Talk:Kid Rock/Archive 2

Redirect changed
Noting this here as this is marked up as a controversial article. I've changed the redirect from Robert_J_Ritchie to point to a disambig page as we've at least two other articles on similar names. - TB (talk) 12:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Would it be possible to create a seperate page for RJ Richie as whilst the Kid Rock page is detailed. It provides little insight into the early life of Kid Rock, following only his music career. I feel it would be beneficial to have two seperate articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.142.190 (talk) 08:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Seperate Pages
(Fennydom (talk) 08:53, 11 June 2009 (UTC))

As incorrectly noted in the previous section. I feel a seperate page for RJ Richie would be ill-advised. Although the addition of an "Early Life" paragraph within the Kid Rock article would be beneficial. The only additional page worth making that spawns from the Kid Rock page, is in my opinion, one for the Twisted Brown Trucker band.

Personal life
I removed this for several reasons. It is unsourced, beautiful is a weasel word, and there is not other important information that would be great in such a subsection. This needs work for it to meet the requirements for inclusion in a BLP. For your convenience the information is below for reworking:

Kid Rock has been linked to many famous beautiful women, Sheryl Crow, Pink, Pamela Anderson. Kid Rock was engaged to "Baywatch Babe" Pamela Anderson for a few years before calling it quits, then a few years later they got back together and married and in 3 separate ceremonies to only divorce less than a year later. Kid Rock has a teenage son from his high school girlfriend.

Cptnono (talk) 08:56, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Nu metal
He wasn't really ever traditional metal, nu metal would be more appropiate because most of his '90s stuff was just that.Rockgenre (talk)Rockgenre 20:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Genres
I'm by no means an authority on this person's career or musical style, but this came up during an argument over at Talk:List of nu metal bands, where it was pointed out that a genre book discussing the term states that Kid Rock does not perform nu metal. One source saying that he did perform in this genre doesn't necessarily make it so, and a source discrediting it pretty much says it all. I've never heard Kid Rock described as "metal" in any fashion, "nu" or not, until Allmusic, which refers to rap-metal, not nu metal. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 20:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC))
 * It's sourced. And many other sources refer to him as nu metal. Page 325 in Sound of the beast: the complete headbanging history of heavy metal By Ian Christe and in Nu-metal: the next generation of rock & punk By Joel McIver. We also have a quote from Rolling Stone saying, "Kid Rock — revisit the bygone days of nu-metal" And allmusic has no entry for nu metal, so that's why it is not on his page. I'm not trying to be rude here and I apologize if I am, but your consistent removal of source information I find unbecoming. RG (talk) 23:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "Consistent removal of source information"? Give me a break. There's a difference between what one source says and what the majority of sources say. If the rule was to include every genre associated with any given band at any period from any person for any reason, Queen would have heavy metal included alongside rock in the Infobox. Queen is generally not considered to be a heavy metal band, so it's not there. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 21:01, 3 January 2010 (UTC))

Kid rock is generally considered nu metal, get over it. These sources back this up. RG (talk) 21:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That's your opinion. The sources clearly do not reflect this. Why do you care so much that the infobox for that page include a genre based on a single album that you can't even find sources for stating that that genre should be applied for, and that there sources discrediting the use of the term? (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 21:17, 3 January 2010 (UTC))
 * "That's your opinion" Wrong. Have you read any of these sources that I have clearly mentioned? He's nu metal, get over it. RG (talk) 21:21, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Stop responding to me as if I care what genre you personally categorize a musician that I don't care about. What I do care about is that you choose to respond to other people with this kind of attitude, "get over it", as if there's something to "get over". The issues at hand are what the sources state in regards to an entire musical career (not one album which you can't account for) and your attitude, which sucks. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC))
 * By the way, while looking through the history, I've found that another editor pointed out that the source you've repeatedly tried to add doesn't even say what you claim it backs up. And it's specifically a book about the band Slipknot, not a biography of Kid Rock, a discussion of rock music or a discussion of "nu metal". (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2010 (UTC))
 * I apologized earlier if I come off a little rude on this topic, again I'm sorry. But might I remind you that the first comment I read from you was, "Nu metal is a useless catchphrase invented by MTV" when I was simply asking for on whether or not nu metal should be mentioned in the RATM article. Now I just "suck" apparently. "I don't care about" Then why change it so much? "you've repeatedly tried to add doesn't even say what you claim it backs up" Incorrect again. This source used on Kid Rock's page specifically mentions him, Limp Bizkit, and Korn for laying the foundations for nu metal. Also, the Slipknot bio has written by Joel McIver, who also wrote Nu-metal: the next generation of rock & punk so this is a guy who should know his history. Since this debate will continue I hope that the both of us can keep it civil. RG (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I didn't say that you sucked, but your attitude - you admitted that you were being rude in your previous responses. Also, "laying the foundations" for a genre doesn't necessitate being a part of the genre. I don't even think the lead is accurate in describing Kid Rock's music as having heavy metal aspects. Rap rock, definitely, and possibly rap metal, but definitely not heavy metal. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 22:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC))


 * Also, the brevity of sources related to each album or single needs to state that that album or that song is of a certain genre. You can't just add genres to any album or single based on your opinion. In regards to this article, doesn't "rock" cover everything, since he certainly hasn't performed any rap metal or "nu metal" for years? (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 01:28, 8 January 2010 (UTC))
 * Excuse me, but no consensus was made about the genres. They're are currently only two people debating this. "I don't even think the lead is accurate in describing Kid Rock's music as having heavy metal aspects." POV, sources say otherwise, which I have already mentioned four citing him as a nu metal artist. "You can't just add genres to any album or single based on your opinion." I have done no such thing, sources have cited him with this term several times. I've noticed that you did this same thing on the list of nu metal bands talk page. Whenever Blackmetalbaz took out a reliable source with a quote you said something like, "That's your opinion and that book isn't about nu metal." You and I may have gotten off on the wrong foot at first, but I don't see any reason why you and I shouldn't be able to get along. I still don't understand your hatred of the simple term "nu metal". Anyway have a good night. RG (talk) 01:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for yet again ignoring the points I made, but, including myself, there are at least two people who have disagreed with this categorization, including Albert Mond (Talk:Heavy metal music). Blackmetalbaz was the first to point out that there are sources stating that Kid Rock is not nu metal. My issue here is trying to make source that music articles are accurate and properly sourced. Since this article's subject came up in other discussions, I am discussing. As stated repeatedly, I haven't removed this term from where there is a consensus for this term. Repeatedly adding the same source and making the same argument shows a clear POV on your part in light of the evidence, and the fact that there is no need to cite multiple types of rock music when simply "rock" covers anything else you can think of. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC))
 * "Thank you for yet again ignoring the points I made" You have made nothing and are being very rude. At least I apologize for heaven's sake. There is no concensus on this talk page. Albert and Blackmetalbaz have both not commented on this talk page and also Albert's comment did not say Kid rock wasn't nu metal just that he was more rap metal. "shows a clear POV on your part" Hilarious. You see this term "nu metal" as a death term and have consistently put it down. Besides what book states Kid isn't nu metal, pull out an exact quote. RG (talk) 00:28, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Clearly, you are being very rude by repeatedly adding poorly substantiated information to every article you have ever been involved with. Read the discussion at Talk:List of nu metal bands. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC))
 * And if you are going to use the opinions of editors who have not commented on this page, well than one User:Xx1994xx specifically added nu metal back on "Bawitdaba"'s page meaning he must be in favor of the term for Kid. Bringing our tally of editors who have not commented one on this too 1-1-1. In other words, our score is even. RG (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not sourced. There needs to be a consensus of sources specifically stating that each song belongs to a certain genre. Not doing so is like categorizing Body Count as hip hop because Ice-T is a member. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC))
 * "My issue here is trying to make source that music articles are accurate and properly sourced." This explains why you would do this right? Which reminds me if we were to use otherside opinion then SOAD would have nu metal in their box. Me, User:Blackmetalbaz, User:WesleyDodds, and User:Erlandinho have all been in favor of that term to describe that group. RG (talk) 01:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The cited quotes do not back up what they claim they cite. You have been warned repeatedly about what is clearly enforcing your own perspective upon your articles. Denying this makes you come across as foolish. My reasons for editing are valid. The only reason you have been repeatedly changed everything I edit is because of a childish predisposition against me. You are clearly in the wrong here, and have no idea what you're talking about. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC))

Genres, again
Again, some editors do not seem to comprehend the myriad of concepts that led to the genres listed in the infobox. One is consensus, which disagrees with the addition of monotonous genre additions. The second is that having one album or a few singles in a certain genre does not mean that we must define any act by that genre. The third is POV. We came to these genres not because of the opinions of any editor who worked on this article, but because this is what the sources reflect. Changing the article to reflect your own opinion goes against policy. (Sugar Bear (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC))
 * One there is no consensus and even the people who you claim coined the useless catchphrase cite him as nu metal. RG (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Two, there clearly is a consensus. Three, read the above notes on generalizing. How is it a problem to simply list "rock"? Articles for similar artists do the same thing. Add to the fact that you feel that only one of his albums is in this genre, and that there are no sources labeling the albums you feel are nu metal as that genre. Your POV-pushing attempts are astounding. It's not about including every genre under the sun attributed to any given artist. It's about using the terms that describe that artist best per the overwhelming consensus of sources. And there are sources stating that this artist does not perform in this genre. (Sugar Bear (talk) 19:01, 26 January 2010 (UTC))
 * You're still doing the same thing - ignoring the sources and the points I made and continuing to edit based on your own opinion - and possibly a POV source, as you seem to believe that I am basing my edits upon...which doesn't make sense. Is a "POV source", in your viewpoint, any source that doesn't agree with your opinion that we should include every genre under the sun because one source says it's so? Next you'll be telling me that we should label King Crimson as a jazz band. (Sugar Bear (talk) 22:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC))


 * RG, the issue has been repeatedly discussed, and there is a consensus. Please review the sources, the opinions on the matter from other users, and discuss any changes before making them. (Sugar Bear (talk) 23:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC))
 * Consensus? You count as multiple people now Ibaranoff? RG (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow. And you accuse me of being rude. Isn't that extremely rude to say "You don't agree with my opinion, therefore you're the only person who feels the way you do"? Think about that next time you file a complaint against someone for telling you not to enforce your own POV. (Sugar Bear (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2010 (UTC))
 * "Personally, I don't like seeing crowded info boxes and don't see a need to list every genre with which a particular artist has been associated."
 * "Kid Rock and RATM are really more rap metal, and in their cases I think editor's opinion weighs pretty strongly."
 * Clearly, two editors think that generality is better. And the guidelines back me up here. (Sugar Bear (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2010 (UTC))
 * Rude? You are rude, you claim there is consensus when only two users have contributed to an agrument then claim their is a consensus. And I noticed you didn't finish the rest of the first IP's quote, "I don't think this preference matters when another Wikipedian wants it there and has produced good sources supporting it's inclusion", now by your logic there is a clear consensus in favor of nu metal. RG (talk) 20:01, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Three. Three users. I am a user. Three users against one. Consensus. (Sugar Bear (talk) 20:34, 4 February 2010 (UTC))
 * No, as I previously stated the IP address said, "I don't think this preference matters" and also Albert never said he wasn't nu metal. Hence no consensus. RG (talk) 03:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * No one is saying that Kid Rock is or isn't a certain genre. You are imagining things. The genres listed are clearly because of the sources and style guidelines. Having "rock" instead of "Specific Genre #1 & 2" does not mean that Kid Rock doesn't perform "Specific Genre #1 & 2". You have to bring it to where the Infobox covers his entire career and musical library, not one album. Your repeated reverts against consensus on this and other articles are really absurd and unbelievable. (Sugar Bear (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC))

Okay, enough. Stop the edit warring. I've reverted Rockgenre's latest "undo" because this was the genre version that seems to have been around quite awhile before the edit war started. This doesn't mean that I'm preferring one version over the other, but it was the most stable for awhile. Until you guys reach a consensus on the talk page, it will stay that way. So, let's make this clear: if either one of you (Snow Bear or Rockgenre) changes it again without consensus, you'll be blocked. This lame edit war is ridiculous. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 05:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "No one is saying that Kid Rock is or isn't a certain genre" I'm sure that's why you said you don't see anything metal about Kid Rock earlier, right? The sources point to him being nu metal as well as rap metal, you have no argument on why the term should not be in the article and in the box. In fact a majority in otherside articles have been in favor of the term with him. BlackmetalBaz, User:Xx1994xx, and with the addition of that IP address that puts four people in favor of the label. RG (talk) 03:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't want to have to deal with you every time I log in on here. Look at the guidelines at Template:Infobox_musical_artist. The sources point to him performing other genres of rock music, not just metal-based genres, and the guidelines clearly state "Aim for generality". There is no consensus in favor of your POV and failure to read and understand our rules and guidelines. You have no right to repeatedly claim consensus where none exists. The consensus is against you, dearheart. You've even been warned, above, against edit warring and reverting against consensus. Do you not get it? You need to understand and abide by Wikipedia's rules, or don't edit. It's as simple as that. Either look at the guidelines, read them, understand them, and abide by them, or go away. (Sugar Bear (talk) 17:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC))