Talk:Tonedeff

Untitled

"which is alleged to be among the fastest in hip-hop history at 13.5 syllables per second"

In which song?

the song " Champions Freestyle", its insanely fast, def the fastese

He shouldn't be credited with the flow of 13.5 syllables a second. That measurement was only taken over about two seconds, and not a whole verse. Other fast rappers can flow at super high speed for longer and while Tonedeff no doubt can, there is no measurement for 13.5 across a whole verse.

That's why it's a "record" - you hear about runners who can do a 40 yard dash in 4 seconds or whatever - but they obviously can't run a marathon at that pace. -64.112.227.142 (talk) 17:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I love Tonedeff but this article is horribly made. An entire upheaval may be in order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.251.24.250 (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

He should be credited with the record. He broke 13.5 sps. No matter how much time he was able to hold it for, he broke it. The song wasn't Champion Freeverse, though. It was Most High by The Plague. There's a few videos on youtube of him doing it live. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OriginalKwerk (talk • contribs) 19:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

This whole dispute is a little odd. from where I stand, the whole 13.5 syllables/sec is not referenced, and nobody seems to know where it came from. Who actually timed it? Thus it could be taken out. That being said, it could very well be accurate. I have a good-quality version of the song and could time it myself but that wouldn't exactly be non-original research, would it? Either way, 26 syllables in 2 seconds is absolutely insane, but does the line 'which is alleged to be among the fastest in hip hop history' even merit being in the article? There could easily have been someone faster that not enough people heard or one who hasn't been discovered yet. Just leave the time in there and remove the 'alleged' bit because that is much more disputable. Mathesoneon (talk) 18:54, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Tonedeff. 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/20090325071852/http://www.abcdrduson.com/interviews/feature-vo.php?id=174 to http://www.abcdrduson.com/interviews/feature-vo.php?id=174
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325071852/http://www.abcdrduson.com/interviews/feature-vo.php?id=174 to http://www.abcdrduson.com/interviews/feature-vo.php?id=174

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) 18:08, 8 January 2018 (UTC)