Wiki143:Articles for deletion/LL Cool J - Kool Moe Dee battle

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete with no prejudice towards restoring or userfying. The subject is notable and easily verifiable. east.718 at 07:37, November 24, 2007

LL Cool J - Kool Moe Dee battle

Template:La – (View log)

Seems like mostly nonsense made up of original research and theories, with the only source being an ePinions article! AfDing as I couldn't find an appropriate CSD reason. Collectonian (talk) 04:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow; that fast! FOUR MINUTES? I had just posted it, and had just finished adding a brief comment to the discussion page (where I see apparently there once was another article on the battle). You all found and read it read it that fast?

There's also the "wakeyourduaghterup" and FOUNDATION/Jayquan sources. (As I said on the discussion there, if you missed that, it might be because I have to redo the refs. I tried to do it with the ref tags, so the refs would automatically list at the bottom, but that doesn't work anymore. So I have to relearn how to cite refs, when I get a chance; probably tomorrow. Still, the little "uplink" numbered symbols are there). So everything is from those three references. Plus simply the order the raps came out, with each one answering the last one (which is the bulk of the article). Nothing is my own original research. I can give a reference for lyrics as well.Eric B (talk) 05:14, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete: This isn't notable. ePinions, obviously not a RS. Speedy under db-DUH, although that category does not exist, it should. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, then I'll take the bottom material off, but the rest of that article simply relays the sequence of answer records, and the other hip hop rivalries are considered notable, and this is the most famous of all.Eric B (talk) 05:16, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Still needs sources, and I still don't think it is notable. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Why isn't the FOUNDATION enough? Would you be satisfied if I included a lyrics archive as a source? (And why is epinions not an RS? (And that wasn't a souce as much as Foundation and "wakeyourduaghterup". What about those?)

I also notice that there is absolutely no mention at all of the Kool Moe Dee battle in the LL Cool J article. (there once was, a long time ago). It only mentions more recent battles, (Canibus, West Coast, etc) which were not even as well known as this old one. All of this seems strange. Why is this considered so not notable? Are we sure there is complete neutrality here? not any sort of bias floating around?Eric B (talk) 13:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm suprised you had to ask, but ePinions is NOT a WP:Reliable Source because anyone can post anything. Nothing is verified, there is no fact checking, or even an assertion of facts. IT is purely a site where people post their own opinions and product reviews and sometimes OR, and often for the purpose of earning money. Collectonian (talk) 16:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, sorry about that. I thought it was a bona fide article, rather than a blog post. In the rush, I didn't pick up the connection of "e"pinions with Opinions until later. I also should not have called it a "reference", but could not think of anything better at the moment. I guess something like "Additional Information"? I still think both that article and http://wakeyourdaughterup.blogspot.com/2007/03/hip-hop-101-nas-where-are-they-now.html should at least be there under that category, as many other Wikipedia articles have 'information' references like that that are not sources.

And since this was mostly a lyrical battle, then what sources would be necessary, other than the words? Again, would you all be satisfied with a reference to a lyric site where one can go and read the words and follow the sequence of the battle for itself? Eric B (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

A personal blog post is generally not a reliable source either, even if the blog primarily focuses on one topic. If other articles have sources or references like that, they should usually be removed or replaced with more valid sources. The only exception to no blogs is, I believe, a blog written by a verified expert or an official blog (so Yahoo!s product blogs are valid sources for articles about Yahoo, for example). If the battle was notable, there should be third party, reliable sources on the topic. Music magazines, industry publications, etc. Otherwise, the article appears to just be WP:Original Research if its whole idea is inferred from interpretations of the lyrics. Collectonian (talk) 20:55, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, but first, it is not even "interpretations" of the lyrics. They are clearly responding to each other; not always directly by name, but by other clear references (and then Kool Moe Dee does begin mentioning LL by name). All the article (now) is doing is chronicling these responses. As for references, are these better?

http://www.beastiemania.com/whois/kool_moe_dee/

http://www.mtv.com/bands/n/nas/news_feature_012102/index4.jhtml

http://www.freewebs.com/whatsbeef/beefarchive1.htm

http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/oct/article401.html Where Is Kool Moe Dee When You Need Him? By Timothy N. Stelly, Sr. Oct. 30, 2005

The problem here is that, as I explained to Anteater, below, is that the battle is so old, you are not going to have any magazine articles on it today. They would have been written back then, nearly 20 years ago. I don't even know if the hip hop magazines were out yet, like we know them today. Rap was still in the process of entering the mainstream. This does not mean that is is not notable; but rather that it occurred before our current information medium. (I encountered the same issue when people demanded more "sources" for articles on classic arcade games such as Pac Man, and the only real sources that remain today are the games themselves). A review by Alan Light in Rolling Stone July 11, 1991, seems to be such a source on the battle; but I can't find the whole article online yet; and don't know if it is online. I may even have to take an old fashioned trip to the library for this one. Otherwise, all you are basically going to get on it is blog "look-back" posts and reviews. Many of the references for the other hip hop rivalries artcles; including even for newer battles, are the same types of blog posts (which made me so surprised this one was being jumped on, and so quick). So basically, then, it's like we really cannot have classic rap battle articles on Wikipedia, and the whole category should be deleted. They are best known about today by the lyrics themselves; the most reliable, direct "source".Eric B (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, isn't the printing of the lyrics a copyright violation? Collectonian (talk) 05:22, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Yup, Im pretty sure it is. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

What about "Fair Use"? There are only two blocks swith several lines, and one smaller one, and any other lyrics are single line quotes int he text. I can remove the larger blocks, if you all insist.Eric B (talk) 13:34, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Userfy and work to find sources, then move the article back to mainspace. Didn't the battle precede the internet? AnteaterZot (talk) 08:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes it did, and I wonder if that be why people think it is not "notable", compared to LL's more recent battles. I'm strictly old school, and that was a big thing back then, and is still remembered vividly today).Eric B (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - Unsourced, and all it contains is lyrics. Woop-Woop That's the sound of da Police 11:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

see responses aboveEric B (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

New Proposal up

No more responses? OK now; most of the lyrics were removed. It is basically down to three short snippet quotes. Certainly within the range of "fair use"! All info based on the raps themselves, still no "intepretation", etc. I also added all of those links under a new header "External links: Additional Infromation and opinions on battle". If that doesn't pass, it is easily removable.

My next proposal will basically be to turn it into a stub, listing the songs relevant, and let it be built back up from there, as more references are hopefully found.Eric B (talk) 23:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, added lyric archive as source.Eric B (talk) 02:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

• Still Delete Lyrics are not proof. The article is still mostly rumor, vague innuendos, and writer interpretation. Only one of the new sources is decent (the MTV one), but can't tell exactly where it is used since no citation method is being used and all it really does is sort of explain why the disagreement started and list songs. The rest of the sources are still unreliable, mostly personal sites and the like, and the lyric database is not a source. At best, a well cited mention that LL and Kool Moe Dee apparently had a beef with on another should be made in their respective articles (properly following the biography of living people requirements since both are still alive last time I checked. Such a disagree could easily be covered in a single paragraph. Collectonian (talk) 03:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Could you name one "rumor", "vague innuendo" or "writer interpretation" in the article? Just like we need "sources" for our articles, we need some "verification" for these claims against the article. Also, the MTV site and others are under "other information and opinions", so they are not even claimed to be "sources" now. The main source (other than the lyric site) is FOUNDATION, which is used as a reliable source, elsewhere. And why isn't the lyric database a source? This is a lyrical battle, primarily. But is that it? Do you think I am trying to write an article about some real life "beef" using lyrics? Then, I could see the objections, as sources could then be found dealing directly with the off-stage situation. But classic hip hop rivalries are primarily lyrical. LL and Kool Moe Dee had very little dealing with each other off record. So that is not what the "battle" was about. (It wasn't until like the last decade when they became real life, often violent beefs). Again, should that whole category be deleted and replaced with little "mentions" in respective rappers' articles? Why is this battle being scrutinized so much?Eric B (talk) 04:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.