The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
This article is part of WikiProject Miami, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the Miami metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.MiamiWikipedia:WikiProject MiamiTemplate:WikiProject MiamiMiami articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Record Production; a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's documentation of Record Production articles. Questions or comments related to record production and related articles are welcome at the project's talk page. Anyone interested may join the project: add your name to the list of project members!Record ProductionWikipedia:WikiProject Record ProductionTemplate:WikiProject Record ProductionRecord Production articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
I an unable to view Greenburg's article, because the blog is subscription only. So I am unable to verify what's going on. I have left the data in the article but have attributed it to Greenburg rather than Forbes as a whole. — Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted that he is a billionaire based on a Forbes cover story ("Inside The Rubble Of Diddy's Empire") from June 2024 by a staff reporter that refutes the claim. (Paywalled but the snippet appears in search.) JSFarman (talk) 17:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He still goes by Puff Daddy. @Cena332 told me he retired that name in 2001 but he released a mixtape in 2015 under the Puff Daddy name. A lot of people today still call him Puffy or Puff Daddy in addition to Diddy, so it should be "or Puff Daddy" not "formerly Puff Daddy". JuanBoss105 (talk) 14:10, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A stage name is different than a artist name. He briefly returned under the Puff Daddy name in 2015 for a mixtape. At the MTV Video Music Awards he opened as Diddy. You say "He still goes by Puff Daddy." His social media listed is under @Diddy, His website is called Diddy. The name has been retired since 2001. From March 2001; "No more Puff Daddy," he told viewers of an MTV music show. [1]Cena332 (talk) 16:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The statememt is worded "also known by...", and he is still known by that name. Regardless of Combs' thoughts on the subject, a lot of people, including people in the media, still use that name. — Diannaa (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Youre argument of using that statement from 2001 doesnt hold water because he released a mixtape in 2015 as Puff Daddy, so if he really retired that name in 2001, he wouldve released that mixtape as Diddy. Do people know him as Diddy? Yes. Do people know him as Puff Daddy? Yes. I agree with @Diannaa, and I propose that you take out formerly and put also known as Puff Daddy. Regular people acknowledge him as Diddy, P. Diddy, Puff, Puffy, Puff Daddy, etc., so to put formerly isn't right. JuanBoss105 (talk) 02:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People can still acknowledge you by your former name. I don’t believe a brief return under the Puff Daddy name for a mixtape is WP:NOTABLE. And to the other names, people still acknowledge him by those names, that’s why we have a other names section. I will get HumansRightsIsCool involved, since he was the one to suggest formerly in the lead. Cena332 (talk) 16:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He hasn't used the name puff daddy since 2015. Since he retired the name, it should say formerly puff Daddy. There's a reason why the English word "formerly" exists HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 16:58, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The proof is he hasn't officially used the name in 9 years. And he only used the name one time in 2015. Before they he hasn't used the name in a decade is what I was told on this platform. And why do you even care so much it says "formerly puff daddy" HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 18:31, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also more proof is he doesn't go by "puff daddy" on any social media platforms. It's always @Diddy. He hasn't called himself puff since 2015 which was like 9 years ago HumansRightsIsCool (talk) 18:35, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the redirect for now. The page, as created, had next to no content, and people seeking info on this topic will likely look for it here first anyways. — Diannaa (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of the story remains to be told, as events unfold ln real time. It will be simpler to only have to update one article - this one. — Diannaa (talk) 01:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it should be split into it's own article, given just how high profile his arrest has been and how damaging it's been for his profile. Though I don't think all of the legal issues need to split, only the recent allegations in regards to his sexual abuse and all the other similar allegations made against him.CarterSterling (talk) 07:22, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes! You definitely are - I stated "how damaging it's been for his profile" as a way to reiterate it's importance and how much of a big deal it is. Apologies if I sounded like I was stating otherwise.CarterSterling (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Considering the fact that this section already has approximately 2,300 words, I think it's completely appropriate to split this into a new article, especially with allegations dating back to 2017. This type of article isn't uncommon or against Wikipedia policy either, as there's already pages like Donald Trump sexual misconduct allegations based on similar topics—celebrity sex scandals and assault allegations. Definitely needs to be worded carefully, though. Sexual assault allegations are an incredibly touchy subject. Also agreeing with Hal here, that section is definitely uncomfortably long to read and deserves to be split off for viewing's sake. RidgelantRL (talk) 21:59, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support based on the multitude. It is awkward as all hell to see this massive, line-after-line-after-line-after... you get my point. Make sure it is cohesively structured, and stays within BLP and Controversial Subjects policies. Otherwise, definitely notable and fleshed-out in its own rights, that's for sure. BarntToust (talk) 22:37, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That article is thirteen years old, and may not reflect his current views on religion. So no, I am not in favor of this addition. — Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More context added to the first introductory paragraph
The first paragraph of a long article such as this serves as a brief summary, introduction, and signpost to the main points to be found later in the article. Currently the introduction and first few paragraphs are very one-sided, and given that many readers do not look much further may thus introduce an unreasonable bias for casual readers. My suggestion is to add a single sentence at the end of the first paragraph stating that "Combs is currently awaiting trial for sex trafficking and racketeering, and has been the subject of a number of sexual misconduct allegations". 2603:7080:A400:4300:734D:3C2F:94C0:8C76 (talk) 15:10, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. His arrest and the sexual assault and abuse (not misconduct) allegations are far more significant than "two MTV Video Music Awards, an MTV VMA Global Icon Award in 2023, and a Guinness World Record for "Most Successful Rap Producer" in 1997." JSFarman (talk) 02:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of this section, in the last subsection of legal issue, there is a mistake with the date, when the Jonas brothers changed their lyrics in a concert. The year shoud be 2024. Rayofrivia97 (talk) 02:04, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Done An editor has taken care of this. — Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 21:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Fixed Thanks for the suggestion. — Diannaa (talk) 10:16, 28 September 2024 (UTC)