Talk:Shaggy defense

Eddie Murphy

It should be noted that the so-called shaggy defense was brought to prominence earlier than when Shaggy came out with 'it wasnt me," by Eddie Murphy in his Raw stand up show (1987). Transcript below:

Excerpt from Eddie Murphy's RaW, 1987

He got busted coming out

of another woman's house.

His woman saw him come out,

knew that the woman lived there

and didn't say shit.

Wait till they got home and said:

"What the hell was you doing

in that bitch's house?"

You know what the man said?

"Wasn't me."

"I looked right in your face!"

"Wasn't me."

"Well, I'm supposed

to be a fool, right?"

"Hey.

"Wasn't me."

You know what the woman said?

"Maybe it wasn't you."

66.250.122.186 (talk) 17:49, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Yup, when I first read this article, Eddie Murphy is EXACTLY what came to mind. I think it is worth a mention in the article.Robbmonster (talk) 11:43, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

As everywhere on Wikipedia, what would be needed is a mention of this connection by a reliable, secondary source. --JBL (talk) 12:05, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIuBSTiNBlE Starting at about 58:00. The 'connection' is that what Murphy describes EXACTLY matches the so-called 'Shaggy Defense', 13 years before the Shaggy song from which the phenomenon took its name. So much so that a better name for the whole thing would actually be the 'Eddie Defense'. Additionally, the connection - with a citation - is already mentioned here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Wasn%27t_Me. And here is the citation... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y81Y655C2LURobbmonster (talk) 13:35, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Please see WP:RS to understand the meaning of the phrase "reliable, secondary source" in the context of Wikipedia. --JBL (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I gave sources. Three of them, including the eponymous man himself talking about his inspiration. If the man himself talking about his inspiration doesn't contitute a reliable secondary source good enough to warrant even a mention in the article, I'll quit and drop the matter.Robbmonster (talk) 07:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

And have you read the link to attempt to determine whether this could qualify under our policies? Frankly, though, this is tangential information at best to this article (as opposed to the article about the song itself) in any case. I will add the link to Fallon as an external link. —JBL (talk) 11:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I read the article as best I could. Does the Shaggy interview not count because it would be considered a 'primary source'? As for the relevance, my opinion is the Eddie Murphy reference constitutes history and background information. It is not unreasonable to suggest that without Eddie Murphy, the Shaggy song would not exist, and the 'Shaggy Defense' would have a completely different name. I'm no longer trying to justify inclusion, simply trying to learn why and how the suggestion falls down.Robbmonster (talk) 10:12, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

@Robbmonster: Yes, it's a primary source. (I think that "clips from the Tonight Show" probably do not generally constitute reliable sources, but in this case I don't see any reason to be skeptical of the validity of the content -- actually it's a great video, thanks for finding and sharing it here.)

The process you're engaged in is called "synthesis": you're taking two verifiable, sourceable statements (that Shaggy credits Eddie Murphy with providing the inspiration for the song, and that the "Shaggy defense" is named after the song) and synthesizing a new piece of information (that Eddie Murphy is important to the history of the "Shaggy defense"). This kind of procedure is a common and valid way of producing new knowledge, but it's one that's explicitly frowned upon in Wikipedia (WP:SYNTH): the role of an encyclopedia is supposed to be to report on what other sources say about the topic, and by synthesizing you've produced knowledge that is not actually in any source.

In this case, you have convinced me that there really is a connection and that it can be sourced (if not in the best possible way from an encyclopedic viewpoint); but without a source that makes a direct connection between Murphy and the "Shaggy defense", I am hesitant to put it into the body of the article. Instead, I have added a section of external links and included the Tonight Show link (with a sentence describing its content) there. I invite you to have a look and see if it can be improved.

Finally, I am not the ultimate arbiter of what goes on here, I am just a volunteer editor like you -- if you want to get other viewpoints, I suggest WP:3O (for requesting third opinions) and WP:Teahouse (for any kind of question about editing Wikipedia). --JBL (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and sorry for being so adamant. I am still learning about editing (mostly I stick to typos and grammar), but sometimes something will come up that makes me take notice. I definitely see your point about synthesis. What's next - how Eddie Murphy was inspired to write that material, how the guy he's talking about was inspired to cheat on his wife...? In future I'll make sure I reasd guidelines before suggesting anything so dramatic. And thanks for your patient replies!Robbmonster (talk) 03:31, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Rkellytrappedinthecloset2007.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)