This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Doggy54321 You removed WAY too much, and some of the justifications for this information being removed sound a bit petty. You removed every single source except for Billboard and YouTube, which signals that you may have only removed those sources because you are unfamiliar with them. There are plenty of other pages I've seen that use similar sources, such as Seventeen, which I would not name in fear of you going on a vandalism frenzy. Second, the notability of Wikipedia pages rely on how much media coverage there is on the topic, and the “trueness” (for lack of better words) of claims made on pages relies on where the claim is coming from and whether the source itself is reliable, and these two requirements are sensible on their own, but when you are taking into consideration the amount of coverage a topic gets, it shouldn’t matter how reliable the sources are as long as they aren’t ‘opinion articles,' and I’m not the only one who agrees with this. Third off, something doesn’t need a source if it makes sense, such as the genre of the song. It doesn’t take a genius to know it’s a rap song, and on most song pages, there is no citation for song genres, ( Despacito, Old Town Road, Uptown Funk are some examples I thought of. Some may argue about the genres of two, if not all of these songs, yet there are no citations to be found...) as there shouldn’t be. It also doesn’t make sense that you’re saying TikTok is unreliable, because the sentence this citation is backing is a statement coming from the subject himself, it essentially doesn’t matter where the website is coming from if it hosts a video clip of the exact subject verifying the information. Fourth, I removed the link to Larray’s discography, but every song page needs a chronology unless it is not a single. Last off, the rejection of sentences based on WP:SYNTH requires re-wording, not deletion of the information entirely, as showed in the examples on the actual page. In general, there might have been some unnecessary data there, which is why in my first edit summary for this page, I said “feel free to expand it,” but removing this much data, especially if nearly everything was backed right from the horse’s mouth, (i.e. Controversy/Music video) almost accounts as some sort of vandalism, and song pages are generally required to have this sort of information if it is relevant, which it is. I hope you understand. TrevortniDesserpedx ( talk) 06:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
the field should include the music genre(s) that best describes the song. It should come from a reliable source and also be stated and referenced in the body of the article; personal opinions or original research must be not be included.Therefore, the genre does need a reliable source. The examples you listed have the genres stated and referenced in the body of the article, this article does not. I’m not even going to acknowledge that you just called me a vandal to my face. Most section/article blanking is done in good faith. The common practice is to warn the user, have a conversation, restore the blanked content, and if the user blanks it again, they are most likely doing it in bad faith. That’s not what is happening here, I was blanking for the good of the article, while providing edit summaries. So it wasn’t the best practice to restore the removed content. I will go through the sections and detail every single thing wrong with them so you can get a better understanding, if you want, because there aren’t enough reliable sources to back all that information up. D🎉ggy54321 ( happy new year!) 15:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
The entire title for this song has a spelling mistake. The title is "canceled" with 1 "l", not two like the title says. The page title has to be corrected. CranberryGingerAle ( talk) 20:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved ( non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 18:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Cancelled (song) →
Canceled (song) – Majority of the sources use "Canceled", so we should move the page to abide by those sources. "Cancelled" is only used for the music video.
D🐶ggy54321 (
let's chat!) 15:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Doggy54321 You removed WAY too much, and some of the justifications for this information being removed sound a bit petty. You removed every single source except for Billboard and YouTube, which signals that you may have only removed those sources because you are unfamiliar with them. There are plenty of other pages I've seen that use similar sources, such as Seventeen, which I would not name in fear of you going on a vandalism frenzy. Second, the notability of Wikipedia pages rely on how much media coverage there is on the topic, and the “trueness” (for lack of better words) of claims made on pages relies on where the claim is coming from and whether the source itself is reliable, and these two requirements are sensible on their own, but when you are taking into consideration the amount of coverage a topic gets, it shouldn’t matter how reliable the sources are as long as they aren’t ‘opinion articles,' and I’m not the only one who agrees with this. Third off, something doesn’t need a source if it makes sense, such as the genre of the song. It doesn’t take a genius to know it’s a rap song, and on most song pages, there is no citation for song genres, ( Despacito, Old Town Road, Uptown Funk are some examples I thought of. Some may argue about the genres of two, if not all of these songs, yet there are no citations to be found...) as there shouldn’t be. It also doesn’t make sense that you’re saying TikTok is unreliable, because the sentence this citation is backing is a statement coming from the subject himself, it essentially doesn’t matter where the website is coming from if it hosts a video clip of the exact subject verifying the information. Fourth, I removed the link to Larray’s discography, but every song page needs a chronology unless it is not a single. Last off, the rejection of sentences based on WP:SYNTH requires re-wording, not deletion of the information entirely, as showed in the examples on the actual page. In general, there might have been some unnecessary data there, which is why in my first edit summary for this page, I said “feel free to expand it,” but removing this much data, especially if nearly everything was backed right from the horse’s mouth, (i.e. Controversy/Music video) almost accounts as some sort of vandalism, and song pages are generally required to have this sort of information if it is relevant, which it is. I hope you understand. TrevortniDesserpedx ( talk) 06:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
the field should include the music genre(s) that best describes the song. It should come from a reliable source and also be stated and referenced in the body of the article; personal opinions or original research must be not be included.Therefore, the genre does need a reliable source. The examples you listed have the genres stated and referenced in the body of the article, this article does not. I’m not even going to acknowledge that you just called me a vandal to my face. Most section/article blanking is done in good faith. The common practice is to warn the user, have a conversation, restore the blanked content, and if the user blanks it again, they are most likely doing it in bad faith. That’s not what is happening here, I was blanking for the good of the article, while providing edit summaries. So it wasn’t the best practice to restore the removed content. I will go through the sections and detail every single thing wrong with them so you can get a better understanding, if you want, because there aren’t enough reliable sources to back all that information up. D🎉ggy54321 ( happy new year!) 15:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
The entire title for this song has a spelling mistake. The title is "canceled" with 1 "l", not two like the title says. The page title has to be corrected. CranberryGingerAle ( talk) 20:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved ( non-admin closure) ( t · c) buidhe 18:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Cancelled (song) →
Canceled (song) – Majority of the sources use "Canceled", so we should move the page to abide by those sources. "Cancelled" is only used for the music video.
D🐶ggy54321 (
let's chat!) 15:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)