Talk:Freaknik: The Musical
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why does 'Trap Jesus' on the page redirect to the same exact page?
editThe link 'Lil Wayne - Trap Jesus' links to /trap_jesus which is a redirect back to this page. Delete the repetition? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.168.34 (talk) 01:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Not Tiger
editThat's Russell Simmons, not tiger woods.
Run time
editMike jones is not in this the producers names was something jones —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.0.193.131 (talk) 01:23, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I counted and it's only around 45 minutes long. Do 15 minutes of commercials count? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.73.245.151 (talk) 20:33, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
- Yep. That's to say it occupies a one hour segment on television, including commercials. It is not to say that the special without interruptions is 45 minutes long.--Scyldscefing (talk) 19:34, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
How does the author know that "ghetto commandments" is going to be 2:16? where is the source? all the youtube songs are only 1:03 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.231.139 (talk) 23:35, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
yo meng t-pizzle just released ghetto commandments on iTunes n.e. buddy got ifo up on dat shit?
POV, etc.
editThis could use a little editing to make it sound more like an encyclopedia article and less like a fan appreciation piece. Just a little. PurpleChez (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Where's the plot?
editOn my computer, there's no plot other than a notice for copy-editing. It may need to be reverted, unless someone right now is editing it.--Hemi9 (talk) 03:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Agreed on the plot-line
editI know you guys who do the editing apperantly 'despise' any hint of fandom in any wikipedia articles, but it doesn't make any sense to take down the ENTIRE SECTION then put nothing in to replace the potential information...simply because you dislike the manner in which it was written.
I'm still shocked that after years they never implemented a policy against taking stuff down on a whim.... SOME TYPE of information is better than no information at all. If you deem it unfit to be a wikipedia article, fix it immediately, or just mark it down as "needs editing" or whatever. Don't take down the entire section and leave it to rot for months till you feel like getting around to it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.232.206.165 (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)