Talk:Untitled Nas album

April 22, 2008: Date of CD Release

Nas was on a radio show and within the last two minutes, was asked when the album would come out. The response was, April 22nd.

Here's the link to go to: http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/audio/id.4293/title.nas-foxxhole-radio-interview ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.71.40.153 (talk) 09:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

--STDZzij (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)==Album Cover== Whats the source on that cover?--Sosa 15:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC

It's a fake, someone made it to show of her skills, and she admitted it was fake. Therefore, I've deleted it. Mittens2317 (talk) 17:10, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Why is the cover back in the article? The citation doesn't have any sources of its own... Shouldn't we wait for an official statement? --68.158.159.128 (talk) 16:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Could the original cover be included in the article as it was changed due to controversy?--STDZzij (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Untitled

Def Jam said that title will not be allowed and that Nas is not even releasing an album on December....I will go with the record label for the source.--Sosa 14:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Wait, I looked at everything again and the new album is untitled. I mean, I was putting up the sources but I noticed that the date of the articles were before the release of Hip Hop Is Dead and I found an article that the first --Sosa 01:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)title name of the album was gonna be called Nigga but changed it to Hip Hop is Dead. I think it's a mistake here.... --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 23:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Here is an MTV article from October 13, 2007, claiming Nas said the title would be Nigga, and it was confirmed by a "source close to the project". (MTV.com) --Zimbabweed 01:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

And here is source from the record label, Def Jam saying that it WILL NOT be the title and NO album being released in December. Useless article until information is release from the label and not Nas, that is why the previous article entries for this ninth album have been deleted, twice. --Sosa 15:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The Fox News article that came from didn't say Def Jam denied the album title, it said an inside source. Def Jam themselves haven't said anything about it and Nas says they have no problem with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.82.7 (talk) 20:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

It is not titled, and im sure he wont be let to use this title so easily. West Coast Ryda 18:22, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

This article is pretty much useless....waiting until confirmation is the best thing to do, Nas is not a credible source, he's the G.O.A.T., but lets face the facts....this will change a billion times before it actually drops...--Sosa 01:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

If you stop making nonsense edits and ignore each warning it would be better. West Coast - Ryda 16:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

non-sense edits? thats subjective--Sosa 16:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Are all of you people idiots? this album's title is NOT "Untitled", it is simply "Nas". check the album cover if you'd like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.2.27 (talk) 01:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

References

Universal Told To Change The Title Of Nas’ ‘N-Word’ Album Or Lose $84 Mil

A New York Assemblyman has called on Universal Music Group to change the title of Nas’ upcoming album, Nigger, or lose $84 million in investments.

As reported earlier, Nas announced his album’s controversial title at a concert two weeks ago, and the news was met with stern disapproval from Reverend Jesse Jackson and The NAACP (The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People).

Despite the uproar caused by his announcement, Nas said he would not be changing the album’s title and claimed that his label Def Jam, a subsidiary of Universal, had not offered any resistance to the title.

According to The Brooklyn Paper, Fort Greene assemblyman Hakeem Jeffries has requested New York’s Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli ‘to withdraw the $84 million that the state pension fund has invested in Universal and its parent company, Vivendi’.

“[They are] profiting from a racial slur that has been used to dehumanize people of color for centuries,” said Jeffries. “It is time for Nas and other hip-hop artists to clean up their act and stop flooding the airwaves with the N-word.”

The Brooklyn Paper reports that a recent report showed that ‘the New York State Pension Fund has $2.8 billion invested in 16 major entertainment companies, including Time Warner and Disney. That number does not include the state’s investment in Vivendi.’

“It’s a staggering amount of money, which at least justifies a review of the appropriateness o f the content that is flooding the public,” said Jeffries, who formerly worked as an assistant general counsel at CBS and a lawyer at Viacom before he was elected last year.

A spokesperson for DiNapoli, who manages the pension fund, said that the comptroller “is concerned about this issue and is intending to contact [Universal] and urge them to halt the release of the album.

Earlier this year, The New York City Council voted to ban the use of the word “nigger”.

“The [Council made] an important symbolic step, but I’m more interested in the substantive approach of reviewing the multi-billion-dollar investment that the New York State pension fund makes in the entertainment industry,” said Jeffries.

Universal did not repsond to a request for comment.

Nigger is slated for release on December 11th. --KarmaLoop 06:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Ref

Who on earth removed the references template and the Nas template? Also the categories. Woop-Woop That's the sound of da Police 15:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

What It Is

a snippet was released today on hiphopgame.com entitled what it is. possible track for new album though not confirmed.snippet may have to look down a lttle. just posting it if anyone wants to hear it--Bren202 (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

by the way, i don't think a snippet can be "leaked", as it is mostly used for promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.90.176 (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

stop adding "What It IS" information to the page, nas said it will not be on album--Bren202 (talk) 01:06, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

no nas said that beat was not gona be on the album the vocals are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The Fear

Uhhh, anyone know the title that will be used on the album because nas said the short title is "the fear" but the long title is "the fear of the black man's dick.[1]--Bren202 00:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It's mentioned of course on the source. It should be said but differently. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 01:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Cover?

Source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.173.137 (talk) 08:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I found a source http://www.hiphopgame.com/news.php3?id=2134, however i doubt it's the real cover.--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 02:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Maybe it's just a "draft", for an official one would be released later on. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 03:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The album cover is a fake. [2]. Apparently the chick wanted to prove a point by making a fake album cover. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.47.107.251 (talk) 10:26, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Track listing

I removed the track listing because i didn't see it on XXL or any other reliable websites and i thought the source it had wasnt reliable enough.--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 06:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

The ref should be ok. The author of the ref has posted tracks of past albums (like The Cool) which were correct. Spellcast (talk) 06:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I just find it hard to believe they would have a track listing two months before the album is scheduled to come out and I would think I would see something on XXL, HipHopDX or other notable hip-hop websites.--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd think so too, but looking at the author's past posts, it seems to be reliable. Anyway, there's no rush to add it. You can wait for a more mainstream source if you want. Spellcast (talk) 06:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

While checking out datpiff.com, I found a link for the rumored tracklist for this particular cd. I'm not sure of its validity, or if someone would want to post it on the page, but here's the link if any one is interested: http://www.defsounds.com/rumors/Nas_nigger_track_list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.254.101.90 (talk) 18:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Def Sounds posts a lot of rumored track listing most of them are false--Rebel Without a Pause (talk) 02:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Just had to re-delete it. - Mittens2317 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mittens2317 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Some one put this on the page, it's produced by Dj Khalil here's the link http://videovault.morrisvideos.com/videos/nas---what-it-is-first-listen-by-dj-khalil —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.125.78.12 (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I tried to alter the track listing as there were songs with no references that looked made up.. But I'm not sure how to fix it now. By the way I think it should be mentioned (like I said about Ice Cube having a possible appearance on the album. The 2 have recently hooked up and mentioned it. So why not have it there?

Some of the tracks on the list are on the Nigger tape and they probably won't be on the album

I just listened to "Be a Nigger Too" a few times, sorry, couldn't find a stub for it, is the "sample clearance issue" just because it is a riff on Dr. Pepper's old ad tune, "Be a Pepper Too" because that doesn't seem like a sampling issue. Usually that is allowed in parody, fair use for artistic expression, ain't it?!? I'd have to listen to it further to see if I could hear if there is another song, other than the Dr. Pepper song, that is sampled or layered in there that I couldn't figure out, but that just seems like Dr. Pepper didn't want to be associated and with all the other ish goin' on, Nas couldn't be bothered to fight it? I just want to say, as my opinion, aside from the merits or how ya feel about the lack there of of Nas either testing the waters to see how far he could go or whether you're really offended by it, that it is a real shame that in this day and age an artist cannot bring to the marketplace the product as he intends it to be. Seems like the discussion should have veered off towards First Amendment Rights and free speech. It ain't exactly Big Bidness vs. the little guy but come on. It is not only that he got a right to say what he want when he want where he want, but that he has a right to express himself artisticly and that means the totallity of the whole. The KKK can have clan meetings protected by the Constitution, and Nas can't put out an album, from track listing to cover art to title, as he sees fit? DR DJ Ragu 2008

Album title changed

The upcoming album won't be called "Nigger", instead it's going to remain untitled till it hits the stores: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1587737/20080519/nas.jhtml

It's already been mentioned. DiverseMentality (Talk) (Contribs) 00:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

So, how about we change the album's name to Untitled instead of just Nas? Ideal4real (talk) 14:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

If the title is going to be changed it should be "[untitled]", without capital letters, in order to make it clear that it isn't actually titled: Untitled.--STDZzij (talk) 20:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Tracks

what about war is necessary?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanv91 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

War Is Necessary is an exclusive track just for GTA IV Ideal4real (talk) 14:23, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

The Nigger Tape cover

http://content.onsmash.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/nas_green-cover2.jpg SE KinG (talk) 07:57, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Is the release date confirmed as the 15th? The back slip of 'The Nigger Tape' features the line, "Tuesday, July 1, 2008." It was released the 9th and conflicts with the currently featured date.

Inside Cover

--68.158.243.12 (talk) 21:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Track listing

The track listing posted doesn't seem like it's the real deal. First of all: -"Be A Nigger Too" was left off and I highly doubt that's going to happen. -"Nigger Hatred", which leaked today, will most likely be on the album, or so I think. -Guests D-Block, Dead Prez, Jay Electronica & Rick Ross are nowhere to be found & I believe that at least one or two of them would be included. -Chances are the track featuring The Game & Chris Brown would not be titled as it is here, with there being a similar sounding one to be featured on L.A.X. This is all my opinion, however. Any thoughts on this matter?

It is on iTunes now. And Be a Nigger to has been leaked for a while, and was found out not to be official and Jay Electronica produced a track. So I think this is legit.

--Piazzajordan2 (Talk.) 11:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yea its def legit as of now. i know the original producer of "be a nigger too" and he said there were sample clearance issues. i presume that "nigger hatred" will simply be more material for The Lost Tapes 2 and yea, dead prez and jay electronica produced some beats on the current track listing. i hope rick ross isn't on this album.

With all this said, about 8 tracks have already been leaked so there is a chance that the album's release date gets pushed up or pushed back again. if it gets pushed back again, then songs like "nigger hatred" and other material might be included.Noahdabomb3 (talk) 22:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The track list on itunes has changed to 16 album tracks and then some bonus tracks. Dillon90 7 July 2008

Leak

People need to stop posting that the CD leaked on the page. It has no place on the site, especially when the link people are posting to confirm it are to direct dl links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfnj123 (talk • contribs) 07:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Heres a link to a site that talks about it without having a d/l link. http://sohhdotcom.typepad.com/sohhcom/2008/07/nas-album-leaks.html Nas also made a video and that could also be a good link —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.237.203.79 (talk) 09:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The Leak

The Album was fully leaked on the night of July 1st, not 5th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.38.14.178 (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Stream available on last.fm

The album is available to listen to, for free, on last.fm at http://www.last.fm/music/Nas/Untitled?autostart . I added this to the intro. If it's not considered a "stream", then someone can change the wording. I think it deserves being mentionned in the intro with the release date information. Additionally, if anyone can find the date that it was added to last.fm, that'd be nice to have. M.Nelson (talk) 03:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Move Request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 20:02, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I have proposed a move from "Untitled" to "Nas".

According to amazon.com, bestbuy.com, target.com, iTunes, fye.com, and a bunch of other sites, the title of the album is called "Nas" not "Untitled".

SE KinG (talk) 03:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ithink they're just calling it that by default because it has no title. Nas has referred to it as "Untitled" in many interviews and even calls it "Untitled" on "Hero". I think this article should still be called "Untitled (Nas album)" Dillon90 (talk) 15:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the latest Allmusic blog calls it Nas as does their album listing. Most other albums that nominally have no title also are generally considered eponymous. — AjaxSmack 06:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think changing it to just "Nas" will diminish the essential essense and connotation of the title. Nas said himself that by the album being untitled it will prompt people who know about the whole "Ni**er" fiasco to remember the original name.

Furthhemore, Look at the cover, and i dont think anyone here is naive enough to suggest that the "N" on his back is for "NAS", and of course its to signify the original, and not so much forgotten, but current title of "Ni**er".

In 10 years time when people look back on the album, i dont think nas would appreciate it if they just thought it was untitled, but it would benefit them to realise it was forced to be untitled. In accordance to this, wikipedia will be, as it is now, a powerful reference tool, and should provide as much information as possible and not be misleading.

"The accomplishment of the new title is that it provides a symbol for the relative anonymity of some of the greatest minds of our generation, particularly among those who don’t have any reservations about including the original title in their vocabulary" says Anthony henriques of Pop Matters, and i couldnt agree more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.75.209 (talk) 13:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

So as you might have gathered by now, i am against it being moved to just "NAS". 195.194.75.209 (talk) 13:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)intellectualrapgod

Come on, the album is going to be released tomorrow and you don't know what the official name of the album is?-SCB '92 (talk) 16:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree this should be moved to Nas (album). The album's title is not Untitled, the album HAS NO title, and as such is referred to "untitled." For another example of an untitled album going under the artist's name, see The Beatles (album) (commonly known as The White Album). --Zimbabweed (talk) 18:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it should be called Nas (album). But I also agree that it shouldn't be called Untitled (Nas album) because that makes it seems that the NAME of the album is "Untitled", which it isn't. Surely someone can think of a name for the article that gives the album no name but an appropriate title for the article.

I think "Nas' ninth studio album" seems the most appropriate title for the article to be honest. Dillon90 (talk) 19:17, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

We'll get to the conclusion of the title of the album tomorrow, when at a music store upon purchasing the new album (hopefully)-SCB '92 (talk) 19:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

We already know that the album is untitled (as in has NO title) because Nas has said it. The stores just call it (Nas) so that they can have a name for it.

So I think the most LOGICAL name for this article is "Nas' ninth studio album" Dillon90 (talk) 23:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please answer me this; what will you do when Nas decides to make an eponymous album? 92.20.22.214 (talk) 06:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)Intellectualrapgod

Nas (2010 album) or whatever the year of release is. --Zimbabweed (talk) 18:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well today's the day the album is released and we still haven't decided what to call the album, great! Well I think the page should be moved to Nas because if it was called Untitled, the title would be on the album cover, and if it was called Nas, and the album is by Nas, then he wouldn't put his name twice on the album cover, otherwise the title is clever and is Untitled and literrally untitled on the album cover... too bad the album couldn't be released as Nigger, that've been so cool-SCB '92 (talk) 08:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

If you click on the link: Release history you will receive a more thorough explanation. --Zimbabweed (talk) 19:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The album simply has no title, hence the name of the article should be "Nas' ninth studio album" or "Nas' untitled ninth studio album". Dillon90 (talk) 17:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree. It should be moved to and called Nas' ninth studio album. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 19:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No, the album is called "Untitled", there are explanations in the article and sources linking to it, it was revealed in iTunes, and he changed the title so people will know what to call his album because it has no title, so the album's "Untitled", and it says in the article that the album was released in 15 July, but in the infobox, it says 11 July, which is right?-SCB '92 (talk) 19:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Follow the "release history" link Dillon90 (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Who here has purchased the actual CD and uploaded it onto iTunes? If you have, what is the album title listed as? I purchased it on iTunes and the album title is "Nas." So if the actual CD says the same thing when uploaded onto your computer, then that is what the article title should be changed to. It doesn't matter what he or anyone else is calling it in articles and interviews, what matters is what the actual CD says.66.30.179.15 (talk) 19:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

iTunes has to have something for the album title or else it screws up the algorithm and an error occurs. The same with Amazon and Best Buy.com, they need to have _something_ for the title or else an error occurs. The album has no title, and this article should be moved. --Zimbabweed (talk) 19:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"If the actual CD says the same thing when uploaded onto your computer, then that is what the article title should be changed to"

^^That statement^^ is untrue and very flawed, who has decided that iTunes is the be all and end all for album titles? And no the album is not called "Untitled". It is an untitled album. If you watch any TV appearance he's done in the last week it has been referred to as an album with no title and on various websites too and by Nas himself. This article should be moved. Dillon90 (talk) 22:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

review

i removed this part because the link was dead and there was no prove if its right or wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.86.127.244 (talk) 09:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

i added Yo raps review becaouse its a good and rap reviews i sugest u take out some more cas there really lazy reviews like Los Angeles Times cas half the review he or she talks about the controversy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Louis Farrakhan

Track 10 is misleadingly titled "Louis Farrakhan"when on the album it is simply "Untitled".

Although Louis Farrakhan is consistantly mentioned in the chorus, he is not at all mentioned by nas himself, and i think this has an implication on the title choice. If you listent to the introductory words, about discipline and the "QUALITIES" of Farrakhan, i think you will get the gist of what nas is getting at, being, i think, about nas himself, nas as a revolutionist who inspires and inculcates discipline in others, and who leads others. i think he added the Farrakhan part in order to offer a comparison and a reference point. But essentially, the lyrical content is about nas himself.

So i suggest the title of the track should be changed to "untitled". 195.194.75.209 (talk) 13:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)intellectualrapgod

Done. Dillon90 (talk) 19:12, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Pitchfork Media review

Debatable, but I think the review should be kept under the ratings of the album. Honestly, as much as I praise Nas' music, the review is notable and has the same right as any other review to have their rating put up. It may be low than the other reviews but it's still notable. --Esanchez_{(Talk 2 me or Sign here)} 20:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Disputing reviews only because they are negative is entirely WP:POVPUSH. A better reason would be needed to exclude it. Many great albums and artists were initially were slagged by critics, and quite a few weak albums now accepted as "classics" received reasonable poor reviews before the party line had been established. I think superfans who delete bad reviews may be lacking perspective on this. / edg ☺ ☭ 07:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand where your coming from...but really read the review a few times.From the very off,it is clear that the author wants to cause contreversy..which is ironic since this is what he claims NaS is doing.Simply casting a blind eye upon the deep cultural theme in this album is bias in itself.The bias also is confirmed when for no apparent reason the reviewer/idiot rants about stillmatic not being on par with blueprint....that is the point when this all comes clear....he is a jay z fan,thus being impartial will not suffice.I am in favour of keeping reviews that discredit Untitled based upon SOUND,LOGICAL comment and argument,which is something this review lacks.A complete bias and hypocracy.

I don't think that the Pitchfork Media review should be included because the writer did a poor job critiquing the album. The writer of the article appears offended by the lyrical content of Nas' "Untitled", and therefore the writer went on a personal vendetta and tried to drag the album through the dirt while offering an ignorantly-written review. The article gave "Untitled" a 3.8 review, at first read, I thought they accidentally switched the "3" and the "8". Then I read the review and realized that the reviewer was writing with a chip on his shoulder. Dronias (talk) 00:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Reviews

Rolling Stone and All Music 4 Stars http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/21747730/review/21883814/nas http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:fxfexqe5ldde~T2

Rapreviews gave the album 8.5 stars. I think all three should be included since all are credible review sources just like pitchfork should remain posted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballistic08 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Review of Untitled by The Independant http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/reviews/album-nas-untitled-def-jam-870486.html

Include this review as The Independant is one of the most respected papers in the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.138.72 (talk) 18:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

 Done. DiverseMentality^{(Discuss it)} 18:58, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

A crucial review should be included: HipHopSite.com 5 Stars http://hiphopsite.com/review/show/id/121 "HipHopSite.com" is one of the most highly-regarded Hip Hop sites, and this review is one of the most well-written reviews on Nas' "Untitled". Dronias (talk) 00:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

some one added The Guardian gave the album 2 and the reviews not evne a paragraph long im goign to take it off —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

That's not a justified reason for removing the review. DiverseMentality 22:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

its not even a music review it dosent really review music it jsut has some reasons y he not a good rapper any more, is that a good reason?

I'm afraid not. This was also argued with the Pitchfork Media review, as it got 3.8 out of 10. A notable professional review is still a notable professional review. I also read the review; it does in fact review the album, vaguely, but does its job. DiverseMentality 00:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

ok but the pitchfork media does infact review the album i read it but the one u put out dont even mentain one song off it but id otn really care —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC) add Yahoo music's review it gave it 10/10 http://uk.launch.yahoo.com/080728/33/21zhs.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.121.153.33 (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

what happened to the P4k review? selective editing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.0.4 (talk) 10:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

This review always seems to be removed for its low rating. It can be restored by undoing the edit via the history. — ξ^xplicit 21:42, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Album title

i really don't know why there was controversy with the title of the album, wasn't there an controversy with 2Pac's Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z. or Ol' Dirty Bastard's Nigga Please?-SCB '92 (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but I have a few possible explanations:

1. In the hip hop world, "Nigga" ≠ "Nigger", which is what Nas intended to call his latest album.
2. Before 2Pac released Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z., I doubt he was as popular as he would be later on or as Nas is today. His only album before that was 2Pacalypse Now. Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z. likely wasn't as popular as Nas' new album.
3. Nigga Please...come on, we all know ODB was loco!! :)
4. In general, today hip hop is much more popular than it was in the '90s so anything now gets more media attention and is more exasperated than it has been before.

My two cents, Do U(knome)? ^yes...|_{or no} 01:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Next Single?

I'm not 100% positive, but I think the next single is gonna be Make The World Go Round. Main reason why is because it's been recieving airplay on 105.1 in NY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.38.2 (talk) 01:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Well until a source is provided it stays as one single. SE KinG (talk) 01:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move Pt. II

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 23:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Untitled (Nas album) → Nas' ninth studio album — Yes, I am aware of the recent discussion that ended with no consensus. Nonetheless, I feel there is a strong need for the title to be changed. I just bought the album and the word Untitled is nowhere mentioned in the paperwork. In fact, there simply is no title for this album. Also, the previous request to move this article to Nas (album) is quite funny to me, knowing what may have led to the confusion. It seems that many believe that the word "Nas" is in the cover art, and therefore the album should be named as such. However, if any of you have the opportunity to get on your hands the physical CD album, you will notice something. If you open the frame of the album and pull out the paper sleeve, you will realize that the word "Nas" is not part of the cover art, but is rather printed on the the front of the transparent plastic frame of the album. Even Nas himself explained this during an interview with BET and stated that the album has "no title" (Just skip to 0:58 if you are not interested in Maino's biography). — Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 04:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• To Nas's ninth studio album? "Nas" is not a plural, so its genitive is Nas's. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• They are both correct, at least in American English. Do U(knome)? ^yes...|_{or no} 06:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. It's Untitled and if you look, all the Untitled albums are just left as Untitled. What's special about this one? SE KinG (talk) 06:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Your argument has a small, yet deep flaw. Nas'/Nas's album is untitled, not "Untitled". The page Untitled is meant to be a list that "includes works that have been released with the official title "Untitled" (or a derivative), as determined by product labeling or other acknowledgement from its producers", as "Some works, paradoxically, have a title of Untitled". In fact, Untitled (Terri Walker album) and Untitled (Five Pointe O album) are titled as Untitled. Leaving this article's title under "Untitled (Nas album)" implies that the album is actually called Untitled, which clearly is not. Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 09:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• Comment There are other untitled albums (e.g. Led Zeppelin IV, which actually does have a title of runes.) Something to consider. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• I noticed that there is a Love Symbol by Prince, that is untitled. But these cases are different from this one, as probably Love Symbol and Led Zeppelin IV were the album's most common names. Here instead, there really is no "most common name" (which seems to be a mix of "Nas", "Untitled" or " — ") Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 13:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Make the World Go Round

Game confirmed on BET's 106 & Park Live on August 26, 2008, that this is the second single, as he co-produced it.

--Piazzajordan2 (Talk.) 22:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Another move?

Untitled Nas album sounds okay, but wouldn't it make more sense to call it "Nas' untitled studio album" or "Nas' untitled ninth studio album".

Discuss. SE KinG (talk) 22:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't that pretty much what I proposed two sections above (and you opposed by the way)? Nonetheless, support for "Nas' untitled studio album", with either the "ninth" or "Untitled". No need for both.Do U(knome)? ^yes..._{or no} 01:09, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

At that time I thought the album name was actually called "Untitled". SE KinG (talk) 22:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Untitled Nas album works just fine. This is the same situation as Untitled Korn album, where there is no title whatsoever. --Pwnage8 (talk) 15:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Many (most?) sources, including the Def Jam website itself, do indeed call the album Untitled. The article only has the name it has now because someone moved it acting on their own view without discussion or presentation of reasoning. Don't confuse what Wikipedia chooses to call its article with correctness or definitive truth. 86.44.25.191 (talk) 05:17, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Making the video

The video to Make The World Go Round is being made.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlboKLxu-pU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thugondarel (talk • contribs) 00:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Chart sources

I've changed the sources from the official charts to αCharts due to the fact that the previous sources are updated on a weekly basis, thus failing to cite the peak of the album. DiverseMentality^{(Discuss it)} 18:24, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Make the World Go Round

Is ANYONE going to make a page for this? Arjoccolenty (talk) 10:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The Title

On iTunes the called the album "Nas" so shouldn't it be that and not untitled? 98.221.153.118 (talk) 21:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Retail websites call the album "Nas" because they can't sell an album without a title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SE KinG (talk • contribs) 22:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Make the World Go Round

Are we ever going to make an article for it? 96.238.63.170 (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Untitled Track Note

I noticed that on my version of the album, the name is 'Louis Farrakhan'. I also see that above, it was decided that it should be determined 'Untitled' because there was no official name. Shouldn't that be noted somewhere in the track listing? I mean, it makes sense. Just wanted to know what you think before I did it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshison (talk • contribs) 03:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Reference 8

This YouTube video has been removed. Someone should find a different version of it. -- SatanicSanta 18:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Untitled Nas album/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

Start: Y A reasonably complete infobox Y A lead section giving an overview of the album Y A track listing Y Reference to at least primary personnel by name (must specify performers on the current album; a band navbox is insufficient) Y Categorisation at least by artist and year C: Y All the start class criteria Y A reasonably complete infobox, including cover art Y At least one section of prose (in addition to the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs Y A "personnel" section listing performers, including guest musicians. B: Y All the C class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details Y A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians N No obvious issues with sourcing, including the use of blatantly improper sources. Y No significant issues exist to hamper readability, although it may not rigorously follow WP:MOS This article has obvious issues with sourcing with plenty of [citation needed] tags found throughout the article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 02:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 09:41, 30 April 2016 (UTC)