Talk:7 Rings/Archive 1

My Favourite Things
Why it is not mentioned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Маргарита Бабовникова (talk • contribs) 08:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The article has been updated. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:14, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Category:Number-one singles in Switzerland
Is there a reason you removed Category:Number-one singles in Switzerland? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 00:57, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Accident, sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sixinchboca (talk • contribs) 02:07, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for confirming. I've added the category back. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:48, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Taylaparxnew.jpg

Personnel / credits section
Reminder: This article needs a personnel / credits section. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:09, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I might as well do it. Trillfendi (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * , Please and thank you. :) --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 15:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Saw that there wasn't personnel on the page and decided to add it, with credits adapted from Tidal. Nice4What (talk) 14:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , Thank you! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 14:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Reference in "Thank U, Next" (song) music video
--- Another Believer ( Talk ) 21:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
 * https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/pop/8487662/ariana-grande-explains-7-rings-thank-u-next-music-video-legally-blonde

Criticism of 7 Rings
Hip Hop artist Princess Nokia claimed in an Instagram video that the chorus was borrowed from her 2016 hit Mine.

Soulja Boy also criticized Grande accusing her of stealing his song Pretty Boy Swag.

(Coderbih (talk) 03:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC))
 * Isn’t it funny how every time I put that information in the article “somebody” removed it? 🙂 Trillfendi (talk) 04:26, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Three sources (there's actually more) are more than enough to warrant at least a mention in the article. I agree that it should be considered as disruptive behaviour if anyone removes it without discussing it again.-- N Ø  05:10, 22 January 2019 (UTC)


 * These are unsubstantiated and unfounded claims that were deleted within hours. Unless legal action is taken, these aren't significant controversies and don't warrant inclusion in the article. Also, these claims don't even aledge anything that legal action could possibly be taken over. Fan4Life (talk) 17:47, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It doesn’t matter, Arianator. She probably deleted it after so called fans bullied her into doing it. The fact is that reliable sources picked the story up based on her initial post. “Flow” isn’t copyrighed but expression is. Nobody knows if legal action shall be taken but the controversy warrants inclusion in the article because this story happened as soon as the video was released and multiple artists have accused her of misappropriation in several different forms. Trillfendi (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Princess Nokia deleted the video and retracted her statement where she claimed Ariana borrowed her chorus after backlash and claims of Princess Nokia stealing from Kali Uchis' "Honey Baby".

Many people and artists claim that Ariana copied previous existent songs and copied them in her song "7 rings", Wayne Marshall, a writer from Vulture New York says otherwise: "While it’s possible that one or all of these songs could have been a model for “7 Rings,” taken together, the claims start to undermine each other, suggesting a broader stylistic trend is at play. If a copyright infringement case were to proceed from any of these allegations, an expert witness would likely argue that the rhythms in question are so generic as to be unprotectable." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danel216 (talk • contribs) 20:33, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

critical reception
criticism was more mixed than negative. someone add rolling stone's positive review to the article: https://twitter.com/rollingstone/status/1088835907636080640?s=21 Sixinchboca (talk) 12:46, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅-- N Ø  13:18, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

, Can you point me to a guideline which says that "takedown"s can't be included? No, there is none. Stop removing negative criticism from the article just because you don't like it. It is disruptive and you've been pointed to WP:NPOV which is the relevant guideline considering your actions here. I will suggest that you restore it yourself, unless you want another visit to the edit warring noticeboard. This is not a fan site and yes we do include negative commentary from reliable sources.-- N Ø  15:45, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Including ping for, since you reported this user for edit warring on this same page less than a week ago and it's happening again, once again to remove criticism and push a fancruft agenda. .-- N Ø  15:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I warned them it would happen again within days... but this time someone else should report. Trillfendi (talk) 16:04, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

The Atlantic article
The article from The Atlantic isn't a review and offers no critique or opinion on the song itself, it's completely malicious and a personal attack on Ariana, it shouldn't be included in the critical reception section. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral, including libelous articles and treating them as legitimate reviews isn't being neutral. Fan4Life (talk) 19:53, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Spencer Kornhaber is definitely a critic. Who btw, raved about "thank u, next" in his review of that . There's no reason to exclude his review of 7 rings just because it is negative. Its not a "takedown" nor a "personal attack", Kornhaber is a respected critic and Atlantic is a reliable source. We need to represent every reliably sourced opinion in the article, not just the fan favorite one.-- N Ø  20:13, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * But the article doesn't offer any opinion or critique on the song itself, it isn't a review, so including it in the critical reception section is incorrect. Fan4Life (talk) 18:25, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Grammy performance?
Should this article mention her scheduled, but canceled, performance at the Grammy Awards? Sources mentioning 7 Rings: --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * https://variety.com/2019/music/news/ariana-grande-first-ever-grammy-1203135070/
 * https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-47168089
 * No. It didn’t happen therefore it’s not relevant. Trillfendi (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I find the comments of this part biased, there should be further explanation of the events as well as evidence and sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danel216 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

US Spotify Chart
To the users who have added this chart before or anyone who is thinking about re-adding it, don't do so as it should not be added if the song charted on the Hot 100. --Kyle Peake (talk) 13:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Tag in "Commercial performance" section?
The current "Commercial performance" section seems generally appropriate, but there's a tag timestamped this month asking for further expansion. Is something specific missing, or should the tag be removed? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:22, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

On today's episode : Why rap is not a genre.
Let's start this by saying that no personal attacks are intentional in what I'm about to say, specially when the administrators are on my back lol.

First of all, I've seen that "rap" is a vocal delivery, see by yourself my dear Rapping even Wikipedia itself does not refer "rap" as a genre and what makes it worse is that you added Hip hop music as the back genre just like you did Right there Let me just tell you that this is truly inconsiderate knowing that Hip hop music can be actually SANG which is why we created Contemporary R&B or even the latter, Hip hop soul which both include hip hop in its production. Qualifying Rapping as a music genre would be just like saying that Singing is also a music genre when we both know that it's just a vocal delivery, music can be mumbled, sang, rapped and much more... You literally said that rap is directly "Hip hop" when Rapping can be used in pop music which we created Pop-rap which is an actual music genre. Your edits can be qualified as disruptive knowingly that what you're doing is misleading.

To sums it all, rap, is, not, a, music genre. Hip hop is and that's what you mentioned.

By the way this to answer your question about how is this offensive, let me ask you to educate yourself on Hip hop history and how people of African descent fought for it :)

BetterOfThatWay (talk) 20:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

BetterOfThatWay (talk) 19:59, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Rap is a music genre. The hip hop music article literally says that rap music is an alternate title for hip hop music. The reason I'm linking to hip hop music is because rap music redirects there anyway. Please, just stop being disruptive. The source specifically called it a rap song, not a hip hop song. Billiekhalidfan (talk) 21:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Fix it, Jesus*

Then why link it to " Hip hop music? Why not directly link it to rap music? It literally so misleading, everybody could've been confused. You literally mentioned " Hip hop music" instead of "Rap music" which is why I was merely confused. And I'm not being disruptive, I was simply focused. Understand this, thanks.

And see for yourself, Rap music immediately redirect to Hip hop music meaning rap music doesn't even exist as a single genre but more likely as an alternative name for hip hop. Time to find another source, beloved, a source that will confuse people a little bit less. If you don't get this then I don't know how to explain it while being neutral.

Misc. Suggestions
Hello! I am evaluating this article as part of a class assignment and I was asked to leave feedback on the Talk page. I am still new to editing so I don't have much to say, but I think some sentences in the lead could be edited to be more concise, or less repetitive. Some sentences will use the same words with different information, which sounds strange when read. See the second lead paragraph, where the term/phrase "to date" is used in two sentences in a row. Have fun editing! Scvaccarelli (talk) 19:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)