Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Music pics[edit]

What photos do we want included in this section? I figured that in addition to Eminem and Beyonce, Linkin Park, Kanye West and either Taylor Swift or Carry Underwood. Of course, User:Dilbaggg is very passionate about not including Swift for some reason, claiming she wasn't as big this decade. Yes, she wasn't as big in this decade as she was in the next, but that was explained in the caption, and to say her influence wasn't that notable yet is completely false, see Fearless (Taylor Swift album) and subsequent videos and singles in the late 2000s. Regardless, I am okay with her photo not being included, but to say that only two photos is enough for this massive section is wrong. We should move to highlight the main genres of the decade - rap and hip hop (Em and Ye), pop (Beyonce), county pop (Underwood / Swift) and nu metal / hard rock (Linkin Park). Perhaps emo rock as well, but I'd say the photo in Fashion is sufficient. Let's discuss. ~ Flyedit32 (talk) 09:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flyedit32 I already discussed this in your talk page, so I will just paste the points here:

On 2000s stop adding Taylor Swift's picture based on your fan crush for her. It is indeed picture flooding, nobody wants it except you, go seek WP:RfC or it will keep getting reverted and please do not WP:EW. Also there were far more prominent musicians in that era than her, Kayne West, Akon, Lady Gaga and more. But Eminem and Beyoncé are enough, one male and one female representative, a perfect 1:1 ratio. Maybe you shuld take your crush to the 2010s article during which time she indeed reached Eminem and Beyoncé level prominence, but 2000s wasn't her peak, and that picture cannot stay based on your single fan crush. So seek a consensus, or stop. I have assumed WP:AGF for now, and this is not a warning, I see you already however were blocked on february, anyway next time it will be a warn, please do not borderl ine WP:EW. Best wishes.

Now when your edit is challenged and reverted and you keep editing it back, and violate WP:TRR you start an edit war for which you were once blocked for the exact same thing. Please stop, and two pictures are sufficient here, there is no need for excessive pictures. There were many break out stars in 2000s like Taylor Swift, Justin biber, Akon, Lady Gaga and endless list, there is no scope to include 1000s of singers who broke out in the decade, and you selectively adding Taylor Swift's picture is pure fancrut and you do not even cite WP:RS for your additions. Eminem and Beyonce were hue in the 2000s, but Taylor Swift's best decade was 2010s she is ore fitting there. Many other musicians had successful albums that period, such as Freedom (Akon album), but you selectively add only Taylor Swif's picture because you are her fan, but this is an encyclopedia and not a fandom, there have been far more successful breakouts in the 2000s than taylor Swift, but only the two biggest musicians of that time eminem and Beyonce are WP:Notable enough to have their own pics, otherwise we could add 1000s which will be picture flooding which you are attempting to do. So please seek a proper consensus with WP:RfC rather than blindly edit warring. Thank you. Dilbaggg (talk) 11:16, 15 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2010 is apart of the 2000s[edit]

Now I put it on wiki and it keeps getting reverted to let me prove my point Just calculate it we started year 1 not 0 so add to 10 years (decade) it because year 11 so that the start of the new decade then do it again 21 then 31 then 41 then 51 the 61 so if you continue on the pattern that a new decade starts when the last digit of a year is 1 you will reach 2011 which is where the new decade started so technically 2010 is apart of the 2000s Pro1902 (talk) 11:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your point is understood, but your additions to the lead sentence are unencyclopaedic and lack a source. Please stop reverting without addressing those concerns. —Legoless (talk) 12:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why do you mean by your additions to the lead sentence are unencyclopaedic and lack a source. Pro1902 (talk) 12:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also added a source just click on the text Pro1902 (talk) 15:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Decades differ from culture to culture because time is relative. (CC) Tbhotch 16:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes but what I am saying is true Pro1902 (talk) 11:15, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WP:The truth. (CC) Tbhotch 21:46, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Or more seriously, WP:Verifiability, not truth. Dan Bloch (talk) 02:04, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If the 2000s refers to a ten year period, then it's all the years that begin with "200". So 2010 is NOT part of the 2000s. This is a different issue from which years are in the first decade of the 21st century. HiLo48 (talk) 02:59, 6 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Computer viruses as non-natural disasters?[edit]

In the 2000s computer viruses reached an unpreceded scale in terms of effects on society and I do think some of the big ones like Mydoom, Sobig, SQL Slammer, Storm(botnet) deserve a spot on the non-natural disasters list. Also there oddly isn't any real mention of computer viruses under Computing and Internet. (talk) 06:40, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A revamp to the internet section in the intro.[edit]

A revamp to the internet section in the intro: 1: Friendster wasn't the first social networking site, this would be clear if you read the site's Wiki page. 2: Make it more data-focused, only mentioning websites that were in the top 10. Koopinator (talk) 20:20, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Renaming of Article[edit]

The issue within this article is that it speaks of the 2000s within a the United States perspective, if that is the case then should the article be renamed to "2000s in the United States" or something similar. Connor W (talk) 16:39, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think this is a good way to go. The article may have a US perspective, but it has a huge amount of non-US information, in the Politics and wars, Disasters, Economics, Religion, and other sections. Dan Bloch (talk) 18:17, 18 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]