Talk:Political hip hop/Archive 1

Archive 1

"can be seen as racist"

I deleted the speculative assertion (WP:NOR) that many political hip-hop artists "can be seen as racist" because of ideals from the Black Power Movement. If there are reliable independent cites that make that statement, then we can reference it & put it back in. But otherwise it's simply two or three opinions added together. --Lquilter (talk) 05:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Back to stub

Because this article was in really bad shape (link), I've reverted it back to a stub like it was earlier this year. All the refs (except for three) were unreliable because they were cited to things like forums, online CD shops, and other Wikipedia articles. Spellcast (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Am restoring to last complete state, prior stub. A near eradication of the entire article is an overreaction to a few questionable source links for the list. If you have a dispute over such links, air them in the discussion page before making such radical changes to the entire article on a whim. That's what the discussion page is for. B.Soto (talk) 22:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Re-Adding Political Hip Hop Groups/Artists That Were Removed

There is no conceivably constructive reason why someone would remove the groups list that was there before. It was an attempt to build a comprehensive list of both significant existing, and now defunct political hip hop acts. While I'm pleased to see more effort was put in to expand the article, it took a step backwards in this regard. As such, I'm putting them back in to the lead-in. If you plan to remove them, please explain your reasoning beforehand to allow a discussion over this. B.Soto (talk) 11:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't remove them before, and I won't remove them now...but a source needs to be provided for each group listed. --Onorem♠Dil 12:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I did remove them before. All of them are uncited and simply having a list of artists who are ostensibly "political" is not productive. Wikipedia is not a collection of lists. It's a repository for facts about a subject, in this case political hip-hop. As such, describing the themes, messages, and effects of the genre is much more important than listing artists who may or may not be political without any explanation or citation. Instead of this extensive list, I propose that there be only two or three mentioned in the intro, but that each be accompanied by a sentence describing the political nature of their work, along with some sort of citation. If, for some reason unknown to me, the consensus is to have such a list, placing it in its own section of the main part of the article would be a better idea than having it in the intro. See WP:TRIVIA for the reasons why a list of semi-miscellaneous facts is counterproductive to a professional encyclopedia. Tiger Khan (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Furthermore, such a list might also overrun the main article, as it once did at conscious hip hop. For example, the latest edit was to add 2 more rappers to the list. At this rate, the list will comprise hundreds of names in a short time. When is a rapper "political" versus simply having a few lines or songs dealing with politics? Is Kanye West political? He did accuse George Bush of "not caring about black people", but he doesn't have a consistent basis in political hip hop. In order to eliminate this policy of simply adding more rappers to the list without any evidence for it, I refer you back to my original proposal of fewer artists, but including a sentence describing the political nature of their work. Tiger Khan (talk) 23:23, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Tiger khan on this. please, cut the lists down. Anarchocelt (talk) 05:03, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

The problem is, you're referencing some much lesser known artists within the political sub-genre. Which is to say, when one makes the distinction 'political' hip-hop, most credibly referenced mainstream media sources dealing exclusively with hip-hop and its culture (eg: The Source, Vibe Magazine, BET etc.) will immediately list a handful of artists that you chose to omit. This would seem to run in contradiction to the Wikipedia:Featured article criteria of being comprehensive. Where I think we agree, is citation (which I'll do for a handful of the only artists I care to see included), and that the list is citing several artists only marginally associated with political hip-hop and/or more closely linked to other forms of hip-hop. You'll note that the original list is not mine, but that I added a few artists to it. The only few I'm interested in keeping there are the ones that can be widely cited by most credible sources as being moreover political artists than otherwise. -The Coup, The Perceptionists, Public Enemy, Paris and The Goats come to mind right away. B.Soto (talk) 08:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

As I said repeatedly in my earlier statement, I'm all for mentioning a few, MAJOR groups with a sentence explaining their political relevance. That includes some sort of citation. I just have no interest in seeing this article become a list of groups that may or may not be relevant as the article conscious hip hop once was. Your selection sounds fine to me, especially with citation. However, the current list is much longer and when I deleted it, I believe it was also different (I'm not sure why, but I seem to have only edited the article once and that edit doesn't include deleting the list, although I know I did it, thus I can't see what the old list was). Anyways, as long as we pare the list down to cited political artists (preferably with some statement about their work, although that could be left to the subsections), I'm all for it. Tiger Khan (talk) 03:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, only the most prominent performers should be included. Much of the list was cited to an online shop catalogue, which is not a reliable source. If you look at the articles at Category:FA-Class music genre articles, they don't really say: "Artists of such genre include <insert long crufty list>". Spellcast (talk) 14:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Your claim that "Much of the list" is linked to "an online shop catalouge" *[sic] is not accurate. On inspection, I counted 3 linking to a very reliable source at MTV, that happened to be selling them, along with a brief bio/description. The rest were all easily credible sources (eg: VH1, Rolling Stone Magazine etc). B.Soto (talk) 22:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the list to List of political hip hop artists, I feel like this is a good compromise because it will allow people to build the comprehensive that some users clearly desire without bloating the main article. Anarchocelt (talk)

Merger proposal

I suggest that both Political and Conscious hip hop be merged, mainly because both seem to overlap and cover very similar subjests. However, while political seems to be more notable as a genre, Conscious it much more general and covers more ground than political. I hope that everyone will shar there opinions.Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 22:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Support

I'm going to go one step further and push for collapsing both conscious hip-hop and political hip-hop into the hip-hop music page. Both of the former pages are too scant to stand on their own, and this has to do with their marginality overall when mechanically separated from the larger hip-hop category. Furthermore, its a bit sectarian to make such a divorce between what is obviously hip-hop. They can merely be included in hip-hop music, a much more prolific page, as subheads. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krisnabest (talk • contribs) 18:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC) couldnt agree more. if these are genres at all they are small and ambiguous165.228.215.182 (talk) 10:17, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Support - Both are small articles, and what really distinguishes them from basic hip hop at all? So one has socially conscious lyrics and the other has political lyrics? That's not a genre, that's just a particular flavour of a genre. Having songs with a general lyrical focus isn't even close to being a "genre". To be honest, neither of them deserve articles at all. Also, regarding one argument in the "oppose" section: it doesn't matter if there are other articles in the same state, just because other such weak articles exist doesn't mean this one should too. Prophaniti (talk) 19:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Support - I support merging as I would consider Political Hip Hop to be a sub-set of Conscious Hip Hop (You can't really be political without being socially counscious and have some ideas on how to make things better). More importantly, it's now close to a year later and there still isn't enough material in the Conscious Hip Hop article for it to warrant being separated from the Political article. If, at a later stage, more content were to be added to the article, I wouldn't object to the articles being de-merged.--Antoin (talk) 12:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose

• Comment I generally favor merging things, but there's enough info out there for both articles to expand comprehensively. As this rap.about.com/od/genresstyles/p/ConsciousRap.htm article points out, people often confuse the terms. Not all "socially conscious" rap is necessarily political. Spellcast (talk) 20:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

While that true, I don't see how both deserve an article. There just to similar when it comes to subject matter. And while it true that not all rapper who are "socially conscious" are political, a majority are, a least in some way.Johan Rachmaninov (talk) 00:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I do not think these two should be merged for the simple reason that they are completely different and for those who browse both pages they can figure out what each is about. Also, as a resolution for peoples confusion one may add a link on the top that you may have this page confused with Political Hip Hop and Visa-Versa. 9:44, 8 July 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.228.92.61 (talk)
• Oppose This subject has enough material to warrant its own article. Yes, it should be on the hip-hop page, but only as a small summary with a "see main article: Political hip hop" subheading. Tiger Khan (talk) 02:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose The two are completely different. If one was to merge political and conscious, Gangster Rap, Pornocore and all others would require y hathe same attention. Hip Hop Music has a lot of different ubgenres, and that can be agreed. However, each has a distinct involment to a completely different audience.unsigned
• Comment I vote no to the merger. Not all political rap is "conscious" and most "conscious" rap isn't particularly political. Anarchocelt (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we consider this discussion closed? it's been a year and the majority clearly wants to keep the articles separate. Anarchocelt (talk)

• Comment This page should not be merged, as there is a distinct difference between the two categories of hip hop. Conscious hip hop deals with a wider range of issues which are mostly unrelated to political agendas. Political hip hop should be kept as just that - hip hop to do with politics and its protagonists, rather than trying to incorporate everything in a single, more ambiguous title.

Regarding Immortal Technique's beliefs

It says here that he supports Castro and Leninism. Is there a source for this? I'm not saying it's not true, it just seems surprising considering his comment on Russian communism: "That is the very nature of Capitalism. But nothing in the form of corrupted Russian Communism offers a viable alternative, only an unmasked totalitarian rule without the details that we have and the choice between Pepsi and Coke." (http://www.blackelectorate.com/articles.asp?ID=1458). Since it appeared weird to me, I just wanted some clarification, and if it turns out to be true, there should be a source for people who question it to believe it. (This is my first comment in a discussion, by the way, so if I'm doing something wrong, let me know) Kharacter (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC).

Edit: I found an article in which he calls a fellow MC an "Anti-Castro Cuban". I really don't think it's meant as a compliment. Would that be enough to assume he supports him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kharacter (talk • contribs) 23:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Post-hip hop

I created redirect to post-hip hop, as I think it's relevant to this genre, but not enough to warrant a standalone article. I 'm redirecting to the conscious hip hop subsection. This source defines it as a musical genre (as well as a movement, but that's not what this is about), or so I believe, as the source says "[...]many young blacks who allegedly belong to the "hip-hop generation," feel misrepresented by it and have begun to realize the limitations of being defined by a musical genre -- a misogynistic, homophobic and violent one to boot." The aforementioned source seems to define the post-hip-hop genre as "an assertion that encapsulates my generation's broad range of abilities and ideas and incorporates recent social advances (i.e., the women's movement, gay rights) that hip-hop has refused to acknowledge or respect". This naturally leads me to believe 'post-hip-hop' to be interchangable with 'political hip hop' or 'conscious hip hop', as the latter is defined, by Wikipedia, as "a subgenre of hip hop that challenges the dominant cultural, political, philosophical, and economic consensus, and/or comments on social issues and conflicts". Questions, comments, suggestions? --Aleccat 07:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

I would be a misnomer to equate 'post-hip-hop' with 'political hip-hop" or 'conscious hip-hop'. They are NOT synonymous. Read more here: http://www.allmusic.com/subgenre/political-rap-ma0000012322. My colleague Jeff Chang began writing about the post-hip-hop aeshetic in 2012 here: https://www.buzzfeed.com/zentronix/kendrick-lamar-and-the-post-hip-hop-generation --sheridanford (talk) 22:30, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Conscious hip hop: "rap.about.com/od/genresstyles/p/ConsciousRap.htm Conscious rap is a sub-genre of hip-hop that focuses on creating awareness and imparting knowledge. Conscious rappers traditionally decry violence, discrimination, and other societal ailments. It's propelled by the conviction that radical social change comes through knowledge of self and personal discovery." The article you linked links Kendrick Lamar to 'post-hip hop'. The article addresses "Backseat Freestyle" as "clowning mainstream hip-hop’s hypermasculine self-regard", which sounds like it is decrying 'societal ailments'. The article also says, about "good kid", "As the music closes in, Lamar’s focus widens to the city. 'Violence is the rhythm,' he raps, that underlies the clash of red and blue gangs, and the red and blue lights of police profiling", which seems like a political statement to me. I'm not opposed to changing the redirect to something like alternative hip hop, as the the article definitely compares hip hop's attitudes to post-hip hop's as to define the genres/aesthetics, as well as to differentiate post-hip hop from hip hop (example: " If the hip-hop generation emerged largely out of a traumatic break in cultural and political leadership, the post-hip-hop generation rises from a sometimes nearly disabling self-awareness."), but I think we'd need more sources for that, and I would like more opinion. I'd like to clarify also that I started the redirect as a placeholder until sufficient discussion has been made on what to redirect post-hip hop to, and I just redirected it to conscious hip hop because I found a lot of parallels, moreso than I did with political hip hop or alternative hip hop. --Aleccat 03:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Political Hip Hop Friends!

Hello,

I too am contributing to this page for a school project! I added a subsection about Black Lives Matter and Hip Hop. Let me know what you think Adaohh (talk) 20:00, 14 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adaohh (talk • contribs) 19:56, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I'd advise against using this Wikipedia article for a school project, it's riddled with mistakes and minimal citations. --Aleccat 23:24, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review on contributions of Nicolelandry, Jaay za, Adaohh, Dezi.rajsky

Just commenting on the recent changes by Nicolelandry, Jaay za, Adaohh, and Dezi.rajsky.

The addition of Black Lives Matter and Hip-Hop as a subheading is an important change to the page. This topic is increasingly relevant and as the content within it grows it's useful to have it as it's own section. It aids the overall organization of the page, which is useful for visitors who navigate the page to find information.

Overall, I think the group added plenty of useful information and improved both the content and organization of the page.

It looks as though this group had more people working alongside them at the same time than we did, and it was interesting to see how that worked out. My only critiques would be based off what I saw here, that citations should always be used to avoid getting things to taken down and perhaps to explain each change more so that other editors can stay better informed.

I also liked how the group made notes of the current page's weak spots and then worked towards correcting them. (Ie making the page sound less like a review)

This article was overall well thought out and addressed the important issues regarding the politics of hip hop. The sub topics are appropriate to current societal issues and many examples are used. Addressing racial representation in the article was apparent, contributing to the quality of the article. The language and vocabulary used throughout the article was appropriate and professional.

My main critique would be that the article addressed many larger umbrella topics when fewer topics could have been focused on in order to ensure quality over quantity in each section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renee.madill (talk • contribs) 19:04, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Black Politix.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2018 and 14 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): LIsaMariecastillo.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 February 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tariqb24.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 11 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jeestees.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

I need YOU

Hey all, I'm new here and am a self identified Wiki noob! I am editing this page as a school assignment and would love to have any of you pro Wiki-ers help clean up my sloppy formatting! If anyone is interested in bringing this page to life, drop a message on my talk page! Im open to all advice and collaborative efforts! Jaay za (talk) 11:01, 04 March 2017 (UTC)

jihadism in political hip hop

Does this section seem relevant? Im not sure if it should remain as it just feels out of context to have such a small paragraph unexsplained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaay za (talk • contribs) 16:28, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

NWA changes

Im making some small changes to the NWA portion of the article, adding in two references that deal with the film, something the page has yet to speak on Jaay za (talk) 16:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Let's get that "sounds like a review" flag gone

In attempts to do this I will be removing several lines of dialogue that are solely opinion or lack reference, I will copy and paste them here if they are ever to be re added: "This increasing application of hip hop references in political movements widens the scope of public reach and opens a new market of supporters in those interested in the rap and hip hop scene." Jaay za (talk) 08:50, 10 March 2017 (UTC)