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

You also ignored the alphabetization issue. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

So as far as Lil Uzi Vert, four songs and a tour. How are these influential in this subject's career? Nothing has changed since the discussion above. There is no association there.

Illangelo: Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source and writing songs together. Are they Lennon & McCartney? I don't know because this article makes passing mention of the subject.

As for Nav, clearly this subject is influential in his career. How exactly is he influential in this subject's career? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

What can I say at this point. You asked me to take it to the talk page, which I have done, yet you report me. This is incredibly unfair. The only opinion I have not accepted is yours, because you have no idea what you are talking about. If you look back through the talk page you can see many users agreeing with me, and YOU can't accept that. Furthermore, how on earth can you possibly say four songs and a tour are not influential in the subject's career? That is hugely influential. With Illangelo, arguably the most significant of the three, if you look at the link to Genius that I attached above, you can see the vast number of songs that they have collaborated on. Why are you choosing to ignore that? It seems your stubbornness is taking over your desire for accurate information in this case. Benarnold98 (talk) 01:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I reported you for violating WP:3RR. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:15, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I notice you have ignored almost everything I have just said. Please stop being stubborn; I proved my correctness. Benarnold98 (talk) 11:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

You acting this way is very unhealthy for the community. Benarnold98 (talk) 11:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I notice you have ignored almost everything I have been writing for months. Please stop being stubborn and improve the article rather than argue for the subject's inclusion on the talk page. It is unhealthy for the community to do so. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, if you fail to self-revert or continue to argue will result in an RfC. You do not accept the project's approach so I'm happy to take it to the community. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

You have pretty much copied everything I said directed at you, that is so incredibly childish. How can you possibly take yourself seriously, when you do something like that? What you fail to acknowledge is that I am trying to improve the article with more accurate information, yet you are choosing to do whatever is in your power to prevent that, and that is really quite sad. You are terrorising me, and the article. Please can you respond to what I said earlier, 6 paragraphs ago, explaining my case, that you have chosen to ignore. I am still waiting for that. Benarnold98 (talk) 01:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Lana_Del_Rey#Associated_acts, where I have proposed adding The Weeknd to Lana Del Rey's associated acts. You can see that I have proposed it in a very similar way to above, and I was treated fairly and respectfully by other users, who acknowledged and understood my points. There is clearly a bias issue here. Why am I treated fairly by other users but not you? You will do everything you can to prevent my constructive editing. You are displaying signs of bias and bullying. Please can you treat me fairly and properly consider my suggestions. Benarnold98 (talk) 02:15, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I did copy it and directed at you, because it is better directed at you. I'm taking this to RfC since you're intransigent and refuse to improve the article. You are treated fairly by all users, especially me. You have not even attempted to edit constructively. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I am not intransigent. I am trying to improve the article to its correct form. It is you who is refusing to appreciate my contributions as you are so set in your ways that the 3 acts I am suggesting shouldn't be there. When I provide proof that they should be there you choose to completely ignore it. I don't understand why you have formed such a strong bias against me. I am not treated by you fairly in the slightest for that reason. Furthermore, every attempt I make to edit is with constructive intentions, yet you are terrorising my opportunity in doing this. You have STILL not commented on the proof I provided earlier. I keep reminding you to do this, but you continue to ignore this. Why are you ignoring the proof? Benarnold98 (talk) 12:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I thought we established in a previous discussion that Lil Uzi Vert is not so closely interconnected to the Weeknd that he should be listed as an associated act in the infobox. Binksternet (talk) 15:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Binksternet: yes, that was my understanding as well. Apparently Benarnold98 thinks that name-calling and making false claims is how things work on Misplaced Pages. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Excuse me, How many time did Lil Uzi Vert and The Weeknd collaborated? If you know, name the songs. HONDA Gang (Talk) 08:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@HondaGang: See my earlier post on this thread, where I have provided links which detail their collaborations. In addition to this, I do not understand why Belly and Daft Punk count for the Associated Acts list, as they have only collaborated with The Weeknd twice; yet Lil Uzi Vert and Nav are not allowed. Literally makes no sense. Benarnold98 (talk) 11:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Travis Scott has one notable song with The Weeknd, which also features SZA. If Scott is on there, why isn’t SZA? The list should remain as is, with Ariana Grande added (like she already is) as Tesfaye has three successful songs with Grande. TheWeekdayz (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

And if Scott has one notable song with Tesfaye, Juice WRLD should be on there too, but he isn’t, and he won’t be added. TheWeekdayz (talk) 20:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I also strongly believe that Max Martin should be added, as he has collaborated with Tesfaye many times. TheWeekdayz (talk) 20:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

That is just not true at all, Travis Scott and The Weeknd literally have 5 songs together (please see my post below), which is more than other artists; and it's not like these songs aren't notable, they have hundreds of millions of plays. I agree that neither SZA or Juice WRLD belong on there, as they only have one collaboration, thus not fitting the criteria: "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions". However, all three of the artists in question do satisfy the criteria, and hence belong here. See my post below where I provide plenty of evidence supporting this. Benarnold98 (talk) 23:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Why do you and Osh33m focus only on the number of interactions and not the main part of the documentation that states the field is for "professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career"? Perhaps you should start to focus on the "significant to this artist's career" part instead because "acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions" falls under a section that states "this field can include", not "this field must include" and relying on "collaborated on multiple occasions" may be your undoing. I don't want to pick a fight, but I do want you to understand why I'm opposed to 1) this many associated acts and 2) including the acts you are insisting on including here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I am going to speak only for myself and say that I focus on "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together" because it is a bullet point listed under the template for AA's which means that wikipedia suggests that this an application of this bullet point is an example of an AA being significant to an artist's career. It even starts off by saying "this can include, for example..." otherwise, anyone could subjectively decide what is significant and what is not. --Osh33m (talk) 02:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I should not have stated that you ignore it. It seems to me that you ignore it. Could you please acknowledge the starting criteria reads "professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career"? Could you also please acknowledge the bullet points stated that the bullet points are preceded by the phrase "this field can include"? It seems that you're pushing that one bullet point over and against the primary criteria of 'significant to this artist's career". Once we're on the same page, we can start to discuss shortening the WP:COATRACK in the infobox. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

That's not what the criteria is saying though. The bullet points are examples of ways in which acts are significant to eachothers' careers. One example of a way in which a professional relationships are "significant to this artist's career" is when acts have "collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together". All three artists literally satisfy this, so should be allowed to feature. Benarnold98 (talk) 10:00, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

As "significant to this artist's career" is so broad, and could be interpreted many ways, it has given examples of scenarios where a relationship with another artist is significant to their career. The bullet points act as guidelines. Without the bullet points how else can we define 'significant'? People's definitions will vary for this, hence Misplaced Pages has provided some examples of significance. Benarnold98 (talk) 10:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Genres

Is emo rap one of The Weeknd genres? This site named him as one of emo rap artist. HONDA Gang (Talk) 08:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Definitely not. That isn't a good source and The Weeknd isn't even a rapper. Bowling is life (talk) 12:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

He is a rapper. TheWeekdayz (talk) 22:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I know, but he had collaboration with some emo rap artists for example Lil Uzi Vert, Future and Juice WRLD. HONDA Gang (Talk) 20:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

@HondaGang: That doesn't make him an emo rap artist. Bowling is life (talk) 23:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Ariana Grande

@Walter Görlitz: Why do you keep reverting others' edits? As I said in my edit summary, Grande and The Weeknd have 3 collaborations: Love Me Harder, Off the Table, and Save Your Tears (Remix). What documentation are you referencing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylx (talk • contribs) 16:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

The documentation is Template:Infobox musical artist#associated_acts. How does it meet the requirements? How are they significant to The Weeknd's career? They were both established musicians at the point of the release of all three so from my vantage point, the career of neither was bolstered in any significant way as a result of these interactions. In fact, the remix is a financial transaction and the two did not work together to release the work. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

How come The Weeknd is an associated act in Grande's article, but Grande isn't an associated act in this article? -- dylx 18:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, Template:Infobox musical artist#associated_acts states that Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together should be included. Grande fulfills this. -- dylx 18:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Appearing on another article is not a valid article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Grande meets the same criteria as Lil Uzi Vert, does she not? To my knowledge, Lil Uzi Vert and The Weeknd have 2 collaborations: UnFazed and Heartless (Remix). -- dylx 12:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

It is similarly contested. Thank you for confirming that it too does not belong. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

It is strange wording to call the Save your tears remix a "financial transaction." The definition of a collaboration, which the remix is, is to work alongside someone to produce a solution. It is wrong on all fronts to say they didn't work together in any capacity to release the remix. --Osh33m (talk) 17:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree that my wording was strange, but to your point, at no time was Grande in a studio with this artist. Most remixes are done by an artist after all of the first artist's work has been completed. That is the case here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I understand that the remix may have been produced remotely in its entirety, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the two artists literally worked together to produce it. Just because they may have not been physically together during production doesn't negate the remix as a collaboration. --Osh33m (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Prove that they actually worked together. They may not have even spoken or emailed each other. the way it usually works is that once primary artist's production team finishes with the tracks, they are handed off to A&R. They make the decision which tracks to promote as singles, and which tracks, if any, would be a good candidate for a remix. Occasionally the remixing team will contact the primary artist's production team about doing a remix of a track. Contracts are signed, etc., and the "stems" are passed to the remixing artist. AT no point would the primary artist and primary artist even meet. So, once again, you'll have to provide a reliable source that the Weeknd and Grande actually connected.

The other thing that you consistently forget is the second part of the criteria: how is this significant to this artist's career? Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

First of all, I didn't "consistently forget" anything. I'd really like if you stop making these accusations when conversing here. It hinders positive cooperation. My input isn't about whether Ariana belongs in Abel's AA section.

Secondly, the proof of them working together is that the Save your tears remix exists. I have provided to you the dictionary's definition of "collaboration," and nearly every single publication of the remix describes the song as exactly that, a collaboration between the two of them. Going by your logic (that they apparently didn't work together), the song isn't a collaboration - which challenges those publications. If you try to make the argument with anyone else that the Save your tears remix isn't a collaboration between Ariana Grande and The Weeknd I doubt anyone else will be convinced of that. I don't think there is a need to hypothesize which person from either artist's party contacted the other throughout the entire process, because that sort of trail can be chased for any time an artist has a feature on a track.

Providing the dictionary definition again here: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/collaborate --Osh33m (talk) 13:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to imply you miss details. In short, the fact that a song exists is not proof that they two worked together. Grande (and most likely her production team) worked on tracks, they did not work together. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

You aren't fooling me with your incessant haughty attitude. In conclusion, there are at least four sources stating that Abel and Ariana collaborated. Since we have defined "collaboration," this means there are at least four sources stating that Abel and Ariana worked together. You choosing to disregard that logic is your own prerogative but the fact of the matter is that these artists worked together to produce the Save your tears remix. --Osh33m (talk) 20:33, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

I was not trying to fool you, nor do I have a haughty attitude. In conclusion just because two names appear on a recording does not mean that they two worked together on it. I think I need to remind you of several duet albums that were released that included people who had died years earlier. You have show that they worked on the same song (hence collaborated) but not that actually worked together. yes, wikilawyering. And yes, it's not significant. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

"I was not trying to fool you, nor do I have a haughty attitude." Then why did you feel the need to say I miss details, after I already said I am not here to debate whether Ariana belongs on Abel's AA section? It honestly feels really condescending.

"In conclusion just because two names appear on a recording does not mean that they two worked together on it." Nope. This is just wrong. I have done my research and shown you several sources that state they work together. It is you, and only you, saying that this can't be considered a collaboration unless they were in the studio together. In a world where a good portion of the workforce has become remote yet team meetings take place to get work done, I find this sentiment to be nonsensical to say the least.

"You have show that they worked on the same song (hence collaborated) but not that actually worked together." I've shown you twice now that the definition of collaboration is to work with someone. And like I said, I have done my research and proven that sources confirm the Save your tears remix as a collaboration. Some have even went on to say it is in fact the third collaboration between the two of them, so all you're doing here is challenging these sources. On the flip side, maybe you should try and show some sources that specifically state outright that they did not work together.

"yes, wikilawyering. And yes, it's not significant." Wrong again. If sources state that they collaborated then it is significant. As for this wikilawyering thing, you claim to not have a haughty attitude, yet hesitate to name call. Way to make this a friendly and cooperative place to edit. --Osh33m (talk) 21:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Ariana and The Weeknd have collabed more than Daft Punk and The Weeknd yet somehow Ariana doesn't meet the criteria. The lack of consistent standards here is hilarious. Deluded communist (talk) 09:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@Deluded communist: @Osh33m: I have no clue why Walter Görlitz is even attempting to argue against this one. The Save Your Tears Remix is literally a collaboration; no form of debate is neded. There are honestly no consistent standards here. Daft Punk and Belly have collaborated with The Weeknd on two songs, the same as Lil Uzi Vert and Nav (who is also signed to The Weeknd's label and are very closely connected), yet Walter Görlitz keeps removing my edits... Benarnold98 (talk) 11:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I have no clue why you are focusing on "collaboration" when a) it's clear that they never actually stepped into the same room, but I'll give that to you. 2) You have yet to explain how is it significant to the Weeknd's career. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:07, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Since when does "collaboration" mean the artists have to have stepped in the room together? That is just absurd. So many artists collaborate by sending work back and forth to each other. How do you think collaborations have occurred over the past year when artists have physically been unable to step into the room together due to coronavirus? Do none of these count as collaborations?? Furthermore, three collaborations is enough proof that they are significant to each other's careers. In fact, Ariana Grande is one of three artists (not including producers) that The Weeknd has collaborated with more than anyone else, the other two being Drake and Lana Del Rey; so their collaborations are undoubtedly significant to his career. The Weeknd has also collaborated with Ariana Grande more times than Belly and Daft Punk, who are present on The Weeknd's associated acts. Why are they more significant to The Weeknd's career than Ariana Grande? There is no sense behind your standards. Benarnold98 (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you need to read the documentation. This field is for professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career. Later it reads collaboration act playing together. So you are focusing on the collaboration, and I am trying to get you to look at "playing together". Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

You have just misquoted the source. You refer to collaboration act playing together but miss out the preceding words which actually reads: or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together. This is something completely different and isn't even in discussion. You have literally just taken words from the documentation to try and back yourself up even though it is referring to a completely different matter... In addition, this article further provides reasoning why Ariana Grande should be included. It reads: This field is for professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career. One of the fields that satisfies this is Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions. Ariana Grande has collaborated with The Weeknd on multiple occasions. Fact. For this reason she should be included, and there is no reason this should be debated. Nav and Lil Uzi Vert similarly satisfy this criteria. Benarnold98 (talk) 17:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

No, I quoted it directly. There are multiple points, but I'll take it to an RfC. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes you quoted it directly but you used the quote for something that it did not apply to. I don't understand why, despite the clear proof, you refuse to accept these artists' inclusions. Benarnold98 (talk) 19:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Because it's not correct to do so. Aside from claiming I'm lying, misrepresenting what the guideline states and do not understand what you're talking about, do you have any other insults you want to level at me? Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

It's hard to assume good faith when it's clear to see that you took the quote out of context. The documentation specifically states, Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together, but you purposefully excluded context to push your narrative. The key word here is toured. A collaboration act playing together, i.e., in the studio, is different than a live performance. Furthermore, in the sentence I quoted above, it gives the example Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, which directly apply the artists in question! -- dylx 13:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

It is your problem that you find it hard to assume good faith because the phrase was completly in context. The fact that you do not like that it is the culmination of the phrase and that you have been ignoring it is the point. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:45, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

I've been ignoring the point? Please read the rest of my response explaining my reasoning, instead of replying to the first sentence and moving on. -- dylx 19:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

I've added her to the infobox. The consensus here is clear despite the stonewalling. -- Calidum 19:38, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

@Calidum: Thank you. Glad this has finally been resolved. Benarnold98 (talk) 23:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @Calidum:.--Osh33m (talk) 19:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Songs has an RFC

Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Songs has an RFC for the use of radio station/networks' playlists being cited in articles. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Heartfox (talk) 23:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Noted by whom?

"Noted for his versatility in vocal style, music production, and eccentric presentation, the Weeknd is often cited as an influence to contemporary music, as well as by other artists" If these "other artists" are being mentioned as doing this "as well", then who is doing the noting and citing in the first place? --Khajidha (talk) 17:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

What do the sources say? Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 19 May 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I am requesting for the inclusion of Travis Scott, Lil Uzi Vert and Nav in The Weeknd's Associated Acts section. I have gained support from other users agreeing with these artists' inclusion as you can see here. One criteria for artists' inclusion is: "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together". All three artists in question satisfy this.

1. Travis Scott: multiple collaborations and tour.

Collaborations:

Tour:

'The Madness Fall Tour'

2. Lil Uzi Vert: multiple collaborations and tour.

Collaborations:

Tour:

'Starboy: Legend of the Fall Tour'

It is also worth noting that the title of Lil Uzi Vert's hugely successful song, XO Tour Llif3, is named after this tour.

Music Video Appearances:

The Weeknd in 'XO Tour Llif3'

3. Nav: multiple collaborations, tours, label connection.

Collaborations:

'Some Way'
'Price on My Head'

Collaborations for Albums (where The Weeknd acted as Executive producer:

'Bad Habits'
'Good Intentions'

Tour:

'Starboy: Legend of the Fall Tour'

Label Association:

Nav is signed to The Weeknd's record label, XO

It is clear that these artists match the description, and thus belong in this section.
Benarnold98 (talk) 16:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm planning an RfC, but need time to correctly format it and this "evidence" is nice, but it is not going to create consensus, which is what is needed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm unsure as to why you have felt the need to use speech marks; I have provided multiple sources containing factual evidence. I'm also unsure as to why you don't think consensus can't be formed, multiple users are already in favour of these artists' inclusion, more so than are not. Benarnold98 (talk) 17:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

You also responded within 4 minutes of my post, not possibly enough time for you to have checked through the sources. Benarnold98 (talk) 17:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I second @Benarnold98:'s request. And I think it's telling once again how you put the word evidence in quotations as if you mean to dismiss everything that is up there. Pinging @TheWeekdayz: @Dylx: @Trillfendi: and @Calidum: for more input. --Osh33m (talk) 17:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Consensus is not a few fans who agree, as you can see from the edit history and the discussions above, there are other editors who are not convinced that all of the subject meet the criteria. The RfC will be open the whole community, not just fans. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

No one said anything about being an involved as an editor here just because they're a fan. No one said that, except you. Also, the criteria is right there above the discussion. If other editors aren't convinced of the research provided, then they're just disregarding sources. --Osh33m (talk) 18:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

True. Sorry to assume you were a fan. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

What you should be sincerely apologizing about is your unfriendliness and sarcasm. It never helps make this a cooperative environment and only makes editing more frustrating. --Osh33m (talk) 02:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

I have nothing like that to apologize for since I am not being unfriendly nor sarcastic. What actually helps is if you actually acknowledge the criteria for inclusion and focus on how the associations are actually significant to the artist's career rather than simply counting the interactions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

How can you say you are not being unfriendly or sarcastic? You just can't say this because you don't know how other people are perceiving your comments. Osh33m and I are deeming your comments to be unfriendly and sarcastic, and you cannot deny how we feel. You have also exhibited sarcasm for us all to see many times, such as your unnecessary use of quotation marks earlier in this thread. There have also been many occasions where you have just completely copied statements I've made, such as in this thread, but reversing it to me, which you even acknowledged yourself; this is just mocking. Examples like this make it hard to assume good faith; and your editing feels disruptive. You have already been seen stonewalling before on this article, in the Ariana Grande thread where you kept refusing to accept her presence in the infobox, despite a clear consensus; and you are doing the same thing once again. Benarnold98 (talk) 10:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Wow what a mess. Benarnold98 provided plenty of reasons why Travis Scott, Lil Uzi Vert, and Nav with sources too. As he said, the Weeknd has collaborated with them many times. They meet the criteria for inclusion and many other editors agree that they should be included. Seriously, this is a waste of time. Benarnold98's evidence should be the end of the discussion. Bowling is life (talk) 21:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Seriously. I expect more from you @Bowling is life:. How are they significant to this artist's career? However, if you think that this is not a valid consideration (despite being the stated purpose of the field) I will drop my opposition and get the documentation fixed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

@Benarnold98: already explained to you up above how they are significant to Abel's career. I quote, "One example of a way in which a professional relationships are 'significant to this artist's career' is when acts have 'collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together'." It's almost as if you don't see what purpose these bullet points serve. And if you still think I am the one who is wrong, just remember that this is the same logic the rest of the editors used to explain why Grande belongs on the list. --Osh33m (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

That's opinion, not demonstrated with sources. One artist is significant to another's when they help an artist's career (as was explained above) and I showed you how that is not always a two-way street. Such as when Bing Crosby and David Bowie sing a duet. They are simply working together, and neither is bolstering the career of the other. Significance is demonstrated when the artist is influential in changing the other artist's style or technique, such as when T Bone Burnett produced two of Bruce Cockburn's albums in the early 90s and he returned from his rock period to a more traditional folk style (and influenced his lyrical content). I can give you more examples, but all you've done is counted how many times they've performed together and asked why I can't count how many times they've performed together. It's like I'm speaking a different language. And besides, I was asking Bowling is life, so please don't answer for the other editor. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:59, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

It is the same question you've asked both me and @Benarnold98: in the past many times already, and I have every right to continue the discussion even if the others don't respond right away. Even if this is opinion, it is a guideline set forth by wikipedia. And I didn't say I was speaking for @Bowling is life: anyway, but they already said @Benarnold98: did the work of providing sources. --Osh33m (talk) 03:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Except that editor is likely to answer the question rather than just tell me to count the interactions. When someone asks a direct question of an editor, that editor should usually answer it though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

You reply with this tone and then wonder why other editors find you as unfriendly and condescending. They're not just interactions, they're collaborations. And the fact that these artists have collaborated numerous times with Abel is the reason why the suggested associated acts are significant to his career. Again, same logic applied to Grande belonging. --Osh33m (talk) 12:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Not done as the page is no longer protected and may be edited directly as appropriate. — xaosflux 13:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Photo of Tesfaye

I am requesting we change the image of Abel Tesfaye on the Misplaced Pages article. The image is four years old, and a lot has changed in his appearance since then. I am thinking maybe a photo from a photoshoot for “After Hours”? TheWeekdayz (talk) 22:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Copyright issues. If you can find any photos that meet Misplaced Pages's copyright requirements, they could be uploaded and used. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I've found one which I believe is copyright-free. TheWeekdayz (talk) 05:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

No. It's a Getty image: https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/the-weeknd-at-the-premiere-of-a24s-uncut-gems-at-the-dome-news-photo/1193417257?irgwc=1&esource=AFF_GI_IR_TinEye_77643&asid=TinEye&cid=GI&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=TinEye&utm_content=77643 Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Categories: