This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.30.16.168(talk) at 20:00, 25 April 2010(re warning about emoval of poorly sourced contentious material on living persons). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 20:00, 25 April 2010 by 92.30.16.168(talk)(re warning about emoval of poorly sourced contentious material on living persons)
If you leave a message here, I will respond on your talk page.
Hello, Tbhotch! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! fetchcomms04:09, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]Some cookies to welcome you!
52nd Grammy Awards
Why would we even think of removing the nominees that didn't win? That is a disservice not only to the still-honored singers, songwriters, etc., but to our readers. I understand that previous Grammys also do not show the nominees, but this must be changed. I have started a thread at Talk:52nd Grammy Awards. Thanks, Reywas92Talk01:40, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
DYK
Being curious I looked at a recently deleted DYK nomination, and it seems you posted a DYK nomination, but for the wrong thing. You listed the new article as Up (2009 film), while I think you meant to use Up (soundtrack). I was tempted to try and nominate Up (soundtrack) myself but it's too short: < 1000 characters of prose but it needs at least 1500. It also needs references for the 'thematic transformation' point, so would fail without some work to improve it.--JohnBlackburnewordsdeeds12:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-free files in your userspace
Hey there, this is just a notification that I commented out the use of non-free files on your userpage. Per our restrictive non-free content criteria policy, non-free content must be used in very limited places—basically, it can only be used in article namespace. If you would like to list the files on your userpage, please place a colon before the beginning brackets and the file.
For example, placing the following on your userpage:
Again, I've added a colon to these images so they don't display. Please remember that non-free images are not allowed in user space. — ξxplicit20:40, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
laundry Service
My links are official! Sources: linklink And find the certifications. Are you blind??? Please, accept the truth. Genieofmusic (talk) 15:427, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Accept the facts. Check the certifications! And I have besides my BMI source, the source of Shakira's OFFICIAL site. You just have one. Deal with it. Genieofmusic (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hola, la página de discusión de Laundry service si existe lo que pasa es que debe estar en los archivos y por eso no lo encuentras. Ese tema se ha discutido muchas veces y se ha llegado a la conclusión de que no se puede confiar mucho en las webs de los artistas pòrque tiende a inflar las ventas. es por eso que se confía más en el reporte de BMI que dice que las ventas de ese disco son 13 millones. Ahora no tengo mucho tiempo, pero mañana buscaré en los archivos la discusión sobre este tema. De momento creo que deberías dejar las ventas en 13 millones hasta que se discuta. alguien podría molestarse y decir que lo que haces es vandalismo. Gracias por tu mensaje, veo que hablas español. chao--Albes29 (talk) 23:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
just FYI.. I opened a sock puppet investigation/check user on 118.90.20.53 plus another IP and one user that's always editing the Kelly Clarkson articles in the same mannor. the mentioned IP claiming to have edited before, when the history only goes back a couple of days is suspicious, but we'll know after the check. If you want to add any comments or proof you may have, here's the investiagtion: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kcfan90. The users have not been notified in case it comes out negative during the check, they may take it the wrong way when it's not a big deal if there's no sock puppet Alan - talk03:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Disputed non-free use rationale for File:I got you music video LL.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:I got you music video LL.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.
I agree, but I was trying to place it in a position where it would be noticed quickly. Sometime soon, i hope to repair some of it myself.76.226.96.194 (talk) 03:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
82nd Academy Awards
why did you remove star trek award I've just added to the academy awards??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mic of orion (talk • contribs)
Dear Mr. Unknown: Star Trek didn't win or do any NOTABLE unlike other pictures, also, who put it marked Star Trek as a Best Picture nominee.TbhotchTalk2 Me16:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you taking a piss, and don't call me unknown have some respect, or I will report you to the admins and have you banned from editing wiki, and I mean main admin (owners) in US.
Star trek won the award, all movies that have won the awards have been listed, so I see no reason for Star Trek not be listed as well, after all "Up in the air", didn't won a single award and it is there. So stop that nonsense, unless you wish me to go to further with this and have you reported for vandalizing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mic of orion (talk • contribs)
stop spamming my inbox, you have issues talk on 82md awards discussion page, Star Trek won the Oscar for best make up, which is 1 more than what Up in the air did, and was nominated for 3 more Oscars which it didn’t won.
⚠ Thanks for uploading File:AmericanLifeLive.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).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Whilst i agree that twitter is not a good source the picture clearly shows a HMV store where the cover is the official single art cover. It is the contents which is most important. Often songs recieve a promo cover and then a proper cover upon CD release. This is widespread practise. Therefore i've reverted your reversion. Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
left you a response on the talk page because i dont think you understood the issue but at the same time are making the same point as me.Lil-unique1 (talk) 03:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, I reverted it. Regardless of what the history says. I pushed the wrong button--save instead of show preview. Now y'all stop harrassing me for an innocent mistake. You don't like it, kiss my ass. InFairness (talk) 01:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"According to the History, I reverted you edition. "
Pop Songs reverts to Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs). Via consensus this is the name we've settled on because the two billboard sites (.com / .biz) refer to it as Pop Songs or Mainstream Top 40. Because there was no preference either way it was decided to name it both. As per WP:USCHARTS which contains the charts with their officially approved names. Lil-unique1 (talk) 02:34, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All I Ever Wanted (Kelly Clarkson song)
Leona Lewis's song ahd more coverage.. This single barely has any (it's not even getting a music video). unfortunatley, not all singles become notable, in spite of what fans wish for Alan - talk05:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. the Leona song you linked to saying it never charted, did chart in multiple countries.. as for the Clarkson song, it doesn't even have album art, all the images being put up for it's cover are fan-made using photoshop back in January and February (yes, wikipedia ads that data when images are uploaded) Alan - talk05:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably right about it never getting coverage.. but then again, it can still chart on a major chart since it's on the component charts now, and getting enough airplay, only time will tell. Alan - talk05:46, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Talkback
Hello, Tbhotch. You have new messages at WP:RPP. Message added 04:38, 3 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
On 5 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Baja California earthquake, which you substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
Thank you for this. That IP has a lengthy history of not adhering to policy, especially the WP:RS. They only start to respond when the article they're warring on gets protection. Anyhow, thanks again. It can get tiresome defending that article :) Pinkadelica♣01:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of juvenile- and youth-themed movie articles were under attack. I'll go ahead and lift the block. Thanks for letting me know. PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You got it. In fact, I am trying to work with the vandal in question since he's showing a willingness to change. Here's hoping... PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:51, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My contribution to the Wikipedia entry "bucket seats" was completely worthwhile and valid. It does not surprise me to find it policed and redacted on a website frequented by pavid vermin such as yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.36.97.101 (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merriam-Webster goes on to say: "...traditionally, however, only the apostrophe is added when the s would not be pronounced in normal speech".
I would venture to say that most people say "Douglas-es", therefore an apostrophe is mandatory.
Please do not change this again--I will simply change it back. This is an important point of English grammar that goes back to Shakespeare's time and is gradually being lost on the world, the editorial policies of Time Magazine and The Wall Street Journal notwithstanding.
Cbrodersen (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did a pretty severe edit on the Reza Pahlavi page as you were doing yours. Not trying to war with you, but I am trying to reduce the self-promotion of the page as it existed. Have a good night! PR (talk) 05:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This ip has the same editing pattern as aradic-es and pushes the same pov in the football riots article. [2] If you would take a closer look at his nonsensical edits you would notice he has added latin, changed the demographics, and added unsourced information. ◅ PRODUCER(TALK)18:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
very funny! If you take a look a revert... you will see
see the article Muslims by nationality-prior 1991 there were no any "Bosniaks" there.Referring them as Bosniaks is unsourced and his WP:OR
just look at the official source . No "Bošnjaci" but "Muslimani".So, his version is
also leaving spam amoung external links is good thing???
Latin name of place is valid information as any alternative name.
Therefore only vandal in this situation is PRODUCER and I suggest you not to follow his pattern!
= Trivia
There are notable events sections in other Oscar ceremony articles. I'm not trying to create a trivia section. I'm trying to give information on details. Here are other example:
Thanks for uploading File:Salvadorcabañas es+.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 72.88.38.50 (talk) 04:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lady Gaga and RedOne
Hi there, please do not refer Lady Gaga and RedOne as "Stefani Germanotta" and "Nadir Khayat". If this is not changed in due course, I shall have to report you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlieJS13 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about listing that, I thought if it was creation-protected it showed up on the log here [5], didn't realize it only shows up on the public log at [6]. mauler90 (talk) 00:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just wondering if you're using automated tools to leave warnings? I noticed this [8], which is a warning on an accounts talk page, but for some reason the Shared IP notice dropped in? Burpelson AFB (talk) 00:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason why he/she was removing comments from your page? I'm considering taking out an ANI/edit war report out against him/her because he/she has failed to respond to discussions about crediting Gaga's songwriting on Telephone as her birth name and i would like to know if his edits to your page were deliberate or not. They will form part of the report.Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is it a new agreed-upon thing to re-arrange RFPP to bring unaddressed requests to the top, or did you unilaterally decide that was a good idea? I'm not so sure about it; it messes up the timelines. Tan | 3915:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you
I just wanted to thank you for getting Saw VII protected for two weeks. Every time I ask for protection it's two or three days! Ugh. I guess it depends on the admin (Fastily is awesome though). Just wanted to come by and tell you that. :) —MikeAllen06:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I would advise you to change the songwriter row about Lady Gaga immediately. The song articles were perfect before you came along and changed them. Please change them back to Lady Gaga and RedOne respectively. CharlieJS13 (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Brexx isn't permitted to contribute. His contributions to articles can stand if another editor stands behind them, but his participation on talk pages serve no purpose whatsoever. The only time an article on a talk page should stand is if another editor has already responded to it. In this case, there had been no response.
Bear in mind that the goal is to have Brexx leave. Anything which provides him encouragement works against that.—Kww(talk) 18:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your warning re removal of poorly sourced material on living persons
Re this
No, content was about living persons. Please see WP:BLP: "Remove immediately any contentious material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced...The three-revert rule does not apply to such removals." 92.30.16.168 (talk) 20:00, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
