User talk:Nowyouseeme/Archive 3

Carrie Underwood

Hello, Nowyouseeme. You have new messages at User talk:Nowyouseeme/EnDaLeCoMpLeX/Sandbox/Carrie Underwood discography.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just a quick word...

Just wanted to say, welcome back! --Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Its horrible because I have no job this summer while I'm on vacation so wikipedia and voluntary work are my life atm... --Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Carrie Underwood

Please explain what is not needed in Carrie Underwood discography and why. Crap is not a good reason. Until then the reverting will continue. Langdon (talk) 05:50, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I personally don't like the Pop 100 chart. It is a short-lived chart with unknown purpose. Also Carrie is not a pop artist at all, although "Before He Cheats" was played on pop radio. I don't mind keeping the reference. Langdon (talk) 05:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Responses

• There doesn't need to be a separate section for 'othet charted songs' and 'other singles'. What the hell even is an 'other single'?! They are 1 in the same and can be put together.

Other singles should be renamed to "Sales-only singles". I separated them because they were released digitally to itunes. Those releases are intentional. They DO NOT appear on any album when they were released. "Inside Your Heaven" should also be in this category.

• And all the footnotes you are adding are pointless trivia that can be left for the individual article pages

I only add footnotes to "Inside Your Heaven". Reasons below.

• width=40 IS FINE, no need to be width=35.

I think 40 is a better width.

• All this claification you want for Inside Your Heaven can be noted on its article page, the way you have it looks SHITTY and CLUSTERED.
• The minor wording changes you're making to release date and label are negligible, there is no need to change them.

You difinitely need to clarify which format has got certified. According to RIAA the track "Inside Your Heaven" and the physical CD Inside Your Heaven / Independence both got certification. They are different things; thus you need to list them both.

I know you want simplicity, but simplicity sometimes creates confusion, when people look up the RIAA website.

Langdon (talk) 06:25, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I think listing different types of certifications is very important. Also the whole discography looks clean under my wide-screen moditor. I think those notes are there originally. The difference between the two section (other singles and other charted songs) is INTENSION. Single releases are intensional, while any song can appear on any Billboard charts. Langdon (talk) 06:54, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Albums & EPs

I have an idea of merging the album section and the EP section into one. Reasons are:

1. Albums and EPs are both collection of tracks
2. EPs appear in all Billboard album charts.
3. If bonus tracks are included in an EP, is it still an EP? (e.g. 1 or 2 bonus tracks added to a 8-track EP; see The Fame Monster.)

It is a new idea and it hasn't been use anywhere yet. Please do not included this as a reason. An example can be seen here. Please add responses here. Thank you. Langdon (talk) 20:17, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Train

True, but don't you think it is at least note worthy? I'm just thinking out loud. I'm not angry you removed it, I'm just asking. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 21:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I never thought of those. Nevermind then. It's all good now! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 21:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Carrie Underwood discography

Try asking User:Eric444. He might have a solution. I can't think of one right now myself. 05:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Roll To Me

The article Roll To Me has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Nowyouseemetalk2me 23:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Roll To Me

Since you created it yourself, you could've just {{db-author}}'d it; redirects don't get prodded. With that said, it's a perfectly logical redirect from an alternate capitalization. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 01:11, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

• Double redirect? Those are fixed automatically by a bot. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for LGBT Barnstar. Will you help with related articles? :) --Destinero (talk) 16:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

David Ragan

I think it was because that IP was making questionable edits. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:47, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

• That was certainly a trick question, heh. Seriously, I made a lot of edits years ago that I now have no idea why I did. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Faith Hill discography

"Comprised of" is grammatically incorrect. It should be "composed of" or "comprises." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 23:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

• It's one of those things that seems to be a hot topic with grammarians; some, such as this and this suggest that it's incorrect usage. I think it might be best to avoid the comprised/composed issue entirely and go with something like "consists of." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 00:58, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Spilled Perfume

I happen to have that album; all the tracks were co-produced by Pam Tillis and Steve Fishell. If you're unsure of a producer, consult me; I might happen to have the album in my collection. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 18:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Lady Antebellum

Hi there!

R.e. "I Run to You", I am aware of the fact that sometimes alternate covers and videos are for more than just Europe, that's obvious. The reason I stated the video was for the UK and Europe is because there are sources verifying the release as the second single from the album in both the UK and Germany. I didn't state it was an 'international' single release for Japan, New Zealand, Australia, and South Africa because I have yet to find any sources to back this up. Is it possible for you to verify this? Otherwise, it's just a release for European countries at present. TopopMAC1 (talk) 15:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Canadian Country charts

You might want to take a look at this discussion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 19:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

• I think you need to talk some more sense into Clovers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 00:32, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

RFC filed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 01:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Where the hell is everyone else? Last RFC I filed, people were swarming over it like flies at a picnic; this one, not a peep outside our WP:LOSE arguers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 01:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Caldor and Endale will talk if provoked; they were helpful in building consensus on a couple merges a while back. If no one else comes to the RFC, what do you suggest next? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:08, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

It looks like Endale understands; he's been removing some of them. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of number-one country hits of 2010 (Canada). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Speak Now

Told ya. :P Yvesnimmo (talk) 14:21, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

One more chart thing

Can you please help me with what I've got going in User:TenPoundHammer/Sandbox 2? Just take the Billboard URLs and add them in the rightmost column for each week, like I started doing. You just have to change the date at the end of the URL. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 04:19, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

• It seems the biggest argument being presented is "but the US positions aren't sourced either." I've been working on that. (Also, what do you propose for Category:Canadian_Country_Singles_number-one_singles and its subcategories? CFD now or later? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps...

you could bite me! (Your comment on Talk:2010 in country music); ahahah that just made my day :-P EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

CAN country category

Here you go. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Jessica Andrews

Thanks for fixing the link. I didn't realize it was the Airplay chart, I thought it was just the main Hot Latin Songs chart. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Any time bud, I can easily see how they can be mixed up, it's weird that it's charting on either one of them anyways; it's about as far from Latin music as you can get. Nowyouseemetalk2me 23:10, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Ain't that the truth. Maybe it was remixed for Latino music stations?? Idk.. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, I did a quick search and found this; seems like a legit remix to me, doesn't sound too bad either. Nowyouseemetalk2me 23:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey yeah that wasn't too bad. And I'm guessing you left the most recent comment on there? Lol, since the last one was 6 months ago...and then 2 minutes ago...hahah. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 23:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Yea that is me, it is awesome hahaha xD Nowyouseemetalk2me 23:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I would, but I don't seem to be able to find an easy way to do that. I've copy and pasted it from other articles in the past before. But, TBH, I click the 'Reference' button and copy-paste the URL into that, and that's all it has me do. If Wikipedia wanted me to fill out my reference, they should adapt the reference button to fulfill those requirements. CloversMallRat (talk) 01:21, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Cloversmallrat again

I think you need to trout this user again. This time, merging The World Is Ours Tonight into Gloriana (album) without discussion. I told the user already that I disagree with the merge, mostly because the song was included on another album before it was put on Gloriana's. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:48, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The World Is Ours Tonight

The amount of sources has nothing to do with it. The four sources on that article were a rather small amount of information. The article as is, is still close to being a stub, because it relies only on four sourced sentences and nothing else. Whereas the two non-charting (Sara's will chart soon, however) singles you mentioned, I have fleshed out some, and will continue to do so. "The World Is Ours Tonight" was left to sit for the most part after its short stint on the charts, and it never amounted to much other than four sourced sentences, which was a small enough chunk of info that I could easily stick it on the album page (an album page that was a hot mess before my edits). I mean no harm, I'm just tryna' tidy up some. BTW, this is basically the argument you used on me: Wikipedia:Other stuff exists... not a good one. CloversMallRat (talk) 03:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Merit

Wow thanks buddy ole pal! :-) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:47, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

BravesFan2006

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#BravesFan2006. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not official yet.

Lopez and Tyler aren't confirmed by Fox yet. Until then it's still just rumors from unnamed TMZ sources who are not even authorized to talk about it. I know that it's likely they'll be the new judges, but on the off chance that it's all a scheme by Fox to drive up excitement and surprise us all, they shouldn't be listed until there's official confirmation. Mike12816 (talk · contribs) Comment signed by Nowyouseemetalk2me 07:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Bubbling Under

Eric444 suggests the use of the Top Pop Singles book from Joel Whitburn. I think it'd be a workable solution; it's available on Google Books. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 15:05, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Bubbling Under

Yeah, you would need the page number. I've been using Whitburn's country songs book to source a lot of articles. The Whitburn book lists everything that's ever charted on the Hot 100 and Bubbling Under. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Douchey

Nostalgia Critic references are always fun. Believe me, if I can find a way to work Big Lipped Alligator Moment into a summary, I will. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 01:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

xD Nowyouseemetalk2me 01:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

BravesFan2006

Another ANI thread. I can't believe the last one went stale so fast. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Opinion request

Could you give your opinon here? Thanks in advance. Candyo32 01:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Need You Now (song)

This looks awesome!! However, I thought that succession boxes were being thrown in the slammer and locked away forever? EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 20:29, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there has been a consensus yet, I just know that TPH began to remove some of them. And on a few pop song articles, they have been removed there as well, so it wasn't just country music articles, which I thought were the only ones having them get removed. I read what you said on that discussion, and I agree. The time and labor for that would take an eternity! Lol, it does look pretty cool now I that I look at it. :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 20:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Haha that's hilarious! When the song first came out (before they went all international), I had my own time when WP:OWN was pretty much how I felt about it lol. I figured you may be on your way to letting get to GA, however, it does take some time and is very tedious. But I think with how you feel about the article, it shouldn't be a problem. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 21:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Lady A discography

Woah kids! Don't you think you should discuss those changes first? EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 20:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Ew that's awful! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 21:28, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of any of it. Especially that the chart names are GINORMOUS! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 21:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey :)

Hey mister! How was your vacation? :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 22:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha! Well good, I'm glad it went well. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 20:23, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

re: List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones

OK then - wasn't sure of the who or why they were placed there - I'll review the lead again and redo what is necessary. Care to help me with it? - eo (talk) 11:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Stealing Angels

You traitor. :-P Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Don't be mad lol :) Nowyouseemetalk2me 21:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

I found another source that's probably a little more substantial. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Poke. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 14:10, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Cool, it needs all the help it can get. Nowyouseemetalk2me 01:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

User:TenPoundHammer/1995

I've also done this for 1990 through 1998 if you want to help there. My eventual goal is to get everything formatted the way 1999 and 2000 are: one page each for US and CAN #1's, with the #1-#20 hits on the 19xx in country music article. Someone else already helped me out in a major way by doing the #1 US lists all the way back, so all we need to do are the CAN #1 lists, then reformat the 19xx articles so they list everything from 1 to 20. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 01:38, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Need You Now

Yeah sure! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 20:55, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

reba-australia

stop changing reba's discography, i posted references, she had 2 albums chart in australia heres proof:

Reba duets http://www.aria.com.au/pages/aria-charts-end-of-year-charts-country-2007.htm

Moments and memories http://australian-charts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Reba+McEntire&titel=Moments+%26+Memories+-+The+Best+Of&cat=a

So stop changing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coderebavids (talk • contribs) 12:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Reba Discography

I did what you said i posted references, but you keep changing it, what the hell is ur problem?!!?!?1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coderebavids (talk • contribs) 12:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Fine

fine i'll add the australian charts, without removin anything —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coderebavids (talk • contribs) 12:21, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, i accepted the fact that you didnt want me to post the canadian country chart which im fine with. But you told me to change and add the australian albums chart manually. So i did it, and when i came back someone called EnDaLeCoMpLeX undid it. It is really anoying, i posted references JUST LIKE YOU TOLD ME TO, I NEED U AND OTHER PEOPLE TO STOP CHANGING THE AUSTRALIAN CHARTS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coderebavids (talk • contribs) 19:09, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The thing is, you claim to adding proof of these chart positions, however, neither of the references you posted had anything to do with the peak positions. They both were year-end charts, and the same source was used for AUS Country and AUS charts. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 21:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:David Nail

Template:David Nail has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:51, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Gwyneth Paltrow

Thanks for changing it to the Hot 100 on the singles table. I hadn't even noticed it said Bubbling Under Hot 100. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 01:23, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

No problemo. Nowyouseemetalk2me 01:31, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Ugh, and it's not just him that does it, too. It's super annoying having to fix other editors mistakes, especially reference mistakes. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 16:35, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

List of number-one country hits

Can you check the "List of number-one country hits of 19xx (U.S.)" articles and clean up the links? The idiot that did it didn't check their work, so every instance of Brooks & Dunn is listed as just "Brooks" and almost everything links to a dab page. Thanks! Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 21:48, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

O god, this is like a fucking nightmare straight out of hell, that guy has got to be retarded Nowyouseemetalk2me 00:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

no its not me, my account is coderebavids lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coderebavids (talk • contribs) 00:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes ive seen the show, its hilarious lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coderebavids (talk • contribs) 22:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

My apologies

My apologies for this edit. It was a poorly phrased knee-jerk reaction. I am glad you removed both remarks from your page.--William S. Saturn (talk) 01:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 in country music

Lost Fugitive is kinda like this. He'll do something outrageous (like, say, make a whole "content" section of an album sourced entirely to CMT's lyrics database), disappear for a while then come back. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 16:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Yeah.. it seemed kinda fishy to suggest that adding a list of 300 songs to every year in country music is "manageable", that's just way over the top. Nowyouseemetalk2me 01:48, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Reception of country music for deletion

The article Reception of country music is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at WP:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2010_December_15#Reception_of_country_music until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

As a contributor to WikiProject: Country Music, your input would be appreciated. Thanks, Seniortrend (talk) 23:35, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Reception of country music

I think you'd know better than to just say "keep" without a rationale. Come on. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Years in country music

WTF? Where'd the rest go? They're not even in the deletion log. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:54, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

• And why are most of the "hits" ones G7d? Did we scare off that jerk who couldn't be bothered to check his friggin' work? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 22:56, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

RFC courtesy notice - succession boxes

As someone who has taken part in previous discussions regarding the use of succession boxes in articles for songs and albums, I'd like to notify you of a request for comment that is taking place at WT:CHARTS#Request for comment: Use of succession boxes. It would be nice to finally come to a resolution on this. If you have already participated in this RFC or do not wish to participate, then please disregard this notice. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 00:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Positions

They came from here, which updates Wednesday mornings. Eric444 (talk) 05:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Bubbling Under

Oh okay. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 15:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Coderebavids

Wanna beat some sense into Coderebavids? He's still being a dick about the CAN Country albums peaks. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:48, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Dolly Parton discography

I've started a suggestion thread here. Please leave your opinion. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 01:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Help Needed

Hi Nowyouseeme, since I've seen you in the WikiProject Country Music, I was wondering if I've could get some help from you. I've been lately working in the article of Willie Nelson, that I want to improve and nominate to good article. It does need some cleanup and sourcing, and beacuse of its size and importance to the project it would be better if there's some more people involved. I will also contact other members of the project. Thanks for your time and hope to hear from you. --Gduwen (talk) 17:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

fr:Need You Now (chanson)

Thank you for your compliment on my French talk page but it's you who have done all the work for this article. (Sorry, my English is bad). Best regards, Ben76210 (talk) 10:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Season 8 Favorite Performances (Adam Lambert album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Season 8 Favorite Performances (Adam Lambert album) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Season 8 Favorite Performances (Adam Lambert album) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Aspects (talk) 06:43, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

1) Why is your up redirected to your tp? 2) Don't you think Nancy should became a sysop? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamsec (talk • contribs) 16:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

May I ask you to ignore Lamsec's messages? He's been asking useless and annoying questions for months on the italian wikipedia, so he's been blocked for an indefinite time. I don't want him to start here too. ׺°”˜`”°º×ηυηzια׺°”˜`”°º× 19:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

And he also asked his question about the user page redirected to the talk page about like, ten times on the italian wikipedia. 'Why don't you say your name in your user page?', 'Why don't you have an user page?' and so on. ׺°”˜`”°º×ηυηzια׺°”˜`”°º× 19:10, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

And Nancy forced me to repeat twice the messages I write to her. Lamsec (talk) 19:22, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		for your tireless work on wikipedia! Elektrik Band 01:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token 8da63a213fc0b2a3201cee2e21682a91

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Jackie Berroyer

I see that you have been removing links to Jackie Berroyer (and others) from many articles using Twinkle. Any specific reason for this? If someone is linked from 14 articles, you normally would expect someone to write an article for him, not that these redlinks are simply removed. Note that he has an article on the French Wikipedia. Some of the others (Philippe Jacquier) seem notable as well, but I'll leave these alone, but I'll reinstate the links to Berroyer since he seems likely to get an article one day, and redlinks encourage the creation of articles. Fram (talk) 06:58, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't really think "likely to get an article one day" justifies having redlinks on over a dozen articles, that person has had a redlink on 3 Dancing Slaves for almost 2 years, if someone wants to create an article on him one day, then they should get off their ass at that time and create the wikilinks. Nowyouseemescreed 12:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

From WP:REDLINK: "In general, a red link should be allowed to remain in an article if it links to a term that could plausibly sustain an article, but for which there is no existing candidate article, or article section, under any name." Removing redlinks because they are old isn't helping anything, articles without redlinks aren't any better than those with redlinks. So yes, if X is a notable topic, then X is justified to have 1 or 12 or 500 redlinks all over Wikipedia. Redlinking is encouraged, not discouraged.

On an unrelated topic: the colours of your user talk page (black on dark blue) make it very hard to read. Could you please change it to a more user-friendly color combination? Fram (talk) 13:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no. Nowyouseemescreed 14:45, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Tonight Tonight

I merged Tonight Tonight (Hot Chelle Rae song) with Tonight Tonight (EP) because the articles were identical, except for one of them being tagged as a single and the other tagged as an EP. There is no reason to have these two separate articles, when they discuss the exact same subject. And you should not have tagged it as vandalism.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

A music single and an extended play are not the same thing. Nowyouseemescreed 21:30, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Read Tonight Tonight (Hot Chelle Rae song) and Tonight Tonight (EP) and tell me that the content (before I edited the pages) is not the same. One of the two pages is redundant and should not be kept.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:33, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Both pages should be kept, they just shouldn't be identical, I don't know who did that. The EP itself is notable for it's own article, and the single itself is notable for it's own article. Nowyouseemescreed 21:40, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

It does not look like the EP is notable.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:48, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. Nowyouseemescreed 21:49, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Nowyouseeme. You have new messages at Airplaneman's talk page.
Message added 08:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Airplaneman ✈ 08:20, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Helena Beat

I'm getting kind of tired at how things seem to be working on certain pages here on Wikipedia; people don't really seem to be interested in discussing big changes and why they are wrong, but they are very quick to stubbornly revert them without any reason. As if the status quo always wins, no matter what evidence (or lack of it) is up against it.

You reverted an edit on Helena Beat without any reason at all and I specifically stated that I welcomed other opinions, but I'd like to hear them, not just be a recipient of a random revert. Would you please contribute to the discussion if you still feel it hasn't been settled? I was trying to reach a consensus, but it feels like I'm talking to a wall. No responses for a week, but reversal within 40 minutes. It's really discouraging. Electricnet (talk) 21:55, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Re:

Perhaps you should learn what a compound sentence is before swearing me out - the chart itself is on Billboard.biz. The sourcing format I used is on FAs such as Just Like Heaven. Further, I am re-adding the chart because that is guideline, not policy, and you seem to have no problem including the Alternative Songs chart. Chao. Toa Nidhiki05 00:09, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Read this. Happy? Toa Nidhiki05 02:15, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Than why didn't you remove the Alternative Songs chart, which fits the exact same criteria? Further, it is just that - a guideline - and occasional exceptions can be made. In this case, the song has peaked higher on the Triple A than the Rock Songs chart, and is also a notable as a record-tying single (tying U2's record of #1s on that chart). Why you want to keep legitimately sourced content off an article in the first place is beyond me. Toa Nidhiki05 02:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Triple A

Triple A is an obscure chart that Billboard doesn't keep track of the positions on, so it shouldn't be used. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 00:58, 27 November 2011 (UTC)