Talk:Dimash Qudaibergen/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Relevance of the section "Vocal range and style"

I'd suggest to remove that section from the article. And not because of lack or sources or bad sources, but because I doubt its relevance.

Reasons:
- His genres listed in the Infobox are: pop, classical crossover, folk, world, operatic pop, classical music => means: he uses pop technique, classical bel canto technique, and traditional folk techniques; otherwise he couldn't sing that.
- His education includes: university degree in classical music (bel canto), another university degree in contemporary music (jazz & pop, vocals) and a masterclass in Broadway musical theatre => means, he can sing classical bel canto, jazz, pop, and musical theatre; otherwise he would have failed his exams and couldn't have those degrees.

The above being self-explanatory, makes mentioning those techniques in a separate section repetitive. That would leave following not meantioned techniques:
- rap: he has exactly one song, which is partially rap (could be added as description of his song "Screaming").
- old school metal: he has exactly one song in that genre (could be added as description of his song "Go, Go Power Rangers").
- rock screams: he has two songs, where he uses it, once in each ("Screaming" and "Go, Go, Power Rangers").
- R&B: he uses R&B like runs and melismas all the time, but so far has never performed an actual R&B song (Edit: and because he uses not only runs and melismas, but also staccatos, glissandos, trills, and glottal stops/yodeling like technique, it could be probably better described, by stating, that he has an agile voice (reference would of course need to be found)
- death metal: he has no songs in that genre and I'm pretty sure that he is not going to become a part-time death metal singer in future, because his usual genres require his voice to be very clean. He just sometimes uses growls more of less as a gimmick. I do think, that he is working on growling technique, but not in the intention of singing death metal but rather to use it like a cappella basses do (e.g. Tim Foust, who is by no means a death metal singer), because that fits way better to his crossover style and could be easily incorporated into his songs.
- distorted rock screams: he used it exactly two times and not in his own songs, but when he was singing Queen covers. And I doubt very much, that he is going to become a part-time hard rock singer, for the same reasons, I don't think, that he will sing death metal in future. He needs a perfectly clean and not a distorted, raspy voice to sing his usual music.
MeUnknown010 (talk) 11:04, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello MeUnknown010! Please read through the whole talk page.

1) The main reason was to implement that piece of information that is most probably of biggest public interest of people reading this article: Kudaibergen's exact vocal range.

We decided to make an own section because Drmies had removed it several months ago from the introduction by saying that it is not suitable for the lead.

The reason why the vocal range is not mentioned in the "Vocal range ans styles" section now is that Drmies suddenly doesn't want Dimash's vocal range at all to be on Wikipedia anymore. :For whatever reason. Even though it is of major public interest and the aspect that most probably even stands out the most with respect to Dimash.

2) Such a section is relevant for EVERY singer. And this one is one with an unusually high skill level, an unusually big range and unusually big versatility. Look at other singers, an extremely big amount of them has such a section. Especially those with big vocal ranges. (And pretty much all articles about singers that are categorised as "good articles" have it.)

3) Please read the paragraph carefully. It doesn't say that he is a rock or metal singer etc, it says he uses styles and techniques of many other genres, including them (which is extremely unusual for a classical crossover singer, he is most probably the only one in the world who does that). And his versatility and contrast of styles and techniques within songs is one of the things he is known for.

4) There are far more whole songs and songs with single specific elements that showcase those genres and styles, see for example the video links on the Talk Page. And he uses all of them in all of his concerts.

5) One of the other reasons for such a section is the necessity to implement reference links that can easily be found within the article in order to justify the information presented in the info box.

Best wishes, Jasmin Ariane (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit: In the links above the main focus is on his screams, but even the heavy twang that he is using in all of his upper belts (so several times in pretty much each song) is actually neither a classical crossover nor a classical nor a pop nor a folk nor a world technique, but a technique that is usually used in rock and in power metal. Jasmin Ariane (talk) 13:56, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Aren’t glottal stops not pronouncing certain letters like “t”?

Here is the article link

nearly everyone talks, sings, and raps with an glottal stop.

And glottal stops aren’t associated with just R&B though, it’s featured in (i think) every single genre of music, including heavy metal, classical music, etc.

(late response) Rosiedanugbtugn (talk) 19:14, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello Jasmin Ariane
I'm sorry to disappoint you, but adding his exact vocal range to the Wikipedia article is not possible, because it would requite original research (editors would have to perpetually note watch all his live performances, improvs, and even backstage and off-stage fancams to determine his currently lowest and highest note) and that (= Wikipedia becomes a primary source) is against the rules.
"Wikipedia articles must not contain original research. The phrase "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist" Wikipedia:No original research

MeUnknown010 Kudaibergen, like all other popular singers with a big vocal range, has an official vocal range, that is regularly shared in articles about him and was additionally confirmed by experts and voice teachers. Additionally, there are hundreds of singers with their exact official vocal ranges on Wikipedia, including "good articles", articles that were proven by admins and recognized for their high quality. Almost all singers with a big vocal range have their vocal range on Wikipedia. Also, the used wording was not that he had a vocal range of [...], but that he was "known for a vocal range of [...]", sourced by respective articles. Even Drmies said that exact vocal ranges on Wikipedia were legitimate, as long as articles are used as sources, and he just didn't like the used artciles (which he didn't read entirely (and finally said that his range wasn't mentioned in them)) Best wishes, Jasmin Ariane (talk) 16:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Jasmin Ariane Yup, but that is not, what you said on that page. I quote your own words here:
"Btw, if you want to have his highest mix note mentioned (and it would be understandable, he is the only male singer I have ever heard of who can reach the 6th octave in mix), there's also the following possibility: We may create an own section for his vocal range (or vocals in general) some day. Many singers have that in their articles (e.g. it's in the "good article" for Devin Townsend). In Dimash's case the public interest would be even bigger, as he is said to be the singer with the world's biggest vocal range (applied in a musical setting). His vocal range is one of the main reasons why people read his article. And if he, then, surpasses himself again in a register, we we would be able to change it in the text in a matter of seconds - without needing to edit and upload any picture files"

The information, that he is known for his wide vocal range/has a wide vocal range is very important for that article and cannot be removed without damaging its quality and usefulness. I wrote that on Drmies talkpage and hope to reach agreement with him about a suitable reference. And should that be impossible, I'll post that on the music portal, biography portal, sources noticebord, use dispute resolve or whatever is necessary to have that mentioned here.

The "heavy twang" is not something, that should be glorified here, but a nasty issue (his worst one), I hope he finally improved on, considering his latest song "Your Love", where his belting for once doesn't hurt the ears. I'm sorry to wake you up from the illusion of a perfect singer, but as I said, I hope, he finally fixed that and we will never hear that awful sound again in any of his pop/crossover/folk songs. But it does fit into the 3 examples, you posted on this page. You have my permission to delete that passage after reading. MeUnknown010 (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

MeUnknown010 Thank you for your answer but this is a personal preference and is not based on vocal technique. You may personally not like the tone of twang, and that's okay, but it is a very good, resonant and healthy technique for upper belts. Even though you are not a singer (or at least not a formally trained one), you can inform yourself about twang. Also, I wonder where you detected a possible "glorification" of twang. The section didn't even include the twang and was absolutely neutrally written. And even if it was mentioned: not everyone needs to like a style to make it a legitimate part of a Wikipedia article Best wishes, Jasmin Ariane (talk) 16:06, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Jasmin Ariane It is not just about him not shredding his vocal cords. It is not and cannot be the goal of a singer to repel listeners and to attract criticism, and about 90% of all critics on him (all the things like: is straining, doesn't support, is yelling, is a screamer, is annoying, can't stand his tone and so on) can be attributed to him using it indiscriminately, regardless whether it fits to the genre/song or it doesn't. He needs to fix that and to use belting techniques (plural, then he sings more than one genre) appropriate for the genre/song he is singing at a given time. And as I said above, "Your Love" sounds like he is improving. But that is irrelevant for the article, so let us stop that discussion here.

MeUnknown010No need to remove a good and relevant section. This is a vocalist after all. Every informational article about vocalists should have a section about Vocals in my opinion. The only thing that needs to be done is to add back the vocal range. That's Dimash Kudaibergen for god's sake. A singer who is known as the embodiment of vocal range, in a manner of speaking. Petra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.147.164.228 (talk) 16:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

A section needs to have substance and merit on its own and to be more than just a bunch of repetitions. If it stays here, it has to be rewritten accordingly.
He is known for 1. wide vocal range, 2. singing multiple genres 3. mixing techniques in one song (= crossover). And one could also claim, that he is known for vocal agility.
He is *not* known for singing death metal (or growls, which he uses for a few weeks as a gimmick on rare occasions and for now in poor quality, and by no means as a regular part of his songs) or using distortion (has done it twice) or rock screams (has done it in 2 songs, once in each) or rap (less than 30 secs rap in one song). And he has never performed any R&B song. Therefore having it written here is misleading the readers. Vocal style is how a singer usually sings and not what he has once or twice at some point.

I read through almost the whole talk page and to this conversation here: I am not really sure what problem you have here. And I don't think that you shall determine the quality of vocals because you obviously have no education in that field (really no offense) and what you say contradicts all expert opinions about Kudaibergen. 1) If you want to go high in your mix with ease and still maintain compression, power and strong resonance, twang is the best technique you can go for. It's a very, very, very good technique that is sustainable for the voice and therefore also recommendable for every singer's vocal hygiene. And you won't be able to have that power on such high notes without forward placement, very bright vowels, a slightly raised larynx, tilting the thyroid cartilage, and the inducing of more nasal, pharyngeal and hard palate resonance (which is referred to as "twang"). And yes, it is very unusual to see it applied outside of hard rock, classic rock, power metal, glam metal, hair metal and the likes, but there is a reason why you only find really high powerful belts in those genres, If you want power on high notes and know how to use twang, why not use it? Yes, some people don't like the sound because it's so forward and bright and a little shrill, but that doesn't make the technique bad. I am a classically and contemporarily trained mezzo-soprano, and when I go into my higher classical head voice, many people also say that it is shrill, and additionally it is very loud because I sing it with an open throat technique. Many people do not like the sound of high female operatic singing because they find it shrill. Does that make the technique bad? No. A classical bel canto technique is even much more sustainable for the voice than singing high notes in a contemporary style. Tone is something subjectice and a matter of taste, and above all: A technique-specific tone has nothing to do with technical quality. And saying that twang is a bad technique shows very impressively that you are not educated in Vocal. 2) Same with his growls. If you do not like something, okay. (And seems like you don't like several things about this singer, alright. We get it It's alright. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion). But that doesn't make any singing objectively bad. Dimash uses growls with a very arytenoid dominant approach (which means that this is not only a slight, it's a very heavy effect that he uses). It is extremely hard to do these with a clear pitch and with understandable phrasing. As you maybe know, growls are not known to be well understandable. His are. Because he is able to control them that well that the phrasing and enunciation are outstandangly good. That he has immense voice control is nothing new, but apparently he also knows how to control his arytenoid cartilage really well. He is very skilled in what he does. This is a world-class singer. And I've never seen him do anything in a "poor" way (except for his English in the beginning of his international career). 3) It seems like you are intentionally trying not to understand the meaning of the current wording of the section. That he has a main genre, some side genres, and additionally uses "styles and techniques of many other genres" (e.g. growls, rap etc) doesn't mean that he is a metal vocalist or a rapper. It means that he implements styles and technques of those genres into his singing, And that he implements styles and techniques of multiple genres into his singing is one of the main singing traits that Kudaibergen is known for. This needs to be in a section about his vocals. And it's not correct that he uses those techniques rarely. If you go to any Kudaibergen concert you will see every single one of those genre-specific techniques applied. Every single one. And he does not need to e.g. have songs that are exclusively RnB. In that case, you would even be able to call it a side genre instead of a style/technqiue that he implements into songs of other genres. And, btw, RnB is a very vague term and there are indeed songs that could be qualified as RnB. And with respect to rock and metal: Almost every song of Kudaibergen includes elements of those. If there's no growling and no distortion, there is at least almost always twang (which is, once again, extremely unusual to see it applied outside of heavy music, but it is one of the things he is associated with, whether people like the tone of it or not), and especially in live concerts he screams in pretty much every song to cheer up the crowd. So, once again: Implementing different styles and techniques of multiple genres into his singing is one of the main characteristics of Kudaibergen's singing style. And in his case it is even a unique characteristic. If you are interested in seeing said styles and techniques applied in a classical crossover setting, there is only one single known singer in the world who does it. Additionally, if you compare it to other articles about singers, you can see that those usually even include styles and techniques that were only used a single time, or only used in a studio recording but never showcase live. For example, look at the regularly cited article of Devin Townsend that was recognised for its outstandingly high quality by Wiki admins: I'm a fan of Devin myself, but I have not one single time seen him apply falsetto. I've only seen him go high via screams. In Kudaibergen's case, however, these are styles and techniques that you can absolutely expect at every single Kudaibergen concert. And their appearance in a description of his vocal styles and techniques is more than justified. 4) Concerning the overall "relevance" of the section: Such a section (about vocals) is relevant for every singer. And in this case especially. This is a singer with unusually high skill, unuusally big versatility and an extremely unusually big range. There is probably no other singer on Wikipedia for whom such a section is more "relevant". 5) About the vocal range topic: Most popular high quality singers have their vocal ranges on Wiki. And Kudaibergen's is bigger than the range of any other singer on Wikipedia. And he's also the only singer in the world who uses a huge range in most of his songs. If he is not supposed to have his vocal range on Wikipedia, then who is? And yes, the "Six Octave Man" should have his octaves on Wiki. And it's not true that exact vocal ranges ae not allowed on Wikipedia and that the numerable articles that include vocal range collide with Wiki norms. They partly do, because the ranges are partly not or only very poorly sourced (via fan YT uploads, online forums etc). But: Vocal ranges on Wikipedia are allowed. But they should have a reliable source.And the mentioned range should be notable. A two octave range is not. However, Kudaibergen's range is most probably the most notable on Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Musicians/Archive_6?fbclid=IwAR343owVmJomnmrS26ZZNVVJWBZXqYXE6nXgZgAU17bJO4ol0VKKYsuaaRs#Vocal_range 190.46.74.201 (talk) 23:25, 5 April 2020 (UTC) PS: Those genres that are already mentioned in the info box receive sources with that section, sources and information in a well-structured, centered way that can be easily found in the article. And those that are not mentioned in the info box wouldn't be mentioned at all without this section. Kudaibergen's mix of different genres and styles is one of the main characteristics of his singing, of course, it needs to be there

1 - Classical mezzo-soprano are you? Judging from your comment, we should assume, that you perform in twangy mix in the opera house, because one size fits all and twang and only twang is what one should use all the time regardless of genre and song? LMAO. If you're a classical singer, then listen to Pavarotti and tell me, that his belting is not powerful, and then listen to David Phelps (who is a gospel singer) and tell me, that his belting lacks power, and then listen to Lara Fabian (who is a pop singer) and tell me, that her belting sounds weak. All three of them are powerful belters in their own way and they all sound great. But, of course, all of them are/were doing it wrong, because they weren't using twang and only twang all the time. And if that was not what you wanted to say, you should maybe read my previous comment again. I didn't criticize, that he is using twang at all, but that he is using it indiscriminately and that this fact is causing 90% of all critics on him.
2 - The growls are not melodic, are spoken and not sung, and he uses them as a gimmick. (I'm hopping for him getting as good at it as Tim Foust one day, so they can become an actual part of his *singing* range. Still, he did hit those notes.)
3 - He screams in MJ-style, who was also doing it all the time to cheer the crowd up and who never claimed to be anything else but a pop singer.
4. I for sure don't disagree, that he is unusually versatile, mixes styles and has extremely wide range. I even recently wrote on an admins page, that those are the 3 primary characteristics of his singing.
5. Again, read, what I previously wrote. I didn't say, that his range cannot be noted here. And again, I even wrote on an admins talk page some time ago, that the range displayed in the article back then was wrong and needed to be corrected. What I said was, that his range cannot be changed here within seconds (means without reference) after he hit a higher or lower note.
So what are you about? Are you trying to turn him into a death and heavy metal singer, because you don't like classical crossover, operatic pop, folk and ballads, what the overwhelming majority of his fans seem to like most about him and what made him famous? Or just trolling?
— Preceding unsigned comment added by MeUnknown010 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

MeUnknown010 Hey there! You know that I like you and always try to cooperate with you. And I'm really thankful for the interest you have in this page. Otherwise, I would be quite alone here. There are indeed some people who write on the talk page, but except for you, I'm the only one who's really working on the article. But tbh:: I'm not exactly sure, what point you are trying to make her either. To address some of your comments:

1) I'm a singer too, and unfortunately I have to agree with the other person. You are obviously not trained in vocals. Noooo problem at all though There are two major different fields of music: Classical music and contemporary music. Some of the main characteristics of classical singing are the use of a gola aperta technique (lowered larynx and raised soft palate) and the use of round vowels. This is what gives classical singing an "operatic sound". But there is a certain passagge within your mix range that you can't go past with a lowered larynx and round vowels. And you need to slightly raise your larynx and especially you need to go brighter in your vowel choices, if you want to go high in mix. Now here's what Im trying to explain: You can't sing in your upper mix with an operatic sound. There is no upper mix in classical singing. At this passagge you would need to switch to head voice in classical singing (which doesn't happen either though because opera singers are either basses/baritones/tenors or countertenors, not both. In classical music, you either sing with your chest voice or with your head voice. That's also why the associated and applied range of every voice type according to the vocal fach and, thus, of every opera singer is exactly 2 octaves).

Basically, all singers you mentioned don't sing in upper mix. This does not "only" apply to classical music in general, and, thus, also Pavarotti, it also applies to David Phelps and Lara Fabian. They don't sing in upper mix. Have you ever seen David Phelps or Lara Fabian sing e.g. a G5 in mix? Or a B5? No, because they don't do it (and Lara doesn't do it even though she is a female and has a higher placed ranged, and, thus, higher placed registers and passaggios). As the other user said: If you want to go really HIGH IN MIX WITH POWER AND COMPRESSION, then, twang is a great tool. Please always read carefully Especially if you look at David Phelps, you'll see that his range is quite limited. Because he only sings in chest voice and the lower "half" of his mix (which is still part of the M1, the chest voice register). He neither sings in an upper mix nor in head voice (even though there is one single recording of him in which he briefly uses his M2, in falsetto though, but it wasn't well-elaboated, and he never showed it live. But anway... this is about high mix). He actually only sings in 1 of the 4 human vocal registers. Dimash sings in all 4 (and even in all subtypes of them). All 3 singers you mentioned are great singers with a good technqiue. And like them too. But it's a much smaller tool box and you can't compare what they do to techniques that Dimash uses, as they simply don't do these things.

2) Those are typical growls.
And because you mentioned Tim Foust: Even though he is said to be a bass, I'm not a huge fan of his low notes tbh: His lower notes have hardly any tone. There are bass-baritones who can sing it with muuuch more tone, for example Phil Anselmo can go lower than Tim Foust with a lot of tone. Phil does switch into some lower fry at his lowest notes, but it's a natural vocal fry, most low voiced people switch into natural vocal fry in their lower range, but it's still less fry than Tim has (and in Tim's case it's not natural, he seems to push to go that low). And tbh: I'm not sure, if Tim's voice type classification is correct. I honestly rather don't see him as a bass. Also if you compare his speaking voice to bass-baritones (like e.g. Phil, you can see that Tim's speaking voice is higher. If you want to listen to low notes wihtout any growling and without any vocal fry, which is rather rare: My personal suggestion would be Alexander Eder, a young bass-baritone. Not the veeery best singer, but definitely a good singer and he has reaaally beautiful low notes, without ANY vocal fry, and with a very rich and bassy tone. Tim Foust has hardly any tone in his low notes. Dimash has more tone in his growls to be honest (even though he uses a stronger heavy music effect). And contrarily to Foust, he can phrase in the first octave. I'm really trying to be objective here. There are e.g. bass-baritones who have of course more tone than Dimash down there, but Dimash's 1st octave growls still have more tone than average. And more than Tim's.

3) No, he doesn't scream in MJ style. I have 3 screams of him (a clean one, a distorted one and a gritty one --> including vocal coach comments explaining the technique used) in my link collection above

4) I'm sorry, but I need to agree with th other user here. Why do you keep saying that he is not a metal singer? See, one of the main aspects of Dimash's singing style is that he fuses different styles. And I differentiate in my section between genre and influence/style. That you use styles and techniques of e.g. rock, metal, rap etc doesn't make you a rock/metal singer/rapper. It means that you are a classical crossover singer who uses styles and techniques of other genres. And this is one of the main things that stands out the most to even vocal coaches and voice teachers. I shared quite some links both in the article and on the talk page. But I'll additionally leave some for you here:

1) To show that it is e.g. extremely unusual that he uses heavy twang outside of heavy music (and I'm not even speaking about screams and the like here, which is even muuuch more obviously a heavy music technique) and that it is sth that is obvious and sticks out to vocal coaches and voice teachers who listen to him for the first time:

a) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kexvaw1KeA4&t=4m33s&
b) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sZWW4SOIzQ&t=3m13s&
c) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdn99mO-7z0&t=5m30s&

And that he implements styles of other genres into his singing, is really one of the most obvious vocal features of Dimash, and it's part of every single vocal analysis. And each time, an expert (voice teacher or vocal coach) talks about Dimash, there are 2 things they point out:

1) his big range
2) his use of different genres ad styles
(3) and those who want to give some kind of value qualification additionally mention the high quality))

Here are a few examples of sources I already use in the article:

1) Mary Zimmer's analysis of Dimash (a US voice teacher who teaches in all fields of contemporary singing, but is specialised in rock and metal):
https://365info.kz/2019/01/sekrety-peniya-dimasha-raskryla-muzykalnyj-ekspert-iz-ssha
And here are some links with timestamps of the video that's embedded in the article:
"What's really crazy about this guy is his exceptional vocal range and his unbelievable mastery and combination of multiple different vocal styles."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO_jD6VDTx4&list=RDkO_jD6VDTx4&t=56s
Then she additionally shows an excerpt of a Dimash performance, and says this:
"So we had an incredibly wide range of notes throughout this, thats No. 1: We had a wide range of notes. And, No. 2, we also had a wide range of styles that he's doing (and we also had a wide range of dynamics).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO_jD6VDTx4&list=RDkO_jD6VDTx4&t=4m10s
Later she talks even more about the different styles, and btw also emphasises the twangy rock technique:
"And then he starts the clipd that we watched in pure belting [...], rock singing with a forward placement."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO_jD6VDTx4&list=RDkO_jD6VDTx4&t=13m42s

2) The Italian vocal coach Valy Ella who also analyzes Dimash talked about him in an interview. She was asked about her influences and singers she admires. And she says the following: "Però devo dire che le due artiste che ho ascoltato di più e che ho amato in modo particolare sono la grandissima Mariah Carey e la mitica Tori Amos. Tra i nuovi artisti, una voce che sto seguendo e di cui ho parlato spesso nelle mie vocal coach reaction su youtube, è quella di questo cantante straordinario Kazaco, Dimash Kudaibergen, che con più di 6 ottave di estensione mischia la vocalità classica, con il rock, con i canti tradizionali… insomma anche qui, la fusione di generi e la qualità sono il tema ricorrente."
So she basically explains Dimash as follows:
She says that he is an extraordinary singer from Kazakhstan, that he has a range of more than 6 octaves, that he mixes different genres such as classical music, rock and folk, and that what makes him stand out is the high quality and the fusion of genres.

3) Then this Brazilian article here, also points out that one of the things that make him stand out is that he has such a big repertoire of different genres and styles, and that he showcases all kinds of styles in his concert, "everything from operatic singing to rap".
https://extra.globo.com/tv-e-lazer/musica/fas-brasileiros-de-cantor-do-cazaquistao-tentam-burlar-regras-da-internet-para-ouvir-lancamento-23735349.html?

However, back to the heavy music influence:

Here's what some other vocal coaches/voice teachers say about him: (Just some more random videos I watched recently)

1) "He is really welcoming them to his concert. [...] We already had some awesome signature Dimash sounds: Excellent rock edginess in his upper chest voice, flips up into his whistle register and some crazy high flageolet notes up there."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiWL_gyFmFQ&t=7m42s

2) "There is the thing I know and love about Dimash, this rock ending he has on all of these vocals" (She refers to the cry he does in the end of pretty much every belt):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZuZKvWSe0g&feature=youtu.be&t=8m22s
And a little earlier in the video she also emphasises his twang:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZuZKvWSe0g&feature=youtu.be&t=5m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZuZKvWSe0g&feature=youtu.be&t=5m6s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZuZKvWSe0g&feature=youtu.be&t=8m3s

3) This is not a vocal coach videos, but he is a very experienced rock singer, and I just watched the video, so I thought why not include it?
"I love it. And you know, I lve it even more because... I always say that Dimash would be a great metal singer. And actually here you hear... this is much more rock. And even though there is an orchestra, you can also hear a nice guitar with a little bit of distortion, and the drums... And with the vocals and the rhythm, this is more of a hard rock ballad so to speak. It almost reminds me of Iron Maiden here, like Bruce Dickinson does, how he goes up in his belting and higher. pretty awesome."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RO_V5HQGzg&t=6m30s
Later: "That's definitely, definitely, Judas Priest territory there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RO_V5HQGzg&t=7m16s

Oh, and I fully agree that this section is of big relevance (otherwise I wouldn't have added it ). Dimash's range and fusion of different styles (and high vocal quality) are what makes him so special. And it's what he is known for. And yes, most singers have such a section, but in Dimash's case it's indeed more relevant. Because his range is bigger and also his versatility is.

Btw, I would be reaaaally happy, if we could settle this argument tbh

Hello Dimash Kudaibergen, Jasmin Ariane has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

It is true that a Vocals section is relevant for every singer on Wikipedia, and in Dimash's case it is obviously even more relevant. The relevance of such a section is absolutely evident imo and doesn't need to be discussed. I was honestly really surprised tht you started this debate here. I fully appreacite your enthusiasm but I would be reaaaally happy, if we could settle this

Hello Dimash Kudaibergen, Jasmin Ariane has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm actually quite busy, and it took me a long time to write this comment here... hmm But thank you for your input

Hello Dimash Kudaibergen, Jasmin Ariane has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Best wishes Jasmin Ariane (talk) 10:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Titles and Honours

Pope Francis awarded Kazakh singer Dimash Kudaibergen with a commemorative medal on the Pope's visit to the seventh Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions on Sept. 14-15 in Nur-Sultan. Kudaibergen shared the news on his Instagram account. “Many thanks to the Pope for the medal.18 Sept 2022 164.39.190.18 (talk) 14:18, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Dimash's Name

Dimash is his name, Kudaibergen is his grandfather's name. (Kanatuly means 'son of Kanat'.) Please read up about the Kazakh naming system before changing the name he is referred to. He definitely should NOT be referred to as 'Kudaibergen'. On that same subject, Dimash has changed his name from. 'Dimash Kudaibergen' to 'Dimash Qudaibergen' because of the changes from the Kazakh Cyrillic alphabet to the Kazakh Latin alphabet. Roscha (talk) 01:01, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Check your talk page. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 01:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Transliteration of Kazakh letter Қ

The Kazakh language has two letters that correspond to the English 'k' sound - Қ, and К. The canonical transliteration of Қ is now the letter Q in Latin script for English language text.

Qudaibergen's English transliteration should therefore be initial Q rather than the now deprecated K.

Dimash Qudaibergen also now uses the Q transliteration on all official announcements and product information.

It seems to me that the article title should be changed to reflect this. Ratpie (talk) 11:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

I would of thought it would be a non-controversial move, but apparently not based on the brewing move war. So then let's discuss it. Gecko G (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• Support The official transliteration scheme being implemented by the government now transliterates "Қ" with "Q" instead of "K". Previous versions of the transliteration plan had been on using "K", and so when he started becoming known in English speaking countries he originally became known with the "Kudaibergen" transliteration and even using the "DK" initialism, but even he is now using a "Q" in his western media releases. Wikipedia should follow suit (albeit with a redirect from "Dimash Kudaibergen" for anyone searching using the old name). Gecko G (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

  They still need to request for the article be moved as I direct them to make that request. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 22:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

  I see now that on Ratpie's talk page you refered them to WP:RMT, but how is it a technical move? Shouldn't it instead fall under WP:RMUM? (or maybe WP:RMCM if there's some potential for living person BLP issues) Gecko G (talk) 22:44, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

  Which ever is the correct one. They need to go through the process to get it changed, instead of changing it as they please. Btspurplegalaxy 💬 🖊️ 05:30, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

  I've only ever moved 2 page's before (1 for a typo and 1 for a nonsensical disambiguation), and thus I've never had to look into the details of different move processes before, but after now having read the instructions at 3 different wikipedia guidelines, then if it falls under WP:RMUM -which it seems to- then it was done in the correct manner. Formal requests/processes are only needed for the other 2 cases. Gecko G (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

  If you look at the information here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimash_Kudaibergen&action=info in the 'Page protection' section you will see clearly that there is no requirement to go through any process.

  Page protection

  Edit: Allow all users (infinite)

  Move: Allow all users (infinite)

  There is no justification for either retaining the mistransliterated K or keeping the page with the wrong title. Ratpie (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

  Just a note for anyone reading this discussion after the fact: at the time of Ratpie's above post on the 13th it wasn't page protected, but it has since become such. (and I'm currently enquiring elsewhere as to why it became so protected) Gecko G (talk) 21:12, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 15 April 2023

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) – MaterialWorks (contribs) 21:22, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

---

Dimash Kudaibergen → Dimash Qudaibergen – The Kazakh language has two letters that correspond to the English 'k' sound - Қ, and К. The canonical transliteration of Қ is now the letter Q in Latin script for English language text. Qudaibergen's English transliteration should therefore be initial Q rather than the now deprecated K. Dimash Qudaibergen also now uses the Q transliteration on all official announcements and product information. It seems to me that the article title should be changed to reflect this. Ratpie (talk) 20:24, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

This is the harder and ultimately likely the slower way to do it, I would of given Btspurplegalaxy a chance to reply to the above section, but ok. For the record, I Support - Discussion in the previous section has been going on for 10 days with no dissention on the merits of the move, only on the method of conducting said move. Don't forget the related steps: Same thing should be done at Dimash Kudaibergen discography and Dimash Kudaibergen should then become a redirect to Dimash Qudaibergen. Gecko G (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I'd like to rule out any possibility of WP:SOCK being involved, at least not in this discussion.

From what I've seen, there are some single-purpose accounts or IPs trying to change names.

1. 15:22, 8 April 2023 2603:7080:5000:1f:b8aa:7e90:f2a1:3685
2. 14:48, 23 February 2023 88.119.158.117
3. 01:03, 20 February 2023‎ to 01:29, 20 February 2023 Roscha‎
4. 11:49, 21 December 2022‎ 2a01:4c8:c04:a7d:18c9:37e3:6be6:2edb

• I only sorted out the Q part, although I have noticed the similar multi-account and IP interference problems in the Dinmuhammed part, but it has not been sorted out.--Rastinition (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Are you saying you are going to do a formal WP:SPI? I'm not convinced there enough evidence but I also don't object if you believe there is. Does the move have to be held while that process is underway or can it proceed independently of such? Gecko G (talk) 22:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't support or oppose either side. I hope no more single-purpose accounts or IPs interfere here until 20:24, 22 April 2023‎.That's all.

Whether I express support or opposition will not affect the result and I don't want to affect the result, so I will not express my position in the future. Rastinition (talk) 01:02, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Although many reliable English-language sources use "Dimash Kudaibergen", the singer himself uses "Qudaibergen" in all his official socials.[1][2][3] Per WP:NCP, "For minor spelling variations (...): when a consistent and unambiguous self-published version exists, it is usually followed." 162 etc. (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

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.

2023 Update

This is not a fan page or a diary--this is a neutral source of key information about Dimash. The level of detail in the Singer section, for example, should not be duplicated for the Super Shine Bros show. Not every appearance or collaborator needs to be itemized. Things like the scholarship that he won and then gave up and thus did not ultimately impact his career path can be excluded. High level, major accomplishments and milestones are enough. General references, like to his recent trip to China, can be supported by a few links where people can go for more information.

Keep it simple, straightforward, businesslike, and well-supported by links to reliable media sources (not fan sources, not his own webpage), and you should avoid any problems.

Neutral is good. There are enough fanpages out there. Roscha (talk) 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Good AND required by wiki guidelines... Hopefully this advice will keep people from running into trouble. Suzannamoran (talk) 13:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)