User talk:Ericorbit

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

FYI[edit]

Hey there. Don't believe we've met. Thought you might want to know that this guy copied all your barnstars. No clue why, since the rest of his userpage seems to be the complete opposite of yours. It's been reverted, and he's been blocked for a week on an unrelated offense, and it looks like it's not the first time he's copied parts of someone's page, but I thought I'd give you a heads-up. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 05:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the heads-up. That's just..... weird. - eo (talk) 11:43, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

US number one name list[edit]

Hi there, would you like to explain why you want to keep it in one column? I obviously did multiple columns for the specific reason of to be able to have an overview of the names - and have that with less scrolling. On the other hand I haven't yet found the specific reason why there should not be an overview and everything should stay in one column next to an empty space. Loginnigol (talk) 12:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Because multiple columns aren't necessary. It's actually more difficult to read when one has to scroll up and down and up and down when going thru the list. If a reader wants to jump to a specific location, that's what the navigation box at the top of the page is for. As this article is several years old, and no one has changed it to a multiple-column layout the entire time, the silent consensus shows that a single column is preferred. Perhaps starting a conversation on its Talk Page to gather opinions could help, if you feel that strongly about it. There really is no benefit to squashing it all into columns. - eo (talk) 16:57, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Billboard Hot 100 and Justin Timberlake discography[edit]

In the least offensive way possible I would like to explain my edits to some pages containing information about the US Billboard Hot 100 and why I believe they are correct and shouldn't reverted back to how they were originally.

1. On the page "Hot Digital Songs", grammatically "Thrift Shop by Macklemore and Ryan Lewis featuring Wanz is the first song to log eight and also nine weeks of 300,000 or more in digital sales.", does not make sense. "Eight and also nine weeks"?. Overall, it is the first song to log nine weeks of 300,000 or more in digital sales, so shouldn't that be the only thing needed to be mentioned?

2. On the page "List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 1998 (U.S.)", shouldn't the order of "Something About the Way You Look Tonight/ Candle in the Wind 1997" be reversed? I just think that because on the page "List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 1997 (U.S.)" the order of the two songs is with "Candle in the Wind 1997" first and "Something About the Way You Look Tonight" is second, so why are they randomly reversed on the Hot 100 number-one singles of 1998 page? Alphabetically, Candle in the Wind 1997, is first so it makes sense to put it before Something About the Way You Look Tonight.

3. Suit & Tie on "Justin Timberlake discography" should be "featuring Jay-Z" not Jay Z. This is because Jay Z is the stylized version of his name and for example, on Kesha's discography page they would not use Ke$ha since it is the stylized version. (talk) 4:29, 03 May 2013 (UTC)

Replies[edit]

  1. No other song has had eight weeks. So it is the first to sell 300,000+ in eight and nine weeks.
  2. Billboard changed the billing on the Hot 100 mid-run because, at the time, AA-sides were listed with the song receiving the most airplay points first.
  3. This I have nothing to do with; I haven't seen this revert. But a dash is not the same as a dollar sign. - eo (talk) 23:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Innano1 and a Romanian Blogspot chart[edit]

I'm obviously going to have problems with WP:INVOLVED with this problem, so can you take care of warning Innano1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) about how edit-warring in an blogspot chart is a very bad idea? You might want to take a peek at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Romanian Top 100 top 10 singles in 2013 for background.—Kww(talk) 02:23, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of songs written by Emeli Sandé/archive1[edit]

Hello. If you get time would you be able to comment on my FLC please. It's stalled in the past month or so.  — AARONTALK 13:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Rihanna 777[edit]

Hi Ericorbit! I was wondering, do you still have an access to Billboard.biz? If you do, can you see if the DVD Rihanna 777, debuted on the Music Video Sales chart? And If so on which position and for what issue. Thank you! :) — Tomíca(T2ME) 22:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure. Debuted at #7 on issue date May 25... following week dropped to #18 on June 1. - eo (talk) 11:27, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks!:) — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of number-one Billboard Alternative Songs of 2013 may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

List of Hot 100 number-one singles of the 2010s (U.S.)[edit]

I honestly don't even understand what I did wrong on this wiki page, please explain. Also, I don't think I should be blocked, once again, for making a small mistake that was not even explained to me when posted on my talk page. Finally, I mean, at least I edited this page and did it first before anyone else did and also contributed by noticing and changing mistakes with some of the dates! For example, where it says the "number-one single as of", this had the wrong date and I changed it. I do not like being discriminated this way. —lucifer1998(talk) 03:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Your "small mistakes" yesterday are some of many mistakes you make whenever you edit. If you look at your edit history, you may notice that nearly every edit you submit is either reverted or corrected by someone else. This pattern indicates that you either a) don't care, b) are rushing too fast to check your work and make sure links and formatting etc. are correct, or c) you simply lack the basic level of competence required to edit articles. In any case, it is disruptive. - eo (talk) 14:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Number one modern rock hits of 1988 for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Number one modern rock hits of 1988 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/Number one modern rock hits of 1988 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 15:59, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move of Deadmaus[edit]

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Deadmaus#Requested_move_3_.28to_.22Joel_Zimmerman.22.29. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

most artists with number one is the us[edit]

In the article List of artists who reached number one in the United States What do you think about adding this "if both entries from George Michael and Wham! combined it will make him the most successful british and non American solo artist in the charts". — Preceding unsigned comment added by GM25LIVE (talkcontribs) 19:31, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't do this, especially since McCartney (as well as the other Beatles) are all British :-) - eo (talk) 19:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Get Lucky (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.

2Pac's number-one singles in List of artists who reached number one in the United States[edit]

The number of number-one singles 2Pac has in the U.S. is only 1. It may seem like he has two, but this is not the case, since California Love and How Do U Want It shared a joint run at number-one as a Double A-side. Another case of this is how Toni Braxton only has 2 number-one singles even though 3 of her songs had a run at the top of the Hot 100. Un-break My Heart had a run by itself and You're Makin' Me High and Let It Flow had a joint run at number-one, like 2Pac, as a Double A-side single. This is why I have changed 2Pac's number-one single count back to 1. —lucifer1998(talk) 01:56, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with Brazil again[edit]

Can you double-check some of the edits being made by Thissz here? He says that he is using the published magazine as a source, but the positions differ from what I get on Billboard.com. Billboard.com being the piece of crap that it is, I'm willing to believe it could be wrong. Billboard.biz seems reliable, though.—Kww(talk) 17:10, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Just logged into .biz and checked the "hits of the world" section....many charts listed, but only one for Brazil, and it is an albums chart. No idea where this editor is getting those chart positions. - eo (talk) 17:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
"Brazil Hot 100 Airplay" is in the dropdown box for "chart name" on the main page.—Kww(talk) 17:21, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Okay, this looks like typical inconsistent Billboard crap. That chart is not listed in their "Hits of the World" section on .biz, however, when using the "search" function, Brazil Hot 100 Airplay" does come up in the drop-down. More, when I did a search on just that chart, odd chart weeks came up: the most recent being 06/01. Prior to that, I see 04/27 and from there it seems to have all weekly charts listed. - eo (talk) 17:33, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
"Weekly"? That's really peculiar, because it's a monthly chart.—Kww(talk) 17:45, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
This is what I see: http://awesomescreenshot.com/0391hqbjd2 - eo (talk) 18:04, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting[edit]

You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey[edit]

I'd like to make List of number-one dance singles of 2012 (U.S.) an FL, do you want to do it with me?  — AARONTALK 12:05, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Sure! Just let me know whatcha need. - eo (talk) 12:41, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Cool. Just a source for each linked week, and other Chart beat articles for interesting stats etc.  — AARONTALK 11:18, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Joan Jett ILRNR.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Joan Jett ILRNR.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:27, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Human League Greatest Hits 1988.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Human League Greatest Hits 1988.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 18:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Studiomusica[edit]

I've gotten myself too involved. Can you keep an eye on Studiomusica (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)? If a block isn't already justified, it will be very soon.—Kww(talk) 17:28, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Will do! Sorry was offline for a coupla days. Looks like the user is already blocked but I will continue to keep an eye. - eo (talk) 11:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User talk:RealityShowsRock/subpage01[edit]

User talk:RealityShowsRock/subpage01, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:RealityShowsRock/subpage01 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:RealityShowsRock/subpage01 during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Whpq (talk) 14:21, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of number-one dance singles of 2013 (U.S.) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • |}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:20, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Ke$ha discography[edit]

I do NOT believe my edits were disruptive and unconstructive ... sales are a better indication of record sales ... it's not like I DELETED the certifications ... I thought it was helpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by SayaamRulz (talkcontribs) 11:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Billboard achievements by decade[edit]

Hello, sorry that I edited your page, I really don't know how to edit. Regarding the article, in the 2010s songs with weeks at #1, Katy Perry's Firework spent 4 weeks on top. Can u please add it? Thank you!

Billboard achievements by decade[edit]

Hello, sorry that I edited your page, I really don't know how to edit. Regarding the article, in the 2010s songs with weeks at #1, Katy Perry's Firework spent 4 weeks on top. Can u please add it? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graviton08 (talkcontribs) 15:48, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Thursday (song)[edit]

"No"? Why not? It's pretty clear here that it entered the midweeks at #40, and obviously the full chart position will be added once it charts on Sunday. Sometimes a simple "no" doesn't suffice and makes an edit look ignorant. DJUnBalanced (talk) 16:28, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

We do not report midweeks, especially without any source. Please see Wikipedia:Record charts for acceptable chart positions. - eo (talk) 16:30, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism[edit]

User:62.7.174.178 seems to have been accorded long enough time here. See their recent edit history. Can you put him/her in the cooler ? Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:16, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - eo (talk) 15:32, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:36, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Question[edit]

Could you answer the question that I posted here?: Talk:List of Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles of 2013 BollyJeff | talk 20:21, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Michael Jackson Discography[edit]

Hi Ericorbit

During the time of editing the tables on the discography, there were many many mistakes in the original. I didn't realize "sandbox" was the place to do this. I would like to continue this project there, and refresh the discography. Please advise.

Thank you

Thanks. - User:Wozza20 17:36, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

The undo was temporary so I could copy my previous work to my sandbox. Thank you

Michael Jackson Discography[edit]

Hi Ericorbit

I will do as advised and complete the discography in my sand box than seek your advise when complete. I have noticed that Elvis Presley has a singles discography for Europe, and another one for the US. I think something like this could be beneficial for MJ. The current information is inaccurate, and has many major markets missing.

Thank you

(talk) 17:53, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • *64 weeks – [[Carrie Underwood]] — "[[Before He Cheats]]" (2007), [Awolnation]] — "[[Sail (song)|Sail]]" (2013)

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Oh, sorry sorry, thanks for for letting me know. ;) . List of Billboard 200 number-one albums. Connie (A.K) (talk) 18:34, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

List of number-one Billboard Alternative Songs of 2014[edit]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of List of number-one Billboard Alternative Songs of 2014, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: List of number-one Billboard Alternative Songs of 2013. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

List of Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles of 2013[edit]

Hey, just wanted to run something by you, please don't block me again. I changed the top-selling song on this article to Blurred Lines since Billboard recently posted this article declaring it to be the top-selling song. http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/5855151/justin-timberlakes-2020-2013s-best-selling-album-blurred-lines-top-song , take a look. The article states "Robin Thicke's "Blurred Lines," featuring Pharrell and T.I., was 2013's top selling song, with 6.5 million sold. Macklemore & Ryan Lewis' "Thrift Shop," featuring Wanz, was the year's second-biggest song, with 6.15 million. So just realize that before you revert the edit. Thanks talk) 7:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

It's still wrong. That article refers to digital sales. The indicator in the number-ones list is for the number one song on the year-end list, which is "Thrift Shop". - eo (talk) 13:35, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

List of Billboard Hot 100 number-one singles of 2013 cont.[edit]

So then why on the article does it say indicates best-SELLING single of 2013? You keep telling me my information is false, disruptive, etc, but I think you should at least change it to best-PERFORMING on that article as well as the other Billboard Hot 100 articles. Not only is best-SELLING false and disruptive but it is also plain wrong considering the article that Billboard just posted on their website yesterday clearing claiming Blurred Lines as the top-selling song by a good 350,000 downloads. Thank you, have a nice day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucifer1998 (talkcontribs) 13:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

The Nielsen Soundscan year-end info is different from Billboard's chart-year lists. Billboard is reporting on Nielsen's calendar-year results in your source. This is not the same thing as Billboard's year-end charts, which cover a December-to-November schedule and factors in sales, airplay, streams and online activity. - eo (talk) 13:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Reply: You said it right there "Billboard's year-end charts, which cover a December-to-November schedule and factors in sales, airplay, streams and online activity" So by saying this what this really means is that if a song tops Billboard's Year-End Hot 100 Chart it is therefore not the best-selling single of that year but rather the best-performing single of that year since sales, as well as, airplay, streams and online activity are all factored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucifer1998 (talkcontribs) 14:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

New England Wikipedia Day @ MIT: Saturday Jan 18[edit]

NE Meetup #4: January 18 at MIT Building 5
Wikimedia New England logo.svg

Dear Fellow Wikimedian,

You have been invited to the New England Wikimedians 2014 kick-off party and Wikipedia Day Celebration at Building Five on the Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus on Saturday, January 18th, from 3-5 PM. Afterwards, we will be holding an informal dinner at a local restaurant. If you are curious to join us, please do so, as we are always looking for people to come and give their opinion! Finally, be sure to RSVP here if you're interested.

I hope to see you there! Kevin Rutherford (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Hi there, sorry for the edit war but I didn't know how to contact the mods since I'm a very infrequent Wikipedia editor... :( Thanks for locking the List of best-selling girl groups page, I'm not an expert on the subject either but all that guy did was to remove all the South Korean groups, and he's done so before according to his edit history, thanks again! :)

Arthur Arthurmauk (talk) 00:08, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

No problem... and thanks! - eo (talk) 13:03, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Digital Songs[edit]

Directly from http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/5862620/pitbull-kesha-take-timber-to-top-of-hot-100: "Chart historians, take note: as of this week, Radio Songs becomes the chart's name across all Billboard platforms; it previously went by Hot 100 Airplay in Billboard magazine and on billboard.biz. The tweak, thus, better streamlines the names of the Hot 100's three main component charts: Radio Songs, Digital Songs and Streaming Songs. Additionally, Digital Songs drops the "Hot" at the beginning of its name in print and on billboard.biz. The prefix "Hot" will now be reserved solely for the sales/airplay/streaming hybrid charts, which mirror the Hot 100's methodology. Adding "Hot" as of this week are Dance/Electronic Songs, R&B Songs, Rap Songs, Christian Songs and Gospel Songs."

Lucifer1998 (talk) 15:42, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Please add this source to the article. It will also need to be moved to its new title, and template wikilinks will need to be updated all around. - eo (talk) 20:54, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

List of best-selling girl groups[edit]

Please put a reasonable time-limit on the full protection of List of best-selling girl groups. With limited exceptions such as Office- or Arbcom-imposed or -sanctioned situations, "indefinite full protection" is a bad thing, frequently worse than the problem it solves.

Please reduce the terms of the full protection to something like 1-2 years, or less if possible. Consider putting and "update after" or similar template that will expire shortly before the full protection to remind the community to re-add at least semi-protection when the full protections expires.

If a "PC2-protection" proposal that would allow this article to be put under PC2 protection passes, consider immediately downgrading the protection to PC2 as soon as such a proposal passes. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 04:34, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014[edit]

I must apologize for my unsourced material edits. I thought those dates were right, but then I realized, they were the wrong dates. I promise it won't happen again.DBrown SPS 21:25, 15 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBrown SPS (talkcontribs)

The usual[edit]

User talk:190.233.208.78 - time for a spell in the cooler ? - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 01:08, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

HMV[edit]

Hi, I see you reverted the link in Morrissey's discography from His Master's Voice to HMV, a slightly mystifying choice considering that the latter covers only the retail activities of the HMV brand, whereas the former covers the record label including its revival for the Morrissey releases. Might I ask you to reconsider?--Humphrey20020 (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

You're invited: Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March[edit]

Women's History Edit-a-thons in Massachusetts this March - You are invited!
We Can Edit.jpg
New England Wikimedians is excited to announce a series of Wikipedia edit-a-thons that will be taking place at colleges and universities throughout Massachusetts as part of Wikiwomen's History Month from March 1 - March 31. We encourage you to join in an edit-a-thon near you, or to participate remotely if you are unable to attend in person (for the full list of articles, click here). Events are currently planned for the cities/towns of Boston, Northampton, South Hadley, and Cambridge. Further information on dates and locations can be found on our user group page.
Questions? Contact Girona7 (talk)

Various Artists entries[edit]

I noticed you have reverted the capitalization on the "Now 49" entry. Keep in mind that each and every various artist entry between 2000 and 2013 have used capitalization for the words "Various Artists". Likewise, Billboard itself has classified it as a designation, allowing it to function as a collective proper noun. I noticed that Billboard may not always be the brightest bulb, but I'd recommend just using what they have on their site as the standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WolfSpear (talkcontribs) 20:09, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

You're invited![edit]

NE Meetup #5: April 19th at Clover Food Lab in Kendall Square
Wikimedia New England logo.svg

Dear Fellow Wikimedian,

New England Wikimedians would like to invite you to the April 2014 meeting, which will be a small-scale meetup of all interested Wikimedians from the New England area. We will socialize, review regional events from the beginning of the year, look ahead to regional events of 2014, and discuss other things of interest to the group. Be sure to RSVP here if you're interested.

Also, if you haven't done so already, please consider signing up for our mailing list and connect with us on Facebook and Twitter.

We hope to see you there!

Kevin Rutherford (talk) and Maia Weinstock (talk)

(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)