User talk:Extraordinary Machine/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome![edit]

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --JYolkowski // talk 15:28, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback[edit]

I appreciate you pointing out that I did not source the text regarding Hilary Duff's voice-enhancement. I went back and added three more references, as I should have done in the beginning. Now I know how to do footnotes correctly! Thank you for taking the time to let me know. RJSampson 23:44, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)


...and thanks for helping me clean up the notations. Much better now! btw - I like HD too! RJSampson 08:16, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks![edit]

Thank you very much for writing the I Dream article. I meant to do it myself, but I thought there wasn't enough info for a seperate article. Maybe you could add a section for the cast too (or copy the table from S Club 8? - Mgm|(talk) 13:30, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

  • Not a fan and you still take the time to split off the article. Wikipedia needs more people like that. :) Mgm|(talk) 20:37, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

About KaDee Strickland article. Thanks![edit]

Thank you very much for writing the KaDee Strickland article. By the way, you did a really great article. Congratulations! -- Carioca 15:25, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Did you know?[edit]

Updated DYK query Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article KaDee Strickland, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently-created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

J-Horror[edit]

Ah, no problem. I did think a link like that right at the beginning of the article could confuse some people. Better this way, I think. Thanks for informing. By the way, if you have any interesting contributions to add to the J-Horror article, that would be nice. It's still just a stub.

See you.--Kaonashi 20:48, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Apologies & New System[edit]

Sorry, I didn't mean to completely ruin it, just wasn't really paying attention while doing a re-write. Can I ask you to not add references to all sections and just wait until one section is fully complete before you begin the next. Currently only the early life and family section has references, so please find references for that and just add them until you move on. Ultimate Star Wars Freak 9 July 2005 19:25 (UTC)

what?[edit]

And what, may I ask, did I vandalise? Journalist 01:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that. The only reason why I did that was because I believed that we had all come to the consensus that so much references were not needed. (see the talk page). If I did anything wrong, that was not my intention. Furthurmore, how is 'expansive" POV? I only wrote it because:

  • It true;
  • That was how her voice was described in the 'diva' article.

Journalist 01:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey[edit]

Hello, Extraordinary Machine. I have left a note on Journalist's page and would also like to ask that you acted a little more calmly on this matter. I do not mean that you are wrong, but perhaps you should use a little more patience in your approach. I am sure that both you and him share interest for the article's subject, but it benefits no one if this becomes an edit war. Thank you for your attention. --Sn0wflake 03:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trust me, that's a feeling most of us share, but you know how things work around here. We try to be as neutral as possible for a long as possible. I do hope you all can reach a consensus regarding information on the article, since it has potential to actually become featured some day. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 00:34, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ago gratias![edit]

Salve, Extraordinary!
I am delighted by your commendation. I've promoted several articles as FACs. I've won a few (e.g. Julia Stiles, Warren County Canal, Dawson's Creek), lost a few (e.g. Mark Felt, Katie Holmes). It's been my frustrations with FAC's that led to by irritated post on my home page ("Nihil nisi malum"). Your remarks lessen my stress, if just a little.
From your home page, I see you too work on pop culture topics. If I can help in your areas or you want me to look over an article, let me know. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 14:03, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Mariah Images[edit]

Hi. With reference to the pics, I have found the source. I forget to write the info at times.

  • Image:Cry.jpg, was found at [1]. Its a German site, but if you scroll down you will find it.
  • Image:Sing.jpg found at [2]. It is a screenshot of the single 'through the rain'
  • Image:MariahCarey4-05 300x298.jpg, -the link is present on the page. The pic is under fair use as it is the photo on the album. Its practically the same pic as the one that currently heads her bio.

Journalist 03:46, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked[edit]

Sorry about the collateral damage. You're released (unlike the real Extraordinary Machine). Heh. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 20:22, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

GNAA FAC[edit]

Yes, I have answered the copyright questions about the image you were refering to. I first released it as GFDL, which was a no-no, because I used Internet Explorer to make a screen shot. Another user cropped the IE stuff out, but I was told it could not be GFDL, because a press release is copyrighted. So, I put the copyright information on the image page and the person who objected to the image status retracted his claim. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:08, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:RoyBoy/Sandbox#Documentaries[edit]

Working on a new section for Blade Runner. Wanted to know what you think... I was also going to include the Online Fanbase section, but I don't think its terribly notable/useful considering the external links... which I plan to reorganize and elaborate on just a touch anyway. - RoyBoy 800 00:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Thank you for your message, often times I'm so busy trying to get in the filmography I don't stop and check the links, I defiently will for future times. I see you also have an interest in pop culture, very cool :) Well, take care. Courtkittie 21:18, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Southland Tales[edit]

I'm sorry, but was the casting comment POV?

A number of Richard Kelly fans at the linked forum and previous Donnie Darko fans (at a non-kelly-centered site) expressed surprise at the casting choices... And the point wasn't to suggest that somehow these weren't as credible as the other crew and staff (pardon if the "mainstream" word suggested otherwise) but that the nature of their work and success differed from that of others involved, which had surprised some (Kelly fans in particular) as to their inclusion.

Is this point completely invalid? I admit that it might be better placed somewhere else in the text, more carefully phrased, but I dunno, maybe I'm blind as to this, but again, is it really POV?Zeppocity 14:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You know what? I've checked around a bit and screw it, it WAS POV, in that I'm starting to think that I felt that what I took for the general impression as to the casting was the existing impression, and I'm finding no solid back-up for that, besides a passing comment on the board as to it having some teen-movie stars or somesuch, and on another board something about the movie sounding utter wank due to the cast and etc. Neither of which are noteworthy. So I'll admit that it was most likely a matter of me retroactively reading things the way I expected them to be read by others, or somesuch idiotic process. Really sorry about that; it's fine as it is and it's as it should be. Zeppocity 18:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Clark (actor)[edit]

Yeah, i ve been categorising people in the Greater Toronto area as Toronto people. would you say i should not? People i ve met from Mississauga or Scarborough have introduced themselves as being from Toronto - i supposed people from anywhere in Greater To. considered themselved Torontonians. maybe people from outside Toronto city but within Greater To. should be put in both catergories? appreciate the input, -Mayumashu 13:31, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

okay. yeah, it would be best to get the opinion of some wiki user from the area - like you, i m not from the area. in the meantime, i ll see that Clark's page has both cats on it. good talking to you, -Mayumashu 05:07, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

Journalist awards the aptly named Extraordinary Machine for his exceptional contributions to Wikipedia (especially to the Mariah Carey article). Keep up the good work.

You might want to move this to your user-page:)

Journalist C./ Holla @ me!

Re: The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar[edit]

Thank you kindly for the barnstar. I now need to reconfigure my user page a bit.  :) Hall Monitor 21:26, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

The syntax is not confusing at all, since its been adopted by most single articles. Personally, that infobox looks like a mess and is more confusing. I think your point in point 3 gives exactly the reason why we don't want to use a template. Not every article wants to have every section mentioned. How is that template I'm using not following MoS? The music guidelines never said anything about chart positions having their own spot until some random person edited it in a week ago! How, does the action of one person become official policy? OmegaWikipedia 12:04, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The syntax is not confusing, your box is. And many people have used this template, so it cant be that confusing at all. And I have already explained how that would only be problematic. Looking at my edits? So you're going to stalk me now? I don't agree with this policy. I could just go that page and change it. Just because one person changed it, doesnt suddenly make if official policy. The USA positions should generally be listed first. That person who disagreed with me, even agreed that. In any case, you've presented an extremely weak argument that has no basis or logic or any official policy on why your template should stay. The articles need to go back to the way they were. OmegaWikipedia 12:27, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply #2[edit]

The 2nd one is easier and much flexible to navigate. Taking the shortcuts in life only bring you down later and gives no freedom. And no, dont give me that nonsense about systematic bias. The USA charts are considered the most relevent charts. Same with the Billboard charts, they are listed by hierachy. If we to do it another way, it would look like a hot mess. And um, no, I've heard your reasons and examined them: they have no merit. You on the other apparently havent' been listening to mine. Besides, if that single template is the offiical template, yours is actually the second template and far from official policy. Then any random who wants to can suddenly create anything! OmegaWikipedia 12:47, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply #3[edit]

Excuse me? I found your response quite hypocritical and ironic, since you aren't following the own rule you campaign so furiously for. Who said I had a probelm with parentheses in years? Ummmm, I never had an issue with that. Please stop making up information, just because you have a weak case. OmegaWikipedia 15:49, 10 September 2005 (UTC) Maybe we could talk about this calmly and stop going around in circles, if you could stop being so hostile and talk in a mature normal fashion. Do you want to try? OmegaWikipedia 15:49, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply #4[edit]

EM, thanks for responding maturely, but that's exactly my point. The Wikiproject songs never had any policy stating that chart positions needed their own box. If you look at the history, one week ago Moochocoogle decides to change things. There wasnt even a discussion on the matter. He/She just changed it! I hope one person does not make that policy suddenly official. Just like you don't like how I changed the policy, I don't see how one person who change the policy suddenly made it OK to get rid of single boxes that have been in use for months. OmegaWikipedia 16:10, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your reply to Mel[edit]

EM, I don't think it was fair for you to contact Mel Etitis in this edit war. You said you read my edits, so you know we've been in our own debate over something, and if you want to get someone else as a third opinion, you should get a 3rd party who doesn't have anything against me.

Ok, I see. If we do get a 3rd party, I hope we could get someone else besides him though. Recently, another person who I was in a disagreement with contacted Mel, knowing that Mel had power and a bias against me.

And I'm glad we're talking this over more calmly now, but I'm just wondering if you could could answer this question, which you haven't really addressed in your replies. (Or if you have it must have been indirect cause I don't see anything about it, except a slight reference). One person changed the WikiSongs standards. How did that suddenly become official policy? You saw how you reacted when I "changed" the policy (to show you an example). Not suprisingly, imagine how I would feel when I see somebody changed it. If there had been some type of discussion or vote or anything on the policy, that would be reasonable, but it was just one random poster who edited it. OmegaWikipedia 00:43, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OmegaWikipedia replies[edit]

EM, one last thing about Mel, he is in a debate over another article similar to the problem you have with the live performance section, so I think his reaction, or I know his reaction will be biased. And I've made some edits to compromise on some things. Please see the talk pages for details, but please dont revert, otherwises we will have a revert war, and I think for the sake of fairness, I've tried to accomodate to both our needs, and if you have an issue, please talk it over it on the talk page....but no edit wars please, they're retarded and then we both lose. OmegaWikipedia 01:24, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Courteney Cox in November.jpg has been listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file you uploaded, Image:Courteney Cox in November.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Thuresson 03:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the barnstar[edit]

Means a lot :). Unfortunately we didn't get either of the Ashlee Simpson articles through :(. Oh well.... maybe it'll be easier next month :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 05:47, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Shake It Off image[edit]

Oh, sorry. I didn't mean to do that. I had wanted to restore the image to the original one uploaded by Journalist to include the one with the black bars. I didn't know that would only remove the copyright tag, and not revert the image to its original state with the bars OmegaWikipedia 03:30, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hero[edit]

How am I reverting you into submission? You made an edit that I disagree with, so I restored it. Am I not allowed to do that? And isn't there a thing against threatening people on Wikipedia? Maybe I'll file one against you too. I've read those pages, so stop acting so snide. We've been over this time and again, but you still don't get it about your singlebox. A week before you started editing these articles, Moochoogle decided to edit the article. He didn't consult anyone, and there was no discussion before he did it. You suddenly decided that his edit suddenly became official Wikipedia policy. I asked you how this worked? Without you answering, I figured that anyone could edit it, so I did, which you reverted because suddenly it didn't work out for you anymore. Even Mel agreed with me when he said there should be a dicussion about this policy. OmegaWikipedia 21:22, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it's hard to talk to you, when you constantly get rude and snide. I saw your four points, but I disagree with them too.
"You're not supposed to change the guidelines after somebody has created one, at least not :without a discussion first."

The guideline was there before Moochoogle edited it in. Even if no one has complained, that doesnt justify his edit as the bottom line. If I had edited the article a day before Moochoogle, would you accept my edit? Again, what's up with the personal attacks? Isn't that against Wikipedia policy too? You shouldn't accusse me of this so called "U.S.-centric systhemic bias" all the time without evidence, and who are you to say who or what is "common sense"? You're probably the first person who had a major problem with it. I've been speaking to other Non US people, and they agree with it, and I even agree with them on articles concering Canadian singers and UK singers. The Spice Girls' chart positions should have the UK come first and I believe they do.

As WikiProject Songs states, "This project is not yet fully defined. Feel free to add stuff to make things clearer." Which at the end of the day means, your singlebox carries no weight. What this comes down to is a dispute over content. So please stop accusing me of all these false accusations. Like you accused me of violating Wikipedia's caption change, when I made a mistake and apoligized. It seems like you're looking for reasons to get me in trouble on flimsy reasons, because you want to get rid of me, and edit the article like you own it. That isnt what Wikipedia is. Its about people coming together and trying to work together (instead of you who seems to think you own the article) OmegaWikipedia 21:47, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Explainations please[edit]

How am I violating those policies? I even told you in my last reply to you that I made a mistake about the caption! I think it's a little pathethic for you to try to bring me down, when I acknowledged my mistake on the matter. About NPOV, AWT, CITE, and NOR, if you look at the history of "Shake It Off", Mel was able to edit the article in a fashion that I agreed with his second to last edit and I agreed with it. That's all I was asking for - Thankfully, Mel was a better editor than you were and he was able to express the gist of what I was going for to make it seem more NPOV to you. So I'm happy with the way the Shake It Off chart performance section reads now, so I wont revert that. See, EM, thats all you have to do. Reach somewhere in the middle. Compromise with people. Dont get all angry and irrational and accus people of false things.

When did I do WP:Point? If you're talking about the Wikiproject songs thing, then Moochoogle is just as guilty, and I guess you'd get in troubel too. And the thing about Fancruft talks about fiction with Star Trek and Japanese robots. It doesnt mention anything about live performances.

The only thing you could possibly accusse me of is Ownership, which you have also violated. And how did I start the edit war? If you look at our discussions, you made an edit, I disagreed, and asked to talk about it, but then you blew up and refused to discuss. I'd think the Rfc people would look down at you more, as I actually tried to talk about it calmly while you blew up like a volcano.

Now, can we talk about this matter civily, please? OmegaWikipedia 22:21, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're the only one slandering me. I've said time and again, that many of those edits were in mistake, such as the one with the captions, so I'm not sure why you keep accusing me of that OmegaWikipedia 23:56, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Extraordinary Machine/temp[edit]

May I request a speedy delete of Talk:Extraordinary Machine/temp and its associated redirect? I believe it has fulfilled its usefulness. --maclean25 01:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OSD and IKWYW[edit]

Ok, Ive added a source to the OSD image to make you happy. I dont mind using your IKWYW image, but could you please crop it to avoid the extra space to focus and Mariah and Busta RhymeS? OmegaWikipedia 15:28, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:OmegaWikipedia[edit]

OmegaWikipedia complained to me that his image Image:WMAWBTMariahCarey.jpg was deleted before 7 days had passed in Category:Images with unknown source. He's right, and furthermore, images shouldn't be speedied if there is a claimed source, however disputed and unlikely it may be. Those can go through WP:IFD. I'm letting you know because though you didn't speedy it, you tagged it {{no source}}. Superm401 | Talk 17:35, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Peace[edit]

I really dont know what to say. Thank you very much. I also said somethings that I shouldn't have, and for that I also apologise. When I came here, I was all about Mariah Carey, and I had not read and understood the NPOV guidelines etc, but now, all that has changed; I have better grasp of Wiki policies, and my demeanor has changed. Im really not like that, and any comments made by my IP address were made before I opened the Journalist account. I think its great that we can leave all disagreements in the past. To tell the truth, I also wanted to apologise, but I had no idea what to say.

Anyway, take care and peace.

PS:Im currently running for RFA. If you would like, you can vote. Dont worry, you can vote Oppose or neutral if you think Im not ready for it, no hard feelings what-so-ever. Journalist | huh?

Copyright Violations[edit]

Hi, EM. This is just to let you know that you have to remove all pictures from your user page as they are copyright violations and they don't count as fair use. OmegaWikipedia 20:24, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

barnstar for ya[edit]

I, RN, hereby award Extraordinary Machine a minor barnstar for work done on Ashlee Simpson-related articles during the relavant FACs. Its minor one since you state "I have only made small edits", however, if you ask me your edits were just as helpful as my own were :)

Ryan Norton T | @ | C 21:09, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Website?[edit]

You wrote me threatening to block my IP? For adding commercial links? I thought that my links to lyricstemple were perfectly valid and useful for the topic. (Which I assumed was Mariah Carey). Why did you delete my links and threated me? My site is not commercial. I have a few ads, mostly an XML feed from Amazon which is relevent to the artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkjazz (talk • contribs) 15:18, 26 September 2005

Also, why would you choose to delete my links and leave the links for Rare-Lyrics and All Music Center? I anticipate that you will say that you already have your favorite lyrics sites listed, so why list another? The answer being that LyricsTemple has 32 Mariah Carey music videos which are applicable to the subject matter and holds interest for the visitors. Would you feel better if I pointed my link to my videos page insted of my lyrics page?

Is it your intent to hunt down all my links and remove them or are you just protecting your Mariah Carey turf? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkjazz (talk • contribs) 15:30, 26 September 2005

Your Reply[edit]

Re: Commercial Website?

I sent you those messages because, on half of the articles you edited, there are already external links to web pages about the artists' lyrics. And watch where you're putting them: for example, Olivia is a disambiguation page. Extraordinary Machine 14:25, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

My intent is to prevent people from using Wikipedia as an advertising vehicle. And please sign your comments with four tildes (Jkjazz 14:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)) so people know who wrote your messages.[reply]

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a commercial link you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Extraordinary Machine 14:42, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

End Your Reply


Please reply to the points in my comment. I think that I have some valuable points. Wow how many of my entries have you removed? Again, I feel that the presence of Music Videos on my site adds value to my links. Does it bother you that my links say @ LyricsTemple.com? Why do you call my site commercial anyway? I'm not selling anything.Jkjazz 14:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your Reply If you stop inserting links to your website on articles that already have links to lyric web pages, then I won't stand in your way any more. And yes, it does bother me that your links say @ LyricsTemple.com, so I think you should stop writing that as well. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 14:54, 26 September 2005 (UTC) End Your Reply

So put back my links that you took down! You deleted my links. Are you the CEO or something? Why do I have to please you? How many of my links did you remove?

So according to you, If there is already a link to a lyrics site, I cannot post my link? What about Music Videos? Should I just sumbit a list of artists I'd like to add my link to and you can let me know which meet your approval?65.26.38.74 15:27, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Would you PLEASE send me a list of pages that you deleted my link from? I will edit my entries to meet your requirements.65.26.38.74 16:25, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Thanks for the welcome to User talk:216.126.246.78. I forgot that after about 5 minutes of inactivity I get logged out of Wikipedia. I'm actually CambridgeBayWeather 17:20, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey comments[edit]

Please do not insert weasel terms such as "was met with mixed reviews from music critics" without backing it up with an actual source.

Well, I am sorry but the truth of the matter is that the album has received mixed reviews. Just do a Google search for "mixed reviews" and "emancipation of mimi" and I think my statement will be justified. I find it humourous that you remove any negative remark about this overrated woman and if you can't justify removing a derogatory statement, you simply delete the entire paragraph! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Passionvine (talk • contribs) 20:59, 27 September 2005

Singles Table[edit]

Hi, have you seen the current singles table for Mariah Carey? It's a mess. It's missing the R&B Singles Chart, which is the most important chart for R&B artists. If you're going to remove a single from my table, at least put its information in the other crappy one. No sense in removing important information.

Also, tables are excluded from the page size, according to the Size guidelines page. Xinger 16:05, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • You're right about that. I apologize for only doing the four. When I get the patience I'll do them all. Thanks Xinger 16:20, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Extraordinary_Machine/Archive_1&oldid=1142995344"