Talk:Do It to It

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs 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.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

R&B and Soul Music Mid‑importance

	R&B and Soul Music portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

You forgot about Ploom-baer Boo-bah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.110.235 (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarisation from Ciara - Oh

I've made an edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Do_It_to_It&oldid=1154720847, but as i want to prevent any sourcing warriors from overruling it, let's see if we can get a consensus that it's true plagiarism here.

Reasonably, if you compare both songs ( Oh (Ciara song) and Do It to It ), you will find more than just cues of similarity, you'll find that a large portion of the lyrics are copied and that the beat & rhytm is mostly a reproduction of that on Ciara's track. It's just not been subject to mainstream discussion yet, perhaps the intellectual property holders and their legal staff (Ciara's) just haven't taken note or offense to it at the time. I couldn't find any sources or news about any ligitation or any signs that it has ever been noticed by them.

If anyone has something against the edit, please be constructive and discuss it here before anything else. If not convinced, or not familiar with the Ciara song, i recommend that you also listen to the Acraze remix of Do It to It (said remix is so popular that it's even in the article here), which is even more blatant in its plagiarism by even less modifications/filtering to the original beat & rhytm. By listening to this remix next to Do It To It, you can pick up on key aspects, which may enhance your judgement when listening to Oh (Ciara song) side by side with either of the Cherish clips. --Blooker (talk) 07:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia requires you to cite WP:Reliable sources. "Listening to both songs" is WP:Original research, which is not allowed. If you cannot provide a citation to a reliable source, then your claim cannot be included, as per Wikipedia's policy of WP:Verifiability - Arjayay (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Arjayay I feel you're being unreasonable here, as it's so blatantly obvious that anyone's ears would be an instrument to fulfill the following condition from WP:Original research:

The prohibition against original research means that all material added to articles must be verifiable in a reliable, published source, even if not already verified via an inline citation. The verifiability policy says that an inline citation to a reliable source must be provided for all quotations, and for anything challenged or likely to be challenged—but a source must exist even for material that is never challenged.[a] For example, the statement "the capital of France is Paris" does not require a source to be cited, nor is it original research, because it's not something you thought up and it is easily verifiable; therefore, no one is likely to object to it and we know that sources exist for it even if they are not cited. The statement is verifiable, even if not verified.

The example and what i highlighted in cursive is what's relevant to this matter. Why don't you verify the statement by listening to both songs, and then confirming there are no web sources to explain how such a blatant match would become to exist in a legitimate way. --Blooker (talk) 17:36, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]