User talk:Mayast

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

Some bubble tea for you![edit]

Bubble Tea.png How is it going? Happy editing anyway. smile Sohambanerjee1998 12:20, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
@Sohambanerjee1998: Thanks a lot for the tea! ;) Everything is great, I've just been a little busy recently, with my university and the Christmas preparations :) And how are you? Cheers, Mayast (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Oh I see, best of luck with both of them. Happy editing. I am fine BTW, the entire house is messy as we're moving to a new house! smile Soham 10:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Jared Leto[edit]

Could you demonstrate with reliable sources that Jared's middle name is Joseph?--Earthh (talk) 20:12, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I guess that name kind of stuck in my head, and I haven't realized that there was some confusion over it, as well. Feel free to revert my edit if you feel that the IMDb bio isn't enough (I'm guessing it isn't). I'll try to look for some more sources when I have more free time. Mayast (talk) 20:22, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Blow (Beyoncé Knowles song)[edit]

Hey Mayast. Despite the fact that the US release appears to be postponed/cancelled, it was still sent to radio in Italy, and thus is a single in that country. I Care (Beyoncé Knowles song) was also released only in Italy. — Status (talk · contribs) 21:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

@Status: Hi. Isn't it a promotional single, though? I checked that it wasn't released in Italy on its own — the song is still only available as a part of the album on Italian iTunes. As you might know, there are some Contributors who wouldn't allow for it to be treated as a regular single ;) Mayast (talk) 22:03, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
It's a radio-only single, of course. Promotional singles aren't sent to radio; they are distributed to places such as clubs, for example. There's a couple of editors I can think of that wouldn't like it. I guess they can learn to deal with it. Beyonce is well-known for having many radio only singles, such as "Ego", "Party", "End of Time", "I Care". — Status (talk · contribs) 22:23, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
@Status: Thanks for the explanation, I wasn't sure what's the difference between eg. "I Care" and "1+1". And I had some doubts about two songs from the new Switchfoot album ("Who We Are" and "Love Alone Is Worth the Fight"), which were included on the Fading West EP and released on the same day to two different radio formats. They have both charted on various Billboard charts, but as they weren't released separately onto iTunes, I wasn't sure if they should be listed as singles or promo singles. Now I can sleep peacefully ;) — Mayast (talk) 22:32, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, for "1+1", the song was given away for free when people pre-ordered 4. So that would classify as a promotional single. If it was sent to radio, it would be another story. Yes, yes you can. smile — Status (talk · contribs) 22:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
@Status: I guess some kind of a guide for deciding whether a song is a single or a promo single would be useful, to end these discussions and arguments, once and for all. Maybe we should work on some proposal for WikiProject Songs at some point in the future. Thanks again :) — Mayast (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas all year long[edit]

Soham (talk) 13:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC) Links Whitelisted on Wikipedia[edit]

@Mayast:Hi Mayast,

We would like to advocate for, a competitor to MetroLyrics, both licensed lyrics providers. We are trying to get Wikipedia to verify that is indeed compliant with copyright and and lyric licensing laws.

You can see MusicBlvd's response here - Dear Wikipedia, We Love Musicians More than Lawyers.

This is in response to this Wikipedia thread by other editors should be added under the "Lyrics and Video" section in the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs

Can you please help us in setting the record straight?


Trystanburke (talk) 22:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank You[edit]

... for keeping an eye on, and contributing to, the recent Beyonce articles. I look forward to watching these grow to Good status! --Another Believer (Talk) 19:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

@Another Believer: The pleasure is mine :) I'm looking forward to GA class, too! — Mayast (talk) 19:25, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Actually, I would not be surprised if some of the other tracks should now have articles of their own. Between track-by-track reviews, recording details and music video info, I bet there is enough information for most of the songs. Not to mention, most of them are likely to chart based on album sales alone. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

FAC comment[edit]

Hello, I nominated 4 (Beyoncé Knowles album) for FAC some months ago and it failed through a lack of consensus. I've nominated it again and would appreciate your support/comments/oppose on the FAC page, of course, if it's not your thing then feel free to disregard this! —JennKR | 17:33, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, JennKR :) I'm not sure I'm the best person for this, as I haven't participated in any GA/FA nominations yet, and I'm not sure what to look for in an article – if you have a look at my user page, the farthest I have ever got with any of my articles is C-class (but I've only been a really active contributor for six months now). I'm definitely going to watch this process, though, (as well as any future nominations for all the Beyoncé-related articles) to gain more experience in this field, and I'll try to assist in some way if there's anything I might be able to help with :) — Mayast (talk) 23:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Do you know if "Haunted" has charted at all? I have been working on an expansion of the article, which was redirected back to the album article. Personally, I think there is enough info for a shorter, standalone article, but chart placement would certainly help establish notability. --Another Believer (Talk) 22:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Personally, I agree with the decision to redirect that article for now. Per WP:NSONG, charting is only one of the factors suggesting that a song may be notable – it should still meet the more important criteria for notability, like being the subject of non-trivial published works (with the exception of album reviews and articles about the record). So I think the best thing to prove the song's notability would be to look for some articles about "Ghost" and "Haunted" (and not the album), their videos, etc. In my opinion, not every single must have its own article, let alone every song from an album, no matter how popular the artist is. BUT I'm keeping my fingers crossed for finding something to prove that "Haunted" is in fact notable, and if I come across any chart positions for it, I will definitely add them and/or try to revert that redirect. Cheers, Mayast (talk) 23:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Great, thanks! I just saw that you have been keeping up with chart stats, so wondered if you had seen any other tracks from the albums on the charts. I am not too bothered by the fact that the article was redirected; I just knew a chart position would help my case! :) --Another Believer (Talk) 23:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I'm trying to keep an eye on some of the charts :) For example, I wasn't planning to work on "Partition" any time soon (if ever), but I saw that it charted, and I decided to expand it a little. When I see any 'new' song from the album charting, I'll try to work on it too, or at least let you guys know on the album talk page, if I don't have time to do that. Mayast (talk) 00:04, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Flawless (Beyoncé Knowles song)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II[edit]

WikiProject Poland Newsletter • January 2014 • Issue II
For our freedom and yours

Welcome to the second issue of WikiProject Poland newsletter, the Monitor (named after the first Polish newspaper).

Our Project has been operational since 1 June, 2005, and also serves as the Poland-related Wikipedia notice board. I highly recommend watchlisting the Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland page, so you can be aware of the ongoing discussions. We hope you will join us in them, if you haven't done so already! Unlike many other WikiProjects, we are quite active; we get close to a hundred discussion threads each year and we do a pretty good job at answering all issues raised. Last year we were featured in the Signpost, and our interviewer was amazed at our activity. In the end, however, even as active as we are, we are just a tiny group - you can easily become one of our core members!

In addition to a lively encyclopedic, Poland-related, English-language discussion forum, we have numerous useful tools that can be of use to you - and that you could help us maintain and develop:

  • we have an active assessment department. As of now, our project has tagged almost 83,000 pages as Poland-related - that's an improvement of over 3,000 new pages since the last newsletter. Out of which 30 still need a quality assessment, and 2,000, importance assessment. We have done a lot to clear the backlog here (3 years ago those numbers were 1,500 and 20,000, respectively). Can you help assess a few pages?
    • assessing articles is as easy as filling in the class= and importance= parameters on the talk page in the {{WPPOLAND|class=|importance=}} template. See here for a how-to guide.
  • once an article has an assessment template, it will appear in our article alerts and news feed, which provides information on which Poland-related articles are considered for deletion, move, or are undergoing a Good or Featured review. Watchlisting that feed, in addition to watchlisting our project's main page, is a good way to make sure you stay up to date on most Poland-related discussions.
  • you can also see detailed deletion discussions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Poland (which is a good place to watchlist if you just want to stay up to date on possible deletions of Poland-related content)
  • we have also begun B-class quality reviews on our talk page, and if our activity increases, hopefully we will be able to institute our own A-class quality reviews. As of now, we have about 500 C-class articles in need of a B-class review. If you'd like to help with them, instructions for doing B-class reviews are to be found in point 10 of our assessment FAQ. In addition to this automated list, you are also encouraged to help review articles from our B-class reviews requested list found here.
  • also, those articles will be included in our cleanup listing, which allows us to see which top-importance articles are in need for attention, and so on. We have tens of thousands articles in need of cleanup there, so if you ever need something to do, just look at this gigantic list. (I am currently reviewing the articles tagged with notability, either proving them notable or nominating for deletion; there are still several dozens left if you want to help!).
  • did you know that newly created Poland-related articles are listed here. They need to be reviewed, often cleaned-up, occasionally nominated for deletion, and their creators may need to be welcomed and invited to our project if they show promise as new authors of Poland-related content.
  • we are maintaining a Portal:Poland
  • automated Wikipedia:WikiProject Poland/Popular pages lists the most popular Poland-related pages from the previous month(s)
  • Breaking news: we are looking for a Wikipedian in Residence for the New York City area. See Wikipedia:GLAM/Józef Piłsudski Institute of America for details.

This is not all; on our page you can find a list of useful templates (including userboxes), awards and other tools!

With all that said, how about you join our discussions at WT:POLAND? Surely, there must be something you could help others with, or perhaps you are in need of assistance yourself?

It took me three years to finish this issue. Feel free to help out getting the next one before 2017 by being more active in WikiProject management :)

You have received this newsletter because you are listed as a member at WikiProject Poland.
Please remove yourself from the mailing list to prevent receiving future mailings.
Newsletter prepared by Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here and sent by Technical 13 (talk) using the Mass message system.

Randy Brecker[edit]

Hello, thanks for your edits to Randy Brecker. It's kinda freaky ... I'd just recently cleaned up the article while checking the edits of a rather interesting user, and I'd never even realized that Mr. Brecker had won another Grammy a couple days beforehand! Graham87 06:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

@Graham87: Hi :) I, on the other hand, was approaching the subject of Night in Calisia from a Polish point of view – we're proud to finally have a Grammy in a jazz category ;) (after several awards in classical music). Cheers, Mayast (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Hi[edit]

Haha, that definitely could go in the article—it's strange because artists have been doing unconventional releases like this for some time, but perhaps not to the same hype. Also, what's the status with the categories move? Are we applying again, but not at the speedy page? —JennKR | 12:13, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Invisible (U2 song)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 15:03, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

U2 Barnstar Hires.png The U2 Barnstar
I hereby award you the U2 Barnstar for your efforts in helping Wikiproject U2. Congratulations! The meaningfull DYK hook. —Soham (talk) 14:43, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Fading West[edit]

Since you have not looked at nor read Christian Music Sources, then I will not be editing the critical reception section anymore as part of the article. I will leave you with this new review if you want to include it at your prerogative. The review comes from Christian Broadcasting Network. By the way, we had a discussion about the sources if you want to know.HotHat (talk) 04:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know that I put the reviews back in prose and just put Christian Broadcasting Network in the ratings table. I understand just because it limits editors to ten ratings sources in the template that should not preclude us from utilizing all reviews from RS sources in the prose.HotHat (talk) 10:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: Hi[edit]

Sorry Mayast for the lack of communication—I've been extraordinarily busy recently so my editing time has suffered greatly. This "pulling a Beyoncé" is cropping up everywhere and I saw a news post concerning Skrillex that used the term; it's something that might be worthy of inclusion in the release section, as the whole event was deemed so significant. Cheers, —JennKR | 23:08, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


Dear fellow I appreciate your recent edits on ostium(sponges). You removed information related to cockroaches. Dear fellow, I created this article and as a person having a fair knowledge about sponges I initially believed that term ostium is only used to denote the pores present in sponges but after a massive internet search I found that the lateral openings in the primitive heart of cockroaches are also commonly called ostia. My suggestion would be to change the name of the article from ostium(sponges) to ostium(Biology) in order to accommodate information about cockroaches.Septate (talk) 16:27, 11 April 2014 (UTC)