User talk:Vitor Mazuco: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 19:15, 18 March 2010

Warning

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Beat It, you will be blocked from editing. We've been through this over and over and over again, in your old persona as Vitor mazuco (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). You must not add charts listed on WP:BADCHARTS. Do not add the Brazil Hot 100 to any articles ever again.—Kww(talk) 17:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The IFPI logo appears nowhere on http://www.hot100brasil.com/, and hot100brasil.com is not listed at http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_links/member_sites.html. The APBD is listed at http://www.ifpi.org/content/section_links/local_associations.html, but they have no connection with the Brazil Hot 100.—Kww(talk) 19:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the APBD is an official source of information, and is associated with the IFPI. The Hot 100 Brazil is not an official chart, and is not associated with the IFPI. It is listed on WP:BADCHARTS, and must not be included in any Wikipedia articles. If you want to try to change that, discuss it at WT:Record charts. As long as it is listed at WP:BADCHARTS, do not insert it into Wikipedia articles.—Kww(talk) 21:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are no Brazilian charts that can be included in Wikipedia.—Kww(talk) 01:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just Brazil. Latvia, Lithuania, Peru, Chile, the Dominican Republic, all African countries, Luxembourg, Iceland, Vietnam, Indonesia ... probably a hundred more.—Kww(talk) 01:45, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a chart for nearly all of the IFPI's top 30 markets. Brazil is the biggest missing country. I have no idea why there aren't any official countrywide charts for Brazil. The charts that are included in English Wikipedia cover over 90% of the world's music market when measured by sales.—Kww(talk) 02:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can read more Portuguese than you think. Most of those sites looked to be gossip/entertainment sites, so they won't help. We don't use Charly1300 charts on English Wikipedia either, so they won't help. Globo.com looks much better, and I know that it is a reliable news source. If you can show that Globo.com treats the Brasil Hot 100 as a real chart, and does so in many articles, that can be taken to WT:Record charts. I live in Bonaire, just a 100 kilometers north of Venezuela.—Kww(talk) 02:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you give me a list of Globo.com references to the Brasil Hot 100, I'll help you with getting people to talk about allowing it on Wikipedia.—Kww(talk) 02:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is about time for me to go to bed. I will look over the Globo links in the morning. I know that UOL will not meet our standards for being a reliable source, so I will just look at Globo.—Kww(talk) 02:55, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hot 100 coverage in Globo

Your link to Globo didn't turn out well. It showed 25 links, so I thought it would, but when I looked carefully, this is how the 25 links turned out:

Blog references

NesseInstante

http://emsergipe.globo.com/nesseinstante/exibir_noticia.asp?id=63068

Wanessa - 7084

Wanessa - 7085

The first set (blogs) don't count at all, because they are blogs. Still, notice that out of the 4 links, 3 of them are to the same post.

Then, there is one story from 2004 in NesseInstante.

Then, there is one story about Wanessa Camarga. It showed up twice, but with many, many links to the two versions. The two versions are really the same story.

This means that in Globo, there were two mentions of the Brazil Hot 100 in five years. None of them said anything about the Brazil Hot 100, such as who runs it, where they get the data, how they make the list. That's not enough. If you can find other reliable sources (not blogs, not gossip sites, not Wikis, not chart sites), I'll look at them. I can't try to convince people to change with just this.—Kww(talk) 12:57, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, some sites that pass WP:RS: major newspapers or other news sources. It would be best if they answer the big questions about Hot 100 Brazil:

who runs it
where do they get the data
how they make the list.

—Kww(talk) 13:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question

This looks very good. I'm glad to see something official. I can only find one week though: June 22-June 29. Can you see any other weeks? If it's only ten songs for one week, it doesn't help much.—Kww(talk) 13:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why they do that. Crowley Broadcast Analysis released one week for December 2008. It was the same problem: good chart, reliable source, but one week for ten songs doesn't do anyone any good.—Kww(talk) 18:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very good! They didn't erase the earlier one, so now there is two weeks of charts. If they publish again next week, then I will update everything to tell people about this chart.—Kww(talk) 17:01, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will start a discussion at WT:Record charts sometime today. It is a reliable chart, but we have to figure out how to handle it: having a Brazilan chart that is valid for only 15 albums so far is going to cause confusion.—Kww(talk) 13:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it will be, because it is a valid chart. I am just one editor. If I say "yes" without warning people, they will just take it back out. I need to discuss it first. I am editing my statement right now. I will let you know where to find it in a few minutes.—Kww(talk) 14:03, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion is at WT:Record charts#New chart for Brazil. Let's see what people say.—Kww(talk) 14:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sales?

I know where to find certifications, but what's your source for actual sales in Brazil?—Kww(talk) 01:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that tells you the certification. The certification doesn't tell you sales, it tells you how many have been shipped from the manufacturer to the retailer.—Kww(talk) 01:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will look into this more, but go ahead for now. I know that PDF is wrong about the United States: the RIAA certifies based on how many CDs have been shipped to retailers, not how many have been sold. Nielsen measures sales. Sometime, the certification from RIAA is for many more CDs than Nielsen says have been sold, because many CDs are sitting in warehouses.—Kww(talk) 01:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.ifpi.org/content/library/certification-award-levels.pdf is a PDF file. Look at the last three letters in the link. See PDF if you want details.—Kww(talk) 01:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because it says a Gold certification in the United States is based on sales. I know that is not true. I am not sure about Brazil, and that is why I said it was OK for you to add things.—Kww(talk) 02:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chart stopped?

Looks like the ABPD chart has stopped, after only six weeks. Your Portuguese is much better than mine (I only know any because I know some Spanish and some Papiamentu, so I can usually figure things out). Can you search around and see if they have started to publish it somewhere else?—Kww(talk) 13:15, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Brazil

There are still problems with the website: right now, the only charts they have on the website are copies of the US charts. Once that is fixed, it will be fine to use it.—Kww(talk) 22:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The rankings are very hard for us to validate, and there are going to be big problems because of the name (there's the old, bad "Hot 100 Brazil", and the new, good "Hot 100 Brazil"). It's best to wait a few weeks: hopefully, Billboard will make the old "Hot 100 Brazil" shut down, and will start publishing a good chart. I'm watching it, and I will take care of it when everything looks good. We've been talking about it at WT:Record charts#Billboard Brazil: legitimate or hoax?, and we've all decided it's a good chart.—Kww(talk) 22:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Kane31.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Kane31.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file 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 file 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 '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 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. ww2censor (talk) 15:18, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Brazil

I've noticed the trouble you are having with Billboard Brazil charts in articles. I wish I could help more. The problem is that they don't save the chart. It changes every month, so every position that people add goes bad the next month. That's why I said not to add them until the site works better. I still think waiting is the best thing.

What you could do that would help is to cite them to a specific copy of the magazine, not the website. Use {{cite journal}}, and that way there is a permanent link. Let me know if you have problems understanding how to use {{cite journal}}.—Kww(talk) 14:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crowley charts

Those have been discussed before, and the decision was "no". Two reasons: first, they don't cover all of Brazil, just two regions. Second, they aren't archived: once the next week's chart is put up, the old one is erased. That means that no one can verify an old chart position.—Kww(talk) 22:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake: I didn't see that they had added a Brazil-wide chart. Let's wait a few weeks and make sure that they keep the charts archived, and then I'll add it to WP:GOODCHARTS.—Kww(talk) 22:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that they only keep the last 4 charts online, so it's still not usable as a reference. I've noticed that you are still having arguments with Lil-Unique. Again, the only way you will be able to keep these links is by referencing the physical magazine. Referencing the website is not good enough. After a month, any editor is able to remove your links because everything changes.—Kww(talk) 00:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you take the time to actually correctly reference the physical magazine, with page numbers, publication dates, publishers, and titles, I'll help keep the references in. As long as you keep referencing a website that changes every month, I won't help.—Kww(talk) 14:55, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~This level of edit-warring is completely unacceptable. Inserting Portuguese macros that don't even expand correctly on English Wikipedia is not providing a correct citation.~~Didn't see that you had corrected the citation problem.—Kww(talk) 15:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard brasil

Another user has already told you that there is NO OFFICIAL brasil chart which can be used on wikipedia. So why do you keep adding it? Lil-unique1 (talk) 18:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You don't seem to understand. As the users above have pointed out it is NOT APPROVED for use on Wikipedia by WIKIPEDIAN (wiki-editors). As far the community is concerned there is no consensus on including Billboard Brasil charts. Under these circumstances you would need to start a discussion and find a WP:consensus. You made a series of reverts to IWTNKLI without doing so, you've also broken WP:3RR and showed disruptive editing. Under these circumstances you've displayed WP:IDHT due to a lack of discussion and therefore there is a strong case for a request for you to be banned from editing. I suggest you undo your edit, join the discussion at Billboard Brasil/Official Brasilian Singles CHart? and WAIT until there is a consensus. This is how we do things on wikipedia. It is a community not the opinions of myself or yourself. Lil-unique1 (talk) 18:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GOODCHARTS

I think you are perfectly aware that the consensus is not to use Billboard Brasil's website as a source. Including it in WP:GOODCHARTS was inappropriate.—Kww(talk) 15:57, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. It is described in the "notes" section for Brazil, and that is enough. Because of the discussion on this, I've removed all other unarchived charts from WP:GOODCHARTS. Proper citations to Billboard Brazil can probably be made to stay, but the use of the chart isn't recommended. It won't go on WP:BADCHARTS, though.—Kww(talk) 15:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alice music video

Vitor, I'm going to ask you to please stop removing the music video concept section, which I saw you do yesterday as well as today. The entire section is covered by a single reference: the YouTube video which is cited at the very end of the concept subsection. This is in complete accordance to WP:CITE and I would ask that you read over the policy carefully before removing something "without ref". –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 21:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Vitor Mazuco. You have new messages at Keraunoscopia's talk page.
Message added 22:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 22:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citing Billboard Brasil

This is insufficient. Provide enough detail to convince me that you are buying the magazine and using it as a source, not simply using the website as a source.—Kww(talk) 03:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

False citations

Do not take listings from hot100brasil.com (or mariah-charts, or any other site listed at WP:BADCHARTS), and then dress them up as if you got them from Billboard Brasil. It's pretty damn obvious that is what you did when you made this contribution to Portuguese Wikipedia citing Mariah charts and this edit to English Wikipedia citing Billboard Brasil. You didn't even get the page number of the chart right. You've lied about Brazilian charts before, and I don't want to see this start up again. If you persist in committing intentional fraud, you will be blocked.—Kww(talk) 17:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah-charts does not reflect Billboard Brazil, it's hot100brasil.com. You know that. Take a look at your old talk page before you switched IDs, where I warned you about that specific issue). That's the reason that you listed it as Hot 100 Songs & Tracks on Portuguese Wikipedia (the chart name from hot100brasil.com). I'm out of assuming good faith with you, Vitor. You've lied about the Hot 100 Brazil in the past, you've switched accounts after being warned about it, you continued to add it after being told to stop, and now you are back at it. Stop.—Kww(talk) 19:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 17:02, 18 March 2010 edit Kww (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers 82,475 edits →‎False citations: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 19:15, 18 March 2010 edit undo Kww (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers 82,475 edits →‎False citations Next edit →
Line 136:		Line 136:

	Do '''not''' take listings from hot100brasil.com (or mariah-charts, or any other site listed at [[WP:BADCHARTS]]), and then dress them up as if you got them from Billboard Brasil. It's pretty damn obvious that is what you did when you made [http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alice_%28can%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_Avril_Lavigne%29&diff=prev&oldid=19275864 this contribution to Portuguese Wikipedia citing Mariah charts] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alice_%28Avril_Lavigne_song%29&diff=prev&oldid=349848235 this edit to English Wikipedia citing Billboard Brasil]. You didn't even get the page number of the chart right. You've [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kww/Archive09072009&diff=prev&oldid=300846498 lied about Brazilian charts before], and I don't want to see this start up again. If you persist in committing intentional fraud, you will be blocked.—[[User:Kww\|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww\|talk]]) 17:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)		Do '''not''' take listings from hot100brasil.com (or mariah-charts, or any other site listed at [[WP:BADCHARTS]]), and then dress them up as if you got them from Billboard Brasil. It's pretty damn obvious that is what you did when you made [http://pt.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alice_%28can%C3%A7%C3%A3o_de_Avril_Lavigne%29&diff=prev&oldid=19275864 this contribution to Portuguese Wikipedia citing Mariah charts] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alice_%28Avril_Lavigne_song%29&diff=prev&oldid=349848235 this edit to English Wikipedia citing Billboard Brasil]. You didn't even get the page number of the chart right. You've [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kww/Archive09072009&diff=prev&oldid=300846498 lied about Brazilian charts before], and I don't want to see this start up again. If you persist in committing intentional fraud, you will be blocked.—[[User:Kww\|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww\|talk]]) 17:02, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
			:Mariah-charts does not reflect Billboard Brazil, it's hot100brasil.com. You know that. Take a look at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Vitor_mazuco#..._and_again_... your old talk page before you switched IDs, where I warned you about that specific issue)]. That's the reason that you listed it as ''Hot 100 Songs & Tracks'' on Portuguese Wikipedia (the chart name from hot100brasil.com). I'm out of assuming good faith with you, Vitor. You've lied about the Hot 100 Brazil in the past, you've switched accounts after being warned about it, you continued to add it after being told to stop, and now you are back at it. Stop.—[[User:Kww\|Kww]]([[User talk:Kww\|talk]]) 19:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)