Talk:Kanye West/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Need Consensus: Changing the Introductory Sentence

Based on recent development, I think it is time to change the introductory sentence from: Ye (/jeɪ/ YAY; born Kanye Omari West /ˈkɑːnjeɪ/ KAHN-yay; June 8, 1977) is an American rapper, songwriter, record producer, and fashion designer.

to Ye (/jeɪ/ YAY; born Kanye Omari West /ˈkɑːnjeɪ/ KAHN-yay; June 8, 1977) is an American rapper, songwriter, record producer, fashion designer, conspiracy theorist, and antisemite.

I think this should be changed because of what he posted recently on his twitter (swastika) and the comments he has made over the past few months. I would label him a conspiracy theorist because of his Holocaust denial.

Sources: https://www.vox.com/culture/23400851/kanye-west-antisemitism-hitler-praise https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/unpacking-kanye-wests-antisemitic-remarks https://www.ajc.org/news/5-of-kanye-wests-antisemitic-remarks-explained Amfi2231 (talk) 00:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support West's support of antisemitic rhetoric and conspiracy theories has been the subject of press coverage and academic research for years and, in my opinion, is appropriate to mention in the first sentence. CJ-Moki (talk) 00:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose This is WP:RECENTISM (we've known he's had kooky views for years, but it's the recent uptick that is behind this proposal) and goes against MOS:FIRSTBIO, which says in part try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject; instead, spread relevant information over the lead paragraph. Kanye is notable for his music. His antisemitism is notable about him. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you for sharing that policy. I did not know about it before. I will circle back to this in a few months, as I am pretty sure this antisemitism will continue unfortunately. Amfi2231 (talk) 02:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  Apparently, in 10 years' time, we all would probably say, well, that was just a little antisemitic phase in Ye's life, and not relevant enough to be included in the lede. — hako9 (talk) 07:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per my comments under Talk:Kanye West#Neonazism. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 01:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
• Support These are important characteristics, and existing proof confirms this. Wisconcom (talk) 03:26, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Oppose Kanye is not a conspiracy theorist as he does not theorise simply states what he believes according to others, nothing original has been produced by him. 114.74.171.133 (talk) 04:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

He believes and has stated that the Holocaust did not happen, that is a conspiracy theory. Amfi2231 (talk) Amfi2231 (talk) 04:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support At this point his anti-Semitism is notable enough for mention in the first paragraph. (Note: I made a similar edit just now before I was aware this discussion was going on) -TenorTwelve (talk) 06:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose This would suffer from both WP:RECENTISM and WP:WEIGHT and fail WP:NPOV. Similar (but arguably much worse) statements made by Eric Clapton and David Bowie (who also praised, and compared himself to Hitler) in the seventies were one of the reasons for the founding of the Rock Against Racism movement, yet none of that is mentioned in their articles' leads. GhulamIslam (talk) 15:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Beyond the recentism, its is not what he is primary known for nor is there any reason to believe that will ever overshadow all he has ever done. Donald Trump has been gone around with more conspiracy theories and for a significant longer amount of time, but that was never in his lead sentence even before he was President. I don't see how we even consider it here. Mentioning in the article of course, and somewhere in the lead makes sense and I'm fine with. But in the lead sentence to define him or even the opening paragraph (as it is now with two sentences), I do not agree with at all. Way too much WP:WEIGHT trying to be attributed to it due to recent events. WikiVirusC^(talk) 16:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
• Support The last several months have seen a virtual flood of coverage of Kanye West, and not a much of a stich of it has to do with his music career. He has received intense media coverage for his antisemitism, his praising of Adolph Hitler, and the like. This belongs in the lede now, the reliable sources cannot be ignored. Zaathras (talk) 17:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

  The proposal is arguing for it to be in the lead sentence of lead. The coverage of his recent comments are included already in lead. WikiVirusC^(talk) 20:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose He is not a "theorist", it is not shown that he influences anyone with his delusions. --Delfield (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

A conspiracy theorist is defined as someone who believes in conspiracy theories, regardless of whether or not they are the originator or main proponent of them. --Pokelova (talk) 18:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

The term "conspiracy theorist" refers to the content of a person's beliefs, not to whether they have convinced other people of those beliefs. 104.13.110.123 (talk) 02:50, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

While somewhat semantic, the term theorist is usually reserved for someone (typically a scientist, writer, or philosopher) who systematically explores, develops, and/or promotes a theory or set of theories in some medium with a goal of influencing others' knowledge or belief on a topic. A person can subscribe to certain theories or have an affinity for a certain kind of theory without qualifying as a theorist (otherwise, everyone would qualify as a theorist about something). The term conveys an intent to influence (and some investment in doing so), whether or not successful. If anything about this was added to the lead, it should refer to the fact that West has made statements expressing support for these theories, not state that he is a theorist. General Ization ^Talk 03:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I fear that your semantic analysis is akin to objecting to the term "spin doctor" (a political propagandist) because the "doctor" by itself is usually reserved for someone with an advanced degree and/or practices medicine in some capacity. The standard dictionary definition of the term "conspiracy theorist" [1] [2] [3] as well as its common usage indicates someone with a mere belief and promotion in conspiracy theories, which is certainly true in the case of Kanye West. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 06:51, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose The controversy concerning his views is already adequately covered in the lede section and in the body. The first sentence of the lede should not be overly burdened in an attempt to cover every aspect of the subject, but should explain the primary reasons for his notability, which it already does. Per other comments, fails WP:RECENTISM, WP:WEIGHT and WP:NPOV. General Ization ^Talk 18:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

the 'conspiracy theorist' is fine, but the 'anti semite' is not encyclopaedic 2001:8F8:173D:71C:5D0D:3FB5:586E:4261 (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

The antisemitism label is the one that is actually ironclad here. Zaathras (talk) 01:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per the already cited policies everyone else has provided. Tweedle (talk) 00:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose, mostly due to WP:WEIGHT. West's notability does not stem from his belief in conspiracy theories or his anti-Semitism, but rather he is a famous music figure who, unfortunately, happens to have these views. As mentioned by others, these things are very well covered by the article text. I'm less swayed by WP:RECENTISM as this has been going on for a while now. Regardless, I still oppose including this in the MOS:FIRST sentence. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 07:00, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
• Suggestion Add additional sentence to intro such as: "West has provoked controversy for his advocacy of conspiracy theories and far-right politics, including antisemitism". JJARichardson (talk) 15:11, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

This is effectively covered in the fourth paragraph of the lead. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 16:26, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Of possible interest - the abandonment of Kanye's reddit sub

Hitting the reliable sources now.

1. Kanye West’s Reddit Page Taken Over by Taylor Swift & Educational Holocaust Posts After Hitler Comments (Billboard)

2. Kanye West Reddit page overtaken by Taylor Swift fans and Holocaust awareness posts (The Independent)

3. On Reddit, Kanye superfans finally reach their breaking point (Forward)

Zaathras (talk) 17:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

It's also being covered by Variety and Bloomberg. I would say it warrants a brief mention in the article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 18:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

thing is those articles are kinda nonsense because swift fans themselves haven't taken over it. it's merely ye fans and ex-fans disgusted by his actions who are ironically posting pro Taylor swift comments while more importantly, turning the subreddit into a holocaust awareness subreddit of sorts 2001:8F8:173D:71C:5D0D:3FB5:586E:4261 (talk) 12:25, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I do think this is worthy of inclusion. It could be summarized at Views of Kanye West in one or two sentences. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 02:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Name change

Kanye West has legally changed his name to "Ye West". His full legal name is "Ye West" and not just Ye. Qplb191 (talk) 22:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

You should change the name title (his legal/official name) to Ye west. Qplb191 (talk) 22:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Sources say otherwise. See Talk:Kanye West#He is Ye West. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 22:37, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

This has already been discussed, Kanye West is the name is is most commonly known as. Zaathras (talk) 22:39, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

His name on his ID is Ye West. Qplb191 (talk) 22:49, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@Zaathras His legal name on his ID is “Ye West” not just “Ye”. Qplb191 (talk) 22:50, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Not relevant. See WP:COMMONNAME, and the last time this was discussed formally, Talk:Kanye_West/Archive_12#Requested_move_3_November_2022. Zaathras (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

@ Zaathras But this his name legal/official name . Qplb191 (talk) 07:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

His official name is not just Ye it’s Ye West Qplb191 (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Neonazism

Kanye's antisemitism and neonazism should be more prominently featured in the opening paragraphs, since for several months now that has been a primary cause of media attention around him 81.105.55.47 (talk) 14:51, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

As opposed to the last few decades where his notability was from his music. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:17, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

i feel as if "Neo-Nazi" should redirect to his page. Chicken4War (talk) 16:45, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

That would be a terrible redirect, as Neo-Nazism is the WP:PTOPIC for that term. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to speak for Chicken4War, but I think that was hyperbole.  :) 73.239.149.166 (talk) 03:51, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

He is also now a recorded anti-semite right. Would it be acceptable to have the introduction read something like "Ye (/jeɪ/ YAY; born Kanye Omari West /ˈkɑːnjeɪ/ KAHN-yay; June 8, 1977) is an American rapper, songwriter, record producer, fashion designer, and anti-semite"? JaacTreee (talk) 18:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion, all of this is much too recent to already be included as a defining feature. MOS:ROLEBIO, which outlines how we identify these type of descriptions in opening paragraphs, states the lead sentence should describe the person as they are commonly described in reliable sources. I don't see him being commonly described as an anti-Semite / neo-Nazi just yet. That could obviously change depending on how he chooses to use his platform in the future. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 19:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

This would suffer from both WP:WEIGHT and WP:RECENTISM. — Czello 19:30, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Czello is right, also consider that what Ye said is not nearly as bad as what Eric Clapton and David Bowie said in the seventies, their statements were one of the reasons for the founding of the Rock Against Racism movement. GhulamIslam (talk) 22:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Clapton and Bowie have nothing to do with this article. Keep discussion focused on Kanye. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

No, that's a valid comment. WP:RECENTISM applies. — Czello 22:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Whether or not what Clapton or Bowie said in the 1970s is worse than what Kanye has said recently is irrelevant here. Of course RECENTISM applies. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:12, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

that is not how wikipedia works. hitler was described by his jobs as well, as is nearly every single person who there is an article on wikipedia on.

"Adolf Hitler (German: [ˈadoːlf ˈhɪt.lɐ] (listen); 20 April 1889 – 30 April 1945) was an Austrian-born German politician who was dictator of Germany from 1933 until his death in 1945." 2001:8F8:173D:71C:5D0D:3FB5:586E:4261 (talk) 12:23, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. two sentences later Hitler is described as the mass murderer he was. Nick Fuentes is described immediately as a white supremacist, even though his work has been in youtubing. Richard spencer is described as a neo-Nazi. Alex Jones and RFK Jr are both described as conspiracy theorists. All in their respective intros. At some point, even after controlling for recency bias, we must acknowledge the facts. Most 'reliable' media outlets have described him as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samiam876 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Identified as a nazi?

Erm could I have a source stating where he 'identified' as a Nazi? From what I've seen it seems he said he 'likes' them. Based47 (talk) 16:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Kanye West praises Hitler, calls himself a Nazi in unhinged interview – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/12/01/kanye-west-alex-jones-hilter-interview/ Qplb191 (talk) 04:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 December 2022

To note in Kanye West's description that he is also a neo-Nazi. https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-724187 https://consequence.net/2022/12/kanye-west-nazi/ NotKT11 (talk) 21:08, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Already covered in the last sentence of the lead. Where are you requesting that this be added? Cannolis (talk) 21:22, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I believe that User:NotKT11 is requesting that "neo-Nazi" be added to the opening sentence alongside "rapper," "producer," etc. (Though the user can correct me if that is not what they meant.) Personally, I believe that it does not belong there (yet), since it is not what he is primarily known for (though, of course, that could change). JeffSpaceman (talk) 21:29, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Note that there is already a discussion for effectively the equivalent to this request in the section #Need Consensus: Changing the Introductory Sentence above. It would be better for you to voice your opinion there. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 08:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Analyses of musical style by album

I've already trimmed the general part of Kanye West#Musical style quite a bit; now I'm wondering whether analyses of each of his albums really need to be included in this article (I'm referring to Kanye West#1990s–2000s and Kanye West#2010s, where one paragraph each is dedicated to one of his albums up until 2016). I feel like a general summary of his style is sufficient and anything more detailed can be outsourced to articles about his albums, where all of this is already covered in depth. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 22:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

I definitely think the sections can be massively trimmed, although they also need to be slightly expanded to talk about the psychedelic, gospel, drill, & trap elements of his post TLOP albums. RF23 (talk) 13:42, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

I thought about that at first, but how would that be done? Currently, it is structured in a way that dissects his style on literally every single album. That's textbook WP:TMI/WP:CRUFT to me, and precisely what the maintenance tag at the top intends to address. We could add general trends throughout his career to the general section and simply cut those two subsections. What do you think? Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 15:27, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

As I'm reading through it, I'm also noticing that lots of information is already covered in the musical career section, so I'm even more convinced that this level of detail is totally unnecessary. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 15:39, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Certainly some of the detail can be removed without harming the narrative. For instance, the 2002 John Legend mixtape sentence makes no assertions about Kanye's style. It doesn't move the story along. Lists of who influenced Kanye are also not moving the story along—the reader is probably asking what elements of Kanye's style came from Stevie Wonder or Madonna or U2 (for instance), and we don't have the answer. Binksternet (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

I'll attempt to trim both of those subsections substantially and probably combine them into a general section with no subsections later today or tomorrow. If anyone feels as though I went too far, feel free to add details back. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 15:54, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Bremps, I set up this thread to prevent flat-out reversions like this. It is clear to me and to editors above that the section, as is, is excessively detailed. I can't quite decipher your edit summary, so if you disagree with my condensed version, please suggest other approaches. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 18:44, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

what do you mean? I just redid the citation that was a bare link Bremps 20:23, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

as in there was a barelink and I converted it to a proper citation. apologies if the edit summary was not clear Bremps 20:24, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

wait nevermind Bremps 20:24, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for the confusion, I thought you were referring to another one of my edits. Yeah, it might be too much detail. Bremps 20:25, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Bremps, then I assume that your 22k byte revert was an accident? I will go ahead and restore the shortened version. AnomieBOT will take care of any orphaned references, so you don't need to worry about that. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 20:29, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes. It was an accident. Bremps 20:32, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 December 2022

Please make the following edits for clarity and accuracy

1) In the "Views" section update the line to fix typo: "School of the Art Institute in Chicago rescinded West's honorary degree" to "School of the Art Institute of Chicago rescinded West's honorary degree"

2) Append "Kanye West's honorary degree has since been rescinded" in the section "2013–2015: Yeezus and Adidas collaboration" after the sentence "On May 11, West was awarded an honorary doctorate by the School of the Art Institute of Chicago for his contributions to music, fashion, and popular culture, officially making him an honorary DFA." referencing the existing citation 353 Ramwillram (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

 Partly done: did #1. For #2 I removed "officially making him an honorary DFA" instead of adding the addendum, which, imo felt like it would require more context than would fit in that 2013-2015 section. Do you feel that is sufficient? Cannolis (talk) 22:27, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

“one of the greatest musicians of his generation”how could this be considered encyclopedic?

A highly subjective and contentious statement with just as many people if not more people hating his music than praising. In my opinion, it’s literally not his music, all he does is hire the latest young producers to give him their best beats and stamp his name on it. I could do that if I had the money.

it is an embarrassingly bad and subjective statement. Its nearly impossible to make these judgements until more time has passed. Shhsbavavaa (talk) 10:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

why you straight up inventing things now lmao. just as many people if not more people hating his music than praising

that is an outright lie, and is backed up by absolutely no source 2001:8F8:173D:71C:5D0D:3FB5:586E:4261 (talk) 12:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Are you dense? Okay. Let’s discredit Alfred Hitchcock because he worked with geniuses like James Stewart, Bernard Hermann, and Saul Bass. Let’s discredit Paul McCartney because he worked with George Martin and John Lennon. Let’s discredit Steve Jobs because he actually didn’t do ANY coding himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:FB10:4DB0:C487:7136:1CA:2FC4 (talk) 22:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

IP, comments like "Are you dense?" border on incivility and/or personal attacks, and are not permitted here. Please restrain yourself from commenting on other editors versus the topic being discussed. General Ization ^Talk 03:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Steve Jobs was never known as an engineer, he was known as a designer, entrepreneur, and executive. "Musicianship" encompasses songwriting, and Kanye's success relied largely on sampling, which some would say is less creative than what was done to make what was sampled. That is a debate larger than Kanye himself, and separate from the subjective question raised here. Of course, saying he is the "greatest musician of his generation" is unencylopedic and should be removed, considering current controversies or not. I personally think sampling is and always was uncreative, cheap, and overrated. So clearly he isn't known as one of the greatest musicians of his generation. Successful? Sure, probably. That's a more encyclopedic metric. Perhaps with the proper sourcing it should be changed to that. 2600:1012:B048:293F:746F:832D:E6B3:A585 (talk) 03:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Sampling is an art form in itself and valid musicianship. That’s not my problem with Kanye. My problem is he doesn’t even sample music anymore, he appropriates work by other producers including samples done by others. Kanye is a director of sorts but judging by his last album which was literally unfinished and self-indulgent, he literally wasn’t even doing his only job at that point which was to edit together beats by other people.

Music also isn’t a sport. You can’t say anyone is the “best”. And kanye being the best of his generation is patently ridiculous, inane, and false. He’s one of the leading and most celebrated musicians of his generation , but you can’t say any musician is “the best” Shhsbavavaa (talk) 13:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Paul Mccartney wrote “Hey Jude” , “Yesterday “ and “Let it Be”, among other examples of his best work, on his on. Kanye’s songs since 2012 are not written on his own. They are written by other people , kanye not even being in the same room. Thats the difference. Shhsbavavaa (talk) 13:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2022

In the opening list of descriptions of Kanye along with rapper and musician put "neo Nazi." He has identified himself as such. 2603:7080:A401:5D9A:3D8D:FFFF:A614:BF4F (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: This has been addressed multiple times on this talk page. Please review the talk page to see if similar requests have already been made. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 15:03, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Proposal: Merge "Views" and "Controversy" sections, chronologically

Recent changes, along with the creation of a main article made those sections somewhat incomplete. The new main article should also be renamed to "Views and controversies..." since many of his views are controversial and both subject are highly intertwined. –Daveout(talk) 00:45, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The views section is currently a brief summary of his most prevalent views. The controversies section is composed of single events divided into their own paragraphs. They don't jibe at all in their current form. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 00:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

His views on Nazism for example are highly controversial and missing from the controversy section where they belong (or belong as well.) The way clearly related content is being divided is very odd. –Daveout(talk) 01:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I'd suggest the following: move some info in the controversy section over to Views of Kanye West, incorporate the Change.org and award show stuff into the musical career section, and merge the remainder into a new views and controversies section.

What I'd like to avoid is a chronological series of paragraphs discussing each and every controversial view of his since we'd basically be returning the page to the poor state it was in prior to the Views of Kanye West split. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 01:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and boldly did what I described. Not sure about moving the award show controversies to the musical career section since it's already pretty overloaded. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 01:47, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Daveout, so this kind of MOS:OVERSECTIONing is exactly what I tried to avoid. It's basically mirroring the layout at Views of Kanye West and encourages editors to add onto the section until it basically resembles the stand-alone views article. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 02:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I think a descriptive heading makes it easier for people to find what they're looking for. –Daveout(talk) 02:44, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

True. The WP:PROSELINE is still horrible, but it's at least an improvement over the oversectioning. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 02:47, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Current version seems disproportionately short compared to the sections above and below it, and has a few grammatical mistakes and typos (e.g. "anitsemitic", "spoken out against abortions"), I would recommend reverting the page back to this revision and drafting an improved version. VronaMrk30 (talk) 04:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The section is intentionally brief because it has been spun off into its own article, Views of Kanye West. Grammatical mistakes are easily fixed. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 04:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 December 2022

Add "of all time" after most influential 2603:8080:7203:BA00:AEB1:C8EB:4AD8:5639 (talk) 08:46, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — hako9 (talk) 12:00, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 December 2022

Ye[a] (/jeɪ/ YAY; born Kanye Omari West /ˈkɑːnjeɪ/ KAHN-yay; June 8, 1977) is an American rapper, songwriter, record producer, fashion designer and antisemite. 141.157.19.235 (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

 Comment: There is already a consensus-building discussion underway at #Need Consensus: Changing the Introductory Sentence for this exact change. It would be better for you to chime in there. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Brochure language

Talk page disruption for no obvious reason Dronebogus (talk) 16:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I maybe have a toehold on the spectrum, but whether it's a legitimate toehold or not, I really don't know who the ruckus Kanye is. I've never heard his music, and he only shows up in my (extensive) media roundup when he's shooting his mouth off within arm's length of some other, perhaps equally polarizing a-hole. Whoever the ruckus this guy is, he has a remarkable talent of showing up where other a-holes gather. I know a lot about many of these other a-holes. Certain kinds of divisive, polarizing language gets you onto my a-hole list. It's not personal. I'm sure these are all fine people when they STFU. Intent on pursuing a solo career as a rapper, he released his debut studio album, The College Dropout (2004), to critical and commercial success. That ugly wart on front is called a sentence modifier. It's generally a rather dangerous construction on Wikipedia, where we strive for an encyclopedic tone. If you hang around in the literature portion of Wikipedia, you will read all kinds of stuff about narrative perspective, because fiction treads on ESP. The authors of fiction gets to have real ESP, where the rest of us only get to fake it, if we're so inclined. Narrators with ESP have carte blanche to use sentence modifiers. That's what they do for a living: they tell you the events of the story, while putting sneaky (or not-so-sneaky) spin on the ball. On an encyclopedia, we're (properly) stuck with language like this: With the stated intention of pursuing a solo career as a rapper,[1] he released his debut studio album, The College Dropout (2004), to critical and commercial success. If he didn't state this himself in a pertinent, associated time frame, we're blowing this spin out our ass. The reason brochure language loves to use this construct is that it implies intimacy. We're so damn close to the subject, we've tunneled right through his ear canal, to his deepest personal drives. On the seventh day, the Good Lord realized what a blunder this was, so he made the ear canal extra twisty on the QT, but apparently the problem persists. Prompt Hey, ChatGPT, express my opinion about brochure language in Wikipedia's Kanye West article as if I was one of the expletive-enabled insiders, but, on the tunnel-vision side, with an ambiguous hint of spectral sandpaper syndrome, and an underlying emotional dysfunction in separating my own ego from my current subject matter; on the nerdy "Weird Al" libertine side, with also an overly learned, broadly prosocial bent, and a penchant for satirical myth-busting, regardless of the size of the supposed majority I'm treading upon. ChatGPT has passed the test. What's interesting here is that I never told ChatGPT what my opinion about this article actually was. ChatESP had to entirely infer this from the tonalities of how how I phrased my prompt. But don't try this at homes, folks; it's best left to the rising overlords, our newly omniscient chatterbots. — MaxEnt 14:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC) Do you have a point here? Or do you just want to complain in a very long-winded manner? Is this not something you could just fix? Dronebogus (talk) 15:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC) For someone complaining about slightly flowery language in an article, something with a simple fix that most users could enact boldly, this is a very long-winded and heavily editorialized post. To the point where just from your lead paragraphs I'm not sure I believe you can be comfortably NPOV about this article subject. And what's all this about a chatbot? What's that got to do with the price of gas? Either way, I have to echo Dronebogus above me... So what? GabberFlasted (talk) 15:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC) Should I just hat this? I feel like I should just hat this. Dronebogus (talk) 16:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Removing "most influential" from the lede

I am removing the bombastic, vague and unattributed claim "He is widely regarded as one of the most influential hip hop artists and producers". Relevant policies are MOS:WTW, WP:VOICE, WP:EXCEPTIONAL. The 3 sources cited don't support this claim. — hako9 (talk) 11:57, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree and support the removal per the things you mentioned as well as WP:PEACOCK. The section Kanye West#Legacy does go into detail and perhaps that can be summarized into the lede. However, you are correct that, as it was worded, we're better off without it. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 23:23, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

That section should first be checked for accuracy, i.e. whether information accurately reflects the citations. There's been lots of embellishing and WP:VOICE issues with this article. The legacy section could also use a substantial trim. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 00:11, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

No argument there.  :) 73.239.149.166 (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry? I'm commenting on your suggestion to summarize the legacy section in the first paragraph. I'm saying there are considerations that have to be made first, no more and no less. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 09:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

"No argument" is another way of saying "I agree", my friend. Chill and relax. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 16:42, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree the sources could be better, but I don't see how they fail to support the disputed text. ––FormalDude (talk) 06:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The USA Today article uses the term "influential" once, but only in reference to one of his albums. The Forbes article doesn't use the the term (or anything akin to that) at all. The Evening Standard's list of "most influential hip hop artists" does include him; that source alone does not support him being "widely regarded" as such however. WP:EXCEPTIONAL applies: multiple high quality sources are required to support exceptional claims. Per WP:RSP, there is no consensus on the reliability of Evening Standard. As it stands, the sentence needs to be either removed or supported by new, multiple, high quality sources. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 06:58, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The USA today article starts off by saying that many consider his music to be great and quotes a Billboard editor who says the quality of his music is undeniable. The Forbes article has an entire paragraph detailing the critical acclaim that Kanye's music regularly courts and call his musical process "the stuff of legend". Perhaps these specific sources speak more to the excellent reception of his music rather than its influence specifically, but, either way, this sentence is meant as a summarization of the Kanye West#Legacy section, of which the disputed statement is clearly well supported with existing sources (NME named him the third most influential artist in music) and does not technically need any references in order to be stated in the lede. ––FormalDude (talk) 08:10, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

No. So, based on your analysis, the three sources present are clearly insufficient. Combining a few quotes from the legacy section to conclude—in wikivoice no less—that he is "widely regarded as one of the most influential hip hop artists and producers" would be obvious WP:SYNTHesis. An option would be to agree on cherrypicking individual quotes/lists and including them in the lead, like the NME list for example. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 08:19, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

It's not SYNTH, there's no new conclusion being reached. The legacy section says he's widely regarded as influential, and we restate it in the lede. How do you not understand basic summary style? ––FormalDude (talk) 08:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Gaslighting much? Where does it explicitly say in the legacy section that he is widely regarded (!) as one of the most influential (not a synonym for "good", "acclaimed", "best-selling", "award-winning") hip hop artists and producers? Had we just one reliable source, WP:EXCEPTIONAL requirements would still not be met, which they need to be in order for us to make the claim in wikivoice. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 08:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

My god, change it to "acclaimed" then. I don't have the desire to argue semantics with someone like you. ––FormalDude (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Semantics... We're talking about some of the most prominent information in a level-5 vital Wikipedia article that you decided to edit war over. I kindly recommend you refrain from starting content disputes of this magnitude if you cannot handle "semantics". Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 09:08, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

What does someone like you mean? Please read WP:OWN. — hako9 (talk) 10:05, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Just wanted to say that there are multiple articles that say Ye is one of the most influential artists, so there should be something in the wiki saying that, I’m just saying Gniewko97 (talk) 19:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

If any admin is seeing this, now is your time to shine. While citing WP:STATUSQUO, FormalDude has ignored WP:SQS, failed to add appropriate inline tags indicating the text is under discussion, and reinstated poorly sourced material twice. — hako9 (talk) 09:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The wording should be changed for sure, but there should be some note of his influence in prog-rap and the “changing of hip hop sensibilities away from gangsta rap” that’s mentioned in the legacy section. RF23 (talk) 18:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Unless WP:EXCPETIONAL is met for these claims, they would have to be attributed in the lead. Don't know how well that would jibe with WP:WEIGHT, though. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 18:29, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

• Since Hako apparently thinks two people qualifies as a consensus and feels the need to disregard WP:STATUSQUO, I added an alternate version instead:

He has been ranked as one of the most influential artists in all of music.

This addresses all the concerns that have been brought up thus far, though based on the way this discussion is going I have to assume new objections will be made. ––FormalDude (talk) 03:11, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Your version is unattributed and needlessly bloated (strike "all of"). I've gone ahead and made these corrections. Not sure how I feel about cherrypicking a single list, but it's at least an improvement over the previous version. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 03:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

What a pain in the ass, truly. God help us if we ever cross paths again. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 04:29, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hold a lot of grudges, do you? ––FormalDude (talk) 00:05, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Not at all, I don't know or care for you personally. You refusing to discuss semantics with someone like me sounds much more aggrieved to me. I just don't see how any neutral third party wouldn't call your disruptive editing throughout and confrontational attitude above a pain in the ass. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 01:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@FormalDude That's three people actually, including IP. Now the statement you added "He has been ranked as one of the most influential artists in all of music." is an exceptional claim unsupported by sources, also quite puerile.

@Ringerfan23 Do you agree that this statement added by dude, should be excluded? there should be some note of his influence in prog-rap, what exactly would you put in the bloated lede anyway? I think the lede (excluding the ridiculous statement added by the dude) sufficiently summarises the body as is? Don't you think? Best-selling artist, rolling stone greatest songwriter, and TIME most influential do justice to the content in the body? Please comment. I don't want to hurt the dude's feelings making him think its only 2 of us vs him, so he can stop edit warring and reverting everyone. — hako9 (talk) 13:47, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I don’t agree with the current addition (it just comes off weird), but there should be something there. I know it goes more into the legacy later on in the lede, but many other highly influential rappers (Kendrick Lamar, Jay-Z, Nas, just a few I checked) have a statement like that in the beginning of the lede. The influence section supports the argument, it’s just coming down to appropriate wording and probably extra sources to avoid it looking like a SYNTH issue. RF23 (talk) 22:54, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Do you have any suggestions, RF23? ––FormalDude (talk) 00:07, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I hope you don't conjure up another ridiculous statement to be added in the lede. If you do, discuss here, and don't add unilaterally. — hako9 (talk) 00:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Who died and put you in charge? ––FormalDude (talk) 00:35, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

That ain't formal dude. And you talk to everyone while being on VRT like that? Shame shame. — hako9 (talk) 00:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Getting back to the discussion at hand, how about adding "West was the forerunner of mid-00's progressive rap, credited with moving hip hop away from the gangsta rap sensibilities of the 90's." to the lede? I think that summarized key points of the article not currently in the lede & avoids the greatest/most influential wordings which would lead to constant edit-warring.RF23 (talk) 22:02, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I assume you derive that from this Highsnobiety article and this Noisey article, which are quoted in the legacy section. Again, as these are two separate exceptional claims, we need multiple RS supporting these exact claims in order to make them in wikivoice. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 23:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Nazi

Include “neo-Nazi” in first line of bio. Jsafran (talk) 14:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

We need more of a consensus (i.e., a wide variety of reliable sources labelling him as such in a prominent fashion, on par with such descriptors as "rapper" and "fashion designer") before that can happen. JeffSpaceman (talk) 03:59, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Blurry photo

I think the photo needs to be changed. Very blurry and unflattering. Previous photo was fine 88.109.64.157 (talk) 20:44, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree. The previous photo might be older, but his appearance hasn't significantly changed since then. The professional photograph is clearly superior to the compressed screenshot. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 12:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Throast – I restored the higher resolution photo from before. Adumbrativus (talk) 07:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 January 2023

Kanye West has 24 Grammy wins. 2600:1008:A116:DB67:E19F:925:8DCE:14D1 (talk) 07:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 12:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Creation of a "Current Consensus" chart

In lew of the amount of the editing and the apparent retreads over points previously discussed, would there be any interest in forming a consensus to include for the Kanye West a section on the talk page establishing a current consensus list such as the one being used over at Talk:Donald Trump and ammending the opening edit notice to include a mention that editor(s) review current consensus before editing the article and that changes against established consensus without prior discussion can be reverted on sight? It seems to me that this would help the page settle somewhat and could be useful in ensure that the current consensus for the article is listed and relevant links to the discussion(s) are provided to make sure everyone gets on the same page. TomStar81 (Talk) 13:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support: While I wish someone like a musical artist wouldn't be so hotly debated or held as publicly important as an actual POTUS (not supporting, don't over-analyze), I agree that this is getting messy and controversial. 'New' topics appear on this talk page like fast food and I'm sure most of them could have been collapsed into sub-sections of a greater discussion (e.g. just about every thread about antisemitism/nazism/etc. could have been a lower-level section heading under a big "Controversy" talk page heading) and it makes combing through them difficult and unintuitive. GabberFlasted (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
• Support This is a really good idea. To echo @GabberFlasted, it is really, REALLY easy to get lost in this talk page, which leads to more duplicative topics being added, which makes it even easier to get lost and causing a snowball effect. 73.239.149.166 (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
• Support: I assume that IPs and new editors are going to ignore edit notices and talk headers anyway, but for more established editors, a current consensus list would certainly be helpful. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 12:17, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

  Gee thanks :P  :) 73.239.149.166 (talk) 15:12, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

(with some rare exceptions) ;) Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 15:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support: Per nom. While I agree with Throast that there will be those who don't pay attention, it would make for simple edit summaries when reverts are needed; and as GabberFlasted noted - it's really easy to lose track of things on this talk page as it is very active. ButlerBlog (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Moving forward

@GabberFlasted, 73.239.149.166, Throast, and Butlerblog: Its been just shy of two weeks with 4 supports and no oppose !votes, therefore by the standard rules on site the motion passes (although consensus can always change). What we need now is the list of current consensus points and the relevant discussions for links. I'll give it 48 hours from the time stamp on my signature, after which I'll add the requisite edit notice and move the template into its own space, then add the list here up at the top of the page to officially make it "live", as it were. TomStar81 (Talk) 14:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

TomStar81, do you intend to compile those yourself or should the support !votes collaborate on that? I guess the most important point of contention recently has been his description/categorization as Nazi. Consensus is not to include such a description in the first sentence of the lead and not to categorize him as a Nazi. Throast ^{{{ping}} me!} (talk | contribs) 16:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Compile the list yourselves. I can add the equipment, but I have no idea whats been discussed here, so the initial current consensus points need to come from those who have kept tabs on that here. TomStar81 (Talk) 14:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 January 2023

Wife Bianca Censori married 12/01/2023 2001:8003:1630:8500:70D3:F4FF:FE36:FCBB (talk) 09:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 January 2023 (2)

Kanye West has been married to Bianca Censori, multiple sources including TMZ & Daily Mail. 148.76.27.84 (talk) 11:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Neither the Daily Mail or TMZ are reliable sources. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 January 2023 (3)

In 4th paragraph of personal life section it's mentioned possibly which should be edited to make it possibility to make it correct Ayushqwerty2121 (talk) 15:01, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)