User talk:Teflon Peter Christ/Archive 2011

Birth of the Cool

Explain me why Miles Ahead is the next album, not Conception.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 10:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Taylor Swift Wikiproject proposal

I have proposed that a Wikiproject for Taylor Swift be made. Please share your thoughts here. Thanks! ℥^nding·start 22:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Allmusic Review Changes

Heya Dan56, You're quick on the draw regarding new changes! However, yesterday you undid several edits regarding the Allmusic (AMG) album reviews. These were made because recently AMG changed a selection of its ratings with albums it now considers full "5 Star" classics. AMG never declares an album worth "5 Stars" straight away. Only after a certain amount of time (a few years upwards) will their team 'upgrade' the rating if it is felt the album deserves it.

Having noticed the changes, Wikipedia was updated too. Yet, you undid these without providing any clue as to why these needed to be reverted. I would be interested to know if there was any particular reason. The links to Allmusic's review are always available on the same page for reference if you need to make sure they are accurate. I will shortly reinstate the new ratings. If you have a problem with that please feel free to leave a message. Cheers. Mulumper (talk) 22:01, 21 January 2011 (GMT)

Keri Hilson

Hi there, I've noticed you've edited Keri Hilson articles before. Feel free to edit and help out on her new album's article No Boys Allowed and the single Pretty Girl Rock. ozurbanmusic (talk) 10:23, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey WikiProject

Hi! The Mariah Carey WikiProject is now initiated! If you'd like to join, please add your name here. Thank you. Novice7 | Talk 09:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The Source

I noticed you added a link to the actual Death Certificate review - this is from the Jan. '92 issue = I've been trying to get a hold of this issue for a long time. I was therefore wondering where exactly you found this on the webcitation.org database. I own all of the '94-'97 issues, and several issues before/after, and I've been trying to get a hold of the earlier ones for a while now. If you could hook me up w/ links that have these, it'd be greatly appreciated. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 20:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for those links man, I appreciate it. If you search around here there's a few more. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 20:43, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Unsureness of Mediatraffic

Done, thanks... I asked that page you gave me and hope everything is OK... Thanks for helping me!

--79.216.153.186 (talk) 01:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Birth of the Cool

Explain me why Miles Ahead is the next album, not Conception.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 10:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Taylor Swift Wikiproject proposal

I have proposed that a Wikiproject for Taylor Swift be made. Please share your thoughts here. Thanks! ℥^nding·start 22:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation

hey, wanna join mah group?

Dear Teflon Peter Christ/Archive 2011,

I am inviting you to join the Miles Davis WikiProject. I found you, Teflon Peter Christ/Archive 2011, on several revision history statistics of articles related with "Miles Davis", and therefore I am of the opinion, that you should be one of those members of this WikiProject I recently created. I hope you will approve my invitation.

Regards,

-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 23:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Graduation

DJ Premier is credited as "scratches by DJ Premier" in "Everything I Am". Chris Martin is credit as a feature only at the iTunes Store, in the booklet he have just a add-vocals credit, so what do you think? In my opinion, we should throw it out and add the DJ Premier thing. -MrKingz0 (talk) 00:37, 06 January 2011 (UTC)

Live Evil

Hi, now that Live Evil is a disambiguation page, don't forget to help WP:FIXDABLINKS! This tool makes the job a lot easier (and dare I say it, enjoyable). Cheers, --JaGa^talk 00:36, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Belly st.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Belly st.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 04:37, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Responding to edit semi-protected requests

Hi! I see that you fixed the problem identified in an "edit semi-protected" request on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. If you should do another response like that in the future, it is helpful if you change the part that says "{{edit semi-protected}}" to {{Tld|edit semi-protected}}, and then explain whether or not you made the change (or say why you think it shouldn't be done, if you're not doing it). This removes the page from a special list of pages with these requests, thus letting other users know it has already been attended to. Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 05:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

RIAA

I'm more inclined to be RIAA's own website as opposed to wikipedia. See here where it says minimum sales figures. It also says "In the beginning, there was only a Gold® album award for the sale of 500,000 copies." here. No mention of shipments anywhere. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:41, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Um...

See WP:DTR. And I didn't remove any content, I just fixed the date. That is all. And if you disagree, I had brought up a discussion on the Back to December talk page. ℥^nding·start 22:00, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Raymond v. Raymond

I've reverted the once citing MOS:NUM. But I suggest you leave the user a detailed message about your grievances. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 01:02, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for edit warring, as you did at Raymond v. Raymond. Once the block has expired, you're welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:05, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Teflon Peter Christ (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I don't see how there was an edit war on that article; I only reverted the editor once, the majority of the other edits were changes to the content, removing unsourced statements. When the editor added a citation for one unsourced statement, I still removed the other unsourced statements that were being restored, but I did not make an official revert of one revision. I'm pretty sure I only made one actual revert of a revision to the article. And my edits to that article were to make progress and improve it. I also saught out assistance when I felt the other editor's edits were unconstructive. Dan56 (talk) 02:10, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Accept reason:

Per our deal below. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Im the one who reported this. You may not have "reverted" his edit but any addition other then vandalism that you remove counts towards WP:EDITWARRING and WP:3RR. "Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert." Unfortunitly unsourced edits and poorly sourced edits are not an exception to 3RR. Personally i dont pay attention normally to 3RR when it doesnt involve myself, but in this case because of both of your condescending edit summaries and refusal to discuss anything a block was needed. Please just learn from the mistakes that you both made, ive talked to the other user involved User_talk:Miss_Beautiful_Princess#Read_please and they have agreed they were in the wrong as well and will work constructively with you in future. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

What "condescending edit summaries and refusal to discuss anything"? I said "please" and never let any emotions out into the summaries, nor my posts to his talk page. Upon reading the 3RR guideline now, I see I was wrong and went about my edits in an inappropriate manner, but I see now that the other editor received an edit war warning and only got 24 hours block time. And his remarks in his edit summaries were disparaging and rude throughout the "war". Atleast consider reducing the block time for me? Dan56 (talk) 02:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The reason for the difference in durations is that you have previous blocks for edit warring, whereas they had a clean block log until an hour ago. I'll make you the same offer I made them: I'll unblock you right now if you agree to stay away from the article for the next 23 hours and not to jump back into edit warring after that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Deal, certainly. I should know better anyhow, so I do appreciate the offer. Dan56 (talk) 02:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)
Your block was set for 48 hours due to previous blocks for similar matters located here. The other user only recieved a 24 hour block because the editor has only been active for a few days and this was their first offense. If you want your block to be removed there are a few things you must do; Change your unblock request after reading WP:GAB, mainly "Understand your block" and "Give a good reason for your unblock". Basically accept that you were in the wrong and promise/explain not to do it again. Your current request for unblock falls under a poor example of a request to be unblocked and i highly doubt an admin will be willing to unblock you. Also, show good faith by not going directly back to editing the page you got in trouble for. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:53, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Gaye on piano.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Gaye on piano.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Marvin Gaye in Studio.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Marvin Gaye in Studio.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Michael Jackson Invincible

Please refer to the talk page for reverts based on IP edits and if otherwise to find an explanation for the changes. 92.233.71.47 (talk) 08:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I like what you did looks alright 92.233.71.47 (talk) 02:22, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy

I'm not going to cite the fact that its half notes... you are being ridiculous. --Robert (talk) 03:03, 4 February 2011 (UTC) The current source says nothing about half notes or whole notes in Runaway. --Robert (talk) 03:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

This is a serious matter, don't be absurd. 92.233.71.47 (talk) 15:07, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Succession boxes

If there is no consensus to have succession boxes on song/album articles, how can you remove them citing no consensus? Shouldn't the opposite be true? They should not be added because consensus was not reached. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 21:19, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Because of the ongoing discussion, succession boxes should not be added to articles since the RFC was opened on December 20, 2010. Nor should they actually be removed from articles that had them prior to the start of the discussion. The first succession box was added to Pink Friday on January 7, 2011, thus should removed until a consensus is reached. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

GAN 2

Hi.

Sure I will, and i promise to do it within the week this time. By Friday if school and work allows. Zidane tribal (talk) 01:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

First of all i`m sorry about the GAN, i`ll do it tomorrow, know on the matter of Phrenology (album) It lacks authorship or the songs, only that get in the way of a B. I have a busy day ahead of me or a could do it both today, i ask a little patience. Thanks. Zidane tribal (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

El Debarge (Second Chance)

Hi.

I see you edited Andrell "Zell" Shaw off of the "Writer(s)" section I've made on Feb 27, 2011, and also from the "Production" and "Production" sections. If you look in the album liner notes, you'll see A. Shaw (Andrell Shaw) in the writers section. He was the original writer of the "Format" track and Geffen/Interscope acknowledged that. So that change was correct as future copies of the album will contain that information also in the produced by section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.125.203.115 (talk) 16:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Using {cite} templates

I'm deeply disappointed in your recent edit. Cite templates are supposed to be one parameter per line (as are all such templates)! This allows the "Show Changes" button to easily display each changes per line, instead of one massive unreadable block. Please revert.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Could you comment on this issue

Could you comment on this Talk:Black_and_Yellow#Is_this_remix_really_noteable? issue a user continuing to add a not noteable remix into the page.

Also on an unrelated note you probably should have co-nominated My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy with me when you GANed it considering we both have over 200 edits on it. Its kinda like you taking all the credit for building the article. When we both did. STATic message me! 06:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Why would you remove my picture?

Hello there.I would like to ask you, why did you remove my picture when it would be useful.It understands readers, and I did add a reliable resource.But, I think you are only talking about the music section that I put the sentence.Damirgraffiti (talk) 03:21, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Rapper Game

Hello i was wondering if you can help on improving these 4 articles about rapper Game. i seen some of your editing and its really great i was hoping if you can help.

Please help fix, expand and improve these articles.

• Game
• The R.E.D. Album
• Doctor's Advocate
• LAX —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.140.192.182 (talk) 03:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

RE: Assistance with editor

First at all, try to talk with him and be very (I mean very) explicit that this or this, and many other things are not OK, and should not be inserted/changed, if he ignores you, then start using warnings ({{uw-mos1}} to {{uw-mos3}} and a final {{uw-generic4}}) and revert him with a summary such as "per WP:ALBUM" or "per WP:MOS" or something like that. If he does it again, you may report him with an admin or WP:AIV for disruptive editing after many warnings. If it is denied they may guide you for a relevant noticeboard. Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 01:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

album article leads

Noted. I wholly disagree, but I respect the gravity of your opinion and I will refrain from editing article leads in the future, period.--mikomango (talk) 02:26, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

FAME

Hey, thanks for changing this — was going to do it myself but you beat me to it lol. I was wandering since you did a great job on the critical reception section in No Boys Allowed, could you please help with Chris' FAME when the reviews come out? (: Ozurbanmusic (talk) 21:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: User:79.97.92.28

I know how to deal with deliberate vandals (which he actually wasn't, my mistake), but I haven't really had any experience with edit warriors. Try ANEW, if you think this qualifies. Otherwise, give them a warning and try to discuss it on the talk page. --T H F S W (T · C · E) 21:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Kanyewestsong

" All of the lights " Kanye West Song

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_of_the_Lights

Recorded in 2009 not 2010

Pls Edit to 2009

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janipha tb (talk • contribs) 18:37, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Re:

There is nothing controversial about it at all. Christina has written on mostly every one of her albums, and even co-produced the first disc on Back to Basics. She is the definition of a singer-songwriter. If you disagree, you could have just left me a message on MY TALK PAGE, explaining why you think so. Edit summaries do not give enough reason to show why, and leaving a template on my page that also tells me to read the introduction is editing is quite offense; I really suggest you read WP:DTR before leaving template messages to established users on Wikipedia. ℥^nding·start 01:52, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Why should I have to explain myself to you, again? I already did. Sensitive? Oh, please. That sounds like a personal remark, and I am not here for that. All I'm saying is that you used the template incorrectly. If you felt my edit was incorrect, a simple message would have been fine. I have replied there. ℥^nding·start 02:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Great job on the critical reception section man! ℥^nding·start 07:21, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy

Why was the European Top 100 Albums Chart removed from my edit on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy? On Eminem's Recovery album page it was allowed, I don't see why it shouldn't be allowed on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy's album page. It is an official chart by billboard plus I already added the citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melrocks50 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank You. Sorry for not knowing how to add citations properly before. I will learn it and use the correct way from now on.

Re: Help with editor?

Hmmmm well I don't think I've seen his/her other edits, but the edits in question—which I reverted here—could still be considered made in good faith. It was only a capitalization (maybe (s)he thought "Unknown" was the name of the label, or was capitalizing it for consistency's sake), making a note small (which is... unnecessary but not of bad faith), capitalization and italicization (perhaps also for consistency), removing a comma (there is no real correct way), and making a word small and styled (small is understandable; italicized and bold not so much). There's not a specific part of the edits that can lead me to not assume good faith, as it's not obvious vandalism. I've left a message on the talk page of this editor for now, but if I see him/her making some more edits like this, there'll be more to come. Yves (talk) 05:32, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

One Mic

And I already told you as well, I posted my own justification for the edit to the Talk page and I provided a citation for the edit. It was not a "controversial edit", and I will amend it no further save for a direct ref link to the video itself. Also, please do not threaten me, as that was totally unnecessary. --Toussaint (talk) 19:09, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

RE:

Thanks for the heads up, and for taking care of those edits. Hopefully they now realize that sub/regional genres are to be mentioned in the actual articles (w/ sources), not in info boxes. If by chance they still don't understand this, or they choose to continue with such edits, I suggest we inform an administrator of the situation, just so we can get this whole thing resolved. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 05:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

re:Soldier of Love

Hi. i just added the souce as you requested, but also, please ensure that you provide informative edit summaries too. You may also wish to read the "Don't be a dick" essay for further information. Cheers, best wishes. ;) --Der Golem (talk) 16:01, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, i didn't really tell you that you must "be a dick", did i? That must have been just Your assumption, i didn't mean to be offensive. but thanks for telling me that i'm one! Anyway, to the original topic; we obviously have different views on being constructive. You were definitely right about the compilation album; but i don't find it constructive to just remove content (the grammy) that is easily verifiable and obviously not incorrect. I'd prefer 'thinking' when deleting. But if your intension is to delete all content that does not have a footnote, then i wish you a good luck with deleting the majority of Wikipedia. You can start with, lets say, a rather sourced article like Rolling Stones: you've got unreferenced dates, sales and information about tours, films, chart positions, music videos, albums, singles, member changes and many more - all waiting just for you to delete them! But prepare for someone telling you not to be a dick. cheers for real now! --Der Golem (talk) 14:20, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

well, i added the source; so how's that diregarding? what's your problem anyway? and on top of that, telling an editor who has been for a longer time on Wikipedia than yourself to read the introduction to editing.... get out of town man, that's just ridiculous. don't forget that Jimmy Wales created "ignore all rules" himself; rules are not to be followed blindly. man, you really are way too serious. you should't get upset too much. it's not good for your health. this is just a website. you take it too personally.--Der Golem (talk) 11:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

You started to leave messages. But allright i'm quitting now. In any case, you better keep it cool. Have a good day. --Der Golem (talk) 14:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

File:John Coltrane 1960.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:John Coltrane 1960.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 18:08, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Dan56/draft

Subpage. Dan56 (talk) 19:51, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

RE: April 2011

Normally I have used reliable sources and references, but I wasn't sure of a reliable source (or if one was necessary), as the only source I knew was the song itself, or lyrics page. So, would a reference to the lyrics for the song justify?--Technobliterator (talk) 20:00, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Could you explain why my edits to the Janelle Monae article were unconstructive? 208.65.20.140 (talk) 01:52, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

How is there anything controversial about what I did? 208.65.20.140 (talk) 02:24, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I didn't remove anything at all. I changed genres. Neo soul source is in the article. I can't find one for alternative rock but I found one for indie rock and I'll add it. Now stop harassing me, Wikipedia is supposed to be the encyclopedia anyone can edit. You don't own this place. 208.65.20.140 (talk) 02:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and please don't call me unconstructive like you did on someone else's page. I'm not. 208.65.20.140 (talk) 02:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm the other page in question, and I have to agree with Dan56 on this one. But sometimes, it's a battle to teach people the rules.--mikomango (talk) 01:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Accolades List on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy

Can I add an Accolades list on My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. It will be a new section just under the Charts section. I feel there should be an accolades table because it would provide a clearer way for readers.

Here is the list that I made so far.

• #1 - The A.V. Club's Top 25 Albums of 2010
• #1 - Billboard's Top 10 Albums of 2010
• #1 - Pitchfork Media's Top 50 Albums of 2010
• #1 - MTV's 20 Best Albums of 2010
• #1 - Rolling Stone's 30 Best Albums of 2010
• #1 - Spin's 40 Best Albums of 2010
• #1 - Time's Top 10 Albums of 2010
• #1 - The Washington Post's Best Pop Albums of 2010
• #1 - Vibe's 10 Best Albums of 2010
• #2 - The Guardian's 40 Best Albums of 2010
• #3 - The New York Times 10 Best Albums of 2010
• #4 - Paste's 50 Best Albums of 2010
• #4 - PopMatters's 70 Best Albums of 2010
• #7 - Chicago Tribune's Top 20 Albums of 2010
• #7 - Relevant Magazine's Top 10 Albums of 2010
• 34 - NME's Top 75 Albums of 2010

It is made in the same format as Arcade Fire's The Suburbs (Arcade Fire album)'s accolades list. Please tell me if it is appropriate for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melrocks50 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why it is still inappropriate for the article at this point and time though, it is still a relatively new album and since the suburbs album has this, why shouldn't this album as they're both equally critically acclaimed. You are a bigger expert on this than me though so I am looking forward to a clear answer from you. Thank you for your time.

Melrocks50 (talk) 18:12, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Unconstructive? For real.

Did you say it was unconstuctive? Or was that an auto Wikipedia thing? Cause it isn't unconstructive to be percise (1,046,718 over 1,047,00). Do you want me to name a hundred sources cause I can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theodorerichert (talk • contribs) 20:21, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

B'Day

Oops, sorry. I just meant to undo the tracklisting edit. Sorry for any inconvenience caused! Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Neo Soul

 Done

I rate it a B, to be honest while it meets the criteria nicely, it was hard to compare it with others couldn`t find a B subgenres articles, and besides watching the history, you really had worked hard on it. Zidane tribal (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

The King of Limbs

I will refer you to Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:LDR in how I changed the references. In particular, there are 2 references (named "official" and GBP) that refer to the same website. Also, the documentation of several of the references was not robust enough and thus I changed it. For consistency, I used the {{cite web}} template. For clarity, I used the List-defined references to because "This can help separate large reftags with long cite entries from the ordinary text, making it easier to read and to edit."

I have reviewed the {{Album ratings}} documentation and see that the ratings should in fact be cited. I will not change this in the future.

For the {{Infobox album}}, you will note that they suggest using the {{startdate}} and {{Duration}} templates when filling out the released and duration fields.

Next time you choose to do this, please refer to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution#Focus on content. I did not change any of the content of the page; I simply made it easier to edit and consistent with other pages throughout Wikipedia.

I will redo the changes to use the list-defined references to clean up the citations and use the the templates in the Infobox, but not use the {{cquote}} or move the citations from the Album ratings. Rlholden (talk) 13:04, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Teflon Peter Christ. You have new messages at Rlholden's talk page.
Message added 21:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Teflon Peter Christ. You have new messages at GoingBatty's talk page.
Message added 02:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Why is "Only Girl (In the World)" listed as eight #1 single, and "What's My Name" ninth?

Why is "Only Girl (In The World)" listed as Rihanna's eight number 1 single when it was her ninth? Regardless of release date, "What's My Name" reached #1 on November 30, 2010, while "Only Girl (In The World)" reached number 1 December 4, 2010. It says so on the Billboard website. http://www.billboard.com/song/rihanna/only-girl-in-the-world/22819947#/artist/rihanna/chart-history/658897 Billboard.com even states that it's her ninth #1 in this article: http://www.billboard.com/news/rihanna-s-only-girl-rebounds-to-no-1-on-1004130511.story#/news/rihanna-s-only-girl-rebounds-to-no-1-on-1004130511.story The Singles section should be changed to reflect this. I did it once and didn't include these citations because it was already stated in the next citation, but the info was still removed. It might also be worth mentioning that it was the first time in history an artist's second number 1 got there before the first (which is states in the second Billboard link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simpletons (talk • contribs) 14:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Fear of a Black Planet

Hi. Just letting you know I started the article's GAN review here. GamerPro64 (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I have passed the article for GA status. Have you thought about an attempt for Featured Article? GamerPro64 20:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I may have prematurely gave the article the GA status. Here are more references to remove and replace: ref 49 and ref 74 GamerPro64 05:12, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject:Rihanna

As I can see, lot of the singers have a WikiProject. I can see you are interested in Rihanna and the related articles, how about starting a Rihanna WikiProject? Greetings Tomica1111 (talk)

File:Davis at Birdland.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Davis at Birdland.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:20, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit.

I made a lot of a edits to an article about a Nine Inch Nails' album named The Downward Spiral, so thanks for the edit you did on the Reception section. The edit before that was claiming Robert Christgau as a "detractor," but indeed, that edit was fucked up. Your edit was somewhat like a revert of him as praising the album.

Anyways, your edit to that article was good. I'll speak to User:Malconfort to nominate The Downward Spiral for Good Article status. I wish that article was like that, because I've gotta do this wiki-stunt. '| () () `'/ I> (talk) 05:08, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Why do you keep removing my edits in the MBDTF article? If that website isn't reliable, then how come HipHopDX is accepted? They're both Hip Hop websites. Also, those numbers also seem very realistic. I think it is very annoying how you keep removing my posts like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Melrocks50 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Coltrane for lovers sleeve.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Coltrane for lovers sleeve.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Born This Way

You have been reverting my revisions on the article, even though there are prefect edit summaries to explain that. So, next time read that and don't be an ass. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Gil Scott-Heron

You wrote in an edit summary, "wrongly added; the burden of adding a citation is on the editor who adds it (WP:Verifiability); and it's not "factual"; WP is about what's sourced, not what's "true"."

Care to back this up about what Wikipedia is about with a source? The one you provided about verifiability does not back you up. While it does state that the "burden of evidence" lies with the editor adding the information, talking about removal of unsourced material, it continues, "How quickly this should happen depends on the material and the overall state of the article. Editors might object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references. It has always been good practice to make reasonable efforts to find supporting sources yourself and cite them."

You need to read WP:NOCITE which states that contentious material must be removed immediately, but you've been deleting things like names of surviving family members and information about a memorial service, none of which were at all contentious. I can see from your talk page that this complaint is not unfamiliar to you and that other people have even called you names. Your actions are counter-productive to Wikipedia's goal of retaining new editors. Your lightning-fast and repeated deletions, even of surviving family members of a recently dead person are unhelpful and aggressive. This sort of behavior scares people away from Wikipedia, not the opposite. You need to take a deep breath and check yourself. Marrante (talk) 18:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Only warning.

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Born This Way. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

In particular, the Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states that:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

• If i see you make another revert in the next 24 hours (doesnt matter what for other than vandalism) you will be blocked per 3RR. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:37, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Stone Rollin

Hi Dan, Thank you for coming to me with this GA review. I would be happy to take it up, but I'm unsure when I would be able to do it. I have already nominated my self for reviews with Hair (Lady Gaga song) and Blow (song). I'm also awaiting comments on at least three of my own GANs plus I'm presently revising for exams. I'd suggest you approach other editors. (I presume the article is on the GAN list?), I'll try and approach the article in a week's time if noone else has done so. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 14:19, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Scott-Heron/West

I disagree. The link to West's song (it was actually two songs, but in one video) was on his new album, My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy under the titles "Lost in the World" and "Who Will Survive in America". "Who Will Survive in America" is quite clearly a sample/remix of "Comment No. 1" by Scott-Heron, with more background music and edited so it's shorter. "Lost in the World" also features someone (presumably Scott-Heron, as it sounds just like him) saying "Who Will Survive in America?" between 3:05 and 3:11 marks in this video.

I posted both videos to show that "Who Will Survive in America" (the second song in the West video) is basically a sample of "Comment No. 1" (the other video I posted), and that "Lost in the World" features Scott-Heron (or his clone; seriously, nobody else has Scott-Heron's voice) saying "Who Will Survive in America?".

While it's arguable that YouTube is a reliable source, I can say with certitude that those videos I posted are the real thing. Regardless of what you think about the relevance of posting that "Lost in the World" featured Scott-Heron, you cannot deny the fact that "Who Will Survive in America" on West's album is basically "Comment No. 1" slightly altered and shortened. Watch both videos in their entirety for yourself, and then get back to me where you believe that there isn't enough evidence to support that Scott-Heron appeared in "Lost in the World" and "Who Will Survive in America" is practically "Comment No. 1".

Lost in the World & Who Will Survive in America: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kF1_kj2i3hM&feature=related

Comment No. 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Hmr8YLNzoQ

Those are the exact same videos I posted in the article.

MAINEiac4434 (talk) 19:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. But "West cited Scott-Heron as a major influence of My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy" or whatever was not mine, I think. I believe it was there before, I just added the stuff about "Lost in the World" and "Who Will Survive in America". MAINEiac4434 (talk) 23:57, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Brian Jackson

Hi Dan, I'm curious why you reverted a change make by an IP to the Brian Jackson page here and more importantly, why you called it vandalism? All the IP did was to add the word "jazz" to the phrase "Brian Jackson is a jazz keyboardist...". You seem to be familiar with Brian Jackson and Gil Scott Heron's music, so you must know that "jazz" is a reasonable description for Jackson, which negates any argument that it was vandalism, so I'm guessing the issue must be verifiability, but refs linking Jackson and/or Heron to jazz are easy to find [1] [2] [3]

“ Scott-Heron credits his longtime collaborator, classically trained pianist Brian Jackson, as crucial to his music's development. "I had an affinity for jazz and syncopation, and the poetry came from the music, " he says. ”

Rob. Robman94 (talk) 01:20, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

The issue was that it was another IP editor making an unexplained genre change after being warned multiple times (User talk:86.144.71.100). Also, that article, along with those associated with Scott-Heron and Jackson (album, song articles) have been vandalized similarly by possible IP socks, making the same exact genre change, going away for a while after being warned, and after a period of time different IP accounts coming back and making the same genre change. That user's contributions mirror those of other IPs, such as 109.152.112.86, Special:Contributions/109.155.13.208, Special:Contributions/86.169.134.107. Dan56 (talk) 01:32, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I see, so it was part of a pattern of disruptive changes. Thanks for letting me know. Robman94 (talk) 02:38, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Stone Rollin'

Hello there. Why have you immediately undone the mention of the hidden track, instead of first placing a "source required" tag, or discussing it in the talkbox? It is mentioned earlier in the article anyway (and with a source). Why exactly not to keep it within the tracklist section? Morefun (talk) 18:13, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Teflon Peter Christ. You have new messages at Robman94's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Born This Way reviews

Hey Dan, when you add reviews from websites like Village Voice and MSN to any article, could you also archive them? VV and MSN links tend to become dead after sometime, rendering them impossible to find. Other websites showing this tendency are Vancouver Sun and The New York Times too. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank Me Later

Do you have any plans to nominate Thank Me Later for a GA? I think it would easily pass, it's a very well written article which only needs it's last reference to be fixed.

RE: Public enemy album

It said it was recorded in 1987 and 1988 in the liner notes. So don't change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bonethugsfan1994 (talk • contribs) 03:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi

See talk page of 4, please =). Orane (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Response to "See Also" edits

Thanks for the heads up. I'll try to keep in mind the order of which paragraph sections come before and after the "See also" sections, though I may have been rushing through the edits and not paid attention to where I was putting them. I still hope the succession templates for the charts get completely phased out soon for the comprehensive simplified links to respective #1 music charts, but it'll take time. GETONERD84 (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Marshall Mathers LP

Bruv, you mad. The album has sold over 20 million copies lol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OVOXO (talk • contribs) 04:34, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Beyonce's 4 and excuse my frustration

Hi there Dan56. I'll try to keep it short and to the point. I'll start off by pointing out an error in your reasoning regarding a revert. This edit that you reverted was actually done by me, because I initially didn't feel like logging in. Here are my issues with your edit summary:

1. "Generally positive critical" is not "3 consecutive adj." as you mistakenly point out. It's one adjectival phrase (generally positive) attached to a noun/noun phrase (critical review).
2. Secondly, it's become common practice on Wikipedia to use grammatically awkward expressions like "X received positive reviews from most music critics". This is incorrect. It should be "X received generally positive reviews", as it received generally positive reviews out of all reviews considered, and not individually positive reviews from most critics.
3. Thirdly, "progressive" and "understated" are not biased or unencyclopedic expressions, because they are basically summarizing the actual general response to the album (a number of reviews-and believe me, I've read many- state that it was a progression of her sound, or a maturation of her music etc etc). In other words, they praise the album's progression. Likewise, reviews describe the album as "subtle", "nuanced", and not as "aggressive" etc etc as her past albums (i.e. understated). If you wanted to challenge those two words, I'd have no problems quoting them for you. That would take care of the NPOV issue.
4. You said "Critics wrote the reviews ("who" vs. "most of which")". As it stood, the sentence was gramatically correct, because when I wrote it, the sentence's object was "reviews", which means that "which" would be the correct pronoun (see again).

All in all, I've made only a small contribution to the article, and the main reason for this is because users like you are so overzealous with your editing of articles by your favorite singers that you become obsessed with monitoring and reviewing every single edit that is made to it (it's the same thing with Lady Gaga with an user who shall remain nameless). I'm getting sick of it. I want to edit the damn article without being reverted because you think that the reviews I'm placing in the info box isn't to your liking, or the words that I use aren't up to your standards. Go write a blog if you want things your way all the time. Orane (talk) 09:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

• 1. Regardless of whether or not it "sounds like" 3 adjectives, it's not. A "critical review" is one thing. It's a noun. I've already explained that, and my aim is not to teach you grammar.
  2. "4 "received positive reviews from most music critics" seems simpler and more concise, as it mentions from who they were "received" rather than the assumption of critics b/c their described as 'critical." That sentence actually makes no sense whatsoever.
  3. When I say that it's awkward to use the expression I mean this: We are supposed to be reporting on the general consensus on the album. We're supposed to be creating an aggregate, based on the opinions of critics. So we say "generally favorable" or "generally positive" reviews, not "positive from most critics". We're not counting the actual critics one-by-one (individually) and saying 10 gave positive, 3 gave negative. We're collecting all reviews that range from positive to mixed to negative, and we're saying that generally speaking, the reviews were positive. It's in the same light as saying something like "The album received universal acclaim". It would be downright cringeworthy to say "the album received universal acclaim from most music critics". As you can see, the focus should not be on the individual critics, but on the reviews themselves (you seem to have it backwards!). It's not complicated. And as evidence, even metacritic says "generall favorable [critical] reviews" and not "favorable from most critics". The range goes, "generally negative reviews", "mixed critical reception", "generally positive reviews" or "universal acclaim" (all focus on the tone of the reviews as an aggregate), not on whether or not most gave it positive. What if 6 critics had reviewed the album, and two gave it 5/5 stars, two gave it 2.5/5 stars, and two gave it 0/5 stars. How exactly would you write it, based on your way of writing? You sure couldn't say "mixed reviews from most critics", because most critics didn't give it a mixed review— only 2 did. You'd have to write it correctly and say "the album received generally mixed reception", because based on the reviews, the aggregate tone of the reviews fall in a mixed range. There's no other way I can explain it.
  4. In any case, I'm glad you incorporated my changes into the article. That's more acceptable to me than blindly reverting changes that people make to it. Orane (talk) 03:27, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now - Dan56 - (Singles: why's this attributed to the source?)

To answer your question it's for accuracy and so nothing will be confused for what it isn't. If you look at the page for double a-side you will see to claim that two singles were released as that is in accurate and incorrect when the singles were actually released for two different stations (one for pop and one for country) so if you see it was more to stop confusing then anything else cause if even I thought it meant there was a single released like that and it's actually not true. lol JamesAlan1986 (talk-Contributes) 23:04, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Born This Way

Regarding your concern for chart trajectory, I believe the first three-four weeks is fine, after that its simple WP:UNDUE. This is because an album achieves stability after four weeks generally, hence uptill then commentary is fine. IF you find further trajectory, please remove. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Re:Second Chance (album) (English)/(French)

[4];

Now, it is everything good. I done delate interwiki in enWiki and frWiki, now none bot can't found other interwiki between this articles. French user in this edit insert wrong interwiki link. Karol007 (talk) 09:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Liquid Swords

Re: this, just thought I'd explain sticking it in the references template. Any upcoming expansion of the article (something I'm stroking my beard over) would make further use of the liner notes and I was just sticking it down there in anticipation. So to speak. Seegoon (talk) 00:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj's date of birth

Add your opinion. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 01:08, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now

What section. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 00:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, all information in the lead should be brought up and sourced in the article body. No new information that is not in the article should be brought up in this section. That's the first problem. What does it say about sales in the article body? I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 00:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

You have it slightly wrong originally I used http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/71209/chart-watch-extra-eminem-does-it-again/ for the 2010 figure refrence but I replaced it with this billboard refrence http://www.billboard.com/#/news/eminem-s-recovery-is-2010-s-best-selling-1004137895.story. Which by the way has the same figure because although Paul Grein posts year end charts early "to get them to you in a timely manner" (quoting Paul Grein) he updates them at year end. That however is irrelevant because the last couple times I edited it I used the billboard as citation for both figures. So it is the same reliable source for both figures and there are no missing days(or weeks) even if there maby ever was. I haven't been just undoing your undoos, I have actualy listened to what you were saying. If Wikipedia has a rule against adding figures form the SAME source then please let me know other wise I haven't broken any rules. Thankyou.Theodorerichert (talk) 06:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Investigate my sources, they are both the billboard. This is a routine calculation. Two numbers from the same source added together dosen't violate any rules. Billboard.com=Billboard.biz. You just have to pay for most of the charts on billboard.biz and billboard.com only has a few charts some of which are just top 25 or 40 however they are identical to the charts on billboard.biz and numbers are from the same source Neilsen Soundscan. According to Neilsen Soundscan Speak Now sold 2,960,000 in 2010 http://www.billboard.com/#/news/eminem-s-recovery-is-2010-s-best-selling-1004137895.story also according Neilsen Soundscan it sold 563,000 in the first half of 2011 http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/industry/retail/top-selling-albums-of-2011-so-far-1005267092.story so it MUST have sold at least 3,523,000 so far. How is this so hard to understand?

Also you didn't reply after I clearifyed that both my sources were the billboard so I thought you were OK with that. Sorry.Theodorerichert (talk) 19:04, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

808s & Heartbreak

Hi Dan, are you the main contributor to 808s & Heartbreak? I ask because from a glance it doesn't seem too far from Good Article consideration, and I'd be willing to lend a hand if you want to work it up to that status. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment re Types of Protection

You requested semi-protection for Speak Now. Just to let you know, semi-protection is designed to apply for IP vandalism, but has no effect on registered users. Since there have been no IP edits since March 17, this would mean full protection would be the way to go. This means, however, that only administrators may edit the article; you won't even be able to make edits, though you can still edit to the talk page and seek consensus for changes.

I've noted this at WP:RfPP so you don't need to. Feel free to read up on the protection policy. Cheers. CycloneGU (talk) 18:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now

What you removed from that page was not for promoting anything it was posted to give accurate information about the album as there is no way to post a format in the infobox. JamesAlan1986 (talk-Contributes) 10:22, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Watch the Throne

I don't think so. It was released as a single from the album, whether or not other sources say it wasn't. ℥^nding·start 03:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Killer Love‎. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Roh^G ??· 04:42, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now

You removed the review score for AbsolutePunk on "Tha Carter IV"? You're ridiculous. Look at Eminem's Wiki page for the Recovery, and tell me it's unnotable. Absolutepunk.net is one of the biggest music sites on the Internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anarkafrica (talk • contribs) 19:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

—Andrew_stalk seems to think consensus has been reached, if you have reason to doubt it please let me know within 72 hours. Thankyou. Theodorerichert (talk) 21:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Your 'Loud' edit

If you are going to add in info which I had removed, could you at least format the reference correctly in the future please? Though, I'm pretty sure "Pitchfork" is not a reliable source. Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 23:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, that link for Pitchfork didn't even work, so I've removed it. Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 23:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Teflon Peter Christ. You have new messages at Calvin999's talk page.
Message added 23:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹

again Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 00:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

and again. Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 00:14, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

You may wish to:

see here — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 00:25, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

RE: The Throne

For the time being I'd leave it as Kanye West & Jay-Z as I don't think its been listed as The Throne. In the future it may be worth listing as The Throne (Kanye West & Jay-Z). As it may be a long time before The Throne gets its own page. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 20:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Adele 21

I reverted your edit to the article in which you said that her receiving acclaim for the album was "not true". Well, it is true, so I replaced the info, and I sourced it. How exactly is it not true? If u remember correctly, there was a semi-colon between the sentence and the mention of the metacritic source, so the statement was never meant to mislead readers into thinking that metacritic gave the album it's acclaimed status. Secondly, metacritic is selective and only considers a handful of reviews, and disregards other publishers, even some listed here (it uses only about 40 publications). The site is not the be all end all for all music reviews. It can only give critical response based on the sources that it collects. It doesn't necessarily mean that that's representative of all critical response towards the album. In other words, according to the Rolling Stone source I used, the album received acclaim; according to the selective reviews that metacritic collects to compile their scores, the album received generally positive reviews. The article makes that distinction. And thirdly, I see you're still saying "positive reviews from most critics..." Whenever I see that awful expression, rest assured, I will change it. Orane (talk) 07:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

No problem. :) Orane (talk) 23:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Question

Check Rihanna discography, where "Raining Men" was labeled a single because of airplay, or Keri Hilson discography, where the same was for "Make Love" and Change Me" and "Lose Control". I was like you, but was repeatedly told that since the rise of the digital era, people can download songs the moment a album's released and because of the physical market in the US almost being non-existent, labels release singles that follow album solely through airplay, unless the single is an alternate form of the song "Bow Chicka Wow Wow" by Mike Posner. Its different in international markets though. --68.79.95.84 (talk) 03:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

CD singles, digital download, and radio releases are warrant as a single. The only reason why radio dates would be used, is if there is no CD single or digital release available. If there is, that date should be listed instead. ℥^nding·start 03:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi

If you are interesting in a WikiProject Rihanna being created and would like to be apart of it, please state why you want one to be created here please. Thanks. Calvin • ⁹⁹⁹ 15:23, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of We're New Here

After reviewing the article, I have decided to put the article on hold at this time. For comments, see: Talk:We're New Here/GA1. - Rp0211 ^(talk2me) 20:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

An Invitation to Join WikiProject Jennifer Lopez

You have been invited to join the Jennifer Lopez WikiProject, a WikiProject on the English Wikipedia dedicated to improving articles and lists related to Jennifer Lopez. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page and add your name to the list of participants. Thank You. ℥nding·start 08:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello

I saw you reverted an IP user on the Loud article and changed his edit from CKB charting "thirty-seven" back to "forty-seven". I have reverted you back to the IPs edit because CKB is at number thirty-seven this week. You must always check chart positions before you revert someone, as you could be wrong, which was proved in this instance. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 11:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

A possible WikiProject Eminem

Hello. I'm proposing a WikiProject Eminem at WikiProject Council/Proposals/Eminem. Would you mind taking the time to vote there? Put your name in the Support section if you think he deserves one. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 14:27, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making We're New Here a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

The Psycho (Dr. Dre song)

I have tagged this page for deletion per WP:SONGS. Would you like to comment at the AfD page? I would like an outside opinion. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 15:17, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Big Boi- Tiny Mix Tapes source issue

Thanks for directing me to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard; I just posted there. Feel free to add your comments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Tiny_Mix_Tapes_news_post_used_as_source_in_Big_Boi_article

Re: Review article?

To be honest I don't know how to review articles, even though I have reviewing status. QuasyBoy 04:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

RE: Review articles? 2

I may take one of them the next week, but I need to finish first Transformers: Dark of the Moon's GAR. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:44, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Kind of Blue

An article that you have been involved in editing, Kind of Blue has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. howcheng {chat} 17:43, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

TMOLH

Howdee Dan. As you might remember, you and I got into a little "squabble" about a year or so ago in regards to the album rating table on The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill - you were in favor of the Pitchfork rating over the 2004 Rolling Stone one, and I was opposite. We settled on the RS rating and left it at that, until recently. I noticed that you once again replaced the '04 RS rating w/ Pitchfork. I have absolutely no problem with Pitchfork's review, It's just that I can't help but wonder why this is an issue here, but not elsewhere like Illmatic, where there's by no means a shortage of reviews. You also replaced the USA Today rating with a Chicago newspaper that's not on Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Review sites - which is why I reverted them (until this is settled). I really don't want to edit war and jeopardize my editing privileges, so hopefully we can be civil with this and not get riled up. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 23:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Replacing USA Today with Pitchfork sounds good. I can dig that. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 01:44, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now (2)

I did some work on there and copy-editing and what not to fix it better please check what I have done and anything that needs edited please do. Thanks. JamesAlan1986 (talk-contribs) 17:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Let me tell that was a LOT of work fixing that, especially the copy-editing (oiy!) talk about messed up lol! At least it looks a lot better. JamesAlan1986 (talk-contribs) 19:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Late Registration edit

Hello, Teflon Peter Christ. You have new messages at Mattchewbaca's talk page.
Message added Mattchewbaca (meow) 22:10, 22 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Speak Now

Hey, I saw you removed my edit and I honestly don't really mind but what I didn't like is your reason. Saying it's "fancruft" well I think it's exaggerated since there are lots of music pages that mention in which TV series a certain song has been used. You could have written "not sufficiently noteworthy". I'm not mad or anything but I just wanted to explain myself. Sofffie7 (talk) 15:49, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

yo

what was unconstructive & how come I dont get a welcome to wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickyRozay (talk • contribs) 01:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

how come I dont get a welcome to wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickyRozay (talk • contribs) 04:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Give your opinion.

Someone is asking here about changing the genre on Speak Now can you give your opinion on this? JamesAlan1986 (talk-contribs) 03:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Kanye West proposal

Hello. I'm proposing a WikiProject Kanye West at WikiProject Council/Proposals/Kanye West. Would you mind taking the time to vote there? Put your name in the Support section if you think he deserves one.

Kanyewest1123 (talk) 08:43, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making House of Music a certified "Good Article"! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Image size reduction

Hi there. You recently tagged a file with {{non-free reduce}} or {{reduce}} that was, in fact, within acceptable size for fair use images. Standard practice places the maximum size at 160,000 pixels, which is 400x400 in a square image. However, 500x320, 600x266, etc. are also 160,000 pixels, and are acceptable. DASHbot, the program that does almost all image resizing, actually won't even bother with files that come out to less than 160,000 pixels, so chances are low that the files will ever be reduced anyways. If you really want a file smaller than 160,000 pixels reduced, you can do it easily with the free program Paint.NET (what I use), or ask me directly.

Just letting you know for the future, Sven Manguard Wha? 14:19, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

I've responded on my talk page. For ease, what I said was "File:Nas-the-lost-tapes-lp.jpg was the one that triggered the message. Don't lose any sleep over this, I've left a half dozen other people the identical message, it's a common and pretty harmless mistake." Sven Manguard Wha? 14:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The version I uploaded is more accurate to the original album cover and is between 220 and 300px per Template:Infobox_album#Cover. It should be kept. Dan56 (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I was unaware of that stipulation (it appears most album cover uploaders are also unaware of it). Just so you know, unless the upload is exactly the right size, the Wikipedia software will resize it for display, causing a quality loss. It looks like the best result is 220x200. Either way, thanks for pointing that out, and feel free to revert back to the smaller version. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Dan56: I read your comments on minor edits. Helpful. In your view, is changing the plural to singular in a paragraph to make it grammatically correct an ME? E.g. The firm are now making widgits to The firm is now making widgits? Herbolzheim (talk) 20:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

John Mayer reverting

I have John Mayer on my watchlist and happened to see the reverting going on between yourself and 200.56.178.29. Without commenting on the actual edits/dispute, might I suggest you actually engage with the user rather than just templating him over and over and reverting it as "vandalism"? Your current pattern is not the proper way to handle a dispute. either way (talk) 21:50, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

I should also mention that you're at 3RR on the page. either way (talk) 22:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Civility and persona attacks

You should be well aware of our civility and personal attack guidelines, so I should not be seeing edit summaries like this coming from you. If things like that continue, you will be blocked. either way (talk) 17:33, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Watch the Throne

I'm not sure if you'll know that i've replied on my talk page so i just thought i'd let you know here too. Thanks for letting me know about the fact the album wasn't mentioned in the ARIA database as being certified, It looks like that section hasn't been updated yet. If you visit this part http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display.asp?chart=1G50 it shows that the album has been certified Gold, sorry about the confusion. --Duphin (talk) 11:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

WTT

im sorry, i wont do it again, my apologies, i was just putting the facts from the sources. 68.62.240.86 (talk) 20:51, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now

Believemets409 is vandalizing the deluxe edition section twice I have checked their reference and all it does is take you to the main page of HMV. I looked on the site as well and looked up their claim it shows the same thing as here and here all it is like the first one an import being sold brand new that's all it is. JamesAlan1986 *^talk 19:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

This is the only one I have found that is a legit Canadian Deluxe Edition. JamesAlan1986 *^talk 19:23, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Lost Tapes

The article The Lost Tapes you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are many changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within one week, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:10, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Input

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Disruptive edits Redirect here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sparks Fly(Taylor Swift song), this user has been warned 5 times now that to stop their disruptive behavior and if all those involved would please comment on this it'd be really appreciated. Thanks. JamesAlan1986 *^talk 16:09, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/FutureSex/LoveSounds/archive2

Hi Dan. Your inputs to FutureSex/LoveSounds have been very much constructive. Can you possibly leave some comments on the PR page? Thanks. --Efe (talk) 13:49, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Opinion

Can I get your opinion on this? JamesAlan1986 *^talk 21:13, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:D'angelo promoting.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:D'angelo promoting.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:05, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Playa Playa sample.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Playa Playa sample.ogg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:23, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Help

Hi there, since you've done a great job at working on the 'Critical reception' section on the F.A.M.E. article, I was wondering if you could please work on the reception section in the Future History article as well? Oz ^talk 05:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I'm pretty sure you warn the user and IP editor first about that. But if they keep reverting your edits and you still think its the same person, then report it here Oz ^talk 01:10, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

GOOD Music

Hi, the second table in the Discography table on the GOOD Music page is contains an error, as you can probably notice, starting at the 2010 part. I've spent some time looking at it, and can't figure out what's wrong. Do you know how to, or anyone who can?--Technobliterator (talk) 22:28, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Talk page undos

Re: this edit. Editors are free to erase past warnings and blocks. While I agree with you in spirit that they probably shouldn't be allowed to, they are. That means you shouldn't undo page blankings like that.—Kww(talk) 14:14, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Lost Tapes

The article The Lost Tapes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see the talkpage for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

The one adding sales form Meditraffic

Hi. (Still remember me?) Kendallamc2 said he is reporting me. What should i do? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 05:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for late reply. Thanks for you message Dan. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi again. I think there is an article on Wikipedia which lists the professional reviews that can be added to album articles. Can you please direct me to that page? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Dan. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:18, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Re:

Hey Dan, I apologize for the late response. Anyways, I noticed this topic has now found its way on the 36 Chambers talk page (obvious not prior to your contacting me). If this issue boils back up I will no doubt partake in the discussion. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Let's Talk

Say anything you want. I want to know why you always want to revert my edits and call them vandalism when it's not. KopJ (talk) 02:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Why do you keep deleting stuff without explanation?   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 02:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

"Enchanted"

I have started a discussion about the vandalism that has been going on regarding this song on the Speak Now talk page. I think all of us who edit on Taylor's stuff should discuss this and come up a consensus on what should be done about the vandalism. So please be sure to give your input. Thanks! JamesAlan1986 *^talk 10:27, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

East Coast hip hop

I'm not by any means an expert on hip hop music, but the list which I made wasn't original research. I happened to be watching a documentary on the East Coast-West Coast hip hop feud from back in the 1990's and they talked briefly about the history of hip hop and then began to name off the most influential East coast hip hop rappers and some names I was already familiar with (ie. The Notorious B.I.G., Run-D.M.C., and Rakim). So I quickly grabbed a pen and paper and listed as many names as I could. The list I had up on the page was still missing several rappers which were mentioned in the documentary. Plus, if you look at the article itself under "History", you'll see that all or most the names which I listed are the same names mentioned as the people who influenced East coast hip hop in the main body of the article, anyway. I was just compiling those same names into a list so that it can be easier for readers to become familiar with the artists that influenced and shaped East coast hip hop as we know it. Can I reference the documentary? Can I re-reference some of the references that are already on the page? Also, there seems to be a similar list in the West coast hip hop article and it seems like it was okay over there, so why not here? Bastian (talk) 20:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: GGGB

I can't "undo" edits, I only have the option to "restore" or "rollback". Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:14, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Young Money

There's a page Young Money (band), which I don't think is necessary, as all the information seems to belong on Young Money Entertainment. As I'm not familiar with deletion policy, should Young Money (band) be deleted?--Technobliterator (talk) 20:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism or a mistake?

Your recent change to Stories from the City, Stories from the Sea looks like either vandalism or a mistake. The quote "record of sustained beauty, power, insight, groove, and/or googlefritz that has invited and repaid repeated listenings in the daily life of someone with 500 other CDs to get to" attributed to Robert Christgau is nowhere in the review cited. And adding a reference to Christgau's rating explanations is totally unnecessary.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and allow you to correct this

-- J. Wong (talk) 22:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

The reference to Christgau's rating explanations is the reference to the quote. Dan56 (talk) 00:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see, yes. I guess I was confused because it didn't seem to have much to do with the album itself. Maybe it isn't really appropriate here? There's some number of A+ Christgau ratings. I don't think we need to quote it for every album so rated.

-- J. Wong (talk) 00:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

No Ceilings and Man on the Moon: The End of Day

Dear Dan56, this is User:Speedfish. When I was editing No Ceilings and Man on the Moon: The End of Day, I was actually adding important info, NOT vandalizing. The End of Day's page said that No I.D. helped produce the album. There is a category for the albums he produced, but that category wasn't on the album's page, so i put it there. Also, notable producers of No Ceilings were not listed in the infobox, and there are categories for the albums produced by them, but they were not on the bottom of the page, so I put them there. Why are you saying that I was messing around? -Speedfish

Reliable sources?

Where can I find a reliable source for genres? lyriclegendlover 21:05, 30 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Streeter (talk • contribs)

My last post to your talk page (October 2011) addresses that. Dan56 (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything - as of "WikiProject Albums". I want songs AND albums. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian Streeter (talk • contribs) 00:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ware&Gaye.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ware&Gaye.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 03:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Please let us know what you think

My friend, as you know, Beyonce's new album 4 is being handled in a catastrophic way (i do not know if this is a correct word). Please voice your opinion here so that we can decide which format will suit "Party" that best. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Huh?

You didn't quite yet answer my full question. The next part of my question is that when I edited it it said [[Hip hop music|Hip-hop]] and when you edited it and removed the dash, you also edited something too. You changed it from [[Hip hop music|...]] to [[Hip Hop music|...]]. You capitalized the first letter of "hop". The page on Wikipedia is not written Hip Hop music. lyriclegendlover (talk) 12:39, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Sir Lucious Left Foot: The Son of Chico Dusty

Greetings, and thank you for your edit. I understand your concern, particularly given standards of WP:BIO. However, I did not add incorrect information to the article; my edit clarifies that "purple" or "purple drank" is liquid coedine, and does so without either adding another full sentence or requiring the reader to leave the current paragraph via link. Per WP:MOSQUOTE and WP:QUOTE, my edit clearly falls within the allowable use of brackets, i.e., "[s]quare brackets are used to indicate editorial replacements and insertions within quotations, though this should never alter the intended meaning;" and "if not used verbatim, any alterations must be clearly marked, i.e. [square brackets]." Thanks. -199.173.225.33 (talk) 13:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

In a Perfect World...

Hi there, I don't understand your revert: the article on "Slant Magazine" has "Slant" in italics and identifies the site in the infobox as a "webzine" (web magazine); and Template:Album ratings says "most commonly an online music service like Allmusic, or a music magazine like Rolling Stone—note that magazines are italicized", which to me implied a reminder that magazines should have italics, rather than only magazines should have them. Also, my edit wasn't even to the template: it was to the prose. Acalamari 19:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I would appreciate a response please. Thanks. Acalamari 23:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

That seems reasonable to me, and I'll remember that in future. Thanks for explaining. :) Acalamari 11:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

AIV

Hi, I actioned your AIV report of Ian Streeter because it was an unambiguous case, but in general, I and other admins tend to dislike blocking good-faith editors through AIV. I know it takes a little longer, but could I trouble you to use Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for any reports of that nature you might need to make in future. Alternatively, you can bug an admin you know—you;re welcome to ask me, but I can;t promise an immediate response. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

intro to invincible mj

can an agreement be reached that though numerically it is a certain number studio album ( which can be placed later in the article), it is his final album,, at the begining of the intro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.8.189.108 (talk) 16:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

AfD

Your input here is appreciated. Thanks! —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 19:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Genre warrior?

I wasn't meaning to be a genre warrior when I edited pages like Drake (entertainer) and Thank Me Later. All I did was re-arrange the genres. I put them in a different order. I have a question — does putting genres in a different order really matter? Ian Streeter (talk) 03:09, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: If It's Lovin' that You Want

He was right in this instance, that's why no one reverted him. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 14:27, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Could you please help?

User Itsbydesign seams to think that there is some rule against stating 1,346,242/1,346,658 as 99.97% (in the Speak Now World Tour) and continually reverts it to 99% yet all he cites to support his actions is neutrality and this makes no sense. Please let me know what you think. And if it must be rounded shouldn't it be rounded to the nearest (100%). I appreicate your opinion if there is some thing I am missing please let me know, thanks. Theodorerichert (talk) 20:28, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Are you serious right now?

You lack of knowledge about music astounds me. "Downtempo" and "uptempo" are descriptions of the beat and pace of the songs. They are not genres. The sources never said they were genres. It's not up to me to prove to you that they are genres, but the other way around. You're introducing incorrect information into the article. Orane (talk) 05:32, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

• And, the Wikipedia article that you are citing has absolutely no weight in the argument, because it has no references to support its claim i.e. it contains original research. All of it. And I may put it up for deletion. Orane (talk) 05:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Take Care

A lot of users on here do it that way. Plus theres notes underneath the track listing to explain what they're for. Oz ^talk 07:31, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

He would never listen. Same problem I had with him on an article we worked on in the past. It's his way or the highway. Orane (talk) 07:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Shit, I'm sorry. I got your request to late, though I would have helped out if I had seen it earlier. Bruce Campbell (talk) 02:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Why are you so intent on saying there's less rapping on Take Care than on Thank Me Later? Take Care not only features multiple Drake rap verses on several tracks (while almost all tracks on Thank Me Later featured only 1 Drake verse and a guest rapper for the others,) but Take Care also features songs where Drake does nothing but rapping....while Thank Me Later featured his singing vocals on all but 1 song, its title track.

Take Care is also something like twice as long as Thank Me Later. So again....how you can say that Take Care has less rapping on it than Thank Me Later boggles my mind, and it's rather misleading and paints an incorrect picture of the album to have it there. Critic reviews are not sources, they're opinions, and opinions from people who obviously haven't heard Thank Me Later in a while. I ask you to consider removing that line. Info845 (talk) 02:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I suppose that would be an improvement, as it's simply a fact (going by album length alone, letalone the content of the songs themselves) that there's not more rapping on Thank Me Later than there is on Take Care. I'd still disagree that Take Care has an increased emphasis on singing (have you heard both CDs?) but I'd be willing to compromise with something like that "larger emphasis" line if you honestly feel that those critics are right. I just don't see how you can, though.

Info845 (talk) 03:33, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Can someone please check this out? User talk:RickyBryant45324 10:13, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

The Fame Monster sales.

Hi, The Fame Monster EP wasn't released WW, It was released only in US, Canada and Japan. WW it was part of The Fame re-release, called The Fame Monster too. The article is talking about the re-release not the The Fame Monster EP. The wikipedia article is about The Fame Monster EP, that is why you can't put 6 million sales because that include The Fame re-release too. Thanks--Albes29 (talk) 14:57, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Feller and Charles.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Feller and Charles.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. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• 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) 06:41, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Worried Mind sample.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Worried Mind sample.ogg. 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. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• 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) 06:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Modern Sounds promo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Modern Sounds promo.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. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• 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) 06:46, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

WP:Articles for deletion/This Close to You

I've started a new articles for deletion page. It actually started on November 4 but didn't get any shares after mine. I want to get repliers quick so I've invited you to share on the articles for deletion page! Go to this page to share:
WP:Articles for deletion/This Close to You


Ian Streeter (talk) 12:12, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Warning?

How do you find quickly who are doing bad things so I can leave warnings to them? Because I know htat this is what you do. Ian Streeter (talk) 21:23, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

user:JentinaChapman

You're an admin right? can you do both a user IP check on mine and JentinaChapman's as Kww has got it in his mind that me and her share the same IP and he's blocked someone he shouldn't of had as she's an ex-rapper turned model truned mum who's got Gypsy in her family, and once you've done the check could you tell him that there's no match and unblock her as one of my friend's got her on Facebook and both him and her are doing their nut about it. 86.142.233.1 (talk) 17:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Do You know anyone who's an admin who has got it? 86.142.233.1 (talk) 17:14, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but Dan56 isn't an administrator here on the English language Wikipedia. I would suggest that she appeals the blocking by putting {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} (with the reason after the =). Tell her to read WP:Guide to appealing blocks first. PS - I am an admin... Peridon (talk) 18:01, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Back To Black

How should it be included either way? The site I took as source names all the Platinum albums and there are only 4 albums reaching 7x Platinum including the albums I named. So it's obvious that BTB is the 3rd best-selling album there (along with the other album I named). So why not writing it that way? --79.199.27.43 (talk) 01:12, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Speak Now

Dispute or Support the Charted Songs Section in Speak Now. I have posted this for a consensus to be agreed upon in whole instead of just by two people. RickyBryant45324*^talk 06:20, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Discussion?

I posted a new message at the talk page of 'Project Chick' saying that it could be notable because it peaked inside the top twenty of the R&B chart. Please reply ASAP. Ian Streeter (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Question at the help desk about one of your edits

Hi Dan, there's a question here at the Help Desk about this edit to Undun in which you removed this review in particular. I've guessed what your reason was, but you might be able to explain it better. Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 10:49, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down

The article Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself?

This user helped promote Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down to good article status.

Very nice! Looks like a good candidate for WP:FAC, isn't it?♫GoP♫_T^CN 16:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Think we've got a sock puppet

216.249.66.160 (talk · contribs), Dumb + dumb = 4 (talk · contribs)

And possibly Brexx (talk · contribs)?

— Status {^talk_contribs 11:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

My Sincere Wishes For This Festive Season

		★*★*★*★*★*★*★*★* Merry Christmas And Happy New Year 2012 *★*★*★*★*★*★*★*★
		I Wish You And Your Family A Merry Christmas And A Happy New Year 2012. May The New Year Bring Much Happiness, Prosperity, Peace, And Success In Your Life. I Am Very Happy To be Part of Wikipedia And To Have Great Friends Like You. Cheers. - From A Big Fan of ----> Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Concerning Nostalgia, Ultra

I had some free time and I wanted to work on the Nostalgia, Ultra article, perhaps to promote it go GA status. Mostly out of boredom and because I really love Frank's music. But I can't really do anything with the article because of all the Nostalgia, Lite information.

I propose that since the EP has been indefinitely delayed, the article should be only about the original mixtape, and it should mention the planned EP in the article itself. I don't know though... you're the main contributor on the article. Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of What Were You Hoping For?

The article What Were You Hoping For? you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:What Were You Hoping For? for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself? ♫GoP♫_T^C_N 16:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

		The Music Barnstar
		For you work on music articles, I hereby award you this barnstar! :)♫GoP♫TCN 16:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Good Article Barnstar
		Thanks Dan56 for helping to promote What Were You Hoping For? to Good Article status. Please accept this little sign of appreciation and goodwill from me, because you deserve it. Keep it up, and give someone a pat on the back today. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 01:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Your pages are back

Hello Dan56, your pages are moved back. If you don't want this to happen again, please file a indefinite move-protection request to WP:RFPP. --Bryce (talk | contribs) 05:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)