User talk:Chubdub

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Contents

[edit] Welcome

Hello Chubdub and welcome to Wikipedia! I'm glad you've chosen to join us. This is a great project with lots of dedicated people, which might seem intimidating at times, but don't let anything discourage you. Be bold!, explore, and contribute. If you want to learn more,

Wikipedia:Bootcamp teaches you the basics quickly,
Wikipedia:Tutorial is more in-depth, and
Wikipedia:Topical index is exhaustive.

The following links might also come in handy:
Glossary
FAQ
Help
Manual of Style
Five Pillars of Wikipedia

Float around for awhile until you find something that tickles your fancy. One easy way to do this is to hit the random page button in the navigation bar to the left. There are also many great committees and groups that focus on particular jobs. My personal favorite stomping grounds are Wikipedia:Translation into English and Wikipedia:Cleanup for sloppy articles. Finally, the Wikimedia Foundation has several other wiki projects that you might enjoy.

There are a few crucial points to keep in mind when editing. Be civil with users, strive to maintain a neutral point of view, verify your information, and show good etiquette like signing your comments with four tildes like this: ~~~~ If you have any more questions, always feel free to ask me anything on my talk page or ask the true experts at Wikipedia:Help desk. Again, welcome! -- Draeco 21:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rakim

Hey there. I really appreciate your work on Rakim's article, but I had to tone down some of your most recent edits for two reasons: They were unsourced, and they were heavily POV. I agree with you that Rakim was a pioneer in hip-hop, but Wikipedia's policies (such as no original research and neutral point of view) require that articles stick to facts and opinions by reliable third parties. If you can source some of what you were saying, it can certainly go back in the article. Please let me know if you have any questions, and keep up the good work on the old-school hip-hop icons! | Klaw ¡digame! 02:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You wrote on my talk page:

Why do I need a citation. ITS A COMMON FACT that Rakim revolutionized Hip-HOp and moved it towards the direction it went.

You need a citation because that's not a fact - it's an opinion, and it needs to be verified. Telling me that Follow the Leader is one of the greatest rap albums of all time - it's not even in my top ten, by the way - is not a fact, it's your opinion, it's original research, and it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. If you want to contribute to hip-hop articles here, you need to put your opinions aside and concentrate on facts and things you can cite. Otherwise, they'll be removed. | Klaw ¡digame! 03:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Rakim's record label (the source of the text on sing365.com) is not a reliable source. And please stop adding your opinions on his "breath control" and "meticulously engineered" lyrics unless you can source them. | Klaw ¡digame! 04:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Just putting a random URL about Rakim into the article does not count as verifying your opinions. I have removed them four times already. Please stop adding those same two sentences over and over. They are ridiculously biased and can not be verified. The two quotes that are already in that paragraph are more than enough. | Klaw ¡digame! 04:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. You can put links at the bottom in the External links section - I just added the globaldarkness.com essay (a great link) in that section, so just follow that example. My issue is with the text of the sentences that you were inserting. I happen to agree with you that he remains the best rapper in the genre's history, and he is hands-down my favorite, but I can't just write that stuff in the body of the article. The article can talk about his role in rap history to the extent that we can cite reliable sources that define it. Incidentally, I think "Rakim Allah" was a name he gave himself, wasn't it? Have a good night. | Klaw ¡digame! 05:08, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your violations of Wikipedia policies

If you want to continue editing on Wikipedia, you need to familiarize yourself with some basic policies. I have asked you several times to stop re-inserting your opinions into articles, but I see you're doing it over and over again, despite requests for you to stop.

Please review the following policies:

I have reverted your changes on Rakim, The Chronic, Das EFX, and Dead Serious (album) several times already. The sentences you're adding do not belong in Wikipedia. The official policies I pointed to above explain why. | Klaw ¡digame! 19:01, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Let me explain to you why your edits are just plain wrong for Wikipedia. On Das EFX, you inserted the text:
Das EFX was deemed as one-dimensional and repetitive by critics.
But gave this article as your source. The problem is that nothing in that article says anything about critics calling Das EFX one-dimensional or repetitive. Just sticking a link on the end of a quote doesn't mean it's been sourced; it means that you're trying to pull a fast one and are inserting your own opinions into Wikipedia articles even though you've been asked repeatedly to stop. | Klaw ¡digame! 22:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
First of all, please sign your posts on talk pages by typing ~~~~ at the end of your comments. I deleted something you posted on my talk page earlier because you didn't sign it appeared to be vandalism.
Second, those sources on The Chronic are better, as they at least start to support the language you keep inserting. I still had to tone down some of what you wrote, as it wasn't supported by the sources - for example, G-funk was the dominant sound in rap only until about 1997, when East Coast artists under Puff Daddy became popular. Adding sources is not enough; the sources must actually verify what's in the text.
Third, your additional source on Das EFX still doesn't support the sentence you stubbornly insist on adding, since it's an interview from 2003 and can't be used to talk about an album from ten years earlier. Why is it so important to you to add that one sentence even though someone else has told you he doesn't think it belongs? You should consider reading Wikipedia's policy on ownership of articles. Repeatedly inserting the same text over a three-week span borders on vandalism. If you feel that strongly about these opinions, put them on your own Website. | Klaw ¡digame! 03:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits on Paid in full

Chubdub, your recent edits on the article Paid in Full have been reverted on the grounds that they were spurious and appeared to be of little contributory value to the article. I see you have been warned for Vandalism before, which is what in some respects, this may amount to. I am therefore issuing you with this: This warning has been withdrawn by the issuer, Thor Malmjursson

Thor Malmjursson 03:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC) Talk with me (Politely please!)

In response to your request on my talk page, which I thank you for, I am happy to explain why your edits were reverted. As my Userpage specifies, I am a member of the Wikipedia Counter-Vandalism Unit and also a Recent Change Patroller. We have access to a special system which flags or identifies multiple edits by the same user in a significantly short period, especially on what we call "Watchlisted Articles". In this case, Paid in Full is one such article, and your edits came up as a potential vandalism issue on our system.

The edits were reverted because of this flag appearing, although as I now note, the edits were not spurious, just simply done in a slightly different way. I withdraw happily my issue of the Vandalism warning, which I will note now, and I hope I have not inconvenienced you by doing this. Please accept my apologies, and thank you for getting in touch. Thor Malmjursson 04:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC) Talk with me (Politely Please!)

Thanks for getting in touch again, Chubdub. You are most welcome to continue editing the article. I have added the Paid in Full article to my personal whitelist, which means that future changes will not be flagged, but will show up as a standard edit. It simply means that I can see who is editing the article, check it over, and prevent it from being vandalised in the future by other users. Your conduct has been impeccable discussing this with me, and I am going to, as soon as you create a Userpage, award you a barnstar for this. If more users were as polite as you are, people like me would be a whole lot happier!

Take care, and enjoy contributing. Thor Malmjursson 04:56, 16 January 2006 (UTC) Talk with me

Addendum Your barnstar has been awarded. I have also created a temporary user page for you to facilitate issuing this award. see here: User:Chubdub - Take care. TM


Hiya again, Chubdub. Providing you can balance those remarks, ie. give both sides of an opinion, something for it, and something reflecting it, I see no reason why the addition of such comments would affect the NPOV status of this article. If you want me to check the article over for NPOV problems when you have amended it, please get back in touch with me on my talk page and I will be happy to help sort it out. Regards, Thor Malmjursson 17:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC) Talk to me

[edit] citations

Very well. I'll remove the citation regarding dasefx/snoopdogg/etc....But I am going to replace "prevalent" with "popular" in order to reduce the POV.

however, I clicked on the link to the eminem article in the section regarding the influence of illmatic on eminem, and there is nothing within that article that suggest that he was infuenced by Illmatic. Until you provide a definitive source, the citation will remain on that line.... --Eth3red 01:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay...since it does mention that nas inspired him, and eminem's style sounded similiar to nas.....I'll remove the citation tag....

[edit] re: Illmatic

Only albums and publications are in italics; songs are not. I ran a find/replace to remove the italicized quotes and songs, and re-italicized the albums and publications by hand. I may have missed some, so if you spot them, by all means fix them. --FuriousFreddy 01:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: pictures at Nas (rapper)

The pictures probably should be replaced. I don't have any in my own collection, but if you run an internet search for pictures (magazine covers and screenshots are safest), link me what you find and I will see if we can upload it. Oh, and sign your name by typing "--~~~~" after your messages so you don't have to type the whole thing by hand. --FuriousFreddy 17:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

We can't use the pictures directly from his site, I don't think. Screenshots and magazine covers are safest. --FuriousFreddy 02:01, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Lyrics

A line here and there is fine, but whole verses are not. --FuriousFreddy 20:03, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note

Hello, I noticed you edited a Hip Hop related article. If you wish you can join the new Hip Hop Wikiproject. Thanks for your time. Tutmosis 22:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I be honoured to have you as a member. Tutmosis 04:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 50 cent pic

Anyone that's famous is criticized. He's on the page because his style of delivering lyrics has sold the most records.--Urthogie 17:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Replied at PR. By the way, where you from? Which part of the US? Make any hip hop yourself?--Urthogie 12:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History Page

If you dont mind, I noticed you are doing a lot of work for the project, can you add entries to History page everytime you do something. Im just trying to get that page going so people will know recent changes to articles done by our project members which will influence them to contribute themselves. Thanks, if you rather not bother that its still fine with me, the work you do is whats important. Tutmosis 00:44, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stubs

Im a truly sorry for not responding to your comment. When i checked out my talk page I missed your comment by accident. Regarding the stubs, There are A LOT. I have added links to categorie listing all the stubs on the main page here. Basically it would be pointless to put hundreds and hundreds of stubs on the to-do page. Thats why now the stub section on the to-do page says thats only essential articles should be listed. I think we should only concentrate on essential stubs since there are too many stubs to list there. Practically every album is a stub. You get what im saying? The stubs you added are fine since they look and are essential. Tutmosis 03:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cite.php

I converted Battle of Cannae, but you'll want to look at my comments over it at the FAC page. Circeus 19:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note concatenation

See this diff to see how to combine notes. Circeus 19:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mea Culpa

My apologies if my organizational edits screwed up your citations :( - Vedexent 20:01, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to stop there - because I think I notice two trends which are causing the "problems"

  1. Many links all go to the same source, who you are using for you source on Polybius. You should break this up so that you reference Polybius DIRECTLY. A bit of a pain, but you HAVE the quotes, and Polybius is searchable online, so you can find the original quotes.
  2. Placement of citations might be a little "fuzzy". When you have text - citation - text, it is unclear where the reference for the second text block is from. Is it from the same source? If so, the ref needs to come after both for clarity. Remember that people have to be able to tell where a "fact" comes from so that they can locate your references for further information (in theory).

I think if you can get the references ironed out, the article kicks ass though :) - Vedexent 20:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok - I think I see an inconsistency between the way I reference things, and the way you are doing it. I don't know if it is a problem or not. You're not providing page numbers. I had a look at WP:CITE and it isn't clear whether page numbers are required - but they are pretty common.

Like this:

[edit] Text

Blah blah, histortical claim[1], blah blah

[edit] Bilbiography

SomeRef, "Book Name", publisherName (Year).

[edit] Footnotes

  1. ^ SomRef, page 12

Now.... I don't know if it has to be done like that - I would suggest asking about it in the discussions. At THIS point, it would be a real "pain in the ass" for you to have to retro-fit your references to that style :( - Vedexent 22:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


Ok :) Whew, that has to be a relief :) - Vedexent 00:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wow! thanks!

I think that's the first award I ever got for being nice - usually I'm a grumpy old SOB :D - Vedexent 00:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW, in a couple of days you can take a swipe at me ;) I think by then I'll be putting Third Servile War up for peer review - once I get all the bloody footnoting done.... - Vedexent 00:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)



[edit] Help has arrived

You wanted some help, here I am! How can I help you? You can ask your questions right here, and I will respond. --JoanneB 13:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello. On the Battle of Cannae article, there is some text that will not appear. Alhtough for some reason, when you press edit button, the text does appear, but it will not show on the actual article itself. For instance, the header "Event" will not show on the actual article, but it appears on the editing page. Is there any thing you can do to help me?--Chubdub 13:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
There's a problem with the reference tags in that article. They are not all closed. If you look at the specific text that is missing, it appears to be missing from the opening of a reference tag, to the closing of another reference tag much later. Apparently, one of the references is not properly closed with </ref>. You might be able to fix it yourself, now that you know what to look for, if not, let me know, and I'll get into it in more detail. --JoanneB 14:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Battle of Cannae

The article is very good at this point. Unfortunately, it's rather outside my normal area of interest, so I can't really help too much with the actual historical details.

In any case, it's now been promoted to featured article status. Congratulations! Kirill Lokshin 00:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Casualties are probably best kept under the discussion of the battle itself.
As far as your other questions: the Military history WikiProject has both a collaboration of the fortnight and a dedicated peer review process. I encourage you to join the project and take part in both! Kirill Lokshin 01:43, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter, Issue I

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter
Issue I - March 2006
Project news
From the Coordinators

Welcome to the inaugural issue of the Military history WikiProject's newsletter! We hope that this new format will help members—especially those who may be unable to keep up with some of the rapid developments that tend to occur—find new groups and programs within the project that they may wish to participate in.

Please consider this inital issue to be a prototype; as always, any comments and suggestions are quite welcome, and will help us improve the newsletter in the coming months.

Kirill Lokshin, Lead Coordinator
Current proposals
  • Proposed guidelines for categories of military people are currently being discussed. A number of issues have already been resolved, but the proposed scheme is still in draft form and further input would be very welcome.

delivered by Loopy e 04:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hannibal ad portas

Good entry :) I've even heard "Hannibal at the Gates" used as an archaic expression in my own lifetime (and I'm younger than 2,000 years old ;) ) - Vedexent 15:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

You think Marduck's work on Hannibal is bad? Look at Carthage - since a Sysop locked the page to end the edit war right after one of his reverts - and then look at Talk:Carthage to see the fray. But only if you're a fan of slapstick and wrestling :p Heck - feel free to vote on the "group consensus to get the page unlocked" poll as well. - Vedexent 16:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration

Yea we should definetely start on our first collaboration which is obviously "Illmatic". Maybe we should make rules for the collaboration such as:

  • design specific dates when next article voting will take place, unless we want it weekly.
  • within a certain amount of days the article with the most votes wins.

Something like that, what you think? –Tutmøsis · (Msg Me) 17:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Collab

I updated the collaboration page a bit, what else is it missing? – Tutmøsis (Talk) 15:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Well I think voting + nomination can take place any time. Only next colloboration pick will be only after we finished with Illmatic and cant do anything else to improve it. Also I was thinking we should write a peer review for each collobaration so that our members can know what the article needs instead of how it is now "here the article, go edit it" type of atmosphere. What you think? – Tutmøsis (Talk) 15:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay then peer review is definetely a good idea. Members I have no idea, they seem to come by themselves, I sort of dont know how to advertise the project except that hip hop template on article talk pages. The project right now seems to be lacking leadership and direction so members arent really active in the project except some of course. The talk page should be a little more active in my opinion. I'm no better since I'm a little busy in life and have minimal time to spend on wikipedia. I think it be great if members began taking leadership in the project. This isnt my project so people shouldn't rely on me for approval or anything, I just helped build the foundation of the project(aka project pages). This project is more a community thing. You understand where im going with this? – Tutmøsis (Talk) 15:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
The rating system still hasnt been started but I was hoping on getting started on it as soon as possible. Inserting the rating system into the peer review would also be helpful. Maybe the peer review can give a score to various aspects of the article such as: lead, substance, pictures, references. What you think? – Tutmøsis (Talk) 15:47, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Im trying to figure out how to get the peer review started. We create a seperate page for the review, thats obvious... then how do we invite our members to contribute? except the project talk page anything unique we can do, like a colorful announcement or something? how do we decide on the scores... obviously we need to get some discussion going... so where does the discussion happen? when the article is improved... should we update the scores? who updates the scores? – Tutmøsis (Talk) 16:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks alot for your help, I really appreciate discussion. – Tutmøsis (Talk) 16:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for sending out that collab template; I think that's a great idea. One thing you might want to know for the future, is that templates update on the userpages everytime the template itself is updated. In order to make sure that that template stays the same on the userpages you send it out to, you should subst: it, or change the template parameter (see Help:Template). Further, a tool called AutoWikiBrowser can help deliver the message faster, and not make it as annoying for you. Anyway, thanks for the message, and if I can help you do something in the future, drop me a line. -Mysekurity[m!] 17:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Re: your question about Illmatic

I wouldn't say that those two styles were the most popular styles around at the time. We've discussed the Das EFX fad but that lasted for only about a year. The artists that based their careers on off-the-wall technique but limited lyrics disappeared quickly. The exceptions are Common who smartened up and Busta Rhymes because of his irresistable personality. I also don't feel that Illmatic should get the credit for a return to lyricism or rhyming with clarity or rhythmically. For one thing, although it was immediately hailed as a classic, it didn't sell well outside of the East coast initially so it's impact was rather limited at the time. Plus, Wu-Tang's Enter the Wu-Tang predates Illmatic and it went platinum. A Tribe Called Quest was still popular and their Midnight Marauders also predates Illmatic and went platinum. Then, the writer is extremely unfair to Snoop Dogg and West Coast artists. Although his flow is laid-back, it's anything but simple or arhythmic. On The Chronic and then Doggystyle, Snoop shows off witty lyrics and crystal-clear flow. It paved the way for a little guy named The Notorious B.I.G. and Ready to Die. P. Diddy has stated that Bad Boy Records was to be the East coast version of Death Row Records. Also, at the time BIG's friend, 2Pac also was popular with his sharp lyrics and clear flow and he had two hit albums before Illmatic. Plus, Ice Cube was still very popular and still had strong lyrics at the time. I'm not all clear in what the writer is talking about in regards to West Coast rappers. I would estimate he is referring to artists like Warren G and Mack 10. But they came after Illmatic. Illmatic's impact is more retroactive. It wasn't until Nas came out with It Was Written and he became a mainstream star that more people started becoming curious about Illmatic. People had assumed Nas was a follower of BIG's and Snoop's style. But when they checked out Illmatic then they realized that he had that style all along but he streamlined it (some say improved it) for better sales. It's legacy has really grown over the past decade. Don't get me wrong! It's one of the best albums ever. But it's immediate impact was limited. Snoop deserves the credit for a greater focus on meaningful lyrics and smooth flow at the end of the golden age of hip-hop. BIG and Wu-Tang deserve the credit for starting the East coast resurgence of the mid-90's. After them, Nas and Pac really stepped their game up to mix great lyrics with greater mainstream success. But that's just my opinion. MrBlondNYC 08:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] helpme

What kind of help do you need? --Fasten 19:24, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed that you used {{helpme}}, what can we help you with? Ask you question here, and place the {{helpme}} template at the end so we know to check back.--Commander Keane 20:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
copied: More than half of the gangsta rap article has been deleted by a vandal. And I do not know how to revert his edits. The article has undergone several abuses from vandal, so some one needs to revert it back to its previous version as soon as possible before any more madness happens. The vandal also deleted all of the talk page --Chubdub 19:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
To revert an edit you select the version you want to revert to from the history and then you edit that version as you would edit the article. If you don't have to change anything you can save the page immediately. You should make sure not to revert sensible changes that may have been made after the vandalism and you should also make sure that what you perceive as vandalism is actually vandalism, not just a bold edit you could discuss on the talk page. You should begin the edit summary with rv or revert and, possibly, an explanation why you had to revert. You can do that to both the article and the talk page if necessary. Don't revert the same page more than 3 times in 24 hours (except for the cases listed under WP:3RR). And that is not an invitation to revert other editor's changes at all; discussion is always preferred where you would prefer somebody else to discuss your changes.
I would revert the talk page to 03:15, 19 April 2006 and the article to 09:54, 18 April 2006 by GoldRhymer. The changes made afterwards are minor but maybe you should consider adding them manually to the restored version. I would especially restore the {{cleanup-rewrite}} if you agree with it or add a {{disputed}} notice and start a section on the talk page where a possible rewrite is discussed. --Fasten 20:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I have reverted the talk page and article (Gangsta rap) to appropriate versions)--Commander Keane 20:19, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help

I saw you put up the {{helpme}} template. What can I do for you? Pepsidrinka 20:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm kind of confused at what your asking. I already see that the peer review is archived. Do you mean this page? If that is the page you want, go ahead and edit it, delete the redirect, and start a new. Let me know if this is what you need. Pepsidrinka 20:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Just edit it as you would any other page. I'll just go ahead and fix it for you. You don't need to delete the page, just the content from the page. Pepsidrinka 21:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Got sidetracked. Okay, Wikipedia:Peer review/Illmatic should be blank now. Pepsidrinka 21:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Illmatic

but i never uploaded any illmatic images in the first place --HasNoClue 00:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue II

The April 2006 issue of the project newsletter is now out. You may read this issue or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following the link. Thanks. Kirill Lokshin 18:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] hey man

thanks for doing so much work on the illmatic article, it looks excellent. i wish i had more to add, or more free time. i'd give you a star or whatever but fuck that. --HasNoClue 00:24, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Illmatic

I copyedited it, but I didn't find much POV, except for the last paragraph. You can go ahead and improve the lead now. TheJabberwʘck 01:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you think this sentence is really necessary? I eliminated it in the interests of conciseness, since the reasons for the rise of Mafioso rap are outside the scope of Illmatic. I think it would be better to let users check out the Mafioso rap entry themselves if they are interested.
Also, it would be helpful if you could use edit summaries for non-minor edits. Thanks, TheJabberwʘck 03:27, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lead

I think the lead is a tad brief - but as it is, it works. If you want to extend it, the lead should basically summarise everything important in the article - things that could be added back to the lead are a sentence on the significance of the album in the hip hop scene at the time, chart success (or lack of) and any really notable songs. It is currently 140 words, try and keep it below ~250.--nixie 01:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

I didnt get a chance to say congrats before, so here it is now. What you've done with Illmatic would make any editor proud, and I thank you greatly. Not only were we desperatly in need of an album featured article, but also of something going against systematic bias. It's a sad fact that rap is underrepresented here, so thank you for making this article what it is. Are there any other articles you think are suitable? Jay-Z, Until the End of Time, or Speakerboxxx/The Love Below, perhaps? Or would you prefer Nas, I Am..., or Nastradamus? Interestingly, after this article was selected as the collab, I listened to I Am... for the first time in a while. I'd definitely be up for any of these, or more if you'd suggest. -Mysekurity[m!] 04:42, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Great. Do we perhaps want to focus on any albums/record labels? -Mysekurity[m!] 22:21, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:new collaboration

Great! I guess Rapping is the next collaboration, it would help to establish a time period for how long the voting process lasts before the next collab is decided. - Tutmosis 19:31, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Collab template

Chubdub, make sure that when you add {{CurrentHHC}} to user talk pages that you substitute the template, so that it doesn't change each time. I don't have AWB at my service, but if anyone else does, that would be greatly appreciated. Anyways, keep up the good work, and I'll see ya around. -Mysekurity[m!] 04:11, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] good point

feel free to remove examples.--Urthogie 22:56, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] prose on rapping

I'd like that but I don't see how to do it and still make it flow and look good.--Urthogie 22:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The best way to do it would be to find a way to categorize various subject matters into smaller categories(maybe politics, gangsta, and relationships...thats how encarta does it at least). But it's hard to find a small number of categories to cover so much.--Urthogie 07:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rapping

Didn't get a chance today, but tomorrow's the weekend, so I'll be able to finish up copyediting the rest, including the "subject matter" area. TheJabberwʘck 06:03, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Done. Whaddya think? TheJabberwʘck 05:30, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] helpme

Hi, I noticed you asked for help - what's your question? Once you've asked, but the template back onto this page as to get people's attemtion again. -- 9cds(talk) 15:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2Pac songs

Chub, I uploaded a sample of Changes to the Tupac and Changes articles, and I was wondering what you thought of for other songs to add (see the discussion on the talk page). Thanks and happy editing, Mysekurity[m!] 22:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

If you check out the 'Pac article, you'll see that I uploaded 2 samples: Image:Tupac - Changes.ogg and Image:Ghetto Gospel.ogg. I'm thinking of uploading Hit 'Em Up, but the only thing is that in order to comply with Fair Use, we have to discuss it in the article, not just say "this is what he sounds like". As for Illmatic, I'm afraid I don't have the CD (yeah, yeah, I know...). In lieu of me actually going out and buying the CD, if you send me a song or two that you'd like sample-fied (my sn @gmail), I'll cut it down, make it sound pretty, and upload it. If not, then I'll go out and get it (something I've been meaning to do for a while, and especially since I've seen how much work you've put into it... I Am... and God's Son are two of my favorite albums) and I'll upload it then. Happy editing and thanks, Mysekurity[m!] 02:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The golden age of hip hop for deletion?

I see that The golden age of hip hop is up for deletion. I wonder what you think of this. P.O.N.Y. 17:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re:Template:Hiphop

Just go to Template:Hiphop. - Tutmosis 21:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] rapping FA nomination

The only thing left to do, as far as I can see, is to clean up the last couple paragraphs in the subject matter section. Then I think it's ready for FAN.--Urthogie 10:05, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Λυδαcιτγ(TheJabberwock) 03:43, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright violation

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the Image:Wildatheart bwmtaj03.JPG article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! --Yamla 01:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Magazine covers are legitimate (provided you provide a detailed fair-use rationale, provided the title is clearly visible, etc.) but that image was clearly not a magzine cover (or if so, had the title removed, though I think I remember the magazine and it had an entirely different cover). --Yamla 01:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
You said: "Could it count as promotional material then? And why do you believe that the lower back tattoo article needs to be deleted?"
No, most definitely not. It did not come from a promotional kit. It's a clear copyright violation. It's just a scan of an inner page of a magazine. As to why the lower back tattoo article should be deleted (and I only prod'ed it, not marked it for deletion) is explained therein... I don't think it is notable when we already have an article on tattoos. --Yamla 01:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
You said: "Very well. But I am against your decision to "prod'ed" the Lower back tat:too, because the main tattoo article does not go into detail, nor does it provide pop culture references (a section that I plan on expanding in the near future)."
I believe the tattoo article could easily incorporate all of the information in the lower back tattoo article. However, you have convinced me that this is not clearcut, and you have made a productive start on the article itself. I'll remove the prod and leave you to develop the article. If later nominated for deletion, I will reevaluate and vote accordingly. --Yamla 01:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I think our conversation is almost complete, but please note that I'll only be posting responses on my talk page, if that's okay with you. It's a pain copying-and-pasting, as I'm sure it is for you.  :) And by the way, thanks for not flying off the handle at me. --Yamla 02:03, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nas

i ain't violating anything. look at the facts -- no hit singles from Illmatic, while It Was Written had "Street Dreams" and "If I Ruled the World" to drive it. it's common knowledge that hit singles help an album sell, i don't need to provide a source for that, so the simple fact is whether or not it's important that Illmatic had no hit singles -- and it is, because it's part of the reason it didn't sell well. if you need me to provide a source for that that's fine, but i don't see why it's really necessary considering i'm pretty sure there's a chart at the bottom of the page. Dr. Trey 01:38, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spam

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. The links you added to the page Lower back tattoo have been removed. Please do not add commercial links—or links to your own private websites—to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Yamla 01:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue III - May 2006

The May 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. —ERcheck @ 22:59, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:hip hop collaboration.....

I personally think we should keep it as a collaboration. I plan on personally going in depth about critiquing it, as I would suggest everyone else do so also, otherwise if there is no discussion then no one will probably edit because the article looks fine at first glance. I'm not gonna insist on keeping it as collaboration but would suggest we do so since we shouldnt just give up. Also, sorry I'm not much help in improving the article but I really suck at research unless someone wants to give me a few pointers. - Tutmosis 21:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History of hip hop music

Please see Talk:History of hip hop music#Unreferenced. Λυδαcιτγ 02:24, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to be at a computer for a few days. I'll try to deal with all the dating stuff as soon as I can. Λυδαcιτγ 04:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:S22397-lge.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:S22397-lge.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Edit summaries

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Λυδαcιτγ 02:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE:

Thanks bro, I'ma work on the samples thing, I'm not exactly sure what you're referencing with the weasel words and informal tone, if you'd give a little more info I'll flip it up. --PDTantisocial 01:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I tried to clean up the "weasel words", I think I cleared most of 'em out, tell me if there's anything else on there. --PDTantisocial 07:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Enta Da Stage

I think most of it is like an encyclopedia entry, save for "The Music" section, which is supposed to talk about the music. It looks pretty similar to the Illmatic article in my opinion. --PDTantisocial 07:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IV - June 2006

The June 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Kirill Lokshin 06:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging for Image:Medium1670123.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Medium1670123.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:06, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue V - July 2006

The July 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot.

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history Coordinator Elections!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by August 11!

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 18:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Courtney_peldon.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Courtney_peldon.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Search_nas.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Search_nas.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of France

Hi, Chubdub! You indicated that you considered the Historiography section POV, but you didn't say on the talk page exactly why. Of course as the section tries to reflect POV from other writers, it is obviously containing POV on that level, so the real problem should be that such opinions have been rendered incorrectly. Could you make more precise where exactly and to what extent you think this has happened?

Greetings,--MWAK 05:47, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please vote here by August 26!

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 11:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hip Hop (don't stop!)

The Original Barnstar
Eixo 20:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

There's so much bad language, bad editing and unexplained slang on the hip hop pages of Wikipedia, your work gives me hope. Please don't stop!

[edit] RE: Illmatic

I'll throw them shits on tonite, I'ma do Enta Da Stage too.

[edit] Congrats!

...On getting Illmatic on the front page! I've really come to appreciate Nas' work much more since reading the article, as I know how hard you've worked and just well, damn, congrats! -Mysekurity 05:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Illmatic

What do you mean by back covers, of the actual album or the singles or what? And where would you suggest I stick the pictures? --PDTantisocial 23:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Illmatic

Got 'em all up. --PDTantisocial 23:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] X-Clan Boycott of WTC Movie

Do you have a source for that? If it can be sourced it should be added to the Jason Thomas article. If not, it has to go.--Mantanmoreland 19:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that's adequate sourcing under WP:RS and WP:V. It's an important detail but it needs verifiable sourcing.--Mantanmoreland 20:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grunge

The problem with adding more about metal is that metal simply wasn't as big of an influence as punk. Sure, elements were incorporated, but it was more about parodying and/or deconstructing metal than about seriously adding to the genre. I don't think we really need to go into more detail about it. -- LGagnon 01:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Sourcing of boycott claim

No those two sources are not allowed under WP:RS IMHO. I think the boycott thing is very significant and would like to get it in the article, but it is inflammatory and we need to follow the rules on this. Why not get a second opinion from an administrator? Let me know what he/she says.--Mantanmoreland 00:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006

The August 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 11:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Punk music

Whats up? Hi, I'm trying to gather some more interest and support for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Punk music. Please check out the topics and lets get our WikiProject to function better. Recently, I've taken an interest in the Wikipedia:WikiProject hip hop and I consider that WikiProject to be better developed. I am now writing to usernames on the hiphopWP who might be interested in helping with the punkmusicWP. Hopefully we can all work together to improve articles relating to punk as has been done well with hip hop. Finally, I am trying to gather support and opinions concerning the punk house article and specifically the Theta Beta Potata article which is currently in AfD (x2) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theta Beta Potata (second nomination). Please check it out and voice your opinion. Xsxex 09:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Lower-back-tattoo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lower-back-tattoo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:08, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military history Newsletter - Issue VII - September 2006

The September 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by Grafikbot - 18:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Lower_back_tattoo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Lower_back_tattoo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Sexy_tattoo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Sexy_tattoo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:03, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Wu-Tang

Thanks for those links. I just skimmed over a few of them and saw a bunch of good stuff. Sometimes this week I will add in some sections. Noahdabomb3 14:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue VIII - October 2006

The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:150px-LitaChamp.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:150px-LitaChamp.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue IX - November 2006

The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 36 Chambers

Thanks for asking my opinion. I think it's getting close to FA status, but might still need a little work. When it was first nominated, it had two weaknesses: lack of citations and unpolished text. I think both those problems are just about solved, especially #1 - Noahdabomb3 did a great job assembling all those references. Personally, I'd like to see the text polished up for another week or so before we take another shot at FA -- either through an active peer review (not sure why the recent one drew so little response) or simply through the efforts of the editors already working on it.

To me, the model for this type of article is Illmatic, an excellent article that I noticed you worked on. Therefore, I'll defer to your judgement on when to nominate Enter the Wu-Tang for a second time! Venicemenace 18:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Illmatic FAR

Illmatic has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Sandy (Talk) 22:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 10:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Intv.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Intv.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military History elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 13:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 14:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tupac RfC

Hey, Chubdub. The old discussion about 'Pac's birthname is back! I've filed an request for comment hoping to clear this up. The RFC can be found under "Tupac Shakur" on this list, and the actual discussion can be found on Talk:Tupac Shakur#RfC, in case you wish to participate. -Mysekurity 06:09, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIII - March 2007

The March 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 18:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/h/u/User_talk%7EChubdub_54e9.html"