This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
On wikipedia, I remark that there's the following consensus : on a page about a band, one doesn't publish a picture when only the singer appears on it with no other band member on his/her sides. I read many bands pages and that's always the case on wikipedia. The Cure, The Smiths, Joy Division, killing Joke, etc... You replied me "there are plenty of band articles with member-pics". Can you give one instance on wikipedia ? carliertwo (talk) 05:09, 1 august 2008 (UTC)
Didn't realize that Triping was blocked again. You missed one of her accounts.
Kww (talk) 18:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are listed as the protecting admin for RBD discography. The page has been semiprotected for longer than 2 months without an expiry date set. Because Wikipedia relies on contributers to make the encyclopedia, I'm asking you to review your decision and either
I hope that you will do one of the two in order to reduce the backlog of pages that have been semiprotected for very long period of time. If there are other pages you have also protected, I will try not to give more reminder, but I hope that you will double check your protection log to pick up and pages you might have forgotten. Thank you. -Royalguard11(T) 20:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC) Why am I receiving this message?
I moved this article to a more accurate title List of artists who reached number one in the United States , as there was a lot of info that predated the Hot 100, the title was somewhat inaccurate. It will also stop people complaining about those older artists like elvis, it allows the full inclusion of any artists #1's irrelevant of date barriers. It's also inline with other articles on US #1's. — Realist2 16:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.103.7 (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
How is that naming conventions? A duo are not a band. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
The protection of I Kissed a Girl was warranted but excessive. A two week protection is too much for such vandalism, and do please remember to place the sprot tags onto an article when protecting it. 91.110.235.111 (talk) 19:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Could you please move Category:Eagles (band) members to Category:Eagles members? It's been sitting in speedy rename for a while now. Thanks. Oh yeah, I re-nominated the Leslie Satcher category, you might want to weigh in there. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Can you please take a look at this afd? People are calling for a keep when it's clearly too early for a page. I think some major trouting is needed. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, eo. I have a couple of questions I was hoping you could answer. I created the page for the Bill Withers song "Lovely Day" and have been cross-referencing and trying to find other versions of the song. I found "It's Gonna Be a Lovely Day" by S.O.U.L.S.Y.S.T.E.M. featuring Michelle Visage on the Billboard #1 Dance lists for 1992 and 1993, and "It's Gonna Be...(A Lovely Day)" by Brancaccio & Aisher on the same list for 2002, and I wiki-linked both songs to the article I created. Do you think that's right? I wouldn't ask if the songs were just cover versions, but I'm pretty sure they're both samples, and I'm not sure if the same applies in that case. I did mention both versions in the article, but if I'm wrong just take the links back out (and sorry for being a pest). Also, does the article look OK to you? I think I've learned a lot since I first encountered you through wikipedia a few months back. Thanks. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Since you are the lead music person I'm coming to you. You/we really need to erode the specification of "Billboard Hot 100" on all these articles unless you actually want an article dedicated to billboard Hots 100 hits only. It doesn't make sense to do it like that anymore. All article should be aligned to "U.S. number one hit", irrelevant of pre Billboard dates. I don't think this should be just the article title, but any other info in the article that tries to distinguish the charts. We can make a new article dedicated to Billboard Hot 100 only if you think it's worth it though. It's become an urban myth that the only chart that ever existed was billboard hot 100 and Elvis has 17 of them. Lets set the record clear. If you want me to help you I can, maybe I will watchlist some of ya articles to help you? — Realist2 03:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this, do you think we could try and get media traffic banned as a source? I believe UK MIX was stopped. I really hate that fake chart. — Realist2 04:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Why not just move it to Sugarland and put a hatnote for Sugar Land, Texas? We don't even need the dab there, since the DeNiro film was evidently cancelled. Could the dab then be speedied as a G6 because the hatnote would serve the same purpose? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 11:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
However it is an important chart. Hot Digital Tracks is more of a component chart than Hot Digital Songs. Plus, why should the Pop 100 have one and not the Hot Digital Songs? As far as I'm concerned, the only non-component chart fro singles in Billboard is the Hot 100. Tcatron565 (talk) 15:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Everybody else posts Those charts so Get over Yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NickGossiplover (talk • contribs) 05:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
I vaguely remember people deciding that Brazil Hot 100 was absolute crap, and shouldn't be listed. However, I can't find any traces of that discussion. Ring any bells?
Kww (talk) 22:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
It looks to me like the Radio Disney Hot 30 fails WP:CHARTS, so I started a discussion here. It's clear to me that it doesn't convey notability ... I'm more worried about trying to maintain the column in articles where notability has already been established. If I could find a verifiable source, I wouldn't bother to push it, but my feeling is that I'm going to start taking it out of hundreds of articles. Before I do that, I like to have the feeling that there is support for that decision, and that I haven't just failed to find a source. Your input is welcome.Kww (talk) 14:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I can't find any argument in WP:FU that indicates that the single cover can't be merged into the parent article when the single article is merged. I've been merging the Disney singles, and when I do, I merge the cover along with the article. If you can point me at what part of WP:FU you believes that violates, I'd appreciate it. For now, I've reverted [[2]], because it will fuel the fire towards bringing back all these single articles I've been working to merge.Kww (talk) 20:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you could help me. I seem to be involved with some weird edit battle with KM*hearts*MC and an anon IP user. How I got involved was, I agreed with KM's edit to KylieX2008and this editor got really upset and began to call both myself and KM "stubborn" and "stupid". He/She continued to make claims about not having freedom, etc. Additionally, he/she has gone through my contributions and reverted edits that I have made to other articles, which I believe is being done out of spite (am I not sure if he/she is doing the same to KM). With every edit this user makes, their IP address changes, however (according to WHOIS), the IP belongs to the same company, Telekom Malaysia Berhad and Opal Communications (located in Kuala Lumpur/Manchester), which why I believe is it the same person, probably using a public terminal. I feel that this person is going to continue to "throw a fit" and continue to revert my edits. I am not really sure if this problems constitutes blocking but tts already starting to be annoying and quite frustrating to replace my edits. I have complied a list of the IP address I know he/ she are using. I am sure there is more. Dancefloor royalty (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
As a frequent contributor to articles related to music, you are invited to review this RfC and comment, if you see fit! Best regards, --Winger84 (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
You posted wrong information about the Mittageisen single ---> wrong producers + Wrong copyrights. In fact, here are the correct details mentionned on the sleeve : "produced by Mike Stavrou/Nils Stevenson", "Love in a void (copyrights : Sioux, Severin, Morris,FENTON)" and not by McKay ("Love In a void" was composed in early 77, before the arrival of McKay in the band). Other point, I'm gonna rename that page 'cse the actual page is about the german release of june'79 which was very confidential. The uk release released in sep'79 is slightly different : first, it's called "Mittageisen/Love In a void" and not simply Love.... and both songs are mentionned in red on the front of the sleeve. Two, it is also slightly different in its form : it's a double A side single (on each side of the label, there's a A written) which means that the band decided that both songs are the same importance. carliertwo (talk) 16:09, 30 august 2008 (UTC)
Can you check the August 4th and May 22 versions of the deleted article Beat Goes On (Madonna song)? The reason given for deletion was that there was no evidence that the song would be released as a single. Even though it was not released as a single as far as I can tell, a remix of it was on the Get Stupid video interlude on Madonna's Sticky and Sweet Tour. As such, an article about the song should be allowed. Please restore one or both of the versions with their edit histories so I can create an appropriate article without having to start over. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Is this category a speedy renaming criterion? Since I moved the parent article to Robert John "Mutt" Lange, the category should match, shouldn't it? Rockfang disagreed in the speedy rename category, so I thought I'd ask you since you've moved categories for me before. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Can you please look into this? There is a normal one, a singles one and an album one, as a result of User:Jarajet89 Eight88 (talk) 08:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --15:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Goldfrapp Satin Boys Flaming Chic.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
I've had to edit one part of The Grass Roots article many, many times. One part features a partial list of their hit songs, with chart positions NOT included. I edited it this part of the article to include the chart positions, feeling it would be more convenient to have the positions there than scroll down to a whole other part of the article. However, everytime I return to the article, my edits have been taken out, forcing me to re-edit the same section over and over. Is there a way to lock off this part of the article, so my edits can remain without being deleted by someone else? --Putnam269 (talk) 18:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Heart Nothin at All.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 14:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
wait... what did i do wrong? i added a tracklist confirmed by 4 MAJOR sources... whats wrong with that? Ba11innnn (talk) 01:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Why is this a problem, what is the matter with adding Hot Digital Sslaes chart, reply or else Hometown Kid (talk) 09:57, 15 September 2008
I would like your input, if possible, at this thread of WP:AN. As the admin who gave Vitor mazuco the indef block, I think your response would be appreciated. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Komeda Plan 714 Till.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Lennox INAM.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)