Talk:HIStory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Contents 1 Controversial lyric from TDCAU 2 To: Funky Monkey 3 I have removed and will not reinsert brilliant - am now leaving 4 "Biggest selling multi-disc album" 5 Merging of D.S: 6 Censored? 7 Include Info RE: Different Releases?

[edit] Controversial lyric from TDCAU

There is also another controversial lyric in TDCAU where Michael sings "Don't you say that I fucked a baby". Should this be included in the article? Street walker 11:33, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not aware of that lyric...are you sure its not a missheard lyric?

[edit] To: Funky Monkey

I am unable to send messages through net send at the for the time being. So this will have to do. -

The word Brilliant is neither in-favor or going against MJ. It is not impartial to any opinion. It is fact as 20 weeks on the US Billboard Hot 100 singles chart is a brilliant achievement, especially considering it debuted at #1 – it is said so on the old Michaeljackson.com website, and on, though not in so many words, http://www.mjinf.co.uk/index.html - a website which I have provided a fair amount of information to – that which is used as the source of most of the data on wikipedia’s HIStory page. I am not sure why the word Brilliant would cause such offensive. I have been making tons of updates lately, and I don’t appreachet someone else changing something, even though minor, just because they don’t approve of the man. Would you do the same with Madonna or Elvis, I don’t think so. If you check their relevant pages you would see many instances of exagerations by fanatics - if it get reverted again I will only change it back, and I wont be intimadated by being threatened of banned from wikipedia. I will be adding more to the HIStory page soon, as well as most of the other pages concerning MJ in the coming weeks, as I fell the information already written is inadequate. As for Gorm, I give a meaningful sorry, I just find it annoying when edits are made by Jackson haters.

About your second message, I will have to just revert it again at an appropiate time! I'm not being stopped! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Appropiate (talk • contribs) .

A few things:

1. Using the word "brilliant" in this context is indeed a violation of Wikipedia's neutrality policy. A minor one, sure, but there should be no objections to its removal.
2. "I don’t appreachet someone else changing something, even though minor, just because they don’t approve of the man" – If you don't want your contributions edited mercilessly, you're in the wrong place. Also, you are ascribing a motive to Funky Monkey. Please assume good faith.
3. "Would you do the same with Madonna or Elvis, I don’t think so." – If you see similar flowery language in Madonna's or Elvis's articles, feel free to remove it.
4. "if it get reverted again I will only change it back, and I wont be intimadated by being threatened of banned from wikipedia" – If you refuse to play nice with other editors and abide by consensus and applicable policies, your contributions will not be welcome here. Please mind the three-revert rule and understand that revert warring is harmful to the encyclopedia.

In short: be willing to discuss your changes on the talk page, and also be willing to compromise if necessary, and you won't have any problems. android79 20:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I have removed and will not reinsert brilliant - am now leaving

To Feitclub, Clown person, Android79 and Funky Monkey. I do not know why the word "Brilliant" causes such offensive. And I know your all just going to post more annoying wikipedia policies and guidelines, which I wont read - but Brilliant does not impeach WP:NPOV in my opinion - if would take the time to read the sentence in its context you would notice the word wasn't used to "unbalance" the pages neutral point of view, but is used as fact. 20 weeks (equaling to 5 months) on the US Billboard Hot 100 is a brilliant achievement - as if it stayed in the charts for more than 20 weeks it would have to be above certain position, and if not then it is removed - so 20 weeks is the maximum it can achieve in most cases, add that fact together with the fact that You Are Not Alone got to and debuted #1 also makes it even more brilliant - I wanted that achievement to be noted in some way, but it seems people find it inappropriate and impolite. One of you said I was impolite, well in fact I have been the one making strenuous efforts to improve this page over the past few weeks, and have inserted many pieces of information from reliable sources - what have you four done lately to the page to both expand and improve it - NOTHING - except for taking certain part outs that, in your opinion, break WP:NPOV. I haven't broken any regulations, whoever controls wikipedia haven't told me to stop, and they didn't stop me editing the page after a third time - so keeping on posting policy reminders has no effect on me and doesn't urge me to stop doing something I'm allowed to do.

As I'm sure you've notice there been a battle of removing/reinserting - well I am ending it now, NOT because I getting bored/fed up and NOT because I realize a mistake, no, because I’ve realized its pointless - I will let you get your own way if that’s what you want, well there you go, I have removed brilliant myself. I wanted to re-edit and type a brand new and better a better biography, as-well as other pages concerning MJ because at present they are NOT GOOD, but instead I'm deleting my account and will not return as its obvious that any changes I make will only be scraped. Patronizing me, speaking to me in an authoritarian manner or ordering me to stop doing something does not impress me, nor have any impact on what I do. I have told other Michael Jackson fan's and forums about this Brilliant matter, and I see some of them have helped me out. Though I won’t revert the current page - they may, so you will have to keep an eye on it.

I'm sure your all great people - I hold no bad feelings.

Right, that’s me done. appropriate over:)

[edit] "Biggest selling multi-disc album"

This is obviously incorrect. This is nowhere near the top of List of best-selling albums worldwide, double disc or not, and it's fairly clear that Pink Floyd's The Wall (a double album) at 23mln units sold ranks far above HIStory. I removed this claim until someone can verify it. 212.219.92.98 09:49, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Never mind, List of best selling albums seems to contradict this. 212.219.92.98 09:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merging of D.S:

I see no reason why the D.S. page shouldn't be merged with the HIStory page, it is of course one of the albums songs. I'm a bit surprised that there is an entire page allocated to D.S. - after all the song wasn’t released as a single, it isn't really anything that special of a song, and isn't widely known outside of the Jackson community. If it is going to put merged then I think it should not be "over mentioned" and the explanation should stay brief - 2 or 3 lines max.

I extended the HIStory page a few weeks’ back so that all of the album singles were mentioned, and even though D.S. isn't a single I'm fine with it being merged. However I absolutely disagree with all 15 of the albums songs being included and having each there own little bit as it would be completely pointless and rather silly. The HIStory page as it currently stands is very large compared to other similar pages, and I would also disagree with it being extended further on other aspects as all things important are already mentioned.

But for the matter of D.S., I think it’s a good idea. Appropiate 16:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Censored?

Just a question about "They Don't Care About Us"; did certain pressings of the album insert sound effects over the words "jew" and "kike", or did all versions of HIStory come like this? If it helps, I'm Canadian and mine did come with the mild censoring. --Matharvest 21:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

When HIStory took critism for the lyrics of "jew me" and "kike me" they added these sound effects for the re-release. Also in the re-release the opening music of the track HIStory was changed...possibly for legal reasons. There are Canadian versions that do not contain the sound-effects (I own the Casette version which I know for a fact does not...however I got it during the first release). There is also another pressing of the cd with a silver disc rather than gold which is considered to be rare. :: ehmjay 16:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Include Info RE: Different Releases?

Should the article mention the 3 different releases of HIStory. There's the original which is uncensored, the censored version which censors the lyrics in TDCAU and contains different intro music during HIStory, and then the silver CDs which are considered to be rare (however I'm not sure which versions they contain, censored or uncensored) :: ehmjay 17:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)