Talk:Mixtape

Rapidly getting out of date

Much of this article seems anachronistic, and sometimes even trying to push certain topics.

"The CD-R disc is currently the most common medium for homemade mixes" - really? Still? Most computers are sold without optical drives these days. Surely the USB stick is more dominant now.

I'm also suspicious of the entire "ctape" section. There's no wiki article for it and Googling for that term doesn't turn up anything about mixtapes.

--David G (talk) 00:44, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

• I am also suspicious of the "ctape" section; the grammar and syntax was off, and Google couldn't provide any information about what a ctape even is. Should this section possibly be removed? BandW2011 (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mixtape. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20061210001213/http://www.events-in-music.com:80/burnlist-mix-tapes.html to http://www.events-in-music.com/burnlist-mix-tapes.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:59, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Dubious

The statement in the article, that copyright owners have no recourse if infringing material is given away without profit, is simply not true (at least, not in the United States). Under US copyright law, the copyright owner can argue that their financial interests have been diminished by the very existence of the unauthorized copies. The law also recognizes that the infringer can receive non-financial benefit simply by using the material to advertise himself. Thus, copyright owners most certainly can take legal action against the infringer, and that action can result in the payment of damages to the copyright owner. The statement needs to be removed. NewYorkActuary (talk) 21:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The statement in the article is definitely untrue. I'm removing it. Wendy Day and Deborah Mannis-Gardner discuss the issue in the following video for a couple of minutes : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GtC6z7dRjE&t=4m33s . Wirty Inc. (talk) 21:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

beginnings of mix tapes

Mix tapes were popular in the 1970s. The article indicates that they didn't become popular until the 1980s, but that just isn't so. The earliest I remember mix tapes being all-over-the-place popular was 1978, but I grew up in a small town in North Carolina. I imagine the mix tape phenomena happened even earlier in places more attuned to music than my small town in NC was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1004:B0B5:57E6:7C8B:97E:C7AD:BA (talk) 02:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Two Concepts in One Article

I see this article as trying to combine two rather distinct concepts that share only a name. Mixtapes in the original sense have been replaced by playlists, and I would honestly argue that that conception could be merged into that page, because that's really what people were trying to do for each other previously but when everything was on one format. Perhaps a note at the top with a redirect if one comes to the "Mixtape" entry looking for this former conception.

Personally, I would like significantly more information about the current and future uses of the concept of a mixtape, which mostly seems to be an album that an artist wants to classify differently for whatever reason. I'm very curious why no one seems to talk about mixtapes when they can sometimes represent more of the artist's output than traditional albums, like 12 mixtapes to 5 albums or something. Thanks. 130.45.43.153 (talk) 19:53, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

I have long meant to split this article because of this. -Lopifalko (talk) 09:49, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree. I have tried a few times to find out just what artists mean now when they call one thing an "album" and another thing a "mixtape" and I can't find anything that explains it. It does seem to me to be that a mixtape is a mixtape just because the artist decided to call it that and not because of any other criteria. Also, Kendrick Lamar put out something he called an "EP" despite it having 14 tracks and being over an hour long. It seems like what something is and what artists decide to call it might not be the same thing at all anymore. 159.2.34.252 (talk) 19:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

SELF ESTEEM 102.88.36.96 (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

"Mixrecord" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Mixrecord has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 3 § Mixrecord until a consensus is reached. Deauthorized. ^(talk) 21:21, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Complete overhaul of the page

I've added lots new information to this wikipedia article about mixtapes. However, I still need help verifying the information during the mixtape era. Almost all of the article's stuff in the 1980s has no proper citation. Help would be great in verifying the information of some of these! BlondArkhangel (talk) 06:37, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mixtape/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: BlondArkhangel (talk · contribs) 06:18, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Leafy46 (talk · contribs) 19:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to quick-fail this nomination under criteria #1: "It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria". A quick look through the article reveals a lot of uncited material, some of which I've gone ahead and marked with a template. The article also suffers from a lot of choppy wording (such as "By the early 2000s, mixtapes started changing by definition through hip-hop."), has a touch of synthesis (e.g. "mixtapes have evolved to allow artists to present music that could be considered eclectic or genre-blending" is not supported by a citation, but by an example), and seems to be incredibly US-centric without giving much view to non-American (or, indeed, non-Western) adoption of mixtapes: the only artist mentioned who is not American is Drake.

I'd suggest fleshing out some sections a bit more (specifically adding more details to the "History" section and expanding the "Release and marketing" section to mention physical release of mixtapes), re-structuring the article using one like Bootleg recording as an example (e.g. possibly merging "Current trends" into the History section), making sure that everything is cited properly, and giving the article a good copyedit (or sending it through peer review). Given that you're a newer editor, I'd also suggest reaching out to a more-experienced one on broader music topics like this one, and to keep practicing writing. Good luck with the article, and feel free to re-nominate once you feel everything is up to snuff! And do let me know if I've been too harsh, as this is my first GA review, after all.