User talk:Yids2010

Take That

You may care to check your information at ASCAP.com. I have reverted Patience and quoted a reference, do you want to amend the others? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries, i'll sort it, thanks for pointing it out!

Yids2010 (talk) 01:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Take That

Why is the release date of The Flood wrong? If you look below, you see that the release date of Denmark was October 15 and we always write the first release date above, don't we? So I don't see anything wrong with the info I wrote... Hello...--79.216.213.42 (talk) 20:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

because it wasnt officially released on that date, see the sources provided, the one you refer to was a leaked promo. Yids2010 (talk) 15:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yids2010. You have new messages at Armbrust's talk page.
Message added 00:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 00:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Take That discog

hey, thought i'd explain some of my changes on here. 1) IRMA does not certify it's singles, so the irish flood certification is false. 2) their is no existing reliable source for the irish album chart pre-2000, so even if albums charted highly their is no way of proving it so they can't be included. 3) mediatraffic.de is a very very bad source for anything and it always contains mistakes. if it does indeed get it's sales info from music week, then find the music week article. 4) i removed the eu and italian certifications because their positions are not included in the tables. per WP:DISCOGSTYLE they should not be included. - i could not find the irish cert for the ultimate collection in the irma site, thats why that was removed. Mister sparky (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

haha it's cool, i don't always read things either lol Mister sparky (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

No worries mate! Yids2010 (talk) 22:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

i removed the italian one cuz the positions aren't in the table, i wasn't saying it doesnt exist lol. Mister sparky (talk) 22:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

It's live... and it may be more helpful than not

See Wikipedia:Future Films Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tt progress.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tt progress.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 03:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

This has already been discussed and the deletion file has been removed as it does not meet WP:CSD guidelines. Yids2010 (talk) 12:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

User

Hi Yids. I just wanted to ask a question. There is this user, Fatty2k10 who is continuing to remove sourced stuff (Gary Barlow now X Factor judges) and acting in an agressive manner, how can we stop him doing this? --SATURDAYmight. (talk) 09:14, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Itsbydesign

Yes, I know he's a trouble some user. There's no indication of why he's removing the information and sponsors are as important to the article, not some dumb rule he pointed out. Just keep in mind his one point, "not to cut/paste quotes", else if he fails to provide reasoning and continues to vandalize, raise an ANI thread and report him. Wikipedia does not need disruptive users like him. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:10, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

trying to figure out

I'm trying to figure out the purpose of this. Why would using a redirect to the template better than using the template itself? Am I missing something here? Best regards.--Muhandes (talk) 07:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Widespread edit war

Everyone needs to calm down and look at things more closely. Taking Shine (Take That song), for example, I discovered that the references to the Belgian Tip charts weren't correct: Swisscharts.com does not reflect Belgian Tip positions. I used the singlechart template, and now we have correctly referenced positions. I looked at the Czech chart, however, and it was fine: the reference indicates what to place in the search bar, and, when you do that, the Czech position shows as described. Everyone slow down, stop reverting each other, and actually check the material that is being put in and taken out. If this keeps up, it's possible that I'll block everyone involved.—Kww(talk) 17:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your involvement, it is very welcome. Yids2010 (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I've determined that you were dealing with a long-term disruptive editor, Pesf. His strategy, however, seemed to be removing blocks of good data along with a little bit of bad. You really should go over the articles where you have been reverting Madiera1234 and check the material. There's probably at least one real problem mixed in with the invalid reverts.—Kww(talk) 19:46, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and yes I will check over the articles right now. Thanks again.Yids2010 (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Kidz (song)

Continuing on the spirit of our mutual understanding, in Kidz (song) you added a certification giving top40-charts.com as the source. You were probably not aware that top40-charts.com is on WP:BADCHARTS and should be avoided. I removed the source and tagged with "citation needed", and rather than remove it, I ask that you either find a reliable source or remove it yourself. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Another one on the same article. You added a certification, however, the source is not specific enough and does not in fact verify the fact - neither the song nor the band appear on the page. I did not touch this line, so I just ask that you either provide a specific source, or remove the certification. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Rule the World

I'm sorry but this is more of the same. Following Kww's advice I went over some of the deletes Madiera1234 did, and indeed Madiera1234's modus operandi is to remove good material with bad. In this case, you added to Rule the World a certification with a source that does not verify the fact. Neither the band nor the song appear on the page provided. On the spirit of our understanding I did not remove it, and I ask that you either provide a proper source, or remove the certification yourself. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

And I'm afraid another one on the same page. here you added another certification without verifying source. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Although I notified you of the above a week ago, you still have no corrected it. I really do not want to remove this, per our understanding, but you have to do your part of the deal, which is to either find reliable sources, or remove the material yourself. For now, I replaced the inappropriate sources with {{cn}}, but they should not stay there without a source. Please advise me on how you think this should be handled. --Muhandes (talk) 23:27, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

This applies to the Polish chart for Kidz (song) as well. --Muhandes (talk) 00:16, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for handling these. I see that the pages were semi-protected, so I took them off my watchlist again. If you ever need me to put them back on let me know. --Muhandes (talk) 08:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem mate, thanks for your help and I will do. Yids2010 (talk) 09:55, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Gary Barlow

You have on multiple occasions removed fully-referenced and accurate information from this article without reason. Please refrain from doing so. If you wish to request its removal, do so on the Talk Page and provide justification for doing so within Wikipedia's guidelines. Jammy07 (talk) 17:33, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

If you feel so strongly about mentioning it then put it on the The X Factor (UK) article as it is about the show not individuals. It will continue to be removed from the Gary Barlow article as there is proof. What tabloids say is one thing but no statements have been made regarding it and insiders say it never happen. The definition of an inconclusive story. Yids2010 (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Barlow is mentioned specifically as being involved in the incident rather than any of the other judges. The story has been widely reported and not just in the tabloids, the references show. If you wish to remove it discuss it on the talk page of the article in question, not simply here. Jammy07 (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

They all quote one tabloid, The Sun, which carried an exclusive story heading when it was printed and the twist on the story is categorically denied on the last paragraph of the original article here. I understand you are acting in good faith but it is not appropriate for the article as there is no conclusive evidence. Best Yids2010 (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

TT

What is your problem with my edits PLEASE LEAVE THEM ALONE!!!! --Equalizer2011 (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Equalizer, you do not own "your" edits. Below the "Save Page" button on every edit window appears the text "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Re:Princess of China

Digital Spy published the mid week tally given by the Official Charts Company, what is your problem with it? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 14:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

It is not the official charts. It is the midweek charts. Therefore the song has not 'officially' charted until the OCC announce the charts at 7pm here. For even further clarification that the song has not charted see here Yids2010 (talk) 14:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Re:Paradise

I provided the sources. If you find the Triple A format unacceptable (it is used on FA-class articles such as "Just Like Heaven (song)"). I will be happy to provide you a link to the current edition of the chart. :) Toa Nidhiki05 22:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks, however for future reference see WP:OTHERSTUFF, and the US Triple A chart can remain as it doesn't appear on the list of WP:BADCHARTS but again please consider this before adding charts and sources. Best Yids2010 (talk) 23:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I know exactly how OTHERSTUFF works, and looking to FA articles for formatting help is perfectly fine. Further, an 'unsourced' chart peak is not unpermitted under BADCHART, which is guideline, not policy. Removing 'unsourced' data without making any attempt to even look it up is not cool, in my opinion. Toa Nidhiki05 00:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

If you know WP:OTHERSTUFF then that's cool, no problem. I simply removed an unsourced chart which seemingly misled the reader of the article. If I wanted to include it in the article then I would have avoided hassle and included the appropriate chart source. You have now, just bare it in mind for the future regardless of whether you think it is cool or not. Best Yids2010 (talk) 00:32, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Beautiful World (Take That album)

Hi Yids2010. Had to revert this since it did not have a source and I could not find it in the source of the next sentence. Feel free to restore it with a reliable source. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Progress Live

Threats do not work with me. No discussion was had, no administrator "warned" me of anything. If you seriously want to throw a hissy fit over the placement of content, please let me know. Itsbydesign (talk) 00:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Repeat disruptive editing at Take That

"Ballad" is not a music genre, nor does "pop" or "dance" link to music genres. Your reversal of proper disambiguation in itself is disruptive editing. Furthermore, date spans and record labels are separated by commas, not line-breaks, as clearly indicated per Template:Infobox musical artist#years_active and Template:Infobox musical artist#label. Are you going to revert your own disruptive edits, or do your actions need to be taken to another level?  -- WikHead (talk) 20:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

My good faith with you and this matter has expired. I.E. - There is absolutely no good reason for a "team player" to continuosly reverse proper disambiguation... especially when it has been clearly explained in the edit summaries. I see you have made some changes since you posted to my talk page, yet "pop" is still an ambiguous link. I have no interest in edit warring with you, and this is why I've brought the matter to your talk page. I'm hoping that you'll do the right thing and just clean it up in a civil manner so that noboby else has to, again, and again.  -- WikHead (talk) 02:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

• PS. If it helps, "pop music" does link to a genre, and so does dance music . Feel free to use link-pipes.  -- WikHead (talk) 02:39, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand how you can call your repeat reversal of good, non-contreversial edits "collaboration", especially when I had taken the time to explain the issues in detail, with guidline links. I don't even understand how or why you think I've treated you in a threatening or uncivil manner. If true collaboration is what you want, let's just work together, follow the wiki guiglines, and get along. Good faith is a two-way street, WP:OWN is not.  -- WikHead (talk) 03:32, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Lighthouse (song)

First. Read FULL UK Discography on official Westlife website.
Second. If you know nothing about this song, please read here.
Third. I repeat: Chartstats shows all charted songs. Single and song not the same.
--Uptownboy (talk) 16:40, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Take That

I see we both like Take That. How have I vandalised Wikipedia with "Eight Letters" exactly? It's a promotional song, maybe not a single (I was going to change that if you hadn't deleted the page again) but it still deserves its own page, just like all of the songs on David Bowie's "Hunky Dory" album. "Eight Letters" is an extremely popular song with fans and the band alike. It tells the story of Take That, documenting Robbie William's feelings about the band after he left the first time in 1995 (the second time being this year), and how everyone is on good terms now. Please give "Eight Letters" what it deserves: its own page. Thank you very much.