Talk:Tiga (musician)

DJ-Kicks album
Please don't remove the DJ-Kicks album from the Album listing. DJ-Kicks is a series, but regardless, Tiga mixed the album and is technically the album author. It makes absolutely no sense to have an album credited to Tiga in a separate article, yet no link on this page to that album. --Damae 20:52, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it should be on the page, but in a different section. Sexor should be the only entry under Albums. Maybe we could have a section called "Mix Compilations", where you could put the DJ-Kicks mix and his InTheMix.05 CD. PlazzTT 22:36, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good, I'll do that now. --Damae 21:26, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Bloated and unsourced article
Restored verifiability tag: once this article is sourced, then it can be removed, "disruptive" or not. Removed possible future event. Removed extraneous "discography": Wikipedia is not a directory. Removed external links to retail sites, i.e., sites which sell things; listing them here only serves to promote their business, nothing else. 72.76.81.253 13:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Well you've removed his allmusic biography again, what's that selling? It's an article about someone who makes some of their living selling music; just because a site is selling something doesn't mean it's not relevant.  How does the discography make Wikipedia a "directory" and what does that even mean?  It's information that some people care about and those who don't can easily ignore it.  And what does the top tag say that the bottom tag doesn't in fewer words?  You aren't going to  get people to source the article by yelling at them.--P4k 20:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking at this more closely, I guess you decided his singles and albums didn't make Wikipedia a directory, but his remixes did? What the hell?--P4k 20:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Please read the verifiability tag and the references tag to see what is contained in the former that is not contained in the latter. Please see WP:NOT for what is meant by "Wikipedia is not a directory."  The allmusic site makes available the purchase of his music, as such it is a retail site, and Wikipedia is not a conduit to retail sales.  And what does the bio there say that the bio's in the other links don't in fewer words? Albums, compilations, singles -- all contain some of his own synthesis, but remixes? He takes others' work and transforms it into an electronic equivalent of pre-90's Muzak.  Whoop-dee-do.  What's next, quoting him every time he mentions an artist's name, in the expectation that he will remix their work? The article has been unsourced since its inception last year.  Look, go ahead and restore whatever content you want, add whatever content you want, sourced or unsourced, it will not be challenged.  Make this article into one huge advert and retail link for this artist.  Then it will qualify for deletion. Do keep in mind that "Wikipedia's articles are not a resource for conducting business."  72.68.30.28 23:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Why exactly does the article say that Tiga produces his own material when he doesn't receive writing or production credits on any of the tracks on his two albums? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.252.76.68 (talk) 04:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, that link doesn't seem to mean the same thing by "directory" that you do. Remixes involve original work.  Allmusic links to commercial sites, but isn't a commercial site itself.  I haven't compared their bio's its content to that of the other bios but it's more valuable since it's an independent source.  Since you say I "won't be challenged" I'm going to revert your edits.--P4k 23:25, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Except you should leave out "and is due to remix the next single from Pet Shop Boys who he supported on tour in 2002." That's a possible future event and should not be included in the article.  A directory in this instance refers to a listing of everything this artist has ever done. His remixes are not as significant as his other work.  Believe what you want, but a remix is a rehash of somebody else's work, with feathered edges -- there's nothing original about it.  Remixes are not noteworthy, even for this artist.  Like I said, they're old Muzak in a new form.  72.68.30.28 23:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If you want to remove the bit about the Pet Shop Boys I won't stop you. I understand (now) that that's what you mean by "directory" but it doesn't seem to correspond to any of the uses of that term in the policy page you linked to.  If you really want to talk about remixes then I guess we can do that, although I'd much rather avoid it.  The fact that Tiga's remix of "Washing Up" was so much more popular than the original is one example of how they can be noteworthy.--P4k 23:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You make my point: if "Washing Up" is noteworthy as you say then it's worthy of inclusion, the others not so. Including everything he's done in remixes falls under item 3 in the policy re directories: include the major or significant stuff, but not everything.  Removing Pet Shop Boys.  Be well.  72.68.30.28 00:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Tiga (musician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130204200132/http://mynameistiga.com:80/mnit-about/ to http://mynameistiga.com/mnit-about/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 21:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)