Talk:Canceled (song)

Hip hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Added back information[edit]

Doggy54321 You removed WAY too much, and some of the justifications for this information being removed sound a bit petty. You removed every single source except for Billboard and YouTube, which signals that you may have only removed those sources because you are unfamiliar with them. There are plenty of other pages I've seen that use similar sources, such as Seventeen, which I would not name in fear of you going on a vandalism frenzy. Second, the notability of Wikipedia pages rely on how much media coverage there is on the topic, and the “trueness” (for lack of better words) of claims made on pages relies on where the claim is coming from and whether the source itself is reliable, and these two requirements are sensible on their own, but when you are taking into consideration the amount of coverage a topic gets, it shouldn’t matter how reliable the sources are as long as they aren’t ‘opinion articles,' and I’m not the only one who agrees with this. Third off, something doesn’t need a source if it makes sense, such as the genre of the song. It doesn’t take a genius to know it’s a rap song, and on most song pages, there is no citation for song genres, (Despacito, Old Town Road, Uptown Funk are some examples I thought of. Some may argue about the genres of two, if not all of these songs, yet there are no citations to be found...) as there shouldn’t be. It also doesn’t make sense that you’re saying TikTok is unreliable, because the sentence this citation is backing is a statement coming from the subject himself, it essentially doesn’t matter where the website is coming from if it hosts a video clip of the exact subject verifying the information. Fourth, I removed the link to Larray’s discography, but every song page needs a chronology unless it is not a single. Last off, the rejection of sentences based on WP:SYNTH requires re-wording, not deletion of the information entirely, as showed in the examples on the actual page. In general, there might have been some unnecessary data there, which is why in my first edit summary for this page, I said “feel free to expand it,” but removing this much data, especially if nearly everything was backed right from the horse’s mouth, (i.e. Controversy/Music video) almost accounts as some sort of vandalism, and song pages are generally required to have this sort of information if it is relevant, which it is. I hope you understand. TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 06:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trevortnidesserped: First off, you didn’t need to restore the information that I intentionally reverted for a reason. I’m not unfamiliar with sources such as TikTok and Seventeen. I have seen them be intentionally removed from articles citing that they are unreliable, so it’s a chain reaction. I’m not a vandal, that’s a bold claim for you to assume. Please read WP:VAND, I don’t match the criteria there whatsoever. The notability of songs on Wikipedia is a little different than the general notability guideline. This song has charted (which is a criterion on the song notability guideline), which is probably the sole reason I didn’t end up blanking the page. There’s a reason why none of Larray's other songs have articles. You are wrong when you say that genres don’t need a source, because it’s WP:SYNTH otherwise. Per Template:Infobox song#genre, the field should include the music genre(s) that best describes the song. It should come from a reliable source and also be stated and referenced in the body of the article; personal opinions or original research must be not be included. Therefore, the genre does need a reliable source. The examples you listed have the genres stated and referenced in the body of the article, this article does not. I’m not even going to acknowledge that you just called me a vandal to my face. Most section/article blanking is done in good faith. The common practice is to warn the user, have a conversation, restore the blanked content, and if the user blanks it again, they are most likely doing it in bad faith. That’s not what is happening here, I was blanking for the good of the article, while providing edit summaries. So it wasn’t the best practice to restore the removed content. I will go through the sections and detail every single thing wrong with them so you can get a better understanding, if you want, because there aren’t enough reliable sources to back all that information up. D🎉ggy54321 ^{(happy new year!)} 15:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Doggy54321: I did go off on an unnecessary tangent. First, I apologize for calling you a vandal. It was intended as exaggeration, but at that time I didn't realize I was essentially bullying you, which is not something I do in real life. I try my best with whatever I put effort into and I'm always learning with Wikipedia, so when something like this happens I'm usually heartfelt about feedback I get about a message or an edit, as I'm sure many devoted Wikipedians are. (even if all of them have more experience than me, but that's besides the point) And second, I now acknowledge that you were doing it in good faith and I'm glad you were trying to help, even if I was upset, but I still think some important factors of this article should still be here if the song "applies to it," for lack of better words. (like the Controversy section, for a song that has been involved in controversy, for example) Thanks for understanding. TrevortniDesserpedx (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trevortnidesserped: thank you for replying. I accept your apology. It’s fine to use exaggeration, but the tone you want your words to be read in doesn’t always transfer to the person reading it. You weren’t bullying, I just thought it was a mistake, and you didn’t know what a vandal was. I think we were both heated coming into this, but I’m glad we both cooled down. If it’s fine with you, I’m going to go through the article again, remove important information that doesn’t have a source (like the genre, for example). I’ll also tag statements with {{citation needed}} and {{better source needed}} when needed. I’ll also be removing 100% unreliable sources like Seventeen, as the source is unreliable. I won’t delete as much content now. Thanks! D🎉ggy54321 ^{(happy new year!)} 21:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the only requirement for a song to be considered notable is that it has "been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label." A song can chart and not have an article if that requirement has not been met. A song that never charted could have an article if the requirement is met. Charting in and of itself does not make a song notable outright. Thanks. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 20:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: thank you so much. D🎉ggy54321 ^{(happy new year!)} 21:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Title Spelt Wrong[edit]

The entire title for this song has a spelling mistake. The title is "canceled" with 1 "l", not two like the title says. The page title has to be corrected. CranberryGingerAle (talk) 20:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:RM and follow the instructions on how to request a move using {{requested move}}. Thanks! D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 21:37, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Canceled and cancelled are both valid spellings. Canceled is more common in then US and cancelled is more common in British English, but it may be a matter of preference. The references seem to not be consistent on which should be used and I'm not sure which should be considered definitive. RJFJR (talk) 21:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All but one reference use "Canceled". The author of the subject is also American. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 00:19, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 January 2021[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 18:28, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cancelled (song) → Canceled (song) – Majority of the sources use "Canceled", so we should move the page to abide by those sources. "Cancelled" is only used for the music video. D🐶ggy54321 ^{(let's chat!)} 15:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nomination. American spelling for American subject. Wikipedia's File:SingleCoverFor2020SongCancelledByLarray.jpg clearly depicts the title as "Canceled" on the song's own cover. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 03:37, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It seems that the spelling on the album is "Canceled", as well as on all the music platforms (Spotify, etc). --Deansfa (talk) 19:52, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.