This article is written in
American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of
hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 3 December 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Hans van Lindenberg.
@
Jennica: In U2's album
No Line on the Horizon Bono's writing credits are done with his stage name so i guess its okay to use his stage name
32zel (
talk) 04:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oops. I didn't see the Bono header. I almost linked a U2 album but figured it was irrelevant hah. --
Jennica✿ / talk 05:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Shouldn't it be titled "Damn."
The title is clearly "Damn." with the dot at the end. I understand we may not title it "DAMN." because it's just a stylization but why do we omit the dot sign in this case? The same thing I could say about the titles which are spelled with capital letters and dot at the end
TashiTalk to me 21:46, 11 April 2017 (UTC)reply
@
Tashi: Per
MOS:TM. There is a strong precedent on Wikipedia to avoid including full stops. Please see the discussion at
Talk:Mad Love (JoJo album) for further arguments. TheKaphoxT 23:23, 11 April 2017 (UTC)reply
@
TheKaphox: thank you for your response. I still do not agree with all arguments but at least you have a point that it has not been a new problem.
TashiTalk to me 21:07, 12 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Yes the title should be "Damn." Stylized as "DAMN ." — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.21.37.141 (
talk) 01:08, 18 April 2017 (UTC)reply
"Damn." is the title not "Damn". One dot makes a huge difference. Just because it seems like a minor issue doesn't mean it should follow the convenience of readers/editors. "Damn" is not a recognized Kendrick Lamar album title. — TheMagnificentist 06:07, 6 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Requested move 15 April 2017
This discussion was
listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 6 August 2017. The result of the move review was no consensus to overturn or endorse.
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. There is a clear policy based consensus against moving the article as proposed. !votes supporting moving do not address the stylization points raised by those opposing, and
WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments are relatively weak.(
non-admin closure)
TonyBallioni (
talk) 18:54, 29 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Damn (album) → Damn. (album) –
MOS:TM (guideline) does not trump
WP:COMMONNAME (policy). The album title is represented in the majority of reliable third-party sources with a full stop at the end of the title. We do not change the titles of albums/works that end in exclamation points or question marks; periods should not be treated any differently. See:
Daily Beast,
Billboard,
NME,
Rolling Stone,
USA Today,
NPR, and
BET among others. MOS:TM is frequently misinterpreted and is not meant as a way for Wikipedia editors to change the name of works; it's meant to differentiate between official titles and unprintworthy trademark stylizations that are not the official name of a brand/product (i.e. "Macy*s" is not the name of "Macy's"). Chase (
talk |
contributions) 17:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)--Relisting.Yashovardhan (
talk) 18:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
assume good faith on the part of others and to
sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
Many people likely do not remember the fullstop as part of the name.
Anthony Appleyard (
talk) 05:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
This is not an argument. "Many people do not remember" vs. third-party sources that use it (
WP:COMMONNAME). Chase (
talk |
contributions) 14:05, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This isn't a rehash of "Gangsta." vs. "Gangsta (manga)", is it? ...To be fair, I proposed using "Gangsta. (manga)" after the first attempt on changing to "
Gangsta (manga)" failed. But that's a couple years ago. Still, adding a full stop to please trademark enthusiasts would not benefit most readers.
George Ho (
talk) 05:10, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose - per above. TheKaphoxT 13:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support as per reasons in move request.—
16← (
talk) 20:38, 16 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose - per user George Ho's argument.
Jamiehino (
talk) 03:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose — It's just stylization, isn't it? Like the tracks? I'm not entirely sure what to think of the whole thing, so my oppose is a weak one for now.
Aria1561 (
talk) 04:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
The actual title of the album and songs on the album all end with a period. Refer to iTunes or Spotify listings. Chase (
talk |
contributions) 16:43, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Untitled Unmastered is also listed with a period on both, but we've gone this far having the title just "Untitled Unmastered", so I imagine it's just stylization that shouldn't affect the article title.
Aria1561 (
talk) 19:57, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Separate case. I'd need to see the sources and which ones use the full stop for that album and which ones don't. Considering how often Wikipedia changes the title of albums and other works where it isn't warranted that might need a separate RM. In this case, it's been established that the majority of sources are representing Damn. with a full stop. Per COMMONNAME we should follow suit. Chase (
talk |
contributions) 21:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support per reasons given. —
WLM /
? 14:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)reply
CommentDamn! (album) exists. Is it the full stop that is frowned upon on here? I will admit, it would make the article look a little wonky with the full stop intact. --
Jennica✿ / talk 05:35, 18 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment - these are just some albums that end in periods.
Support – the album itself it actually titled DAMN. While it's established we don't do capitals, the album itself is titled Damn. so it should be titled the way it's intended to be.
BeatlesLedTV (
talk) 20:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support based on the 7 sources provided by Chase that use "DAMN." or "Damn.", and the lack of counterexamples. As far as possible, we should stay consistent with how the album is named in the
reliable sources covering it. -- Lear'sFool 03:09, 19 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support move to "DAMN." or "DAMN. (album)" If a user types Damn in the search box, they'll get redirected to Damnation, where they'll have to go to the Damn disambiguation page, and then find the article - if they've even bothered to go that far. On the other hand, if it's moved to the name that it's been referred to in the media and the actual stylized name, they could see it appear in the search prediction pop-up and reach their destination much easier than the current name.
Jon Kolbert (
talk) 07:50, 19 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – The title is listed as "Damn." on Kendrick's official website, it's not just a stylization for the cover.
Red Alien 12:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support - as per the requestor's rationales, and even though it's an
WP:OSE argument, consistency is a nice thing.
Onel5969TT me 18:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – seems damn obvious.
Uncle Alf (
talk) 13:11, 21 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support move to "Damn." – a full stop in an article's title is not stylization―it is part of the title. You might as well move
Airplane! to
Airplane (film) or
D.R.A.M. to
DRAM, both of which make no sense. The same rationale applies to Thomas Pynchon's novel
V.Malayy (
talk) 13:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – Just like untitled unmastered. the casing and punctuation is relevant to the title i.e.
Airplane!.
Callan992 (
talk) 17:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Relisting comment Although, there seems to be a clear consensus for support, there is a possibility of mild canvassing going on. Reposting to get more viewpoints and if any other editor spots a case of canvassing.
Yashovardhan (
talk) 18:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
SupportOppose, per
MOS:TM: a significant majority of reliable sources that are independent of the subject consistently include the special character in the subject's name, as shown by the nominator. –
wbm1058 (
talk) 19:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
But, as
Cornerstonepicker lists below, a significant number of sources do not use the full stop. I don't see a significant majority here, But I do see a very popular artist, to have gotten this much coverage!
wbm1058 (
talk) 23:34, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose per
MOS:TM and oppose the all CAPS option as well. An out-of-place full stop/period is more disconcerting than an exclamation point in running text. I looked through sources that use the period/full stop and it takes artful editing to avoid potentially confusing syntax.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a fansite or a promotional tool and should not be required to use to superfluous stylistic elements that could impede reader accessibility. —
AjaxSmack 19:20, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
You make a good point. Presumably italicizing the title Damn. will avoid confusion in running text, but it may be harder to distinguish a . in italics than it is to distinguish an italicized ? or ! – I am also opposed to all-caps as we have at least one
mainstream source using lower case. I think the the capitalized proper name Damn. in italics is (barely) sufficient to signal that this is not a "normal" full stop.
wbm1058 (
talk) 19:44, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
I agree that the italics help but I still see no compelling affirmative reason for the move when sources are all over the place on their usage. —
AjaxSmack 19:54, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Show me a few sources that do not include the full stop and I could change my !vote.
wbm1058 (
talk) 20:00, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Damn. I'm gonna have to change my vote. Thanks,
wbm1058 (
talk) 23:34, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
@
Wbm1058: why does this impact your vote? It was released to iTunes and other music services as Damn. [with full stop intact]. Those sources listed just chose to write it without it. Billboard is the publication for music. I would trust its judgement over The Atlantic or the Telegraph. --
Jennica✿ / talk 23:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)reply
I understand that the artist is just using the stop for
stylization purposes. We indicate that in the lead of the article: "(stylized as DAMN.)"
MOS:TM clearly indicates our bias is to avoid stylization that is not adopted by the majority of independent sources. I do not view iTunes, which is selling the song, as independent as mainstream sources such as Rolling Stone, USA Today, NPR, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, and The Atlantic, none of which are focused entirely on covering popular music. Since these sources are mixed, it seems clear to me that we should default to our house bias not to use this stylization. I give Billboard more weight than iTunes, but not as much as the more general-interest publications. It's perhaps ironic to consider, that if this were a less popular artist who only had coverage in music-industry publications, they might have a better chance of getting their stylization to stick on Wikipedia.
wbm1058 (
talk) 00:20, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Reminds me of the previous discussions at
Talk:Janet (album). Why should this be treated any differently?
feminist 09:55, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose. per AjaxSmack. The decorative full stop is confusing and this is a rehash of various similar discussions that have led to omitting full stops in similar titles. Note also that several reliable sources have been identified that omit the full stop. Decorative
full stops, and especially terminating full stops, are frowned upon in Wikipedia article titles, as in the "skate." example of
MOS:TM and the prior RM discussions for
Anderson Paak,
Bakuman,
Fun (band),
Gangsta (manga),
India Arie,
Janet (album),
Kobato,
Lovestrong,
Mad Love (JoJo album),
Melody (Japanese singer),
Moon (visual novel),
Okay (album),
Shakira (album), and
The Goods: Live Hard, Sell Hard. I don't think titles that end with ellipsis (like "
The Earth Is ...") are directly relevant here – that's different. The "
Love. Angel. Music. Baby." and "
D.R.A.M." examples are a bit more relevant, but they are outliers that have never been confirmed by an RM consensus, and the fact that they have four full stops interspersed in them makes it a bit more evident what is happening when used in a sentence. "
V." has also never been confirmed by an RM consensus, and placing dots after letters in abbreviations (as in "
V." and "
D.R.A.M.") is more conventional in English —
BarrelProof (
talk) 19:23, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Your argument hinges upon the assumption that the full stop is decorative a la the Skate video game (which only appears with a full stop on the game's cover art), when iTunes, and the artist's official website end the title with a full stop, as do the majority of third party sources that have reported on the album. Chase (
talk |
contributions) 16:56, 25 April 2017 (UTC)reply
We try to look primarily to independent reliable sources. The artist's official website and iTunes (and probably any other site that is promoting the album for sale) are not independent. We also do not try to follow the "majority". If the usage in independent reliable sources is mixed, we follow our own house style. Many similar examples have been listed for which we have had formal RM discussions and omit the full stop for similar titles. Please see also the comments by Cornerstonepicker and wbm1058. —
BarrelProof (
talk) 20:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose per AjaxSmack. It's an entertainment product which isn't consistently written with the period in third party sources.
In ictu oculi (
talk) 19:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support – The title is supported by reliable sources I believe the title should be as Damn., but not as DAMN.TheAmazingPeanuts (
talk) 16:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support The title of this album is clearly DAMN., and the fact that the rest of the songs have the period at the end of the title further proves that Kendrick intended his album to be capitalized and have a period at the end. Many people go to wikipedia for information, and it is the editors duties to make sure that the information is correct, even if it is as mundane as simple stylization of a title. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
72.189.130.245 (
talk) 23:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Readers will know the stylization of the album title in the first sentence of the intro.
2012MarcoMDNA (
talk) 05:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Oppose Its just a stylization and nothing more. —
IB[
Poke ] 04:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)reply
If it was "just a stylization and nothing more," it would just be album art decoration. It's actually being sold with the title and reported on in sources with the title. Chase (
talk |
contributions) 06:24, 27 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Support The title of the album is clearly "DAMN." by account of most sources, and considering that there are other album articles that use the album's stylized name I think this change would be appropriate.
-Euphoria42 (
talk) 16:25, 29 April 2017 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a
move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Sample credit writers in track listing
Is this necessary? I just noticed but at quick glance, can't find who added all the songwriters of the songs that were sampled. They're already credited below in 'Sample credits'. --
Jennica✿ / talk 01:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
@
Jennica: Who added all these songwriters of the songs that were sampled is by this
IP, these songwriters are not supported by the booklet.
TheAmazingPeanuts (
talk) 23:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)reply
They need to be removed because they aren't credited in the Damn booklet.
BeatlesLedTV (
talk) 21:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)reply
Youtube
is generally not considered a
wp:reliable source. Please discuss here before attempting to add content sourced therefrom. --
Dlohcierekim (
talk) 21:08, 1 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Meaning of "Damn"
Meaning of the word "damn" most used by teens or the age of 7-60
85.187.115.227 (
talk) 15:12, 14 April 2022 (UTC)reply
Second track listing
Per a
recent edit to the new It's Almost Dry article, a
similar question was brought to my attention regarding this article: the editor there mentioned this page having a second track listing for the Collector's Edition version of the album which, as we can all see, is merely the same as the original album but in reverse order. My thinking is that that's the sort of thing which can be easily explained in a sentence or two rather than needing a whole second template to get it across. These things take up a lot of space on a page and can be inconvenient to readers trying to scroll past them, and if they aren't supplying any new information in a way that can only be properly explained in that way then what's the use?
QuietHere (
talk) 19:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)reply