User talk:Livelikemusic/Talk Page Archive 20

File:Sugababes - Change Greatest Hits (Official Album Cover).png

This image duplicates the other image, even with different font colors. Shall I remove the Greatest Hits cover and then request speedy deletion? --George Ho (talk) 23:28, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

@George Ho: While I would normally agree — per the non-free content criteria — this might be considered a slightly different case, as it's for a different album entirely. It's not for the same album; same article, yes, but not the same article. If you truly feel compelled enough to have it removed, then I will request it to be deleted, at the request of the author (myself). livelikemusic talk! 17:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Removed the image. George Ho (talk) 17:55, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

User:Livelikemusic/Scotty Grainger

FYI that I moved this draft to the location linked above. Looks like you accidentally created it in mainspace. Just giving you a heads up so you don't lose it! TonyBallioni (talk) 19:58, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Thank you very much. No clue what I was thinking! That's what sleep deprivation does to one's mind! livelikemusic talk! 15:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

"Cover does not belong on Commons"

Regarding Anymore (Melanie C song). How is this so? The cover consists only of text, and thus can be hosted on Commons. Because of this, it is a much more high quality, superior version of the cover. So why don't we use that version? Thanks, TheKaphox T 20:53, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

"Shows vs. "Tour dates"

Please see the discussion I have started here. I see no reason to continue to use an ambiguous, non-specific section title simply because the project has no guidelines on article structuring or because the section title has been copied over from tour article to tour article. Thanks. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:54, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Confusion re an edit

I note you redacted my Cheryl Cole edit whereby I added Liam Payne as a significant partner in her InfoBox. I am wondering how a relationship is classified significant for Wiki? I believe one that results in a planned and wanted baby should be considered significant. Bringing a new life to this world with someone is significant step in a relationship. Is there a Wiki guideline on this

your undo comment (I don't believe it necessary to list a relationship that she's only been in one-year in the infobox; not substantial enough to list) (undo | thank)

BeenFishing (talk) 19:54, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

@BeenFishing: I must say this — we do not know if this pregnancy was planned, as that has not been publicly disclosed both either party. And simply by being in a relationship, where a child is produced, does not qualify it being listed within the infobox. Per {{Infobox person}}, it clearly states "If particularly relevant, or if the partner is notable; "partner" here means unmarried life partners (of any gender or sexual preference), not business partner. Use the format Name (1950–present) for current partner and Name (1970–99) for former partner(s)." While Liam Payne is a notable person, his relationship with Cheryl is not relevant to who she is. An example of where a "partner" would be appropriate is at Roseanne Barr, who has been with her partner since 2003. Cheryl and Payne, according to the reliable source within the article — which should not be linked or cited in the infobox — states they've only been dating since early 2016. I hope this helps you understand why I reverted the edit you made, and removed Payne's name from the infobox. livelikemusic talk! 20:05, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Erica Hill and the CBS This Morning article

Hi. I can't find any other newscast article where former personnel are listed in the infobox. Everywhere else, the infobox seems to list those currently on the program, and there's a Former Personnel entry somewhere in the body of the article. JTRH (talk) 01:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@JTRH: Per {{Infobox television}} it states:"Presenters are listed in original credit order followed by order in which new presenters joined the show. Years and/or seasons should not be included." Erica was once credited on the series, and should remain credited in the infobox, per the template and MOS:TV. livelikemusic talk! 02:03, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

"Presenters" for the other newscast articles seems to mean current presenters. Otherwise, Dave Garroway and David Hartman would be at the top of the boxes for Today and Good Morning America. JTRH (talk) 02:23, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@JTRH: But it does not state that, though. Per the template and MOS, Hill should be credited in the infobox for all intents and purposes. livelikemusic talk! 02:25, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

So should everyone who's been on the Today Show since 1952 be in their infobox as well? JTRH (talk) 02:29, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@JTRH: At a certain point, we did have the main presenters all listed at Today (U.S. TV program), but a compromise was decided upon, and how it is listed now is what was decided was best, due to the extensive list of main presenters. livelikemusic talk! 02:33, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Chicago P.D. image

Livelikemusic, the title card image for Chicago P.D. is more suitable than the one you put up. Besides, a lot of of TV show articles use title cards image for infoboxes. So I would recommend that you leave it alone, please. BattleshipMan (talk) 04:40, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

The category revert on the Lea Michele album article

• Hi, I didn't mean not to follow your rules. I'm not looking for a petty argument, I was sincerely asking for your opinion since there seems to be multiple views. I apologize. Keep up the good work. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:46, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perrie Edwards

Just so I thought I let you know that I've begun a discussion above, whether this article should be deleted or be redirected back to Little Mix.

P.S. Feel free to delete this message if you want. Raritydash (talk) 01:06, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

@Raritydash: Thank you for this notice! I placed my vote! livelikemusic talk! 01:14, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Why is PopCrush not a reliable source?

On Digital Distortion, I provided two citations for the release month of the album. You dismissed one, PopCrush, as not reliable. However, I can find no source to back up your assertion. Townsquare Media also publishes The Boot, Loudwire, Taste of Country and XXL, all of which are reliable. Therefore, it is not inherent in the publisher for the unreliableness of the source. Wikipedia has not blacklisted PopCrush, like it has done Northern Transmission, so the evidence of being unreliable does not come from Wikipedia. Reviewing PopCrush.com, it appears to be a standard news site. Therefore, I am requesting your help on showing why PopCrush is unreliable. It may be that you are thinking of another website, or that it's reliableness has improved since you formed your opinion. It appears to be a reliable and citeable website at this time. Mburrell (talk) 05:36, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with opinion, nor am I thinking of another website. And simply because it is published by Townsquare Media does not automatically associate it with being a reliable source. That would be like stating The National Inquirer and Star are reliable sources, simply because they're published by American Media, Inc., which also publishes Soap Opera Digest and Men's Fitness, etc. Per Wikipedia:ALBUMAVOID, PopCrush is to be avoided being used as a source on Wikipedia. livelikemusic talk! 01:37, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for that answer. I had no idea that the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources existed. I would love to have posted it on the talk pages of the list of albums when I give advice to newcomers. It looks like it will be a useful resource to me, and I wish there was a way to make it more widely known about. Mburrell (talk) 02:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Have this for your work at the Admin noticeboard.  — Calvin999 23:24, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you email me so I can send you an email please.  — Calvin999 08:48, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: Definitely. Just got online, so I'll send it shortly! And thanks for the WikiLove above, too! livelikemusic talk! 12:22, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Cheryl

Hi, Livelikemusic! From your edits, it looks like you might be interested in contributing to WikiProject Cheryl, a project aimed at organizing and improving the quality and accuracy of articles related to Cheryl. Thanks and best regards! Linguisttalk|contribs 20:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Why is daily mail not a "reliable source"? You continually remove any edits I make. After I considered your first edit I changed something to a 'report' of a departure and you say there's no source.. well that is so because you have previously deleted it. Zacmath (talk) 23:58, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@Zacmath: I suggest you read up on is and is not a reliable source. The Daily Mail is a tabloid source, which is to be avoided because it is not a reliable source. And not including a source constitutes original research, and since it concerns a living person, it defies Wikipedia's biographies of living people. livelikemusic talk! 00:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Ciara

TMZ is allowed as a source per WP:PUS (albeit it says to treat carefully.)

Furthermore there was never any source indicating she changed her last name to begin with. Thanks aqwfyj ^Talk/_Contribs 01:37, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Regardless, only thing it states is her birth name, not her current legal name. livelikemusic talk! 01:57, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

The Real Housewives of New Jersey

Hello, Livelikemusic! How are you? I notice you edit the article a lot, so I decided to talk with you here first. A source in the production section for Jacqueline Laurita's departure (Season 6), is now a dead link. [1] The only other source I can find is [2] but I'm not sure if its reliable. Should it be removed? Vmars22 (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

I've also added information about Wakile's departure, the source states : "Wakile won't be back for the eighth season of RHONJ, "That was a great time for me," "That chapter has closed for now. I'm going on to other things. This is really where my heart lies." [3] Vmars22 (talk) 23:52, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Life & Style is not a reliable source. I've gone and put back the original source URL, and gave it an archive URL, classifying it to remain at the article. livelikemusic talk! 00:50, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey

You're from America and you know of Steps? ;-)  — Calvin999 07:31, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: Yes, I proudly do! Haha. I know [a lot] of British music acts! livelikemusic talk! 16:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Ah good. Steps were my childhood band. Maybe we can work on some together?  — Calvin999 16:41, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: Yeah, that'd be cool! And yeah, Steps were [one] of my childhood groups, too! I mean, I would do their dances all-the time, haha! livelikemusic talk! 17:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Me too! How old are you?  — Calvin999 17:07, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: 24 years of age! Yourself? livelikemusic talk! 18:14, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Just 25, so we were prime Steps fans!  — Calvin999 19:59, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: Yes, we are! Only wish I had the opportunity to see them live! livelikemusic talk! 20:58, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I saw them in 2000 and 2001, and I'm going this year :)  — Calvin999 21:00, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: I am properly jealous! Only seen them live on television, or via-YouTube/Vevo! livelikemusic talk! 21:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

There new music is on U.S. iTunes. I wish American DJs were playing the remixes to Scared of the Dark so it could chart on the Dance Club Songs chart.  — Calvin999 21:05, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: I doubt American fans, unless still pining over their music, know they've got new music out. It is a shame, because the album is outstanding! livelikemusic talk! 21:08, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, but usually DJ's pick up on remixes like this. "Sex with Me" reached number-one off the be back of a remix EP being released.  — Calvin999 21:09, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: *shrug* I honestly don't know, then. I don't even go to clubs, so I don't even know what they're playing! livelikemusic talk! 21:12, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I wish they would. The only entry they ever got was a remix of One for Sorrow, despite releasing remixes for every single. 08:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Calvin999: Unfortunately, I do believe it was because Jive Records pushed it, especially since they were touring with Britney Spears, which helped! livelikemusic talk! 22:27, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Yeah. Rihanna's "Pose" has debuted on the chart without any kind of promotion at all.  — Calvin999 08:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Whack-a-mole

It's like playing whack-a-mole with a user who edited Britney: Piece of Me as the user "Hugo.lee.bs" was using multiple IPs while logging out. You'll never know when this user with multiple IPs pops up. Raritydash (talk) 03:36, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Raritydash: Pretty sue it's the same person using a VPN of some sorts, because all of the IP's trace back to Beijing. I requested a page protection, but have yet to hear back. It'll [likely] be declined! livelikemusic talk! 03:40, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

And just so you know, I had started a discussion on the talk page regrading of putting China down, if you're interested. Raritydash (talk) 03:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

@Raritydash: I will take a look at it tomorrow evening; it is now 11:45 pm, and I must be getting to bed... I have work in the morning! livelikemusic talk! 03:44, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Reality Television Task Force

Reality Television Task Force Hello Livelikemusic! I noticed your contributions to an article related to Reality Television, and thought you might be interested in the Reality Television Task Force, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Reality Television. If you would like to participate, please visit the task force page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! WikiVirusC (talk) 22:39, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Katy Perry - Witness (Official Album Cover).png

Hi Livelikemusic, I just wanted to give a little bit of feedback regarding File:Katy Perry - Witness (Official Album Cover).png. In the future, when it becomes clear that you are in a disagreement with another editor, I would stop reverting – even when you know you're right – and communicate with the other editor on their talk page, explaining why you reverted. Few matters on Wikipedia are urgent, especially this album cover, so it's typically not worth it to restore an edit that has already been reverted without talking to the other editor first. You risk being accused of edit warring otherwise. Best, Mz7 (talk) 02:44, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hey

I don't have to explain anything to you; you're listing characters that are NOT on the show, aren't relevant to ANYTHING, there's zero reason for zach conroy to show up on b&B at this point; he hasn't appeared since summer 2015. You're just a control freak. User:Blakebs 7:07PM (CST)

I am not going to engage in someone who is going to take this to a personal and attacking level. Your history of removal/addition of information, like the behavior you are exhibiting, is problematic. You are not sourcing any of the edits you are making; no sources support them. livelikemusic talk! 00:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

For one thing, this kid Zack Conroy is not recurring; he hasn't appeared ONCE since he supposedly went to recurring in two years; he has obviously left the show. I've already asked you when the cut-off point is, you have yet to reply. Do you insist on leaving it the way it is even if that character NEVER appears on screen again? User:Blakebs talk 7:23PM (CST)

 Again, as explained—multiple times—recurring status means you appear when it is required of you. By simply not making appearances, as a recurring player, does not mean you are not with the series. Wikipedia runs on verifiable, reliable sources, and there are no sources to state that Conroy, who by the way, is not a kid, is off the serial. In addition, "Rafe 2" was a consensus made here. Per Wikipedia policy, once consensus is made, that's the decision you make. Should you want to change it, you must re-ignite a discussion and prove your point, as to why it should be changed. Just changing it means you are going against consensus, and Wikipedia policies. livelikemusic talk! 00:28, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Forget it, its not worth getting blocked; you can keep the page. I'm done. User:Blakebs talk 07:32, 24 May 2017 (CST)

You even removed the actors that debuted on Y&R today; thanks for undermining by contributions. User:Blakebs talk 07:34, 24 May 2017 (CST)

Actually, I moved them to where they should be properly credited and formatted. livelikemusic talk! 00:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Have this as a gift for your WikiBirthday. You are a kind and a fellow editor to me. Raritydash (talk) 07:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

@Raritydash: Shit! Thank you so much! It is a pleasure to edit alongside you! You do fantastic work!

Liam Payne infobox

Hi :) This might just be my opinion, but should the infobox be infobox person instead of musician, given the fact that he is dating and has a child with someone as high-profile as Cheryl?

Still getting used to writing on people's talk pages.

Let me know what you think. CB19 (talk) 00:51, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

@Cloverboy19: No. Simply dating Cheryl and having a child does not mean he qualifies for {{Infobox person}}. He is primarily a music artist, whose fame is predominately focused on being one-fourth of One Direction, which means he should continue having the {{Infobox musical artist}}. Regardless, his relationship status and fatherhood is mentioned within the article's body paragraph, which is more than enough. livelikemusic talk! 00:55, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks. CB19 (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Edits

My apologies, I'm new to editing and am trying to learn the ropes.

I've been watching ABC soaps for 26 years and keep cast records for GH. I have really been enjoying the pages, and wanted to make the edits due to many of the characters listed under the "recurring" banner are no longer on the show or only appeared briefly.

Didn't mean to step on any toes.

--HeyHowdyHi (talk) 14:13, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the Sheila Carter Article...

Hello! I've responded to your comment on the Sheila talk page. I need your advice regarding an edit. Israell (talk) 03:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Eli Grant reliable source?

When it comes to viewer reaction, or someone that responds to the content themselves, what would be considered "reliable"? I'm curious because I've never had a problem with using any links for reception. Reception is usually opinion based so how could it be "unreliable"? --Nk3play2 ^{my buzz} 23:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Nk3play2: But fans, unlike journalists, are not unbiased when it comes to their reactions, and are more times than not pressed by their "faves" and their "number ones", etc. And, Wikipedia tries to adhere to a neutral point of view within its articles. That would be as if saying you or I were to create a website, post an opinion, and then it's creditable? I don't think so. livelikemusic talk! 23:45, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

If you aren't willing to engage me about this, then I'm going to the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard to make a request. I am really getting TIRED of you deciding any edit I make is spam when some are just honest mistakes and you always ALWAYS think the worst of me. I admit when I first started in 2007, I was a little crazy but I have grown up and I'm not intentionally ruining pages.

Regards, Arjoccolenty (talk) 00:09, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

@Arjoccolenty: You are making this into a personal issue when it is not, and to imply it is not an assumption of good faith. You have received three blocks for disruptive behavior. And you, yourself, stated that he stated the divorce was "almost finalized", which alone alludes that they are still married, so capping the marriage off, by your own edit summary, is false and is disruptive. And, your edits go beyond soap opera articles, so this is not a one-subject issue Arjoccolenty, it's a multiple one. And, for the record, nothing was reported or remarked as "spam" at all, nor has anyone said you are "ruining pages". livelikemusic talk! 00:51, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Your Viewpoint on Sheila's Resurrection

If you don't mind, I'd like to have your opinion on the best and most logical way of explaining Sheila Carter's resurrection. This doesn't have anything to do w/ the Sheila Carter article, so this is why I'm posting this here.

Some fans of Y&R and B&B have that theory that the Phyllis look-alike was not Sheila at all. Quite some of them insist it was Sugar. As Sugar was taken to her cell, she screamed that she was stuck w/ Sheila's face forever. The thought of having another plastic surgery never at that time crossed her mind, and she *hated* Sheila with a passion!

So, Sugar managed to escape minutes or hours after being taken to her jail cell, get on a plane unnoticed, take Sheila's place and have the surgery in her place??? And why would Sugar do that? She hated Sheila so much she tried to kill Scotty with a knife! Sometimes, I feel like I'm the only one that actually *watched and understood* Sheila's 2005/early 2006 storyline. The woman who was made to look like Phyllis could *not* have been Sugar; it does not make any sense at all, even for a soap!

So, at the very last minute, Sheila decided not to go through w/ the surgery, and she easily, automatically found another woman demented enough to have that surgery in her place??? It doesn't make sense as the Phyllis look-alike not only remembered something only Sheila would (taking photos of Lauren and Brad together), she really did see herself as Sheila, even in scenes when she was all alone.

Sheila was so mentally ill at that time that she bombed a yacht in an attempt to murder both Lauren and Tom—she was THAT psychotic. Having that surgery to look like Phyllis and then going after Fen and renaming him Scotty (psychological transference) is something she was completely capable of, and only her would do so.

Many characters survived getting shot! Some, like Phillip Chancellor II, Taylor Hayes and Chloe Mitchell had fake funerals! Why would it so impossible for Sheila to have survived getting shot by Lauren, and then have been locked up, unable to contact her family, and then released and have had a second surgery to look like her old self. Much more credible and logical to me! What do you think?

Keep in mind that years after she got shot, Sheila was still presumed dead in Genoa City, so whatever State had her incarcerated did *not* tell the GC authorities about it.

And for Sarah, Daisy and Ryder to also have been imposters is just too much! Sarah could have been a paternal half-sister using her married name. As for Daisy and Ryder, they were aged the way Mary was! What's the point of giving Sheila all those kids (Diana, Daisy, Ryder), and then write them off as imposters? Doesn't make any sense. Israell (talk)

I honestly have no opinion on it, truthfully. It's been made clear, by Bradley Bell, that he does not intend to address what happened at The Young and the Restless, especially since he implied he was not a fan of the stories being told at that time. And, I, for one, am personally pleased with the decision. As far as I am concerned, Michelle Stafford portrayed Sheila, and that will never change. And nor should it. Personally, if I were to write the storyline, I would've written it as Sheila low-key surviving the gunshot wound, and was arrested and held in jail under an alias. However, I doubt Brad is going to address, beyond stating she was in jail for "X" amount of time. livelikemusic talk! 13:43, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey

I would like your opinion on th[is]. Jester66 (talk) 21:04, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jester66: Unfortunately, I don't have much opinion, as I was not a Passions fan, and was a primarily CBS Daytime watcher. That being said, it is standard that families receive an i-box for overview. livelikemusic talk! 22:38, 26 June 2017 (UTC)