Revision as of 17:07, 30 June 2016 editXboxmanwar (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,800 edits →Birth place/origin in infobox← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:13, 30 June 2016 edit undoXboxmanwar (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,800 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
The key message is "and shit like that", which clearly demonstrates the ephemeral and fluid nature of these nicknames. I would expect a better source, or thorough edit summary, if this edit gets reverted again. Thank you. ] (]) 23:21, 27 June 2016 (UTC) | The key message is "and shit like that", which clearly demonstrates the ephemeral and fluid nature of these nicknames. I would expect a better source, or thorough edit summary, if this edit gets reverted again. Thank you. ] (]) 23:21, 27 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
{{ping|Magnolia677}} Your vision of key message |
{{ping|Magnolia677}} Your vision of the key message "and shit like that" isn't clear, he mentioned that those are his former stage names, there is no problem to remove it, you are too restrictive on this article, I never seen anybody kiss this article's ass as much as you, plus you removed the chart that {{ping|JustDoItFettyg}} added, and you removed it because the source "isn't reliable", are you lazy? The source that Fetty provides is from Billboard itself, how can you call that not reliable, thats straight from the source of Billboard. You need to let loose. ] (]) 02:15, 30 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
== Birth place/origin in infobox == | == Birth place/origin in infobox == |
Revision as of 17:13, 30 June 2016
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Stub status
@Magnolia677: Your edits here and here appear inappropriate.
WP:STUB says: An article too short to provide more than rudimentary information about a subject should be marked as a stub by adding a stub template from the list here to the end of the article.
It then goes on to say: A stub is an article that, although providing some useful information, is too short to provide encyclopedic coverage of a subject, and that is capable of expansion.
The Kodak Black article as it stands today certainly only contains rudimentary information, some (but not all) of which is useful. It is clearly too short to be encyclopedic and there is absolutely room for expansion. There also is room for improvement since some of the sources are highly questionable for a BLP article.
Unless a good reason exists the {{stub}} tag should be included. Please explain why you believe this article does not meet the definition of a stub? Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 06:52, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
- This article provides encyclopedic coverage. It is no longer a stub. Please get input from other editors before adding the stub status. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Respectfully @Magnolia677:, I am not sure why you are so intense about removing the stub tag, there is NO downside in flagging an article as a stub until it is matured. A stub just says "Please be patient, I know this article can be better and we're working on it." The fact is that this article is still a stub. Now I won't add the stub tag back until after we have talked here but unless the article makes some dramatic improvements the tag will eventually be re-added ... if not by me then by someone else I'm sure.
- The problem with this article is that both the quantity of information and the level of writing style are so thin this cannot possibly be considered as encyclopedic quality yet. To clarify what I mean by "thin" notice that the sentences are almost like bullet points, with no full paragraphs at all. It looks a lot more like a PowerPoint outline than an article at this point. Yet I know it can be better. Your research is good and I think its great you and others keep finding more sources for this artist and his work but in my opinion this article just hasn't reached the level where the stub tag should be removed yet.
- KB obviously has real talent and his article should be so much more than this. By removing the stub tag you are effectively saying "this article is good enough as-is." People coming to read the article without the stub tag are going to say to themselves "Is that all there is? Is this everything that Misplaced Pages is going to say about the guy?" ... but ... with the tag they will see the stub notice and say to themselves "This is a work in progress. It needs more but I see they are at least working on it." Who knows, they might even try to help.
- Take a look at the articles on Aaliyah and The Notorious B.I.G.. These are "Featured Articles" and they represent the best examples of what an article should look like. Now compare those articles against this one. Of course KB has barely started his career so there will not be nearly as much information, but beyond the amount of content look at the way the article is written. Full sentences, good prose, organized and logical. Shouldn't this article at least look a little like those articles before you say "good enough"? Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 11:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
XXL Freshman Award Issue
@Magnolia677: There are NUMEROUS articles that have the XXL Freshman Award in the articles, why would you leave this one out, just because its "not notable", well you might as well remove it on every single page that has it (ridiculous if you actually do it), plus it doesn't hurt the page, so just leave it in there. P.S.: It's annoying that @Koala Tea Of Mercy: wrote a whole explanation about the issue on this article about being a stub and you ignored it. Disrespectful. Xboxmanwar (talk) 00:03, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Xboxmanwar: I assume you are talking about the edit here where the summary says:
"XXL's "Freshman Class" is not a notable award"
. I would start by asking Magnolia677 if the word "notable" in that summary is being used per the very specialized definition of WP:notable or is it being used per the common English dictionary definition of the word. If the latter (common English) then this is just a personal opinion issue about the value/appropriateness of a source, which will probably require input from other editors. If it's the former (WP:N) usage then this is a clear and dead wrong interpretation of the term as used here at Misplaced Pages because WP's "notability" only applies to determining if a topic is worthy of having its own article, it never applies to determining if the content within an existing article is appropriate. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 18:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)- User:Koala Tea Of Mercy Instead of looking at the edit history of the article and seeing that I have been trying to head off an edit war, you take issue with the word "notability". You told me earlier it was all about improving the article? Magnolia677 (talk) 20:58, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Magnolia677: You are right, I did say that and it is all about improving the article ... within and per the rules, policies, guidelines, and community standards of Misplaced Pages. Working outside the rules hurts the encyclopedia in the long run.
- First, it is never an "edit war" to discuss desired or contested edits. You have been asked a number of questions recently but you have not replied to them or engaged in discussion at all. That is not the Misplaced Pages way.
- Second, one of those questions is how are you using the term "notability"? It is a legitimate question and deserves an answer. If you are misusing it (and I say "if" because you have not answered the question yet so I don't know) just to win an argument then that is called expediency and many great men have commented on the destructive power of expediency:
Do not let arguments of expediency persuade you. That is the slow road to oblivion. That is the tortured path to undoing step by step, bit by bit, as the river creates a canyon, the way of life that we love.
— Chuck SchumerWhen virtue is lost, benevolence appears, when benevolence is lost right conduct appears, when right conduct is lost, expedience appears. Expediency is the mere shadow of right and truth; it is the beginning of disorder.
— Lao TzuExpediency often silences justice.
— Seneca the Younger
- Using expediency will only hurt the encyclopedia in the long run. Misplaced Pages is a community effort built on the foundation of establishing consensus, and that is never quick and seldom easy. It takes time and effort and most of all it takes communication. That is the Misplaced Pages way.
- Third, you talk about
"trying to head off an edit war"
but where have you tried communication to head off the war? Where have you actually sat down and discussed your differences with the other editors? Where have you even tried to consider their viewpoints or ask their opinions? You started this article six months ago and this talkpage was empty until I posted an explanation of why I restored the stub tag. Throwing out declarations that"This article provides encyclopedic coverage. It is no longer a stub."
is not communication. That is not the Misplaced Pages way.
|
- Fourth, and finally, I know I have been on a soapbox for the last few paragraphs and I want to be sure it is not just my opinion that is presented here. You said above
"Please get input from other editors before adding the stub status."
I'll go you one better and try and get input from many editors on both (A) the stub status of this article and (B) whether or not my position on Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines is correct. I am going to tag this talk page with {{rfc}} and ask for input on what I just wrote so that it is not just one editor's opinion. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 23:59, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- Fourth, and finally, I know I have been on a soapbox for the last few paragraphs and I want to be sure it is not just my opinion that is presented here. You said above
@Magnolia677: Yes, we can improve the article and add more content to the article, since there isn't a lot of info in this artcle, by adding the award to the page, no other article has had this problem with the award except this one, which shouldn't even be a problem. @Koala Tea Of Mercy: Thanks for the help. Xboxmanwar (talk) 23:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
- I can't keep up with you. You've filled a page with text and now you're insisting I tell you my definition of "notability"? I'll let the edit go. Take a moment to look through the edit history though. Perhaps you can help improve the article in some way. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:37, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- Magnolia677, I don't want your personal definition, I want to know if you used "notability" in the (A) WP:notable sense or the (B) English dictionary sense when you said the XXL Freshman Award was "not notable"? You can answer the question with a single letter, "A" or "B" ? Part of effective communication (both on Misplaced Pages and everywhere else in life) is making sure everyone is using the same understanding of the terminology involved. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 01:35, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- I've come here because of the
{{rfc}}
above which has listed this page at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Presumably the question being asked is "is this article a stub or not", it's not entirely clear. I would say that it's not a stub. One comment above suggested that this article should be compared against some Featured Articles (FAs). That's not really a fair comparison, since it implies that anything that is not a FA must be a stub - but there is a whole spectrum in between - at the top of this talk page there are some WikiProject banners, one of them says "This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale." Articles rarely (if ever) go straight from stub to FA. Most FAs go through the Good Article (GA) stage prior to being nominated for FA; offhand, I don't know of any that didn't, but I do know of one which went from stub to GA in just two days (it became a FA six weeks later). At the quality scale table, look at the rows for Start and Stub, expand the collapsed portions for "More detailed criteria", and see which fits Kodak Black best. Going by those, I think that Start-class is fair; every paragraph is referenced, even though some paragraphs are just one sentence. Since it's (to me at least) Start-class, that means that it's not a stub - although it is a long way from FA yet. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:36, 27 June 2016 (UTC)- Thanks for the input Redrose64. After seeing the "assessment" guideline I have to agree that this article is not a stub any longer and I am okay with Start-Class (albeit barely). I'm always willing to admit error when I learn something that expands my understanding. As for the policies part of the RFC tag it was more aimed at the issue of the use, misuse, and abuse of WP:notability. Of course the community's opinions about editors engaging (or refusing to engage) on the talk page is also a policy topic that might benefit from some appropriate comments here. :) Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 16:08, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
This is an RFC discussion, not an AfD proceeding. If you want to !vote for deleting this article go to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kodak Black. |
---|
|
Kodak Black -- notability sources
Just to put the Kodak Black is "someone who is not notable" issue to rest once-and-for-all please note the following:
- Feature article on Kodak Black by The New Yorker magazine. (already cited in the article)
- Feature article on Kodak Black by XXL magazine. (already cited in the article)
- Feature article on Kodak Black by SPIN magazine.
- Feature article on Kodak Black by The New York Times.
- Feature article on Kodak Black by MTV.
- Feature article on Kodak Black by Hey Reverb (an edition of The Denver Post).
- Identified by Forbes magazine as one of the "5 Hip-Hop Artists To Watch In 2016".
- Identified by XXL magazine as a member of the Freshman Class of 2016. (already cited in the article)
I did this research in about 5 minutes and I know nothing about rap music (I don't even like it). But he is definitely notable. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 17:02, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- I would say that WP:GNG is met. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:58, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
AfD -- 28 June 2016
SHEESH! Somebody decided to start an AfD here even after I posted this. I have responded with Speedy Keep referencing this section. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 13:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
- Perhaps you should try writing less, but saying more. That may be more effective in keeping readers' attention. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Alias in infobox
An editor has four times added the aliases "Lil' Black" and "Black" to the infobox at the parameter "associated_acts". The editor does not always leave an edit summary, and I have deleted these edits with the edit summary "according to the source cited, this does not meet the criteria of an alias, per Template:Infobox musical artist. Template:Infobox musical artist states "for listing official stage names for the act or solo artist other than the name in the |name= parameter. Also for the solo artist's legal name(s), or other officially authorized names that differ from their birth name. This field is not for nicknames such as "The Godfather of Soul" (James Brown) or "Nippy" (Whitney Houston), which are not the artists' official names". The source cited to support this addition is an interview with Kodak Black, where he states:
"Oh yeah, when I first signed up I signed up as Kodak Black, ‘cause you know Kodak, that’s pictures and all that. Before Instagram and before Facebook and all that other shit I was just Black, or Lil’ Black, and shit like that, all that other shit. But yeah Instagram came out and I was like man, I’m gonna be Kodak Black. And after that people just started saying, “Man, I like Kodak Black better.” And a lot of people, like when I started walking around, bitches would call me by my Instagram name. “Kodak Black! Kodak Black!” So when I started rapping and all that I just said fuck it, I’m gonna be Kodak Black. Everything turned out the right way."
The key message is "and shit like that", which clearly demonstrates the ephemeral and fluid nature of these nicknames. I would expect a better source, or thorough edit summary, if this edit gets reverted again. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:21, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
@Magnolia677: Your vision of the key message "and shit like that" isn't clear, he mentioned that those are his former stage names, there is no problem to remove it, you are too restrictive on this article, I never seen anybody kiss this article's ass as much as you, plus you removed the chart that @JustDoItFettyg: added, and you removed it because the source "isn't reliable", are you lazy? The source that Fetty provides is from Billboard itself, how can you call that not reliable, thats straight from the source of Billboard. You need to let loose. Xboxmanwar (talk) 02:15, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Birth place/origin in infobox
I'm trying to avoid an edit war with an editor who continues to change both the birthplace and origin in the infobox. An example of the correct format is at Template:Infobox musical artist. See the example provided for Mariah Carey. Yet this editor persists in changing or deleting the following: birth_place = Pompano Beach, Florida, U.S. origin = Pompano Beach, Florida
I will correct this again. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:31, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Magnolia677: No you are wrong about the example on Mariah Carey, because she was born in Huntington, but she is from New York City, two different places, you separate the locations from the birthplace from the origin/residence, but since Kodak Black was born and raised in Pompano Beach, its not necessary to put where's he from because its the same place, an example of this is Kid Ink, I am going to change it to how its supposed to be. Xboxmanwar (talk) 02:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
- @Magnolia677: In this case I agree with Xboxmanwar. The Template:Infobox musical artist page covers this (see the highlighted text):
- Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 12:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
birth_place
This field is only relevant for individuals. The artist's place of birth. Do not add a flag icon. (see field "origin" below).
], State/Province, Country
origin
The town, city etc., from which the group or musician originated (that is, the place where the group was founded, or where individual performer started their career, should it not match the location of their birth). If the place is not known, specify at least the country. Do not add a flag icon. Omit the country if it does not differ from that specified at the field "birth_place".
], State/Province, CountryCategories:
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (musicians) articles
- Unknown-importance biography (musicians) articles
- Musicians work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Unassessed Florida articles
- Unknown-importance Florida articles
- WikiProject Florida articles
- Unassessed Hip-hop articles
- Unknown-importance Hip-hop articles
- WikiProject Hip-hop articles
- Misplaced Pages requests for comment