Talk:Tupac Shakur

Activism

Why did you remove the part that Tupac is considered a symbol of struggle and activism against inequality? Tupac, in addition to being an influential rapper, was also a very influential activist. Pier1999 (talk) 21:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

I believe you are correct. I have reverted based on the discussion here:

• User_talk:Binksternet#Tupac_Page_on_Wikipedia (permalink to discussion as of 02:38, 21 March 2024)

I believe that discussion should be moved here. Please feel free to move my comments here.--David Tornheim (talk) 03:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

ok, but it should be written on the page that he was an activist and it should be rewritten that he is considered a symbol of struggle and activism against inequalities Pier1999 (talk) 03:04, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

That's where you'll need WP:RS. If you have time, I suggest reading all of the article (Tupac Shakur) and as much of the sources from the article that are relevant. Then provide your sources--especially if you have others not already cited. (Of course, no one expects you to read even close to all 297 sources of the article.)

Of course, you always just provide the sources that support the claim, like you were doing on Binksternet's page. I suggest you spend a little time looking at some article talk pages (for other very different subjects) to see how editors argue for or against the inclusion of material based on the WP:RS. Sometimes you will see long lists of sources with quotes. If you can't find one, I can point to one. The better organized such a list is, the more effective and convincing it is. Long discussions--like the one on Binksternet's page--are much harder to read and often run into the problem of TL;DR. A list of sources with key quotes is more effective. The more and stronger the sources, the better. Hope that helps.--David Tornheim (talk) 03:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-pictures/tupac-shakur-wake-me-when-im-free-exhibit-1293618/ "TUPAC SHAKUR WAS more than just one of the most influential rappers of the Nineties. He was also a poet and activist who became one of his era’s most revolutionary voices." Article of Rolling Stones Pier1999 (talk) 11:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

https://mcac.maryland.gov/2023/10/alleged-former-gang-member-indicted-in-rapper-tupak-shakur-murder/ "Shakur was widely considered one of the most influential and successful rappers of all time and]among the best-selling music artists, having sold more than 75 million records worldwide.

Much of Shakur’s music has been noted for addressing contemporary social issues that plagued inner cities, and he is considered a symbol of activism against inequality." Other source Pier1999 (talk) 21:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

What needs to be done to ensure that it is written on the page that is a symbol of struggle and activism against inequalities? I cited the sources Pier1999 (talk) 23:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for providing the WP:RS. Keep up the good work!

Like I suggested before, include all the WP:RS that says it. I believe you left off WP:RS mentioned at User_talk:Binksternet#Tupac_Page_on_Wikipedia, including one that I provided. Above I suggested making a table with quotes.

I don't know if you are able to edit the article directly. You could try a WP:BOLD edit and see if others revert it. If they do, DON'T revert back, please. (See WP:BRD). I suggest avoiding any edit to the WP:LEDE until you have more experience on Wikipedia.

And again, I suggest you look at other articles that you are less invested in. I also suggest you look at the top of my User:David_Tornheim, and click on the section "Advice for new editors"--I wrote it primarily for editors who are amped up to the point of accusing other editors of bad faith editing and or feeling attacked for trying to put in their preferred version. You're not there, and I hope you never get there. It's easier to understand what happens when you are not involved in the subject under dispute. Watching others helps you see what NOT to do. You are not alone in trying to add (or delete) something to an article that has push-back. Patience is critical. Diligently reviewing, posting and discussing the best WP:RS is always helpful.

I'm not ready to add anything yet, as I am not sufficiently familiar with the article to even know where to add it and how to phrase it. I'm hoping an editor more familiar with the article sees this and considers adding it. Again, be patient. If it is unambiguously in the WP:RS, which I believe it is, it will end up in the article per WP:NPOV, which says:

All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.

NPOV is Wikipedia policy.

--David Tornheim (talk) 00:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

ok, but it won't let me edit Tupac's page, it says edits are closed to avoid vandalism. Pier1999 (talk) 00:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Go to the Wikipedia:Teahouse and tell them that you would like to edit the article and that you are not going to vandalize it. Ask if there is an appropriate place to ask an WP:admin for permission. You can WP:ping me there by typing {{u|David Tornheim}} in the wikitext and saying something along the lines that I sent you there, and I will vouch for you. --David Tornheim (talk) 01:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Answered at Teahouse: Pier1999 will be auto-confirmed late Sat or Sunday latest, and then able to edit the article directly. David notMD (talk) 10:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Disagreement

@Pier1999 and ActionHeroesAreReal: Both of you are new editors. Rather than reverting each other like this [1][2][3][4], please discuss here or in another section of the talk page. You'll want another editor (or more) to break the tie. I'm not willing to weigh in at this point. You can try WP:3O, or test your source at WP:RS/N, or maybe you both can come to an agreement. Please review WP:BRD--it's not policy but it's well worth following. --David Tornheim (talk) 20:02, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The original sentence I removed was a direct copy from the cited source (Mcac.maryland.gov). This was a clear copyright violation, that’s why I removed it. I also removed the second edit by @Pier1999 which, again, was mostly a direct copy, and this time with an unsourced statement that Tupac’s music was noted for “political issues”. This is not mentioned anywhere in the source. @Pier1999 then changed the sentence to “Shakur symbolizes activism against inequality.” This vague statement doesn’t even deserve to be in the lead; it’s not explored anywhere else in the article, and only one source states this. It seems like puffery. ActionHeroesAreReal (talk) 20:18, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@ActionHeroesAreReal: Thanks for discussing. I would support including that text as a quote in the WP:BODY, but, at this point, not in the WP:LEDE. Have you seen the section above (#Activism)? Pier1999 does have sources. I agree with you that the WP:LEDE should only mention activism to the extent it is mentioned in the WP:BODY. If it is not in the WP:BODY, then it should not be mentioned in the WP:LEDE at all. I suggested Pier1999 add material to the article using the above sources.--David Tornheim (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes I agree it shouldn’t be in the lede. As for him being an “activist”, this was not a notable occupation of his. Most reliable sources refer to him as a rapper, not an “activist”. It shouldn’t be in the lede either. ActionHeroesAreReal (talk) 20:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I also have academic sources that demonstrate that he was also influential in activism. I also contacted academic scholars directly, I don't write things on the page at random. I'm very knowledgeable about Tupac's life Pier1999 (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I’m not saying that there aren’t sources that state he was an “activist”. The source you cited also refers to him as a “poet”, “actor”, etc. Why don’t you add those occupations also? Because they aren't his notable occupations. Most reliable sources refer to him as a rapper because that’s what he’s best known for, not a poet, actor, or activist. ActionHeroesAreReal (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

We have plenty of articles that list the various occupations and skills of people. We usually include those other skills rather than keeping them out. Consider Noam Chomsky. --David Tornheim (talk) 23:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

However, to put him at the top I used a professional Rolling Stones source, I have other academic sources that talk about him as an activist. So what should I do? Pier1999 (talk) 21:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

It’s still not a notable occupation of his. He was only an “activist” within the scope of being a rapper; not an activist per se. What did he publish as an “activist”??? What did he publish as a “poet”? Rather, he’s best known for being a rapper. He was also better known for being an actor than an activist or poet. Britannica, for example, refers to him as a rapper and actor (https://www.britannica.com/biography/Tupac-Shakur). I would have no objection to actor being mentioned alongside rapper, but activist or poet is just not notable enough. ActionHeroesAreReal (talk) 22:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I quote you this article from Temple University:" Pier1999 (talk) 23:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

I quote you this article from Temple University:"https://temple-news.com/discussing-consciousness-message-hip-hop/" Pier1999 (talk) 23:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

"One of Aaron Smith’s favorite songs is Tupac Shakur’s “Ambitionz Az A Ridah,” because of its bold beat, empowering lyrics and purpose.

“Tupac was an artist with a message,” said Smith, an African American studies professor. “An activist, not the gangster that people portray him as.”

Smith teaches a class in the Department of Africology and African American Studies called Tupac Shakur and the Hip Hop Revolution. The class is dedicated to studying Tupac’s message, the direction of his life and his symbolic significance as an artist and an activist." Pier1999 (talk) 23:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

• Britannica--which is only marginally reliable because it is a tertiary source rather a secondary source--does, in fact, mention activism within the lyrics: "[Tupac] appeared in Poetic Justice, opposite Janet Jackson, and he released his second album...[which]...did not stray far from the activist lyricism of his debut....". That source supports claims of activism. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:08, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/21/books/review/tupac-shakur-authorized-biography-staci-robinson.html "“Tupac Shakur” is a touching, empathetic portrait of a friend. Even familiar stories achieve new intimacy at closer range. And small moments help clarify longstanding narratives, coloring in the outlines of this well-known tale of the actor-rapper-activist who died at 25." This is an article from the NY Times and it talks about the book that was written by Staci Robinson about Tupac. The only biography authorizes Pier1999 (talk) 01:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/148529.Tupac_Shakur_ "Acclaimed for his writings on Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr., as well as his passionate defense of black youth culture, Michael Eric Dyson has emerged as the leading African American intellectual of his generation. Now Dyson turns his attention to one of the most enigmatic figures of the past decade: the slain hip-hop artist Tupac Shakur.Five years after his murder, Tupac remains a widely celebrated, deeply loved, and profoundly controversial icon among black youth. Viewed by many as a "black James Dean," he has attained cult status partly due to the posthumous release of several albums, three movies, and a collection of poetry. But Tupac endures primarily because of the devotion of his loyal followers, who have immortalized him through tributes, letters, songs, and celebrations, many in cyberspace.Dyson helps us to understand why a twenty-five-year-old rapper, activist, poet, actor." This article is about the book written by Michael Eric Dyson about Tupac, Dyson is an academic scholar and professor in the College of Arts and Science and Divinity School at Vanderbilt University Pier1999 (talk) 01:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

https://temple-news.com/discussing-consciousness-message-hip-hop/ "One of Aaron Smith’s favorite songs is Tupac Shakur’s “Ambitionz Az A Ridah,” because of its bold beat, empowering lyrics and purpose.

“Tupac was an artist with a message,” said Smith, an African American studies professor. “An activist, not the gangster that people portray him as.”

Smith teaches a class in the Department of Africology and African American Studies called Tupac Shakur and the Hip Hop Revolution. The class is dedicated to studying Tupac’s message, the direction of his life and his symbolic significance as an artist and an activist." It's an article from Temple University, it describes a course that was held at Temple University on Tupac. Pier1999 (talk) 23:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

You referenced the work of one person, Aaron Smith, an African-American whose book “Tupac and the Hip-Hop Revolution” (which the lecture at the University was based on) was published by CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, a self-publishing service. So it’s not even a reliable source to begin with, as per Wiki guidelines. And he claims, because of ONE song (Ambitionz Az A Ridah), which contains profanity every other sentence, Tupac should be considered an “activist”… What a joke. Again, it’s only his view and his book is not even a reliable source to begin with. Like I said, Tupac cannot be considered described as an activist in the lede, as it wasn’t a notable occupation of his. ActionHeroesAreReal (talk) 00:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Aaron Smith actually Is a Professor of African American Studies and works at Temple University. Pier1999 (talk) 01:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

It also says in the article that he is a professor of African American studies. But have you read it? I also linked the part for you Pier1999 (talk) 01:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

you can also look up his curriculum, he's not just an "African American", he's a professor of African American studies who teaches at Temple University. His opinion is valid, we are talking about those who have studied African-American history. Pier1999 (talk) 01:17, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

His opinion alone is not sufficient to be lede material. Nowhere close. And even he is is an established expert on the topic cited, it’s still an exceptional claim he is making. As per Wiki guidelines, exceptional claims require exceptional sources. His claim is not notable. Most sources, as I have already mentioned, do not refer to him as an “activist”, but rapper. ActionHeroesAreReal (talk) 01:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

That's not correct. Pier1999 provided quite a few sources--however, s/he should really bring them here rather than leave them--inappropriate on an editors talk page. I have asked a few times that the sources be moved here. I will support the claim once I see the sources mentioned here. Again, It's not an exceptional claim.

I have several sources, however I wrote that Tupac symbolizes activism against inequality, because in this way I report what is written in the source without copying it word for word. Pier1999 (talk) 20:49, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

@Pier1999: Like I say above, you need to provide them. Right now you have them on an editor's talk page. That's like not having mentioned them at all. ActionHeroesAreReal is under no obligation to go on a wild goose chase looking at every talk page of any editor you might have interacted with.

If you want the sources to be considered for this article, they must be brought and discussed here (or a venue like WP:RS/N), and then ideally find their way into the article. I have asked you a number of times to provide a list here of the sources and quotes from the sources. You have the material. All you need to do is organize it. Why not do this? You will get more support for putting activism in the article if you provide all the sources you have already mentioned somewhere else. A table would be best. --David Tornheim (talk) 00:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I just cited the source here Pier1999 (talk) 00:35, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I quoted a Temple University source in this discussion. Among other things, I had cited a source regarding the fact that Tupac was a symbol of activism against inequality and it was canceled by another user Pier1999 (talk) 00:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

@Pier1999: ONE source from a what appears to be a college newspaper written by a student will not cut it. You have other sources, like Stanford, Dyson, a New York Times article, an article in El Planteo, the Rolling Stones article (I don't see it mentioned here), and the .gov--possibly others. I also mentioned this as potential RS. Why not use them? Put them all together. You already have all the material assembled. Why not copy and paste it here? Your argument here is weak without all the sources. It doesn't need to be. --David Tornheim (talk) 01:48, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

I mentioned two, the one about Dyson's book and the one from the NY Times Pier1999 (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Description

why is it that someone changes the accurate description of Tupac that I have provided using various website sources? It don’t understand should I include citation’s now? Like references. Confunxion (talk) 00:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

@Confunxion: These is really a wikipedia policy questions. I have answered on your talk page in these two sections:

(1) User_talk:Confunxion#About_citations (permalink)

(2) User_talk:Confunxion#Changes_to_something_you_have_added (permalink)

--David Tornheim (talk) 07:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2024

I am the biological daughter of Tupac shakur I have verified X and Instagram accounts @lisajanehargreaves and I also have my medical records confirming my blood results. I am of African American origin. Lisa jane Hargreaves (talk) 18:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.

Please note that social media accounts are not acceptable sources on Wikipedia. If you are asking to be mentioned in the page we would need independent reliable sources, such as news articles, confirming your relation to Tupac. Jamedeus (talk) 19:17, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

• Lisa jane Hargreaves Thank you for coming forward and immediately declaring your relationship and WP:COI per the guidelines. I look forward to hearing your edit request(s). --David Tornheim (talk) 23:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Song writer

This is a continuation of the discussion here and here. Based on my review of sources, Tupac is indeed a song-writer and that should be in the WP:LEDE. I believe it has been in the LEDE for quite sometime, so the removal is not justified.--David Tornheim (talk) 04:16, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Then why is this not in the lead of every hip-hop artist that writes their own songs? The Notorious B.I.G., Jay-Z, Nas, Eminem. I have looked up multiple artists and do not see this in the lead of their articles. Why is it for Tupac's article in particular and not these other artists? They should be edited for uniformity was my argument. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I looked up Notorious B.I.G. and this category certainly indicates to me that he was a song-writer. So I agree with you that article should probably say so too. It's all about what the WP:RS says. I did a google search and it appears to me that Tupac wrote many or most of his own songs. this category also supports the claim. It is mentioned in the WP:BODY, which should be fleshed out to say more about Tupac's song-writing. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I apologize to both editors for engaging in the edit war. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia rules and shouldn't have been aggressive in my approach. This is the last I will post about it. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 04:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

@Darrencdm1988: Thanks for the apology. You can continue to discuss any concerns you have about the article here on the article talk page. But it should be grounded in the WP:RS. Also, I did look at Notorious B.I.G. and it lists his occupation as "songwriter". I do know you are a new editor and I appreciate you acknowledging that. There are indeed a lot of rules here and many seem to contradict each other. If you have any questions feel free to ask me or any other experienced editor, or ask at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Previous discussion #1 on user talk page that should probably be here instead

This is a continuation of the discussion here:

I disagree with your reasoning and will continue to remove songwriter from the lead. Just because he wrote his own songs does not mean it was a "main occupation" of his or should be considered an occupation that he made money from. You're saying the fact other music artists don't have this in the lead of their article doesn't matter, and I also disagree. So therefore until settled by another editor, this will be considered an edit war because I will continue to remove your edits. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand one thing: but what does it change to you if it says songwriter or not? It's been months since it wrote songwriter and no one has complained. So do we need to remove songwriters from all artist pages? Why shouldn't Tupac be written? Pier1999 (talk) 00:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Before edit war, let's discuss. No need for an edit war. I want to understand why on Tupac's page there can't be written songwriter, this is written in the lead of many artists. Why can't Tupac be written? What's different for you? Tupac is considered one of the best songwriters in the history of music, Eminem considers him the greatest songwriter ever, Nas said in an interview that Tupac was better than Shakespeare. Songwriter is written in the lead of many pop stars whose lyrics are quite banal and do not have the literary complexity of Tupac's. Pier1999 (talk) 00:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Every hip hop artist I have researched that wrote their own songs does not have this in the lead. Tupac did not write songs for other artists that I know of, so it shouldn't be considered an occupation he profited from much less a main occupation of his. Eminem, Notorious B.I.G., Jay-Z, Nas etc. would all have to be changed to suit your whims of adding this in the lead on Tupac's article. That's how I see it. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 01:24, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Songwriter doesn't just mean who writes songs for others, it also means who writes their own songs. For example, on the page of Kendrick Lamar, Kanye West and Lil Wayne it is written. Why shouldn't it be written in Tupac's? For example, on the page of Bono of U2 and Nina Simone, there is also an activist in the lead. Yet these are not two of their main activities, they are above all artists. Why should only Tupac's page say only rapper? When he was also a poet, activist, songwriter and actor. Pier1999 (talk) 01:39, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

It's not about tantrums, so according to your reasoning we have to take away songwriter from Kendrick Lamar, Kanye West and Lil Wayne as well. Right? Pier1999 (talk) 01:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I don't agree with you, following your reasoning then we should take Songwriter off the lead of all the rappers who have it because Jay-Z, Eminem and Biggie don't have that in the lead. Wikipedia should be an information site, not a personal information site. When I've edited the lead several times, the admins have praised my edits, so songwriter needs to be written. Your reasoning has nothing to do with it, so if we take away songwriters from Tupac, we have to take it away from all artists. Pier1999 (talk) 01:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Until settled, this will be an indefinite edit war. That's the end of it from my perspective. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 02:35, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

This was not in the lead of the article until you added it recently. It's your opinion only. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

It's actually not true, it has been in the lead of the article for at least two months and a few days ago it was removed. Check the changes Pier1999 (talk) 02:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Tupac's article was created in 2005, so it is true that it was added recently. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 02:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

So, precisely it was added by me 26 days ago and was removed for the first time yesterday. You can check the changes to the page. Pier1999 (talk) 02:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

As I stated, it was not in the lead of the article until you added it recently. It is your opinion only. The article has been on Wikipedia since 2005. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 02:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

It was actually written before, even years ago, then it was changed several times. First it was written on the page that Tupac was a symbol of activism against inequality and then it was removed. In the past other people had written songwriters, you can go into the edits. It was actually written before, even years ago, then it was changed several times. First it was written on the page that Tupac was a symbol of activism against inequality and then it was removed. In the past other people had written songwriters, you can go into the edits. It was actually written before, even years ago, then it was changed several times. First it was written on the page that Tupac was a symbol of activism against inequality and then it was removed. In the past other people had written songwriter, you can go into the edits. Pier1999 (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Then we have a disagreement on whether it belongs in the lead of the article. Simple as that. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 03:03, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Of course, basically Tupac's lead is always changing, it changes every six months. While the other artists' leads always remain the same, which is a strange thing. Then there are often edit wars on the page. That said, what does it make to you if songwriter is written in the lead or not? At least that should be written, other artists have written all the occupations in the lead, even if they are secondary occupations. Pier1999 (talk) 03:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

@David Tornheim I ask you to intervene because there is a user here who is making an edit war. Remove songwriter from Tupac's lead just because in his personal opinion he shouldn't be put. When in reality Tupac is considered one of the best songwriters ever Pier1999 (talk) 03:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I had to tag an admin because you're making edit wars and editing a page that doesn't make any sense. According to your logic, Kendrick Lamar and Lil Wayne should also be stripped of songwriter in the lead. Pier1999 (talk) 03:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

You are willfully engaging in an edit war as well. Don't put it off on me and act like you are not playing a part. That's what this entire thing is about, really. You are acting like your opinion is supreme. I have never noticed this in the lead before and have been editing this article for years, so if it was there before I am not the only one who has removed it. Others disagree with you as well. Darrencdm1988 (talk) 04:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

--END OF DISCUSSION #1 COPIED FROM USER TALK PAGE--

Copied here by --David Tornheim (talk) 04:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Previous discussion #2 on user talk page that should probably be here instead

This is a continuation of the discussion here:

Hi, I saw that you took songwriter out of Tupac's lead and added actor. Actor is not one of Tupac's most important occupations, while songwriter is. Also because songwriter is about his music, his main activity. It's okay as it says. There is no need to change the lead. His main activity was music, not being an actor. Actor is already reported in the occupations part. The fact that it's not written in the beginning to other artists has nothing to do with it, songwriter is one of Tupac's main occupations and it has to do with his music. Songwriters and rappers are the two main occupations, so they must remain so. Actor is a secondary occupation. As we have already written in several threads on this page. I don't see what it has to do with the fact that they didn't write it to other artists, so we should take songwriters away from all artists.Pier1999 (talk) 00:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

--END OF DISCUSSION #2 COPIED FROM USER TALK PAGE--

Copied here by --David Tornheim (talk) 04:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

AI Tupac voice generator

Don't know if this is important enough to mention, but there's a web page that can be used to have Tupac's voice dubbed: [5] I don't see how he can have given his permission for his voice to be used, but maybe his heirs did. WiseWoman (talk) 20:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@WiseWoman: Probably would need to be mentioned in WP:RS to justify including any mention of it in the article. Sometimes external links are included in a special section at the end of articles, as is the case with this one: Tupac_Shakur#External_links. Because of potential copyright infringement, I would be against inclusion. --David Tornheim (talk) 21:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Also, please note that according to our article Copyright_law_of_the_United_States#Duration_of_copyright: 'Copyright protection generally lasts for 70 years after the death of the author. If the work was a "work for hire", then copyright persists for 120 years after creation or 95 years after publication, whichever is shorter.' However, as a paralegal--I am not an attorney and cannot give legal advice--Wikipedia is not a reliable source on law. There are better sources online and law does change and is often complicated by case law that can even vary by jurisdiction. Law libraries are good resources, but in the end if you want proper legal advice, you need to see an attorney who specializes in the appropriate field. --David Tornheim (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

personal interpretations

@HumansRightsIsCool https://theconversation.com/in-tupacs-life-the-struggles-and-triumphs-of-a-generation-79266 "Moviegoers this summer have enjoyed “All Eyez on Me,” the biopic of Tupac Shakur, one of the most iconic and influential musicians of the 20th century." Articles written by Jeffrey O.G. Ogbar, professor of history and popular music at the University of Connecticut. The article describes Tupac as one of the most influential musical artists of the 20th century, does not mention "one of the African-American artists." You have to stick to the sources Pier1999 (talk) 20:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

I just added a source which said he's one of the most influential black artists. Now I'm sticking to sources. Being black was a big part of tupacs career, he rapped about it, talked about it tons of times and was an activist for his own people, the fact that nowhere in this article says he's black is crazy HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 20:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

So I read the article you wrote, but it's not as authoritative a source as the article written by Jeffrey O.G. Ogbar. He does not report that he is one of the most influential African-American musical artists, but one of the most famous ones. However, your source does not delete an article written by an academic. Pier1999 (talk) 21:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

The article you cited is not written by an academic, while the one I cited months ago is written by one of America's leading academics in history and popular music. Also, as already written, it only reports that 2pac is one of the most famous African-American artists ever. I don't read influential writing. That said, a different source doesn't delete an authoritative source, I recommend you read the Wikipedia rules. Pier1999 (talk) 21:11, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has rules? HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 01:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Yes, of course there are rules. You can contact the administrators to have them explain it to you. Anyway I removed Gangsta rap in the lead, because it's already mentioned in the music genres and on the page. I don't understand why Tupac's lead has to have changes every week... Pier1999 (talk) 02:00, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

• @HumansRightsIsCool: Yes, Wikipedia has a few rules called policies and guidelines. I explain on your talk page here: User_talk:HumansRightsIsCool#Yes._There_are_rules.... And FYI. I'm not an admin. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

  Ok. I'll read it to make sure I don't break any rules HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 04:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Gangsta rap in the lead

@Cena332 In my opinion it is useless to write that in the final part of his career he did Gangsta rap, it is already written on the page. Otherwise we would have to write in the lead that he was a political and conscious rapper. But it's useless, it's already written in the genres and on the page Pier1999 (talk) 02:27, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

@Cena332 In fact, I'll write more: most of 2pac's songs are political rap and conscious rap songs, only in the final part of his career did he do Gangsta rap. So it would be more appropriate to write political rap and conscious rap in the lead. Or write both political rap and gangsta rap. (As it is written in the Ice Cube lead for example). Pier1999 (talk) 02:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

It is already written in the contents of the article that he addressed say for example social injustice; but it's still included in the lead. I don't see a problem with including Gangsta rap respectively. He also did do gangsta rap before Death Row; (but when he got to Death Row it escalated) but yes he did had socially conscious songs like Keep Ya Head Up. I think this is already addressed in the lead by "His lyrical content has been noted for addressing social injustice, political issues and the marginalization of African-Americans". Cena332 (talk) 02:36, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

African-americans or black americans in the lead

Okay, but let's write African-Americans then? Or do we leave black Americans? Pier1999 (talk) 02:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I'll let you and HumansRightsIsCool discuss that, because that wasn't my issue. Cena332 (talk) 02:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I've sent him a invite. Hopefully he responds. Cena332 (talk) 02:49, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

ok, thanks Pier1999 (talk) 02:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

it doesn't matter If it says "African-Americans" or "black Americans" they're pretty much the same thing. Most African-Americans are considering black and most people considered black around the globe have African ancestors HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 03:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea why i wrote black americans and replaced African-Americans HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 03:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

sorry In my first message i meant "considered" not "considering" HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 03:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Lead

@Confunxion There is no need to write in the lead: "one of the hip hop artists of his generation", because it is already written: "one of the most influential rappers of all time." Let's avoid repetitions that can lead to edit wars. Pier1999 (talk) 06:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)