Talk:Untitled Nas album

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Albums 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.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles This article has been marked as needing immediate attention. hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Nas was on a radio show and within the last two minutes, was asked when the album would come out. The response was, April 22nd.

Here's the link to go to: http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/audio/id.4293/title.nas-foxxhole-radio-interview ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.71.40.153 (talk) 09:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--STDZzij (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)==Album Cover== Whats the source on that cover?--Sosa 15:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC[reply]

It's a fake, someone made it to show of her skills, and she admitted it was fake. Therefore, I've deleted it. Mittens2317 (talk) 17:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the cover back in the article? The citation doesn't have any sources of its own... Shouldn't we wait for an official statement? --68.158.159.128 (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could the original cover be included in the article as it was changed due to controversy?--STDZzij (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Def Jam said that title will not be allowed and that Nas is not even releasing an album on December....I will go with the record label for the source.--Sosa 14:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I looked at everything again and the new album is untitled. I mean, I was putting up the sources but I noticed that the date of the articles were before the release of Hip Hop Is Dead and I found an article that the first --Sosa 01:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)title name of the album was gonna be called Nigga but changed it to Hip Hop is Dead. I think it's a mistake here.... --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 23:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an MTV article from October 13, 2007, claiming Nas said the title would be Nigga, and it was confirmed by a "source close to the project". (MTV.com) --Zimbabweed 01:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And here is source from the record label, Def Jam saying that it WILL NOT be the title and NO album being released in December. Useless article until information is release from the label and not Nas, that is why the previous article entries for this ninth album have been deleted, twice. --Sosa 15:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC) ^[1][reply]

The Fox News article that came from didn't say Def Jam denied the album title, it said an inside source. Def Jam themselves haven't said anything about it and Nas says they have no problem with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.82.7 (talk) 20:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not titled, and im sure he wont be let to use this title so easily.

This article is pretty much useless....waiting until confirmation is the best thing to do, Nas is not a credible source, he's the G.O.A.T., but lets face the facts....this will change a billion times before it actually drops...--Sosa 01:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you stop making nonsense edits and ignore each warning it would be better.

non-sense edits? thats subjective--Sosa 16:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are all of you people idiots? this album's title is NOT "Untitled", it is simply "Nas". check the album cover if you'd like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.2.27 (talk) 01:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A New York Assemblyman has called on Universal Music Group to change the title of Nas’ upcoming album, Nigger, or lose $84 million in investments.

As reported earlier, Nas announced his album’s controversial title at a concert two weeks ago, and the news was met with stern disapproval from Reverend Jesse Jackson and The NAACP (The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People).

Despite the uproar caused by his announcement, Nas said he would not be changing the album’s title and claimed that his label Def Jam, a subsidiary of Universal, had not offered any resistance to the title.

According to The Brooklyn Paper, Fort Greene assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries has requested New York’s Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli ‘to withdraw the $84 million that the state pension fund has invested in Universal and its parent company, Vivendi’.

“[They are] profiting from a racial slur that has been used to dehumanize people of color for centuries,” said Jeffries. “It is time for Nas and other hip-hop artists to clean up their act and stop flooding the airwaves with the N-word.”

The Brooklyn Paper reports that a recent report showed that ‘the New York State Pension Fund has $2.8 billion invested in 16 major entertainment companies, including Time Warner and Disney. That number does not include the state’s investment in Vivendi.’

“It’s a staggering amount of money, which at least justifies a review of the appropriateness o f the content that is flooding the public,” said Jeffries, who formerly worked as an assistant general counsel at CBS and a lawyer at Viacom before he was elected last year.

A spokesperson for DiNapoli, who manages the pension fund, said that the comptroller “is concerned about this issue and is intending to contact [Universal] and urge them to halt the release of the album.

Earlier this year, The New York City Council voted to ban the use of the word “nigger”.

“The [Council made] an important symbolic step, but I’m more interested in the substantive approach of reviewing the multi-billion-dollar investment that the New York State pension fund makes in the entertainment industry,” said Jeffries.

Universal did not repsond to a request for comment.

Nigger is slated for release on December 11th. --KarmaLoop 06:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who on earth removed the references template and the Nas template? Also the categories. Woop-Woop That's the sound of da Police 15:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

a snippet was released today on hiphopgame.com entitled what it is. possible track for new album though not confirmed.snippet may have to look down a lttle. just posting it if anyone wants to hear it--Bren202 (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

by the way, i don't think a snippet can be "leaked", as it is mostly used for promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.90.176 (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

stop adding "What It IS" information to the page, nas said it will not be on album--Bren202 (talk) 01:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

no nas said that beat was not gona be on the album the vocals are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhh, anyone know the title that will be used on the album because nas said the short title is "the fear" but the long title is "the fear of the black man's dick.[1]--Bren202 00:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's mentioned of course on the source. It should be said but differently. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 01:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.173.137 (talk) 08:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found a source http://www.hiphopgame.com/news.php3?id=2134, however i doubt it's the real cover.--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 02:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's just a "draft", for an official one would be released later on. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 03:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The album cover is a fake. [2]. Apparently the chick wanted to prove a point by making a fake album cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.47.107.251 (talk) 10:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the track listing because i didn't see it on XXL or any other reliable websites and i thought the source it had wasnt reliable enough.--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 06:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The ref should be ok. The author of the ref has posted tracks of past albums (like The Cool) which were correct. Spellcast (talk) 06:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just find it hard to believe they would have a track listing two months before the album is scheduled to come out and I would think I would see something on XXL, HipHopDX or other notable hip-hop websites.--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd think so too, but looking at the author's past posts, it seems to be reliable. Anyway, there's no rush to add it. You can wait for a more mainstream source if you want. Spellcast (talk) 06:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While checking out datpiff.com, I found a link for the rumored tracklist for this particular cd. I'm not sure of its validity, or if someone would want to post it on the page, but here's the link if any one is interested: http://www.defsounds.com/rumors/Nas_nigger_track_list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.254.101.90 (talk) 18:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Def Sounds posts a lot of rumored track listing most of them are false--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 02:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just had to re-delete it. - Mittens2317 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittens2317 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some one put this on the page, it's produced by Dj Khalil here's the link http://videovault.morrisvideos.com/videos/nas---what-it-is-first-listen-by-dj-khalil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.125.78.12 (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I tried to alter the track listing as there were songs with no references that looked made up.. But I'm not sure how to fix it now. By the way I think it should be mentioned (like I said about Ice Cube having a possible appearance on the album. The 2 have recently hooked up and mentioned it. So why not have it there?

Some of the tracks on the list are on the Nigger tape and they probably won't be on the album

I just listened to "Be a Nigger Too" a few times, sorry, couldn't find a stub for it, is the "sample clearance issue" just because it is a riff on Dr. Pepper's old ad tune, "Be a Pepper Too" because that doesn't seem like a sampling issue. Usually that is allowed in parody, fair use for artistic expression, ain't it?!? I'd have to listen to it further to see if I could hear if there is another song, other than the Dr. Pepper song, that is sampled or layered in there that I couldn't figure out, but that just seems like Dr. Pepper didn't want to be associated and with all the other ish goin' on, Nas couldn't be bothered to fight it? I just want to say, as my opinion, aside from the merits or how ya feel about the lack there of of Nas either testing the waters to see how far he could go or whether you're really offended by it, that it is a real shame that in this day and age an artist cannot bring to the marketplace the product as he intends it to be. Seems like the discussion should have veered off towards First Amendment Rights and free speech. It ain't exactly Big Bidness vs. the little guy but come on. It is not only that he got a right to say what he want when he want where he want, but that he has a right to express himself artisticly and that means the totallity of the whole. The KKK can have clan meetings protected by the Constitution, and Nas can't put out an album, from track listing to cover art to title, as he sees fit? DR DJ Ragu 2008

The upcoming album won't be called "Nigger", instead it's going to remain untitled till it hits the stores: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1587737/20080519/nas.jhtml

It's already been mentioned.

(Talk) (Contribs) 00:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

So, how about we change the album's name to Untitled instead of just Nas? Ideal4real (talk) 14:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the title is going to be changed it should be "[untitled]", without capital letters, in order to make it clear that it isn't actually titled: Untitled.--STDZzij (talk) 20:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what about war is necessary?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanv91 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

War Is Necessary is an exclusive track just for GTA IV Ideal4real (talk) 14:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://content.onsmash.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/nas_green-cover2.jpg SE KinG (talk) 07:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is the release date confirmed as the 15th? The back slip of 'The Nigger Tape' features the line, "Tuesday, July 1, 2008." It was released the 9th and conflicts with the currently featured date.

Inside Cover

--68.158.243.12 (talk) 21:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The track listing posted doesn't seem like it's the real deal. First of all: -"Be A Nigger Too" was left off and I highly doubt that's going to happen. -"Nigger Hatred", which leaked today, will most likely be on the album, or so I think. -Guests D-Block, Dead Prez, Jay Electronica & Rick Ross are nowhere to be found & I believe that at least one or two of them would be included. -Chances are the track featuring The Game & Chris Brown would not be titled as it is here, with there being a similar sounding one to be featured on L.A.X. This is all my opinion, however. Any thoughts on this matter?

It is on iTunes now. And Be a Nigger to has been leaked for a while, and was found out not to be official and Jay Electronica produced a track. So I think this is legit.

--Piazzajordan2 (Talk.) 11:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea its def legit as of now. i know the original producer of "be a nigger too" and he said there were sample clearance issues. i presume that "nigger hatred" will simply be more material for The Lost Tapes 2 and yea, dead prez and jay electronica produced some beats on the current track listing. i hope rick ross isn't on this album.

With all this said, about 8 tracks have already been leaked so there is a chance that the album's release date gets pushed up or pushed back again. if it gets pushed back again, then songs like "nigger hatred" and other material might be included.Noahdabomb3 (talk) 22:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The track list on itunes has changed to 16 album tracks and then some bonus tracks. Dillon90 7 July 2008

People need to stop posting that the CD leaked on the page. It has no place on the site, especially when the link people are posting to confirm it are to direct dl links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfnj123 (talk • contribs) 07:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heres a link to a site that talks about it without having a d/l link. http://sohhdotcom.typepad.com/sohhcom/2008/07/nas-album-leaks.html Nas also made a video and that could also be a good link —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.203.79 (talk) 09:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Album was fully leaked on the night of July 1st, not 5th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.38.14.178 (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The album is available to listen to, for free, on last.fm at http://www.last.fm/music/Nas/Untitled?autostart . I added this to the intro. If it's not considered a "stream", then someone can change the wording. I think it deserves being mentionned in the intro with the release date information. Additionally, if anyone can find the date that it was added to last.fm, that'd be nice to have. M.Nelson (talk) 03:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i removed this part because the link was dead and there was no prove if its right or wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.86.127.244 (talk) 09:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i added Yo raps review becaouse its a good and rap reviews i sugest u take out some more cas there really lazy reviews like Los Angeles Times cas half the review he or she talks about the controversy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Track 10 is misleadingly titled "Louis Farrakhan"when on the album it is simply "Untitled".

Although Louis Farrakhan is consistantly mentioned in the chorus, he is not at all mentioned by nas himself, and i think this has an implication on the title choice. If you listent to the introductory words, about discipline and the "QUALITIES" of Farrakhan, i think you will get the gist of what nas is getting at, being, i think, about nas himself, nas as a revolutionist who inspires and inculcates discipline in others, and who leads others. i think he added the Farrakhan part in order to offer a comparison and a reference point. But essentially, the lyrical content is about nas himself.

So i suggest the title of the track should be changed to "untitled". 195.194.75.209 (talk) 13:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)intellectualrapgod[reply]

Done. Dillon90 (talk) 19:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Debatable, but I think the review should be kept under the ratings of the album. Honestly, as much as I praise Nas' music, the review is notable and has the same right as any other review to have their rating put up. It may be low than the other reviews but it's still notable. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 20:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputing reviews only because they are negative is entirely

WP:POVPUSH. A better reason would be needed to exclude it. Many great albums and artists were initially were slagged by critics, and quite a few weak albums now accepted as "classics" received reasonable poor reviews before the party line had been established. I think superfans who delete bad reviews may be lacking perspective on this. / edg ☺ ☭ 07:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't think that the Pitchfork Media review should be included because the writer did a poor job critiquing the album. The writer of the article appears offended by the lyrical content of Nas' "Untitled", and therefore the writer went on a personal vendetta and tried to drag the album through the dirt while offering an ignorantly-written review. The article gave "Untitled" a 3.8 review, at first read, I thought they accidentally switched the "3" and the "8". Then I read the review and realized that the reviewer was writing with a chip on his shoulder. Dronias (talk) 00:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rolling Stone and All Music 4 Stars http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/21747730/review/21883814/nas http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:fxfexqe5ldde~T2

Rapreviews gave the album 8.5 stars. I think all three should be included since all are credible review sources just like pitchfork should remain posted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballistic08 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Untitled by The Independant http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/album-nas-untitled-def-jam-870486.html

Include this review as The Independant is one of the most respected papers in the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.138.72 (talk) 18:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done.

^{(Discuss it)} 18:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

A crucial review should be included: HipHopSite.com 5 Stars http://hiphopsite.com/review/show/id/121 "HipHopSite.com" is one of the most highly-regarded Hip Hop sites, and this review is one of the most well-written reviews on Nas' "Untitled". Dronias (talk) 00:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

some one added The Guardian gave the album 2 and the reviews not evne a paragraph long im goign to take it off —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a justified reason for removing the review.

Mentality 22:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm afraid not. This was also argued with the Pitchfork Media review, as it got 3.8 out of 10. A notable professional review is still a notable professional review. I also read the review; it does in fact review the album, vaguely, but does its job.

Mentality 00:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

ok but the pitchfork media does infact review the album i read it but the one u put out dont even mentain one song off it but id otn really care —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC) add Yahoo music's review it gave it 10/10 http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/080728/33/21zhs.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what happened to the P4k review? selective editing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.0.4 (talk) 10:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This review always seems to be removed for its low rating. It can be restored by

undoing the edit via the history. — ξ^xplicit 21:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't know, but I have a few possible explanations:

1. In the hip hop world, "Nigga" ≠ "Nigger", which is what Nas intended to call his latest album.
2. Before 2Pac released Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z., I doubt he was as popular as he would be later on or as Nas is today. His only album before that was 2Pacalypse Now. Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z. likely wasn't as popular as Nas' new album.
3. Nigga Please...come on, we all know ODB was loco!! :)
4. In general, today hip hop is much more popular than it was in the '90s so anything now gets more media attention and is more exasperated than it has been before.

My two cents, Do U(knome)? ^yes...|_{or no} 01:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% positive, but I think the next single is gonna be Make The World Go Round. Main reason why is because it's been recieving airplay on 105.1 in NY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.38.2 (talk) 01:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well until a source is provided it stays as one single. SE KinG (talk) 01:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Game confirmed on BET's 106 & Park Live on August 26, 2008, that this is the second single, as he co-produced it.

--Piazzajordan2 (Talk.) 22:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Nas album sounds okay, but wouldn't it make more sense to call it "Nas' untitled studio album" or "Nas' untitled ninth studio album".

Discuss. SE KinG (talk) 22:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't that pretty much what I proposed two sections above (and you opposed by the way)? Nonetheless, support for "Nas' untitled studio album", with either the "ninth" or "Untitled". No need for both.Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 01:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At that time I thought the album name was actually called "Untitled". SE KinG (talk) 22:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Nas album works just fine. This is the same situation as Untitled Korn album, where there is no title whatsoever. --Pwnage8 (talk) 15:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many (most?) sources, including the Def Jam website itself, do indeed call the album Untitled. The article only has the name it has now because someone moved it acting on their own view without discussion or presentation of reasoning. Don't confuse what Wikipedia chooses to call its article with correctness or definitive truth. 86.44.25.191 (talk) 05:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The video to Make The World Go Round is being made.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlboKLxu-pU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thugondarel (talk • contribs) 00:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the sources from the official charts to αCharts due to the fact that the previous sources are updated on a weekly basis, thus failing to cite the peak of the album.

Is ANYONE going to make a page for this? Arjoccolenty (talk) 10:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On iTunes the called the album "Nas" so shouldn't it be that and not untitled? 98.221.153.118 (talk) 21:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retail websites call the album "Nas" because they can't sell an album without a title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SE KinG (talk • contribs) 22:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are we ever going to make an article for it? 96.238.63.170 (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that on my version of the album, the name is 'Louis Farrakhan'. I also see that above, it was decided that it should be determined 'Untitled' because there was no official name. Shouldn't that be noted somewhere in the track listing? I mean, it makes sense. Just wanted to know what you think before I did it myself. — Preceding

This YouTube video has been removed. Someone should find a different version of it. -- SatanicSanta 18:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]