Talk:To Pimp a Butterfly

WHY IS METACRITIC CONTINUOUSLY BEING REMOVED?????!!!!!
WHOEVER KEEPS TAKING METACRITIC OFF EITHER 1. PUT IT BACK 2. STOP THAT BS 3. EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF THAT BS

Album cover artwork
Hi all. Is there a reason the cover artwork isn't mentioned in the article or has no one had the chance to do it yet? I think it deserves a mention given its confrontational imagery. Thoughts?  Rob van  vee  08:57, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Anthony Fantano
The sources you added are not reviews at all, just mentions. It's against Wikipedia's guidelines to include his reviews unless there's a case where his reviews is specifically published by a third party, not summarized or mentioned. Also please direct your efforts at discussing your changes at the article's talk page rather than reinstating them (WP:BRD). TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 09:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Could you please point me to the specific Wikipedia guideline that you’re referring to? I wasn’t aware of any guideline that would prohibit adding that sentence, and I assumed that it would be uncontroversial to add since it was notable enough to be discussed in several reliable sources. —Drevolt (talk) 19:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem with the sources that they are not reviews, just because the sources briefly mentioned his review on the album doesn't mean it should be there. The guideline for the critical reception section in music-related articles can be find here, and the discussions on Anthony Fantano can be find at WP:ALBUMAVOID. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * But the score given was deemed notable enough to be reported in several reliable, independent sources, and what's being reported is a well-sourced statement of fact (namely, that the album is among the few to have been given a perfect score by a well-known reviewer). The linked guidelines only prohibit using his self-published reviews as sources. But the self-published review itself is not being used as a source here; the reporting on his work in reliable, independent sources is. Surely we're not questioning whether or not the New York Times qualifies as a reliable source in this context. --Drevolt (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You seem to don't get it. I'm not saying that the sources is not reliable, my issue with the sources that they only briefly mentioned his highest scoring albums and the sources mostly focus on his reception as a critic, not the albums themselves. If they were his actual reviews of the album published by a third party source such as Robert Christgau's review on the album, they wouldn't be removed. Pinging other editors , , , and , they probably explain it better then me. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * It is still his self-published work, I believe the difference here is if Fantano wrote for the NYT a review of the album that would be acceptable or if his review was quoted by someone that work there and said that he agrees with the score or something in that vein. Now, a mention such as "btw fantano gave it a perfect score"...this is nothing. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see any problem with citing The New York Times to say that the album got a perfect score from Fantano. The source is one of the most reliable in the world, used as a yardstick of reliability. It doesn't matter how we rate Fantano by himself. It would be the same if NYT said the Daily Mail – a very much deprecated source – gave the album a particular review. Our source is NYT, not those others. If NYT saw fit to print it, then it's significant enough. Binksternet (talk) 03:31, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Very well said, I agree completely. —Drevolt (talk) 03:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't agree with that at all, I have no problem with The New York Times but the source says: The only five albums to earn a perfect 10 from him are by Kendrick Lamar, the noise-rap trio Death Grips, the Kids See Ghosts duo of Kanye West and Kid Cudi, the aggressive rock band Swans, and Daughters, which he praised for its "nuclear bomb of cathartic hideousness" and "vile displays of auditory abuse." That paragraph mentioned the artist's names but not the albums themselves, it have to be explicitly stated. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:07, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Even if it was ambiguous which Kendrick Lamar album was being referred to in the New York Times article, To Pimp a Butterfly is explicitly mentioned by name in the SPIN article (which was also cited as a source for the sentence you removed). —Drevolt (talk) 04:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it would be better just only add the Spin source in the article instead the TNYT source. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I restored the New York Times source since the SPIN article doesn’t have an updated count for the number of albums to have ever received a perfect score. I think it’s also good practice to have multiple sources in cases where there were questions about whether it was adequately supported by reliable sources. We can discuss this further if you feel that the NYT article shouldn’t be there, but I think there are sufficient grounds for including it. Regardless, thank you for being reasonable about this. —-Drevolt (talk) 05:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I leave the sources as it is and restore the content back at Kids See Ghosts, if anyone else have issues with this, they can discuss it in the talk pages. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 05:55, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for mentioning me, I believe that the Fantano review is not notable because even though the source used to cite it is reliable, there is only a passing mention given. If a source like The New York Times re-published his review in full then yes, I believe that would prove notabilty. --K. Peake 10:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That's what I been trying to say. I'm not good at explaining things, that's why I ping other editors in this discussion in the first place. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This was never a discussion about whether or not TND meets notability conditions, because it’s already been established that he does. The only reason why TND reviews are often excluded is that they are typically self-published, which means it’s an issue about reliability, not notability. As Binksternet rightly pointed out above, this issue does not arise when extremely reliable sources like the New York Times are reporting these facts. —Drevolt (talk) 18:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I agreed with Kyle Peake on this issue. I get that Spin and The New York Times are reliable sources but the Fanfano review is not a full album review. If I review this article now, it wouldn't make it to good article status. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The score isn't in the review infobox, it's just in the body of the section. So this is a non-issue for the current version of the article. --Drevolt (talk) 20:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Anthony Fantano RfC
Should this source be in the article? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:06, 30 October 2020 (UTC)


 * No – The Anthony Fantano review by The New York Times barely mentioned the album at all, I see no reason that source should be in the article. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:33, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Limited use - the consensus is that it’s Fantano is usable when it’s done through a reliable source. So, in this case, anything the RS published is fair game. That said, the RS’s don’t really say much beyond the fact that he gave a perfect review. I can see the argument that it’s kind of pointless, especially in such a mainstream subject with so much reliable coverage in existence. But it’s use wouldn’t technically go against the music WikiProject consensus if used in this limited capacity. Sergecross73   msg me  20:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Did you even read TNYT source? It didn't even say the names of the albums that Fantano give high scores on, just the artists. That source shouldn't be in the article at all. I would just prefer the Spin source instead. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 10:33, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I never articulated anything specifically about the NYT source. Did you even read your original RFC question? A reminder that this was the RFC question at the time that I answered. (And this being the question at the WikiProject that brought me here.) The question was much different then.You asked about two sources at the time, and I gave a general response about the concept in general. So to recap, you changed your RFC question after I responded, and then scolded me for the answer I gave to it. This RFC is a real mess, as is your approach to all this. Get someone to do you an RFC for you next time, you clearly can’t handle it on your own. Sergecross73   msg me  14:00, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You are right. I admit that I kinda rushed on this RfC. Sorry for attacking you. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 18:19, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Procedural comment, please reword your opening statement to be more neutral. Save the arguments for your bulleted comment. signed,Rosguill talk 21:46, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have change the wording, sorry if my statement is confusing to you. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem Rosguill is raising is not that your statement is "confusing". It's that you're required to formulate an RfC in a neutral fashion that doesn't put your opinion on display or presume it to be the correct opinion. As it's currently formulated, your opening to the RfC is inappropriate and needs to be changed immediately. Please take a look at WP:RFCNEUTRAL for further guidance. --Drevolt (talk) 23:07, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Your edited statement is still not neutral. Please read WP:RFCNEUTRAL again and reformulate it in a way that introduces the topic at issue clearly and concisely without stating your opinion. --Drevolt (talk) 23:29, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , a neutrally worded version could be Should the sources [3] [4] be in the article? signed,Rosguill talk 02:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Done, thanks for the help. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 03:30, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Limited use - There have been countless previous discussions about this, all of which decided that Anthony Fantano can and should be used when covered in reliable sources. I don't think that there even needs to be an RfC on this topic, since it's been discussed at great length many times in the past and the consensus has remained fairly consistent over time (and the score in question isn't even featured in the review score infobox, it's just mentioned in the body of the article). But if you still want to proceed despite the overwhelming past consensus, that's fine with me. --Drevolt (talk) 23:14, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No - The NYT sources doesn't even mention which album and as of September 2020 Lamar issued four studio albums, so I have no idea which one the author is talking about "The only five albums to earn a perfect 10 from him are by Kendrick Lamar,the noise-rap trio Death Grips..." He just lists the bands, duos and artists. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 15:42, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Please read the other source. The NYT article is being used to support the claim that only five albums have received a perfect score, not that To Pimp a Butterfly was one of them. --Drevolt (talk) 17:51, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it looks like TheAmazingPeanuts removed one of the sources from the RfC question without announcing it, the question that you answered is now a completely different one from the question that other users were answering. I'm taking this up with TheAmazingPeanuts directly now, this RfC is a mess and should be voluntarily withdrawn. --Drevolt (talk) 18:05, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * No – it does not give the full review, this is a trivial reference for sure --K. Peake 08:35, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Procedural comment - You have now changed the RfC question again to a different question while the RfC was already in progress, which is explicitly against the RfC guidelines. Some people were replying to a question about two different sources, some people were replying to a question about just a single source. This is not how RfCs are run. Given that this has turned into total chaos now and that no authoritative consensus is going to come from an RfC that violates Wikipedia guidelines, I'd like to ask you to withdraw this. --Drevolt (talk) 18:02, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You haven't replied to my previous comment, but I see you're now also making user talk page posts that violate WP:VOTESTACK. This is in addition to changing the content of the RfC question midway through the RfC, AND in addition to your original non-neutral RfC statement. As Sergecross73 said: "This RFC is a real mess, as is your approach to all this. Get someone to do you an RFC for you next time, you clearly can’t handle it on your own." This whole process has been completely mishandled and has violated several very basic rules which govern RfCs. I think the time has come for you to withdraw this. --Drevolt (talk) 23:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed that this RFC is unlikely to head to a constructive conclusion. I'm happy to formulate a better RFC if people will accept my help. For the record, I have no real interest or history in writing Kendrick Lamar related articles. I was only answering this as a significant contributor to the WP:RSMUSIC source list. But it’s easy enough to write neutrally about something like that. Sergecross73   msg me  03:14, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late reply. Yeah I think it would be better to just close this RfC or start another one later on. If you could do a better RfC, I be happy to accept your help. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 04:46, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Since TheAmazingPeanuts is no longer disputing the inclusion of the SPIN source or the sentence on Anthony Fantano, I'm not entirely sure that a replacement RfC is necessary at this point. As far as I can tell, the issue is now just whether the New York Times article should be included in addition to the SPIN article. Whether this particular claim needs two sources or just one source is a pretty minor issue, and one that hasn't been discussed at length yet; so my first instinct is to say that this is something to be hashed out in talk page discussion. A second RfC would be the right way to go if talk page discussion doesn't lead to a consensus though. --Drevolt (talk) 04:55, 3 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Can you close this RfC? TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 21:46, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey, I thought it was worth pointing out that per WP:RFCCLOSE, you can just end the RfC yourself by deleting the template at the top of this section. It doesn't need a formal close since no consensus has been reached. That's why I removed the template before, because you had said that you wanted to close this and we all seemed to be in agreement about it. From WP:RFCCLOSE: "The question may be withdrawn by the poster", or "The RfC participants can agree to end it at any time, and one of them can remove the rfc template". --Drevolt (talk) 00:41, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

NYT source inclusion
To pick up the discussion from before: It seems to me that the NYT source is worth including because there isn't an up-to-date count of the albums that have been given perfect scores by Anthony Fantano in the SPIN article, whereas there is in the NYT article. Since this is relevant information, and since I think the article would be worse off if it simply said that To Pimp a Butterfly was one of "a few" albums to get a perfect score, I don't see a good rationale for removing it. I'm happy to keep discussing this if others see it differently though. --Drevolt (talk) 21:19, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You appears to don't understand how album-related articles works (WP:ALBUMSTYLE). Kyle Peake and MarioSoulTruthFan has already discuss twice that The New York Times barely mentioned the album at all, and should not be in the article. I don't know why you so obsessed with that source. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 22:11, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I just explained to you why I think that source is worth including. It includes information that's not in the SPIN source and is relevant to the positive critical reception of TPAB. I'm not "obsessed" with that source, whatever that means. Are you going to actually respond to what I said before, or are you just here to argue? --Drevolt (talk) 22:23, 4 November 2020 (UTC)