User talk:Realist2

RE: Thriller 25

I'm very sorry Realist2 but i have no idea of what you're talking about.. im very new to MJ.. i know hardly anything about him.. i started listening to his music abt 4 months ago.. I'm very sorry Sai2020 15:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I see.. but i don't know anything abt it yet.. i'll learn abt it soon.. Sai2020 08:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

RE: Thriller 25 & vandalism to my page

Thanks so much for cleaning up the vandalism. I laughed out loud when I saw what the person tried to do- I can't believe anyone would even bother!lol this person has no life, which is why it cracked me up. But such is the life of a fan. lol Thank you so much for doing that- I really appreciate it and it looks like the user and all accounts attached to that name have been blocked.

Anyway, I will be happy to help on Thriller 25 for sure! Let me know what you would like me to do. I am a good writer and can contribute any way you need me to. You're right- it needs a page of its own- its a far bigger release than the previous editions and the Thriller page is big enough on its own. It will also have a lot added to it because of the promotional campaign and single due to be released. :) Let me know where I can start. Marnifrances (talk) 05:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thriller 25

It needs to go on Thriller's page. That's standard practise for album re-releases. I know that Thriller's a bigger album than most, but all the same I think we should do that.

Hysteria (album) No Prayer for the Dying Bad (album)

See?

It is a re-release of Thriller, just a special edition one. (The Elfoid (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC))

Realist, you must have read my mind! I was actually considering a new page for Thriller 25, but considering the large group of editors currently 'running' the Michael Jackson page who are resisting any new progress in any way possible, I was apprehensive of going through with my plan. I've been researching the new special edition (and preordering it :D) and I think that it deserves a new page, as opposed to being added onto the current Thriller page, for several reasons:

• Notability - Thriller is not any old successful album. It is THE GREATEST SELLING ALBUM OF ALL TIME. And this is not just a 'special edition' version with remastered tracks, a few unreleased tracks and an interview. This is a 25th ANNIVERSARY release, and that's gotta count for something. Don't use the same old argument of 'it's not notable enough' for it's own page or 'other album re-releases' don't have a separate page. Of course they don't - they're 'special editions' or whatever. We don't have separate pages for the special editions of each of MJs albums. But this is different, and I think that per the above reasons we must realize that.

• Collaborations - Thriller 25 has got some really notable collaborations with other highly successful contemporary pop artists. These include Kanye West, Akon, Fergie and will.i.am. This further adds support to the above idea that this product, Thriller 25, has enough notability APART FROM ITS CONNECTION WITH THRILLER that it deserves a page of its own. These collaborations are part of that notability which does not rely on the original Thriller album, and justify Thriller 25 having its own page.

I think that for these reasons, no one in their right mind can dismiss Thriller 25 as "just a special edition" or "just a re-release of Thriller". It is MUCH MUCH MORE and I have outlined why above. This is no special edition. This is a product which has enough importance by itself, as opposed to having importance solely in relation to the original Thriller, through COLLABORATIONS with HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL POP MUSIC ARTISTS. And that's gotta count for something.--Paaerduag (talk) 23:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course, absolutely I'll get the article up on its feet. I know a bit about it as well. As I'm sure you've done, they've got a nice little advert at www.michaeljackson.com, and we may be able to use part of that image, namely the 'Thriller 25' bit, in this article. I'll get to work making the article right away, but be prepared for trouble. I have a feeling an AfD may pop up sooner or later. Don't say I didn't warn you ;) --Paaerduag (talk) 01:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I for one think HIStory's single CD re-issue is not worthy of it's own page, to be honest. I mean, look at the page - it offers nothing useful whatsoever that the main HIStory page doesn't. You just reminded me to change it sometime.

Create a page (e.g. [1]) to do a write-up on it. See if you can really find enough to give it a page.

I read Paaerduag's stuff. Yeah, it's notable, and important, and useful. But most of the information from the Thriller page would have to be copied across. Wikipedia is more efficient if it is in less expansive form. And to be honest, I doubt a page's worth of material will get on there.

I also think too little information on a new page is concrete.

Anyway, if you set up a page like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Realist2/thriller25, let me know. I'll check it out and contribute and we can put something together. I might argue about giving it it's own page, but if it's gonna have it's own page we might as well make it good. I really doubt we'll get the material though.(The Elfoid (talk) 01:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC))

If it only has 1-4 new tracks, I don't think it's remotely worthy of a new page and I'll apply for a merge the instant it's up. But if it's got more than that, I'd agree it might deserve a new article. (The Elfoid (talk) 01:20, 7 December 2007 (UTC))

NEW INFORMATION!!!!! This release does not only contain the artist collaborations, original songs, unreleased and demos, but it ALSO INCLUDES the THREE VIDEOS FROM THRILLER. This alone is enough to justify its notability. HIStory Volumes I and II got individual articles because they contained a compilation of videos. So does Thriller 25. This justifies, beyond doubt, that the Thriller 25 article deserves to be standalone. --Paaerduag (talk) 01:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes and the source i read says that if you include remixes and previous unheared songs there will be 8 new songs on it. I think this is going to be a three Disc CD so some1 better no how all this platinum and gold stuff works. Realist2 01:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

hehe my browser's going so slow because i've got like 10 windows open from various news sources. I'll put em on the talk page. --Paaerduag (talk) 01:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

"some1 better no how all this platinum and gold stuff works"

It's entirely based on unit shipments. I have a feeling the third disc is gonna be a DVD though, and won't count. If it's a DVD, only the CDs will count. If the album is over 100 minutes long, it counts as a double to the RIAA, and is worth 2 sales units per sale. Read my little essay on The Wall on the MJ page, if you need more info on that :P (The Elfoid (talk) 20:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC))

Well certification we don't need to worry about, only the sales figures it represents. And I meant it, if it's over 100 minutes of audio CD material it'll be a double album, if not it's a single. Don't worry - I'll handle it if you want. And hey, we're cool. I love you to bits man, don't go thinking I hate ya :)

What about PYT or Stranger in Moscow? I don't get it. (The Elfoid (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC))

Tracklist

I didn't remove them. I'm just re-organising the list itself. Someone else removed them.

We don't actually know the order of the songs anyway. So after the original list, so we should note that song order after 1-9 is un-known. (The Elfoid (talk) 19:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC))

theelfoid_TFS[AT]hotmail[DOT]com

Send me an e-mail. I wish to discuss some things. (The Elfoid (talk) 15:13, 10 December 2007 (UTC))

Re:

I meant the 1993 trial. When he paid an un-stated sum of money to the family and they decided it was enough to drop charges. I mean, if he was innocent, why do that? It just seems an odd thing to do.

The recent trial, yes, they were just unable to prosecute him and evidence he committed the crimes accused was minimal.

Jackson's decline began in 1993 because backsales slowed down then. Why? The cancellation of the promised US tour upset a lot of people, and also because the accusations of child molestation, whether true or not, hit his popularity hard. HIStory's sales were 18.5 million...it should have been a lot higher given the wealth of content on there.

His album sales did go from 60 million (or 104, if you want to say Thriller sold that), to 32, to 30, to 18. HIStory sold less well in most territories where Jackson was already famous; he compensated by touring places he had rarely, if ever visited before. I would say he did not face SIGNIFICANT decline until around late 1998, when it became clear his albums and singles had been charting as well as they should have for three straight years.

Singles sales fell hugely, even in 1992. And yes, I know album-launching singles for Dangerous/HIStory/Invincible charted well, follow up singles did not.

Oh, and archiving? Look it up, it's easy to find info. I forget how to do it ;O (The Elfoid (talk) 16:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC))

(The Elfoid (talk) 16:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC))

Archive

Did you mean to create User talk:Realist2/Archive1 rather than /Archive1? You might want to move it before someone goes and deletes it. Cheers! —Travis^talk 20:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

• After a mistake of my own, I think it’s correct now. —Travis^talk 21:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

RE:

Sure, will do.

Singles were cheaper in the 90s. Albums were a focus on sales in the 80s, singles in the 90s. The scene changed. (The Elfoid (talk) 21:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC))

I don't REALLY like it, but maybe once the page has more stuff on it it will look better. It isn't really suited at all, I just want to shut that guy up. (The Elfoid (talk) 21:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC))

Album Reply

I have in no way checked this situation out yet as i am having some relationship problems that are keeping me off wikipedia but it seems that these pages do need to be split from what i am hearing, also when you reply, reply to this on your page insted of damageing mine, i will convert it to my pages standard afterwards. Gaogier (talk) 03:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thriller 25 - CDs

How can it be a single CD as people seem to think? There is a limit to how much music fits on a CD, the bonus songs will not all fit. No way in hell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Elfoid (talk • contribs) 19:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Lol. The bonus songs will fit exactly. How come YOU ever think a second CD would be needed? A CD has space for 80 min of default audio and the few bonus songs do not even reach this frontier.

Just read this --> [2]

AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.55.44.130 (talk) 21:42, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MJ on Ebony cover in 2007.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:MJ on Ebony cover in 2007.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Armedanode (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

reverted your edit

Dude. Thriller 25's tracklist was confirmed on michaeljackson.com. It needs sourcing still, but I had to revert your edit.

Since Jackson's serving as EXECUTIVE producer and has not actually produced any of the tracks directly (the Vinent Price one and "For All Time" had main production handled by Jones, only any additional work by Jackson and the remixes are specifically listed as produced by will.i.am) I felt we can list him as a producer on the list of producers but not call it co-production. Since it's not.

I deleted spaces since Wikipedia likes having less spaces. Odd rule, but there you go. It does work better at the top particularly where the contents partitions the page naturally.

I removed Akon from list of people Jackson's working with since Kanye West is remixing a song and will.i.am is remixing the rest. The people featuring in william's (easier to call him that...) remixes have worked with him. Jackson might have had ideas on who to involve but we can't confirm he has worked with them directly. I'm playing safe by leaving it ambiguous as to what role Jackson had with them.

(The Elfoid (talk) 23:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC))

We are here to change the world

We Are Here to Change the World Talk:We Are Here to Change the World

I know you said to drop the matter, but given I'm proceeding...you should take part I guess.(The Elfoid (talk) 04:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC))

Pop music

Hi Realist2. Over the past month I've been rewriting the Pop music article, as advised on various notices on the talk page. These days I'm adding the finishing touches, and yesterday I had various edit conflicts with you; you were making minor additions whilst I was trying to save big paragraphs and my work was being refused, but that's beside the point.
The issue that brings me here is, of course, Michael Jackson. You've added a whole bunch of his songs to the article and I wish you to note the page is about a genre of popular music, not a performer, regardless of his commercial success or your passion for his music. I've removed those songs that are not notable, and moved others to their appropriate paragraphs. With these latest additions, Mr Jackson is more than sufficiently represented on the page, and I would be grateful if you would abstain from adding more of his oeuvre to the article. Thank you.
Finally, to help avoid edit conflicts such as those I suffered yesterday, I would like to suggest you use the preview button before saving; this has the benefit of allowing you to find errors you may have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again, and happy holidays. ↔ Dennywuh (talk) 15:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

HIStory (the song)

HIStory (song) HIStory/Ghosts

I don't know what we should do with the two since I've only skim-read them, but right now a lot of information is repeated on the two. Generally a remix does not get a new page. We should perhaps change the page for HIStory/Ghosts to make the HIStory song's page redundant. Right now HIStory is only notable as a song since it has famous quotes; these could be listed in HIStory/Ghosts and a re-direct link created.

Your opinion? (The Elfoid (talk) 20:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

You're definitely right that we only need one article on the HIStory song. Wasn't it released as a double A-side though? It's kinda odd, since it was the only remix to ever be the 'main' version of a song on a single. Might be worth asking other people. (The Elfoid (talk) 22:27, 25 December 2007 (UTC))

Sorry!

By lord, I meant you are the guy who knows more about everything Jackson related on Wikipedia than anything else. I wasn't talking about you at all in the rest of it. I was talking about...well you should be able to guess. (The Elfoid (talk) 19:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC))

RE: archive

I dont know how to split archive 14 into smaller bits.. reduced the max archive size Sai2020 07:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

2 things

1) Wikipedia:Editor review/The Elfoid 2) I put a semi-colon into the Thriller 25 article. Just so you know, it is grammatically correct! I know from your user page you aren't English in origin, wasn't sure if you ever had to use semi-colons. They've fallen out of common use. Didn't want you confused :)

It'd be cool if you check the review thing and add comments too. (The Elfoid (talk) 17:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC))

Michael Jackson

When blind reverting the above article, you removed a huge section that on finances that was merged in from another article. Please take time to check over what you're actually reverting from and to. Also, attacks in edit summaries such as this serve no purpose. If you check the logs, you'll notice that no-one unprotected the article, the protection just got lost when the article was deleted to make way for the history merge. Ryan Postlethwaite 19:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Before you revert me, read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Jackson's finances - if you revert again, it's plain disruption, the AfD result is quite clear. Ryan Postlethwaite 20:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks like the semiprot was accidentally lost when an administrator temporarily deleted the page; unfortunate mistake, but fixed, now. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Realist, he has a point. His finances are half of what the tabloid press talk about (other than his surgery), and whether we find it relevant/interesting, it's important stuff. Needs a LOT of work though. (The Elfoid (talk) 21:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC))

Girl is Mine

Doesn't matter. We can have it like other cover songs - give it a new infobox. See All along the watchtower - that's the best known cover song of all time and it hasn't got it's own page. The new song is a cover rather than a remix since it's got new lyrics by a new vocalist, new Jackson vocals inserted etc. but remixes and covers in general NEVER get their own page. Basically because so much relevant information is on the existing page and would need moving over.

It's much easier keeping it on one page, and easier to keep track of. It's not an issue of notability, organising the discography or anything...just being consistent with Wikipedia policy and making it both easier to research and maintain. The Girl is Mine 2008's article is absolutely useless without The Girl is Mine's own, but TGIM is not a "main article" on the topic...it's a needless split in the article.

(The Elfoid (talk) 21:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC))

A remix is a form of cover, when you're talking about electronically produced sounds that can be replicated exactly with pin point precision the line blurs. If Jackson's involved isn't an issue - some artists have covered their own songs numerous times before. Not common in pop though, which is what you appear to listen to mostly judging by your userpage (though I have been surprised before, you might have other tastes). It's really because no one can find out anything about the 08 version until they read up on the original, and a lot of information would be needed in both, so it's easier that way. The "The Girl is Mine" page could do with a big clean-up though, we should tackle that together sometime :) (The Elfoid (talk) 22:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC))

You're not my type, lol. (The Elfoid (talk) 00:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC))

Reply

Yes it was tagged for one week, during the holidays. That is hardly a long time to be tagged. And as another editor told you, tagging it for improvement is the preferable option to outright removal, since all that info is in fact correct. I would suggest you bring this to the talk page itself, rather than delete it. There are many dedicated editors working on Beatles-related articles, and I'm sure one or two are planning on working on those citations. I'll assume good faith on your part, but you really need to actually discuss the removal of such a large block of text. That's why we have talk pages. Thank you. freshacconcispeaktome 13:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Im quite supprised by your comment there, it goes against wiki ideology entirely. You must have a liking for the beatles. And I'd like to remind you to assume good faith, as I have done for you. (As you're an admitted Michael Jackson fan, I could be inclined to think that there is some sort of agenda at work here, deleting The Beatles' achievements, but I won't be so inclined). freshacconcispeaktome 13:16, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

New singles

Sorted out girl is mine 2008 infobox, do we know of any new singles to be released by Jackson/will.i.am afterwards? Only bit I didn't know about.

Also, now we know what the new single is, we need to re-write the stuff on thriller 25 about "a new single will be released" and just write about the girl is mine being released. (The Elfoid (talk) 16:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC))

Your edits to Michael Jackson

Regardless of your own view of the Daily Mail, it is regarded as a valid source on wikipedia. I have therefore, reverted the edits you made where you removed verifiable information. Please, as I have asked you before, read WP:V. I would suggest in future you follow your own advice here [3] Thanks  Funky Monkey  (talk)  19:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yet you continue to remove verifiable information from the article. I have reverted again. Continue and you WILL be reported for vandalism.. You may nor agree with the source, but it IS verifiable, and reliable.  Funky Monkey  (talk)  19:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

In that case, say so in your edit summary. You stated in your edit summary that you were removing the info as it was poorly sourced. What do you expect? The edit summary is there for a reason.  Funky Monkey  (talk)  19:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)