User talk:AnemoneProjectors/Archive 4

NowCommons: File:Andy Abraham.JPG

File:Andy Abraham.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Andy Abraham.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Andy Abraham.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 05:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Bleeding Love (Leona Lewis).ogg)

Thanks for uploading File:Bleeding Love (Leona Lewis).ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Take a Bow (Leona Lewis).ogg)

Thanks for uploading File:Take a Bow (Leona Lewis).ogg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Miss seeing you around

OK, it's been a year now since you last edited. On the off chance that you should ever log in again one day, just wanted you to know that you have not been forgotten :) GunGagdin^Moan 13:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Omg I is back!!! As of like, now! but don't expect edits or replies for ages cos i got no internet access at the moment! I missed you, Wikipedia! ^anemone│_projectors 14:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

WOW! Welcome back!! I'm so, so pleased to see you're OK. I thought you might have had a horrible accident or something cos u just vanished, and the EE project has been all but abandoned without you around. OK, none of my business, but WHERE THE HELL HAVE YOU BEEN??? I really missed seeing you around. You've been away for a year and missed a whole series of X Factor!!! not like u, lol 19:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I thought you might have thought I might have had a horrible accident or something cos I just vanished. Well, maybe I did. Or maybe I was just abducted by aliens? Who knows? I can't remember what happened. It's all a big haze... Luckily they get The X Factor in outer space :) Is Trampikey still around? ^anemone│_projectors 16:32, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, so long as you enjoyed the anal probing the aliens gave you :) whatever you were up to, you're a sod for not saying goodbye, leaving me to imagine all sorts. I think Trampikey still edits, though neither he or I edit a great deal now, and we dont really collaborate on anything anymore. I'm off work this week, so I've been looking over the EE articles, and they are mostly all ruined. No one is left to police them. Shame really after all that work that went into them. Anyway, welcome back. GunGagdin^Moan 16:45, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I didn't get probed but I got some alien pregnant... hehe. I knew Wikipedia wouldn't survive without me ;) ^anemone│_projectors 16:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back! I wondered where you'd gone! Adi39 (talk) 21:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

OMG

Welcome!

Hello, AnemoneProjectors, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Majorly talk 23:57, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, now I know. ^anemone│_projectors 00:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Welcome back! Great to see you again. Acalamari 02:47, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I haven't made a mess of anything. I've added information that is correct. Characters keep being listed as regular cast members when they're merely flying visits. What ever happened to the section for the temporary/short term characters? Also, when questioning my edits, don't be rude. I find that form of communication to be unsuccessful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eefan (talk • contribs) 17:53, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Danielle Jones (EastEnders)

Do you think it's time this page is protected? The edit warring is getting silly.GunGagdin^Moan 14:02, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and done. ^anemone│_projectors 14:18, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

James Forde

Hey there, AnemoneProjectors, this is just a query but just wondering can I redirect James Forde, to EastEnders?, because as you'll see on Forde's profile it is up for AfD, so should it be redirected or should it be left your comments please --79.76.57.25 (talk) 22:02, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't redirect it while the AFD is there. It might be kept, if not it'll be deleted. I don't know if I would redirect it. ^anemone│_projectors 22:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

You are mentioned at ANI

[1]. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 20:52, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh no! ^anemone│_projectors 20:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

The Secret Mitchell

I redirected this article to Danielle Jones (EastEnders) because the whole storyline centres around her. All the information in the article you created is found in Danielle's, so there's no need to duplicate it. Also, claiming that you "created the page fully and added pictures, references etc" on your user page is a bit out of order when all you did was copy and paste it from another article. You didn't even copy the references correctly and you certainly didn't upload the image. ^anemone│_projectors 20:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I didn't claim I uploaded the pictures or anything i said i ADDED it. And I haven't completely finished it the whole promotion/reception part as the ratings haven't been released yet so could you at least wait before you at least consider deleting it as if that is the case then why hasn't Sharongate or Get Johnny Week been deleted?? Alex250P (talk) 21:03, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Because they're not completely covered in other articles. If you think they should be deleted, why not list them at AFD? But I think you should read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Ratings can still go in Danielle's article when they're released. And it's still out of order to claim you did all that work when all you did was copy and paste. ^anemone│_projectors 21:09, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I wrote the ENTIRE plot section no copies, I copied the photo as the one I tried to upload tonight wouldn't work and I just copied the promotion section so there would be something there before the ratings come out when I will condense and edit it Alex250P (talk) 21:11, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Well then I apologise. I assumed it was copied, as the other sections were. But that doesn't mean the article is necessary. ^anemone│_projectors 21:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Why not, if you look The Secret Mitchell rolls it all into one like the others do Sharongate etc. There are bits of info about the storyline on Danielle, Roxy, Ronnie and Archie's pages but that is the point its now all in one page and it was a storyline then was focused on for over a year so its defintly a major one. Alex250P (talk) 21:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, you'll notice I've left the article there. But I'm going to ask other editors what they think in case I'm wrong. ^anemone│_projectors 21:22, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

EastEnders - Danielle Jones

Just noticed on there it says for Danielle: Danielle Jones (Amy Slater)? Shouldn't that be Danielle Jones (Amy Mitchell)?? Ammera (talk) 13:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Haha, my mistake! Thanks for letting me know! ^anemone│_projectors 13:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I think Archie Mitchell, needs protecting

Because there is way to much IP vandalism on this article people are saying he is leaving but there has been no official statement released, so until there is I think it needs protecting agree? –79.68.94.204 (talk) 18:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Not at the moment, but I'll keep an eye on it. ^anemone│_projectors 18:38, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Danielle

Why are you deleting my updates? Am I the only person in the world who noticed the fact that Ronnie never called Danielle by her birth-name? This could be an important point in the future. Even if it isn't this is factual information and I don't see why you should decide to remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamgeorgefraser (talk • contribs) 19:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I think Frickative has answered this adequately on the talk page of that particular article. ^anemone│_projectors 20:43, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou

I just want to thankyou for giving me a chance creating The Secret Mitchell page, I hope i've updated it enough to get it to a good standard. Thanks again Alex250P (talk) 19:58, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Though I still think it has less information than Danielle Jones (EastEnders). Are you still working on it? ^anemone│_projectors 20:46, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Danielle Jones and EastEnders Template

Hi there AnemoneProjectors. Seeing as you edit the EastEnders pages alot i wondered if you could clear up a altercation with regard to the Danielle Jones article, the Template:EastEnders and User:Frickative.

User:Frickative is editing the page to include the Template:EastEnders. I have been removing it because with EastEnders characters when they depart, the template is removed and as seeing Danielle is now gone, the template should also be removed. Please help. Ammera (talk) 17:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I have replied on the talk page of that article. ^anemone│_projectors 17:21, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and with regards to the articles and the template, having read your response i do agree that all articles should include the template. I only kept removing it from articles as i thought that was the process so i apologise if i was wrong. Ammera (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

It used to be the process, so I'll let you off ;) ^anemone│_projectors 17:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Danielle

Sorry to have been such an A***hole. I was a bit stressed out and got annoyed at repetitive deletions of what I thought was a notable comment. My 24 hour ban helped me understand about Wikipedia and I hope we can work together in the future. Thanks for not undoing my edit earlier on this evening.-Williamgeorgefraser (talk) 20:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

That's ok. I didn't realise you were blocked. Your last edit to Ronnie Mitchell was a good one so I hope you can continue to make relevant contributions to the site. ^anemone│_projectors 20:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Leona Lewis

What's the purpose of this shadow copy of the Leona Lewis article that you keep around?—Kww(talk) 14:14, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I was working on improving the article in my userspace. Many people do this on Wikipedia. ^anemone│_projectors 14:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Stacey Slater

I've noticed that you've recently changed the character Stacey's name from Stacey Slater (previously Branning) to Stacey Branning (nee Slater). Well I think it should be kept as the first one because she refers to herself as Stacey Slater even though she is still legally married. She is separated from Bradley. Alex250P (talk) 19:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

That's why I started a discussion at talk:Stacey Slater#Name. As far as I remember, she refered to herself as Stacey Slater once when she was chatting someone up. She's still called Stacey Branning in the eyes of the "law" and on the EastEnders website. We agreed not to move the page as Stacey Slater is her best known name, but the lead should still read "Stacey Branning (nee Slater)". Feel free to discuss this at the talk page linked above. ^anemone│_projectors 19:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Beales

I'm not sure what is happening to all the family templates but I think that its slightly absurd. I was followind the absurd system and you have just persecuted and threatened me. I find it sordidly offending. If you want think that I am doing wrong please negotiate in a more cordial tone and I would like to debate th reasons of my work. You are not the EastEnders King in Wikipedia. We have diferent opinions to be honest. You might think that the Beales and the Fowlers are two seperated families who are just related I think they are one family. Theoretically, no one is wrong. You have really hurt me by your abasive ways. Now I'm am editing Beale family and I am including information on the Beale Empire. If you do not approve, please do not hesistate to talk to me before you delete it. Once again I am very hurt and the WikiProject should get rid of this travesty with making Frank Butcher a Mitchell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Twelfth Doctor (talk • contribs) 15:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

The Hills family template should stay how it is because the Hills family members are only related to the Beales through Kathy's marriage to Pete. There are several Hills members who aren't Beales and should therefore have their own template. I've only been merging the smaller templates where there were few characters not in another template, such as the Willaims and Clarke templates. I have no problem with you writing about the actual Beale family in the Beale family article. I haven't touched any other of your edits today, only your blanking of the Hills template and other similar edits. I didn't threaten you, but you were warned twice already about blanking the template, then you replaced it with your own text so I gave you a third warning. I have never separated the Beales from the Fowlers, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there. I haven't abused you in any way. Frank Butcher was in the Martins template so I added him in brackets as a spouse of Peggy, but please feel free to delete him, as I was probably wrong about including him there. We're trying to restructure the templates based on "clans" rather than genealogy. I'm not exactly sure what you think I've done that's upset you so much. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 15:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Amy Slater

Hi. The EastEnders website now has Amy Slater listed as Amy Mitchell so i wondered if you could change the names Ammera (talk) 13:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

EDIT: - Roxy has also gone back to Mitchell too

I don't know why they would have made that mistake. Roxy hasn't had her name legally changed, and hasn't had her daughter's name legally changed. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 15:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Giving up

OK I will officially give up editing wiki if this latest deletionsit on my talk page starts a trend.GunGagdin^Moan 22:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The Liam Connor image? Is this person saying that all pictures of fictional characters should be deleted? There's no difference between a picture of fictional character Liam Connor and fictional character Homer Simpson, and that's a featured article. It's pathetic. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 22:20, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I know! I can understand wanting to keep the images down to minimum, but that is one image, hardly could be deemed as overuse in that article. I just think it's ridiculous.GunGagdin^Moan 22:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Lauren Crace categorization

Hi, just wondering why you undone Lauren Crace categorization for Eastenders? Regards Gadjet001- 20:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadjet001 (talk • contribs)

Because categorising people by TV shows they've been in is a form of overcategorisation. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 21:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for tidying up and finishing the Slater template for me! I'm not a Wikipedia expert but I hope you didn't mind me helping with changing the template to the new agreed format?Cutekitten05 (talk) 22:46, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Nope I don't mind at all. I've been slowly going through them all... very slowly! So thanks for helping. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 22:48, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Clarence Whistler

Could you take a look at this for me. The article was created by L-morrow-028 (talk · contribs) ands originally looked like this. I don't normally edit wrestling articles and noticed that the article didn't have much of a claim of notability. I checked it out and was able to turn it into this. L-morrow-028 made a couple of edits and then did this which I reverted and left L-morrow-028 a message. Today I found that they had restored their version, which I reverted and left another message. Obviously I'm in a conflict with them and can't take any administrative action so I picked a random admin who I don't recall having talked to before. can you look it over and take the appropriate action. Thanks. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 15:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Nothing happened since your last warning, so I've put the page on my watchlist to keep an eye out. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 19:52, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 07:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton revert

Hello I notice you reverted my changing of 'debut' into 'début' on the Lewis Hamilton page. I would like to point out that, although this is indeed the English-language Wikipedia, 'début' is not an English word; in fact, it is taken from French (in the same way that café is). Therefore, as it isn't an English word, we must spell it the way it is spelled in the language it is taken from. The spelling 'debut' has evolved over time through laziness, as did the apostrophe. Just a little English lesson for you there... ;D Cdhaptomos talk–contribs 22:05, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

Debut is an English word, hence it appears in English dictionaries as 'debut', not as 'début'. Dictionaries aren't wrong you know. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 22:15, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

201.220.92.91 aka Nikollita

Hello, I just wanted to inform you that I have reported both users for edit warring. Thanks a lot for your help. (Jamesbeat (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC))

Good stuff. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 22:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Pat Evans

Dear Mr Projectors,

I am furious with your threat and I think its totally unreasonable. I feel like being absolutely offensive and I just want you to get a few facts in to your knolwedge because I have an arguement , I have a thought that should be respected.

Pat Wicks married Frank Butcher in the '80s. If you go on the [http:bbc.co.uk/eastenders|EastEnders website] you'll find that if you go to the Characters list, Pat is a Butcher. Why isn't she listed as a Beale? However, I would like you to click on the EastEnders web and you'll see that Pat is the figurehead of the Wicks, like Peggy is the figurehead of the Mitchells and was a still a Mitchell when she married Frank (according to wiki, Frank was brought into the Mitchell family). Therefore, I think that it is just to conjoin the 2 families together. Please to contact me if you want to argue your point but cease your haughtiness and I wasn't disruptively damaging the templates I was making sure that they were fully informed if you please. You have offended me very deeply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Twelfth Doctor (talk • contribs) 16:20, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hello. Firstly, I didn't threaten you, I just asked you to stop. Secondly, I don't know why Pat is listed with the Butcher family on the EastEnders website. She's only a Butcher through her marriage to Frank and she's only a Wicks through her marriage to Brian. The Butchers' template isn't Pat's template, and neither is the Wicks template Pat's. The Wicks family members such as Kevin, are nothing to do with the Butchers and therefore the two templates should not be merged. The Wickses and the Butchers were never a single family unit. I'm sorry you feel the way you do, but please try to stay calm, it's just a template. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 16:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Carly Wicks

Thought id bring it to your attention that someone has added the Butcher Family template to the Carly Wicks article. Is it a mistake or have i missed something lol? How is Carly related to the Butchers? Im sure she isn't. 92.20.148.178 (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Someone had decided it was a good idea to merge the Wicks and Butcher templates when obviously it isn't. I thought I'd removed the Butcher template from all the Wickses but I must have missed this one. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 16:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

William and Holly Trott

Yes they were, it was quite a while ago though. It was when Roxy was in hospital giving birth to Amy and She, Denise, Phil and Jane were in the Vic and Denise asked her if she would like kids and she said I would like boy and a girl, named after her fathers parents. Alex250P (talk) 18:03, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

How do you know!

I am sure if you look at the concept behind it, Peggy became known as a pole dancer when Janine revealed it and Sal admitted to Janine. I don't think it really matters to be honest if she is known for being erotic or not. I think we shouldn't start getting on the wrong side of each other because I think very strongly that you are making an enemy of out me. I think that my comments are useful. If you disagree we can vote. That will make Wikipedia more democratically and it may pacify our feud.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.168.194 (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, pole dancing usually is erotic. But I wouldn't expect to see Peggy Mitchell in a category for fictional erotic dancers. If I was looking for fictional erotic dancers, I'd expect to find the category populated by characters who do erotic dancing on-screen or it's their main job or something, but Peggy and Sal supposedly did it years before the show even began. Also, I'm sorry if it seems I'm reverting a lot of your edits. I didn't realise I had reverted you before because all I see is an IP address, I don't recognise the numbers. I don't want to make an enemy out of anyone. And Wikipedia doesn't have votes, it has dicussions. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 21:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I am very sorry that I didn't make it evident that it was me. I was editing without logging in. I am aware of this, but people now know that Peggy and Sal were involved in pole dancing. Pat was involved in prostitution before she arrived and I don't think that people exhume that part of her past. However, people on the Square are aware about her pole-dancing when Janine tried to ruin her political career because Peggy didn't want Janine as her spinmeister. It is fair to say that they were erotic dancers and I think it is reasonable to put them on the category. I don't think we should be making such a fuss about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Twelfth Doctor (talk • contribs) 10:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

We do seem to conflict a lot. I'm sorry about that. It's nothing personal against you. What would you expect to see if you were looking for fictional erotic dancers on Wikipedia? AnemoneProjectors (what?) 15:44, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Twlfth Doctor, but I also dont think the category is appropriate for inclusion. It isnt even covered in the article. Plus, Pat was actually prostituting herself in EE when she first came into it, so that's not a good comparison.GunGagdin^Moan 18:41, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

And as Frickative quoted from WP:CAT: categories should be based on essential, defining features of article subjects. Peggy and Sal's pole dancing is neither essential nor defining. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 20:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

Is this WHJ User talk:07jor GunGagdin^Moan 20:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know but I've blocked him for all that vandalism. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 20:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Ian and Nick (EastEnders)

I no I have already posted this on the List of EastEnders Characters discussion article, but I thought I would get a quicker answer if I asked you direct on here - What happened? What order is in question regarding Ian/Nick? Maybe I could help. Newtree21 (talk) 20:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I've replied at the appropriate talk page. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 20:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Lovetolovecraig

Re: Your edit here, you might be interested in my SPI report of this user ;-) Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 13:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh. I bloody hate sockpuppets. And I just happen to be watching a lot of the articles he's edited. AnemoneProjectors (what?) 13:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Dates

Oh, okay, I just thought it looked really ugly :$ Alex250P (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Haha yeah! I suppose we could keep them, but maybe we should set up a debate page or whatever? See what other people think? Alex250P (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, so I guess we should leave it like that then, I just think though if it is say, 1999-01 it should be 1999-2001 seen as though there is a change in decade? Alex250P (talk) 20:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I just don't like the way it looks anymore :$ I suppose that it makes them smaller but there was never really a problem in the first place Alex250P (talk) 14:51, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you did I'd be willing to help you :) I personally hate the way it looks now and the edit wars, well if we make like a proper statement/announcement about the way they should be e.g: 1983-1984, 1990, 1993-1999, 2006- instead of the 1994-98. So shall we change them? Alex250P (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay, and how do you use AWB by the way? Also it is kinda confusing as well when you see like 1998-99 and sometimes it just looks odd when like on spouses it's like this:

Joe Bloggs (1982-91) Bloggs Joe (1997-2003) Alex250P (talk) 17:37, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Reverend Stevens

Just wondering why you reverted my edits on Reverend Stevens? I appreciate he is only a recurring character in EastEnders but he has been appearing since January 2005, and has been present and key in some of EastEnders most dramatic episodes since then. Seeing as other recurring characters DO have their own wiki pages (Sal Martin, Janet Mitchell, Brenda Boyle) why not one for Reverend Stevens? Bleaney (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, he's still a minor character, even more minor than Tracy, who has been in it much longer but is still on a minor character page, and there's no real-world information about him, unlike Janet Mitchell or Sal Martin. I'm sure real-world information could be found about Brenda, what with this secret she has, but you won't find anything about the Rev. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Liking

Liking how you are now doing lots on development :) I think you should help me with Dot ;) GunGagdin^Moan 13:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you need any help with Dot! I doubt I'll find anything that you haven't already... But let's see, I've done Heather, a bit on Max, some on Stacey and Jean... yeah, I'm getting quite good! I think I did a good job with Joe Wicks! I'm just adding bits when they come alone, mostly. I'm also working on storylines sections, as and when I'm in the mood! Making sure they're all in present tense. I have more time than I used to... AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I never did finish Satcey's development off! I started that back when you suggested a project collaboration, several years ago!! I hate leaving things unfinished, but I keep doing it.GunGagdin^Moan 13:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I did say we should collaberate on her. Never mind! I'm really glad I sorted out Ronnie and Roxy's storylines, they'd got well out of hand! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:56, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm excited about Dot. I think she can be our second FA once finished, dont you? GunGagdin^Moan 14:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Definitely! U've done an absolutely amazing job! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:58, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks like Walford web have made their own wiki, and are using images we uplaoded and some prose we have written too [2]. Not that it matters to me, but just wanted you to know in case we get accused of poaching their images or content by any of the fairuse/copyright bods on here.GunGagdin^Moan 16:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. I won't be getting involved with it. Good luck to them. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

They could have all the images from our minor lists that were deleted.GunGagdin^Moan 16:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Do you want them to? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:20, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I dont mind, better that they are used by someone after all the time it took to capture the things. I think Trampikey is involved with WW, under a username called Shameless, so he may have something to do with that; he mentioned he was doing work with them to me a while ago.GunGagdin^Moan 17:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps he's working on their wiki then. TRAITOR!!! hehe AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Nick Cotton‎

In the absence of a section tag, I put that there because people come along and add plot narrations which do not illuminate the character, which is what the article is about. Any idea how we can fix this, apart from just deleting such detritus? Rodhullandemu 17:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

fixed it :) GunGagdin^Moan 18:18, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks GG. The problem with that one is that it has no storylines section, so any new storylines have to have some sort of development attached to them, unlike the other articles, but all past storylines are covered in the development section. I'm sure he'll be leaving soon though, and hopefully never returning again, so it won't be a problem then! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Amen to that, and also thanks to GG. Rodhullandemu 18:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

image position for Darwinius masillae

I noticed you took the effort to change the radiograph image of Darwinius masillae from float-right to float-left. The comment says "moved image to left to clear whitespace" but I am not certain what you mean by that. The "type specimen" section is plenty long enough to have the radiographic "diptych" be placed below the taxobox. Such a placement would also make the layout of the beginning of that section appear less crowded. Please clarify at Talk:Darwinius masillae why you think "float left" is best for the image. Thanks. 67.100.222.146 (talk) 22:43, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I assumed the image belonged at the top of the "type specimen" section, so I moved it because there was a huge area of whitespace between the merge tag and the text, due to the image being positioned within the text on the right. I have no problem with it being where you've moved it to, I only wanted to remove the whitespace. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Stacey Slater (Branning)

Hi again, I am writing in regard of the whole is she Stacey Slater or Stacey Branning thing and I think it should be kept as Slater seen as though both attempts at their marriage only lasted four months added together and she refers to herself as Stacey Slater. Roxy refers to herself as Mitchell not Slater and her page says Roxanne Lizette Mitchell (previously Slater). Do you agree, I just feel like this is the only page that is being treated like this. Alex250P (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I've changed Roxy's page, obviously it was missed. I'm a bit fed up of debating this now, I've explained it before. Could you ask on either talk:Stacey Slater or WT:EE? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

User:StamfordBridgeYeah

seems like that Abi loving blocked user is back.GunGagdin^Moan 17:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Again? I'd have thought she'd be too old for him now!!! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:43, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Lol, that's what I thought!GunGagdin^Moan 22:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Britian's Got Talent

Hi, AnemoneProjectors, I thought I would explain to you why I have been removing the "tables" from the semi-final section of Britain's Got Talent (series 3). This is because I feel that the various tables below and above have already explained the information at hand, and to repeat this would become unnecessary and redundant. Dt128 20:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the above and below tables show all the information from what you removed, but also there's a discussion going on about merging the table you removed with the buzzers and judges' saves tables. Your removal of the table goes against that discussion, and your change wasn't discussed. I'm reverting so the person who is going to merge the tables can do so. Hope that's ok with you. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I guess so, I will join the discussion. Dt128 21:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Creative (song)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Creative (song), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Creative (song). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 12:43, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

EastEnders character article

Some fool has added all the dates and durations to the List of EastEnders characters artcile. Could you please revert it possibly 92.11.20.215 (talk) 14:26, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

thanks

Yes, please put a copy of it on for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Symphonia87 (talk • contribs) 09:14, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Darth Jackson

Why the hell did you delete my Darth Jackson article, send me it, because I don't have it!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Symphonia87 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi
FWIW, I noticed about this at Symphonia87's talk page, and that article didn't really fit A7. I don't think that he has reached the level of notability to pass WP:BIO, but being part of that show certainly is an indication of importance to get it past A7.
Cheers, Amalthea 13:37, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps A7 was wrong, perhaps speedy deletion was wrong, but I doubt the article survive AFD. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I meant, you'll note I'm not asking for it to be restored. It's more a general issue when a good-faithed attempt at an article gets speedied, the author will often respond as above, which I think is part of the reason why A7 is so strict. A snowed AfD is I think preferable (and in this case, there probably would have been voices to keep it).
Cheers, Amalthea 14:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Bleeding Love

A talk page is for discussing ways to improve an article. Your outburst wasn't particularly helpful in that regard. "What does Leona Lewis know? ... Daft cow." (diff) Instead of regretting making such a remark, much better if somebody simply removed it. Certainly not worth getting angry over at any rate. Dynablaster (talk) 19:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

X Factor

The reason that I separated the pages, is because I was cleaning up the disambiguation page for X-Factor, and every link I could find with the dash in it, was about the X-Factor (comics). All the other disambiguation links I found (without the dash or the word "The") were actually about The X Factor (UK). Since the links were divided, I thought that the disambiguation pages should be divided as well, in order to make the distinction between the comic book spelling, and the TV show spelling. Furthermore, the Factor X (disambiguation) page did not have any pages linked to it, but similarly named pages were on the old X Factor disambiguation page. I appreciate your opinion, and I was not trying to make things difficult, but feel free to move the link for XFactor, if you think it is on the wrong page. Fortdj33 (talk) 17:47, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually, now that I think about it, you have a point. I went ahead and merged the two pages back into one. Thanks for mentioning it! Fortdj33 (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

My main goal was just to clean up the pages linked to the disambiguation page. I figured that this would be easier to do, once I knew which pages were about the comic book, and which pages were about the TV show, but after I did that, I realized that they didn't need to be separate pages. Thanks again for your help! Fortdj33 (talk) 19:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh my God

You're back! Where the bloody hell were you!? 86.144.58.86 (talk) 07:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Oops, wasn't logged in... -Trampikey^{(talk)(contribs)} 07:20, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh my god, YOU'RE back!!! As I told Gungadin, I was abducted by aliens. I've been 3 months and you only just notice?? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:28, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Adam Best (EastEnders)

On June 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Adam Best (EastEnders), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Mifter (talk) 09:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yay I did it :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Pop Idol (series 2)

Re: this, sorry about that. Post-ban I've been reverting all Nimbley6 edits on sight, to deprive the troll of any gratification.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 18:33, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I understand that you would revert all Nimbley6 edits, regardless of what they are. Just thought I should revert though as it just happened to be a good edit this time. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The edits do seem to have a greater proportion of better ones amongst them, or at least they did shortly before the ban (at which point I stopped paying attention... I suspect I should be more careful, or at least re-edit after reverting). I think part of it is a strategy (if that's not giving the troll too much credit) to get the more dubious ones past "the censors". The latest IP, for example, and the IP before it, seems to want this image added to an article. The image is on commons, and a blatant copyvio, so I regard the edit as a "bad edit" (ironically, if a non-banned editor uploaded the same image here, it would be fine under fair-use). Anyway... I'm wittering on! Thanks for being so understanding! Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 19:22, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Please moderate the Regine Velasquez page. So many false claims, there are no citations.

So many users in that page keep on putting false claims about Regine Velasquez' achievements and talent, to the point that they make up fake 'achievements' about her so-called 'reign'. Velasquez is not famous all over the world, she has not sold one million records all over Asia. They keep sensationalizing her page by writing over hyped and false claims such as having a 'palatial house', albums selling over 10X platinum, that Regine rejected the Miss Saigon role, and so much more. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.104.22.195 (talk) 22:50, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Storylines of EastEnders (1990s/2000s)

Hi, I wasn't signed in for some but I made some edits to both pages tonight and you deleted them. Can I ask why?

I added a couple of notable pets (Roly & Willy) to the deaths section in 1990s seeing as Wellard is listed in the 2000s page. I also reordered the marriages on the 2000s page to the order in which they were married in, Ian and Jane in particular are listed as having married a year before they did. Justifiable reasons for edit I thought? AJ21SW (talk) 23:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't mean to revert the dogs, only the additions of "by...". I've reverted myself there. You're right about Ian and Jane, I've also reverted myself there. Sorry again, I should have checked before I reverted. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 07:44, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Christian Clarke

Hi

I decided the other night to update the profile of Christian Clarke (EastEnders) to include the recent explosion at Kathy's Cafe. My update was deleted with the reason that he was not involved in the storyline and it didn't affect him.

I'm just wondering why it was deleted? Christian was involved in the storyline. He was in charge of the cafe at the time, he tried to break the door down to break into the cafe to rescue people, he is the one that is redecorating the cafe, he is the one currently having to trade the cafe off a market stall! His step-niece was also taken hostage during the siege. I also suspect that it will be Christian having to pay for the redecoration of the cafe. So I don't understand why it was deleted for him not being involved in the storyline and it not affecting him. He clearly was involved for the above reasons and it has affected him because he will be out of pocket if he has to pay for redecorating the cafe.

I wouldn't normally question what a mod says but I'm new to editing for Wikipedia and don't understand what I've done wrong here. So far every edit I'm making is getting removed :(

--5 albert square (talk) 21:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi. So far, the café explosion isn't important to Christian's storyline. We try to keep the storylines sections to a minimum and only include the main points for each character. The explosion was more important to Nick and Bradley, so it's mentioned in their articles, but Heather, Lucy, Abi, etc, who were involved, don't have it mentioned in their pages because it wasn't important to their development. If, however, it turns out that it actually was important, it'll be added in the future. We also only include storylines that involve that character, so mentioning what happened inside the café in detail wouldn't be necessary even if we were mentioning the explosion in Christian's article. Basically, for Christian, it was a very minor thing in relation to what we include on Wikipedia. I understand your frustration and your edits were in good faith, but this time they weren't necessary, so they were removed. I hope you understand. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Thanks for taking the time to reply. That now makes sense :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 5 albert square (talk • contribs) 22:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Debra Dean

Sorry about that (putting List of minor Hollyoaks characters instead of EastEnders) I'm so used to editing with Hollyoaks that's why I made the mistake, didn't even realise I did it.Whoniverse93 23:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

No probs AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

EastEnders

ya but for some characters that left it says that they were fictional characters.is there like a certain amount since they left the show that makes them stop being fictional characters danielle jones died after jase and it says that she was a fictional character please reply brian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 12:17, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

ok thanks for helping me out dude —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 12:28, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

sorry to boder you again but i was just wondering how do you create a wikipedia page for someone who should have one this isnt for anyone out of eastenders i would just like to know out of interest —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 12:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

great thanks dude —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 12:44, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

sure dude no problem the only thing i hate is when i have changed was to is some other fuckers changed it back to was fair annoying is what they are haha by the way wats ur name mine is brian

i meant ur real name but dats alright too haha so wat else do u do this for i do it for wwe wrestling im going 2 start doing it 4 home and away —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 21:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

sorry i was just trying to be friendly but sure if ur goin to be like that your whole life man u need to get over ursef gud luck —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 01:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

your probably right about that man but i know a fair bit about the characters in eastenders so i think i know how to write in these things —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 12:56, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

listen man thanks 4 all da advice but really i didnt ask for it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 14:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

i know u told me not a message here but i dont know how to write it in the other place am i remembering to change in to from i think i am but just to make sure —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 15:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

thanks hey listen i have 2 go in a few minutes im just finishing 1990 but il continue later--brian moore (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Twitter as source

I hope I am not bothering you, but I need some advice. I was just wondering if Twitter is a valid source. I am contributing to the 8 out of 10 Cats page and on the SROAudiences tickets page, there was information saying that this particular series, they were filming two shows in one day, due to Jimmy Carr's forthcoming comedy commitments. So I mentioned it on the page and sourced it. Naturally, once the show finishes that link will disappear. Now in this new Twitter age, both Jimmy Carr and Jason Manford have posted about them taping two episodes last night on their Twitter pages, but I've tried linking to it, but I can't isolate a post. Is Twitter a reliable source and is there a better way to do this? Thanks in advance. 70.31.220.28 (talk) 15:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)samusek2

Theo Kelly

hey man i was wondering if u cud fix something if u go onto the page with the eastenders cast theres something wrong with the link to theo kellys page from that one i tried to fix it but u wud be better at these kind of things:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 21:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. The correct link is Theo Kelly (EastEnders) and needs to be piped, like this: [[Theo Kelly (EastEnders)|Theo Kelly]]. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

gallery

hi. i would like to know how you insert a picture gallery as i wish to do this to one of the eastenders actress articles MK Dude 182 (talk) 19:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Would that actress be Lorna Fitzgerald? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:25, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Patsy Palmer

Hey can you take a look at this page. The ip is constantly adding material lifted from the internet, and I dont want to get in trouble for continuously reverting.GunGagdin^Moan 21:16, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like someone else has spotted it. Don't want you getting done for 3rr violations!! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Edits

Sorry if this seems like I'm wasting your time, but you are a really good editor! I went onto the Ferreira family page and it's brilliant, they weren't the best of characters, but you've managed to make the page very detailed etc. All of your other edits are brilliant as well. I just thought I'd tell you what I thought. : ] Whoniverse93 talk? 12:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! That makes me really happy to know you think that. I'm really proud of my work on the Ferreira family, and even though they were terrible characters, I think when you read the article they actually sound sort-of-interesting in a strange way. Most of my edits are minor/reverts/etc but when I put my mind to it, I can actually do some good stuff. Adam Best (EastEnders) for example. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I was sceptical about the creation of a page just for a family but now it's complete, it's great. You're right they were terrible but anyone who goes onto their page would probably think they're interesting. Adam Best has a good page, and he hasn't even joined EastEnders yet! :D Whoniverse93 talk? 14:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

There are other family articles for EastEnders but most of them are purely plot: Mitchell family, Beale family, Branning family. We also have Karim family which was written by User:Gungadin and is also a good example of a well-written article. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

RFC: socionics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Socionics Tcaudilllg (talk) 21:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For this. In my copying-and-pasting of edit summaries and templates I forgot to do that. Much appreciated. Acalamari 22:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

No probs! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:55, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

FL help

Hi mate, If you get a chance could you take a look at List of music releases from Popstars contestants that I have been working on. It would be good if you could expand the lead section and check that I haven't missed any releases. I will add release dates and the Girls Aloud albums tomorrow. Thanks. 03md 22:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

It looks fine. I'm not sure I'd be any good at expanding the lead section. Just wondering if Darius should be included, because he was in Popstars before he was in Pop Idol, although Pop Idol is what gave him his music career. But he was still a Popstars contestant. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

He should be included - I will add him to the other releases section with a link to the Pop Idol page. Thanks for your response. 03md 16:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Samantha Womack (aka Janus)

Just to inform you that the official BBC EastEnders website now has her credited as Samantha Womack instead of Janus. Should the article be Samantha Janus article be renamed to show this and also the various articles that too credit her as Janus? 92.8.17.54 (talk) 11:46, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

(A talk page stalker de-lurks). In my view, no, because she's currently better known as Samantha Janus. The article should note that she is not called Samantha Womack (if it doesn't already), but it shouldn't be moved (yet). Other articles should note the name she used when she was credited, and could also note that she is now known as Womack (though that's not really necessary as her name will be wiki-linked to her article, which should explain this). AnemoneProjectors, I won't be offended if I'm completely wrong and you disagree! Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 12:09, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, MrFlag-that-isn't-red-anymore... I'm just waiting for her to come back to EastEnders to see how her name appears in the credits. Then perhaps the links in her EE-related articles should say "Womack" but her article should still stay "Janus" because it's the name she's best known as. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Patsy Palmer

Can you semi protect this article. The editor is obsessed with adding stuff lifted from other websites.GunGagdin^Moan 21:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

It's better to block the user. I've given a final warning and will block them next time. Always better to give warnings and block the user than protect the page, if it's only one IP doing the vandalising. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok thanks :) GunGagdin^Moan 21:41, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, where's the link gone so I can email you wiki-style? I have some disturbing news!!!GunGagdin^Moan 15:27, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It's in the toolbox at the side of this page and my user page, where it's always been... :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:32, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I was sure you had a tab linking it from your main user page. Anyway I have emailed you.GunGagdin^Moan 15:35, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I used to have a link at the top but I decided I didn't like it :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

character durations - eastenders

Hate to do this to you again but some fool has messed up the list of eastenders character page again by including character durations. It looks awful and im not sure how to change it back in one go like other users, so i wondered if you could. Thanks. 92.21.58.113 (talk) 13:10, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Done and thanks for letting me know. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:07, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

protecting redirects

Are you allowed to do that for the articles that The Twelth Dicktor keeps un merging. We've seen before that he is incapable of discussion.GunGagdin^Moan 16:48, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes I can do that. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. If you need to edit any of them, just let me know. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

12th Doctor

LOOK! I HAVE HAD ENOUGH YOU SUPREMACIST!

CAN YOU STOP YOUR TOMFOOLERY IMEDIATELY YOU BULLY! HOW DARE YOU KEEP ON CHANGING WHAT I DO! I WOULD LIKE TO SAY A LOT OF THINGS ABOUT YOU WHY! PEOPLE LIKE YOU SHOULD NOT EDIT WIKIPEDIA!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Twelfth Doctor (talk • contribs) 21:44, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

What have I done this time? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:04, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

YOU IMBECILE. YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE DONE! HOW DARE YOU BLOCK ME FROM MINOR CHARACTER JUST BECAUSE I AM RIGHT! I HAVE HAD ENOUGH WITH YOU CAD! YOU ARE A DRAIN ON SOCEITY AND ESPECIALLY WIKIPEDIA!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Twelfth Doctor (talk • contribs) 18:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I haven't blocked you. Do you mean the protection of Syd Chambers, Theo Kelly (EastEnders) and Jordan Johnson? That stops any editor, other than admins, from recreating the pages, which do no need to be recreated, as they lack notability. I protected them on request from another user. Also, you should read WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA and WP:HAR. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, he definitely wasn't blocked then. He is now, for the abuse of your talk page and for denying that he was editing while logged out.

List of number-one albums from the 2000s (UK)

Thanks for explaining :] I'm a bit confused though, I read the link you provided on non-free images, but what I don't understand is why an album cover can be used on the album's page, but not on the number one albums list? Surely if it can be used on one page it can be used on another? Is there any way to get around it? Because I really think the page looks better with the album covers rather than the artist's picture, and it also enhances the article. Loveable Daveo (talk) 21:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Opinion Regarding Charts

Dear editor please can you add your opinion to the following discussion to help reach a consensus. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 15:59, 2 August 2009 (UTC))

Leona Lewis Recorded Tracks

I have written songs that have been recorded by Lewis for possible inclusion on her forthcoming album which you have deleted. Can you not delete it again considering i have the evidence and it is written under the correct heading. Once the forthcoming album page has been created the piece i have written can be pasted over, but for now leave it where it is. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beautiful&Dying (talk • contribs) 13:42, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I won't delete it but it would be better as prose than as a list, and just kept in the forthcoming album section rather than as a subsection of that. Some of your references are broken. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm also not 100% convinced that Associated Content is a reliable source. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:50, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks thats much better. Also, it was the only ref i could find with all 4 song names. Other sources only named a couple of the songs instead of the complete 4. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beautiful&Dying (talk • contribs) 14:01, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I've asked at WP:RS if it should be considered reliable. If not then it's ok to use more sources. I still find it highly unlikely that "Strangers" and "Perfect Stranger" would appear having such similar names. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Found a new ref which works and names all 4 songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beautiful&Dying (talk • contribs) 14:31, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

That's fine. And if any of them are confirmed for the album we'll have even better sources then, and we can remove the ones that aren't appearing. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:35, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

9 (Damien Rice album)

Please do not add unsourced information, as you did to 9 (Damien Rice album). BlackWidowRon (talk) 16:27, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't add unsourced information; I reverted an edit from someone who seems to be adding false information in every edit they make. If I reverted a correct edit then I apologise. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, if you disagree with something in an article and it isn't sourced, it's standard practice to add a {{Fact}} template to the statement, and maybe even question it on the talk page, rather than commenting it out. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey Admin

Hi, I been trying to move this Annie Smith (disambiguation) to Annie Smith, but it needs an admin. Can you oblige? :) GunGagdin^Moan 21:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Done. Rodrigo to win! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:01, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Ta, I agree. Bea is hideous.GunGagdin^Moan 23:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

The X Factor (UK)

Thank You for adding the reference and yes i am aware that The Sun is not as reliable all the time! but anyway thanks for leaving the reference and should any new more reliable information occur then the current format will be corrected or kept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MummyMagnet09 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Offsite_canvassing_at_the_Afd_of_Search_for_Alan_Goulden. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MickMacNee (talk • contribs) 19:27, 14 August 2009

The X Factor

I believe The Mirror is much more reliable than The Sun and also via other sources via internet websites concering news reports and The X Factor all point to minogue having the girl category. and its ok about making the mistake it doesnt really matter as if any more reliable news reports crop up between now and the offcial Boot Camp show then the page can be corrected or kept. Thanks Kind Regards MummyMagnet09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by MummyMagnet09 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Gungadin's exit - dum, dum, dum, dum da dum

Just wanted to let you know that I shall probably go AWOL in about a month. I am moving out of my parents and am starting a really, really hectic new job. So my participation on here will probably lessen substantially. What I want to try and do is sort out as many character articles with OOU and sources before I go. I would hate to think they might get deleted when i'm not around, so that's my plan :) GunGagdin^Moan 01:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh thanks for letting me know. I'll try to help where I can but you're the expert on older characters. Actually there's a chance I might disappear in about a month too! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:22, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Are the aliens returning for you? ;) GunGagdin^Moan 12:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

No but something might be happening that I'm not happy about, and I might be forced to lose my internet connection. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Den Watts

I don't know where to find a cast list, but do you not remember the episode? You mustn't have watched it if you can't remember as it showed a close up of his face and everything :S Alex250P (talk) 18:40, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow okay, it was a mistake, no need to get so defensive over some internet page lol Alex250P (talk) 11:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello

hi. you blocked my account the mark tom and travis show recently and also deleted my article about the next blink-182 album. i was just wondering why you did this, since other admins said that the username didnt violate wikipedia uername policy once they realised that it wasnt an advert for a show. u deleted my page about the nu blink album, which i had also put some references on. please can u explain why u did this. also im sorry for making another account to write this, but on the original i cannot even edit my talkpage to appeal the block The mtats2 (talk) 18:33, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Because you look like a sockpuppet of the banned user Ln of x, not because of your username. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Why do i look like a sockpuppet?? is there any way i can get that account unblocked The mtats2 (talk) 19:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

There are just similarities. I've allowed you to edit that talk page so you can appeal the block if you want. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

thank youThe mtats2 (talk) 19:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Jim Branning

Hi, I just wanted to apologise for the confusion with the Jim Branning page. I could've sworn that I edited an up-to-date version of the page! Anyway please accept my apologies, no harm was intended. --5 albert square (talk) 22:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem! You should get a warning in a pink box above the edit window when you're editing an old version of a page so try to keep an eye out for it. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Sock puppetry

Looking at the CBB AfD, I notice that the following IPs (who all voted keep) have made contributions to BlackpoolKickboxer2008's sandbox

• 90.217.230.156
• 90.205.46.41

I don't know how to instigate a sockpuppet alert but would you, as an admin, be able to help? Dale is supporting Lisa Wallace to win Big Brother 2009 13:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't woory, I reported it to WP:ANI. Dale is supporting Lisa Wallace to win Big Brother 2009 13:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh ok. I don't have much experience of sockpuppet investigations (I just block the ones I know about!) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Jade Ewen

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you.

If it now is Mobo Awards and not Mobo Award as you claim, then make it intoa blue link and not a dead link, when you know a article exist about the award.thanks--Judo112 (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

However your edits seems to be OK overall, and the Jade Ewen issue has been fixes by me.--Judo112 (talk) 20:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

"Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia"??? "your edits seems to be OK overall"??? I've been editing on Wikipedia for several years and am an administrator here, I'll have you know. OK, I didn't realise Mobo Awards is a red link (I would never have expected it to be), but it should redirect to Music of Black Origin Awards as Mobo Award does. It should actually say MOBO Awards or Music of Black Origin Awards rather than Mobo Awards - but a MOBO Award is a single award, but the MOBO Awards is the ceremony, so in the article it should say Awards not Award. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes and i have fixed that my friend. For future reference... when you obviously know what is needed to be done then do it instead of reverting into a read link. would have been mutch more pleasant if you had fixed it into MOBO Awards instantly. And remember even the worlds greatest leaders can sometimes do wrong, a title doesnt change who you are. Thanks.--Judo112 (talk) 09:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know it was a red link, but it isn't now as I've redirected Mobo Awards to Music of Black Origin Awards. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Donna Freedman

Hi Anemone

I'm just looking for a bit of advice here. I recently had issues with the Donna Freedman page where people were posting a rumour that to me obviously wasn't true. At first I just reverted the edits but because they were happening so often, I eventually let one stay but added a citation tag and said that if a referenced link to prove that the rumour was true wasn't submitted within 2 days then the rumour would be removed again. I kept to my word and did this and have since got proof that the rumour is false. However, I'm just wondering is this the best way to have dealt with it? It was the only way I could think of to stop the rumour being constantly posted on the page. --5 albert square (talk) 23:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

It sounds like you handled it well. If you have a website that shows it's definitely false, then perhaps post a link to it in your edit summary next time you need to revert the edit, or even post something about it on the talk page and when you revert, say something like "false rumour, see talk page" in your edit summary. Sometimes the easiest thing is just to keep reverting. It gets frustrating though so you can also request semi-protection of a page if it's happening regularly (go to WP:RFPP and follow the instructions). AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi again

Yeah, thanks for the advice. I did consider doing that but decided against it. However because I also do some reviewing for one of the Neighbours websites, I've managed to get concrete proof direct from Neighbours that the rumour posted is not going to happen. The next time the same rumour is posted on any of the Neighbours casts pages I've got a referenced link that will state otherwise. I can never understand why people vandalise any Wikipedia page on purpose. Thanks again for the advice, I hope you're well and take care --5 albert square (talk) 20:34, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

BBUK sidebar

Hi AnemoneProjectors. I just wanted to say to not attack me with my edit from the BBUK sidebar. I'm not trying to start fights or anything, but I just think that it should be Final Five cause it is the final week and should be clear to readers. I know it is obvious, but just wanted to point that out. If you'd like to keep reverting it, then fine, I'll just keep it to In The House. Thanks. --Dudejerome (talk) 00:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think it's ever been listed as "final five" or whatever in previous years (if it was I apologise). I think if you want to change it you should bring it up on the template's talk page (or some other talk page), but there's only a few days left now so it won't really make much difference. Sorry that my edit summary came across as an attack. It was a bit sarcastic and I couldn't think of anything else to put! Apology. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:25, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I agree, I think we should leave as is. Thank you for the apology and idea! --Dudejerome (talk) 04:11, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

BB 2009 (UK)

Hi, this message has been sent to you in accordance with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Canvassing#Friendly_notices

It concerns the following discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Big_Brother_2009_(UK)#Cite_Episode_template

leaky_caldron (talk) 09:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Leona Lewis - Happy

Why do you insist on deleting my version of the edit when it is clearly better than yours. Why do you have to have the monopoly on the article? My edit is worded much better yet you keep reverting back to yours. You have also laid the article out horribly (reception below release history?). The information you have provided in the first paragraph is already available in the release history, no need to repeat.--Beautiful&Dying (talk) 19:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It's only a draft, no need to worry about the order of things. You have removed information, and the article should start saying that it's a song, mentioning who it's written, produced and then performed by. You've removed information on the song's premiere on Radio 1, for example. But it's only a draft! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:28, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

I did not remove any info. I mentioned all of the above. The premiere of the song is in the release history (the first airplay date) so did not need to be said twice. It should be in order so that it can be moved as it is. You also contradicted yourself by saying "no need to worry about the order of things" but then you say "the article should start saying...".--Beautiful&Dying (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I meant the order of the sections, not the order of the text. The text needs to make sense (eventually; it's a draft, but might as well get it perfect now - you'll see I worked on the Echo article long before the article was created and the album's title was known). I don't agree with putting airplay as a release format anyway. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Also, if you don't think the radio premiere dates should be written in the article because they're in a table, then why not remove all release dates from the text for the same reason? The table doesn't replace the fact that the song is getting promotion on the radio. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:33, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it is good to have ALL the information that is available in the article e.g. airplay. What's the harm? (rhetorical question). You can have the radio premiere date in the article if you want but i just thought it was pointless considering it is written under the 'release history'. All dates that are already mentioned should not be mentioned again in the article in my opinion. I just don't like repetition. You recently wrote Evan Bogart as one of the writers of "Happy" (without a ref.) but this is not true. According to the official Leona Lewis site the song was written by Lewis and Ryan Tedder and produced by Tedder.--Beautiful&Dying (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Considering that the lead section is meant to be a summary of the rest of the article, it's impossible not to repeat information in articles. There's no harm putting the song's premiere date in the promotion section and the release date table as it relates to both. I didn't add Evan Bogart as a writer; someone else did and I requested a reference by adding {{fact}} and then someone else removed it completely, and I already know Lewis and Tedder are the writers but haven't seen an online source yet, I heard it through Twitter earlier today. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:29, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I thought the earliest release date (when the single can be downloaded) is November 8, where is the single available from on September 15? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC))

Apparently in the U.S. it'll be available on iTunes from 15 September, that's according to her official website here. I find that rather shocking. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:20, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone been on itunes to confirm this? it could be an error, it doesn't make sense considering that the song doesnt impact on radio till 21 september. Usually songs impact on US radio before digital download. The only thing i can think is that they are hoping that the performance of the song on VH1 Divas brings the song straight to a top 10 chart position, and that then it cn reach a top 10 position once again when the cd is released? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC))

I just assumed that was how things worked over there, assuming that it would climb slowly and end up at the top of the charts around the same time as over here. I want to buy it in September. I think it's unfair if it's true. I assumed that like the album, the single would come out the same week on both sides of the Atlantic. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

i know what u mean im in the UK too and really bummed about this... (Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC))

I'm sure we'll get over it. We get to hear it today anyway! Hey do you think it's time to put the Happy article in mainspace? Here is my draft, have a read and see what you think. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Lorna Fitzgerald and Abi Branning

Hi Anemone

I happened to stumble across the recent trouble with these wikis last night when one of them showed up in the recent changes log. I notice that one of the editors is blocked and it's obvious he or she keeps trying to rejoin for whatever reason. Anyway I know that Abi Branning has something happen to her on Tuesday, and whilst I don't think that this part of a storyline is something worth mentioning in her or the actress' wiki, I am worried that it is going to attract the same sort of vandalism, and as a result I'm going to keep an extra close eye on those two pages when I'm on Wikipedia that night. I'm just wondering, if I do spot the same type of vandalism is there anything in particular that you'd like me to do or not to do?

Also, I tagged I think Lucas Johnson and Charlie Slater last night as being written as an essay and I notice that you've changed it to in-universe. Sorry if I tagged them wrongly, I just don't understand what Wikipedia mean by "in universe". --5 albert square (talk) 21:43, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The user who vandalises those pages is banned from Wikipedia so all you can really do is revert, and once I see the edits I'll block the user. They seem to come on randomly, I've never connected it to when the character is on screen, but you might be right.

To be honest, I don't understand quite what is meant by an article looking like an essay! Basically, "in universe" is what happens within the fictional universe, i.e. Lucas pushes Trina onto a rake. "Out of universe" is what happens in real life in relation to the show, i.e. Jo Joyner will leave the show for a number of months for maternity leave. WP:WAF should explain it better. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah thanks for the explanation there. To be honest I just took it that "essay" meant a section or sections were written without being properly broken up. It just lists them all together, doesn't split it up into one part say about Trina and another part about Tony King etc. Anyway thanks for explaining about "in universe" and "out of universe" to me. Hope you're keeping well --5 albert square (talk) 22:58, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

The X Factor list

Hi, Thanks for your message and your kind words. I was thinking the other day about starting The X Factor article but would probably need some help with so many contestants having released music. I would appreciate your assistance in sourcing the list - do you know of anywhere other than Chart Stats that are deemed reliable. I think the criteria should again be Top 100 charting singles and albums, with all other releases noted. Thanks. 03md 23:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought there were more but then checked articles like Rhydians and realised that "The Impossible Dream" was just released as a radio single etc. I will start the list tomorrow and you are welcome to chip in. I will submit all four for Featured List review (the Fame Academy list failed because the reviewers believed that Chart Stats was unreliable). 03md 00:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I have created a basic table for the singles in the article. Can you please check it through and add any missing dates, singles or details. I will add the albums table tomorrow. Should the Leon Jackson songs which charted on downloads alone be noted in the "other charting songs" section? 03md 00:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

If they weren't actually released as singles, then yes. I'll have a proper look tomorrow and see what I can add to the singles table. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I have added a lead section to the list. Could you please expand it with references, particularly the part about Leona Lewis with your knowledge about her music, but also have a paragraph on releases by the other artists, with references. Each top five or top ten single needs to have a reference (in addition to the Chart Stats ones which I will add tomorrow). Thanks. 03md 23:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations totals debate

As a regular editor to Big Brother 2009 (UK), I am writing to inform you about this discussion on the aforementioned issue. Dale 20:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

You are indeed, though I had already spotted it. I think I'm undecided right now though. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Blushing...!

Thanks! I really should check my Nimbley6 reverts, and fix on those rare occasions the edits were useful. I'm so used to Nimbley6's [3]-style of formatting that I parsed the most recent Nimbly-ism as replacing the usual style with Nimbley6's prefered style... sorry! Glad you're more awake than me!

Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 21:41, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. While you were away for a while (or seemed to be) I had to deal with two Nimbley6 socks and reverted most changes regardless, before I read that even if a user is banned, you can keep in any useful edits they make. I thought banned = no edits allowed, but I guess not. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Sock Puppet Log

Hi Anemone

I thought I would let you know that I've set up a Sock Puppet Log to keep track of any suspicious sock puppet activity. The page is primarily for Wikis relating to EastEnders and Neighbours and can be found here[[4]]. Let me know if you have any suggestions for improving it as this is my first sock puppet log! --5 albert square (talk) 01:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I've never seen or heard of a sock puppet log so I can't help you. All I know is that Abi Branning and Lorna Fitzgerald have been targetted by one particular user for several years, and another one goes to pretty much all the EastEnders character pages changing dates. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Link Rot / Improving Citations

Hi there, today i notice you quite rightly tagged the article Overcome (Alexandra Burke album) for its lack of clarity with its citations. i thought for future reference you might like to know that wikipedia has two tools which can help. They can both save you heaps of time in manual editing.

1. WP:REFLINKS - is a useful tool which you can use to fix bare urls/links. By clicking 'simple' after you've entered the article name it will attempt to automatically title and date the references. Alternatively if you just want the source and date for each reference click 'bare...'. This tool can also be used to over-ride BOT-titled sources too.
2. WP:CHECKLINKS - is a good tool for established articles as it will check all of the sources and tell you if any are dead. It automatically tags these highlighting the need for validation. It also indicates any sources which require a log in and therefore cannot be publically used. Finally it can identify duplicated sources in an article and update them by merging together where necessary.

Happy editing. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 04:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC))

Yeah I know about both of those but I never used the link rot template before so I decided to do that instead ;) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:23, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Jade Ewen

I'm not sure it's not a current event...it's a current event that it's a rumour! Anyway, will leave you to decide. Be nice if you can revert Sugababes rumour if your spot them. SunCreator (talk) 23:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Jade Ewen isn't a current event, she's a person ;) But even if she is joining Sugababes I wouldn't add the current event template. Doing the Sugababes page now, though that's not on my watchlist. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:07, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

You can have current events about people. When Michael Jackson died it was a current event. Thanks for watching. SunCreator (talk) 23:10, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah you can, but that was a major event. I don't think someone joining a band is. Once she's joined, the event is over. It's like, an event that lasts a matter of moments. MJ's death went on for ages because of the aftermath. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Echo (Leona Lewis album)

Hi i just wanted to say sorry for not filling the reference out properly which sourced that Lewis had co-written the new song with Tedder producing it. Im glad a responsible user such as yourself has taken a lead on managing the article, i've looked through the history and noticed that many IPs have been involved in improperly adding information. I know myself my edits haven't always been correct but then editors do seem to develop and adopt their own editing styles some of which are more appropriate than others. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:51, 2 September 2009 (UTC))

No need to apologise, but thanks. I want the article to start off looking as good as it can so hopefully it can end up as good as it can be (maybe being listed as GA or even FA), so any little thing that doesn't look quite right I'll change it according to whatever guidelines I'm familiar with. By the way if you like you can also help with my draft version of "Happy" in my userspace here. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

RE:Labels

It is ok, its not something that many users are aware of. There is an on-going dispute bubbling over about how reliable retail sources are for labels because HMV Japan clearly says that BMG Japan will be releasing the album but Sony Music Japan has confirmed that it has acquired BMG Japan and last month held a corporate conferance in Japan to say that it would be merging BMG with Sony Music Entertainment Japan to create one single music label/group Sony Music Japan. I know it is very confusing and can be misleading too. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 13:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC))

Recent Changes (13-15 sept)

Hi once again i want to thank you for your excellent work regarding the maintainance of this album. I would however like to point a few things out. Syco and J records together have provided the A&R for the album as well as funded its production. However Syco has no presence outside of the UK and is a record label in the purest sense in that it has no distrubution. J records is slightly differnet in that it is distributed with Arista records through Zomba Music Group. Therefore in the UK Syco is the branded record label but in the US J records is the branded label. Elsewhere Sony Music is used as the frontline label to promote and distrubute the record because Sony has a large musical presense in Asia, South America and Europe. I hope this explains why i made the changes i did to the release history.

Furthermore i changed the stolen demoes section to a sub-catagory because it is still part of the main section (background and production). i hope this is ok? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC))

Hiya. The Syco/J/Sony changes wasn't me but I'll make sure it's Syco for UK, J for US and Sony for others in future. In fact I knew that so I don't know why I didn't already change it. I guess I was going on good faith. I do feel the stolen demos section should have a more descriptive title though and be a section on its own. Someone obviously agrees it should be separate, but I won't change the title unless something better comes along. I stole the idea from the person who created Overcome (Alexandra Burke album), where the section is headed "Criminal investigation". I feel the section is more about the activity of criminals rather than the songs, so that's why I think it shouldn't be a subsection. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough but really the stealing of production demos is information relating to the production of the album and should really be a heading within the main body of the article which is about the recording of the album. Don't worry about the label thing, that is why you have a user like myself who is on here regularly providing support whenever and wherever possible providing useful information. i often find myself verifying details, its good to have several editors with a common goal because then you can really make massive achievements with an article. Think of me as your back-up to maintaining the article. :) together we won't let anything slip in which shouldnt be there. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC))

Absolutely. I don't think it does related to the production of the album. The recording of the tracks is, but not having them stolen. Hmm I'm trying to fix the release date table (on the "Happy" article) so there can be a single cell for the US but one row keeps getting "eaten"! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

i tried doing the same, this was a compromise i came up with but it doesnt look right. the only thing that might work is if you list canada, united states for the digital download. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC))

It works if you list the US first, then Canada and then the US again. Shall we do that instead? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Aye that will look better i think. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC))

Leona to work with Chris Martin

I've been thinking about it for a while but i think i've come to this conclusion that this information was speculative that Lewis was going to work with Chris Martin/Coldplay. In the rollingstones interview/article she says "i wanted to collaborate with Christ Martin, but he's hard to track down." is this not confirmation that she planned to work with him but could not work with him due to circumstances? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC))

Yes it is. Basically I took it to mean that she hasn't worked with him. We shouldn't be talking about who she wanted to work with but couldn't — though I think it's still worth saying some songs were Coldplay-influenced. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

References problem

Hi there, i've been having problems getting some of the reference links to work in the Echo article. I thought you might be able to fix them. There are 3 of them, all from the same website "Harry Fox Agency". If you look through the article you will find 3 song titles which the refs refer to. They are "Save Myself", "Unreachable" and "Outta My Head". thanks.--Beautiful&Dying (talk) 21:41, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I noticed. It's possible that a direct link won't work and anyone wanting to verify will have to search. I'll have another look. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, a direct link won't work. Depending on the last search you did, a totally different song will show up. I've linked all three refs to the search page. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:47, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

List of buildings in EastEnders

hey did you delete my page that i made about the buildings in EastEnders????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brianwazere (talk • contribs) 21:14, 24 September 2009

Yes, because it was previously deleted by consensus per the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of residences in EastEnders. Have a read of Wikipedia:Recreation of previously deleted pages. I don't feel any of the valid reasons for recreation applied, as it still fails the guildelines set out at WP:V and WP:FICT. It also falls under WP:LISTCRUFT. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

right whatever!!brian moore (talk) 20:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Happy / Leona Lewis song

I am afraid im not happy with how the chart section has appeared in the article. I accept that some featured articles have a charted section seperately and after the release history however i dont view this as the convential format. 98% of all single pages i've seen have the charts before the release history because songs often chart before their release. Certainly this is the case with high profile releases from Janet Jackson, Leona Lewis's other singles and people like Whitney Houston. I accept that maybe charts do need their sections but i still think it should come before the release history. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC))

All articles on Leona's singles, apart from "Forgive Me" and "I Will Be", show the release history table before the charts table, and the majority of singles articles on Wikipedia (that I have seen) have a separate chart performance (prose) section and charts (table) section. A song has to have some kind of release before it enters any chart, even if it's an airplay release. It just makes sense to have "Release history" before "Charts" as a song has to be released in some format before charting. "Happy" was released before it charted. I don't see why you're not happy. This is just the way it is. The sections with tables are normally towards the end to keep all the prose sections together as the prose is more important than the tables. There doesn't seem to be a guideline on the layout but to me it makes sense to have release history before charts and looks better to have chart performance prose separate from charts tables. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hello, As an experienced editor i think you might be able to shed some light on this question that i have. I was patrolling some articles the other day and noticed that several users had reverted edits to track listings stating that it is not the convention to include producers, only the convention to include the writers of a song. Is this really the case? It is just that i reviewed WP:albums and saw that although it doesnt mention listing the producers - it is not explicitly clear. My worry is that i have been editing I Look to You in the hopes that it can become a featured article but worry if the track listing would let it down because it appears not to follow conventions? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC))

Hmm, WP:ALBUMS#Track listing examples has three examples of formats you can use and none list producers. I've seen lots of articles with the producers listed like that though and sometimes I actually think it's useful, though I prefer the numbered list format to the table format so producers don't really fit into that. If you leave it in and someone at the FAC questions it, it can be removed then. You won't get an instant fail :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: File:Roxie mitchell.jpg

Looks like User:Fabbygenie01 fixed the image by uploading another unsourced image. Which one I should delete now - the old unsourced image or the new one without source. Thanks in advance. /s/ feydey (talk) 22:27, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

love and rockets

23:27, 29 September 2009 AnemoneProjectors (talk | contribs) m (15,893 bytes) (Undid revision 316982874 by Kernitou (talk) galleries of non-free images are not permitted) (undo)

please where is this specified? i do not see anything here Wikipedia:Galleries kernitou talk 23:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

the said article says

Fair use : An important element of the fair use doctrine is ...the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.... In simple terms this means that copying one page from a comic book may be okay but copying 12 of them all at one time is probably not. This element is extremely important when fair-use images are used in galleries. If one image, say, from a copyrighted book, is used in an article, it may be fair use. Then another image from the same book is used in another article and so on. If all of these images from the same book appear in a single gallery, it is almost certainly not fair use. Another element of fair use suggests that it is acceptable to use copyrighted material to illustrate the subject of an article. So, it is fair use to illustrate Carl's Jr. with its own copyrighted Carl's Jr. logo. It is probably not fair use of that same image in Globalization. Galleries may be on very shaky ground when it comes to fair use images. It's probably best to avoid them entirely and stick to public domain and freely licensed images. See Wikipedia:Fair use.

AND IT'S NOT THE CASE since "my" images are the covers of different books ! kernitou talk 23:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Galleries is a failed proposal. The page you need to look at is WP:IG where it says "Fair use images may never be included as part of a image gallery, as their status as being "fair use" depends on their proper use in the context of an article (as part of criticism or analysis). See Wikipedia:Fair use for more details." This applies to any non-free image, regardless that they came from separate sources. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

ok i see : i asked a question in the village pump since i'm convinced at only 90%... instead of a gallery, i will open 24 articles...........

it means, for an article like Whitney Houston discography, we will never see the cover near the title for every cd?! kernitou talk 23:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, a discography article should contain no CD covers at all. The cover images only belong in the articles for the albums and singles. I suppose creating 24 articles would allow the images to be used individually, as long as each article passed the general notability guidelines. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Lauren Branning

Hi Anemone

Could you please check out the new image on the Lauren Branning page when you get a sec? It's just that it's a screenshot and I'm not 100% sure that it's allowed. --5 albert square (talk) 22:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi. We can't actually use anything other than screenshots for EastEnders characters as they're only characters when they're in the episode. A free image of the actress wouldn't be a picture of the character, so that's no good. Screenshots are allowed if they have a valid fair-use rationale, and this image does. Gungadin has been providing EastEnders articles with images for many years so she knows what she's doing. Hope that helps! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh that's ok. Sorry I don't know how to tell how long someone's been editing Wikipedia for. I did wonder if screenshots were allowed for characters but wasn't sure how to tell if they were legal or not. The notice appearing under Lauren's picture didn't make much sense! --5 albert square (talk) 22:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry too much about images uploaded by other people, as if they're licenced incorrectly, or whatever, then they're quite quickly discovered and dealt with anyway. I watch all the EastEnders pages so I'd remove any images that weren't supposed to be there. If you want to know how long someone has been editing on Wikipedia, you can go to their userpage and on the left of the screen you'll see a toolbox with a link "User contribtutions". Click on that and then on "earliest" and it'll bring up their first edits with the dates they were made. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

old images

Hey, you know how all old image versions have to be deleted now, are you still able to retrieve them if needed? Only reason being is that some will show the character in an early appearance and may have been useful to add to the "then and now" pics we do. GunGagdin^Moan 13:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, as an admin I can retrieve the old versions. Any in particular you'd like? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Not at the moment, but was just thinking how much the actress who played abi has grown over the last 4 years, and we only have current pics up for most of the current characters, because with these we tend to just update as we go along, but really we should try and get some separate early images of them up.GunGagdin^Moan 16:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

That's true. Also look how much Thomas Law has changed! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Leona Lewis / Stop Crying Your Heart

Writing credits: The site has heard the track, how much reliable can that be?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.105.109.75 (talk) 08:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

How do we know they've actually heard it? If they have they must be the only ones, because I can't find anyone else confirming that it's definitely the Oasis song. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Stacey Slater

Hi Anemone

Sorry I didn't realise what I was doing was wrong. I only reverted the edits by User:Brianwazere once and then left him a message on his talk page requesting that he left the page to read Stacey Branning until further notice. I was then going to request page protection if he'd carried on.

The only other edits I've made to that page today was to update the current storyline and to change grammar errors.

Sorry, but I didn't realise that was edit warring. --5 albert square (talk) 21:44, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, I just got your message. You were messaging me at the same time I was messaging you! That's ok, I'm keeping clear of that page now, which was my intention if the user didn't listen to my advice. I've tried to revert his changes once but the user doesn't seem to be listening so like I say I was going to request page protection. Are you going to do that though? --5 albert square (talk) 21:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again AnemoneProjectors

I thought I'd let you know that someone has been editing the Stacey Branning page again to change her name back to Slater. I changed it back to Branning (even though my edit summary says I changed it to Slater! I think I had a blonde moment then lol) but I thought I would check that you are still wanting it to read Branning? It's just that I noticed that you edited it afterwards but didn't change the name back? --5 albert square (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I hadn't noticed the change because they edited it at pretty much the same time I did, otherwise I'd have changed it back. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again AnemoneProjectors

Do you remember a character or actor in EastEnders called Preston Madison? It's just that someone keeps editing the Stacey Branning page saying this was a one night stand of hers? I've searched Google and the only reference I could find to this person was a dubious Wikipedia page. The reason I say dubious is because the page was only put together tonight and is up for deletion. I've also checked the official EastEnders website and the BBC website in general, cannot find any mention of this person. I've already reverted the Stacey Branning page twice today for this, don't want to get in trouble for the 3 revert rule so thought I'd ask your advice :) --5 albert square (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Never heard of him, though the article is actually about an actor. So you're right to revert. 3RR doesn't actually apply to reverting vandalism, which is what this is. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I didn't remember a character or actor of that name. The reason I thought they could be a character is because the IP editing the Stacey Branning page put that she'd had a one night stand with Deano Wicks and Preston Madison. However, the Wikipedia page that's proposed for deletion seems to be about an actor, wasn't sure which page was right. I'll warn the persons appropriately then and report the page if it happens again. Thanks for your advice --5 albert square (talk) 19:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

List of The X Factor finalists (UK series 6)

Hey, I didn't realise you were a Wikipedia Admin, but I just put in a request for semi-protection on the above article due to the vandalism by unregistered users. Sorry for treading on your toes... AndyB (talk) 14:12, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I didn't really notice the vandalism but I've protected it now. You weren't treading on my toes so don't worry. I only protected it for a month but if it starts up again it can be protected again. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Abi Branning

Hi Anemone

Thought I would update you, looks like User:Ln of x may have been active on the Abi Branning and Lorna Fitzgerald pages again, this time under the guise of User:Antwerpen. I've gathered together as many sock puppet IDs of this person as I can find and reported it but thought I would also update you :) --5 albert square (talk) 01:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, unfortunately I was asleep when it happened but I would have seen it straight away this morning. I've blocked Antwerpen now. But it should be noted that Antwerpen is not the puppet master but the puppet. The other users you named in the puppetry case, User:User:Rock and dnb rulez, User talk:User:Ln of x and User:User:Yormomma are not actual users. You accidentally put an extra "user" in the user name! But the ones you meant are sockpuppets or Ln of x, not of Antwerpen, because that's another puppet. I never bother to start sockpuppetry cases because it's so obvious, I just block them as sockpuppets of Ln of x. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, sorry about that. Only my second or third time filing sock puppet reports, still trying to get used to it. Sorry :) --5 albert square (talk) 11:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I've forgotten how to do them and try not to if I can help it! I'm guessing there's some sort of template and you put the user names in without typing User: and that's why you ended up with User:User:. Not to worry, I'm sure it'll be sorted, but I guess it should be noted that the user is a sockpuppet of Ln of x and not a puppet master. But I've already blocked anyway because it's obvious. Probably not worth doing sockpuppet cases when it's that obvious as I'll always block them as soon as I see them. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah if you use Twinkle there's a template on it to report sock puppets. So I'm guessing Ln and x is the first username this person used which is why it is the puppet master? Wish I could've blocked them straight away. Looking to be an admin on Wiki one day but would like to get to grips with absolutely everything on it before that. Any tips to becoming an admin? --5 albert square (talk) 21:32, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually it was good that you started this sockpuppet case as many of the accounts I've already blocked were confirmed and others were found that we didn't previously know about! Yeah, Ln of x is the first username this person used, so that's the one marked as the puppet master. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Woah I see what you mean - Checkuser found 51 accounts from the same sock puppet with J Delanoy suspecting a couple more! I nearly didn't request check user as well because all the edits were identical, only requested it to be on the safe side. I thought this person had a lot of accounts when I got to 4 lol! --5 albert square (talk) 22:11, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually Checkuser didn't find the 51 accounts but that's the number of accounts that have been blocked as sockpuppets of Ln of x. Actually I'm sure it's more than 51, possibly even over 100! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:33, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

George Trott

Sure, here is the link to the spoilers for that episode: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/soaps/s2/eastenders/spoilers/a181121/heather-gives-birth.html Alex250P (talk) 13:45, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Images

WHY HAVE WIKIPEDIA STOLEN ALL THE PICTURES FROM WALFORDWEB CAST WIKI? THEIF. UMMMMM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.253.84.24 (talk) 19:22, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't upload EastEnders images to Wikipedia, so you're messaging the wrong person. However, it's probably the other way around as most of our images are uploaded by someone who does not use Walford Web. I've never been on Walford Web so I wouldn't know what the images are like there. It's also possible that one contributor uploads their images to both sites. I've just visited and Walford Web appears to use a lot of promo photos. We only use screenshots that we obtain ourselves. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:59, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

tut, definitely the other way around! Trampikey/Shameless - who used to edit here - has been uploading them on that site by the looks of things, so ask him and i'm sure he'll tell you that the images were used here first and were captured by us.GunGagdin^Moan 20:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, why's he devoting his time to that site instead of this one? Wikipedia is way better AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

No idea, I havent seen him about here for ages. Shame, but i'm sure he would have objected to numerous changes we have made anyway, especially tense :) GunGagdin^Moan 20:39, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Last time I remember seeing him I told him off for not logging in, he was editing as an IP. Changing tense is one of the best things we've done, present tense comes so naturally to me now. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree, works much better.GunGagdin^Moan 20:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

sorry

My bad on that edit, sorry. What kinda jerk randomly punches somebody and then laughs? ugh, people I tell ya! tommytalk2me 00:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I know, it's disgusting. I was there, saw the guards jump on him! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

wow!! did you see her get punched? tommytalk2me 10:21, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

No but I heard it, looked up and saw the security guards jump on the guy and wrestle him to the ground, saw her taken out and he was dragged past us. Oh and don't worry about the edit :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:27, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

It wasnt you was it Anemone? ;) GunGagdin^Moan 20:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

No, it was Peter Kopwalczyk! He's been sectioned now, which totally doesn't surprise me. I was quoted! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I love that you were quoted. You should so put that in her article :) GunGagdin^Moan 20:32, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I deliberately used that page for a reference, but I wouldn't use my quote in the article. I was slightly misquoted anyway. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

I love your five minutes of fame Anemone! --5 albert square (talk) 23:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

YOU'RE FAMOUS?!?! :) tommytalk2me 00:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

No! I was just quoted in a newspaper. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:12, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Famous enough for me! :) hah tommytalk2me 12:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

X Factor: this week's songs

Hi Anemone,

Just thought I'd give you a heads-up as this week's songs have just been released on the official website. You can see them here: [5]

Some interesting choices. Thanks :) Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 17:52, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Already on it but thanks. I follow the right people on twitter ;) Do you happen to know this "Fool in Love" song? There's no Wikipedia article about it. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, it's "A Fool in Love". AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I think it's this one. Originally by Tina Turner, just seen YouTubes of both performances and they are the same song. Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, you got it. Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 18:02, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Looking forward to J&E this week! lol AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Aidan Davis

As an admin with an interest in the current UK talent shows, could I ask you to take a look at this article?

The original article on the subject is at Aidan Davis (dancer) and there is some dispute about whether it should merely be a redirect to Britain's Got Talent (series 3) or not. Leaving that aside, an anon IP performed a C&P move of the article to Aidan Davis and keeps reverting my attempts to fix that, despite my explaining the rationale. Perhaps protection of the page is warranted - although until it is established whether Aidan Davis (dancer) should itself be a redirect, the target is not fixed.

Many thanks!

I42 (talk) 10:44, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, I've merged the histories of both pages and the article is now at Aidan Davis where it belongs. As for notability, I would wait and see what happens with the article about Greg Pritchard, which is currently being discussed for deletion. Davis appears to be no more notable than Pritchard, so if that page is deleted when the discussion ends, I think it would be a good idea to nominate Aidan Davis for deletion. The difference is that Pritchard's page has references from about nine different sources, but Davis's only has three, so I think there's probably a stronger case for deletion. How does that sound? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:59, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Excellent - many thanks. Ending up with one article was my objective, and the IP will presumably be happy its taken on the new name! I42 (talk) 12:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

The X Factor (UK series 6)

ok.. x factor season 6... do not make the tables small... you can have the original artist in brackets small but not the other text as it looks stupid and inappropriate. The results summary. bolden the names in the judges vote e.g. Rachel as they are important and it looks good... bolden the cowell's vote to eliminate as it makes better sense than cowels vote (to eliminate). I only put btm 2 because if you put 'bottom two' then Rachels row is twice as big as every1 wlse who hasn't been eliminated. Use Bottom 2 if you must. 92.4.209.184 (talk) 16:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the most recent changes you made to the table, i.e. removing the small text and bolding the votes. When you say Rachel's row is twice as big, do you mean it's twice as high? It doesn't really make a difference that it's twice as high, and by the end of the series, all the columns will be the same height. Rikki's and Kandy Rain's are that heigh as well. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Also putting "Bottom 2" would be wrong because it's referred to as the "bottom two" throughout all the articles. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

EastEnders major/minor characters

Hi there. As you seem to be the chief EastEnders editor on here, I was wondering what the policy was as to what EE characters qualify for major status (i.e. their own wiki page) or minor status (appearing on the EE minor charcter lists)? It's just at the moment I can't see what the dividing line is? For instance Owen Turner has his own wiki page, but Liz Turner does not, yet both characters have featured for roughly the same amount of time in EE. Similarly, Callum Monks has his own wiki page, but Syd Chambers does not. Even though again, both charcters appeared in EE for roughly the same amount of time. Can I ask, who makes the final decisions on which characters get their own pages, and what is the criteria? At the moment its seems a little arbitrary. Bleaney (talk) 15:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Good question. Often the decisions are made over at WP:EASTENDERS, though there are very few of us so it's normally just me and User:Gungadin, who I think s on Wikibreak at the moment. One of the main things we go by is how much information we have that describes the character from a real-world perspective, unless the character is definitely main or definitely minor. I guess the four you mentioned could be considered either minor or major. Liz hasn't really had her own storylines and has nothing from the real world, whereas Owen has a pretty good reception section. Callum has some information in a creation section, but it is a very short article and could probably be merged with one of the lists. We tend to discuss which character pages to merge, often on that article's talk page, though not always. It's only really this year that we've started putting new characters straight into the lists of minor characters instead of creating a new article, so they tend to stay there unless they can be substantially expanded. Examples are Syd, Theo Kelly (EastEnders) and Joel Reynolds (EastEnders). Basically, some characters seem to pass the general notability guideline and get their own articles, others don't and are stuck in a list. Does that help??! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:49, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

To a point. It still seems a little arbitrary though. Could I make a suggestion? How about all characters that have appeared regularly for more than 6 months qualify for their own page? 6 months is the shortest standard contract that EE will give to an actor playing a regular EE character. I'm not sure that I agree with you about Liz either, and this is what I mean: Saying Liz hasn't really had her own storylines is subjective, its not quantifiable. Its also likely that younger characters or well known actors will get more critical reception that is sourceable. But I cant see how this is fair on older charcters? Surely a time-frame or number of episode appearances would be a more scientific way of sorting this? Bleaney (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Further to this - Have just noticed that Glenda Mitchell already has her own character page, yet Qadim Shah doesn't. Neither of these charcters have even appeared yet, and we dont know how long either of them are staying! Further to my above suggestion, maybe all new characters should only be classed as minor until they pass the key 6 month mark of appearances? Bleaney (talk) 17:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea to me, though we sometimes come across the problem of articles being nominated for deletion because there's a lack of sources and real-world information. For example, Syd Chambers was in the show for 8 months but I don't feel there's enough material for there to be a separate page. We've been trying to avoid future AFDs by expanding articles where we can and merging them to the lists where we can't. Maybe you're right that we should just say "over six months = separate article; under six = minor", and then see what happens. I'd like to hear from other members of the EastEnders WikiProject before we change anything though, especially Gungadin. Maybe we should discuss this at WT:EE. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:17, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I would happy for this discussion to be transferred to WT:EE. I'm going to join WP:EASTENDERS as well, so my voice can be heard! Bleaney (talk) 18:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Great, we could do with more active members. Will you be helping to expand articles? :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to, though I always struggle writing in the present tense rather than the past! Will give it a go though. Will you copy this discussion over to WT:EE? Bleaney (talk) 18:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I will. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

That's done now. Present tense comes naturally to me now, but we have a lot of older articles that are still in past tense, and a lot of our storylines sections need have minor plot details removed. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:32, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

OK will, have a go soon. Have seen that the discussion has been tranferred, will direct my comment there about this now. If I have any EE questions when i'm editing, can I come to you? Bleaney (talk) 18:40, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep of course you can. It's just good to have another experienced editor on our team. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I have added to Syd Chambers, do you think she is notable enough now to have her own page? She is certainly better sourced now than the likes of Callum and others? Bleaney (talk) 21:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Go for it. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

OK done. Just a note to say all the present cast have made the 6 month mark apart from Amira Shah, and she's about to. Adam Best (EastEnders) has only been in a month or so, but his page is well written and sourced, so I guess he can be one of the 'exceptions'. I'll go off ahead now. Thanks for the help. Bleaney (talk) 22:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I thought Adam's name might come up, but I think I did a really good job on his page :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, sorry for being so absent. Have had no pc access. Havent given up on the project though, and looking forward to getting a lighter schedule soon. P.S Yay Carol's coming back, shock that Peggy's leaving! GunGagdin^Moan 23:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it too much. It's nice to have you around when a major discussion starts though. P.S. Agreed and agreed! But I'm actually mostly looking forward to EastEnders: E20, but it might just be so that I can add cast and episode lists and make another Good Article. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The Bill

Hi Anemone

I was wondering if you could please do me a favour if you get two seconds?

I was wondering if you could give The Bill a quick read over and offer a second opinion on it?

I've put The Bill forward as a Good Article, it's been put on hold and has requirements to meet before a decision is made. I think I've got about two days to go before it has to be completed, I'm aware that I've still got a couple of edits to make, include things like audience ratings etc but I'd rather get your opinion on the article too just to make sure I'm heading along the correct lines? --5 albert square (talk) 03:09, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for asking me, but, even though I've been a Wikipedia editor for many years, I don't feel "qualified" to get involved with GAs, other than nominating my own articles! Plus, I really hate reading long articles as I have a very short attention span! If it fails GA you can always improve the article without the rush and resubmit it when you think it's ready. You can always ask for a peer review as well. Good luck though. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries, my first time asking for an article to be promoted to GA status and by all accounts The Bill is unfortunately requiring a lot of re-work. Certainly learning new things with it! Hope you're well :) --5 albert square (talk) 04:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey Anemone! How are you? Looking for a bit of advice here and thought you'd be the best person to ask as you seem to know a lot about what pictures are and aren't allowed on Wikipedia. The Bill recently changed it's logo and now the logo spreads over two screens, meaning if I'm to update the logo on Wikipedia, there would need to be two screenshots in the infobox. Every other Wikipedia article I've come across only ever has one image in the infobox, I'm just wondering is there any limit to the amount of images that we can put in this box? Hope you're well :) --5 albert square (talk) 02:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I just checked out the opening sequence on Youtube to see what you mean. I don't think using two images would be a great idea, so I'd just go for the word "BILL" with a flash of blue behind it to make it look a bit more interesting, and rather than say "The Bill logo", say something like "An image from the current opening title sequence of The Bill" like on the EastEnders page. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Aneomone, thanks for that, I will have a little "tinker" with the opening credits images over the weekend :) --5 albert square (talk) 14:31, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Jack Branning

How did I do with this? Actually, writing in the present tense isnt that difficult after all! I was quite radical in cutting, I also was going to cut the line about how Suzy revealed Amy's parentage, but thought people would think it was too radical. You cut it though, so I should have trusted my intincts! Bleaney (talk) 13:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you did good! That's the kind of thing I need to start getting back into doing. I'm not sure exactly what you removed but I'm sure it was all minor and unimportant detail. The way Suzy revealed the paternity results doesn't really relate to Jack and isn't that important anyway so I got rid of it. By the way we (or I do anyway) like to refer to the pub as "The Queen Victoria public house" the first time we mention it and "The Queen Victoria" thereafter. Or just "the pub". The only thing I wasn't sure about with Jack's article is it mentions Scarlet and R&R but would people be clear that it's the same club with a different name? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:13, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I got rid of the entire passage about Janine tying Jack to a radiator and blackmailing him out of the car lot, only for Jack to con it back off her. While I loved the scenes between Jack & Janine (particularly Jack tied to the radiator!!) that whole storyline has had no major repurcussions on either character, so I got rid of it. I have clarified the naming of the club. Hope it reads better. Bleaney (talk) 16:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah you're right about that storyline. Good stuff. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for EastEnders: E20

On November 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article EastEnders: E20, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Daniel Case (talk) 13:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Laurie Brett

Hi Anemone

I thought I would let you know that I have requested for the Laurie Brett wiki to be semi-protected today because of the amount of anonymous IPs that are posting on her main page that her date of birth is incorrect. I suspect it's one person editing from various computers/IP addresses, and I know that the level of vandalism isn't high, but I couldn't help but think that some 'time out' would help. I googled her date of birth and every site bar one is saying the same as Wikipedia. The only site saying different is the BBC, they are saying she's Aries (but they don't give her precise date of birth!), to me that indicates that it may be an error on the BBC's site. Anyway, whilst the article is locked, I've started a discussion about this at Talk:Laurie Brett and have sent a message to all the anonymous IPs disputing her date of birth telling them of this and inviting them to join in the discussion and quote sources if they dispute her date of birth. I thought this was the best way to handle things --5 albert square (talk) 15:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, 5! (Dunno what else to call you!) The page was protected today at 12:57 and expires the same time tomorrow. Personally I don't think that's long enough but we'll wait and see. I'll have a look at the discussion when I've worked through my watchlist. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I always call you Anemone cos I don't know what to call you! My names Louise by the way :)! As for Laurie, I'm inclined to agree with you. I've just reverted an edit from a registered editor which is along the same lines of vandalism as before, stating that she's Aries, including a link to the BBC site that states she's Aries but doesn't state her DOB etc etc. I'm inclined to still believe that it's one editor causing this mayhem, I think that they maybe just didn't log in before to carry out the vandalism, but now the page is locked they're logging in to carry it out. I've messaged this person asking them to join in the discussion on the talk page so hopefully they will. Don't really want to ask for full page protection as that punishes everyone, but might not have any choice. I've looked into this most of today, I can only see the BBC and 1 interview from John Partridge on Digital Spy saying she's an Aries, there's been nothing from Laurie herself. Could be that John Partridge was mis-quoted as he was also talking about his real-life sister being an Aries at the same time --5 albert square (talk) 20:42, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Anemone is fine :) Hi Louise. I assumed you were a guy actually, sorry. I've commented on Talk:Laurie Brett now. I'll have a look at the editor as well. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Anemone, that's ok, thanks for looking into that. I did wonder about editing the DOB solely on the John Partridge interview but I wasn't sure if that would be allowed because I know sometimes that Digital Spy aren't an accurate source, was thinking of tagging the article instead, I think there's a tag for accuracy? Never mind hopefully your edit will put an end to the vandalism --5 albert square (talk) 22:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Should do. The user just wanted the date of birth corrected. As we don't know her date of birth, it's best to just remove it. I left the year in though. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh and I always find DS to be a perfectly reliable source. But as it was an interview with John Partridge, who knows Laurie Brett and his sister share a birthday, he's going to know she's an Aries. There's nothing more accurate than a direct quote! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:07, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sure, at least I will know that for next time now :) --5 albert square (talk) 22:33, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

ps, I've just added a hidden comment to her article asking people not to add 2 May 1970 as a DOB. It's just you can guarantee that someone will come along tomorrow and try to re-add it! --5 albert square (talk) 22:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, good thinking. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Anemone, there's been more vandalism to this article today over Laurie's date of birth. One of the editors who was complaining that she is in fact Aries, removed my hidden comment asking for 2nd May not to be re-inserted, he then re-inserted 2nd May as her DOB and has left a note on his talk page saying that we must find out her true date of birth. I've also pointed out to this editor, politely on their talk page that they were one of the editors claiming that she is Aries, which was the reason for the change in the first place! For what it's worth, this person has previously been blocked for vandalising her wiki --5 albert square (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

(←) Yep I noticed, but I didn't realise it was the same person who was saying it was wrong. Wish they'd make up their mind. I presume you know what to do once you've given a level 4 warning and they continue to vandalise... AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:37, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, don't worry I know what to do if he gets to level 4, a little trip to WP:AIV is then needed for them to intervene. Yeah, I wish they'd make their minds up too, she was either born on 2nd May or she wasn't, I'm quite sure she's not like the Queen with 2 dates of birth! I mean they complain when it's wrong, so you changed it to be more general so it's more correct and then they say they'd rather have the original date of birth. Interesting though, I just noticed that Jane Beale's date of birth is given as 2nd May too, I think somewhere along the line someone has got actress and character confused --5 albert square (talk) 22:52, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh I bet you're right. Someone's put her date of birth on IMDb after confusing the character's dob, and then the whole internet has picked up on that. 1970 might not even be the right year. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:07, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Well I managed to get her agents details through IMDB. So I've sent them an email including a link to her profile on IMDB and pointing out that I think her DOB is wrong. I've asked them if they can confirm her DOB but I really don't know if they can do that. Even if they can't they'll now have the link to IMDB and her agent can always contact IMDB directly to get the DOB changed if it's wrong. Shame it won't really help us though! --5 albert square (talk) 00:34, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep an eye out and see if it changes on IMDb. If it does, it's probably going to be correct, considering that you've contacted her agent. But I've narried it down to Aries 1970, which seems good enough for now. We don't have to have the exact date anyway. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:36, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Anemone, I was thinking today about updating the screencap that's on Jane Beale's page. It's just that I noticed today that it's not got one of the fair rationale templates to explain why copyright doesn't apply to it. I was going to update it to a more recent picture and upload it properly to Wikipedia. Just wondered if you would have any objections or comments to this? --5 albert square (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi. The image was originally uploaded in 2006 when the rationale templates didn't exist and you just had to write your own, so the rationale it has is still ok-ish (though a lot of the older EastEnders images use a very basic rationale that probably needs updating). The picture of Jane is a recent one (September) and she hasn't changed her appearance since so to be honest with you I don't see much point in updating it now. We seem to only upload a new image once a year or so or if they get a hair cut or something! But I assume that you know how to how to upload a file with the same name - just use the "Upload a new version of this file" link and it'll have the same file information and rationale so that won't need updating. By the way fair use doesn't mean copyright doesn't apply - it still does. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:58, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, ah ok I didn't realise it was uploaded so recently, I just looked back on the edits and realised she had the same picture this time last year. And thanks for the info on fair use, as you can probably guess I'm still trying to learn about that part of Wikipedia --5 albert square (talk) 01:27, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean you looked back at history of Jane Beale and the same image was there? If so, that's because the image has had the same file name since 2006, even though different images have been uploaded. So even if you go back to 2006, you'll still see the current image :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Help

hi i was wondering if you could help me with something?. Now thgis has nothing to do with EastEnders or the Articles for it,but i was wondering how you would remove a characters article on them on the minor characters page for the year the first appeared,you see this needs to be done for one of the articles for coronation street ,incase u didnt know i contribute to Coronation street articles aswell Eastenders and since your very good at what you do on this i decided to ask you for this help thank you:) brian moore (talk) 22:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I presume you mean Natasha Blakeman. I don't normally get involved with Coronation Street articles (though I do watch it) and well, due to the size of the article and the amount of information that isn't just about what she's done in the show, I'd say keep it as a separate article. Plus she's been in it for over a year. But you would need to copy the information from that page and create a section for the character in the list page and then redirect her page to the new section in the list. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok i'l leave it but in all fairness like how many episodes has she been in no more then 10 i would say,but thanks for the help il leave it as it is for a while anywaybrian moore (talk) 23:02, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Well you've started a discussion on the talk page, so you can wait and see if you get any replies there. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

yup ok thanks for the helpbrian moore (talk) 23:13, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Echo Leona Lewis

Hey, found more accurate writers/producers. They are from someone who was at the listening party in Paris so there is no ref. but they are fact. Obviously we can't post without a ref. but thought i would give them to you anyway. Here they are:

1.Happy (Ryan Tedder/E.Kidd Bogart/ Leona Lewis) Produced by Tedder

2. I Got You (Arnthor Birgisson/ Max Martin/ Savan Kotecha) Produced by Arnthor

3. Brave (Andrew Frampton/ Julian Bunetta/ Savan Kotecha/ Leona Lewis) Produced by Julian Bunetta and Andrew Frampton

4. Outta my head (Max Martin/ Shellback/Savan Kotecha) Produced by Max Martin and Shellback

5. My Hands (Arnthor Birgisson/Ina Wroldsen) Produced by Arnthor —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beautiful&Dying (talk • contribs) 19:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. We know the credits for Happy, Outta My Head and My Hands, but the others are good to know as we only have partial credits for I Got You and nothing at all for Brave. I hope a source appears so we can reference them. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:16, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Recording studio locations & producers

You see by listing xenomania and matt hales etc it gives ammunition for people to go and try and guess which songs they produced etc. We should only place the producers as they are actually confirmed and linked to specific songs. It is up to you regarding the recording studio issue but i did think it was important to list it. maybe we could put something like 'including...' before the studio? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2009 (UTC))

Album Credits

EEK!!! sorry im so excited that i've been able to find the album credits, seriously you don't know how long i've been searching for them. Every night since the album title was confirmed i've searched high and low for details. We finally have the missing peice. Well done. Between us the article is looking fantastic - even if i say so myself ;) (Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC))

Great stuff. If you like, tomorrow I'll update the background and production section. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I've had a brief go over it already. but yeah sounds good. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:50, 19 October 2009 (UTC))

You've done a great job. I have ideas but I can't do anything now as I don't have time. I wanted to be in bed 45 minutes ago. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

More potential information

Is any of the information contained [6] useable or appropriate?(Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC))

I used it to say "Naked" is upbeat. The information on "Outta My Head" would be useful if it became a single, but I don't know if we should be going into great detail about individual songs. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Is this relevant? [7] Also note that Japan releases from Sony Music always have a Jason Nevins remix of the lead single tacked on the end (as with Ciara, Britney Spears, Backstreet Boys, Jennifer Lopez etc.) (Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC))

Not sure what specifically you want to know about, but I don't realy see anything there that's not already in the article. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:59, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Happy (single)

Hello i have a question for you. What would you think about changing the format section to match the one demonstrated here? It is quite an experimental format and method for laying out the section but it is something which i can hope can becomne more mainstream. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC))

I'm not really sure what section you're refering to, nothing there looks experimental to me, or at least not new. I can only presume you mean the track listing section as that's where the formats are listed. Using {{tracklist}} isn't something I'd call experimental, and in articles for singles it's probably not necessary. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

X Factor series 6 mistake

Hi. In Week two on the series 6 X factor page, it says bottom two instead of 10th and 9th. Please change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foorganders (talk • contribs) 18:54, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not a mistake. The result did not go to deadlock so we don't know who received the lowest number of votes that week. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh ok thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Foorganders (talk • contribs) 18:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Celebrity Big Brother & Big Brother 2010

Hi, I was wondering if you would take a look at Celebrity Big Brother 2010 (UK) and Big Brother 2010 (UK), is it too early for them or not? MSalmon (talk) 23:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

and this Big_Brother_Celebrity_Big_Brother_(UK) by the same editor just seems plain wrong. Leaky Caldron 23:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

(ec) I've had them on my watchlist since they were created but haven't had the will to get involved in their deletion just yet. It's definitely too soon for Big Brother 2010 (UK), and probably a bit too soon for Celebrity Big Brother 2010 (UK) as well, but I'd say it doesn't have any notability at the moment anyway. The logos aren't even official, as I'm sure you know. The third article should be changed to a redirect as Celebrity Big Brother (UK). AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. 1 less to delete I suppose! Leaky Caldron 23:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

What about the other two articles? MSalmon (talk) 23:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

AFD? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about you but I would keep the Celebrity one for now but AFD the summer one MSalmon (talk) 23:24, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I am pretty sure this discussion happens every year... if it's going to get created eventually, I honestly can't see any point in deleting it. Majorly talk 23:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does happen every year, but having an article for next summer's series is ridiculous. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Moscopole

Please, can you move Moscopole to Voskopojë? See disscuss. at talk-page. Guildenrich (talk) 01:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thnx. Guildenrich (talk) 01:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I have to inform that the proposal was Moschopolis not Voskopojë, and the discussion isn't over. Seems user Guild. continues his nationalistic spa campaign.Alexikoua (talk) 05:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I apologise. The discussion appeared to be closed and it was unclear what the result actually was so I trusted Guildenrich and moved the page to Voskopojë. I'll be happy to move the page again if you need me to, when consensus has been reached. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: John & Edward

Please explain to me why the John & Edward page was redirected to the X Factor series VI page. If they had been mere contestants, I would have understood, but in recent weeks these boys have become 'celebrities' in their own right. For weeks, the papers have constantly covered John & Edward, and they have become a national talking point in the United Kingdom and Ireland. Even YouTube users in America have been taking a keen interest.

Bear in mind that shortly after her first audition at Britain's Got Talent, a page was created for Susan Boyle - and this was before she was guaranteed a place in the live shows; today, she is a global sensation. Why do faded reality show contestants, like Natalie Okri, have their own page when they did not generate the same level of excitement? Jemmabond (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Finglas (song)

The article Finglas (song) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable song, recording artist doesn't even have their own article and this is never going to be anything more than a stub.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. BigDunc 10:58, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Finglas (song)

I have nominated Finglas (song), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finglas (song). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. BigDunc 16:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Michelle McManus: you owe me an apology

Don't call me a liar. [8] You are supposed to assume good faith. First result at [9] The report of Michelle McManus's death was on Popbitch this morning but got removed after a bit. I thought (wrongly, as it seems) it might be breaking news as they reported Michael Jackson's death before it hit any of the main news sources, and have been first off the mark and correct on many other news stories as the site is peopled by industry insiders. And yes, I know it's not a reliable source, which is why I didn't add it to the article, just put it on the talk page to see if it was true. 81.156.126.150 (talk) 16:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, on this occasion I forgot to assume good faith. People are always vandalising articles, saying people have died when they haven't. Michelle McManus has been targetted several times. I looked on Google News and found nothing. You could have posted your source on the talk page as well, though. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

82.36.17.10

As an admin involved with the X Factor articles, could you take a look at this edit? Something odd is afoot. Hassaan19 and 82.36.17.10 are one and the same (this much is obvious: the IP keeps signing their name Hassaan19 and User:Hassaan19 even says as much). But in that edit, IP has changed their signature to Woohookitty, another admin. I presume User:Woohookitty is uninvolved. Thx! I42 (talk) 22:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

And I am uninvolved. I changed the signature back to what it should've been. I'd still like for you to look into this though. I'd obviously rather not have people hijack my name. :) --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 01:34, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, sorry, I don't really have time to deal with it at the moment. Could you take it to WP:ANI if you haven't already? Thanks. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Thx! I42 (talk) 18:10, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Cathy LeSurf

Well, going through the redlinks on Fairport Convention's template, I thought it was about time Cathy had an article. Google search turned up your page. SO here are some links I found, in case they're of use to you:

• "allmusic ((( Cathy Lesurf > Songs > Songs Composed By )))". www.allmusic.com. Retrieved 2009-11-23.
• "One-hit wonders". arts.guardian.co.uk. Retrieved 2009-11-23. {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help); Text "guardian.co.uk Arts" ignored (help)
• "BBC - Nottingham - Entertainment - World in 1 County". www.bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 2009-11-23.
• "Alive & Shouting - The Official Oysterband Discography Website". www.musikfolk.co.uk. Retrieved 2009-11-23.

Cheers. Rodhullandemu 00:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm not actually familiar with her myself but I did come across her in an article in my local newspaper about her releasing a Christmas single this year. Then I figured she probably should have an article so I had a quick look. But if you want, you can start the article yourself, because at the moment I don't have time and probably would never get around to writing about her as I'm not familiar with her. It's up to you though. You can use anything I've put on my subpage. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:09, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Sam Mitchell

Sam is gone what makes you think she isn't??,and what makes you think Todd is coming back?? brian moore (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Her contract isn't up yet, she had a three month contract which was slightly extended, so it ends in December. I added a reference to say Todd is returning, which what someone else added to his article. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Lucas Johnson

Hi, just to say I've requested semi-protection of Lucas Johnson. Perhaps unsurprisingly since he murdered Owen Turner in tonights episode his page has been subject to all sorts of vandalism from anon IPs. Hope your house move has gone well :) --5 albert square (talk) 20:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

If I had been around last night I would have done it myself. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it was originally only for a few hours, but I checked the page again at work today and found the same sort of vandalism returning. So I requested semi-page protection again and it's now locked to anonymous IPs again, I think for a week. Hope the house move is going well and you get internet connection soon! --5 albert square (talk) 16:29, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. The move is done, I'm just waiting on a housemate because I'll have to share his TV and internet account. Need to find out if he's contacted Virgin Media yet. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:58, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Stacey Solomon / Olly Murs

As you know, I've been as opposed as anyone to independent articles on The X Factor (UK series 6)‎ contestants, but as these two have reached the final three and so are guaranteed to be "placed in a major music contest" - WP:MUSIC #9, shouldn't the independent articles stand?

I still don't see why they should have articles when they're still not independently notable from the series. I've never agreed with WP:MUSIC #9 since I joined Wikipedia three or four years ago. I mean, only the winner is guaranteed a recording contract, so I don't see why the third placed contestant would deserve and article any more than the fourth placed one. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

You may want to comment at Talk:List_of_The_X_Factor_finalists_(UK_series_6)#Joe_McElderry_2. Given WP:MUSIC#9 it seems to me difficult to justify contesting creation of the articles, though - presumably attaining that level of achievement is considered notable even if no recording contract follows. I42 (talk) 15:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the link. As I've said there I guess I don't have a problem if everyone else agrees. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:30, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thx! Per your comment there, I'd not even attribute significance to a recording contract. WP:MUSIC requires either two released works on a significant label, or a charted release. I42 (talk) 15:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, we all know the winner's single will chart! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:LDN (song).jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:LDN (song).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. Skier Dude (talk) 07:00, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

User Talk:86.172.31.54

Hi Anemone

I'm sorry to have to trouble you about this. Could you please have a word with this user when you get a second? The editor keeps editing the Laurie Brett page insisting that I write to her to get her date of birth. I've told the editor that I will not do this. I've told the editor that I have emailed Laurie's agent and made them aware that her and Jane Beale's date of birth is appearing the exact same but I've not heard anything back so I'm assuming that they don't want us to have this information for whatever reason. I've also told them that the cast of EastEnders are very busy people and I would not write out to her for this information as it's not essential for her page. I've told them this something like 5 times today both on their talk page and at Talk: Laurie Brett but they seem to be refusing to accept it as an answer and are now saying that they will keep editing her page to ask for this information to be added until it is added. I've pointed out that if they do this then they run the risk of being blocked from editing, but I can't help think that a word from admin might also help? --5 albert square (talk) 23:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Anemone, thanks for your comments on Laurie's talk page. It's not the same IP, but there has been a reply to your post. Although not the same IP, I'm certain it's the same person. They're still requesting that we write out to Laurie for her date of birth. I don't know, I mean they complained when it was wrong, now it's been taken down they're complaining it's not up! --5 albert square (talk) 21:34, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it as and when I can. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for your help Anemone and thanks for locking the main article too. I was wary in case the editor started on that one too. He's now posting that we should update the personal life section on her page, though what needs to be added I don't know! --5 albert square (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi again, heard more from this user. He provided an interview source that was about 5 years old that he said had more information on Laurie. Personally I only took one sentence from the whole article to add to her page and that was just to say that she didn't like media invasion and she felt sorry for her co-stars who always found themselves in the spotlight. The article also mentioned that she drank for 20 years or so, but from what I can remember of reading the article, I got the impression it wasn't all the time, just Friday/Saturday night stuff like the majority of the population so I didn't add it to the article as I didn't think it was encyclopedic enough. Unfortunately though I can't look up the source now as I'm at work and the computer has it blocked! However this editor is now suggesting that we add this to her article. What do you think? --5 albert square (talk) 11:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I think we can add it as long as we don't say she was an alcoholic! If anything, it might get that pesky editor off our backs for a while. Or maybe they'll just never be happy! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll have another quick read of the article tonight and see what we can add. Don't worry I won't make out that she's an alcoholic! Somehow I don't think the editor will ever be happy as he's still mentioning about adding her birthday --5 albert square (talk) 15:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Leona Lewis

Hi Anemone

I felt I should let you know that Leona Lewis has now been semi-protected for 6 months. I know that you normally deal with the page and if it could've waited I would've just reported the incidents on your talk page, but the vandalism got so bad on it tonight I really felt that protection needed to be done quickly.

Hope your new house is coming along nicely :) --5 albert square (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I don't have a new house, just a room, though. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

It's not really like you to revert vandalism without warning the vandal, though, is it? Perhaps he should have been blocked as well/instead. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh no, I did warn him, but from the conversation I had with Enigmaman shortly afterwards, I understand that they deleted the users talk page for some reason

Edit: Just noticed this, thanks for your comments at Talk: Laurie Brett. I genuinely didn't mean to come across as shouting to that editor but sadly it seems like the only way they seem to understand things. I really don't understand some people, I added the info he requested to be added, the only part I didn't add was her saying she'd been drinking for 20 years and her admission that she once apparently flung a table at her boyfriend when drunk. I didn't add it because we don't want people thinking she's some sort of alcoholic! --5 albert square (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I see. I can't see any reason for deleting that user's talk page so I've restored it. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Lauren Branning

Hi

Just to let you know, Lauren Branning's page came under attack tonight from editors having an edit war. I've since set up a discussion regarding the edits at Talk: Lauren Branning, I thought I would let you know in case you have any comments that you'd like to make --5 albert square (talk) 01:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

X Factor songs

I have added a song which I discovered by Avenue (who were kicked out in series 3) called Long Goodbye to List of music releases from The X Factor (UK) contestants. We need to see if there are any other releases that are missed off and then reference the article. Should we also have a "Other releases" section to list non-charting singles/albums by notable contestants e.g. one of the albums by The MacDonald Brothers, as I have done with Pop Idol/Fame Academy/Popstars? What are your thoughts? 03md 09:42, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Yes I think we should have the other releases section. The article is in quite urgent need of more references. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:29, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Would you be able to help me tidy up the Pop Idol list, which should almost be ready for featured list. I just need a few more refs for the "other releases" section and maybe a bit of tweaking of the format. I also need to get hold of pictures of Gareth Gates, Michelle McManus and possibly a couple of others. 03md 00:58, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Images aren't essential, but you can try a creative commons search on Flickr. I'll help out when I can, sure. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:33, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Echo

Hi, I've noticed you've added a lot of good information to the article. If you like (and if you give me some time) I can edit and intergrate the information like i have done at I Look to You with regards to the personnel section and recording studios/locations? (Lil-unique1 (talk) 02:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC))

What do you mean by "intergrate the information"? I did the list by what they did rather than by person even though the guidelines say otherwise, so that the list would be shorter. I commented on it on the talk page. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Reviews

Hi, Hope your well? I've just noticed this difference at WP:ALBUMS#Professional reviews. So in-cordinance with what appears to be a new consensus i've made changes to Echo. But i thought you would want to know. Lil-unique1 (talk) 02:25, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

That's an interesting development. I always thought it would be better that way so I'm surprised they didn't do it earlier. I still don't like the 10-review limit though. Especially if the box can be hidden to start with. Anyway, you didn't have to let me know because I came across the edits on my watchlist. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Chrissie Watts article

Hi Anemone :) I've almost completed the updates to the Chrissie Watts page. There were quite a few rich sources out there so it was quite a task. I'd actually like to get the article up to GA standards all things told. Anyway, before I make the changes I wanted to show you what I've done. I put it on my talk page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Familiae_Watts. I've still got to add a bit to the final section and suppliment the "reception" section. I also have looked at the storylines section. But I wanted to get your opinion before I went further. Thanks. :) I've also used some short hand for things (like EE) which will obviously be changed before being transfered to the article proper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Familiae Watts (talk • contribs) 16:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I don't really have time to read through it but it looks quite good from just a quick scan. Just remember that EastEnders should be italicised even in quotations where it wasn't originally. Also, what about the stuff that's currently in the article, such as Grantham's hair being stuck to the floor, or Oberman's desire to have the storyline wrapped up? AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:36, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, sorry forgot to mention - I was going to put that in the reception section, as I wanted to tie it in with the "rushed" nature of Chrissie exit, then quoting TAO about tying things up.... but I can put it in otherplaces. :) The stuff about the hair sticking I was also going to put in the reception section which would deal more in-depth with the reception of the episode where Den died. Everything currently in the article I have kept - somewhere. :) I'll also remember to fix the italics... I've also got to put in some episode quotes and a few references I've left room for (just fiddly putting in the wiki code for references as I'm doing this in Word and it makes reading the text tricky. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Familiae Watts (talk • contribs) 16:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi again AP. Sorry if I got a little antsy on the Project talk page - had little sleep that night so was irritable. Just wanted to make sure you saw my earlier plea for your assistance on the Chrissie Watts page - if you could just give it the once-over and see whether or not it is acceptable for GA status and what is needed to get it there. :) Thanks for all your help. :)Familiae Watts (talk) 21:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Don't worry about being a little antsy. As for Chrissie, I'll have to wait until I have more time. Gungadin said she will also help. But at the moment, I only have a couple of hours internet access every day so don't really have time to go through the whole article just yet. But hopefully it'll be soon when I can do it. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 14:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem - I understand the limits on your time. Thanks. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Familiae Watts (talk • contribs) 09:19, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm online at home now so hopefully I'll find the time to read through the article. Though I do hate reading ;) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:35, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Makes a difference to be able to surf from home. :) No hurry on the Chrissie article.... it being Xmas I don't think I would be able to synthesise any advice until after the New Year - so take your time. I would like to have the article properly "finished" to the best of my (and all involved) abilities by the first few weeks of January - but I think we can get down to the nitty gritty of improving it from the first week of Jan onwards - so feel free to stagger your reading! ;)Familiae Watts (talk) 13:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC) (PS: personally, I've hd a look at other GA and FA articles, and I believe that we can get the Chrissie article up to that standard; there are plenty of references and good source material. The major problem is that I have a tendency to extrapolate too much from a source sometime, so that it can (or at least appear too) cross the border into original research. I think fixing some of my phraseology and weeding out some of the more "original" comments is really what may be needed). Anyway.. have a happy Xmas. :)

Thanks. Maybe it would be a good idea for me to check the references against what you've written then, though that will make the task even more difficult! It's something I never do because I just assume good faith :) AnemoneProjectors (talk) 13:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmmmm.... most of the content I think is ok; I usually took my starting point as the infomation in the sources, then grouped that information together into a structure. 90% of what is there I think is fine, I'm just not 100% certain that in the remaining 10% i may have said more than is justifiable in the source. I will give you the point that I am probably most concerned about as an example. 2005 was a very odd year which meant that the character of Chrissie featured in the show to an unprecedented scale.... now, no source/reference actually says that, but TAO remarks about how she did 4 years in a 2 year period and that she was "in the show all the time". So I don't know if using those points to note how prominent Chrissie was is actually a step too far. That is probably the point I am most concerned about, and as you read through the article you can determine if it is justifiable or not. Having just come out of 5 years at uni, my "writing" style still has an "essay" quality to it, which I am just trying to check (ie: presenting an argument). I think I did check it with the Chrissie article and was sure to reference the points I made. Most of the references are probably ok; I've tried to quote as much as possible too, to reduce any temptation towards extrapolation.Familiae Watts (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Further to your point about checking the references..... I think the Creation, casting, personality, and Mrs Watts sections are all fine; most of the content that I am concerned about falls into the Witches of Walford and especially the Victim or Villain section. The latter was heavily influenced by the EE Revealled doco, obviously, and I think it is an important part of her character development - BUT, it may not contain enough OOU information as the foundation. Perhaps if you just check what is said against what is referenced for those sections it would be a more appealing proposition for you! ;)Familiae Watts (talk) 13:59, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Leona Lewis Run

Why did you revert my change that Run was not the fastest downloaded single in the UK? This is clearly not true and you're now vandalising the page. I will ask another admin to remove your privileges if you continue to abuse pages on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riksweeney (talk • contribs) 08:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I reverted because it WAS the fastest download, but I added that that is no longer the case. It should still be mentioned. Just because it no longer holds that title, doesn't mean we should remove all reference to it. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:16, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

problem?

Hey mate i think you must have a problem with me or something.First of all whenever i do perfectly good edits you ALWAYS change its like think they can only be perfect if they are done by you!!.Also whenever isay something you always disagree with it! but if it was you that did it you would be happy.There is nothing wrong with my edits!! and i wish you would kow that but of course yours are the only perfect ones!!. Brianwazere 20:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I cleaned up your edit to Pat Evans, does it matter? It was slightly overly detailed. Don't take it personally. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:54, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh trust me its alot more then just flippin fat pat evans!! Brianwazere 22:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I clean up after most edits to pages on my watchlist. Like I said, don't take it personally. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:05, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

ya but sometimes there is no need other people can be right besides you Brianwazere 23:17, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I don't change every single edit I come across. I only change things if I think there is a need to. You should read WP:AGF. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:30, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Couple of time

Hey ho, AP. I've just put up 3 sections on my talk page for you and Gungadin to have a look at - just some ideas. I put it on my talk page to save me having to repeat myself and to have one area to gage your thoughts on the matter. :) Familiae Watt§ (talk) 00:04, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

widescreen shot

Ok, so I've done one for Chrissie Watts but I've uploaded it to the temporary Dennis Rickman article in my userspace rather than the proper article to see what you guys think first:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Familiae_Watts/workspace/Dennis

I think it looks good, personally, but will defer to you and AP (I am actually not on my normal computer so am not 100% sure if it just looks good on this display and not others!)

It was tricky - so am not suggesting we make wide-scale replacements.... also, I appreciate how difficult it can be just to get a profile shot, let alone one that can be put into a "widescreen" format.

But I do think it looks better - I don't know why... it makes the info table appear a bit more compact and.... professional?? (if that is the right word!)

Anyway, as I said if you guys still prefer the portrait style, I will defer. :) Familiae Watt§ (talk) 10:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Lorna Fitzgerald

Hi Anemone

Just to let you know I suspect that there was a sockpuppet around on Lorna Fitzgerald's page before. I initially assumed good faith but the editor didn't heed the warnings, despite explanations from myself and another editor on their talk page, and the edits were so similar I did end up reporting them. You can see the report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ln of x.

Oh, and glad you're back online permanently now! --5 albert square (talk) 00:49, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Blatently Ln of x. Was already blocked for vandalism, I made it indefinate. The investigation will confirm it, but I know Ln of x. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that Anemone --5 albert square (talk) 01:44, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

I know it's a Twinkle thing but I don't think it was necessary to contact Ln of x on his talk page! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:53, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Lol! I keep forgetting that Twinkle does that! God knows why it does that, I've removed it from Ln of x's talk page anyway :) --5 albert square (talk) 20:41, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

A reply

ah sorry there was me getting ahead ahead of myself again haha oh ya happy holidays have a nice one:D Brianwazere 23:58, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

The Climb

Hello! You mentioned on the talk page of "The Climb" that you agreed that the article was bloated. Since I would like to make it an FA at some point, would you please tell me what information you feel is unnecessary? Thanks in advance. Liqudluck✽talk 06:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

I agreed with User:Kww when he said the article was bloated and gave some examples. I haven't actually read the whole article but I agreed with his comments so you should ask him if you haven't already. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:07, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Liqudluck✽talk 19:00, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Celebrity Big Brother

hi, i'm not trying to add anything to wikipedia because the sources aren't there yet, but have you heard any RUMORS about who the celebrity big bro housemates might be? just wondering. thankx 75.1.48.21 (talk) 23:45, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Since you asked, yes. Boy George was meant to be going in but had it stopped by the courts because he's currently on licence. Other rumours I've read are Pamela Anderson, Mitch Hewer, Alex Reid (Jordan's ex), Dane Bowers, MC Hammer and Heidi Fleiss. I know there have been other names mentioned too but those are the ones I can remember reading about. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:51, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

okay thanks. I'm not sure who alex reid or dane bowers or mitch hewer is...maybe because i'm American. But that still sounds interesting. I will go look some of these people up. Thanks. 75.1.48.21 (talk) 04:38, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh right. Alex Reid is only famous for being Katie Price's most recent boyfriend. Dane Bowers is a singer who used to be in Another Level and is also an ex of Katie Price. Mitch Hewer is an actor. Just click on the Wikilinks I provided for more info. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:25, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I say Alex is only famous for that, but he does have a Wikipedia article so he must be famous for other things too. But I only heard of him when he dated Katie Price. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

re Amy Pond/Eleventh Doctor image

He kept the same license on Flickr, but allowed it to be uploaded under a different license on Commons. Cirt (talk) 19:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

That is, he gave Wikipedia special permission to use it, and the OTRS-thing is so that trusted users can confirm the permission as genuine. ╟─TreasuryTag►inspectorate─╢ 14:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't think "used with permission" was allowed on Wikipedia, and to me it doesn't make sense because if he doesn't want the image used commercially (per his licence on Flickr) then allowing it on Wikipedia defeats the purpose of that as the new licence means anyone can use it commercially anywhere they want and not just on Wikipedia. I dunno, just seems a bit contradictory to me. I also sometimes wonder if some people have used OTRS to claim they have permission when they actually don't. Maybe I'm just suspicious! Also, someone once changed a fact in an article citing OTRS in their edit summary but to me it was unreferenced and unverifiable! But never mind. AnemoneProjectors (talk) 16:20, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject

Could you give me a link to the page where ye had the discussion about the minor characters article cause i wasn't aware of it and also to mkkae sure i dont miss out on any further discussions on that page thanks :) Brianwazere 21:31, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Molly Conlin (2nd nomination)

All Wikipedia articles must meet our criteria for inclusion (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Since it does not seem that Molly Conlin meets these criteria, an editor has started a discussion about whether this article should be kept or deleted.

Your opinion on whether this article meets the inclusion criteria is welcome. Please contribute to the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Molly Conlin (2nd nomination).

Discussions such as these usually last seven days. In the meantime, you are free to edit the content of the article. Please do not remove the "articles for deletion" template (the box at the top). When the discussion has concluded, a neutral third party will consider all comments and decide whether or not to delete the article. Eastmain (talk) 02:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hi Anemone

Just popping by to say a Happy New Year for when it happens. Hope all is well with you :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:03, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

And to you. And to everyone reading this! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)