Talk:It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back

Tracklist and sample list

Previous discussion

Tracklist/Sample section merge? Does there need to be two sections for the tracklist and the sample section? I was going to merge the two together, kind of like I did on the A Future Without a Past... article. Just wanted to know if there'd be a problem with that. WikiGuy86 (talk) 18:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC) The only problems would be that there are so many samples, it would be kind of messy. But its worth a try. Dan56 (talk) 18:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC) Though the current tracklist format doesn't look awful, I agree w/ Dan56 on the "messy" factor. I honestly think that the previous one (w/ the samples in a separate section) looked a bit better. In my opinion though, the type of tracklist table used for pages such as It Was Written would be the best for this album (minus the "producers" column, being that the Bomb Squad produced the whole thing, and it'd be unnecessary to have them listed in each and every song as the producer). If I were to change the current tracklist format to either of the previous 2 mentioned, would there be any complaints? --Blastmaster11 (talk) 18:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC) If everyone thinks it better another way then it's fine with me. I personally prefer the version of the tracklist now. The way it was before felt too excessive (as far as having an entire section just for samples on the page) and it seems like it will be almost the same thing if we use the style from the It Was Written article here. WikiGuy86 (talk) 03:46, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

The track list is somewhat awkward to navigate due to the inclusion of the sample list. One important aspect of this album is the amount of sampling that was used - as such, quite deserving of a separate section devoted to discussion of the sampling - why they did it, how they did it, how much it cost, and that the use of the samples has restricted reissues of the album due to the licensing costs involved. I'm wondering if the sample list could be separated, collapsed per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Tables and WP:PROSE and moved to a section on the sampling which picks out the main points and discusses the main samples.

I am also wondering about the source for the samples - The-Breaks.com. Is this regarded as a reliable source? This statement is not reassuring: Please remember that this site is composed of many educated guesses on both my and the the contributors parts, so please excuse any mistakes, but feel free to disagree with our own opinions. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:41, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I would like to add that this information is better presented as a table/templated track listing, as a list split from the relevant section, i.e. track listing, brings up readability issues and elongates the article (Wikipedia:Table#Size). The track listing template is not required, but just one example of how a track listing can be shown (Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Album_article_style_guide#Track_listing); the template does have the "extra" parameter which is for "per-track information" (Template:Track_listing#Parameters) so perhaps the samples can be incorporated there as nearly each track has samples. Unfortunately, the source is not the most reliable, and samples were almost never credited/cleared during hip hop's golden age, so it's a moot point. Would WhoSampled ([1]) be a better source? Dan56 (talk) 21:02, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080913103452/http://www.everyhit.com/ to http://www.everyhit.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:14, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070626050454/http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH to http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=SEARCH

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:42, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

No, Oris Josphe

No Oris Josphe does not appear on this album, whoever or whatever he or she is. I have the original album and it makes no mention of this person or thing. Just because you found it AllMusic does not make it correct. So I have taken the liberty to remove this person or thing Credit where credit is due, know what I'm saying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.133.97.238 (talk) 05:34, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Abryn (talk · contribs) 03:59, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Lead doesn't require references, so long as the things in the lead are mentioned in the body and sourced there.

Lead could be structured a little better. Consider combining the first and second paragraphs together.

Sabella's involvement is absent from the body and unsourced.

Rationale for the song should be a little stronger to justify itself. The caption seems to provide a good one.

Strongly recommending paraphrasing more; the Reception section has too much quotation, and a lot of it seems like stuff that could be summarized in your own voice.

Attach the respective sources for US Billboard Top LPs and US Billboard Top Black Albums

Check to make sure all of the reference values are correct, I saw at least one issue with an accessdate.

Amazon.ca can't be used as a source, please find something to replace it

Otherwise it's pretty good. Only major problem is the paraphrasing issue. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 23:37, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Abryn:While I was doing some of improvements I noticed unreliable sources such as songfacts and whosampledwho. I can't replace them all. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

@MarioSoulTruthFan: I would recommend then removing that information if you still can't find sources. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 17:41, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

@Abryn: I removed some of them, but the samples of the album all rely on the source which is not reliable. On top of that, the article is not mine, I'm not familair with this topic I tried to give it a hand as it didn't seem too much work and could easily pass. But it is just to many flaws, I have other projects right now. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 17:56, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Going to fail the GA. If you feel interested in trying again, the issues shouldn't be horribly insurmountable to help fix it. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 17:02, 19 December 2019 (UTC)