User talk:Greenock125

Unblock

Alright, so we'll give this another try per User talk:LJB824#Deal.

Understand that this is a probationary unblock. I'm not going to supervise all your edits from now on, but I have a few conditions and expectations:

Conditions

1. I want you to use edit summaries with *every* edit in all namespaces, providing an explanation and context for your change.
2. If any editor comes to your talk page with a concern, question, or warning, stop editing immediately and comment on it. Never ignore it, at the very least acknowledge that you have read it. Do not make edits to which that same concern, question, or warning would apply until the underlying issue is resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. If an issue can't be resolved, talk to me.
3. If an edit of yours is reverted, discuss! Don't redo the change, or make similar edits to any other articles, unless the underlying issue is resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. If an issue can't be resolved, talk to me.

Expectations

1. I won't add any conditions regarding content, in the assumption that any upcoming issues should be resolvable in a collaborative spirit if you follow the above conditions. I expect that you do your best to amicably resolve any upcoming issues, and to work with other editors in a friendly and constructive manner.
2. I expect that you return to editing slowly. Your edits will be under a lot of scrutiny, especially at the beginning. I expect that you take it slowly, preview each of your edits, think about it and be convinced that it is appropriate, make sure it is not controversial and in accordance with policy and guidelines, and make sure your edit summary gives enough context to understand the change.

Please read the above carefully, and acknowledge that you understand. If you have any questions or objections please say so now. Your editing with your IP from a few months ago was largely without issues, so I am very confident that this unblock can work out this time.

If anyone else reading this has concerns, now is the time to voice them.

Amalthea 12:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have read the above carefully and I have acknowledged and understood what you have said. I am glad that things have worked out this time, I would like to fully apologies for everything that I have done in the past. I promise I will never create any more accounts. rydogal (talk) 12:34, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Read it again. With your edit, you have ignored condition 1, and also expectation 2 (if you had carefully previewed your edit you should have noticed that your signature was off).
Note that I'm not trying to bully you with those points, or make your wiki-life harder; I'm trying to make it easier, and facilitate your return to collaborative editing with as few problems as possible. It is crucial that you keep those points in mind with every edit, in particular at the beginning. If necessary, write them on a post-it and stick it on your monitor, so you don't forget. You can also set your account preferences to remind you if you forgot to fill in an edit summary. Amalthea 13:09, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry about that I promise I will use the Edit summary when editing pages in the future. rydogal (talk) 13:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have brought up several points in my last reply. It seems you have only focused on one part, and ignored everything else I said. This has been a problem in the past. If you don't understand what I'm trying to say, ask. If you disagree, say so. But don't ignore points that are being made. You seem to be hasty, and that's not good. Be careful with every edit. Preview every edit, and think about what you write, and whether that's an appropriate response.
So again, your signature is wrong. You have not corrected it, and apparently you have not noticed it. Explain to me why. Did you preview that reply of yours, like I asked? An honest answer, please. Amalthea 13:32, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I do understand what you are saying I read the points that you said, I am a bit confused with the signature can you please tell me what I am doing wrong with that please, thanks. --rydogal (talk) 13:39, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, it reads "rydogal", which I believe was another account of yours. Or do you intentionally want to have differing account name and signature? It's confusing, in my opinion.
Also, your last edit did not have an edit summary, again. It's not as imperative on a user talk page as it is in main space, but you must make a habit of it, else you'll just continue to forget. Did you search for the option I mentioned in your preferences?
Lastly, you have now violated this simple condition with two out of three edits. If we're already having trouble here I'm starting to have doubts that you can really follow it over a day, a week, a month. The last time we tried an unblock also failed because you could not follow Kww's conditions, despite him and me urging you a couple of times. Do you have an explanation why this is proving so difficult for you? As I said above, maybe it's best if you put it on a piece of paper and look at each point before you press save, like with a checklist.
And, for the love of god, don't be hasty. Before you save your reply, preview your edit, and be convinced that you address *all* my points and questions!
Amalthea 14:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have changed my signature back to Greenock125. Before I do an edit I always do a preview to make sure it is good, and if I have any problems in the future I will talk to you. Greenock125 (talk) 14:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I did search for the option in my preferences as you asked me. Greenock125 (talk) 14:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

You have not addressed all my points and questions. Amalthea 15:06, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I do not have an explanation to why this is proving so difficult for me. Before I make any edits I always do a preview to make sure the edits I do are ok. I promise I will not be to hasty when editing, is there any other questions you want me to answer. Greenock125 (talk) 15:16, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

This last edit was again missing an edit summary. So even if you found the option in your preferences, you apparently decided not to enable it. And my suggestion of using a checklist for each edit also seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
I despair. You need to get your act together. And we will have to continue this discussion on another day. Amalthea 16:07, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I have got my act together and I am taking up your suggestion of using a checklist for each edit. Greenock125 (talk) 16:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Unblock

Hi Amalthea, sorry about what happened yesterday I want to try and continue this discussion today and try and get this sorted out. Greenock125 (talk) 07:46, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I am asking very nicely can you please unblock me I agree to your conditions and expectations, why can't we get this sorted today please can you consider this, thanks. Greenock125 (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

You said above that I should write down the points you said on a piece of paper and look at each point before you press save I would do that if I am unblocked. Greenock125 (talk) 17:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi Amalthea, can you please stop ignoring me please I am trying to continue this discussion with you but you are not responding why are you doing this, I really just want to get this sorted as soon as possible, can you please consider this and not ignore it, thanks. Greenock125 (talk) 10:48, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I feel like I'm not getting a chance to prove myself on Wikipedia, as it says on the Main Page "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". So please give me a chance, thanks. Greenock125 (talk) 10:52, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

1) You ask nicely and say you agree with the conditions, yet you ignore them with the very edit. 2) My last post ended with "we have to continue this another day", and I made no other edits over the weekend. That doesn't mean I'm ignoring you. 3) And wow, you feel like you're not getting enough chances? You've had plenty, I'd say. Amalthea 08:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, Im sorry about what I said at the weekend and I would love to continue with this discussion and try and get this sorted out, thanks. Greenock125 (talk) 11:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

No need to apologize. Convince me that this is going to work. What did you put onto the checklist? Amalthea 13:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I put the conditions and expectations you wrote onto the checklist. Greenock125 (talk) 15:14, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Explain to me why I now find that you edited anonymously last week, thus continued evading your block? Amalthea 15:41, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I did not edit anonymously last week and evaded my block. Greenock125 (talk) 15:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I admit that I did some editing anonymously last week and evaded my block, but I promise I will never do that ever again. I feel terrible about it and would like to apologize for that, would you forgive me for. Greenock125 (talk) 16:00, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Not good that your first reaction was to lie. I'm happy that you chose to own up to it a short time after.
I have grave doubts that this is going to work out, but I hope for the best. Your account is now unblocked, please make sure to meticulously stick to your checklist.
Amalthea 16:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments, Questions, and Concerns

Hi,
a few brief comments:

1. Regarding the copyright concern noted below by CorenSearchBot, you have properly cited the quote so it can be seen as fair use, but I would ask that you take another look at the quote and see if it can't be shorted to the most relevant bit. Quoting the whole review may be too much as far as WP:FAIR USE is concerned.
2. I know I've said that I want you to reply to all posts from editors on your talk page, but I actually would ask you to address posts by bots as well. Just add a short reply reply so that a visitor to your talk page can see that the concern is resolved, e.g. something like ": License added. ~~~~" to that section by ImageTaggingBot, and some appropriate explanation to the section by CorenSearchBot.
3. File:Whatafeeling.jpg is missing the fair use rationale. Please add it.
4. Do you have a reliable source that that album is called Magnificent? If so, please add it. If not, well, then that name needs to be removed again.
5. Can you explain to me why What a Feeling (Alex Gaudino song) passes WP:NMUSIC? As an uncharted single it doesn't pass the rule of thumb, and from the article I don't see that this one song has in-depth coverage by multiple independent reliable sources. My first impression is that it should be redirected to the article, for now.

As per condition 2, please address my concerns before you continue to edit (If you're right in the middle of editing it's of course OK if you save it)
Amalthea 21:44, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi there I the fair use rationale for File:Whatafeeling.jpg. I have a reliable source saying that the second album from Alex Gaudino is Magnificent [1]. I do agree that the article What a Feeling (Alex Gaudino song) should be redirected to the article, for now. Greenock125 (talk) 21:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, my mistake, I guess I didn't take a good enough look at that source regarding the album title.
Two more things, your reply was missing an edit summary, please remember that, and you've have skipped over my first two comments above -- could you address them as well? Amalthea 22:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi there regarding the copyright concern noted below by CorenSearchBot. I never copied material directly from the website [2]. Greenock125 (talk) 06:40, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

That's beside the point – you have copied it from a website.
Besides the two sections by bots that I asked you to comment on (again, see my first two points at the top of this section), Courcelles has left you a notice as well. By not commenting on it you have now violated condition 2. I have clearly asked that you never ignore a post on your talk page by another editor, and always must give some reply before you continue editing articles. Comment on it! I want to see that you read messages, and understand why they are being left here.
Note, as always, I expect you to address ALL MY POINTS in your reply. You usually only reply to parts. Amalthea 07:15, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

. I read comment number 2 and I understand why they are being left here. Greenock125 (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Good. Now place a comment in each of the sections below addressing the respective concerns: Say if the concern has merit, and what changes you have made or will make to address them.
It may not make a huge difference in the cases at hand, but I want you to make a habit of it; not commenting on concerns (even templates) is very detrimental to collaborative editing, nobody can see inside your head. So do it now.
This is the fourth time I'm asking this, and it's part of the conditions you agreed to. I won't ask again. Amalthea 07:56, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

For the love of god, do I really need to reinstate the block over this? COMMENT IN EACH OF THE SECTIONS BELOW. What part of that could you have possibly not understood? It's part of your conditions. Each time you see an orange bar, it's a signal for you to go to your talk page, read what's been added since you've been there the last time, and reply! Amalthea 08:43, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Getting Nowhere

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Getting Nowhere, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.emmerdale.me.uk/news.php?url=music/singlesreviews/a304550/magnetic-man-ft-john-legend-getting-nowhere.html.

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. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I did not copy material directly from [3] I got the information for the Critical reception section from the website Digital Spy [4]. Greenock125 (talk) 08:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

To address the underlying concern: While copyrighted material was indeed added to the Getting Nowhere article, it was added as an attributed quote, used per WP:FAIR USE, so it was not improper. To be sure the quote complies with our fair use criteria and is not excessive, Greenock125 has shortened it to only use the most relevant part. Amalthea 08:31, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Breakofdawn.png

Thanks for uploading File:Breakofdawn.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 19:06, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

If I do need help choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions I will leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Greenock125 (talk) 08:45, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Like I said above, what I (and visitors to your page) are looking for is a reply stating whether the above message had merit, and what changes you have made or will make to address them. In this case, you could have said "License text was missing from the image, I have added this."
Amalthea 09:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Whatafeeling.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Whatafeeling.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

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 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. Courcelles 03:31, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I will check other unlicensed media and please check whether they're used in any articles or not. Greenock125 (talk) 08:47, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The core point of the above message was that a fair-use image you uploaded is unused and is going to be deleted. In this case, the notice has merit and you don't plan to add it to an article, so it's OK if it gets deleted. I would have expected an answer like "Yes, the article was redirected, image will remain unused for now and can be deleted".
Amalthea 09:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree with what you just said there I could have answered that much better. Greenock125 (talk) 09:22, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Good job

Well, this is working really well, good job! The only thing I'd wish for is that some of your edit summaries were a bit more descriptive. E.g., instead of just "Improved" or "Correction", add a few bullet points what exactly the edit improved or corrected. In case of Numbers In Action the edit summary of "Improved article" was actually a bit misleading since the main change was to replace the redirect by an actual article; I would have written something like "Restored and expanded article, single has charted".
Oh, and I've configured an archive bot for your talk page, it's going to check your page from time to time and automatically move all sections older than one month to an archive subpage.
Cheers, Amalthea 14:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the comments I agree with what you said. Greenock125 (talk) 15:12, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Notability of songs

Hi,
you know the rule of thumb for which songs should have stand-alone articles and which shouldn't. Why did you decide to write articles on Quédate Conmigo, Momentos de Navidad, and Hard Times (Plan B song)?
Amalthea 10:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, I honestly don't know why I created them three articles. The two articles Quédate Conmigo and Momentos de Navidad fails WP:NSONGS because it has not charted, Hard Times (Plan B song) could pass WP:NSONGS if it charts on the UK Singles Chart. Greenock125 (talk) 15:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Caro Emerald Discography

You recently changed the design of Caro Emerald's Discography, the only thing the line under:

2011 "Riviera Life"[21] 18 99 — — — — — — — —

Is missing. Would you please correct that? I would have done it, but I don't know how, so please place a line beneath it.

You also deleted multiple sources. So many chart positions don't have a source anymore. Please corret it.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GangWolvega (talk • contribs) 16:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)