Talk:Hip hop music

Wiki Education assignment: Communication and Culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 February 2021 and 14 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): This is Axel (article contribs).

CENCH

is a nigggaaa 94.205.80.90 (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024

Add to Category:African-American music and Category:Hispanic American music because it originated with African Americans and Hispanics. 163.5.121.233 (talk) 08:55, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 03:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Black American Music F24

This article is currently the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2024 and 9 December 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mrsddhines (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by sheridanford (talk) 22:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 23 November 2024

Hip hop music → Hip-hop – This RM seeks to address two issues with the current title. First, music is an unnecessary disambiguator. Prior consensus, WP:IMPLICIT or otherwise, has already determined the music genre to be the primary topic, as Hip hop and its hyphenated counterpart already redirect to this page. If editors determine that this is in fact not the primary topic, then Hip hop should not redirect here and Hip hop (disambiguation) should be moved. Among the topics listed on the disambiguation page, Hip hop (culture) is the only other real contender for the primary topic. Pageviews for the past 365 days indicate that interest in the music genre article trumps that of the culture article by ten times, so it isn't even close. Related templates and categories such as Template:Hip hop and Category:Hip hop do not use a "music" qualifier, nor do most sources, so there is no evidence "music" is a necessary part of the term. Simply "hip hop" is more concise.

Upon further investigation, it appears the article Hip hop was moved unilaterally to Hip hop (culture) in May 2022, but this actually gives us stronger evidence. Inspecting the pageviews before and after the move, we see that the culture article averaged around 1000 views per day before the move (green line) but dropped to around 200 after the fact (red line), an average that has remained to this day. This suggests most of the pageviews before the move were in fact looking for the music article when they arrived at the undisambiguated Hip hop page.

The second issue this RM aims to rectify is the missing hyphen. Ngrams show "hip-hop" as the overwhelmingly preferred term; this holds true when narrowing down to only noun forms. Dictionaries that use a hyphen include the OED, Merriam-Webster, Cambridge, American Heritage, Collins, Britannica, Dictionary.com, The Free Dictionary, Vocabulary.com, and our own sister site Wiktionary; Longman was the only outlier I found. Several of these dictionaries specifically identify "hip hop" as the less common variant. Furthermore, the AP Stylebook recommends "hip-hop" and the Encyclopedia Britannica also uses "hip-hop", as do Spotify and Apple Music.

Even if you do not agree with the first part of this proposal, this second part should be uncontroversial as MOS:HYPHEN says to hyphenate attributive compound modifiers anyway, in accordance with standard grammar conventions. This is why we hyphenate African-American culture but not African Americans. Thus, if you oppose a move to Hip-hop, please consider supporting a move to Hip-hop music at the very least rather than blanket opposing. Finally, please note that the outcome of this RM will affect all hip-hop–related articles, categories, and templates; due to the sheer number of pages involved, they have not been tagged here but will be moved accordingly.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support per nom. He explains it well. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 13:24, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom. I agree that Hip-hop unambiguously primarily refers to the music genre, and already redirects to the current title. BD2412 T 17:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. "Hip hop" can refer to hip hop music, hip hop culture, or others (see Hip hop (disambiguation).) Of these, hip hop music is the primary topic, hence the primary redirect. This does not mean that the title of the Hip hop music article needs to be shortened - doing so, in fact, would violate WP:PRECISE. No opinion on the hyphen aspect. 162 etc. (talk) 17:22, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

  Once again, 162, you are misapplying policy. WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT specifically states There are times when a disambiguated article title [...] may be moved to its base name (unqualified title) based on a consensus that this is the primary topic for the unqualified term. You yourself have acknowledged that the music genre is the primary topic for the unqualified term "hip-hop", so no further disambiguation is needed and your argument contradicts itself. Primary redirects only arise when the topic is primary for more than one term, when the article covers a wider topical scope, or when it is titled differently according to the naming conventions — none of which apply in this case. Most sources refer to the music genre as simply "hip-hop", and most uses of "hip-hop" refer to the music genre. In fact, virtually all of the dictionary entries I have linked define "hip-hop" as primarily the music genre. There is no evidence that "hip-hop music" is the standard term of the music genre, and it appears we were merely using it for natural disambiguation purposes. This does not violate WP:PRECISE, and you must explain your thinking into why you believe this to be the case. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:27, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

  Per WP:PRECISE, "titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article." Hip hop is not unambiguous. Hip hop music is hip hop. Hip hop culture is hip hop. Hip hop dance is hip hop. We gain nothing by making the title of the article intentionally vague. 162 etc. (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

  You yourself wrote that hip hop music is the primary topic. Being the primary topic doesn't mean it's the only topic, but the most commonly recognized one. Hip-hop is all those things, but most often refers to the music genre. A primary topic is therefore, by definition, not ambiguous because most readers associate a term with that particular topic over all other. If you agree that the music genre is the primary topic, as supported by the overwhelming evidence presented, you can't argue it is ambiguous at the same time. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  >"A primary topic is therefore, by definition, not ambiguous"

  That is completely wrong. A primary topic, by definition, is ambiguous. Please see WP:DAB. 162 etc. (talk) 17:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  Further, a primary redirect doesn't automatically justify a move of the article to a shorter title.

  WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT gives the example of Einstein. The German physicist is the primary topic. He is quite commonly known mononymously as "Einstein". Einstein redirects to the article at Albert Einstein. But, "Einstein" is still ambiguous. There are a number of topics at Einstein (disambiguation) which are also known as "Einstein."

  Or, to spell it out, for Hip hop. The music genre is the primary topic. It is quite commonly known simply as "hip hop". Hip hop redirects to the article at Hip hop music. But, "hip hop" is still ambiguous. There are a number of topics at Hip hop (disambiguation) which are also known as "hip hop." 162 etc. (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  This continues to misread PRIMARYTOPIC and PRIMARYREDIRECT: Einstein is not titled "Einstein" because of naming conventions such as WP:SINGLENAME that take precedent, as outlined at PRIMARYREDIRECT, and would have certainly been moved otherwise; and if a topic is the primary topic, it means there is negligible risk of confusion with other topics of the same name, i.e. there is no ambiguity. But it is probably not worth trying to persuade you given all other editors have correctly read policy. I don't mean this in a disrespectful way, but it is concerning that you continue to misinterpret and misapply policy in so many RMs you participate in. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  My participation in RM discussions is in good faith. I have to assume yours is as well. Ill-considered accusations of impropriety are uncalled for, and I urge you to strike them from your previous comment. 162 etc. (talk) 07:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  I have striven to maintain civility throughout this and past discussions and have never crossed the line into NPA territory. However, calling out editors for their repeated misreadings of policy is not uncivil; civility is not to be confused with politeness (though I have nonetheless sought to remain diplomatic). While I recognize your comments were made in good faith, I am genuinely troubled that you may not have a correct understanding of Wikipedia's naming conventions, in this and previous discussions. This is not me trying to sound snarky. My advice to you would be to re-read our PAGs and consider why the RMs in which you went against SNOW consensus ended up passing. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  Sigh. Ill-considered accusations of impropriety are uncalled for.

  If you legitimately have concerns about my contributions, then the place to address that is WP:ANI, not here. 162 etc. (talk) 08:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support the DAB page should probably be moved here if not moved. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Theparties (talk) 19:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)