Talk:Cat Daddy

Deletion log history
The deletion logs include the following three entries:
 * 14:15, 10 June 2011 deleted page Cat Daddy (A1: Not enough context to identify article's subject)
 * 17:11, 10 June 2011 deleted page Cat Daddy (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement: A9: Non-notable music by artist with no Wikipedia article)
 * 18:15, 3 May 2012 deleted page Cat Daddy (A9: Music recording by redlinked artist and no indication of importance or significance)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedy deleted as being about a musical recording that does not indicate its own importance and where the artist's article does not exist, because... Please be patient with my editing. The song has regained prominence this month as a result of a YouTube scandal. --TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:21, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Original version
I see one YoutTube posting of the original with 66.5 million views posted on December 2, 2010 and another seemingly identical YouTube posting with 4.2 million page views posted on March 9, 2011. Are they identical?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:45, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

unsourceable content
The following article does not appear to be a WP:RS, but has a lot of interesting content that we should look for: http://freddyo.com/new-artist-rejectz-starring-chris-brown-cat-daddy-rej3ctz/uncategorized/ .--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination
I forgot to explain this on the review, so i'll write it here for any editor willing to improve the article.

As the article is written as a single release, it must be evaluated as a music related good article nominee, so, the following information is needed to meet such criteria:


 * On infobox
 * 1) Duration of the song — ✅ -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 2) Label/Imprint — ✅ -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) The lead says it was released in 2010, the infobox says 2011 (may be inconsistent)
 * 4) Cronology of the main performer (if possible)
 * 5) Formats of release — ✅ -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * 6) If the song has lyrics, the writer(s) (if possible)
 * 7) When was recorded


 * On article body
 * There are too much 'external videos' templates around the article. They should be moved all into the see also section, wich must be created.
 * There is no composition, recording, release history and chart performance.
 * Here is one big problem. As the article is treated as a single release, it must meet this guideline: "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable." If this guideline os not met, then it "should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song."
 * And there is another problem, the main performer, and who solely released the song, doesn't have an article.
 * The solution: Change the article style from a single/song article to a more general music article to avoid this guideline.


 * The song has a music video. Why isn't a 'music video' section on the article? It is enough information to write this section.

First, on the article, the "street dance" template appears. So, why don't just rewrite the article like, as an example, the Crip Walk or the Dougie? if the article is not written as a single/song article, then it doesn't have to met the song/single guidelines and all i wrote above can be easily avoided. Also, the prose comments i wrote on the review should be considered.
 * Other things to note

Second, it is highly recommended to add a music sample for to the article, wether it's written as a dance or as a single release. I recommend to change the style out from a song article. If the style is changed, it has higher probabilities to be promoted to GA status. I'd be glad if anyone finds this information useful.
 * -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 13:54, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Additional
To fit the release history, duration, label and formats, i've found this:
 * http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/cat-daddy-single/id446900501
 * http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/cat-daddy-single/id421220086
 * http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/cat-daddy-single/id421687871
 * http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/cat-daddy-single/id464903907
 * ✅ -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Also, the song was included on this compilation:
 * http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/hip-hop-mix-usa-mixed-by-dj/id502162413

Also, i know this website is no reliable on Wikipedia, but it gives charts:
 * http://acharts.us/song/63715
 * http://acharts.us/us_singles_top_100/2011/24
 * Which is an archive of this:http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/hot-100?chartDate=2011-06-18, but now i can't access position 97.

Wow, Billboard gave me the charts! Look:
 * http://www.billboard.com/#/song/dj-woogie/cat-daddy/28242429
 * 9 charts!
 * ✅ -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:24, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

You see? I was right in failing the article. There is so much information to be added on it before it passes GA. I hope this will be useful.
 * -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 14:08, 21 May 2012 (UTC)


 * I assume that there are probably different standards for mixtape releases that meet the WP:GNG. If all these charts exist, then it should not have been WP:CSDed. It was an assumption based on three successful CSD attempts and my lack of understanding on how to research Billboard charts that this content did not exist. If you want to contribute to the article please don't just stand there. If you are an expert on finding chart information, I could use help with with "We Belong Together (Randy Newman song)" and "Zou Bisou Bisou".--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I'd be glad to help. I'll take a look to find chart information for those songs. I know i made a mistake nominating the article for deletion before even searching for charts or releases. I'll be searching for charts for those songs. Saluts! -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 16:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Work
I've made a lot of edits to the article. Still, there's information needed before it's ready for GA. I'll be developing the Composition and background sections with the footnotes already on the article, and other refs i've checked on the web. -- Hahc21 [ <font color="RED">TALK ] [ <font color="GREEN">CONTRIBS  ] 01:26, 22 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The section on the Kate Upton video is poorly worded and contains unneccesary information. I fixed it once, but it was reverted and is oorly worded again.  The video being banned on the 1st or the 2nd and who reported it is completely irrelevant to the important part of the section.  State the facts and leave out the meaningless detail that provides no additional value to the reader.  Who cares if the actual date the video was taken off YouTube was the 1st or the 2nd or who reported that it was back up?  Until terrible writing like that is fixed this article is a far cry from GA.  Arzel (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The video being banned and becoming newsworthy is the only reason why this article exists. The article was deleted several times before. It took a controversy about its banning to get WP:RS to write about it. When it was banned is also relevant.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Whether it was banned on the 1st or the 2nd makes absolutely no difference in the least. It is repetative and takes away from the story.  If the world ended today would it matter if it ended at noon or 1pm?  Would it matter who reported it first?  Report the important facts. Arzel (talk) 17:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Who posted Upton's video?
I heard it was Terry Richardson that actually posted the video, not Upton, could someone resolve this? 71.139.163.158 (talk) 01:05, 11 April 2015 (UTC)