User talk:2Pac

My very own talk page. Anything you write must have a point. Garbage will be ignored

Welcome!

Hello, 2Pac, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

Now, I believe that talking about somebody who wants to 'pull' Pink, but then saying he's going home alone, and it'll just be him and his hand, is an obvious reference to him ing alone. Unless you can provide a reason why that is not the case, I'll re-add it. You can reply either here or on my talk page. Thanks. Saccerzd 16:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, which all articles must follow. Wikipedia is a neutral, verifiable encyclopedia; it is not a place to argue a particular point of view. Thank you. --Madchester 01:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --Looper5920 10:46, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to add the RS 500 rankings to album articles, use the template that exists for it. See my change to Hotel California for an example. Wasted Time R 11:02, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove official templates (copyvio in particular). --kingboyk 08:10, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

stop wasting ur life listning to GreendaY AND MAKING MMASSIVE ARTICKLES ABOUT A SHORT SIONG GET A LIFE SHUT DOWN--Big-piggy 17:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

initiating HeckXX's_Noob_Corrector.exe...
Found 8 mistakes:
1. S top
2. Ur / You're
3. Listening
4. GreendaY / Green Day
5. MMASSIVE / Massive
6. ARTICKLES / Articles
7. SIONG / Song
8. GET A LIFE / No solution, probable hypocrisy

Also, Eminem rocks lolk. HeckXX 21:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more revert and we go to arbitration for revert warring. I'd like to avoid that, but you seem to be missing the point of my deletion , so let me try to make it clear here. Whether or not they belong according to article length is entirely beside the point - the statements have no citations or sources. They are therefore violations of Wikipedia:No_original_research. If you have any further questions about what's necessary by all means contact me. Daemon8666 06:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Citing_sources may help as wellDaemon8666 06:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2007-02-05_Eminem_Album_Articles - per existing wikipedia policy I will attempt this before requesting arbitration.Daemon8666 19:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not that I have a problem with the article length right now. That's something to address later. Regardless of what you call the section, or whether or not it's been around for a while, it is NOT ENCYCLOPEDIC. Without citations. I could make

Wikipedia: No Original ResearchDaemon8666 02:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I understand we have the cittations tag, but that is for info that needs to be sourced. This information is IMPOSSIBLE to source - you're never going to find Eminem sitting down explaining all his songs. The moment he or Dre does, the information casn go back in. Until it does, PLEASE leave it alone.Daemon8666 23:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to explain to you this five times.

• It is a violation of
  Wikipedia: No Original Research
  . Regardless of ANY OTHER FACTOR, this warrants its deletion. You want it sourced, put it on the talk page until it is. It does not belong in the article, because as I've said before, citations are what keeps people from making unwarranted claims. Whether you like it or not, or believe in it or not, your having an account and editing on wikipedia implies that you agree to follow wikipedia's overriding consensus in matters pertaining to article content and formation. It is the basic foundation of wikipedia that for consistency and accuracy's sake that these protocols be followed. No one is qualified to say what Eminem meant when he wronte those songs, PERIOD, besides the author himself, or an accredited expert; say someone who interviwed him directly or maybe he explains it in his biography. I agree that ANY sourced information should be pulled out in a specific section, such as a Trivia section, but no unsourced information can remain for the article to maintain the wikipedia standard.
• Even if it were sourced, it makes the article long and unwieldly. This may be overcome by rewriting the secion, but UNTIL THE ISSUE OF CITATIONS IS ADDRESSED IT DOESN"T MATTER. Send it to arbitration or whatever you want, but ACTUALLY READ THE SECTION AT
  Wikipedia: No Original Research
  FIRST.
• You mentioned using the "need citations tag". While I agree that wikipedia has many articles that fit this tag, THIS IS NOT ONE OF THOSE CASES. The Wolfdog article does, for example, since most of the information was either at one time sourced but is no longer (such as now-dead links), or was badly sourced initially and now needs to be re-verified. A large tract of information comprised entirely of statements of incredibly dubious accuracy is NOT such a situation.

There's really nothing else I can do here.Daemon8666 07:40, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't think anyone's going to object if you delete Big-piggy's comment. That's the kind of garbage that we editors are here to prevent. Regardless of the dispute, nothing excuses actions like that, and you shouldn't have to put up with nonsensical profanity here.Daemon8666 19:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

I made some of the changes you requested at

I noticed that you've edited on the XXL page recently. well, I've just tagged it as unreferenced and as containing original research. If you value the content of the page, please refer to it to provide references to it, otherwise I intend to reduce it to fully verifiable facts, which would bring the article to a stub.

--linca^linca 07:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nice List,Though instead of All Eyez On Me,You should put

The "Seven Day Theory" page has obviously been deleted, so there's an element of flogging a dead horse about this, but bear in mind that an article on a theory only needs to demonstrate the notability of that theory, rather than actually arguing that it's true. Speaking for myself, I think every conspiracy theory is absolute nonsense, but there are an awful lot of people around the world who are prepared to claim that the Illuminati exist or that Osama bin Laden didn't have a role in planning 9/11. The theories themselves are what's notable, even if the people subscribing to them might need some time in a quiet room with a straitjacket. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 12:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coudnt agree with you more on the loser sterotypes who hate rap. I hate ja rule too . do you like chamillionaire? P.S delete that shit that loser posted up there, Secondandonly 02:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping fix the vandalism on 50 Cent. GlassCobra 15:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Amazing Bone has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unreferenced, and apparently abandoned. No assertion of notability. Unable to find any reliable secondary sources of information

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Illia Connell (talk) 02:51, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a note to let the main editors of

Christopher Wallace (1972–1997), best known as

The Source ranked him No. 3 on their list of the Top 50 Lyricists of All Time. He has certified sales of 17 million units in the United States. (Full article...

)

talk) 23:02, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Precious

rappers
Thank you for quality articles on rappers, such as

The Notorious B.I.G, and their music, written with true love, - you are an awesome Wikipedian

!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:11, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year ago, you were the 348th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:06, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seven years ago, you were recipient no. 348 of Precious --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:08, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

ArbCom Elections 2016

: Voting now open!

Hello, 2Pac. Voting in the

2016 Arbitration Committee elections

is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, 2Pac. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 2Pac. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, 2Pac. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply ]

Precious anniversary

Precious

Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]