User talk:2Pac

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

My talk page

Welcome!

Hello, 2Pac, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Rklawton 17:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pink 'U + Ur Hand'

Hi, You removed my statment about the title of the song referring to ion, calling it 'untrue and prob. vandalism'. I can tell you that it wasn't vandalism. Also, if you believe it to be untrue, could I please ask what you believe the title of the song to refer to?

from the lyrics:

I'm not here for your entertainment... It's just you and your hand tonight... You know who you are High fivin, talkin ****, but you're going home alone arentcha?

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]

Basketball

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Downwards 21:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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]

RS 500

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]

ur a fucking nerd

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]

Eminem Album's

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 Britney Spears the longest lasting Queen of Egypt if I felt like it. Citations seperate original research and unverified claims from true information. Until it is verified it does not belong in any section regardless of it's title. You want it in there so bad, that's fine - give me a Source interview with Eminem, or a transcript from G-Unit's radio show. Until the info is backed up, it is pure speculation and I will continue to remove it bases on Wikipedia: No Original Research Daemon8666 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]

Your talk page

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.

Love. Angel. Music. Baby.

I made some of the changes you requested at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Love. Angel. Music. Baby., but I have a few questions about the others. Would you mind taking a look at the userfied version and my responses on the nomination page and commenting? ShadowHalo 04:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

XXL (magazine)

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]

Ur list of best rap albums

Nice List,Though instead of All Eyez On Me,You should put Me Against The World by 'Pac. Nice Best Rapper list too. Hurricaneshady 15:46, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of theories

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]

Ur music

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)

2Pac is alive??

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

Proposed deletion of The Amazing Bone

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 deleted for any of several reasons.

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]

Main page appearance: The Notorious B.I.G.

This is a note to let the main editors of The Notorious B.I.G. know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 28, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 28, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegates Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), Gimmetoo (talk · contribs), and Bencherlite (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you can change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Christopher Wallace (1972–1997), best known as The Notorious B.I.G., was an American rapper/hip-hop artist. Wallace was raised in the Brooklyn borough of New York City and began rapping when he was a teenager. The release of Wallace's debut album Ready to Die in 1994 made him a central figure in the East Coast hip-hop scene and increased New York's visibility in the genre at a time when West Coast artists were more common in the mainstream. While recording his second album, Wallace was heavily involved in the East Coast/West Coast hip-hop feud dominating the scene at the time. On March 9, 1997, Wallace was killed by an unknown assailant in a drive-by shooting in Los Angeles. His double-disc set Life After Death, released 16 days later, hit No. 1 on the U.S. album charts and was certified Diamond in 2000 (one of the few hip hop albums to receive this certification). Wallace was noted for his "loose, easy flow", dark semi-autobiographical lyrics and storytelling abilities. Two more albums have been released since his death. In 2012, 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...)

UcuchaBot (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 Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, 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, you are welcome to 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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

Hello! Voting in the 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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--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 Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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 the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Notorious B.I.G. nominated at FAR

I have nominated The Notorious B.I.G. for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:46, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]