Talk:Bad and Boujee

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Hip hop Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet culture Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Songs This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

• Has no encyclopedic value beyond being a mere unanalysed listing of trivial characteristics.
• Is ostensibly wrong
  • Official video: clearly not a major tonality;
  • this has unambiguously "The tonic of “Bad and Boujee” is an Eb. The higher background melody (pictured immediately above) utilizes the Eb minor scale. Minor scales are nothing special. Big whoop, like every sad song ever is in a minor key. The bassline (pictured above the previous paragraph) is also centered around Eb. HOWEVER! The notes surrounding that Eb function differently meaning that the bassline does not use the Eb minor scale" - [no mention of Gb];
  • the chord structure is evidently centered around Eb (D# is a rarely used equivalent) ([1]); also evidenced here (if you click the the eighth notes on top, you get an option to transpose: the default is clearly Eb minor; same here if you pick "interactive viewer" and select the #/b option)
  • So, in summary, the preponderance of sources say Eb minor; and that (along with a bit of musical common sense) is what we go by. Picking the one source that says otherwise is WP:CHERRYPICKING.
• Now stop making accusations and instead go and relax (off-wiki if need be). Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  It may have been an "unanalysed listing of trivial characteristics", but it need not be. Deleting it was premature; see Mood (song)#Composition for example. I'm going to restore the section, but I'll leave it to you to add supporting sources; you should have done that from the start. I've no idea how to cite a web app; maybe you can include instructions for confirming the key in a footnote. Yappy2bhere (talk) 18:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Except Mood has actual sources which analyse this song and point out the characteristics. Here we only have the details. It would be like saying about the Prelude in C major that it is in C major (duh!) and that it is typically played at a tempo around 60-70 beats per minute: makes no sense if there is no deeper analysis. The only source we have that does anything ressembling this is the medium.com page, but that is at best a dubious, self-published source (see WP:RSP and WP:SPS) and I'd rather have either something more solid for this analysis, or remove it entirely. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I understand. I'm extrapolating from WP:REDLINK, WP:STUB, and the like which generally agree that if a thing could conceivably be expanded or elaborated then it should be left in place until it's clear whether it can/will be or not. I did see the Medium article and do know that it isn't reliable per se, but the author isn't entirely dubious [2] and there may be other sources. idk, haven't looked. I do know that user:SHUTUPGOODLORD has added key and tempo to several more articles, so you might ask if he has plans to expand these sections, and how. Yappy2bhere (talk) 23:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Except that applies to articles as a whole. In this case, it's WP:V which applies - if there's no real reliable source, we're better off not putting information which cannot be reliably sourced, doubly so if (as in this case) it is actually wrong. The medium source could be used if there's really nothing else, but that's a last resort; and the poor presentation [putting the correct key signature is like 5 seconds of work no matter which sheet music editor you're using; and in addition the tone isn't very professional] from someone who supposedly has a masters in music theory is not particularly attractive. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:39, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm very keen on good references but in this case all I thought was needed for WP:V was a second WP:RS to confirm that the song doesn't shift from a minor intro into the major like, say, King Herod's Song, thereby supporting the claim that the key in the title misinterprets the signature [3]. That is, signature per the existing source, corresponding key per the second, and maybe a note explaining how the key in the title isn't right but isn't exactly wrong. If you'd rather cite one of the other two sheet music sites instead, describing where to click and what to look for in the cite's postscript, that's fine too, better really.

  If the section can't be expanded then delete it, but maybe move the (sourced) key into the lede? Perhaps the tempo too, but the tempo is taken from the sheet music which isn't necessarily the tempo of the recording, so I don't think it belongs here outside the "Composition" section.

  Yappy2bhere (talk) 07:48, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• There's a problem with tempo. Tempo was originally given as 120 per cited source [4], but your sources (both Hal Leonard) have 130. Current 127bpm was an WP:unsourced change [5]. Using HL's value. Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Key's in the lede; key, composition tempo, and performance tempo are sourced in "Composition" [6]. Apparently performance tempo is a factor in harmonic mixing of different songs; idk if it's encyclopedic, but it's sourced. Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't wanna edit this in the article on the offchance that it gets reverted for some reason... but wouldn't it be noteworthy to bring up Takeoff's omission from the song? It was talked about nonstop for the longest... just a thought. 4TheLuvOfFax (talk) 23:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]