User talk:Calvin999

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Today is Thursday, 5 March 2015, and the current time is 20:59 (UTC/GMT). There are currently 4,734,806 articles.

More feedback on GA review required please[edit]

Good Article Review[edit]

Mariah Carey=D[edit]

Hey friend, whats up? Well... I have a wish. Please don't delete the references on Mariah Carey discography article. These are the real promotional singles with real references. The tables were corrected to 10 charts and certificates too. This article needed changes and updates. It's a beautiful and correct article now. Please help me make this even better. But don't change as before - was ugly and wrong. Thanks! Carpe Diem friend =D

PS: My name is Isabella. Shane Harper 4 Life (talk) 19:55, 16 June 2014 (diff | hist)

List of artists with the most number ones on the U.S. dance chart[edit]

Just letting you know I've reviewed and approved of the hook for its DYK. Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:58, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of artists with the most number ones on the U.S. dance chart, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hard (song) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:56, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Top 10 artists with the most number ones on the U.S. dance chart[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Personal attacks and incivility[edit]

You are taking any disagreements you and I may have had in the past way too personally. In any case, remarks such as "Even a primate would be able..." are personal attacks. So are several of the comments in this spiel about how I'm supposedly like a child with no common sense or intelligence. You need to stop with the incivility and personal attacks immediately before you end up blocked. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:57, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

No, all what I said in my rather eloquently written essay was the truth. I just happen to have the balls to say what countless other editors have said to me about you, to you. You have created such bad feeling amongst editors, and we feel like you have been on a deletion and reversion rampage on Rihanna Wikiproject. Can you not see that? You surely do because you halted your mass deletion plans of Rihanna articles las year once you released that no one was batting in your deletion corner on the first 4 or 5 nominations, and everyone was voting to keep them. I can't help how you interpreted my comments; I never directly called you anything negative or mentioned you name in relation to the primate comment. If you wasn't wrong or guilty, you wouldn't have interpreted the comments as being about you. I haven't personally attacked anyone. I haven't called anyone any names or been uncivil. It's not me who proposes mass deletion; it's not me who has a problem with the Rihanna Wikiproject, its articles and the editors who edit them; it's not me who crosses the 3RR revert rule (If you had of read my report of you correctly, I said the one on the Sunday was outside of the 24 period, but is still recent. The other three, however, were in less than 23 hours); it's not me who edit wars. So I don't see what I could possibly be blocked for. I think it's extremely uncivil of you to imply that I purposely set out to "pushed you over the 3RR"; I can't make you do that, only you can press your revert button. (Yes, you did violate it). You should think yourself lucky that you didn't get blocked for breaking the 3RR rule, it was very lenient of the administrator who only lock the article in dispute. Tomica was unquestionably in the wrong for making 5 reverts on an articles in 24 hour period (you were no better by reverting instead of discussing, which is another thing that rubs people up the wrong way), and he has been blocked for 2 days because of it. So you should be thankful that you got off with not even a slap on the wrist from an admin.  — ₳aron 22:56, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
You need to drop the Rihanna AfDs. I moved on and focused on other areas because I didn't feel like devoting all my time to that; that doesn't mean I "halted" it or gave up entirely, I might bring some of those back later. And it is not a personal vendetta against the Rihanna project or any of its editors; if you feel like that, that's your problem. And I don't know where you're coming from saying I reverted instead of discussing, seeing as I actually launched the talk page discussion while you posted a long essay filled with personal attacks and uncivilly instructed me not to respond to you. That's not having "balls"; that's just being immature and violating Wikipedia policies/guidelines. You should consider yourself lucky that you haven't been blocked for such behavior yet.
Further, I don't care that a small group of editors may have a problem with me because they're holding a grudge over a deletion discussion that happened awhile ago. I'm not here to make friends, I'm here to build an encyclopedia. This isn't high school. –Chase (talk / contribs) 04:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
No, I won't drop it. It was a hugely disrespectful thing to do and you was completely out of order, and you have not once apologized. You didn't drop it to devote your time to other areas. You seemed pretty devoted in the beginning by listing 20 articles that you planned on nominating for deletion. You dropped it because they weren't getting deleted and you was embarrassing yourself. I can only imagine how you would kick off if I nominated 20 articles for deletions which passed criteria for a Wikiproject that you are heavily involved in and spent a lot of time on. I'd actually have some respect for you if you just admitted that fact. It is 100% an attack by you on the Rihanna Wikiproject, because you don't do it any others. You haven't proposed mass deletion for other Wikiprojects. I haven't acted in any such way to be considered for being blocked, but you have. Just because you clearly don't like that you yourself are not liked by a lot of editors because of your actions, it doesn't make me immature for saying so. You're here to build any encyclopedia? That's funny, because from what I have seen from your contributions, you're trying your very best destroy it in my eyes. Deletions, reversions, edit wars, WP:OWN issues, not assuming WP:GOODFAITH. You're obviously someone who doesn't like being told that you are wrong. You need to get some humility fast and take responsibility for your actions. If you starting treating Wikipedia and editors with respect, civility and humility and don't cause bad feeling, then problems like on "FourFiveSeconds" should hopefully not arise again.  — ₳aron 09:48, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Again, if you view it as a personal attack, that's a sign that you're way too emotionally vested in this project. I can't help that you take any editorial process that isn't in your favor to heart. I have nothing to apologize for. You're the one with bad faith and OWN issues, not me. Say what you want about my edits, but I won't tolerate personal remarks any longer. So do it again and face the consequences. I don't have to deal with the immaturity, and I won't. –Chase (talk / contribs) 15:00, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
It is an attack. And yes, the Wikiproject has spent years editing those articles. We have invested a lot of time and energy into them to make the Rihanna scope better. Everything you're accusing me is what you're guilty of. I'm not the one who you was warring with on FourFiveSeconds and refusing to let anyone change one word; it was you who kept reverting multiple editors. I haven't really had anything to do with the article at all, so it's laughable that you're saying I have OWN issues. You're saying you won't tolerate personal remarks, not that I've made any against you (Never said "you" or you're name), but you clearly think it's acceptable to threaten me saying that I should face the consequences for something I haven't done, whether it be past or future. And you calling me immature...  — ₳aron 17:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


Voice has really improved a lot. Her vocal "artistry" is starting to somewhat exist lol.--PeterGriffinTalk2Me 05:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

I'd love to be a vocal producer on a song of hers.  — ₳aron 10:04, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
@Petergriffin9901: Too bad your fave "voice artistry" is starting to flop hard. lol — Tomíca(T2ME) 10:48, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
@Tomica: Lol. Bro, you need to grow up and get a life. Man up already.--PeterGriffinTalk2Me 04:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
@Petergriffin9901: I bet I have much more life than you. lol — Tomíca(T2ME) 08:21, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is "Sugar (Maroon 5 song)". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! –Chase (talk / contribs) 23:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Mariah Carey[edit]

Why do you believe that removing the emphasis of "even" introduces bias? It's placing emphasis on the "before", suggesting that it needs particularly drawn attention to. This suggests a negative an opinion of her actions. Compare;

  • Carey asked for money before she signed a contract.
  • Carey asked for money even before she signed a contract.

--Escape Orbit (Talk) 13:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

You don't need to say "Before even signing", "before signing" is enough. It implies that it is an unreasonable demand and that it sounds like a fan writing it, and we don't even know if this is true or not. You don't need to reinforce that it's before when using 'before', it pretty obvious already that it's before. (She's worth $500 million, I doubt she would ask for an advance of $3 million).  — ₳aron 16:12, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Please take the time to read comment above. I, and the previous editor, removed the "even". Your revert is putting it back in. Could you revert your change, please. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Top 10 artists with the most number-ones on the U.S. Hot 100 for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Top 10 artists with the most number-ones on the U.S. Hot 100 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top 10 artists with the most number-ones on the U.S. Hot 100 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of FourFiveSeconds[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of FourFiveSeconds at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 16:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Not sure why you left this??  — ₳aron 17:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Towards the Sun (song)[edit]

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 March newsletter[edit]

One of several of Godot13's quality submissions during round 1

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Australia Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.

In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:

You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)

Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.

(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Re: So Help Me God[edit]

I didn't do anything about the reverts because I don't think the article should have been redirected. I was simply suggesting that, if something must be done, simply redirect instead of deleting. In my opinion, there is no point to deleting pages that serve a purpose, including redirects. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Then what on earth was your excuse for leaving the comment on the CSD that I should have redirected for!!!!!!!!! Seriously, make your mind up! I tried redirecting twice, one time of which you reverted, then afterwards you tell me that should have redirected instead of nominating for deletion! The article had no relevance or content what-so-ever. It had 3 sources and the rumoured tracks were not confirmed. And no release date. It completely failed the criteria for an album article. You're being very patronising and assuming bad faith.  — ₳aron 17:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going to argue about this. In my opinion, Redirect > Deletion, plain and simple. I have no further comment on the matter. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Well of course you're not doing to argue about it. You know I'm right and I've highlighted your wrong-doing. It would be helpful if you actually stuck to your own advice instead of messing about with other people and then backtracking. The right thing to do would have been to say to me: "I'm sorry, I am in the wrong here." But no...  — ₳aron 18:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Notability (music)[edit]

I have made a proposal for a change to the opening paragraph of Wikipedia:Notability (music). You have discussed similar issues on the article's talk page and would appreciate your input. Please see Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)#Do all of these guidelines imply GNG or are they stand-alone?. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:28, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not following what this is about? Can you give it to me in a nutshell  — ₳aron 18:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)