User talk:Lil-unique1/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Sub Charts

Done, I left a comment, please review my opinion! Jayy008 (talk) 15:38, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with all the charts you've listed though, although Pop Songs is airplay only, it is a replacement for the Pop 100 which was allowed, and the reason it was dis-continued is because it ended up being the same as Pop songs, so yeah I'd go with what you've done, please try and get others opinions and I'd rather go with "Delete" for Dance In The Dark, like every Lady G song will have it's own article on that basis! Jayy008 (talk) 15:48, 29 March 2010 (UTC)


Ive been basing these edits on this discussion and the template page for the ratings, which shows 12 spaces in the bottom example. Dan56 (talk) 18:54, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Hot Country Songs

I reverted your move. Hot Country Songs is the official name of the chart, so it should stay that way. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 00:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

  • Definitely too bold. There's no need to clarify with "U.S." since that's not part of the actual chart name. Please to be reverting your moves. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 00:32, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
  • Whatever .biz uses is the official chart name. The names were simplified on .com for some reason when the site was redesigned in June. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many ottersOne batOne hammer) 00:45, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Billboard charts

  • There is no consistency with the new titles your proposing, there is more consistency with the way it was initially. The titles are easy to understand the way that they were, your changing things that don't need to be changed, don't fix things that aren't broken. Hot Adult Contemporary Tracks is the proper name of the chart. I also viewed this discussion on WP: Record charts and there is no consensus that the names should be changed, the discussion is just between you and 1 other user! You need to have more people involved in the discussion before you go around changing every title of every billboard chart! I also don't like things done half assed, your just changing the titles, when there are other uses of the old title in the articles, that you aren't bothering to change! Nowyouseeme - Tà£k 04:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
  • I will gladly share my views in the discussion when I have time, but I would appreciate you leaving the title with Hot Adult Contemporary Tracks alone until some consensus from a number of users is made to change it. Nowyouseeme - Tà£k 04:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Billboard Charts

Oh thaks! I would like to help me to upload a picture, you know it's tough for me. Thanks againSiquisloco (talk) 07:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Neon Limelight

I didn't think it should be used in the reception on the Not Myself Tonight article, since it is a blog.Candyo32 (talk) 02:04, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at ANI regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Personal attacks and accusations of article ownership, vandalism. Thank you. --EyeSerenetalk 10:09, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Billboard Sub-Charts/Genre Charts/Component charts

Hi Lil-Unique, you okay? Can you message me a quick summary of what's going on atm, the record charts discussion is amazingly long and confusing, just wanna know the current standing when you get time! Thanks, Jamie. Jayy008 (talk) 17:12, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm good thanks, you? And I like that, when are you going to add it to record charts? Also, why does it have to say "chart" in brackets, or is it only for the Wikipage, please tell me we don't have to put "(Chart)" in the charts table in song articles? lol Jayy008 (talk) 17:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Eesh got it! I'm glad it'll be like that [[US whatever (chart)|Hot Hop Songs. But I agree All Music is a better source, I use it anyway, I personally think it should be added to macro. Jayy008 (talk) 17:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, does that mean that the component table is being cancelled too? Or is that something different? Lol, sorry, I get really confused when the issue of Billboard charts come up, there's just so many. Jayy008 (talk) 17:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I prefer the conditions and applicable rather than the flow chart one, I will leave my opinion if it goes to vote. Jayy008 (talk) 17:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
That's a good idea, make the page and have the table on their and info etc, then link that page to the record charts page, I think that'll be perfect :). Also I agree, maybe I was hasty with Whitney, but if it was going to chart it would chart in the weeks leading up to it's released like all other songs, but I don't mind waiting to add it back :) Jayy008 (talk) 18:00, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, Lil-Unique. Yes we don't have any proof to show that pop songs chart is not longer a component charts. so i think we should wait until that billboard could not declared it officially. Thanks Ashishvats23 (talk), 2 April 2010 (UTC)

New Billboard chart policy

Thanks 4 tellin me then. Dan56 (talk) 19:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I see someone changed it accordingly. I should read first. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 19:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
THANK JESUS! I've been campaigning for this for a long time. Wish I could have contributed to the discussion of it. I just skimmed through the discussion so I didn't look in detail, so is there anything about the Rhythmic Top 40 being included since technically no chart to use for the rhythmic genre? Candyo32 (talk) 22:54, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

re:BB charts

Looks great. I added two shortcuts: WP:USCHART and WP:USCHARTS. Do you think that a row should be added to the WP:GOODCHARTS table for United States at the bottom (under the UK)? A link could just be placed there to the new page, in case people don't see it at the top of the page. - eo (talk) 20:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


Thanks, I don't think I did that much lol. But yeah I'm happy it's got it's own page, it will make life so much easier! Jayy008 (talk) 23:28, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know either, I think people just made it up as they went alone. But it's good to build on now if anything comes up. Jayy008 (talk) 23:43, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

That would also be good! I am sometimes, but usually no as my ideas never go through in the discussion, however if in the near future I feel the need to argue something out again, I will go straight to the beurocrats, I hear they're the level above admins? Jayy008 (talk) 23:56, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, that's who were deciding whether Kww should become an admin as their was rumours of vote rigging so they go involved, I don't think they do much. But recently I've had many problem with user "Max24" total Celine Dion obsessive and refuses to list things that make her anything less than the queen and argues things on Mariah Carey pages simply because I edit Celine Dion, but always wriggles out of it, highly irritating and I get the brunt of it. So yeah I guess I'll take it to a Beuro next time, not an admin. (Not that I know any Beuro's!) Jayy008 (talk) 00:02, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Angels Cry

No, it's really not lol. I think what ChartsPlus done is listed it as the remix by mistake, as I know for a fact the album version was floating around iTunes, but since it was them that listed it, that's why I changed it otherwise I wouldn't have. Jayy008 (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
I have no idea, it didn't pick up that much Airplay to begin with, whoever's in charge needs to be fired, if Obsessed wasn't cancelled it would have done well, same with this it would have done okay. Sometimes I think we here on Wiki know more about music than the people who work with it lol Jayy008 (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


How do u archive url's like u did on the Still Standing article just now? Dan56 (talk) 05:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Dan56 (talk) 05:44, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Lil-unique1. You have new messages at Keraunoscopia's talk page.
Message added 06:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 06:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)


Why did you change it on "Angels Cry" so it's just U.S. Adult Contemporary? Why can't Billboard be in front of it? Jayy008 (talk) 21:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Got it! Jayy008 (talk) 23:43, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

copy of my edit summary at Telephone (song)

There is no 'specific' limit to the number of charts as long as they are 'verifiable' and allowed under the 'component chart' rules. For ease of use see WP:USCHART.

There used to be a limit of 18 charts but we did away with that at WP:CHARTS. So I don't know where Chase is coming up with a 'claimed' limit of 20 charts now? Your comments?—Iknow23 (talk) 03:39, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

UK R&B Chart

The only reason I removed it was because of the source which I've removed again, the only way the R&B chart is allowed is from a Music Week source which I can't get any more :/, I suggested having a non-clickable link for it but it was rejected. Jayy008 (talk) 10:48, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Very good idea, I have no objection now it's archived, someone's brought it up for discussion on Record Charts. Jayy008 (talk) 18:06, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree, considering it's her first number one on both charts. Well it's up to you, I personally prefer web citation ans links to other Wiki pages aren't allowed so it could cause problems. Jayy008 (talk) 18:12, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh yeah, that's perfect! :) Jayy008 (talk) 18:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Finally there is something! It annoys me that only MusicWeek has an archive of it, not that it matters now. I'll deffo use your source! Jayy008 (talk) 18:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)


Just because the Put it in a love song video is gonna be released after the Unthinkable (im ready) video, doesnt mean that PIIALS is now considered the fifth single.....Also, Music video premiere date does not equal = single release date.....unless it is actually written in the source that PIIALS is now considred the fifth single, you cant put it.....You need to read up on WP:OR. You can only say such things if you have a reliable third-party source to quote. (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

but Put it in a love song charted before "unthinkable"...

also, Empire state of mind was not released in the U.S., it was only released in the should not count it as part of the US singles from the album.....first US single, "Doesnt Mean Anything, seacond US single Try sleeping with a broken heart, third US Signle Put it in a love song, fourth US single "Unthinkable" —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:43, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Wondering why Billboard (in name) was removed from the chart table?

Hey Lil-unique1,
At "Telephone" for example, I see that Billboard has been removed from the chart table names except for Billboard Hot 100. However, the example tables at WP:CHARTS shows "Billboard" like this
US Billboard Hot 100
US Billboard Hot Dance Club Songs
US Billboard Hot R&B/Hip Hop Songs
There Billboard is listed on every one of them.—Iknow23 (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't we still use Billboard in the name for album charts like
US Billboard 200
Iknow23 (talk) 05:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Also you should advise Kww to revise the US {{singlechart}} template as the WP:USCHART page states,
'It is recommended that you use the US {{singlechart}} template where possible.
but it adds Billboard to the chart titles. Actually look at the template usage at "Tik Tok". It looks like most of the charts include the name of the chart provider.
But really, I was never under the impression that a consensus was reached to remove Billboard from the chart names. Rather, I thought the dispute was ONLY over the remaining part of the chart name (the "actual chart itself") between the .com and the .biz and published (physical) magazine chart names?—Iknow23 (talk) 06:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, just as I get used to not using it lol, no matter, thanks for informing me Hash! Jayy008 (talk) 15:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok. Thanks for the info on the changeback.—Iknow23 (talk) 18:31, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


Erm, how did I miss that? I check MDJ every day lol. I think it's a perfectly reliable source for facts, they get info direct from the label and have Billboard Biz subscription so I think it should be used for just facts. Can you link me to the MDJ link for Aniversary edition? I only removed as it was unsourced. Jayy008 (talk) 22:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries! I was like huh? lol, I still think MDJ should be allowed. Jayy008 (talk) 23:29, 6 April 2010 (UTC)


Is there still hope for Rhythmic Top 40 if using WebCitation? Candyo32 (talk) 00:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I just think it would be good to use the chart for pop-esque R&B songs that really don't make impact on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs or R&B/Hip-Hop/Rap songs that are successful crossovers on pop radio. There are several, but for example, "Telephone" has R&B leanings, but didn't chart on the R&B/Hip-Hop, but charted high on rhythmic, and due to it on pop radio also, could be identified as a crossover. Candyo32 (talk) 00:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Eh, couldn't rhythmic techincally considered R&B (Rhythm & Blues or Rhythm & Bass). And about it not being listed by Billboard as a genre chart, according to here [1] neither are all the different rocks (triple a, etc.), and rap, and so on. Candyo32 (talk) 01:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok. But one more thing as I was saying, on it doesn't list Hot Rap Songs as a genre, rather under R&B/Hip-Hop, with the Rhythmic chart. Candyo32 (talk) 01:33, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Alright! Thanks for all your help (and patience) with my questions. Lol! Candyo32 (talk) 01:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Haha ok! :) Candyo32 (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I know you were going to get back at me near the end of the week, but I'm going to go ahead and ask before I forget, LOL, what is the reasoning for using the Adult Top 40 and not rhythmic? Candyo32 (talk) 06:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Copy&Paste moves

copy&paste moves are bad. If you can't move a page yourself, follow the procedure from WP:RM please.
Cheers, Amalthea 08:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Nothin' But Love

For MC, ok, that's cool! But yeah I agree, it's weird, although I can't say I'm surprised, no video, no label support, no radio support, it's weird, I thought the label would want the album to sell, yet they just let the singles do what they want. "Million Dollar" was the only one that even had it's own artwork :/. Jayy008 (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

UK R&B Chart/Genre charts

Someone posted on Record charts an archive. The official charts company now archive ALL the charts on their website!! Jayy008 (talk) 13:50, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

It only archives Top 75 when you search for artists and only archives Top 40 charts themselves now :/ Jayy008 (talk) 15:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
No ALL charts are archived on their now, dance, R&B EVERYTHNG! But they (inc the main chart) only archive up to top 40. However, if you search for artists individually, the archive is up to 75 for the main chart. Jayy008 (talk) 15:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Good plan! :) Jayy008 (talk) 16:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Changed status of new Guideline page

See Wikipedia talk:Record charts/Billboard charts guide for my rationale. Hope that's OK? --Jubileeclipman 03:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


Believe me, I wish there was a long-term solution. The problem is that to block him effectively requires disabling editing throughout the UAE, which no one really wants to do. I've taken to requesting semi-protection every time he edits an article in order to slow him down, and I do a daily review of all anonymous edits out of The main thing is to recognize him and report him when he's seen. I do a pretty good job, but some slip past me. Feel free to draw my attention to anyone you suspect.—Kww(talk) 18:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


Please join this discussion Jayy008 (talk) 01:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


Hello. Recently I noticed your anti-vandal work on the Esmée Denters article. The easiest way to clean up vandalism and spam is via the rollback tool. If you are willing to abide by the rollbacker rules (see WP:ROLLBACK), I would be more than happy to grant you access to this function. If, after reading WP:ROLLBACK, you promise to follow the rollback rules to the best of your ability, just drop a quick message on my talk page saying as much and I will update your rights. Thanks again for your help in keeping Wikipedia clear of vandalism! — Kralizec! (talk) 03:12, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Your request for rollback

Wikipedia Rollback.png

After reviewing your request for rollback, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

  • Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
  • Rollback can be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
  • Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Happy editing! — Kralizec! (talk) 17:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Ciara discography downloads

I noticed how there are positions for the download charts. However since they aren't on the songs', shouldn;t they be sourced?---- (talk) 20:06, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

For example, how it says the postitons given are from download charts:

"Oh" - Sweden
"Get Up" - France, Ireland, Sweden,
"cant leave em alone - France, Ireland, Sweden
"Work - France

However, they aren't sourced, not even on the songs's pages. I even \went to the french download chart archives and they aren't listed. -- (talk) 20:22, 11 April 2010 (UTC)


I support it, even though I haven't looked, I trust your judgement on the matter, however I'm not very good at copyediting, I usually just add the template, so I don't think I'll be much help if you need it. But I fully support it, and I'll try! Jayy008 (talk) 13:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Angels Cry

The link you've put now is worse, it takes you to the R&B Chart. It's on MDJ, should that be added? I think it can be argued that a fansite with .Biz subscription is okay as long as you only use it for "factual" information? They also mention about I'll Be Lovin' U Long Time being Top 10 Airplay but only making #84, that was my favourite song on that album, any ideas why it didn't take off? Jayy008 (talk) 14:52, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

re: YouTube

Hey, no apologies needed, I'm just going by the long-standing removal of YouTube as a source.... of course some kind of consensus could have been reached somewhere that I'm not aware of... maybe some long-since-archived conversation on the WP:RS Talk Page....? - eo (talk) 17:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes - when in doubt I'd say go with that second link instead. Let them do the YouTube linkage. - eo (talk) 18:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

UK R&B Chart

I thought it was, but the ref that was there was a link to the current Top 40, the OCC doesn't archive 76-100? Which is why I added the ChartStats source, for the R&B chart I left the OCC source. I'm talking about Angels Cry, is that what you meant? Jayy008 (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Where? :S The link that was there took you to the current top 40, where Angels Cry hasn't charted so how can it say "last weeks positions"? Here's her chart history, doesn't even inc "I Want to Know What Love Is" :S and when I look at the Archive all I can see Top 40 archives, and in the Top 100, current and unarchived is the only place I can see "Angels Cry" help! Jayy008 (talk) 18:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I was talking about the main chart, I never touched the R&B chart souce. Jayy008 (talk) 22:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

That's strange, I think maybe they're just mussling through problems, I'm quite sure that they're not going to archive above 40, but ChartStats still does so that's something, and we can always verify it the week it charts. Jayy008 (talk) 22:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Ride (Ciara song)

I see there is miscommunication. Please help me in removing all things that say April 12 as ive has said the song was not released then and that all websties got it from a twitter account.--OnTopOfTheGame (talk) 23:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


Please join this discussion Jayy008 (talk) 23:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Recent edit

Your recent revert on the Rated R article dealt with LouisTaylor's edit. This user has also been causing some trouble on the articles Love Hate and Love vs. Money, with the genres. I reverted both of his edits in which he added genres and left hidden comments saying that the additional genres are referenced, but they werent. How should I deal with this user w/out having to revert more times? Dan56 (talk) 23:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I added sources in the article indicating that its primarily an R&B/pop album; looking through the reviews/articles about the album, I found no mention of hip hop or synthpop. Dan56 (talk) 01:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Also, this edit shows a user reffering to WP:MOS when reverting my edit to have United States abbreviated at U.S. So Im confused about this US abbreviation thing. Dan56 (talk) 02:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Whitney Houston

Did you take a couple of seconds to actually look at what you were restoring in this edit? First of all, the source does not say, "Let's face it". That was an editorial comment by the person who added it to the article. Secondly, "off her tits" adds nothing to the article except a bit of bathroom humor (and I'm not talking about censorship; no new information was added by "off her tits"). And finally, the source is a blog, and blogs are not reliable sources on Wikipedia. So your admonition "do not remove sources" is a rather simplistic explanation for restoring useless, inadequately sourced vandalism. Thank you. (talk) 02:03, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


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)

See his talkpage (here), I warned for doing changes without apparenlty reason. I also asked if he really want to do that changes should use the talk page. After this, he started blanking my space. TbhotchTalk C. 02:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

RE: Recent edit

I added sources in the article indicating that its primarily an R&B/pop album; looking through the reviews/articles about the album, I found no mention of hip hop or synthpop. Dan56 (talk) 01:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Also, this edit shows a user reffering to WP:MOS when reverting my edit to have United States abbreviated at U.S. So Im confused about this US abbreviation thing. Dan56 (talk) 02:08, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Notice of discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User Tbhotch and Lil-unique1. Thank you. — Satori Son 15:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga

It's because people need to see reliable sources and accurate information. People might not have heard of their real name. Any other concerns you wish to discuss? I will not respond to you next time, if you place a negative comment. User:CharlieJS13 (talk) 15:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlieJS13 (talk) • contribs)


If you continue to threaten me on the site, I will have to ask an administrator to block you. Please stop CharlieJS13 (talk) 16:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Deletion nomination of Talk:Give It Up To Me

blanked page

Hi Lil-unique1, this is a message from an automated bot, regarding Talk:Give It Up To Me. You blanked the page and, since you are its sole author, FrescoBot has interpreted it as a request for deletion of the page and asked administrators to satisfy the requests per speedy deletion criterion G7. Next time you want a page that you've created deleted, you can explicitly request the deletion by inserting the text {{db-author}}. If you didn't want the page deleted, please remove the {{db-author}} tag from the page and undo your blanking or put some content in the page. Admins are able to recover deleted pages. Please do not contact the bot operator for issues not related with bot's behaviour. To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=FrescoBot}} somewhere on your talk page. -- FrescoBot (msg) 00:52, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Bot instructions

(copied from User talk:Misza13)

Hello. I was just wondering i've set the bot up to archive my talkpage User talk:Lil-unique1 but as you can see my talk page is already 229kb long. is there anyway i can get the bot to archive all inactive posts str8 away (there are some dating way back) and then set it to regular intervals? Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

|maxarchivesize = 25K
Seems very small.
|counter = 8
Why 8? Your previous archive is #2, and you've wiped both #1 and #2.
|archive = User talk:Lilunique1/Archive %(counter)d
You're missing the hyphen in "Lil-unique1".
Once you fix the last, the bot should run within the next day or so. After that, it should check your page every day to see if any section(s) qualify for archiving.
—WWoods (talk) 02:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

The first section probably didn't go because it's formatted as a subsection (=== Rollback? ===). You can change "===" to "==", or archive it manually.

The following sections (Human – MariahHateU) didn't go because they don't have timestamps. If you care, you can look up the correct users & times in your page history and add them with {{unsigned2}}, or archive them manually.

—WWoods (talk) 23:44, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and if you want an archive index, go to User:HBC Archive Indexerbot and follow the directions for setting it up for your archives.
—WWoods (talk) 23:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


Hi Lil-unique! I just wanted ask, since I think you expanded the most of Fight for this Love, I wanted to expanded it just a tad bit and copyedit it to GA nominate it. If its okay with you, since I think that you did the article. I've looked at a lot of your work, and you should try to get some of them as good articles sometime! Cheers. Candyo32 (talk) 18:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Your welcome! I just think the articles you work on are of too good quality for them not to at least try to get up to GA status! & Btw, I'm not even from the UK, i'm in the U.S. but i've gotten addicted to Cheryl Cole's Fight For This Love! Lol! I hope her album comes out here, and Alexandra Burke's too. I wonder why it takes so long for UK artists to cross over but not for U.S.? Anyway, that just popped in my head. Haha. Candyo32 (talk) 22:47, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
That is true! I've already seen JLS has sent Everybody to Love to U.S. mainstream, but it hasn't made much impact yet. But I do know Alexandra and Pixie Lott are supposed to crossover later this year, however I've just heard rumors about Cheryl. Candyo32 (talk) 22:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)


Hello Hash will you do me a huge favour, I've seen before you've put on pages the template that says "this article is currently undergoing a major revamp" or something like that? Can you post that on my userpage (not talkpage) as I plan to use it on a few articles soon! Thank you! Jayy008 (talk) 19:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Yeah I'm okay thanks, how's you? Not a bad weekend, quite this time, you? Jayy008 (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Lol, more like ly-in! I've got Whitney in one week, I'm so excited, but I hope I catch her on a good day cos I enjoyed watching on YouTube her Birmingham, Loved Nottingham but think what I've seen of Dublin is awful, so it's how she feels at the time I guess, so I just wanna be lucky lol. Jayy008 (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Lol oh :/... Yeah every single one lol, Nottingham was my favourite performances since her whole comeback inc Oprah etc etc! Jayy008 (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah @ The AMA's and Oprah. I loved For The Lovers performances, they're mimed though that along with "Nothin' But Love"! We always chat about music, do you not watch much tv drama? Jayy008 (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Used to be? I agree, I lovED Waterloo Road but I've just gone off it for some reason. Eastenders I'll watch sometimes but I'm really into 90210 and Gossip Girl atm. Jayy008 (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Lol I know what you mean! Jayy008 (talk) 17:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Lil-unique1. You have new messages at Jubileeclipman's talk page.
Message added 14:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jubileeclipman 14:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The articles you requested


I assessed the articles you requested in the albums project, very good stuff, only two things, some of them, the personnel section is not properly divided in performing personnel and technical personnel and the other thing; I Look to You is already a B, we can`t rate it higher, you have to go to the GA project. Zidane tribal (talk) 16:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I`m sorry to say that i can`t rate Sweet 7 a B like i want because lacks a personnel section, i`ll let it there until its done and then i`ll assesse it. Zidane tribal (talk) 19:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
You requested some articles to assessment, however Still Standing as you list it, leads to a disambiguation page, you have to specify the article you want assessed. Zidane tribal (talk) 04:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
I`m truly sorry to bug you so much with this but on regard to Still Standing, i can`t rate it a B because the personnel section does n`t mention any performer, only technical personnel, i`ll add the vocal credit (Monica, of course) and rate it C, but please let me know when more gets added so it can be rated B. Zidane tribal (talk) 20:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


Alright, I think I am understanding it more. But this doesn't mean that Ultratip should be used also when it charts on the main chart, does it ? Candyo32 (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I understand now, I was going to bring up how the tip is replaced when it charts on the main. Candyo32 (talk) 22:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
On the Rated R article why isn't Young Jeezy credited as Jeezy? Its on the album art, and here's another source [2] and some more on Hard (song) Candyo32 (talk) 01:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


Sweetheart, at least put it as #51, normal people will believe it's #1 in Belgium. (talk) 15:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


Hi there Lil-unique1, as you may or may not know, TrEeMaNsHoE (talk · contribs) has been not only blocked, but banned from Wikipedia a for a while now. He's been making several sockpuppets, as seen in the categories Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of TrEeMaNsHoE and Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of TrEeMaNsHoE. Recently, he's been asking you for requests using different IP addresses, including here and here. Should these come up, please ignore them. He is not allowed to edit Wikipedia, directly through sockpuppets and IPs or ask others to make edits for him; his editing privileges have been revoked as a result of his ban. This is the reason why several Ciara-related articles were semi-protected to begin with. If any accounts stick out and have TrEeMaNsHoE tendencies, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page so I can look into it. Thank you. — ξxplicit 23:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

thank u —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukek26 (talkcontribs) 18:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


But it appers choppy and only certain scenes are mentioned the video section is supposed to give a full synopsis. The whole review shoulkd be altogether. Its plagiarism, for us to take credit for describing the video.-- (talk) 21:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, but lets make a concept section like LOve SEx Magic that describes the video. -- (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I Am...

The article has a lot of meat, but some issues with sourcing, particularly the release history & singles subsection which could be simplified to prose (less article space and all). Also, it could use expanding the music section; musical style, themes, songs/content etc. But since this album has been pretty hot, there are probably alot of sources available on the internet. Most of it seems alright though. Dan56 (talk) 21:35, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Each Tear

The cover is found on promo CD's - which are official! I own one... Blige is the lead artist on ALL versions of the song... Jay Sean etc are NOT, therefore the cover with the lead artist on should remain. Who is to decide which featured artist takes presidence over the other? Surely it's the lead artist that should take presidence? [3] TopopMAC1 (talk) 18:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

That one's found on eBay... here is the link to another [4] Maybe the single cover should be removed altogether in that case but I think having a single cover adds to the article. I found the cover elsewhere so maybe that person removed the 'Jay Sean' from it? The solo version, available on the U.S. version of the album was created and released first and therefore should take presidence over any remixes that should be released and their covers. TopopMAC1 (talk) 18:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
The solo version of the track I believe is being released on the UK digital single at least... the 'international version' is the Jay Sean remix, whereas the 'album version' is Blige's solo version. I didn't use eBay as a source on the image page as I knew they weren't sources Wikipedia likes. Vinyl Exchange are reliable though. I agree with the consensus that all images should be removed in that case! TopopMAC1 (talk) 18:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

userspace links,

The messages you placed on a half-dozen articles (example) point to a discussion that has been dead for ~12 days now. I assume the discussion is over? Can you remove the message? It's somewhat inappropriate, as it probably belongs on the talk page at this point anyhow, and userspace links should not be placed in article space. Please respond here, not my page. tedder (talk) 05:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Apologies... i did almost forget about those templates. I've been through and removed some more. I think they're all gone now but if they haven't please let me know. Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Looks like you got them all, I'm not seeing them on the report anymore. tedder (talk) 00:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Each Tear (Italian Single cover).jpg


Thanks for uploading File:Each Tear (Italian Single cover).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).


  • I am a bot, and will therefore 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.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Rated R (Rihanna album) and in particular the constant addition of poorly sourced information, WP:BADCHARTS and iTunes etc.. Thank you. Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Did you mean to inform youself? :) AnemoneProjectors 20:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
haha omg i completely didnt! i dont know what happened there. I actually meant to leave this on someone else's page. LMAO! Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Whitney Houston

Just letting you know I'm going tomorrow to see her, I haven't forgotten you want a review lol :). I'll do it when I'm back! Jayy008 (talk) 20:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

55????? Where could you tickets for that price??? and ahhh there's always next time :). Jayy008 (talk) 21:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I payed £111 Lol! Jeez! No tickets in London were 55. But yeah Alicia Keys wasn't money for me it was lateless, they was all sold out when I tried :(. You gotta let me know how she is! Jayy008 (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I would do that yes. Thanks and sorry for any inconvenience I may have caused. CharlieJS13 (talk) 17:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Thank you

Yes, I very much hope that is the case in the future. :) CharlieJS13 (talk) 17:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


Oops, sorry! I have very little experience of making templates lol CharlieJS13 (talk) 18:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


Haha thanks for the link. I know where to go now! CharlieJS13 (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

My edits

Spelling corrections - almost exclusively.

EoGuy (talk) 00:02, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Stronger withEach Tear "Singles" discussion

According to Mary's press release "I Am" is the first single off the album. Here's proof --->

"Stairway to Heaven" is NOT a single simply because the song is NOT on the U.S. version of the album. The song is released as an American Idol "Gives Back" single. It's IMPOSSIBLE for a sing to be mentioned as a "single" when it's NOT on the U.S. album & not only that it hasn't been released to radio, nor is there a video. The song was released as a "single" because Mary's camp wanted the U.S. fans to have the song too.

"Each Tear" is the INTERNATIONAL single & it NEEDS to be noted where I previously noted it.

You gon dispute?

At the top of your page where it says User page.... next to it it will say Talk Page. click on that and you'll see the discussion. Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Incase you can't see it here's the link to the response: click here to see your talk page


I probably shouldn't do this (per WP:CANVASS), but it seem odd that you haven't voted here, yet --Jubileeclipman 03:15, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

to canvas you must have asked the question in a subjective way e.g. please voice your support. asking my vote objectively is fine.Lil-unique1 (talk) 03:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Good point --Jubileeclipman 05:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Whitney Houston - review

I give it 7/10.

I had a great night!!!!! She's an amazing entertainer, the only issue was the voice towards the end of the night, I blame her, because she pushes herself too hard and sounds like she's growling. I Look To You was flawless as always, Greatest Love Of All - Amazing, How Will I Know - Deffo my favourite, so much energy, everyone was dancing and singing along so loud! Everything else was brilliant except I Will Always Love You - disaster - she has done that much better since her comeback, Saving All My Love For You - over raspy, awful and finally I Didn't Know My Own Strength I had to love because it's my fav but again GROWLED lol. Jayy008 (talk) 09:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, I still think the Nottingham one was the best still but comparing to the others it was around the same (Not inc Melbourne obvs) but I was just disappointed that she removed "If I Told You That". Yeah "For The Lovers" and "Nothin' But Love" were incredible and full of energy. As for "I Will Always Love You" she didn't leave, she didn't even do the break in the song until AFTER the big note which was stupid, cos she couldn't do it, and nobody walked out like the press were reporting. Jayy008 (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

PS. Thanks for the barnstar! Jayy008 (talk) 19:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!


Happy birthday! Enjoy youself with a panda cake! AnemoneProjectors 19:31, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2010 (UTC)


Amazon has no record of an explicit version, and only has the clean version. It was stated early that an explicit version would be released. All other music outlets such as iTunes and Rhapsody only have the clean version as well. So there is only one officially released version. The explicit version only leaked to internet.--Rib Lover (talk) 02:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I see the whole 26 thing. I allso see what you mean about redundant info, so it has been remoced. --Rib Lover (talk) 02:31, 30 April 2010 (UTC)\

Ok, I see your comment. I will discuss it over on your talk page if there is a next time.--Rib Lover (talk) 02:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Billboard charts

Hey, do you the brackets really need to be there when you're using it for charts? I understand the page for information in more detail like Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs) but for the charts can't it just be Mainstream Top 40 as that's the actual name of the chart, Pop Songs is only what Billboard calls it?

Yep, makes perfect sense :). Jayy008 (talk) 15:54, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article nominations

Hi! I just reverted an edit of yours on Wikipedia:Good article nominations by mistake. I clicked the wrong button, sorry! I have reverted myself, but I thought I ought to explain myself and apologise - really sorry! --Tango (talk) 01:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Not Myself Tonight

Hey Lil-Unique! Since I know you also work on the page, I just wanted to let you know that I worked on expanding the music video section for about AN HOUR, and now i think an IP has re-worked everything, to make it sound more negative. The Michael Jackson and George Michael video comparisons are no where to be found, as with the positive reviews from and TV Guide. Ugh, now I'm trying to fix it all over again. Candyo32 (talk) 19:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I think its perfectly fine for it to go through eventual reduction and copyedting. I'm not that great at copyediting myself. Lol! But the main thing was the users who went and either reworked the reviews to seem negative or removed the positive reviews all together. Candyo32 (talk) 00:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, i see why. Btw, have you seen the video. I think it is pretty good except i could have done without the ball in the mouth S&M stuff. I'm just sick of people saying she's trying to copycat Gaga, whose only really been big for a year, and Christina was all this stuff years ago. Although I like the song, its a bit too poppy. I like R&B Xtina better. Candyo32 (talk) 00:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Sadly you are right! The only thing saving this song here in the United States is when she performs on the American Idol finale, and that is at the end of the month. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Miley Cyrus got like a twenty position jupm and Adam Lambert moved his song from top twenty to #10 after their performances. Like what you said with the state of pop thing, here in the U.S. we have had Nothin' On You and Rude Boy at #1, and soon it seems like OMG, but otherwise it seems like as the only songs topping the Billboard are generic dance-pops. Seems like the days are gone like during mid-decade when R&B songs would top the Billboard. Now they are considered a hit if they reach top 20! But I think the main problem is that Top 40 radio just doesn't embrace the urban crossovers like they used to (therefore another reason for my constant rhythmic radio debate! LOL). Back to Xtina, I don't really know how she would have re-"Dirrty"-ed herself anymore. I remember seeing in an article with MTV they bring up is she trying to out Gaga-Gaga, but people don't think about did Gaga just go Xtina, I mean its been four years since B2B, and techinically those don't count as her Xtina years so its been about a decade! I like Gaga, and everyone is going Gaga, but to me she really didn't develop all of this "artistic ability" until Paparazzi came out. Some would say Poker Face, but look at the video for Just Dance. To me The Fame is just generic electropop anyway. Although I do love Gaga. But the the Madonna homage is so clear Xtina's video, I think she just did that completely to recall her videos. Hopefully her second single (not saying that NMT can't make a comeback) will burst the charts. I hope its the song Tricky Stewart produced, and has an R&B feel. But Polow did produce this and its really only R&B in the vocals. Candyo32 (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
I was under the impression that the revert rule did not count for vandalism. And my reverts were not of content dispute most of them were blantant changing for quotes or unexplained removal of content. Candyo32 (talk) 18:23, 2 May 2010 (UTC)


Hey Unique, Iv'e opened up a new discussion here and would appreciate your opinion and input. Thanks!--PeterGriffinTalk 03:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Tik Tok

Hello =) Im not sure if you are watching my talk page or not so that is why i am typing here.
I believe i have corrected all of the issues you listed for my good article nomination of Tik Tok. If i have made a mistake, please to hesitate to tell me, i am known to be a little oblivious so i wouldnt put it past me missing some things. ..:CK:.. (talk2me) 06:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Ive already corrected all the problems that were listed :)

Do you think i should renominate Tik Tok? I believe i have corrected all previous errors in the article and i think it should now pass.
(Please reply on my Talk Page. =) ) ..:CK:.. (talk2me) 21:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Help with unconstructive editor(s)

An editor, or what could be sockpuppets (I think thats what its called), has been making unconstructive edits to Birth of the Cool. The IP addresses are different on each edit that Ive reverted, but it keeps on. The editor(s)'s replacing the album's release date in the infobox with dates for seperate/single track issues of recordings from the album. Can u help with this matter or is there a place on wikipedia that is for this kind of issue? Dan56 (talk) 19:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Pulse track listing

Hi Lil-unique1. A question: Why have you removed Caught from the tracklist? It is still listed in the iTunes tracklist. Do you have a different source? I couldn't find it in the article. Angel (talk) 22:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

  • I checked right now and it is in the US deluxe edition. Maybe that the two remixes of yesterday are not considered new songs, so there are only 4 new songs. Anyway, I'm not gonna change it now. Let's wait till tomorrow that the album will be released. Angel (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Ok, you've been faster than me... Good job! :-) Angel (talk) 22:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Yes the deluxe edition looks better, but it's a shame that all the songs of the album (and many more!) have leaked months ago... Maybe there's someone who doesn't love Toni... Angel (talk) 22:35, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
  • You're right. I'm afraid that this was the last chance for Toni to save her career. I don't understand why the album hadn't been released in february, the songs leaked anyway. Angel (talk) 23:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I Want to know What Love Is

Don't!lol...Don't worry it happens to the best of us, since it's not one of her main songs, I usually totally forget about that one too!it took me like 3 times to look it over to get the 02:57, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

mixer credits

You wrote: "You made the comment "If remixers are named, the original mixer should also be named. If original mixer is not named, the remixers' names should be taken off also." This is not wikipedia policy so please do not try and pass it off as policy. Also it is not sourced nor is it relevant in the same context. The people doing the remixers are producers not track engineers. If you've bought the single you'd see that it says "Acapella (Dave Aude Remix)" but the original song itself doesn't say "Acapella (mixed by Dylan Dresdow)". The given names in the single are the names of those versions not necessarily the remixer. Lil-unique1"

You know, I'm not trying to pass my comments off as policy. You're clearly a much more experienced Wikipedia editor than I am, so I won't try to argue with you on that front. However, I have more than 20 years of experience of working in the music industry, and how credits (and with that politics) are handled, and it is simply very very VERY bad form not to mention the original mixer of a song, especially in a context where remixers are mentioned (not to talk about make-up artists and god knows what). For an understanding of the role and importance of the original mixer, have a look at my article series at Sound on Sound magazine:, and search for my name: "Paul Tingen". Do some further reading, and you'll also find out that the role and importance of the original mixer has increased dramatically over the last decades. He or she used to be just a balance engineer, but now mixers can act like arrangers and producers, which is why I was commissioned to write this series.

I hope that you agree after informing yourself that, where possible, and certainly with songs mixed during the 90s and 00s, it is important to credit the original mixer somewhere in each wikipedia entry for a song. My suggestion would be to put the original mixer credit at the box on the top right, where the producer is credited, but I've tried that and it seems impossible to change the format of that box. Alternatively, the original mixer can be mentioned in the top 1-2 paragraphs, where the producer and other major participants are mentioned. But I have to admit that I totally don't see why the original mixer can't be mentioned in the list of different versions for each song. In fact, that seems the obvious place.

Paul Tingen.

Btw. you also write that "remixers are producers." This is not exactly correct. Remixers give their own slant to songs, sometimes changing them dramatically, which is different from what a producer does, which usually is to try to bring the best out of the artist and the song. Granted, producers also often make arrangements, like remixers do, but this is not always the case. Sometimes a producer will use an arranger, sometimes the band or artist will make the arrangement. Original mixers will also sometimes change the arrangement and/or do things that can be called production. The difference between what they do and what remixers do is not always big, making crediting remixers (who often run off their remixes in half a day), but not the original mixer (who may spend 1-2 days on each mix) such bad form.

Later entry (05/05/10): Lil-unique: you're only 19 years old and you already sound like the world's worst bureaucrat and control freak! Lighten up! It seems like you have already forgotten that rules, agreements, and what you call "standard practice" are there for a reason: to get desired results. And sometimes rules, regulations and/or "standard practice suck and one has to be a little flexible and apply some common sense to come to a result that obviously is fairer, or more correct, or whatever. Why you dig yourself in like this, when all I'm trying to do is make sure that one key person in the making of records is properly credited in wikipedia song entries, escapes me. You could also say: 'fair enough: you have the experience in the music industry, I've done some reading up, it seems like the original mixer is indeed very important, leave it with me and I'll try to find a way organise the Wiki song entry format in such a way that the original mixer is routinely credited.'

Instead you seem to make it an issue of personal pride to kick someone who has 20 years of experience in the music industry, at the highest level, and who is trying to give credit where credit is due, in the shins. Bizarre and it gives wikipedia a bad name. I mentioned to a few high level folk in Los Angeles (ie, men who make #1 hit records) what you're doing and they're shaking their heads in dismay. As per your suggestion to take it up with the Wiki songs community, I'll try, but you know, I have kids, a job, in general a life, and don't see why I should go to such much trouble to get something very simple and obviously reasonable done... Btw, if you want to verify the Dylan Dresdow mix credit, go to his web site:, and ask him. Don't forget to also ask Dylan for his feedback on your stance re crediting original mixers at Wikipedia... You know, one day you'll hopefully learn: sometimes information is found in real life and not in print, and sometimes you have to do a little first-hand research and believe your own ears and eyes and not only 2nd hand knowledge... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tingen (talkcontribs) 07:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Lil-unique, I accept that I'm not well-versed in Wikipedia common practice and all the ins and outs of commenting and discussing; by contrast, you repeatedly claim to be an expert, so why don't you assume good faith on my part, etc? I've actually given my real name and put my professional reputation on the line. Yet instead of honouring that, you keep slamming down the rule book on me. Trawling around on Wikipedia a bit, I found this suggestion:

"I will always assume good faith on the part of my fellow editors and will be civil at all times, even to those who are not civil to me. I will NOT attack my fellow editors or disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. If involved in a content dispute, I will NOT engage in edit warring and will instead discuss contested edits and/or seek dispute resolution."

Sounds good. Was my repeatedly adding Dresdow's name "edit warring," and if it was/is, is it worthy of threatening to report me? And if so, aren't/weren't you doing the same thing? My addition of Dresdow's name doesn't harm the article, it enhances it, and given what I've revealed about my background, you could at least have accepted the accuracy of my entry, even as you're welcome to point out it's not 'common practice.' So? Aren't you just trying to "make a point" here? Seems like that to me. As you're so experienced in common practice, why don't you give me a good example of how Wikipedians resolve disputes like this? Tingen (talk) 10:02, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


A ok but sorry, a chart like that is really annoying to read..׺°”˜`”°º×ηυηzια׺°”˜`”°º× 16:56, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

okok--׺°”˜`”°º×ηυηzια׺°”˜`”°º× 17:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

You Belong with ME

O.K. But that's for single chart, which is not being used in "You Belong with Me". So maybe you could bring that up in the discussion because as of now it should stay how it is. Once they find a method for it, I'd be more than happy to change it :) -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:32, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

O.K. But the entire article is already based on the original format and it's definately more difficult changing everything relating to charts than just two charts listed. So, I think this would be the exception to the rule. Afterall, it says "should", not "must". Plus yes it is according to the article: "Ultratip is a chart that shows the top 50 songs that didn't enter the main chart. For Flanders positions are equivalent to (51-100) and for Wallonia (40-90). Ultratip measures airplay and sales where the main chart just measures sales. The chart is similar to the U.S. Bubbling Under Hot 100." So please do not bother the article, please. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:42, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry you feel that way but what I meant was for you not to continue making that same edit since I don't want to start an edit war. Also, what's the compromise? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 01:55, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
YES!! Thank you. Or maybe Belgian Ultratip Singles Chart (Wallonia) or same as before but linking Ultratip? I like the way it is now though if these two don't please you. -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 02:00, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
YAY! *high five back* -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 02:07, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Each Tear

Hey! "Each Tear" has been released in the UK today. The UK iTunes cover features that promo cover of Mary without the 'featuring Jay Sean' part as previously posted. I think it might be best to use that one. [5] P.S. here's the Rea Garvey cover too [6]. TopopMAC1 (talk) 10:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:MJB - Each Tear (international).jpg


Thanks for uploading File:MJB - Each Tear (international).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 on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

RE: User:RyanG222

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Lil-unique1. You have new messages at Jonny's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
i think we have a sock... User talk:Sllewellyn7, they're making very similar edits to the same articles Mister sparky (talk) 19:54, 10 May 2010 (UTC)


I am not edit warring. You, in fact, are edit warring. -- Erroneuz1 (talk) 23:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi, before I upload the same image, may I ask something, is "" a blog? In their web page, it is revealed the same picture that I've uploaded is the official cover. Whether I can upload it or not, please inform me. : )Syfuel (talk) 03:46, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear, I've redirected the source. Please let me know if it is okay. : )Syfuel (talk) 04:26, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Pulse (Toni Braxton album)


I added a couple of categories and did a little work on the personnel section i´ll rate it a B, but the personnel section still needs work. --Zidane tribal (talk) 01:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Colonial Cousins (album)

Hello Lil-unique1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Colonial Cousins (album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:08, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Lahore Ke Rang Hari Ke Sang

Hello Lil-unique1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lahore Ke Rang Hari Ke Sang, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Paigham (album)

Hello Lil-unique1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Paigham (album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:14, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: The Way We Do It

Hello Lil-unique1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of The Way We Do It, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:21, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Paul Detwiler

Hello Lil-unique1. I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed on Paul Detwiler to a proposed deletion tag, because I do not believe CSD applies to the page in question. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:30, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Basic Instinct

Hi, I saw that you put no recorded tracks section for the page. However, Rap-up has announced two more songs that could be on the album ("Run it" and "Blauw") should a recorded tracks section be made or should they just be talked about in the article.--Urban music fan (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, do you need sources or can you find them.--Urban music fan (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Here is the one for "Run it" : It was also mentioned by Ciara in her uStream, with her calling it one of her favorites, but I can't source it. I didn't put the one for "Blauw", as it says they are unsure if it is from Fantasy Ride or Basic Instinct.--Urban music fan (talk) 19:52, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

TrEeMaNsHoE yet again. He's just so obvious. — ξxplicit 22:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Did i do it right here? Ldt88 07 (talk) 23:54, 16 May 2010 (UTC)Ldt88 07


Hello. I know for a fact that my edits toward the Basic Instinct album, as well as anything that has to do with Ciara, are correct. I am confident that i know more about what goes on with Ciara's projects than most people. Although the citations may not be accurate, you should at least note that Ciara has worked in the studio with Bangladesh. If the citation doesn't match, then find one instead of just deleting it because the additions that i add to the page are correct. I wouldn't do anything to purposely mislead anyone about this page, because I am a Ciara fan myself. All i ask is that you at least take my additions into consideration.

I can definitely respect that. But the same place where the info about Ciara working in Milk Studios is the same place where you'll find exactly who she worked with there. Naming one studio out of the millions that she's been in is just as pointless as naming a producer without a citation. In fact, Milk studios is the studio that she met up with producer Bangladesh at in the first place. It was posted by an engineer at Milk Studios on twitter, and was posted and confirmed on a page from Sincerely If you could find that, then great. I just want it to be known that Ciara is working with more producers than just Tricky Stewart & The-Dream only because some people aren't even giving the project a chance because they haven't been in favor of what they've heard from previous "Trick & Dream ONLY" produced albums. I know that the team is a pretty good team and i like what im hearing from the Tricky/Dream/Ciara team, but we both know other flopped albums they've exclusively worked on (Mariah, Electrik Red, etc.) left a bad taste in fans' mouthes. And i've been seeing comments like "Oh God, another Tricky & Dream only album!" and "Its gonna flop like their other projects did". We know that the 3 work well together, its just that biased listeners don't. From one fan to another, i'm just looking out on all aspects that's all, lol.

I understand...i just don't want to get deleted or get any warnings or be labeled as a disruptive editor for just stating facts. So the next time i add something could you just look into it further for validity instead of me getting in trouble? Cause 9.5 times out of 10, my additions are correct, i just may not have the correct citation for it. And i noticed that additions have been made to the site based on rumors, like the rumor that a "world tour" would take place in support of Fantasy Ride, which obviously didn't materialize. So with that being said, could i post something to that effect about her working with Bangladesh if i make it clear that it hasn't been confirmed yet? Cause i've done that before and there was never a problem. Let me know, thanks.

-ldt88_07 (^^ p.s. is this what you mean by a signature??)