Jump to content

User talk:STATicVapor/Archive 1: February-July 2010

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

Kevin Rudolf

It has been redirected, not deleted. Take a look at WP:NSONGS, which states the conditions for when it is appropriate to create an article about a single. Note the sentence in WP:NSONGS that reads "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song." "I Made It" hasn't charted. Other notable artists haven't released cover versions of it. There isn't enough information to create more than a stub. Hence, no separate article should exist.—Kww(talk) 23:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It can be unredirected after it charts, and everything you did will still be there. Nothing has been lost.—Kww(talk) 23:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
"Covered" means that another version of the song has been done by another artist, not that there is cover art. That "other editor" was Wiki-11233 evading his block. He is not allowed to edit, and I revert all edits he makes on site.—Kww(talk) 13:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
No problem to restore the article after charting. —Kww(talk) 23:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Pronto (Snoop Dogg song)

But how does that relate directly to the song and not to Snoop Dogg and/or Soulja Boy's articles? And more critically, what reliable sources back up the claim? —C.Fred (talk) 01:32, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Rollback

At this point, I would council you to wait a bit. A few things you should get in the habit of doing before rollback:

  1. Edit summaries. I see you do them for a few of your edits, but it would be in your best interest to do them more consistently.
  2. I notice that you have a warning on your talk page for getting a bit heated. It's a common mistake, so don't let it get to you, but I'd like to see a better demonstration that you can keep yourself together against vandalism.

I recommend you also spend some time monitoring the Recent Changes log to gain more general experience. After two weeks or so, you can request it again by personally asking me or heading over to WP:RFR. bibliomaniac15 01:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Nothin' On You

Excuse me, I was the one who originally put that there on the page. And I removed it because according to WP:USCHART, the Pop Songs chart can be used now. Candyo32 (talk) 03:15, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

You should have explained that in the edit summary than. Putting Edit Summarys helps this kinda stuff out. STATicVerseatide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:STATicVerseatide) 03:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

76.197.247.56

Hi, I've blocked the IP address and undone all the removals of Universal Records. However, I'm not sure about the Def Jam edits he made after that. Could you have a look and revert them if they're vandalism? Thanks. Black Kite 11:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

???

What were u talking about on the Vandalism Noticeboard STATicVerseatide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:STATicVerseatide) 06:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

With the helperbots down every user was removing the blocked, I had taken a shift and was removing them but got tired of waiting to see if the vandal you reported was blocked or not.--SKATER Speak. 15:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Do u know if he eventully got blocked? And r the hyperbots back up cause another IP is doing the same thing the one i reported was doing and idk if im going to have to report him too STATicVerseatide talk 19:17, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

76.197.247.56 was blocked for 31 hours, and unfortunately no, The bots still aren't back up I dunno what the deal is with them.--SKATER Speak. 19:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

AIV

Just a note, I removed your report from WP:AIV- the user was already reported three reports above yours. Thanks for watching for vandalism, though! Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry didnt notice someone must of got to the page to report him before me lol STATicVerseatide talk 20:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
No problem. Just didn't want you to see your report gone and wonder what happened. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk

No, i don't have a personal problem. You just need to know that Good Faith Edits are not generally allowed, i apologize for any inconvenience. Str8cash (talk) 00:52, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with discussion. None of those articles are notable and there's nothing i can do about that. Just because you like a Dr. Dre song doesn't mean it deserves an article. It's a great song but that doesn't mean it needs an article. There isn't sufficient enough info to create a page on many of the articles you created. Str8cash (talk) 00:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
It's nothing to be sorry about, i joined wikipedia 4 years ago when i was 14. I did a lot of the same things, but administrators were ass holes about me creating an article about a Snoop Dogg song or making some The Cool Kids mixtape articles. Sorry if i hurt your feelings or anything, i didn't mean to. Str8cash (talk) 01:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
None of those are notable, just because a song charts, doesn't mean it's notable, especially of there is no substance on the article. There's nothing significant to Insane (Eminem song) that isn't already for When I Hustle by Lloyd and Huey. And that also got deleted/redirected. And just because an album is confirmed doesn't mean it can have an article, I nominated and helped delete the Cudder: The Revolution of Evolution article just a few weeks ago. I love Kid Cudi and Soundtrack 2 My Life is the shit, but that album is not notable. Same with a lot of the articles you created. Str8cash (talk) 01:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

My mistake!

Sorry. I misunderstood what you were intending to do. Was just intending to help out. Let me put that back up for you just in case you want to go and retrieve your old changes. - Vianello (Talk) 04:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

All done. Your page is back exactly as it was. - Vianello (Talk) 04:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

About your edits

I didn't say what you did was vandalism. I just gave you a warning about adding unverifiable information into the article. I suggest you start reading Wikipedia policy and guidelines before adding anything else into articles. WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:V. Also it's discouraged to remove warnings from your talk page, though they are still preserved in your history. Might also be a good idea to read WP:CIVIL since you told one editor to fuck off the other day. Not very nice. If you would like to continue this discussion, you can here or my talk page, since I've added this message to both. —Mike Allen 02:02, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Here's the correct code for your signature that you can enter under "Preferences".

[[User:STATicVerseatide|STATicVerseatide]] [[User talk:STATicVerseatide|feedback]] [[Special:Contributions/STATicVerseatide|what I've done]] —Mike Allen 02:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for butting in, but actually, as far as I'm aware, it's all right to remove a warning. It's considered acknowledgment that you've read it though, whether or not you actually have, so be aware of that. I believe the policy is covered in WP:User pages. - Vianello (Talk) 00:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
It's mainly so other editors will know that they were given a warning previously. Instead of giving a vandal a level 1 warning when they have already received level 4 (but they removed it). —Mike Allen 00:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
So ur saying im a vandal :/User:STATicVerseatide User talk:STATicVerseatide 00:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Not quite. I was using "a vandal" as an example. —Mike Allen 01:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Happy?

Yes, i'm quite all right, thank u. Dan56 (talk) 19:59, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Too Short

The Too Short Template {Too Short} keeps giting confused by Smack Bot that it means Lead Too Short which it doesnt. And it removes the Too Short Template and puts

such as this edit Have any way to stop this STAT- Verse 07:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually that is exactly what {{Too short}} means. Maybe you are looking for {{Expand}}? Rich Farmbrough, 07:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC).
No in case u didn't know there is a rapper named Too Short and his template is Too Short which resalts in this
Of course there is a rapper called Too Short.. sigh.. thanks for telling me. Lets dot this one out. Rich Farmbrough, 07:15, 18 April 2010 (UTC).
 Fixed Rich Farmbrough, 14:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC).

Insane

I dont understand how the result of the Afd for Insane (Eminem song) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Insane (Eminem song) results in Redirect when the tally that came up was 2 votes to Redirect, 3 votes to Keep and 1 vote to merge. And btw i didn't notice anything was merged like this editor said. STAT- Verse 23:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

It looked like your !vote and User:Eduardofoxx13's !vote were the only ones that did not mention a merge/deletion. As User:Vianello quoted, "a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article", which rough consensus held to be the case. I suppose you are welcome to take it to deletion review if you so wish, just let me know. Best regards, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 02:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Ah, User:JohnFromPinckney's merge can be found here. You're welcome to expand on the merge, though. Take care, Arbitrarily0 (talk) 02:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

re:Saw VI

I don't own anything, never said I did. I however, do keep up the articles. I have told you and told you that per WP:FILMPLOT the plot should not list extraneous details and should be as concise as possible (which Saw VI currently is). Is there something you don't understand? —Mike Allen 03:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The fact of what Eddie cut off to his advantage is important as is what happened b4 William got captured. STAT- Verse 03:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
No it's not. The summary is to summarize all the important aspects of the film. Him cutting off his fat is not important to the summary as he is never mentioned again. It's just something readers don't "need" to know. That's why they watch the film, not read the Wikipedia plot. This: "the lights go out and William accidentally shots a secuirity guard believing him to be a threat." That's unnecessary as well as the others. If you keep adding these "little" details then it'll soon be over 700 words. How about helping actually improve the article. Why do editors spend all of their time in the plot summaries. Whatever. —Mike Allen 03:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

All The Way Turnt Up cover

Please don't revert the cover. The original was not the official cover, and the new one is the official one used on Amazon, and iTunes. Candyo32 (talk) 03:12, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you know this...

I do not consider it a reliable source per Wiki's reliable source policy. It is a blog source that isn't even run by professionals (such as Rap-Up), it's run by a random person. SE KinG. User page. Talk. 00:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

By all means always use the source that follows Wiki's reliable source policy best. The best sources are well written with no spelling errors, no "txt" language, no bias, and should not be a blog (however, there are some exceptions to the blog guideline). SE KinG. User page. Talk. 00:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

To The Sky

I'm curious why you recreated this when you know it had been deleted by consensus and you made no fresh attempt to run this by me. Did I miss something? Spartaz Humbug! 19:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Saw VII

Saw VII was unprotected today. So I'm sure the IPs will be back vandalizing as always. Just a heads up. Mike Allen 00:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Good luck with that (getting it protected very long term). Maybe it won't be that bad this go-around. Some IPs are vandal fighters, but the majority only cause "damage". It's all repairable, but just time consuming. Mike Allen 02:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I haven't been on as much, and I was afraid I would come back and check it and it be completely destroyed. So I feel better about it now. Mike Allen 06:25, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
He's a good faith and veteran editor. The poster looks so good and genuine that he thought it was real. An honest mistake. Mike Allen 06:52, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Yelawolf

It's a good start, it just needs some more sources and needs to be expanded. But it looks like it could be a good article. I'll defiantly contribute if I find anything worth wild. SE KinG. User page. Talk. 05:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Dre

This editor Mr.Sedge removed a Speedy Deletion Template from Dre (album) that i placed there because the page was holding up a move from Dre (Soulja Boy Tell 'Em album). He cut and pastedvthe info instead whitch I have reverted. Could you speedy deleate Dre (album) so I can move Dre (Soulja Boy Tell 'Em album) to that space. STAT- Verse 19:25, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 19:32, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

What was the point of restoring that one revision? STAT- Verse 19:53, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

I probably could have just left it out; however, it provides a more accessible record that another editor had previously believed that a redirect was already needed back in April and the dab page Dre was edited to reflect that. You still get full credit for starting the article, though. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 20:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

To the Sky

It was deleted again. I can't find to the sky —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph507357 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Rebirth sales

What "source"? there was no "source"! The only thing it stated was its been certified Gold by the RIAA. Anybody can put that shit. Just last week it said Rebirth sold over 575,000 before I removed the inaccurate mark. Now all of a sudden the story is 505,000? Pfft, I have an estimated track of Rebirth's sales, and as a Billboard.com reader (and sales reviewer)I'm pretty positive Rebirth's sales sit somewhere between 400,000 and 430,000. It has NOT been certified Gold (if it has thats only in shipmint, not sales, therefore it CAN'T exceed 500,000).

Um that is WP:OR. There is a source right after the fact on the article. STAT -Verse 21:37, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Saw cast table

That's correct. They only used archived footage. He really wasn't there. Mike Allen 00:59, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure. Let me see if I can find it on YouTube. Tony Nappo who played Gus (the guy that got shot with the gun through the door's peephole in Saw II) was the only person that physically was there. The rest was just archived footage, because it showed Shawnee and she never stepped foot on set during filming Saw V. Also Niamh Wilson was really not in Saw VI (Director's Cut), that was obviously old footage from Saw III mixed in with new footage of Shawnee. Mike Allen 01:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Because he was the only one available in Toronto and needed some money? Also I thought that article was about the cast members? We already have a character page. Mike Allen 02:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Uni5: The World's Enemy

Doomsdayer520 fixed it, thanks for letting know though. QuasyBoy (talk) 14:21, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand

Can you please explain what's going on with this pagemove? I moved the page in good faith in response to what seemed to be an unopposed move request. You had commented there, saying "Oppisite Done", which I have a hard time getting any meaning out of. It would be helpful if you could explain, on the talk page, why the title is what it is. Thanks in advance. -GTBacchus(talk) 19:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Ok, I see. It sounds like you've got the situation under control. Coming from requested moves, it wasn't quite clear what was going on. Thanks for explaining that. -GTBacchus(talk) 00:17, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Dre (album)

Hello, STATicVapor. You have new messages at Ron2's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
More importantly, please see Talk:Dre (album) —ron2(talk) 23:54, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Your request

Phew! I can imagine how you feel. I'd love to grant your request, but it's a bit of a production with the setup we have currently. You might want to make a "null" edit (an edit that doesn't actually change anything) with a comment in the edit summary, to explain it was just a typo. That way, anyone viewing your edit history has your explanation right there. That might be easier? - Vianello (Talk) 05:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Goon Affiliated

Thanks for finally adding a source. Like I've been saying, it's not what we know, it's what we can show. You've been saying "he's on there", but never provided a source for it. If you've never read WP:TRUTH, you might want to take a minute to read it. It's frustrating sometimes to know something and not be able to source it, but that's how it goes. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

  • I'm all for it. If you look at the edit history, I removed that stuff over and over. I finally just fact tagged it all (which I agree looks like shit), mainly with the plan that after a couple of weeks, I could say that it had been tagged, nobody referenced it and be able to get more backing from a protection request. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:52, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Blanking

Hi, by blanking are you referring to the edit I made where I blanked an entire page for a redirect to The Darkside Vol.1? If so, I was merely trying to fix the redirect that wasn't there previously. Which evidently I didn't manage to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.228.20 (talk) 20:02, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Didn't know about that either but do now so thank you. --94.192.228.20 (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

WP:AIV

If someone reports you to AIV, no matter how stupid the report, it's usually best to let an administrator remove it, even after it's been declined. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

You don't have to be an admin to remove a report, but if you're the one being reported, it's probably not the best idea to remove the report yourself :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Censoring

WP:NOTCENSORED does not apply when pulling a direct quote, as in the article's quote present from Bill Lamb's review. In this case the original phrasing is used, with [sic] coming afterwards. Candyo32 (talk) 20:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rudolf-to-the-sky.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Rudolf-to-the-sky.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 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) 05:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank Me Later

Why is it that in every dealing I have with you, you have to be antagonizing. No, I don't say what reviews go on an album page and not. Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Review sites does. Other review sites should not be used unless brought up for discussion, and therefore added onto the list. Luckily someone has revamped the reception page on the article with reliable sites. Candyo32 (talk) 21:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, it was not added to the list. Candyo32 (talk) 21:37, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Goon Afilated

Here is the link for the week ending June 12: [1]. No Goon Affiliated.

Here is the link for the week of June 19: [2]. Still no Goon Affiliated at #5.

Isn't this the same Hip Hop DX that screwed up the track listing just days before the release? Niteshift36 (talk) 00:09, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

AfD of Emile (producer)

You posted a PROD of this article. I had PRODed the article on 7 June 2010 so I think it's time to take this to AfD. Please feel free to add to the discussion there. Padillah (talk) 12:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

How do I add a picture?

How do I add a picture? User:Joseph507357

Lil Wayne followup

See Talk:Lil Wayne#Gang affiliations before attempting to re-insert any material regarding Lil Wayne's alleged gang affiliations. GlassCobra 19:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer Right Granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Helpful One 12:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The Dark Side Vol. 1

Where is the original research? where is the "previously published material"? I removed a sentence that included misspelling and grammatical errors, as noted in my summary, and poor factual reference.--216.18.244.48 (talk) 18:08, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

This edit removed sourced content that Fat Joe said about the album. You said in your edit summary " This is not new to this album, he has already incorporated southern hip hop production and raggaeton in his previous albums" that is a violation of WP:OR as you are offering origional research in that statement. I have fixed the grammer in the sentance. STAT -Verse 18:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC

Nas/Game associated acts.

You said Nas has appeared on every Game album, and vise versa?

Nonsense, do the research before you post untrue gibberish just because you want YOUR WAY.

Game has NEVER appeared on a Nas album, and Nas has only appeared on two of Games four albums. He is not scheduled to appear on his latest effort, and he did not appear on The Documentary. Look it up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Partially730 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Well as i said in my last edit summary Game was on "Hustlers" off Hip Hop is Dead and on "Make the World Go Round" off Untitled Nas album. Nas was featured on L.A.X. and Docters Advocate and it is unknown if he's on RED until the tracklist comes out. STAT -Verse 04:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

The Dark Side Vol. 1

I was not offering original research, that was an explanation on the SUMMARY not on the ARTICLE. Please learn to comprehend the policies on wikipedia before making yourself look like an ass. If you have questions please do no hesitate to ask an administrator. 216.18.244.48 (talk) 20:22, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Um last time I check your the random IP and i'm the regesterd user that has been bettering wikipedia for over six months :p STAT -Verse 20:30, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm an English graduate and have been editing on wikipedia, both anonymously and through my home IP for the better part of 4 years now, that IP is my work computer. Sosa (talk) 20:51, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) And do remember, STAT, that even as a "random IP", it doesn't mean s/he's wrong, or less deserving of your consideration. (Note: I'm not making any statement about whatever you're disagreeing about.) Butting out now. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:25, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Darkside

Just saw your message, and I'm just headed to bed. I'll look over things in the morning.—Kww(talk) 03:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Replied to both of you on my talk page.—Kww(talk) 23:17, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

RE: What's up with this

I didnt know that was your addition, but still, how is it any different from the other user that added those singles on the Recovery article? It still needs a source, according to Wikipedia:Verifiability. Dan56 (talk) 00:06, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Reverting my edit since there's a page redirected to another page

Why did you revert my edit on the article Game (rapper) since the article os Angeles, California]] is redirected to the article Los Angeles? Wayne Olajuwon (talk) 00:15, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

The Half Barnstar
An old advertising slogan once said, "It's good to talk". Thanks!

Talk to helpers live, with this, any time. Chzz  ►  00:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:P.S. Re. "Curse word" - Thank you for removing the q. greatly appreciated. My note here is merely to try and help; just advice...

Please, don't take it personally. For one thing, wikipedia is not censored - what you might consider a 'curse-word', others may consider fine...and the debate about such things can go on forever, believe me.
We have to operate in a global, collegiate environment; so, it's necessary to often accept a great deal of good faith. Be extra polite all the time; do not rise to any taunts, and...well, think the best of everyone. We're all actually here for the same thing...to make Wikipedia even better. If you object to the word "fuck" then, I'm sorry, but you've chosen the wrong internet...no disrespect intended. I hope you will understand.
I am very, very happy that you talked to the other user and sorted this out with so little drama - it's unusual, and you've risen about 9000 points on my personal 'nice people' scale.  Chzz  ►  00:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Struck; bugger, sorry. I read the diffs the wrong way. Yes, I got it the wrong way around. Oops, very sorry.  Chzz  ►  01:32, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

RevolveR

there are many albums with way less information than T-Pain's next album. I put all this work and research into typing this! please revert it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilv4t098 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Well the article as it stands has no reliable sources. If you can find some sources from places like Rap-Up.com, MTV.com, HipHopDX.com, AllHipHop.com, Billboard.com or other reliable sources then the article can exist. STAT -Verse 23:11, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

RE: Recovery

According to the scale, "Top-selling or top-charting albums may have High importance, as it is likely that a good number of reliable secondary sources exist that could be used to reference the article". Its first-week sales do not merit importance or being "historically and culturally notable", as the high-importance suggests. I think the album fits mid-importance, which states "High-selling or high-charting albums may be rated mid-importance, even if they do not have a high level of historical or cultural significance". Since the album has been out long enough to make any more than just a sales impact, this would be a safe bet. But u can bring it up to WP Albums talk page for more opinions. Dan56 (talk) 00:37, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


WP:AIV

I'm wondering why you removed User:Lilv4t098 from the WP:AIV page and cited it as "stale". STAT -Verse 05:10, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Last edit was over 24 hours ago. Am I missing something?  7  05:13, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay I understand that, as his most recent edit was too vandalism after his final warning. Just because I didn't have the time to put in a report then, he doesn't get blocked or something? STAT -Verse 05:16, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
I get how you feel, but see the second sentence in that section - AIV blocking is preventative, not punitive. If I block him now, a day after he last vandalized, I am not preventing anything. If he vandalizes again, he would be quickly blocked. Keep up the good work patrolling.  7  05:27, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay im going to keep a look out as he usully edits pages in my watchlist. STAT -Verse 05:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Recovery.

Hello, I saw you reverted my edit on Eminem's album. I'll tell you why I've reverted it back. Images are all subject to copyright and only one cover is allowed for use on Wikipedia. Sometimes a second one is allowed if the image is so different that it can't be described in words. But both images are easy to describe using words alone. Jayy008 (talk) 22:09, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Look, I know it's not perfect. It takes a long time to find all the articles with more than one image. Especially older ones. There was ALOT of trouble with the Gaga articles. But eventually one is used in almost all of them because discussions are overuled by fair-use policies. Fair-Use can't simply be claimed because they are different, the second cover has to be something you can't describe with words. I don't like this rule personally, as I've tried to argue it many times. But ultimately overruled on all occasions. Jayy008 (talk) 22:29, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm affraid I make it a point to ignore such things as they are long and annoying, so I just follow them. I will however pass your message onto an administrator who will be glad to point you to the page and answer any questions. Jayy008 (talk) 22:33, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I have posted a message HERE. He should reply within a day or so. Jayy008 (talk) 22:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

PS. Music videos are the same. Put they are more strict as with covers you're allowed one no matter what. The music video screen shot simply has to show something that you can't describe in words, in any way shape or form. Jayy008 (talk) 22:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

No, you're right. It doesn't to me. I don't think it would hold up if nominated for deletion, but I only remove images that I'm 100% sure about. The others I will nominate for deletion and then someone else will decide. Jayy008 (talk) 11:22, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Somebody has re-added the cover. They've shown a new discussion to which the rules have changed. Now it's simply if the cover is different and widely distributed then it's allowed. It's a shame it takes so long as half of Wiki's images have already been deleted. PS. This only goes for covers not screen shots of music videos. Jayy008 (talk) 12:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I got this posted to me... On wikipedia the primary preference for images are those which are classfied as free content. Per the policy at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria non-free content can only be used when free content is not available.

  • Critically WP:NFCC#3a states that Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information. Therefore the use of more than one single/album cover is almost always not justifiable.
  • Additionally WP:NFCC#8 states that Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. Therefore if words alone can explain alternative versions or releases of an album then additional covers are not allowed.

Rules w/hyperlink Jayy008 (talk) 15:57, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Eminem - Won't Back Down

The article may not have been properly sourced, but they were infact accurate. What do you mean the US charting was BS?

Heres the link:http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/hot-100?begin=61&order=position Billboard.biz versions also have the other charting singles: http://acharts.us/canada_singles_top_100 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Partially730 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Revolver (T-Pain album)

Hey dude, thanks for adding some formatting to the RevolveR page! Much appreciated as I'm still figuring out this whole wikipedia thing lol IFreedom1212 (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Don't edit it for a while as I am about to add the infobox as that will take like 5-10 min. Red Flag on the Right Side 20:34, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar.. mooo

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your work on keeping Saw 3D clean and reverting nonsense/vandalism promptly. Many simple things go unnoticed here, so I wanted to give you some recognition. Mike Allen 01:32, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Re:Venom

I think the dates are helpful because it shows a lot...either incompetence by the record label/artist or reasoning behind delays. I think showcasing how long people have been awaiting albums, or when they expected them at one point is historical information. I mean, when Cham's single dropped in September 09 and then he announced the album was coming in December, people were excited for that. Then he says Feb/March, people get excited again, then it's June, etc etc. It let's people question what is really going on here in this industry. -- Erroneuz1 (talk) 04:24, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

The Rehab (album)

I'm contibuing the conversation here because I don't want other users to think we're trying to sway the debate either way. The issue is that per WP:NALBUMS the release date, name and track listing must be directly attributable to the artist/label. It is not in this case. Also how can the album cover be justified as the digital capture of a physical copy of the album if the album is not available? If it has not been released, from who's copy of the album was the cover captured? --Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

The album cover was posted on Thisis50.com which is 50 Cent's official website and 50 Cent is still profesionaly assosated with Young Buck. As I said in my last comment "The title has been confirmed in interveiws by Young Buck and the release date came from the Label. Red Flag on the Right Side 21:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
WP:NALBUMS really (as I read it) seems to give a very strong presumption for deletion of articles on prospective albums, suggesting almost (as I read it) that the date/name/track listing not only be "minimum requirements" but not to be the only minimum requirements--so I think this is the right decision, policy seems to be very much about the "I'll believe it when I see it." I don't see the album cover art as being part of the deletion question, so I'll leave that question be. And Lil, you were right that my attempt at humor over in the AfD page was out of line. My apologies. --j⚛e deckertalk 21:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Its ok (the humour was funny but a little alarming - i worked hard on that album trying to salvage it LOL) it doesn't matter. If the album is not in physical existance it is wrong to say that there is a confirmed album cover. If that's the case then why is Thisis50.com not given as the source? Also there is no shame or downgrade in an album not having its own page. Its just that given the information available it could easily be merged to the artist's page. The whole point of an album page is that there has been enough indendent coverage about the album as a body of work itself. The Rehab hasnt really had that. --Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:47, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
If the problem is there is no tracklist then the fact that the release date is in a month means the tracklist will comeout very soon. If Young Buck was as big in rap as Lil Wayne then there would be tracklist and alot more coverage by this time. Red Flag on the Right Side 23:15, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

RE:

Hello, STATicVapor. You have new messages at Blastmaster11's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Speedy deletion declined: U.N. (group)

Hello STATicVerseatide. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of U.N. (group), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being signed to a notable label indicates importance/significance. Thank you. SoWhy 15:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Drake (entertainer)

Why do you keep removing my changes to the 'Awards and nominations' section. They are properly formatted, and better referenced than previous versions. If you don't see anything there, it may be your browser or computer's problem, not my edit. Thanks, Adabow(complain) 05:42, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Well can you see it? Cause I have Internert Explorer and all i see is a line which means there is a 99.9% that you formated the table wrong. Red Flag on the Right Side 06:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it is fine for me. Can you see List of awards and nominations received by Evanescence? I will redo my edit, and if you still can not see it, then try viewing it with a different browser. Adabow(complain) 06:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes I see that one but as I said, you messed up with the format to make it look like that on Drake (entertainer). Red Flag on the Right Side 06:14, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi, friends. Don't mind by butting in here, please, but I may have found a solution.

The Discography section of Drake (entertainer) had the abortive beginnings of two columns in it. This had the effect of destroying the tables in the Awards section. In Internet Explorer (IE) 6, the tables were not invisible, really, but crushed mercilessly off to the left side, such that no content could be seen. The heights of the table were apparently OK, but the tables were compressed to about 5px wide. Firefox showed everything as hunky-dory, which may be why Adabow was surprised by the reverts

I've now removed the {{col-begin}} and {{col-2}} that I found and now the tables show up correctly (AFAICT) in my IE6. Please test it for yourselves (and do revert me if still appropriate). — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 10:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you to my talk page stalker xD. Red Flag on the Right Side 02:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Editor review

Hello, STATicVerseatide. I have reviewed you. I hope my observations are helpful to you. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to leave them here, there, or on my talk page. Cheers, PrincessofLlyr royal court 15:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the positive reveiw :D. I thought no one was ever going to review me lol. Red Flag on the Right Side 02:12, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome. It does tend to take awhile for reviews. I've become a regular reviewer and try to get to them pretty quickly, but I've been really busy the last month, so ER wasn't high priority. As an additional note, what is the point of your sig? It would seem somewhat confusing as it has nothing to do with your username. Just a thought. Nice to meet you! PrincessofLlyr royal court 02:42, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Idk whats up with my sig. It seemed cool and i've gotten alot positive feedback on it. Sometime in the future I might change my username to it, probably if im bored enough lol. Red Flag on the Right Side 02:45, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh, it's definitely cool, but it has nothing to do with your username, so it might confuse some people. You don't have to change it or anything, I just thought I'd point it out. PrincessofLlyr royal court 03:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Drake

I know that his mother is caucasian. But that doesn't make Drake himself caucasian. Barack Obama, who has a similar background, is never described as caucasian either. I doubt you could find a reliable source that would describe either one as that. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

You should bring this issue up on Drake's talk page. Personally, I think it makes Wikipedia look absurd to list a half-African-American rapper as a "caucasian rapper". Aside from that, I don't think there are any legitimate news sources out there that describe him as "white" or "caucasian" ("half-white", maybe, but that's true of Obama also). All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Here's a source - in this interview, he says he considers himself a "black man" (see the part that starts off with "blast from the past" in the bottom right corner, and scroll down a bit there). All Hallow's Wraith ([[User

Knockout as a Single

The single was never released to radio, it kept being postponed and never happened. It was always April TBD, then May TBD, then it disappeared completely. Check FMQB's airplay archives, you can't find it. Also ANY song can be played on the radio. Radio hosts play whatever they want to, not according to add dates. Add dates are just for when labels are promoting the song. And btw, what you hear on the radio is WP:OR. Candyo32 02:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Why is there a single cover then? Red Flag on the Right Side 04:36, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Lots of non-singles have covers, see Dance in the Dark. Or the single may not even be real, as many fake covers there are of songs floating around on the web. Candyo32 13:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
This says it was the forth single. Red Flag on the Right Side 22:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
And how does AOL Radio Blog know when Universal Motown or Young Money wants to release as a single? It would have been given a solid radio date, and promoted by his official site or something. And AOL may post fake covers sometimes. Candyo32 01:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
What is the link so I can check the archives? Red Flag on the Right Side 01:25, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
FMQB Airplay Archive Candyo32 05:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay you were right. By the way can you give me the link to future radio releases cause I do not understand that website. Red Flag on the Right Side 05:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's FMQB Mainstream & Rhythmic future releases - After it has been released, for a solid source, change the future url to the Airplay archive url.
Here's Allaccess Mainstream future releases Rhythmic and Urban. Unlike FMQB, Allaccess does not transfer the future releases to an airplay archive, so if you use Allaccess, you may want to use Webcitation.org to keep the page. I prefer Allaccess sometimes, because it shows Urban releases (although most Urban releases have been Rhythmic also), but FMQB shows some that AA doesn't always do. Hope this helps. And if you have questions about webcitation.org, just scroll down to "Cite this page" click on it and paste the url and it will give you the new archived one. Candyo32 06:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the links. It helped me add future release dates for singles to pages. Red Flag on the Right Side 03:41, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Libra Scale

The second AFD result was "redirect", so I have restored the redirect.—Kww(talk) 04:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

That was a non admin's personal dission and was stated to be treated as a keep. Also see my discussion with him on his talk page. Red Flag on the Right Side 04:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Non-admin closures are still closures. The album still fails to meet WP:NSONGS, which clearly states that "a very small number of exceptionally high-profile projects" should have albums before the release date. Would you like to explain exactly why you think this album is one of "a very small number of exceptionally high-profile projects"?—Kww(talk) 04:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't think it is. I'm just saying that according to the closer the concensus was to keep. Red Flag on the Right Side 04:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Note that I haven't protected it, and that a redirect technically falls under the range of "keep" closes as well. You are free to undo the redirect once the article meets applicable guidelines. If you undo the redirect before it meets applicable guidelines, you can expect the redirect to be put back in place. Have patience: the article will pass guidelines someday, and there's no reason to rush to put a stub in place before then.—Kww(talk) 04:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
As I stated I dont think it meets guidelines either I just was following the result of concesous. Red Flag on the Right Side 04:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

RE:Thank Me Later

I wasnt under the impression that the reviews should be changed. Dan56 (talk) 11:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

You dont think XXL is better than some of the reviews their already? It would give a Hip Hop only reviewer than all the News Paper reviewers all ready there. Red Flag on the Right Side 23:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:AIV reports

I have removed your AIV comments. Please don't make admin comments on AIV such as "insufficiently warned" because on top of that, you were wrong because they have been sufficiently warned. Thank you. Tommy! [message] 11:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

No he wasnet. He had not yet recieved a final warning. Red Flag on the Right Side 13:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
yes, he was. Tommy! [message]
That final warning was issued after my comment. Im sorry for any confusion. Red Flag on the Right Side 18:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
If it's a vandalism only account, a block is usually common, regardless of how many free chances (erm, warnings) they receive. Why waste our vandal fighters' time? Plus, I don't see an admin flag, so you really shouldn't be declining requests like this, IMO. Connormahtalk 19:23, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay I just said that as some vandals stop after reciving a final warning, i've seen it happen before. Which he had not yet recieved. Red Flag on the Right Side 19:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Still, the 4 times that they do vandalize sometimes turn out to be an utter waste of time. I've also removed the template that you used to prevent archiving so it can get looked at. Comments are usually fine, but try not to use the templates. Connormahtalk 19:27, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
According to the Notion templates anyone can use them so I will. Red Flag on the Right Side 19:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
What is wrong with just plainly commenting? Your use of notion templates can be misleading to others, thinking you are an administrator. Furthermore, IIRC, the archive bot has something to do with the templates, and, say you make a mistake (eg. Tommy's diff above), and decline a rampant vandal, it gets archived, and the vandal continues to damage the project. Connormahtalk 19:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


Well the Notion template in the page notice says ii can and anyone else can use them. I don't even look at diff's I look at talk page warnings and there contribuations. My checking gives less work for the Admin's. Red Flag on the Right Side 19:42, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

As I said, just comment regularly, there's no difference, and it'll prevent confusion. Connormahtalk 19:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
If ii was an admin I would be blocking and removing not commenting and whether ii use the templates or not is irralvent. Red Flag on the Right Side 19:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
It is relevant. I was confused at you templating my request, I'd thought you were an admin. Although your comments are useful, could you just comment regularly, to prevent confusion? Connormahtalk 19:53, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:STATicVapor/Archive_1:_February-July_2010&oldid=1056401880"