| Revision as of 05:23, 22 May 2021 editTheWeekdayz (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users634 edits →Photo of Tesfaye← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 19:38, 22 January 2025 edit undoJawzBlack (talk | contribs)4 edits →Bias: ReplyTags: possible BLP issue or vandalism Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply |
| (237 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Skip to talk}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
|
{{Canadian English}} |
|
{{WikiProject Biography|living=yes|class=B|musician-work-group=yes|musician-priority=Mid|listas=Weeknd, The}} |
|
|
|
{{On this day|date1=2021-02-16|oldid1=1007186309}} |
|
{{WikiProject African diaspora|class=B|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Canada|class=B|importance=Low|music=yes|on=yes|Toronto=yes|Toronto-importance=low}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|collapsed=yes|blp=yes|vital=yes|listas=Weeknd, The|1= |
|
{{WikiProject R&B_and_Soul_Music|class=B|importance=High}} |
|
{{WikiProject Biography|musician-work-group=yes|musician-priority=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject African diaspora|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Canada|importance=Mid|music=yes|on=yes|Toronto=yes|Toronto-importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject R&B and Soul Music|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Pop music|importance=High}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice|age=30 |
|
|
|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
| Line 14: |
Line 16: |
|
|counter = 2 |
|
|counter = 2 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|algo = old(180d) |
|
|archive = Talk:The Weeknd/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:The Weeknd/Archive %(counter)d |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Top 25 Report|Aug 30 2015 (19th)|Feb 7 2021 (2nd)}} |
|
{{Top 25 Report|Aug 30 2015 (19th)|Feb 7 2021 (2nd)}} |
|
{{notaforum}} |
|
|
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Musicians|class=B}} |
|
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
|
{{Broken anchors|links= |
|
{{Canadian English}} |
|
|
|
* <nowiki>]</nowiki> |
|
{{OnThisDay|date1=2021-02-16|oldid1=1007186309}} |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 10 August 2024 == |
|
== Associated acts section == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{Edit semi-protected|The Weeknd|answered=yes}} |
|
Yet again |
|
|
|
create page for the anticipated 2024 The Weeknd album, Hyperlink page ] (]) 17:33, 10 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=The_Weeknd&type=revision&diff=1002930775&oldid=1002930314 |
|
|
|
:] '''Not done:''' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a ] and provide a ] if appropriate.<!-- Template:ESp --> ] (]) 22:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC) |
|
No, they do not belong here. How is each one's individual involvement this subject's career both significant and notable to his career? The case is not made and Benarnold98 is doing nothing more than pushing a ]. ] (]) 18:19, 26 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: And for the record, it would be sorted "Del Rey, Lana" not "Lana". At least he admits she was an influence, but with only one work, why was she both significant and notable to his career? The article just does not support the claim. ] (]) 18:44, 26 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: There has not just been one work, as I detailed below, they have collaborated FIVE TIMES. This is clearly significant to his career. Please stop bullying me by undoing my constructive editing. ] (]) 01:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2024 == |
|
I believe the following artists should be added to The Weeknd's Associated acts section. I have attached various links proving their significance to The Weeknd's career. |
|
|
<br> |
|
|
]:<br> |
|
|
Long-time collaborator, has produced and written a vast number of songs with The Weeknd.<br> |
|
|
* https://en.wikipedia.org/Illangelo - "long time collaborator of The Weeknd" |
|
|
* https://genius.com/artists/Illangelo - "long time collaborator of The Weeknd", and shows the vast number of collaborations with. The Weeknd |
|
|
<br> |
|
|
]:<br> |
|
|
Many collaborations, have toured together. Lil Uzi Vert's hugely famous song, ] is titled after The Weeknd's tour, and The Weeknd appears in the song's accompanying music video.<br> |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFWYTGtRmEE&ab_channel=LILUZIVERT |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F6SWhiFl8c&ab_channel=TheWeekndVEVO |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhr0zSJFS2c&ab_channel=TheWeeknd |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrsFXgQk5UI&ab_channel=LILUZIVERT |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i8b8NQLCik&ab_channel=BenjaminAslaksen |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9VEck1-oQGQ&ab_channel=J%27vonKeller |
|
|
<br> |
|
|
]:<br> |
|
|
Many collaborations, have toured together. The Weeknd has executive produced Nav's albums. Nav is signed to The Weeknd's label.<br> |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRLyREkZles&ab_channel=NAVVEVO |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_v2r8rdGM8&ab_channel=NAVVEVO |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biYH2zjaLDo&ab_channel=NAV |
|
|
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbXL51u0cS8&ab_channel=GoRadioMN |
|
|
* https://www.thefader.com/2019/03/19/the-weeknd-nav-bad-habits |
|
|
* https://variety.com/2019/music/news/nav-rapper-interview-weeknd-drake-haters-1203213393/ |
|
|
* https://www.pressparty.com/pg/newsdesk/umusic/view/211802/ |
|
|
<br> |
|
|
] (]) 19:51, 26 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: But again, this article does not support the claims. And two associations are not usually enough. I am willing to take this to an RfC since you have not accepted the opinion of several senior editors in the music project. ] (]) 21:32, 26 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: You also ignored the alphabetization issue. ] (]) 21:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: So as far as Lil Uzi Vert, four songs and a tour. How are these influential in this subject's career? Nothing has changed since the discussion above. There is no association there. |
|
|
::: Illangelo: Misplaced Pages is not a reliable source and writing songs together. Are they Lennon & McCartney? I don't know because this article makes passing mention of the subject. |
|
|
::: As for Nav, clearly this subject is influential in his career. How exactly is he influential in this subject's career? ] (]) 21:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: What can I say at this point. You asked me to take it to the talk page, which I have done, yet you report me. This is incredibly unfair. The only opinion I have not accepted is yours, because you have no idea what you are talking about. If you look back through the talk page you can see many users agreeing with me, and YOU can't accept that. Furthermore, how on earth can you possibly say four songs and a tour are not influential in the subject's career? That is hugely influential. With Illangelo, arguably the most significant of the three, if you look at the link to Genius that I attached above, you can see the vast number of songs that they have collaborated on. Why are you choosing to ignore that? It seems your stubbornness is taking over your desire for accurate information in this case. ] (]) 01:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::: I reported you for violating ]. ] (]) 03:15, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: I notice you have ignored almost everything I have just said. Please stop being stubborn; I proved my correctness. ] (]) 11:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::: You acting this way is very unhealthy for the community. ] (]) 11:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::: I notice you have ignored almost everything I have been writing for months. Please stop being stubborn and improve the article rather than argue for the subject's inclusion on the talk page. It is unhealthy for the community to do so. ] (]) 23:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::: Also, if you fail to self-revert or continue to argue will result in an RfC. You do not accept the project's approach so I'm happy to take it to the community. ] (]) 23:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::: You have pretty much copied everything I said directed at you, that is so incredibly childish. How can you possibly take yourself seriously, when you do something like that? What you fail to acknowledge is that I am trying to improve the article with more accurate information, yet you are choosing to do whatever is in your power to prevent that, and that is really quite sad. You are terrorising me, and the article. Please can you respond to what I said earlier, 6 paragraphs ago, explaining my case, that you have chosen to ignore. I am still waiting for that. ] (]) 01:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::: Please see ], where I have proposed adding The Weeknd to Lana Del Rey's associated acts. You can see that I have proposed it in a very similar way to above, and I was treated fairly and respectfully by other users, who acknowledged and understood my points. There is clearly a bias issue here. Why am I treated fairly by other users but not you? You will do everything you can to prevent my constructive editing. You are displaying signs of bias and bullying. Please can you treat me fairly and properly consider my suggestions. ] (]) 02:15, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::: Yes, I did copy it and directed at you, because it is better directed at you. I'm taking this to RfC since you're intransigent and refuse to improve the article. You are treated fairly by all users, especially me. You have not even attempted to edit constructively. ] (]) 02:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::: I am not intransigent. I am trying to improve the article to its correct form. It is you who is refusing to appreciate my contributions as you are so set in your ways that the 3 acts I am suggesting shouldn't be there. When I provide proof that they should be there you choose to completely ignore it. I don't understand why you have formed such a strong bias against me. I am not treated by you fairly in the slightest for that reason. Furthermore, every attempt I make to edit is with constructive intentions, yet you are terrorising my opportunity in doing this. You have STILL not commented on the proof I provided earlier. I keep reminding you to do this, but you continue to ignore this. Why are you ignoring the proof? ] (]) 12:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
{{od}}I thought we established in a previous discussion that Lil Uzi Vert is not so closely interconnected to the Weeknd that he should be listed as an associated act in the infobox. ] (]) 15:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: {{ping|Binksternet}} yes, that was my understanding as well. Apparently Benarnold98 thinks that name-calling and making false claims is how things work on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 18:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|The Weeknd|answered=yes}} |
|
Excuse me, How many time did Lil Uzi Vert and The Weeknd collaborated? If you know, name the songs. ] ] 08:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
The weeknd is an actor too. ] (]) 11:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
: {{ping|HondaGang}} See my earlier post on this thread, where I have provided links which detail their collaborations. In addition to this, I do not understand why Belly and Daft Punk count for the Associated Acts list, as they have only collaborated with The Weeknd twice; yet Lil Uzi Vert and Nav are not allowed. Literally makes no sense. ] (]) 11:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:A fact that the article lists several times, including in the infobox. Is there a specific place you think it should be added? ] ⬡ 16:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Image == |
|
Travis Scott has one notable song with The Weeknd, which also features SZA. If Scott is on there, why isn’t SZA? The list should remain as is, with Ariana Grande added (like she already is) as Tesfaye has three successful songs with Grande. ] (]) 20:00, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@] Can you explain why you're repeatedly changing the photo of R Kelly in the section artistry? I explained in my edit summary that I changed the mugshot because it appears out of place with the other images of Michael Jackson and Prince, but you've been changing it back without explanation. ]] 03:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
And if Scott has one notable song with Tesfaye, Juice WRLD should be on there too, but he isn’t, and he won’t be added. ] (]) 20:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:The image was already the one that was there when I first came across this[REDACTED] page. I disagree that it appears out of place because in 2024, that's what R. Kelly is most known for. An image of him performing is inappropriate in my opinion. ] (]) 01:25, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
I also strongly believe that Max Martin should be added, as he has collaborated with Tesfaye many times. ] (]) 20:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::R Kelly isn't most known for his mugshot or his crimes however, he's most known for being a musician. If that's the case in 2024 is arguable, but the article mentions R Kelly because he influenced the Weeknd musically, so his crimes are ultimately irrelevant in the Weeknd's article and a picture of him performing is more appropriate. |
|
|
::Composition-wise the performance picture is better than the mugshot. Although I'll admit the photo I put in is somewhat blurry, the mugshot has too much grain which is noticeable. While the mugshot has a wide aspect ratio and is a headshot that only shows the head, the Michael Jackson, Prince, and R Kelly performance pics all have a tall aspect ratio and is a half-body headshot that shows the person from the waist up. This is what I meant by the mugshot is out of place. ]] 20:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I understood what you meant, but I still disagree. Having a picture of him performing is inappropriate because (as you said it's arguable that) he's most known for being a sexual predator in 2024, and that includes using his own art to lure is prey. That he influenced the Weeknd musically is irrelevant to the photo being used because the Artistry section already mentions that. If an image of his is to be included, it should be the mugshot. ] (]) 23:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I should have clarified that when I stated that he's most known for being a sexual predator in 2024, I was referring to the general public's opinion at that specific point of time. However, we should note that on Misplaced Pages, people should be referred to what they're most notable for throughout their lifetime. ] states that "Well-publicized recent events affecting a subject, whether controversial or not, should be kept in historical perspective. '''What is most recent is not necessarily what is most ]''': new information should be carefully balanced against old, with ] accorded to each." To give just a few examples, Bill Cosby is more known as a ] and Jimmy Savile is more known as ]. I disagree that the musical influence is irrelevant to the photo; in fact, I think that because the Artistry section mention's R Kelly musical influence, it makes more sense to use a photo that thematically aligns with the text, i.e. the performance photo rather than the mugshot. |
|
|
::::Anyways, if you still disagree, then I or you can put it on ] where we can get a third opinion. ]] 00:30, 10 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::R. Kelly being a musician is why he has a Misplaced Pages article, but I also believe that his incarceration due to sexual misconduct ''is'' what is most noteworthy. If an onlooker decides to read the article from beginning to end, the onlooker may end up interpreting it being about a person with talent who became famous and used the fame to his advantage in becoming a predator. Let's go ahead and put ] on it. ] (]) 21:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I still disagree that R Kelly's sexual misconduct is what is most noteworthy. An onlooker may interpret the articles as a person who used their fame to take advantage in becoming a predator as you said of course, but we should still consider ], usually determined by consensus for controversial subjects. Consensus in ] is that R Kelly is first and foremost known as a musician, and that descriptors like "sex offender" shouldn't be used in the first sentence. Even using the mugshot for the infobox image has raised BLP concerns. I still also believe that the performance picture fits better with the other pictures of Michael Jackson and Prince because of its similar composition. |
|
|
::::::Because we still disagree on the image and have agreed to list this dispute on ], I have placed it there. ]] 19:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{| style="border-top: solid thin lightgrey; background: transparent; padding: 4px;" |
|
: That is just not true at all, Travis Scott and The Weeknd literally have 5 songs together (please see ]), which is more than other artists; and it's not like these songs aren't notable, they have hundreds of millions of plays. I agree that neither SZA or Juice WRLD belong on there, as they only have one collaboration, thus not fitting the criteria: "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions". However, all three of the artists in question ''do'' satisfy the criteria, and hence belong here. See ] where I provide plenty of evidence supporting this. ] (]) 23:58, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| ] '''Response to ]:''' |
|
:: Why do you and Osh33m focus only on the number of interactions and not the main part of the documentation that states the field is for "professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career"? Perhaps you should start to focus on the "significant to this artist's career" part instead because "acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions" falls under a section that states "this field can include", not "this field must include" and relying on "collaborated on multiple occasions" may be your undoing. I don't want to pick a fight, but I do want you to understand why I'm opposed to 1) this many associated acts and 2) including the acts you are insisting on including here. ] (]) 01:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|- |
|
::: I am going to speak only for myself and say that I focus on "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together" because it is a bullet point listed under the template for AA's which means that[REDACTED] suggests that this an application of this bullet point is an example of an AA being significant to an artist's career. It even starts off by saying "this can include, for example..." otherwise, ''anyone'' could subjectively decide what is significant and what is not. --] (]) 02:39, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
| style="padding-left: 1.6em;" | The mugshot should not be used. R. Kelly is notable first and foremost as a musician. It's why he's mentioned in this article. Reviewing this request this has been a question for discussion at ] as well and the general consensus is not to use mugshots in the infoboxes for ]. That seems like a good rule of thumb for this case as well. <!-- Template:Third opinion response --> ] (]) 15:51, 13 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:::: Sorry, I should not have stated that you ignore it. It seems to me that you ignore it. Could you please acknowledge the starting criteria reads "professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career"? Could you also please acknowledge the bullet points stated that the bullet points are preceded by the phrase "this field can include"? It seems that you're pushing that one bullet point over and against the primary criteria of 'significant to this artist's career". Once we're on the same page, we can start to discuss shortening the ] in the infobox. ] (]) 02:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|} |
|
::::: That's not what the criteria is saying though. The bullet points are examples of ways in which acts are significant to eachothers' careers. One example of a way in which a professional relationships are "significant to this artist's career" is when acts have "collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together". All three artists literally satisfy this, so should be allowed to feature. ] (]) 10:00, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: As "significant to this artist's career" is so broad, and could be interpreted many ways, it has given examples of scenarios where a relationship with another artist is significant to their career. The bullet points act as guidelines. Without the bullet points how else can we define 'significant'? People's definitions will vary for this, hence Misplaced Pages has provided some examples of significance. ] (]) 10:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Genres == |
|
== Baet leoncio == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weekend real name ] (]) 04:57, 8 October 2024 (UTC) |
|
Is ] one of The Weeknd genres? This site named him as one of emo rap artist. ] ] 08:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: Definitely not. That isn't a good source and The Weeknd isn't even a rapper. ] (]) 12:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: He is a rapper. ] (]) 22:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I know, but he had collaboration with some emo rap artists for example Lil Uzi Vert, Future and Juice WRLD. ] ] 20:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::{{Reply|HondaGang}} That doesn't make him an emo rap artist. ] (]) 23:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Ariana Grande == |
|
== Genres == |
|
|
|
|
{{ping|Walter Görlitz}} Why do you keep reverting others' edits? As I said in my edit summary, Grande and The Weeknd have 3 collaborations: ], ], and ]. What documentation are you referencing? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)</span> |
|
|
: The documentation is ]. How does it meet the requirements? How are they significant to The Weeknd's career? They were both established musicians at the point of the release of all three so from my vantage point, the career of neither was bolstered in any significant way as a result of these interactions. In fact, the remix is a financial transaction and the two did not work together to release the work. ] (]) 17:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: How come The Weeknd is an associated act in Grande's article, but Grande isn't an associated act in this article? -- <u>]</u><sup> (] | ])</sup> 18:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: Also, ] states that {{tq|Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together}} should be included. Grande fulfills this. -- <u>]</u><sup> (] | ])</sup> 18:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Appearing on another article is not a valid article. ] (]) 20:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: Grande meets the same criteria as Lil Uzi Vert, does she not? To my knowledge, Lil Uzi Vert and The Weeknd have 2 collaborations: UnFazed and Heartless (Remix). -- <u>]</u><sup> (] | ])</sup> 12:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::: It is similarly contested. Thank you for confirming that it too does not belong. ] (]) 16:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: It is strange wording to call the Save your tears remix a "financial transaction." The definition of a collaboration, which the remix is, is to work alongside someone to produce a solution. It is wrong on all fronts to say they didn't work together in any capacity to release the remix. --] (]) 17:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::: I agree that my wording was strange, but to your point, at no time was Grande in a studio with this artist. Most remixes are done by an artist after all of the first artist's work has been completed. That is the case here. ] (]) 22:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::: I understand that the remix may have been produced remotely in its entirety, but that doesn't take away from the fact that the two artists literally worked together to produce it. Just because they may have not been physically together during production doesn't negate the remix as a collaboration. --] (]) 01:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::: Prove that they actually worked together. They may not have even spoken or emailed each other. the way it usually works is that once primary artist's production team finishes with the tracks, they are handed off to A&R. They make the decision which tracks to promote as singles, and which tracks, if any, would be a good candidate for a remix. Occasionally the remixing team will contact the primary artist's production team about doing a remix of a track. Contracts are signed, etc., and the "stems" are passed to the remixing artist. AT no point would the primary artist and primary artist even meet. So, once again, you'll have to provide a reliable source that the Weeknd and Grande actually connected. |
|
|
::::::::: The other thing that you consistently forget is the second part of the criteria: how is this {{xt|significant to this artist's career}}? ] (]) 02:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::: First of all, I didn't "consistently forget" anything. I'd really like if you stop making these accusations when conversing here. It hinders positive cooperation. My input isn't about whether Ariana belongs in Abel's AA section. |
|
|
:::::::::: Secondly, the proof of them working together is that the Save your tears remix exists. I have provided to you the dictionary's definition of "collaboration," and nearly every single publication of the remix describes the song as exactly that, a collaboration between the two of them. Going by ''your'' logic (that they apparently didn't work together), the song isn't a collaboration - which challenges those publications. If you try to make the argument with anyone else that the Save your tears remix isn't a collaboration between Ariana Grande and The Weeknd I doubt anyone else will be convinced of that. I don't think there is a need to hypothesize which person from either artist's party contacted the other throughout the entire process, because that sort of trail can be chased for any time an artist has a feature on a track. |
|
|
::::::::::*https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/9559051/ariana-grande-the-weeknd-tease-possible-save-your-tears-remix/ |
|
|
::::::::::*https://www.vulture.com/article/every-ariana-grande-collaboration-ranked.html |
|
|
::::::::::*https://www.vulture.com/2021/04/ariana-grande-the-weeknd-save-your-tears-remix.html |
|
|
::::::::::*https://www.forbes.com/sites/hughmcintyre/2021/04/22/can-ariana-grande-and-the-weeknd-hit-no-1-together-with-their-new-single/?sh=1b81c5ab61fb |
|
|
::::::::::*https://news.yahoo.com/ariana-grande-weeknd-announce-save-091005814.html |
|
|
:::::::::: Providing the dictionary definition again here: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/collaborate --] (]) 13:44, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::: Sorry to imply you miss details. In short, the fact that a song exists is not proof that they two worked together. Grande (and most likely her production team) worked on tracks, they did not work together. ] (]) 20:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::: You aren't fooling me with your incessant haughty attitude. In conclusion, there are at least four sources stating that Abel and Ariana collaborated. Since we have defined "collaboration," this means there are at least four sources stating that Abel and Ariana '''worked together'''. You choosing to disregard that logic is your own prerogative but the fact of the matter is that these artists worked together to produce the Save your tears remix. --] (]) 20:33, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::: I was not trying to fool you, nor do I have a haughty attitude. In conclusion just because two names appear on a recording does not mean that they two worked together on it. I think I need to remind you of several duet albums that were released that included people who had died years earlier. You have show that they worked on the same song (hence collaborated) but not that actually worked together. yes, wikilawyering. And yes, it's not significant. ] (]) 20:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::::: "''I was not trying to fool you, nor do I have a haughty attitude.''" Then why did you feel the need to say I miss details, after I already said I am not here to debate whether Ariana belongs on Abel's AA section? It honestly feels really condescending. |
|
|
:::::::::::::: "''In conclusion just because two names appear on a recording does not mean that they two worked together on it.''" Nope. This is just wrong. I have done my research and shown you several sources that state they work together. It is you, and only you, saying that this can't be considered a collaboration unless they were in the studio together. In a world where a good portion of the workforce has become remote yet team meetings take place to get work done, I find this sentiment to be nonsensical to say the least. |
|
|
:::::::::::::: "''You have show that they worked on the same song (hence collaborated) but not that actually worked together.''" I've shown you twice now that the definition of collaboration is '''to work with someone'''. And like I said, I have done my research and proven that sources confirm the Save your tears remix as a collaboration. Some have even went on to say it is in fact the third collaboration between the two of them, so all you're doing here is challenging these sources. On the flip side, maybe you should try and show some sources that specifically state outright that they did ''not'' work together. |
|
|
:::::::::::::: "''yes, wikilawyering. And yes, it's not significant.''" Wrong again. If sources state that they collaborated then it is significant. As for this wikilawyering thing, you claim to not have a haughty attitude, yet hesitate to name call. Way to make this a friendly and cooperative place to edit. --] (]) 21:05, 5 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Ariana and The Weeknd have collabed more than Daft Punk and The Weeknd yet somehow Ariana doesn't meet the criteria. The lack of consistent standards here is hilarious. ] (]) 09:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: {{ping|Deluded communist}} {{ping|Osh33m}} I have no clue why ] is even attempting to argue against this one. The Save Your Tears Remix is literally a collaboration; no form of debate is neded. There are honestly no consistent standards here. Daft Punk and Belly have collaborated with The Weeknd on two songs, the same as Lil Uzi Vert and Nav (who is also signed to The Weeknd's label and are very closely connected), yet ] keeps removing my edits... ] (]) 11:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: I have no clue why you are focusing on "collaboration" when a) it's clear that they never actually stepped into the same room, but I'll give that to you. 2) You have yet to explain how is it significant to the Weeknd's career. ] (]) 16:07, 7 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: {{ping|Walter Görlitz}} Since when does "collaboration" mean the artists have to have stepped in the room together? That is just absurd. So many artists collaborate by sending work back and forth to each other. How do you think collaborations have occurred over the past year when artists have physically been unable to step into the room together due to coronavirus? Do none of these count as collaborations?? Furthermore, three collaborations is enough proof that they are significant to each other's careers. In fact, Ariana Grande is one of three artists (not including producers) that The Weeknd has collaborated with more than anyone else, the other two being Drake and Lana Del Rey; so their collaborations are undoubtedly significant to his career. The Weeknd has also collaborated with Ariana Grande more times than Belly and Daft Punk, who are present on The Weeknd's associated acts. Why are they more significant to The Weeknd's career than Ariana Grande? There is no sense behind your standards. ] (]) 14:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: Perhaps you need to read the documentation. {{xt|This field is for professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career.}} Later it reads {{xt|collaboration act playing together}}. So you are focusing on the collaboration, and I am trying to get you to look at "playing together". ] (]) 16:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::: You have just misquoted the source. You refer to {{xt|collaboration act playing together}} but miss out the preceding words which actually reads: {{xt|or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together}}. This is something completely different and isn't even in discussion. You have literally just taken words from the documentation to try and back yourself up even though it is referring to a completely different matter... In addition, this article further provides reasoning why Ariana Grande should be included. It reads: {{xt|This field is for professional relationships with other notable musicians or bands that are significant to this artist's career}}. One of the fields that satisfies this is {{xt|Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions}}. Ariana Grande has collaborated with The Weeknd on multiple occasions. Fact. For this reason she should be included, and there is no reason this should be debated. Nav and Lil Uzi Vert similarly satisfy this criteria. ] (]) 17:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: No, I quoted it directly. There are multiple points, but I'll take it to an RfC. ] (]) 18:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::: Yes you quoted it directly but you used the quote for something that it did not apply to. I don't understand why, despite the clear proof, you refuse to accept these artists' inclusions. ] (]) 19:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::: Because it's not correct to do so. Aside from claiming I'm lying, misrepresenting what the guideline states and do not understand what you're talking about, do you have any other insults you want to level at me? ] (]) 20:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::: It's hard to ] when it's clear to see that you took the quote out of context. The documentation specifically states, {{xt|Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, '''or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together'''}}, but you purposefully excluded context to push your narrative. The key word here is ''toured''. A {{xt|collaboration act playing together}}, i.e., in the studio, is different than a live performance. Furthermore, in the sentence I quoted above, it gives the example {{xt|Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions}}, which directly apply the artists in question! -- ]] 13:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::: It is your problem that you find it hard to assume good faith because the phrase was completly in context. The fact that you do not like that it is the culmination of the phrase and that you have been ignoring it is the point. ] (]) 16:45, 12 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::: ''I've'' been ignoring the point? Please read the rest of my response explaining my reasoning, instead of replying to the first sentence and moving on. -- ]] 19:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
*I've added her to the infobox. The consensus here is clear despite the ]. ] 19:38, 12 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: {{ping|Calidum}} Thank you. Glad this has finally been resolved. ] (]) 23:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Thank you {{ping|Calidum}}.--] (]) 19:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== ] has an ]== |
|
|
|
|
|
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">]</div>''']''' has an RFC for the use of radio station/networks' playlists being cited in articles. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the ''']'''.<!-- Template:Rfc notice--> Thank you. ] (]) 23:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Noted by whom? == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Noted for his versatility in vocal style, music production, and eccentric presentation,the Weeknd is often cited as an influence to contemporary music, as well as by other artists" If these "other artists" are being mentioned as doing this "as well", then who is doing the noting and citing in the first place? --] (]) 17:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
The Weeknd's music genres, according to AllMusic, are alternative R&B, contemporary R&B, and pop, so I think his genres in the infobox should be alternative R&B first, then pop, contemporary R&B, synth-pop, new wave, and dance. ] (]) 02:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
: What do the sources say? ] (]) 18:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:@] Just because one source says this does not mean we must cater to it. <span style="color:brown;">]</span> 00:39, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
== Protected edit request on 19 May 2021 == |
|
|
|
::I know, it's just that his music is mainly R&B besides pop, so therefore, he should be known as an alternative R&B and pop artist. ] (]) 00:56, 12 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Bias == |
|
{{edit fully-protected|The Weeknd|answered=yes}} |
|
|
I am requesting for the inclusion of ], ] and ] in The Weeknd's Associated Acts section. |
|
|
I have gained support from other users agreeing with these artists' inclusion as you can see ]. |
|
|
One criteria for artists' inclusion is: "Acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together". All three artists in question satisfy this.<br> |
|
|
:1. ''']''': multiple collaborations and tour.<br> |
|
|
::''Collaborations:''<br> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EivJ5hpQzms</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqCgH83_phI</ref><ref>https://www.fashionably-early.com/2016/01/26/rhythmicurban-radio-update-12616/</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://ew.com/music/2018/08/04/travis-scott-astroworld-best-features/</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yChnkXhauwM&ab_channel=TravisScottTravisScottOfficialArtistChannel</ref><ref>https://ew.com/music/2018/08/04/travis-scott-astroworld-best-features/</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfCuarZqJzM&ab_channel=TheWeekndTheWeekndOfficialArtistChannel</ref> |
|
|
::''Tour'': |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/the-juice/6671102/the-weeknd-the-madness-fall-tour-dates</ref><ref>https://www.thefader.com/2016/01/15/madness-tour-the-weeknd-travis-scott-visonelie-photos</ref> |
|
|
:2. ''']''': multiple collaborations and tour.<br> |
|
|
::''Collaborations:''<br> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFWYTGtRmEE&ab_channel=LILUZIVERT</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhr0zSJFS2c&ab_channel=TheWeeknd</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F6SWhiFl8c&ab_channel=TheWeekndVEVO</ref> |
|
|
::''Tour'': |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.power106.com/2017/03/07/lil-uzi-vert-performed-xo-tour-llif3-for-the-first-time-while-on-tour-with-the-weeknd-watch/</ref><ref>http://abcnewsradioonline.com/music-news/2016/11/11/lil-uzi-vert-set-to-go-on-starboy-tour-with-the-weeknd.html</ref><ref>https://pitchfork.com/news/69369-the-weeknd-announces-tour/</ref> |
|
|
:::*''It is also worth noting that the title of ]'s hugely successful song, ], is named after this tour. |
|
|
::''Music Video Appearances'': |
|
|
::* The Weeknd in ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrsFXgQk5UI&ab_channel=LILUZIVERT</ref><br> |
|
|
:3. ''']''': multiple collaborations, tours, label connection.<br> |
|
|
::''Collaborations:''<br> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRLyREkZles&ab_channel=NAVVEVO</ref> |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_v2r8rdGM8&ab_channel=NAVVEVO</ref> |
|
|
::''Collaborations for Albums (where The Weeknd acted as ]:'' |
|
|
::* ']' |
|
|
::* ']' |
|
|
::''Tour'': |
|
|
::* ']'<ref>https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/nav-meet-the-toronto-rapper-producer-opening-the-weeknds-starboy-tour-253363/</ref><ref>https://www.theweeknd.com/news/starboy-legend-fall-2017-world-tour-phase-two</ref> |
|
|
::''Label Association:'' |
|
|
::* Nav is signed to The Weeknd's record label, ]<ref>https://www.universalmusic.com/label/republic-records/</ref><ref>https://www.umusic.ca/2017/10/24/weeknd-xo/</ref><br> |
|
|
It is clear that these artists match the description, and thus belong in this section.<br> ] (]) 16:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::: I'm planning an RfC, but need time to correctly format it and this "evidence" is nice, but it is not going to create consensus, which is what is needed. ] (]) 16:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::: I'm unsure as to why you have felt the need to use speech marks; I have provided multiple sources containing factual evidence. I'm also unsure as to why you don't think consensus can't be formed, multiple users are already in favour of these artists' inclusion, more so than are not. ] (]) 17:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::: You also responded within 4 minutes of my post, not possibly enough time for you to have checked through the sources. ] (]) 17:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: I second {{ping|Benarnold98}}'s request. And I think it's telling once again how you put the word evidence in quotations as if you mean to dismiss everything that is up there. Pinging {{ping|TheWeekdayz}} {{ping|Dylx}} {{ping|Trillfendi}} and {{ping|Calidum}} for more input. --] (]) 17:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: {{ec}} Consensus is not a few fans who agree, as you can see from the edit history and the discussions above, there are other editors who are not convinced that all of the subject meet the criteria. The RfC will be open the whole community, not just fans. ] (]) 17:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::: No one said anything about being an involved as an editor here just because they're a fan. No one said that, except you. Also, the criteria is right there above the discussion. If other editors aren't convinced of the research provided, then they're just disregarding sources. --] (]) 18:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::: True. Sorry to assume you were a fan. ] (]) 01:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::: What you ''should'' be sincerely apologizing about is your unfriendliness and sarcasm. It never helps make this a cooperative environment and only makes editing more frustrating. --] (]) 02:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::: I have nothing like that to apologize for since I am not being unfriendly nor sarcastic. What actually helps is if you actually acknowledge the criteria for inclusion and focus on how the associations are actually significant to the artist's career rather than simply counting the interactions. ] (]) 02:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::: How can you say you are not being unfriendly or sarcastic? You just can't say this because you don't know how other people are perceiving your comments. ] and I are deeming your comments to be unfriendly and sarcastic, and you cannot deny how we feel. You have also exhibited sarcasm for us all to see many times, such as your unnecessary use of quotation marks earlier in this thread. There have also been many occasions where you have just completely copied statements I've made, such as ], but reversing it to me, which you even acknowledged yourself; this is just mocking. Examples like this make it hard to ]; and your editing feels ]. You have already been seen ] before on this article, in ] where you kept refusing to accept her presence in the infobox, despite a clear consensus; and you are doing the same thing once again. ] (]) 10:25, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::: Wow what a mess. Benarnold98 provided plenty of reasons why ], ], and ] with sources too. As he said, the Weeknd has collaborated with them many times. They meet the criteria for inclusion and many other editors agree that they should be included. Seriously, this is a waste of time. Benarnold98's evidence should be the end of the discussion. ] (]) 21:35, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::: Seriously. I expect more from you {{ping|Bowling is life}}. How are they significant to this artist's career? However, if you think that this is not a valid consideration (despite being the stated purpose of the field) I will drop my opposition and get the documentation fixed. ] (]) 22:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::::: {{ping|Benarnold98}} already explained to you ] how they are significant to Abel's career. I quote, '''"One example of a way in which a professional relationships are 'significant to this artist's career' is when acts have 'collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together'."''' It's almost as if you don't see what purpose ] serve. And if you still think I am the one who is wrong, just remember that this is the same logic the rest of the editors used to explain why Grande belongs on the list. --] (]) 01:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::::::::: That's opinion, not demonstrated with sources. One artist is significant to another's when they help an artist's career (as was explained above) and I showed you how that is not always a two-way street. Such as when Bing Crosby and David Bowie sing a duet. They are simply working together, and neither is bolstering the career of the other. Significance is demonstrated when the artist is influential in changing the other artist's style or technique, such as when T Bone Burnett produced two of Bruce Cockburn's albums in the early 90s and he returned from his rock period to a more traditional folk style (and influenced his lyrical content). I can give you more examples, but all you've done is counted how many times they've performed together and asked why I can't count how many times they've performed together. It's like I'm speaking a different language. And besides, I was asking Bowling is life, so please don't answer for the other editor. ] (]) 01:59, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::::::::: It is the same question you've asked both me and {{ping|Benarnold98}} in the past many times already, and I have every right to continue the discussion even if the others don't respond right away. Even if this is opinion, it is a guideline set forth by wikipedia. And I didn't say I was speaking for {{ping|Bowling is life}} anyway, but they already said {{ping|Benarnold98}} did the work of providing '''sources'''. --] (]) 03:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
{{outdent|::::::::::::::::}} Except that editor is likely to answer the question rather than just tell me to count the interactions. When someone asks a direct question of an editor, that editor should usually answer it though. ] (]) 05:24, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:You reply with this tone and then wonder why other editors find you as unfriendly and condescending. They're not just interactions, they're collaborations. And the fact that these artists have collaborated numerous times with Abel is the reason why the suggested associated acts are significant to his career. Again, same logic applied to Grande belonging. --] (]) 12:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
<!-- place new comments in this discussion above this line --> |
|
|
{{Reflist-talk}} |
|
|
:{{not done}} as the page is no longer protected and may be edited directly as appropriate. — ] <sup>]</sup> 13:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the very first part of the article is “Tesfaye is one of the most innovative and influential artists of his generation.” with no source to back it btw.... How? ] (]) 19:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
== Photo of Tesfaye == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:@] The entire article supports this claim. We do not use referencing in the lede. <span style="color:brown;">]</span> 19:35, 22 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
I am requesting we change the image of Abel Tesfaye on the Misplaced Pages article. The image is four years old, and a lot has changed in his appearance since then. I am thinking maybe a photo from a photoshoot for “After Hours”? ] (]) 22:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
: Copyright issues. If you can find any photos that meet Misplaced Pages's copyright requirements, they could be uploaded and used. ] (]) 23:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
::There is *no way* that a subjective sentence like that should be put on an encyclopedia. No fucking way ] (]) 19:38, 22 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
:: I've found one which I believe is copyright-free. ] (]) 05:23, 22 May 2021 (UTC) |
|
The Weeknd's music genres, according to AllMusic, are alternative R&B, contemporary R&B, and pop, so I think his genres in the infobox should be alternative R&B first, then pop, contemporary R&B, synth-pop, new wave, and dance. AndrewTheWikiEditor (talk) 02:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
the very first part of the article is “Tesfaye is one of the most innovative and influential artists of his generation.” with no source to back it btw.... How? JawzBlack (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
![[REDACTED]](https://u3vuiephb.global.ssl.fastly.net/File:Afrodias_logo.svg){kind=link}
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 22:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: