Talk:Straight Outta Compton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Straight Outta Compton article.
Article policies
Good article Straight Outta Compton has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
November 14, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
To-do list for Straight Outta Compton: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:

    Contents

    [edit] Release Date

    AMG claims that it was released in 1989. Does the (P)(C)1988 on my copy really contradict this? Perhaps 1988 is something other than the release date. However, I was under the impression that copyright begins with the release. Tim Ivorson 1 July 2005 19:10 (UTC)
    Is this really a debut album? Teklund 28 June 2005 14:54 (UTC)
    Not according to AMG. Tim Ivorson 1 July 2005 19:10 (UTC)

    Here it goes, The reason why the article is changed so many times. The album was produced and first released in 1988, although a second, and more impacting, wave came in 1989, which saw the release of even a clean version. Even a video for Express Yourself was aircasted on MTV (after selling the first million)... What I'm trying to point out is the fact that for several releases of the same album, it is the first one that counts...

    I'm telling you 1988 is copyright, not the release date and copyright does not equal release dates (like blink-182's Cheshire Cat was released in 1995, but the CD says 1994, Radiohead's Pablo Honey was released in 1993, but the CD says 1992, etc.). Sorry, but sometimes we just can't go by copyright. Alex 101 20:17, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
    Well some viewers say they heard the album in 1988, and I was born in 1988. I like that year!

    [edit] PA Label

    Due to an explicit title, this album should be rereleased with a PA label.

    [edit] Robert Christgau

    Should this review be deleted from the references? I really don’t know who this guy is nor why his opinion on the record matter but the review itself is not that well-written and even the webpage looks kinda amateur-ish.

    Why don't you look him up?Andrzejbanas 05:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

    [edit] 2002 Re-Release

    This album was remastered and reissued with four extra tracks in 2002: http://www.amazon.com/Straight-Outta-Compton-N-W/dp/B00006JJ51 ~ Strathmeyer 21:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Bitch Iz A Bitch

    The article states: Seven songs from this album- "Gangsta Gangsta", "Fuck Tha Police", "Straight Outta Compton" [Extended Mix], "If It Ain't Ruff", "I Ain't Tha 1", the remix of "Express Yourself", and "A Bitch Iz A Bitch"- were later released on "N.W.A.'s Greatest Hits" But "A Bitch Iz A Bitch" is a track from N.W.A. and the posse. It appeared on the 2002 re-release as an bonus track, but wasn't on the origianal relaese. this should be changed. waitingfordresdetox

    fixed it. West Coast Ryda 20:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Article

    Whoa, this article is going very well. Soon will this one be Good Article too. --West Coast Ryda 20:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Good article nomination on hold

    This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of November 11, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

    1. Well written?: Just a very minor issue. The last sentence of Lyrics says "...all the profanity was replaced." Replaced with what? If it's too verbose to go into bleeping or whatever method they used, then perhaps it's just better to say removed. As a side point, single-sentence paragraphs are probably not very desirable.
    2. Factually accurate?: Looks good in terms of inline citations, but cite number 7 is giving an error message (i.e. no text given).
    3. Broad in coverage?: Covers all major aspects concisely.
    4. Neutral point of view?: Gives fair treatment to all significant points of view.
    5. Article stability? Not the subject of any edit wars or of future events.
    6. Images?: Accounted for with fair-use rationales.

    Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far.— VanTucky Talk 20:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Notes

    For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to the hold below rather than within the body of the review. Thank you!

    It seems cite 7 has been fixed, I'm no longer seeing an error message. VanTucky Talk 04:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

    Thanks for reviewing this article. During this week I will try to cover all of the issues brought up. Sorry I can'd do it sooner, just a bit busy. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 08:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Ok, No.1 has beem sorted. I removed it completely because all albums which contain profanity are released in a censored version so there no need to mention it. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 12:34, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Seems we're all done here, thanks for your hard work G-Unit! Just as a side point, if you're looking to eventually take it to FA, I'd suggest including some of the lyrics of "Fuck tha Police" and the like. I found them extremely amusing, not to mention informative of the album's perspective and feel. Thanks again, VanTucky Talk 19:06, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Straight Outta Compton: N.W.A. 10th Anniversary Tribute

    Shouldnt the remake/tribute album, Straight Outta Compton: N.W.A. 10th Anniversary Tribute be mentioned in this article?-- SameAsItEverWas (talk) 20:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

    I don't think that it needs to be mentioned here seeing as it has its own article. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 20:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] 20th anniversary edition

    Should the 20th anniversary edition of the album be mention in the article? iTunes link The Chronic 04:46, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

    [edit] Top importance

    Shouldn't this article really be top importance.


    So far the only hip hop article with "top importance" is Ready to Die, this one is at least as important! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MasahiroHayamoto (talk • contribs) 18:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)