This article was nominated for deletion on July 6, 2016. The result of the discussion was delete.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of R&B and Soul Music articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.R&B and Soul MusicWikipedia:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicTemplate:WikiProject R&B and Soul MusicR&B and Soul Music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 January 2020 and 12 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Janicee B.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Comment. I don't understand the reasoning. It seems obvious that "wit da" stands for "with the" here. What else should it mean? Darkday (talk) 22:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Just because the words look similar doesn't mean they mean the same. "Wit Da" could be a middle name or a name of the Hoodie. There is no evidence of it being "with the" and since a majority of reliable sources spell it in capitalized form, it should be used per WP:COMMONNAME. The editor whose username is Z004:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If 99.9% of the time, wit da means the preposition and article with the, then that should be the default, common sense position. If you think this is a weird 0.1% case, then the burden of evidence is on you to prove it (e.g. with him saying the meaning in an interview or something, which is already kind of explained in the article). We shouldn't capitalise it just cuz there might be an odd 0.1% chance that the word isn't used how it normally is. WP:Commonname and capitals are different things. The current title is the common name regardless of whether it's in caps or not. Other sources using caps is irrelevant as they have their own Manual of Style. Spellcast (talk) 23:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What evidence do you have to say that "wit da" means "with the"? It might be known as an informal slang in some areas but again, just because they look and sound similar doesn't mean they're automatically presumed to mean the same. Also adding up the fact that most reliable sources use the capitalized form instead of the lower. Wikipedia does not use or recognize informal language. The editor whose username is Z004:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What if the stage name is changed to, for example, "A Boogie wiz ta Hoodie" or "A Boogie widde Hoodie"? Would you argue that it's a slang for "with the"? It might seem obvious to you but it's not the case for most of other Wikipedia readers. The editor whose username is Z005:34, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Who is changing the stage name? I don't see the relevance of this argument.
If you view source at the artist's official web page, there are two alt tags that provide alternate text for two images. The images show two different sizes of the artist's face and the artist's name in text "A Boogie Wit da Hoodie". The alt text for these images is ""aboogie with the hoodie", so ignoring the misspelling of aboogie, we can see that "wit da" is understood by the artist's webpage author to be equivalent to "with the". We should also note that the images have lower case "da", just like BBC, Amazon and Spotify. Binksternet (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The relevance of that is if you think the first name is acceptable as a preposition-article, would you also think the example names are too? Because tbh they all look and sound the same so it wouldn't be right to say "wit da" is "with the" but not "wiz ta" or "widde". They're just difference in spelling but on Wikipedia, ghetto language is not permitted as acceptable English so whatever you think "wit da" is should be treated as a proper noun because it's obviously invented and thus not part of the English language. Also, what the subject or his associates think doesn't matter as reliable sources and proper English comes first in policy/guideline. While there may be some sources like BBC and Billboard that use "wit da", WP:AT recommends the term most commonly used in majority of reliable sources, which is the capitalized form. The editor whose username is Z006:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You're conflating two different things. Reliable sources determine the common name of a subject. But typography issues like capital letters follow our own MOS which can be different to those sources. Slang or informal spelling doesn't mean the word suddenly changes its fundamental meaning. For example, the Oxford Dictionary entry for "da" defines it as a "non-standard spelling of the, used in representing speech", with the example of I'm wit you bro…fight da man!. Yes African-American Vernacular English is generally said to be on the casual/informal end of the continuum. But a spelling change does not automatically change the same underlying meaning of the word. Spellcast (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. per Spellcast and Binksternet. News sources are not consistent, and even per the evidence, the words clearly stand for "with the". Boogie is not a special case who needs to have words in his stage name capitalised. Ss11209:47, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
...Obviously the evidence Binksternet provided above—a primary source recognises them as meaning "with" and "the". Also, by "ghetto language", I assume you mean African-American Vernacular English, which is indeed a dialect of English. "wit" and "da" are common and generally accepted as words meaning "with" and "the" in AAVE, therefore English language capitalisation rules still apply. Ss11213:22, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
It seems strange to have this section consist solely of the statement "Dubose is a private person and does not like to open up about his personal life" when the sources cited involve the birth of his child etc, even if the statement is directly taken from said sources or is a natural conclusion at which to arrive having read them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.67.24 (talk) 17:51, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 January 2020 and 12 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Janicee B.
