User talk:Kww/04012010

Vanessa Hudgens 2[edit]

Juanacho has removed some information AGAIN in the Vanessa Hudgens page. So, since you basically evaluated the page, could you tell him to stop doing those stuff? Please?? I really want to expand the article but he keeps on removing IMPORTANT stuff. Could he get a restraining order from editing that page? He seems to be the only one who keeps on removing stuff there. Kikkokalabud (talk)

What is your problem? The article uses fan language, and exaggerates the information, I try to discuss. (for example film production, cast, grossing) Juanacho (talk)

Vanessa Hudgens[edit]

Hey, I've recently "expanded" the Vanessa Hudgens page. Would it be OK if you evaluate it? I just want to make sure if Juanancho's claims are even legit. He/she's been reverting edits in that page. Thanks for your time! Kikkokalabud (talk)

Just like details on the career section. I just don't see why Juanancho's been doing all this stuff to that particular page. From start, I admit, I've been wanting to expand the Vanessa Hudgens page. And everytime I do so, he/she objects to them and revert my edits. Just like the alleged rumors he/she claims about Hudgens' involvement in Dead@17. There was a source that says she's already attached. And some details about how critics have expressed their praises towards Hudgens. I've based my edits on numerous artists' articles and they were included. So I don't see no reason why they are being removed numerously by Juanancho. Could you talk to him or something? I really want to report him/her. Kikkokalabud (talk)

I just reviewed the article, and appears a lot information about her projects and not about her, for example film production information and details of the singles and album promotion, which already appears in the articles cited. Also, information about nude photos already appear in the "controversy" section and other appearances at events and auditions that didn't happened that are not relevant in the article.Juanacho (talk)

Falling Down[edit]

How is Twitter a bad source if it is literally her saying what happened? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 02:17, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are gaining the knowledge of when the music video was filmed, which readers would want to know about and why would she lie about it? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 02:29, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not like it's super important, but it is notable enough. Plus, obviously the video was shot after the song was recorded (which is not known) and before its release. The exact date is better. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 02:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your view of a better source than a magazine and the actual artist stating it. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 02:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. You were right. That was a weak example, but per the tweet http://twitter.com/selenagomez/status/3319998684, it was filmed on August 15, 2009. This one DOES give a date. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 21:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about this one, http://twitter.com/selenagomez/status/3330282759?

I think it should be stated, she is on set filming it because she is saying that a picture of the music video is coming soon. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 21:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Twitter not a real source? Magazines, newspapers, and MTV news wouldn't make a report just on how she said she was filming a video that day. And even if they did, it would be based on all of the tweets she made - ex: the Examiner (which was used earlier), http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1617283/20090730/cyrus__miley.jhtml, and http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1618671/20090813/gomez__selena.jhtml. So if reliable sources like those use Twitter as a source, so should we. It is never going to be explicitly said: "Filming my music video for "Falling Down" right now, on August 15." It is a SOURCE. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 22:01, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am stressing over it because it is known, and if you can add it, "why not?" -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 22:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edits[edit]

Hey kww, just making sure about something. If on a page lets say it says something sold or made a certain amount of money, and there is no source either there or in the body of the page, can I remove that?Im pretty sure that it falls under my bounds being that its basic editing, but just bc its a number I just want to make sure.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:11, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well usually I would put a [CN] for that kind of figure, but for this case tell me your opinion. The page I saw is The Adventures of Mimi and in the second paragraph it says it grossed over $26 million, and its based on the not completed chart total that was deleted. So what do you suggest be done for that?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 17:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested chart[edit]

Per request at WT:RFA, I made File:Enwiki Admin Activity 09 2009.png. It shows that 25% of our most active admins are long-term inactive and that another 15% are at least less active then they use to be. MBisanz ^talk 12:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i was right[edit]

Seems your over undoing all my Broken Hearted Girl pages didnt work. Theres a full page up now + uve been proven wrong. sorry i LOVE to gloat. Blazemon (talk) 16:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OMG if you had just sed that in the first place we wouldnt have a problem Blazemon (talk) 16:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://eil.com/shop/moreinfo.asp?catalogid=427974

Petergriffin9901[edit]

I'd like to bring something to your attention as it seems that Petergriffin9901 edits are all about praise Mariah Carey and discraise other female artists, even after last discussion about this. Before he was blocked, Petergriffin9901 was constantly inflating Mariah Carey sales. Now he is lowering the sales of other female artists.

1. On the My Love Is Your Love album page Petergriffin9901 changed the text under "When You Believe" from "Performed by Whitney Houston & Mariah Carey" to "Performed by Mariah Carey & Whitney Houston". Clearly, so that Carey could be first. According to him even in her own article, Houston can not have her name before Carey. Petergriffin9901 justified his edit saying: "Their names are in that order on the single cover". Just like that, without any effort and dispite the fact that this article is about an album. Well, although I'm not a Whitney Houston fan, I did some searching and after just few minutes I know that on Houston’s album it is written: "When You Believe" (Duet with Mariah Carey from ‘’The Prince Of Egypt’’). And about the single cover - Carey is first on the international releases, but the U.S. covers have Houston's name first.

2. I understand that Petergriffin9901 should ask you before changing numbers. But what about this kind of changes: on Just Whitney he changed text from "has sold approximately one million" to "has sold less than one million". Number stays the same but the meaning does not. Of course he did it so that Houston look worse. But that’s not all. The source given there says clearly: "The album sold only three million copies worldwide, less than a million of which were in the US." And Petergriffin9901 wrote: "Just Whitney has sold less than one million copies worldwide." How can he justify that? I assume he changed it after reading the source.

3. Above are the latest changes. One moth ago, on the “One Sweet Day” he changed the text from “one of the biggest American hits of both Carey's and Boyz II Men's careers” to “the biggest song in Billboard's history” without any references. And he won’t find them as this song is not what he claims it is. Again, all that just for Carey to be the best of all, to glorify her.

I’d like to know your opinion about these edits, especially that Petergriffin9901 is still on probation. And if somehow he will be able to edit Wikipedia on his own, I know there will be many conflicts as he really hasn't changed. Max24 (talk) 22:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, I can explain those two changes. For the Whitney Houston album page, this is the source it had (i did not add it) http://www.rnbhaven.com/90s-music/artists/Whitney-Houston/38 and as you can see it says it sold 3 million copies worldwide and less than a million were in the usa, making what the article said (approximately one million in the usa) not true. All I changed was from that to less than a million in the usa, which is what the source says. 2. for the song on the whitney album 'my love is your love' all i did was change it from whitney houston and mariah carey to mariah carey and whitney houston. The reason is simply because i previously saw that on the article and article cover art and single cover it was written with mariah careys name first, just a simple edit here is the page so u can see it, the page for the song When You Believe. All Max24 is trying to do is sabotage me in every way possible, if you review what i just presented you will see that non of my edits were fake or out of my probation range, Max24 is just throwing any edit i make in hope of getting me banned. Please let me know once you reviewed this,thanks kww.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 04:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing kww, I did not write it sold 1 million worlwide, if you review the change before mine compared to mine youll see I didnt change the words united states to worldwide, I didnt even read that part, all i changed were the words APPROXIMATELY to LESS THAN.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 04:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basically Just Whitney is a typo, i was supposed to change the worldwide to United States, but all I got to change was approximately to less than. It was supposed to say exactly like the source, that 'In the united states the album sold less than 1 million. I agree it would have been better to write 3 million worldwide, but as i said it was a typo.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 12:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what your sayin and agree, I wasnt careful enough. But I want to explain that I didnt change the order of the names to glorify Carey, but because I went to its page and its mentioned like that on the page and on the photo and single cover. That is the only reason. Were you able to look at the last comment I left you about eminem?thanks.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 12:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Venezuela charts[edit]

Is this chart a part of WP:GOODCHARTS? If so I failed to find it there. And another request, please deal with the above user's request. Petergriffin has been doing the same thing with Madonna articles also. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with what Im doing to the Madonna articles. All I do is review the sources for total album sales, and if it says differently then I change it. You just want to blame it on the fact that it has something to do with Carey. I do the same to her discography page and album pages, if the sales are inflated then I change them.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 12:59, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Eminem[edit]

Hey kww, on the above mentioned in the opening paragraph, i would like to make a change but want to double check with you. It says he sold over 80 million albums and is the best selling artist of the decade. Now first of all these 2 things are not sourced, the source says something else. Second britney spears is the biggest selling artist of the decade not him and there are no sources. So what I would like to do is remove the part that says that he is the biggest selling artist of the decade and put a source for the total album sales being 75 M not 80 M ...this is the source Look Here...thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thats what I was just going to show you but it didnt post because of 'edit conflict'. I found that also on the britney page as well, so I would like to add both of those sources and change it from 80M to 75M and the best selling artist in the United States in the 2000s. Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 13:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So which do you want to me to put, of the decade or of the 2000s? and making sure that that is in the united states right?not worldwide.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 13:48, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, all of the eminem album pages are very inflated, look at his album pages and discography pages they are all wrong, im going to change them--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 14:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. Eminem album (encore) it says it sold 20M globally, with no source. I want to put this source which is used in the discography which says 11M Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is your response?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 02:25, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Turkey Top 20[edit]

Hi, I'm updating this chart here on wiki and I have an problem. Link to official Turkey Top 20 chart (on Billboard.tr) is not working anymore. I don't know what to do. Have you got sugestion? Thank You --SveroH (talk) 13:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

well, when i try to go to site it says that that web site can not be found. Last week was everything right, and from Monday there is some problem with site. --SveroH (talk) 13:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you --SveroH (talk) 13:33, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have just saw question about Croatian singles chart. I'm from Croatia and I'm doing music articles on hr(croatian) wiki. We use Open (Otvoreni) radio as source for Croatian singles chart. We in Croatia don't have official singles chart 8for singles that are not Croatian), but we use Open Radio as source because it plays only music from outside Croatia and it is 3rd most listend radio in Croatia. Open radio singles chart For Croatian music we use this site. It is an official Croatian singles chart but only for Croatian music. --SveroH (talk) 13:40, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

oh, I didn't know about single network charts. Thanks. I agreen with you. Problem is that we in Croatia don't have official singles chart for singles from outside Croatia, we only have HRTOP20, as you mentioned there], but HRTOP20 is only for Croatian singles. --SveroH (talk) 13:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

soundguardian - well i don't know I'll see. I'll try to find something then I'll tell you. --SveroH (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

soundguardian again - hi I have checked few croatian charts (link link link link link link). On soundguardian says that "I Gotta Feeling" is the most listened song in Croatia. Look on other charts. "I Gotta Feeling" is only on 1 chart. "Paparazzi" is very high too. I haven't found that song on any other chart. "Parla Con Me" - same as Paparazzi. So I think that soundguardian is not good chart. --SveroH (talk) 14:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stop[edit]

These are good edits fix it yourself or let it be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.91.20.43 (talk) 01:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC) Look there are a million computers in the world so it is futile for you to continue as me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.91.20.43 (talk) 01:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding this...[edit]

...Thank you. I am not sure what that was all about and asked the editor on his talk page (hopefully my section heading there is not too accusatory as it may have just been an accident or misunderstanding). Anyway, take care. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 02:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Adventures of Mimi / Encore (album)[edit]

Hey kww, I really tried finding a source for both of these pages that weve discussed, and I havent been able to find a source for mimi, or a more current one for eminem. So I am going to proceed and do those two changes as agreed. Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:54, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography[edit]

Hey kww, in the above mentioned page it says mariah has sold 160 million records. I dont believe this is reliable nor true, so I looked for some sources. I found at least 5 sources that I believe are reliable that say over 200 million albums. Im going to post them so you can review them.Thanks!

Look Here

Let me know your feedback, so in the future I can judge whether something is reliable...thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 02:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed now, but thats only on the first two sources. Can you look at the other 3?thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I mean the 3rd-5th doesnt mention that, and the currnet source given on the page is a fansite, so thats why I feel like the bottom 3 would better represent.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, Ill just look for some more..:)--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:39, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, I found a source from reuters and a few more,take a look.

Look Here

Let me know what you think..thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL!this is annoying. OK, my question is, lets say Max24 reverts it and his reason is its not reliable, cant you judge and see. I mean I have like 13 sources already, whether some are quotes from wiki or not, but that is 13 and I have a few more..lol. If you dont want to get involved between us,I understand and all i ask is that you review the last 4 sources I have, so I know which ones to present on the talk page. Because Im being honest, Max24 will never agree whether I show him billboard, reuters or anything.

Look Here

Let me know what you think of these last 4. Im going to post a few on the talk page, Ill post the Fusetv, the insider and if you approve of any of these 4...BTW, Lets say I have like 2 or 3 editors that agree and Mx24 doesnt, doesnt that overrule him?thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 04:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More Sources[edit]

Hey kww, I have found a few more sources.

Look Here

Im not sure if you saw these yet?

thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 04:48, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And even without single which even billboard says she sold over 40 million of, if you add up the current wiki numbers in the discography (which arent all right) it add up to over 170M--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:00, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Falling Into You / Let's Talk About Love[edit]

Hey kww, I have made a few small edits to these two pages. Im just bringing them to your attention because I know they are territiory of max24. The sources for both were only sources for RIAA certifications, so I changed it from saying 10 million sold in USA and 10 million here to what the source showed which was only RIAA certifications. The worldwide sales of these two albums I left untouched, as they have sources. The reason I feal these edits are in my bounds are because they are clearly contradicting the present source, and all Im doing is rewriting the sentence to mirror the source. I hope you approve as Im really trying to be careful and consistence. So please take a look, thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 10:53, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of get you, my question is, that lets say it says the abum sold almost 12 million in the usa, and then the source just says certified 10x platinum, what should i do?was it a smart move to change it to just 10x P...thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 14:27, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good, thats what I thought and did, as it did directly contradict the source. And I know that it isnt going to be certified differently because the albums 15 years old.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 14:35, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Im still waiting for people to agree or disagree on the MCdiscography talk page. When there are a few opinions Ill let you know...:)--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 14:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charts[edit]

I didn't know that, but thanks for telling me, I'll try to find more information from the websites you mentioned. Thanks a lot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uvero (talk • contribs) 11:57, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk on Falling Down[edit]

Since he does talk to you, can you convince him to help settle an agreement in Talk:Falling Down (Selena Gomez & the Scene song). I have already wrote a few things, myself. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 03:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Singles Char[edit]

Hi again. I was always wondering if this is an official Israeli singles chart. I've found in a lot of articles link to this web site. I looked to WP:GOODCHARTS, but i haven't found it there. So, is this official singles chart? --SveroH (talk) 08:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks --SveroH (talk) 13:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

James Blunt[edit]

Re: this edit - d'oh! Now why didn't I think of that? Obvious when you know how, eh? ;-) TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 13:59, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dewan357 sock back as Aamirshkh[edit]

Looks like Dewnans sock is back again after his indefinate block hes back on the same articles pushing his pov:[1] same old articles same pov could you use the checkuser please. I suggest you semiprotect the target pages to deal with his sock accounts thankyou. 86.158.232.138 (talk) 15:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noindex[edit]

I just learned something from you, when you added {{NOINDEX}} to a page. I presume you did so because it contained some copyvio, correct? If that is so, then maybe more people should be aware of that. — Sebastian 16:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that it's a copyvio, it's that it isn't a real article yet (and won't be until you put it back in article space). Google doesn't understand the difference, and presents a user-space article just like a real one. I don't make any judgment about content, it's just to make sure the outside world doesn't see a non-article as being an article.—Kww(talk) 16:04, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I like this because it gives users more time, since it relieves a bit of the pressure to bring userfied pages up to snuff quickly. — Sebastian 16:16, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you --SveroH (talk) 19:52, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

71.51.105.87 / 78.174.118.202[edit]

Hey kww, these two IP vandals have been clearly vandalizing and Ive given them warnings as have others. 71.51.105.87 has been warned 3 times in the last few days and has just vandalized again, and 78.174.118.202 has been warned over 10 times, and has just finished a 3 day block. Please review these as I believe they deserve a full block, thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna-Maria Galojan[edit]

Thanks for the noindex heads up :) --Saalstin (talk) 13:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

true[edit]

you do have a point but wasn't there an actual charting on the Hot 100 on billboard.com --Lizari (talk) 16:13, 13 September 2009 (UTC) indefenitly -Liza --Lizari (talk) 16:17, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Garth revisited (briefly)[edit]

Good catch! I didn't know the backstory, but after seeing that a prior involved account was User:Liddelll, the block was pretty straightforward. Done. —C.Fred (talk) 16:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I remember the Jaydon incident(s), but I don't remember Garth. —C.Fred (talk) 19:28, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boom Boom Pow[edit]

Don't know how I misread that. Thanks for the correction. --MartinezMD (talk) 20:33, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Marshall Mathers LP[edit]

Hey kww, in the reception part of this article it says the album has sold 10M to date in the USA and its sourced. Then in the chart farther down the page it says 11M sold with no source. So I would like to change it to 10M in the chart because that is was is sourced in the above paragraph. Let me now what you think and thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 22:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, I found a source from Rolling Stones magazine, claiming it to have sold around 9.4 million in the USA. This is the source Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 23:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of the new source?.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 00:21, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Growth Hormones[edit]

Would you say the recent edit made by 207.233.85.131 on this page is vandalizm?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:30, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pastor Theo SPI case[edit]

Hey there. Because the Pastor Theo incident is still a sensitive matter, do you think you could forward it to the functionaries mailing list directly, rather than listing it at SPI? Thanks, NW (Talk) 02:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, ArbCom is taking care of that situation. There is no need for a separate SPI case for this. It's been delisted and tucked away in the darkest corners of Wikipedia. Besides, the Arbitrators are also CheckUsers, so they would see the exact same thing as the SPI CheckUsers would. Regards, MuZemike 03:02, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I'm at a loss to understand what makes this sensitive. I would recommend that this go to the funct. mailing list iff they posted results publicly. Protonk (talk) 03:04, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's just being handled in one place - not really necessary to set up an SPI page, and since ArbCom has decided not to reveal all the previously connected accounts (at least, not yet) the SPI case wouldn't be very useful anyway. Nathan^T 03:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is wrong with you[edit]

..it states here that multiple accounts are allowed and that "If you have a negative track record and you have decided to make a genuine, clean, and honest new start, and do not wish it to be tarnished by your prior conduct, you can simply discontinue using the old account(s), and create an unconnected new account which becomes the only account you then use, and is used in a good manner"......and thats EXACTLY what im doing and im not using my old account....but everytime i create a new account i get blocked....i dont get it........and im not vandalizing anything...if you check my contributions, all im doing is trying to improve the articles and putting reliable sources and adding correct information..."

Allicansayissalute (talk) 13:12, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw that...[edit]

I think that "Shootmeplz" account really was legit; he admitted from the get-go that he worked for the guy and the account was created to defend his actions. First edit was to my talk page, not surprisingly. Given his co-worker's behavior, I think the block is justified if only to keep that co-worker from further shenanigans via the account. The thing that bugs me the most is that these hassles started after I unblocked the accounts. Oh, the fun we have here. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beyonvideeophonelo.jpg[edit]

I noticed this image first when it was tagged on 22:14, 13 September 2009 - and then looked at User:Teammelarky and at that point there was nothing on the page. I then saw it on the speedy delete queue two days later and, remembering the state of the user page, just switched it, I should have double-checked - because the 'sock' notice didn't go up until 00:53, 14 September 2009. I did double-check the source [2] which shows it as a legit image, and rather than go through the hassle of deleting it and then re-uploading it and putting it back on the page, simply marked it as 'unused non-free'. If it were a fake/incorrect/(c) violation image I would have deleted it outright, as that's sadly the norm with socks' uploads. Skier Dude (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Time of Our Lives (EP)[edit]

Please help with The Time of Our Lives (EP). I was adding the allmusic review meanwhile it had said Wikipedia was being maintained and the article has gone completely blank. Please help restore this. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 00:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. Thank you. -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 01:01, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Chart[edit]

Are you aware of any music charts pertaining to India? Silly for me to ask, but still. I thought IndiaFM top 100 is the only reliable source i found which is a airplay chart based on requests. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 06:33, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brexx returns?[edit]

May want to take a look this user. — ξ ^xplicit 23:39, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Double Disc CD[edit]

Hey kww, are albums that come with 2 CDs still counted as double RIAA certifications?Like if an album ships 1.5 million copies, but is a double disc will it be certfied 3x platinum?I'm pretty sure it used to be like that, but I'm not sure if that still applies.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 04:04, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

100 Greatest Singers / IMDB[edit]

Hey kww, I have this source that is used in many famous singers pages. I would like to apply this source to a few singers pages. Here is the source, tell me what you think Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I would like to add some info (mainly nicknames) using this site, do you think its good enough to mention the stars nicknames ect?. Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brexx[edit]

Hi Kww, please don't create a second Brexx report while one is open. Thanks, Nathan^T 15:10, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Something's wrong[edit]

Whoops! I think I have it fixed now. Thanks for letting me know! — Kralizec! (talk) 23:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notification[edit]

Hejsan, Kww. I'm posting to let you know that I have listed you as an editor who had an unsuccessful RfA in the not-too-recent, not-too-distant past on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running for administratorship (or not), or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. If you might be interested, but would like some private confidential feedback from experienced observers, I would be happy to propose this via the new vetting service. Regards, Skomorokh 18:23, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

This is my first time participating in RFC. Joe Chill (talk) 17:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Examples Galore[edit]

It appears we have to indulge your burst of coprophilia. Could you please provide ISBNs for this book and for The Truth About Poop and Poop: A Natural History of the Unmentionable? from RHaworth on my other account.
You are not welcome here. Go away. I don't need to. Stop trolling and go away. Reverted to revision 306969051 by Esradekan; actually, lets just cut this crap out - it's unrelated to the deletion discussion - if you want to insult me use my talk page. removed trolling totally irrelevant to the deletion discussion Michig got away with all of that because everybody sided with him at ANI. That was on this account. I wonder where he read the invisible insult at. Joe Chill (talk) 21:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I find your berating of people who have a differing point of view than yours invalid. The !vote stands, it is not invalid and you can go read WP:AGF and WP:DICK until the cows come home. Do you know what I have been doing while you have been rambling on and making a mockery of this AfD? From NeutralHomer on this account. Everyone said that it wasn't a personal attack.

I believe you are truly more intelligent than that. From Edison on this account. He got away with it because everyone said that it wasn't a personal attack.
Joe, I'd like to point out you're coming across as the Wikipedia equivalent of the grumpy old man who comes out on his front porch and yells at the neighborhood kids who step on his lawn. From Hullaballoo Wolfowitz on this account. Everyone said that it wasn't a personal attack.
Harasser Imnotacoolguy harassed me with sockpuppets and no admin would help me because I didn't explain the problem in an essay at ANI.This is on my other account.
I'll refrain from !voting but some of the comments here are laughable and not based upon reading the "sources" presented (here's a clue, one is immediately out because it's user submitted). However, this is a great example of why AFD is broken, all I see here is a lot of people voting keep because their friends have voted keep or because they saw a notice at the article Canvass Squad. how many people have rushed to add those 'vital' sources to article? oh look it's zero. Uncivil? - let's have a quoteThe civility guideline is important, but it's not as important as people think. I was told that calling someone lazy was uncivil when the user was obviously lazy to not look at the sources. Why do so many editors put words in my mouth? Joe Chill (talk) 02:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Um, no. You've erected a straw man to attack. Of course every criminal is not notable, but the GNG and ONEEVENT doesn't mean that a criminal has to have someone's thesis written about his life or a major motion picture made about his exploits before he meets the notability guidelines. Another user putting words in my mouth.
I don't remember the name of the article, but when I nominated a book for deletion, the creator constantly assumed bad faith towards me by questioning my motives.
There has been many AFDs where editors kept on saying that I was uncivil when I wasn't. I guess their belief is that everyone that particpates a lot in a long AFD is uncivil. Joe Chill (talk) 02:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for siding with people that do things like call me a troll, tell me to leave Wikipedia, say that I'm attracted to feces (not a joke), nominate articles of mine for deletion to be pointy (including someone using a sockpuppet to do so). Another user that says that I'm to blame for it all. On those, zero policies were broken by me except when they were responses to people calling me a troll or assuming bad faith. I'm not sure what WP:CIVIL means anymore. Joe Chill (talk) 03:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Memoirs of an Imperfect Angel[edit]

Hey kww, can you take a look at this page and look at the edits Promotion and Release and tell me what you think. It says the album leaked today on the internet, and there is some bogus source attached to it. Please tell me what you think.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 18:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Not Your Toy[edit]

i think that this and this images should be deleted. I'm I right? --SveroH (talk) 18:59, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frustration[edit]

I understand your frustration with regard to AN, but I would be remiss in my duties as an editor if I did not point out that under RFC rules, an RFC cannot result in an involuntary sanction on a user. Failure for a user to adjust their behavior following an RFC can lead to a ban discussion at WP:AN or the filing of an arbitration case at WP:A/R, but on its own, the consensus of an RFC will not lead to a ban, so it is probably best to either amend your comment or not tout that as the main purpose of your comment, since it won't happen. MBisanz ^talk 22:42, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved comment[edit]

I moved your comment to Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/A_Nobody#Comment_on_various_proposals_from_Casliber. Hope I wasn't stepping on toes, but this RfC will get much more complicated if we get into the practice of adding an "oppose" section alongside endorsements. Protonk (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography[edit]

Hey kww, Ive waited a while and there is a user with a long history of edits that agrees with my changes on the talk page. Oddly there hasnt been any other comments. So can you tell me what you think about going through with the change.Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 22:55, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why havent you been answering me?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 04:28, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Google News[edit]

I'm well aware. When I say "news feeds" I understand everything it encompasses. My point was to illustrate the fact that the basic google search brought up nothing (from the context of the discussion) and even google news, which obviously narrows the field in terms of reliability, also offered nothing. I'm very meticulous when it comes to fact taking, and I've never taken every single hit that comes off google news as pure gospel and never will. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SPI / Brexx[edit]

Actually, I asked you not to create a new SPI case when one is already open. The one you just edited was, in fact, already closed and archived. Perhaps you can revert and try again? Nathan^T 19:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to your question on my talkpage. Nathan^T 19:04, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sacagawea[edit]

Per the log, you protected the article for 0 seconds, not 6 months.—Kww(talk) 18:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um... I think you messaged the wrong person. I protected the article for ten days two weeks ago. -- tariqabjotu 19:09, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography[edit]

Hey kww, Max24 has added some other source for total sales saying 175 million. The only problem is that you cant read the content of the source, as it is in white backround. Also Id like for you to see which you think is more reliable, his that you cant read, or my 5 that you approved of. Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 21:36, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You really believe that thats more reliable than the five sources I have.?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 14:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Celebration[edit]

Sorry. I've made a mistake once again. Sometimes, I don't realise what I am reverting. I assumed because of the source url, it did not directly lead to a specific issue of the chart. That is why I stated it as unsourced. Obviously, I was wrong. I should of viewed the reference before making judgement. Shame on me. • вяαdcяo chat 11:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD and behaviour[edit]

I think you pretty much nailed it with your last post there. Too much of that talk page concentrates on this side issue, and I don't want to take up any more space there.

It seems to be some kind of received wisdom that the 'atmosphere', 'environment' or whatever of AfD is a cause of problems and proof that the process needs reform. Of course this then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as people justify their own behaviour because they see themselves or their views as threatened. It's a dangerous precedent to allow laxer standards of behaviour 'just because it's AfD'.

I think that the conduct of participants in general could be discussed on the process page. Behaviour of individuals needs to be considered individually, as you say. pablo_hablo. 13:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Laundry Service[edit]

Hey kww, for weeks already this page has been recieving much vandalizm from anonymous IPs. Can you please help me have this page semi-protected.Thanks?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

massive vandalism[edit]

i was doing some edits on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_missile and i noticed massive vandalism done by people using anonymous ip addresses, i was wondering if you could protest that page, and make it so that only registered members could edit it.

Reviews for question[edit]

Hey kww, I have a few reviews that I would like to show you. I want to place these in the memoirs of an imperfect angel page as professional reviews.

Toronto Sun Look Here

Boston Herald Look Here

Newsday Look Here

Let me know what you think about these three.Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well to be honest I dont want to answer that and then get accused of giving the most favorable reviews to Carey. Im going to really give my honest answer and why.

1.I dont understand why I have a very positive newsday review and the article has a very negative one?Id like to switch them or combine them and write (mixed).

2.I think the boston herald should replace either the la times or ny times, i looked through them and the boston one seems more official.

3.And maybe we can just add the Toronto Sun as an extra p review, you know, add one more review. Let me know what you think.Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I copied and pasted on google and these 2 came up, and I cant tell which site it belongs too. Here are the 2

1.Look Here

2.Look Here

As for the review, as I said there isnt much to point out. In my eyes it looks like a more official post and article and is judged on a more precise score (letters with + or - not just 4 or 5 stars). Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you wanted me to find you the original page for the article, because you said newsdayisnt the right page, as we already have a newsday review. I guess I misunderstood you.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 16:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, what do you think about this source, Im not sure what to make of it Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, I dont mean to bother you, I'm just wondering. What did bambifan101 do that has caused so much buzz?I mean the way people are talking, It sounds as if he has surpassed usual vandalism?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey kww, A few days ago the prince blog was used in the eminem discography for albums sales. The sales have a relable source already and since prince blog isnt a good source, can I rebvert it?Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 23:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Bit of Trivia[edit]

Sorry for replying so late, was on a break. I heard that "Paparazzi" is being used in SET channel. But what is a "medium"? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ohh oops :) --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination on Carmine Guida[edit]

I was actually following protocol at Wikipedia:Guide to deletion: "Place a notification on significant pages that link to your nomination, to enable those with related knowledge to participate in the debate.". Did I use the wrong template? Luminifer (talk) 16:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah thanks. Luminifer (talk) 16:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Something I really...[edit]

don't want to delve into, but since I see you've been dealing with part of this, would you please look over the edits to Hilary Duff from today and see what you think. Some of it just removed valid sourcing that supported statements regarding box office, awards, etc. and it is just too extensive for my taste in how it was done. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really excited about doing too much on it, I mostly keep that article watchlisted due to it being a target for one young IP editor that was blocked for a month, then reblocked for 3 months, after a lot of disruption and threats that his neighbor, the cop, would shut down Wikipedia). (Then today, posted one request to change a photo on Mandy Moore and the 3 month block - made on Sept. 20, was lifted by the person who placed because of that request. No request for the block to be lifted was made, no "I'll be good, I promise." Nothing, and it will just lead to repeated problems.) Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proxies[edit]

I honestly believe that the proxies Bambifan tries to recruit are aware of the level of damage he's caused, at least when starting out. FWIW, I just looked at Ryulong's request at Meta to have him blocked globally. The damage he did as "Ice Age lover" across multiple wikis is staggering. The fellow on the Russian wiki he duped was deserving of a block based on his comments and attitude (English Wikipedia is "stupid, for example). I don't think this latest one is as culpable, although he was certainly wrong in assisting him while knowing about the blocks/bans. That said, I would like to see an immediate block on any future proxy, admin, bureaucrat or whatever. Both proxies knew what they were doing. I don't know what it will take to get BellSouth in Mobile involved, but if a formal complaint is made and witnesses are needed, I'm your guy. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I only say that because I don't think this fellow was aware of how bad the problem really was and I hope he's aware now. Just trying to AGF based on his previous record. I'm not sure what if anything should be done in this instance, but IMO there should be no mercy whatsoever to future proxies regardless of edit history. This is just nuts at this point. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:3RR[edit]

Thanks Kevin. I really don't know what the big deal was by reverting unsourced additions or non-notable inputs. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:02, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Review[edit]

Hey kww, although Memoirs had a Billboard review that was positive it didnt have much specific scoring info. Ive found this new review Look Here on Billboard that has a written score of 71. Can you tell me what you make of this, and what you believe should be done with it. Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mix-up[edit]

Quick note about your recent RfAr post. They were different years. Block in 2008, adminship 2009. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[3]. Came to make the same comment as SlimVirgin - you're right about the block to creation of the Law account, but GlassCobra refers to the distance between the block and when Law gained adminship. Nathan^T 03:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, must have missed your follow up! Sorry, Nathan^T 03:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Kww. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Last One (Aqua Teen Hunger Force).
Message added 01:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

warrior 4321 01:34, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Number 1's (Mariah Carey album) GAR notice[edit]

Number 1's (Mariah Carey album) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edits in the Hilary Duff article[edit]

Hi...I would like to bring a consensus on recent mass deletions being made to Hilary Duff article....Would love to have your views on this.... pls comment on this Gprince007 (talk) 12:47, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Singles Chart[edit]

Please revert your edits. There is an official Israeli Singles Chart, not only the one at charts.co.il. Edenc1 • Talk 13:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

about Latin Areschart[edit]

Ok. I didn't kew that that chart was on the "Badcharts" list. I think i doesn't have dubious methodology but if it is the general though, i won't include it again. Thanks =). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hahc21 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Max24[edit]

Hey kww, Just bringing some of Max24's recent edits that appear to constitute vandalism and fancruft. I would like for you to look into this, so you see the class of editor who's trying to have me blocked. In my opinion he should get a warning for this, he added a source that says 13.5 million, and for no reason wrote 15 million, of course to glorify Celine Dion. Tell me what you think. Thanks Look Here --Petergriffin9901 (talk) 18:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well thats OK, I dont expect to make a big deal over one offense, Im just trying to point out that editors can make mistakes, as he was accusing me with whitney pages for a mistake trying to block me for it. Just to show you an example.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Xtinadbest sock[edit]

I think these two could be her as well, PokerFace3 (talk · contribs) Obsessivemisslittle (talk · contribs). What do you think? Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 20:08, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this might be much bigger than only relating to a few articles though. I believe she edits different articles with different socks to avoid getting noticed. Do you remember the Hayden Panettiere and Lindsay Lohan articles, and the fuzz she made about the albums that never existed? She made all those edits based on old articles, rumors and really vague sources. That is the type of edit patterns we need to look for. It may seem like a stretch, but I don't think it is.

I am getting tired of this, so I am going to spend some time compiling a map of the confirmed socks, and their edit patterns. I'll let you know how it turns out. ;-) Erzsébet Báthory_{(talk|contr.)} 15:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old SPI question[edit]

Hey, sorry for the late reply, but I've finally got around to User talk:Luna Santin#Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive6#Stacked reports; does this still need action? – Luna Santin (talk) 21:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Celine Dion discography / Madonna[edit]

Hey kww, on this page there are many sources being used, some tha are unreliable, some that are books that arent readily available. So can we use this source thats the same site that was previously allowed by you and Max24 on the MCdiscography?Thanks Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I would like to use this source for madonna sales in the US on her album pages in the little boxes in the charting section? Look Here .--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its not the album for album difference, tell me if you agree with me but I think its better to have the same source in a discography than to have 20 different articles in different languages. And many of them are in books with no page numbers so its hard to check the reliability. That is the reason I would like to change it, not to discredit or change her sales (btw ticketspecialists agrees with alot of them ad is VERY generous with her album sales):)--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I forgot to ask, can I use the Madonna page on Billboard for Whitney Houston album sales in US?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:35, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suspicious?[edit]

What do you think of this? It has caught my eye. [4] - eo (talk) 19:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Charts query[edit]

You seem to be pretty well versed in WP:BADCHARTS. I looked at the page, but couldn't find the information so I figured you'd probably know the answer. There's a request right now at Talk:U2 over whether worldwidealbums.net is a reliable source for sales figures or not. Can you shed any light on that? Cheers, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 21:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please join discussion at Wikipedia talk:Record charts "PROPOSAL: Use all Billboard charts that relate to the subject."[edit]

Please join discussion at Wikipedia talk:Record charts "PROPOSAL: Use all Billboard charts that relate to the subject."
Thank You.
Iknow23 (talk) 03:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA[edit]

I didn't really look to closely at your RfA and probably won't, but I did notice what might be a mistake. A casual glance looks like you kept some logs (eg AFD participation). Your links read "Activity X Since October 2009"... I suspect that you meant to have an earlier date in there?---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 03:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong dates?[edit]

re Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Kww 3#Contribution tables - two of these list "contributions since October 2009" (ie 10 days). I think you mean 2008 but I'll leave it to you to change it. pablo_hablo. 13:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Admin recall[edit]

You may be interested in User:LessHeard vanU/Dead minimum. pablo_hablo. 17:52, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding changes in Xavier University school of medicine, Bonaire.[edit]

Hi,

I work in Xavier University school of medicine, Bonaire. I have permission from my CEO to do changes regarding our school over internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drvamsi (talk • contribs) 03:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding changes in Xavier University school of medicine, Bonaire.[edit]

Hi kww,

I just want show our school logo. I don't want anyone to misuse our logo. Guide me in a proper way —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drvamsi (talk • contribs) 03:23, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding changes in Xavier University school of medicine, Bonaire.[edit]

Hi Kww

Thank You so much —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drvamsi (talk • contribs) 03:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post on the issue page, not on my talk page[edit]

Please do not post on my talk page again.

Unlike the editors you so closely work with, I have no problem reversing any mistakes that I make, or issuing clarifications, and I am happy to have everyone know about those mistakes and calls for clarification on the page at issue. Ikip (talk) 19:09, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Albums Chart[edit]

What is wrong with the chart? I didn't know albums charts came into discussion as you sell the albums they chart, there's less going on than in singles charts.

Explain please. Jayy008 (talk) 02:17, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I get it now thanks. What I found confusing about Wiki Bad Charts was the fact that it looks like only the chart itself was bad not the website. Jayy008 (talk) 10:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heaven help Brazil if they actually get a valid chart issued there. It'll still get deleted on sight here after all the bad Brazil adds that have been made. (Brazil Billboard...that gets a point for originality, but minus-five for yet another bad chart.) —C.Fred (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

B.S.[edit]

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	I've just got to give you this for all of the tireless work you do in checking out so many Charts in the song and album articles, and constantly removing the bad ones. Cheers; it's work like this that makes Wikipedia great. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 01:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarian charts[edit]

Hi Kww, just to tell you that they updated the chart, they have 12 weeks in the archive now. Regards. Frcm1988 (talk) 03:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Acharts.us[edit]

It's listed on GOODCHARTS though... That's why I've been using it. Jayy008 (talk) 18:11, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

email[edit]

ping. Protonk (talk) 03:57, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian chart launched[edit]

I think you would enjoy reading this as a editor. I'm not sure if you already know that but Billboard has launched an official Brazilian chart, comprissed by airplay. Unfourtunately, I've not found any archive on the site...but the launch of the chart, by Billboard, is a good start. Decodet (talk) 16:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the update on the chart. I saw the discussion in WT:Record charts, though I don't follow it regularly. I guess once it is fully up and running, WP:BADCHART will get updated also? —C.Fred (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

I said that I was sorry to have argued against you this time. You have been a decent editor, so no question. You may do better by trying to convince others. Best of luck. Bearian (talk) 20:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah's album sales[edit]

Hi user Kww. I have to say, I have tried to discuss the issue. No one seems to have addressed the fact that Columbia was her official record label for 9 years, and are accountable for the sale and distribution for her highest selling releases. The fact of the matter is that Def Jam is responsible for only 4 of her albums, that's less than quarter of her catalog. Why would what they say be any more reliable than Sony/Columbia who are responsible for 80% of her sales. She has 17 releases. All but five of those are on another label and even Glitter was overseen by Sony Music Entertainment because it was tied to the film which was produced by the label. Yes the def jam press release is more recent by by less than a year, and for matters like these it really shouldn't matter. It's not as if the number is higher or that there are any more releases to account for in that time span. Also I noticed that for "Best selling artists" list, Wikipedia users have agreed to use the standard of the highest amount published, why should this be any different. Also, there is no point in saying that def jam's is more reliable than Columbia's because it seems more plausible. One thing I've learned on wikipedia, is that it's irrelevant whether it seems more plausible, or if you think something is not right as long as that's what the source says. One last point, Columbia's statement is supported by other sources, like MTV, which lends even more credibility to the 200 number. I don't see the problem. But I'm open to listening to anyone who can provide me with a logical explanation as to why Def Jam would be more reliable than SOny just because they're her current label, 'cause as I stated before, they still have no bearing over the shipments and sales of her previous releases, most of which have sold more individually than her entire catalog at def jam. That's my position and i posted that on the talk page hours ago. PhoenixPrince (talk) 04:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Sony/Columbia figure was given last October of 2008 not years ago. It was in a press release for The Ballads. And because the figure is large doesn't necessarily mean it's exaggerated, even if you take the lowest reported amount for her album sales, and add it with her single certifications, strictly from the U.S., and that doesn't include all the sales for the single or singles that are uncertified, it will equal about 170 million in sales, so that would mean she's only sold another 5 million singles WW? That's not only illogical, it's improbable. Her Albums sales total about 190 mil in actuality, but there is no source stating that figure, it's just the range you get when you add up the sales. So I don't see how it's so exaggerated. Also there is the thing about the other sources supporting that claim which adds more validity to it than the 175 mil claim which has no supporting source. PhoenixPrince (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kwww. Just to let to you know, I've been working on gathering sources for my claim. Right now I'm waiting to hear back from billboard's "ask billboard" section. Most of the sources I have seen claim her albums sales range from 138-146 million records, which isn't a problem. The issue is trying to find a cumulative total for her record sales. Mariahdaily has a total that equals about 46 million. Now I don't know how they're viewed on reliability, but according to the RIAA her singles certifications add up to 20.5. I sent the request to billboard becuase her singles have actually sold more so I want them to help verify my claim. So right know that's just what I'm waiting on and soon as I get that I show you the rest of my math and everything. Thanks! PhoenixPrince (talk) 02:39, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Memoirs of an Imperfect Angel[edit]

Can you do me a favour and semi-protect this album's page. Somebody keeps adding back Brazil everytime I look! Will you first sem-protect it and since you personally overview the real Brazillian chart add it's listing to the album chart once it charts?? Thank you Jayy008 (talk) 18:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and will you add it or let me know when it does chart in Brazil? Jayy008 (talk) 19:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you and why do you doubt it will chart? Also there's a lot of arguments on the 200 million worldwide sales on her main page and I think you're the best person to deal with it efficiently Jayy008 (talk) 19:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok thanks! and the 200 million figure what's the consensis so far? Jayy008 (talk) 19:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So do I. Despite being a big fan and would like to believe 200 million. Adding up indiviual album sales really doesn't make it to 200. Btw if I reply to your comment on my talk page does it show up "New Messages" for you or do I have to put it here? Jayy008 (talk) 21:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, how do I watchlist your page?? Jayy008 (talk) 22:02, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlisting[edit]

Done it thank you!

Right [5] that link says Memoirs... chart position in Hungary is either 32 or 2 can you please tell me which column is correct? and for future reference should I put something like this on your talk page or on the charts page?Jayy008 (talk) 22:23, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peak is 32. Current is 36. It has been on the chart for 2 weeks. If it's just a quick technical question or you just want my opinion, here is fine. If it's something that needs discussion, then WT:Record charts is better.—Kww(talk) 22:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Maybe until I get used to it more replying on my page is better as I didn't get notified when u reply :S. Right I'll add it onto the chart then.

Next... under a different title...

Memoirs...[edit]

Korean certification Platinum and chart position #1 according to her official website and there's a photo of her recieving Platinum plaque from head of universal music korea. I thought this was fine to be included but one user thinks it isn't enough as they can't find any other info on it on "google" what is your opinion? Jayy008 (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks no rush! Jayy008 (talk) 22:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin, I'm the user that had an issue with this being included. All the Korean news sources simply say that she received a platinum album plaque, but do not say that she actually went platinum with this album. Granted, considering that the platinum threshold is quite low (10,000 copies), it's certainly possible, but the only source that says she did is her own website.

As for certifications, I know that MIAK turned into something else, but that something else has a broken website (I checked it earlier today), so that's gonna be difficult as well.... Hope this explains things. :P SKS (talk) 03:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Koreon Cetification reply[edit]

That's a good idea. It should stay for the time being. I think it should stay permanently as it's not exactly a hard figure to match and it could only be shipments quite an easy number to reach.

But right Korean website? So an actual chart will be available soon with certifications etc? Jayy008 (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well hopefully the reason they're sorting it out is because they're rethinking their chart policies and it will be less confusing to the international market. Also in Brazil I have read that Memoirs shipments have been 20,000 copies which must mean that sales are near to that right or they wouldn't ship so much? If so would 20,000 copies mean it would chart? Sorry to ask you it's just I doubt anybody else on here would know lol Jayy008 (talk) 18:57, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

General[edit]

Thanks!

Right to get things clear there are seperate recording associations for China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and Korea (Bad Geography) aswell as seperate certifications and charts?

Also I want to Subscribe to a music magazine, Billboard.Biz seems appropriate as I would like to know sales of everything in the U.S. and other places but you mentioned MusicWeek and something else before. Which would be best? Jayy008 (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Kww! Jayy008 (talk) 22:20, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA[edit]

There was a comment at the RFA related to the issues you raised on my talk page, so I clarified my comments at the RFA. For beter or worse, I don't expect to be editing again until after the scheduled closing of the RFA, so I don't respond to any followup you might have, it's not because I'm ignoring or dismissing it. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 20:31, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Charts[edit]

Hey kww, I came across this Source and Im not sure which of these charts Im able to add or even what country they are from, can you help?If you can tell me what each country is and which ones are eligible to add to the song page.Thanks!?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Brasil[edit]

Kww, see the article about the new charts in Brazil, the Billboard Brasil, and the official website. Now the coutry have a good charts. May the Wiki-en uses in the artist? Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 22:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But now the Charts doesn't on, check out this and other rankings in the print edition and will soon be available here on the site. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 22:37, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any additional news?[edit]

With respects to this posting... do you have statistics that cover earlier flurries of supports or opposes? Statistics that might indicate that there may or may not have been earlier incidents of support or oppose canvassing during this RFA? Or only of this revealed incident? MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 01:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

		The Resilient Barnstar
		For maintaining a cool head and professional demeanor throughout your recent ordeal, which is, IMO, evidence in and of itself that you're fit to be an admin. –Juliancolton \| ^Talk 04:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure how I missed that, is it too late to add my support? :( Verbal chat 15:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shakira new singles date[edit]

I just saw on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/She_Wolf_(album) that Did It Again will be released October 21, and Give It Up To Me the following week (on the right side of the page, in the table, under "Singles from She Wolf"). So I was wondering if that is confirmed, because I can't find a source for it... Thank you. --Jadshakira (talk) 11:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil[edit]

Hi, can you add Brazil to goodcharts please? I've added it on a few pages and don't want people to remove it thinking it's from Hot 100 Brazil or something! Jayy008 (talk) 01:49, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I hadn't seen you comment it for a while, but it's up and running now, I don't think it will have a searchable database to be honest, it looks like it's only a weekly chart so would that make verification impossible? So it looks like we won't be able to use it. Or are people allowed to place a link from Billboard.Biz?

One more question thing Billboard Japan Hot 100, is that official chart in Japan or is there an Oricon one?
Also I've added something to Belgium discussion, I know you dislike using it but I'd appreciate your input!

Thank you Jayy008 (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed everything I added for Brazil until/if there's an archive Jayy008 (talk) 02:15, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why the site hot100brasil.com cant is the offical chart?The billoard Brazil is late."Halo" nomuber 1?The song raraley is play in brasilians radios Stonemash (talk) 13:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

Hey kww, fisrt off, how are things looking for your adminship? Secondly I would like to use this source mentioning Obsessed being certified Platinum in the USA and so forth. Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, Here's the source.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:46, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Im trying to improve the new section in the Mariah Carey page, so ive got a few sources from the wiki page Precious (her new film) that Id like to add to the page. This one is for basic info on the project and her part, This is what Variety had to say about it, and these BBC, Digtal Spy and Reuters talking about it's success in Toronto and it's accolaids. Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Japan[edit]

It wasn't a chart question. It was for personal knowlage not for sourcing. I was just wandering if there was a seperate singles chart for each or are they the same? Jayy008 (talk) 02:02, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh how confusing, thanks for the info! Jayy008 (talk) 02:06, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism off my user page! It seems that the result of the RfA is awaiting a long bureaucrat decision. This is a lonnnng time for them to delay announcing an outcome. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:51, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Good mood[edit]

Re your message: No particular reason. You have to have a little fun from time to time. I write goofy edit summaries on WP:AIV from time to time just to break up the monotony. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:47, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Better luck next time...[edit]

I'm sorry to report it doesn't look like we can promote you to an administrator this time, per a detailed bureaucrat discussion that failed to generate a meaningful consensus to promote you based on your request for adminship. I think the community has spoken that you are still a valued contributor and with time and good behavior, will win over the community to win its support. Sorry, and better luck next time. Andre (talk) 08:01, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bureaucrat note:Clarification must be made that Andre meant "failed to find meaningful consensus within the community's responses" and not that the chat was meant to /generate/ consensus. -- Avi (talk) 18:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is just a note to bring some proper closure to the situation. I've gone ahead and archived the discussion completely, following WJBscribe's final remark. I echo Andre and wish you the best in the future. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Andre's words are just what I wanted to say. I apologize for not making up my mind during the 7 day RfA ... I certainly wasn't ignoring it ... but I definitely would support you next time if there is a next time. -- Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 13:59, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although I landed on the oppose side, I meant it when I said "reluctantly" and wish you all the best in your future endeavors. I am sure you are quite disappointed by the outcome (who wouldn't be), but try to not let it get you down too much. I think nearly every oppose would agree you are a welcome and valuable contributor. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me second what ThaddeusB said. Hobit (talk) 20:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I feel the restraint and maturity you have shown during this difficult time demonstrate that you have the temperament to be an admin. I don't know how you remained so calm during all this. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You probably know how I feel about the RfA in general (not the close, that probably couldn't go any other way), but thanks for persevering with an exceptional amount of dignity in the face of lies and misinformation. Protonk (talk) 18:25, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, my outburst was motivated by the hugely disappointing outcome of this. I apologize for taking it out on you, that was very wrong of me even if I don't think it was right to name specific opposers in the table you posted on WP:BN. I've been here far too long to not know better and I'm sorry for not restraining myself. I didn't believe you were ready yet and I stand by that per what I said in my oppose but I wish you the best of luck on your next RfA which I'm sure you'll pass without any problems. Bye. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 18:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Kww. Sorry about the unsuccessful RfA; even though I didn't participate, I've been watching the interesting bureaucrat chat through its entirety. I must say you certainly handled the whole situation very commendably, probably better than I could have. If you plan on running again in the future, I strongly suggest waiting longer than three months. Wait six months because otherwise, there will be many claims of you wanting adminship too much if you run again in January. This is coming from someone who's endured just as many failed RfAs as you have and has learned a lot in the process. Anyway, the bright side of all this is that you can still keep on helping build and maintain the encyclopedia without the tools. Good luck in your future endeavors. :) Tim meh 22:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help[edit]

First of all, sorry you didn't make Admin, bad choice in my opinion as you know the most about the charts and would be very handy if you handy more power to decide things.

Secondly Japan on GOODCHARTS, I'm so confused! I've written on the discussion page about it so if you get a minute and you take a look at the discussion and then explain about it Jayy008 (talk) 20:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That explains alot! I understand it all now and know why Japan Hot 100 I only ever see as opposed to an Oricon Singles Chart and as to why Japan Digital Chart only has Japan artists. Thank you Jayy008 (talk) 20:35, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flanders and Wallonia[edit]

Sorry to bother you again but a user keeps highlighting Wallonia and Flanders in their own piece. I don't think this is needed as when you click on the Belgium Singles Chart highlight it tells you it's seperated into two charts and why. When someone clicks on Wallonia or Flanders it has nothing to do with music just tells you about the country.

Do you think it needs to be highlighted? Jayy008 (talk) 20:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock again?[edit]

Would you consider looking at the contributions of this user? I have a feeling it can be User:Pokerdance's sock. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didnot understand. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spam[edit]

Glad to help. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 18:20, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Class[edit]

Your choice of RFA-spam image and text shows both class and a keen understanding of what the mop entails, plus a bit of humility. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 18:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. In the same spirit, but less refined, see [6]. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that RfA rather than adminship itself is the inferno. Here's hoping that you're rejoicing in your ability to rivider le stelle. Deor (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA[edit]

Hey kww, Im really sorry you didn't become an admin, but I just want you to know, you really deserve that position and in my eyes you'll always be an admin to me, the editor who gave me a chance and who guided me all this way. That is a true editor, and no admin would have done that. Were all backing you, because you have demonstrated true judgement and service to the wiki community. Don't ever forget you have contributed more than most admins and have proved far better fairness and jugdement, and don't ever let people take those accomplishments away. If you decide to run for admin again, we'll all be there waiting to support you....:)--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 18:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - that's a shame[edit]

I look forward to supporting you again after you spend two months not irritating anyone. Hipocrite (talk) 18:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re RfA spam[edit]

**Wikipedia: The Early Years**
A bureaucrat deals with an unsuccessful RfA candidate

No problem. It was a close-run thing, and as countless people (including some opposers) have already told you, the way that you conducted yourself throughout is a credit to you, and will stand you in good stead for Kww4. pablo_hablo. 18:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Now I get to link my all time favorite image on wikipedia. Protonk (talk) 19:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warning[edit]

Your RFA spam is a clear attempt at inducing mass admin resignations. Please stop this disruptive behavior or you will be blocked ... or elected to adminship yourself. Abecedare (talk) 19:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Spam[edit]

It's a shame you didn't get through, I thought you were up for the job. Cheers, Crafty (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commiserations[edit]

I am so sorry that your RfA, in which I was support number 51, did not satidfy the powers-that-be. Your support !vote was among the highest which I have seen not to succeed. Advice, it you will; if you can put this behind you, just edit normally and non-controversially for 3 months and then try again, you should be in without any problem; and deservedly so. Some opposes harked back to your last RfA, but I think very few will want to go two back on your next request. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. i didn't really like the picture!! --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see that you weren't promoted on this occasion. I don't see any real hindrance against nominating in a few months, provided that you stick with the same steady behaviour that earned supports like mine over past months, and, where possible, try and learn from the oppose votes as to what areas need work or attention (or even avoidance). As I am not an RfA watcher, feel free to let me know when you next nominate. Orderinchaos 19:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rfa[edit]

Hello. Thanks for coming to my page. It must take a lot of effort to thank all of the contributors (even those like me who opposed) even after it did not succeed. I think that reflects great character on your part and I hope that next time I'll be able to support you. You seem like a good guy with opinions and I hope you can take and apply WP:FUCK as much as possible. I'd be in support if you next time if you did. Thanks.--TParis00ap (talk) 19:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great image and spam. Best of luck. Bearian (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with both of these! It was good of you to thank me, even though I did not support your RfA at this time. Good luck for the future. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 19:50, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the RfA card, I was neutral this time, but I hope to support if you try again in the future. Camaron · Christopher · talk 20:01, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good sport[edit]

I appreciate the fact that you took the time to thank all the RfA contributors. I opposed for a minority reason (concern about your not giving due weight to minority viewpoints in the science/pseudoscience arena) - I don't think it's possible to get a real sense of your online demeanor while you're crossing swords with editors that can be equally inflammatory. I hope to someday have your level of knowledge, and other than that one area, I have confidence in your professionalism. If you choose to go again, I will be particularly interested in diffs in that area. Cheers!--otherl left 20:00, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are proving that my reasoning was invalid! That's the second nice thing you have done for me in the last week. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI[edit]

I'd rather not get RfA spam. For next time. Cheers. Anyway, you know what you doing. For great justice. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock surety[edit]

Yup I'm sure this time its the same user here. Started on October 15 but edit summaries and genre-warrior 3RR attitude makes me believe that it is the same one. Also has teh habit of replying in own talk page. Hence it will be Pokerdance only. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well thats what he said in his unblock request that he wanted a different account. I believe more than 1RR or 3RR, it is the same genre-warrioring on the disney, britney, gaga articles which will again create those 3RR bendings. And it kinda already started with the Disney articles and User:Ipodnano05. I'm concerned again for him because frankly I learned my lesson in my 1RR. I don't want him blocked again. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Rfa spam[edit]

Thanks for the picture although I opposed you. I hope you take it well. I can only say; better luck next time. Cheers. Meursault2004 (talk) 08:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

afd[edit]

I would have liked to see you promoted, with no broad caveats. Keep up the good work. It's the community's loss; not yours. Shadowjams (talk) 09:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA spam[edit]

Dear Kww, thanks for the nice picture. I didn't supported your RFA, but if you continue good work on en.wikipedia, I may support your future RFA. Have a nice day! AdjustShift (talk) 13:43, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tasteful thanks spam. You have my upmost respect for the resolute but restrained way you handled the RFA. Unless I chance upon another example similar to the AN RFC close to your next RFA I wont oppose next time. FeydHuxtable (talk) 07:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Croatian singles chart again[edit]

this article should be deleted. this chart is also unofficial. it is based on airplay on one radio channel that has roud 200.000 listeners only. --SveroH (talk) 18:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

INVITATION to Talk page.[edit]

INVITATION to Wikipedia talk:Record charts#Are Charts to be shown strictly in Alpha order per country?.
As you are one of the major contributors to the Record charts Talk page, I would welcome your input :) —Iknow23 (talk) 01:51, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Record charts rewrite/restructure[edit]

Hey, I've been doing some work on the guidelines page's contents at User:Kiac/Record charts, just wondering if you'd like to give it a working over yourself? It's still got a fair way to go; I need to sort out those tables properly, I just felt that what we have been discussing on the talk page should be illustrated better on the guideline page, and the page should be easier to navigate with sections. I've tried not to stray too far off of the current text, but if there's anything that you feel needs to be discussed more before adding, please red flag it and mention on the talk page there. Thanks. Kiac (talk) 05:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hit Me Baby One More Time[edit]

I'm pretty sure it's the correct title. Why did you revert my move?--Laun chba ller 21:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The ... indicates there's more before that, which is why I moved. Seems fairly basic to me.--Laun chba ller 09:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know about legal titles.--Laun chba ller 12:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Hot 100[edit]

Hi Kevin, I'm affraid I didn't add it. I only changed the name to "Brazil Hot 100" because that's what it's called on their website. Jayy008 (talk) 15:24, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

Hey kww, would you say this is a reliable source for record sales (album + singles)Thanks!Look Here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 23:38, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well even I honestly don't think that source would go very far on her page or discography page, just because its the only source that has such a high claim, but on the other hand it's talking about albums and singles. Do you think I should give it a try on the talk pages?or just wait to see if I find other sources that back it up?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 07:36, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI[edit]

Thought you would like to know about this new account: User talk:Buenarocks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your record chart-related bot request[edit]

I have a feeling we had some interesting discussions about another bot that was going to trawl internet pages and edit Wikipedia accordingly - never went into operation, principally because your arguments were compelling to me. The point is, I did get myself to the stage of mass article manipulation based on 'net data. If you have a reliable source we can use, I'm happy to develop such a bot if you'd like me to help. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not forgotten about this - your bot is being held in a queue and will be attended to shortly Fritzpoll (talk) 17:24, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion on this user?[edit]

Look familiar? [7] - eo (talk) 17:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a look, I just wasn't sure. In fact, I may have even asked you about this user in the past... I can't keep all the socks straight any more. - eo (talk) 01:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I Want for Christmas is You[edit]

Hey Kww, I don't know why but this page is all screwed up, and I can't figure out which edit did it. Maybe it was a bot. Can you help out?bc I dont know the wikipedia formula by heart.Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 18:11, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just butting in for a second. The title of this thread caught my eye on my watchlist so I had a look and fixed the problem. Sometimes its better to restore to a version from before the time the problems began than trying to undo the edits individually :) All sorted, I think. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 18:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's all fixed, thanks flowerpot!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 19:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ne-Yo discography[edit]

heya, how are you? thank you so much for your comments at the articles FLC discussion :) however, Goodraise is still saying he will not support the nomination whilst chartstats is being used, even tho every other comment he made has been satisfied! there is just no pleasing some people :( any suggestions? Mister sparky (talk) 23:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you :) you have a much better way of phrasing things than i do! if you ever want any help with anything please let me know because you're always helping me lol Mister sparky (talk) 01:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hey, well surprise surprise goodraise has changed his mind again. i'm getting really bored of him now lol Mister sparky (talk) 12:52, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian Albums Chart[edit]

I didn't quite get what you were trying to say. DO you mean to just leave it as Brazil Top 10 Albums ABPD or not include it at all? -- Ipodnano05 (talk) 13:38, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Tisdale discography[edit]

So, User:Goodraise wants a more reliable source for the UK chart peak positions. You've mentioned a physical magazine titled Music Week. Do you have any idea about where I can find the exact issue, exact page and this kind of stuff, to source every single peak position? It's going to be a hard work but I really want Tisdale's discography to be nominated for FL. Decodet (talk) 13:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I guess an admin reads all the review and then he decides if the article is promoted or not.

WP:FLC says: " A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director who considers a nomination and its reviews:actionable objections have not been resolved; or consensus for promotion has not been reached; or insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met."

I'm not sure but does it means that all reviewers have to agree with the same, in order to get the article promoted? Anyway, I'll contact the user you've mentioned and see if he can help me with the UK chart. Thanks. Decodet (talk) 14:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just managed to switch Charts-Status.com and Zobbel references for physical references of ChartsPlus journal, which publishes weekly the full UK chart. The official site helped me with the issues numbers. I just wanted to let you know it. Decodet (talk) 01:23, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus charts[edit]

Hey, a friend of mine recently created/expanded the page for IFPI Greece and I found what he wrote for Cyprus very interesting. In our discussion before we had come to the conclusion that All Records was just a retailer, but it seems to be much more than that. Here is what the article says: Since the music industry of Cyprus closely mirrors that of Greece, and because virtually all the Greek and foreign releases are provided by the record companies in Greece (under a blanket licensing agreement with Cypriot record company All Records), IFPI Greece is represented in Cyprus by All Records, who in turn publish Cyprus' official charts currently known as Musical Paradise. (I'm going to ask him to add his source). Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 15:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So according to here it represents all the major record companies through out the world, Sony BMG, EMI, Universal, Warner and a large number of Independent labels and is the only IFPI member www.ifpi.org, on the island and is actively engaged in the fight against piracy. So from that we know that it is a member of IFPI, so it has a means of recording sales, and after looking at this which lists the labels it distributes (that's pretty much every label doing business in Greece) we can tell that it handles all record sales in Cyprus. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 21:13, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a distributor, the distributor. All releases seem to go through All Records before they go to retail outlets, whether owned by All Records or others. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 22:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The key word is "outside"[edit]

"Outside userspace" means that inside userspace Speedy G7 doesn't function the same. See further the replies to you at User talk:Graeme Bartlett#Speedy Deletion of Blanked User pages.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 19:41, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

I happened to notice a note you'd left at User talk:Elizabeth Bathory where you'd commented that you used the usercompare tool to check some accounts. Is that a tool that is available for others to use and if so, where is it? Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:44, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've come across some accounts related to on she was investigating: Saa19952 and the Gellar55 that are apparently the same person. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE:[edit]

Really? Then notify the others as well, for it was he who started ... Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 23:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chart trajectories in tables? [Invitation to discussion][edit]

Hello Kww,
I thought you might like to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Record charts#Chart trajectories in tables?? If so, please for completeness of discussion post all comments there.
Thank You.—Iknow23 (talk) 23:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Waking Up in Vegas[edit]

all edits made by 77.97.55.144 shoul be reverted --SveroH (talk) 20:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Brasil[edit]

Kww, now all the Charts, and the URL is OK! Please see you. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 21:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Fame Monster[edit]

Hey, you might wanna check on the discussion on The Fame talk. There is a reliable source for it being a seperate album. With that being established, the articles for deletion is invalid because the result was to redirect the "re-release's" page, not the "album's" page. It's an annoying little technicality lol, so there's no consensus to redirect. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 03:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm conufused. You didn't respond, but are continuing to improperly redirect the page. I hope this gets straightened out soon! Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 14:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My problem was only that there was no censensus for the particular page. The AfD was for a different page with the same name, but a different topic. I'm glad that is all cleared up. In response to our discussion before, have you considered the new information regarding Cyprus? Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian Charts[edit]

I would like to know the criteria for a chart is considered bad. For me this is a tremendous bias!

(Leozinhoow (talk) 14:54, 12 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Ok, I understand your position. There was only cited the "hot100brasil.com" because it is the chart that most stood out in the country, despite being an amateur, before the creation of the Billboard Brazil.

(Leozinhoow (talk) 15:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Forensic RFAs[edit]

I was intrigued by your comment at User_talk:WereSpielChequers#Forensic_RFAs. You said, "That would suggest that early voters researched, and later voters primarily responded to early votes".

When I first started participating in Rfas, I found it easier to wait a few days for people to identify opposition reasons, then examine that evidence and see if it was convincing. So I probably was representative of those later voters who responded to early votes. (I will emphasize that the vote itself didn't sway me; my goal is never to !vote based upon another persons !vote, but I will examine the rationale.) I felt others were better at knowing how to look at editors history, and I should take advantage of that expertise. Over time, I've tried to wean myself away from that parasitic approach, and do my own research.--SPhilbrick T 19:21, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

user:AJS2050[edit]

Hey Kww, I have warned this user for deliberate vandalism many times already, and all he does is remove the the warnings and update his talk page. I have just placed another warning which he will soon remove, please help me stop him.Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 23:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would you[edit]

consider commenting on this one? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My Mentorship[edit]

Hello Kww, my probation began on June 24th of 2009, and and was supposed to last for 90 days. After a few mistakes it was extended another 30 days if I submitted to you the Celine Dion source. As I did not it was 60 days more than the original probation, which equal to 5 months. On Tuesday November 24th it will be 5 complete months since I was put under your mentorship. Im just bringing this to your attention, and please get back to me on how you feel about this.Thanks!?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I appreciate it!Thanks for all your help, and well still be in touch...remember, your still my mentor...;)--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 19:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

again chris willis[edit]

some one on this page keeps trying to add useless garbage to this profile.

the guy is a borderline wiki at that since he is only a back up singer or in dance a featured singer where vocals are only an extension on the dj or producers mix...

also, there seems to be an ongoing attempt to remove any reference of marc mysterio work to chris willis and vice-versa from the same ips..

can u enact a moderator to protcet this article, restore the roll wit it an dmarc mysterio credits, and block the offending ips? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.202.147.2 (talk) 00:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Fame certification[edit]

Hi Kevin. Would you please comment at Talk:The_Fame#CRIA_certification? A concern has been raised due to the dubious certification present in both the pages of cria. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute on Gwen Stefani[edit]

Hi, I don't think we've run into each other here, but I've noticed that you are great with settling disputes on entertainment articles. Which is why I am here assisting your help. Myself and another editor are having a content dispute on what the genre listings should be on Gwen Stefani. User:Bookkeeperoftheoccult wishes to list "Rock, ska, pop" backed by consensus. I wish to list "Alternative, dance, electronic, pop" as sourced by Allmusic's listing for the artist. In my opinion, verifiable information should always override community consensus. Otherwise, Wikipedia is nothing more than the opinions of random folk in cyberspace.

If possible, could you come to the article and give a third opinion on which genres to list? I'd greatly appreciate your opinion in resolving this dispute. Thanks! Chase wc ⁹¹ 04:46, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Intermediation require[edit]

Dear user can i ask you to please comment on User talk:Thestreamer#She Wolf / Shakira. You have already asked this user to stick to charts at WP:GOODCHARTS but he/she is struggling to understand when you can and cannot use the french digital chart. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Amprofon[edit]

actually the official AMPROFON website says "This is the official list of music sales in Mexico, encompassing over 60% of CDs sold in Mexico. Additionally, the Top 100 has the support of major record distributors in the country.". Translate the page [8] using babel fish or google-translate. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Well, Did You Evah! - your opinion please[edit]

Word on the street is you're the go-to guy for chart notability. I was looking at the article for this song and it seems to me that there's undue weight in this article given to the Debbie Harry/Iggy Pop version (due to a merge in 2008). The article thus looks messy and bottom-heavy. I think a case could probably be made for the song's notability, but do you think that the Harry/Pop version is sufficiently notable to demerge into a standalone article? pablo_hablo. 22:58, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel your pain, but it's a pretty firm convention that versions of a song don't get independent articles. The Harry/Pop version is at pretty much minimum size (except for a completely unnecessary single cover). If you can find a sentence or two to add about other versions, that would help. Deleting the cover from the infobox would go a long way to reduce apparent visual weight.—Kww(talk) 01:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography[edit]

Hey kww, Im in need of your assisstance. On the above mentioned page, a user keeps replacing the ticketspecialist source(which is fine) but replaces it with a source in rolling stones from 1998 Here and some source in hello magazine. Please take a look and tell me what you think?.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 01:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TrEeMaNsHoE[edit]

Hey there Kww, just thought I'd let you know that we might see a long term problem user TrEeMaNsHoE (talk · contribs), as the user has been socking. Just thought it might interest you, as you've recently dealt with some socks over at Love Sex Magic. WP:DUCK characteristics include CaPsWiThUsErNaMeS or random items. Just a heads up. — ξ ^xplicit 02:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a place where must tell the truth and not their point of view. When you write something on wikipedia, you must cite good/historical reference(s). Else you're a liar. Scheduled Caste(SC), Scheduled Tribe(ST), Backward Class (BC), Most Backward Class (MBC) are status used by the Indian Government. See this link: http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Media-targets-me-because-Im-from-MBC-Ramadoss/248735/. I'm not vandalizing wikipedia, just removing false things added by liars who are trying to rewrite indian history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.213.126 (talk) 15:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you to tell that what i have done in 'kantri' wiki page is vandalism ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.213.126 (talk) 09:36, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

201.209[edit]

You may have noticed 201.209 is back and reaping havoc on the Katy Perry discography page again. I cannot believe the straight out arrogance and stupidity of this person. I can't remember what the SPI was under, can we just get him banned as well or what? What's the best way to do this? kiac. (talk-contrib) 01:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

Can you tell me your reasoning for wanting to change the whole chart template that everyone is used to? If people are coming onto a place like this to see charts wouldn't they just look at the country and the number like it is now. If they was curious about the chart itself or who runs the charts wouldn't they click on the hyperlink? As there's a consensus for the jumble I haven't got much to stand on but I would ask you to 1) Re-open the discussion once it's completely ready to be implemented so that all users can have there say, maybe if you invite all your watchlisters to have their view

2) Why did you want it like this?

Thanks Jayy008 (talk) 23:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that does sound amazing, I am fully behind it after hearing that, it will make everyones life alot easier. I just don't know why it can't say "Australian Singles Chart" still or "UK Singles Chart" rather than UK (Official Chart Company), it just seems irrelevant to show it that way. Jayy008 (talk) 23:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean UK (Official Charts Company) doesn't say alot apart from it charted in the UK and the place that provided it was Official charts company. It leaves the question, is that the UK airplay chart, is it the download chart, is it urban, nobody knows because it doesn't say. That's the point I'm trying to make. Jayy008 (talk) 23:50, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Singles_Chart <<<<< There we go, that's the UK Singles Chart's own page. Also Denmark is listed as IFPI, I thought it was Tracklisten that run Denmarks singles chart?

Also are you going to be making these changes to albums charts? Jayy008 (talk) 00:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! and that's good it is a handy feature! What about Denmark then? Jayy008 (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Kevin. If there are any other ones I'll let you know but I can tell this will make editing alot easier! Thanks for all your hard work on it! Jayy008 (talk) 00:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Singlecharts[edit]

I wasn't aware of any new policy or change, Lilunique has now informed me of it. Thanks for the notice--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 08:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland[edit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Singles_Chart <<<<<<Irish Singles Chart the current format calls it IRMA when there is a page for "Irish Singles Chart" on it's own Jayy008 (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but that's the name of the chart itself, you've called Canada (Canadian Hot 100) etc. Canada is provided by Billboard and Nielson etc but the chart name is Canadian Hot 100 like Denmark has Tracklisten. Why can't you change UK, Ireland and Denmark to the actually chart names rather than the provider?

A wikipage exists for all 3! Jayy008 (talk) 12:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

18 chart rule[edit]

Can you make some changes per the latest discussion in Record Charts. 18 charts does make the information biased most of the time and as long as all the charts are WK:GOODCHARTS if the list gets to long it can be split across the page. Can you make these changes unless you disagree with it?

Also can you reply to the above with your opinion Jayy008 (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beyonce[edit]

In your new chart macros, if I was to edit Beyonce to your standards like I am planning with Video Phone. Is it spelt like "Beyonce" or with an apostrophy above the "e" because most keyboards can't spell it like that they have to be pasted off the internet. Jayy008 (talk) 16:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops[edit]

Looks like we've both filed reports for Thestreamer for edit warring.(Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Edits undone on "10 Things"[edit]

I noticed that your recent edit on 10 Things I Hate About You (TV series)‎ to revert changes by '1989 Rosie' has been undone by that editor. I agree completely with your edit, but I wasn't sure if I should revert it back. From reading 1989 Rosie's talk page, this editor appears to be involved in a number of edit wars and didn't know that I wanted to instigate another one. I am a newbie here so I figured I'd leave it up to you. I just wanted you to know because I find it frustrating. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 19:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Macros[edit]

Can you please review what I've asked or atleast reply. It is nice if people would be able to know if it's an airplay chart or a singles chart or whatever it is. By putting the actual chart name if one exists. Jayy008 (talk) 00:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok, I can understand if you're busy. I really don't mean to sound picky but Switzerland has it's own page to, I'm only offering ideas to help make your new feature the best it can possibly be.

Also Czech and Slovakia have only airplay charts so how will people know what it's charted on could it not be formatted like Czech (IFPI airplay) and the link takes you to IFPI still but it at least tells you what its charted on, what are your thoughts on that? And yes, with Beyonce I can imagine it's very difficult to do it, seems impossible. Jayy008 (talk) 16:20, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Examiner.com[edit]

Hi, I noticed you stated the examiner is "on blacklist" - do you have a link to any discussion on it? I've been wondering if anyone on wikipedia has had discussion on whether it should be reliable or not. I've avoided using it, but it would be since to have some reference from other editors. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 02:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1989 Rosie[edit]

FYI, I've reported her to WP:AIV after today's edits. She was given a final warning on 3 Decemeber and frankly, I'm sick of giving her chance after chance after chance to do the right thing. --AussieLegend (talk) 22:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Moon (2009 film) and Eclipse (2010 film)[edit]

Both these two articles were recently submitted for a name change. I did agree with this name change in February, however, now I am a strong opposing factor in why the name should ramian New Moon and Eclipse with the signifigant other name in the first line of the articles.

WP:NCCN and WP:PRECISION both state the title should be "terms most commonly used", "A good article title is brief and to the point", "Prefer titles that follow the same pattern as those of other similar articles", "An article can only have one name; however significant alternative names for the topic should be mentioned in the article, usually in the first sentence or paragraph". "And despite earlier reports that the movie would be known as The Twilight Saga's New Moon, the title will remain New Moon according to the movie's rep. They just have Twilight Saga in the artwork to identify it for anyone less devoted than your average fanggirl."Source.

Also see WP:PRECISION. I quote from there: "Articles' titles usually merely indicate the name of the topic. When additional precision is necessary to distinguish an article from other uses of the topic name, over-precision should be avoided. Be precise but only as precise as is needed. For example, it would be inappropriate to name an article "United States Apollo program (1961–1975)" over Apollo program or "Nirvana (Aberdeen, Washington rock band)" over Nirvana (band). Remember that concise titles are generally preferred."

However, I personally do not think we have had enough input and would like input from people who might not like these movies, or just edit them to help wikipedia out. The pages are: Talk:New Moon (2009 film)#Requested move and Talk:Eclipse (2010 film)#Requested move. Any help/input would greatly be apriciated.ChaosMaster16 (talk) 22:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)ChaosMaster16[reply]

December 2009[edit]

Hey please stop to delete or make changes on my edited articles.Siquisloco (talk) 18:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Siquisloco[reply]

Excuse me, but Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. That includes Kww. We do not own articles here, they are common property. Also, editing another user's userpage is generally considered rude, and you certainly should have reverted yourself there once you left the message here. Thanks however for your contributions to the project.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there, may I ask why citing sources from United World Chart or thefreedictionary.com is unreliable and therefore sunject to deletion? All I did was mention the postions each album and single was in according to their charts, I never thought that people would be confusing it with Oricon.--sapphirewhirlwind (talk) 2:42 am, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Help[edit]

Can yiu please do something about IP user 82.43.119.44 making unnecessary changes to charts and genres on articles. Charmed36 (talk) 02:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chart macros[edit]

Why are the Billboard charts on your chart macros italic and some are not? Jayy008 (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yo ho ho[edit]

File:Father Winter Solstice.jpg

Ϣere SpielChequers is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Xmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hannukah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.

See talk page for Jumpin' Jack Flash[edit]

The chorus of a song and how the chorus rhymes is not original research. See talk page for Jumpin' Jack Flash. 68.116.53.246 (talk) 06:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

Ok, i will use the type of ref. But i have know the ABPD and Billboard Brasil will works together, a like Billboard and RIAA is U.S. So all charts is save, but didn't to show now. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 14:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions[edit]

I left a message on the discussion board about NVIP but people ignored or do not know the answer. Why does the certification only go up to 2006?

Also can you help me navigate Turkey? The links don't take me to any charts.

Also can you research Tracklisten more. It will be better to include in on the chart macro.

On a final note, how far are you with the album chart macro? Jayy008 (talk) 18:27, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IMPORTANT![edit]

Please see the following topic: http://forums.sega.com/showthread.php?t=306802 - Zhang He (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:S2daam[edit]

Hi Kww. I think that sounds like a good course of action. If you can get User:S2daam to agree to those terms, I will unblock them. Best, FASTILY ^(TALK) 21:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bloat in The Climb.[edit]

Hi Kww. On the talk page of "The Climb" you said that the article's length was due to unnecessary bulk. Since Ipod and I do hope to make the article an FA, I'd like to cut out any unnotable info. Would you please tell me what you believe is extraneous on my talk page or here on the article talk page? Thanks. Liqudluck✽talk 23:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying! Liqudluck✽talk 23:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right Round[edit]

Perhaps it wasn't the most appropriate move to revert everything after my version, I just got a little hasty and acted without thinking. However, there were many issues with some of the prior edits that I had brought up, and don't you think it was a little pointy to criticize me for a wholesale reversion when you essentially did the same? I had modeled the article after featured song articles such as 4 Minutes (Madonna song) and Hollaback Girl, and I'm trying to get it at GA status, if editors go against Wikipedia policies such as having a four-column reflist (laptop users cannot see three), it will fail.

Forgive me if this sounds like bad-faith, I'm just a little stressed out because I worked very hard to have the article looking perfect so it could be nominated for GA and many inaccuracies and MoS violations are being brought into place. Could you possibly assist me in restoring some of the issues I brought up? If I were to do so, it would be 3RR violation. Chase wc ⁹¹ 00:38, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you please show me where aCharts is considered unreliable? If you avoid the WP:BADCHARTS (which are pointed out on each page they show up at), it's actually quite reliable, and it's used in many FAs, including 4 Minutes (Madonna song) which I previously brought up. Chase wc ⁹¹ 00:44, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never saw that about GA and FA articles, thank you for pointing that out! Would Ultratop be considered a licensed chart site, and if not, could it be used for charts such as Australia, where (as far as I know) there is no online archive? Chase wc ⁹¹ 00:55, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you! Chase wc ⁹¹ 00:58, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And another question (sorry to be a bother!), could aCharts be used to describe the chart ascension and descension in chart performance sections? Or should other references be used? Chase wc ⁹¹ 01:00, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I'll work on improving that section soon. aCharts can be used as a last resort, can it not? I see that it is bad practice, but if it's near impossible to find another source, could it be used? Also, is Allmusic a licensed chart site? It has information about the Pop 100 that is no longer available on Billboard's website. Chase wc ⁹¹ 01:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allmusic seems to be generally considered acceptable. They credit Billboard, and people seem to assume that they must have worked things out with Billboard. That said, the consensus among people at WP:Record charts was to just drop mention of the Pop 100.—Kww(talk) 01:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(←) OK, I replaced all of the chart sources with licensed ones. I had to use aCharts on a few that I couldn't find on licensed sites listed at WP:GOODCHARTS. It says not to use it when possible, and I felt it was necessary to use so as not to leave out important charting info. Could you also do me a favor, and change the reflist columns back to 2? 4 is not to be used, and 3 is only used when there is a large amount of references because laptop users cannot see it. Chase wc ⁹¹ 01:41, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my, haha! I checked the sites at WP:GOODCHARTS but I found it hard to find chart info for the song there. But then again, I probably wasn't looking hard enough. I'm about to take a break too, until tomorrow. I've done a lot of editing today, I'm tired, and the Right Round article is making me very stressed! Thank you so much for your assistance with this article and my chart queries! Chase wc ⁹¹ 01:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've been referred to you..[edit]

By User:Wehwalt. I had expressed an interest in expanding Said the Whale, and was wondering if sources such as the band's myspace/home page are considered reliable as far as member history, tour dates, and release dates are concerned. Wehwalt suggested that you might be a good person to talk to, so I'm taking my query here. Thanks. Throwaway85 (talk) 11:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse Nelly Furtado citizenship[edit]

Nelly Furtado has both portuguese and canadian citizenship. This discussion was already taken place in Nelly Furtado discussion page (which was erased after consensus). Just read the article about Portuguese nationality law and you will see that a child from a portuguese parent is automatically a portuguese citizen. So please stop changing "portuguese-canadian" to "canadian" in the intro of the article. thx Tacv (talk) 18:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above user has also been pushing this POV for many months now, in the Carmen Miranda ("The Brazilian Bombshell") article, despite being unable to produce any evidence that she was associated primarily with Portugal rather than Brazil. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He also neglected to tell us about this: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-12-29/Carmen Miranda ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:55, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless she has used her alleged Portugese citizenship in some way, it's pretty much irrelevant. Canada is not subject to Portugese law. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brexx[edit]

I hope you don't mind, but I updated User:Kww/Brexx with some of the new articles that came up at the latest WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Brexx, as well as some of the most edited ones by his older socks. I also took the liberty of alphabetizing the entries so it's easier to find stuff and remove duplicates, feel free to undo this if they were in some particular order. Maybe it's time to create an entry at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse so we can collaborate in keeping track of him. Siawase (talk) 08:09, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and I just blocked that obnoxious IP for the next three months. Please let me know if he pops up again. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New![edit]

Helo Kww!!, I have good news about the Charts in Brazil. Remeber the Billboard Brazil uses the CROWLEY, for your charts?? So this website show the charts weekly, no by month alike the Billboard Brasil. May the Wikipedia uses this Ranking, every weeks?? Thanks!! Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 21:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's wait. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 11:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock revert[edit]

Hi there, I've just rolled back some of User:Generalboss3 sock edits. He's made quite a number of edits for a while but I'm thinking that since you might be more familiar with him you might like to finish it. Nirvana888 (talk) 00:24, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

209.212.23.42 (talk · contribs) reverting all to User:Generalboss3. Are you going to deal with this? Nirvana888 (talk) 16:20, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken care of big chunks of this problem, but please don't leave it entirely on my shoulders.—Kww(talk) 16:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to take care of some more of it. I guess this is one of the problems of not nipping socks in the bud sooner - that it becomes a huge pain to revert once they've made 3,132 edits. Nirvana888 (talk) 16:45, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I've just rolled back a bunch. I think this might have to be complete over a protracted period given the sheer number of edits over a long duration. SpacemanSpiff, maybe you could help out too when you have time. Nirvana888 (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)I've just blocked an IP sock of his - 209.212.23.42 (talk · contribs), he's reverted both of you on multiple articles. I've undone on some, can't get to all, so if you can finish up, that would be good. cheers. -SpacemanSpiff 16:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography[edit]

Hi Kevin, can you help me please. A user keep removing data off the discography i.e. Merry Christmas and Glitter because they think they're not studio albums. They just remove them and don't add them anywhere else which to me in vandalism.

I have reverted but the editor is persistent in removing them. Merry Christmas and Glitter are considered studio albums are they not? and all sources say Memoirs is her 12th not 10th album.

I need to know if I'm correct in reverting these edits, I've offered to bring it up for discussion. (no reply yet) But I'm 100% sure they are studio albums. Jayy008 (talk) 00:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Generally I would agree, but the information regarding these albums shouldn't just be removed, because they are still albums and in Carey's case studio for some reason, and it's important for a discography to include all releases by the artist. how can I stop the user removing them completely every 5 minutes? Jayy008 (talk) 00:31, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am the editor responsible for these edits. I have removed them from the Studio category and ADDED them to the Other category. I am not vandalizing Mariah's page. I am simply correcting this mistake in good faith.--Sosa (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have not, you completely removed them from the discography page making the page incomplete where alot of users including myself have worked hard to bring that discography up to scratch. Jayy008 (talk) 01:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin, I have added a discussion on the matter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mariah_Carey_discography#Glitter_and_Merry_Christmas please join Jayy008 (talk) 01:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your chart macros[edit]

Hi Kevin, French digital chart isn't working for me on your macros anymore I tried this first...

|Invalid chart entered FrenchDigital |17 then put a space "French Digital"

Have you removed it from the macro? Jayy008 (talk) 18:33, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kevin. How far are you with the album one? I think Wikipedia is calling for it. Jayy008 (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RIAA certification[edit]

Hi Kww,
could you maybe visit Talk:Down (Jay Sean song)#RIAA certification and also have a look at Talk:Tik Tok (song)#RIAA certification while you're at it? I'm confused since two apparently reliable sources claim certifications that I can't find in the RIAA database, although at least one is old enough that it can't explained away by a delay. Not sure if that's just due to overeager/incorrect claims by those sources, by a problem with the RIAA database, or with me using it incorrectly.
Thanks, Amalthea 21:04, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ARC and Pop songs[edit]

Am I write to assume that ARC is not allowed in the chart box? It's not an official chart in all respects? Also is it true Pop Songs is now allowed? Jayy008 (talk) 17:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Unenforcable Threats[edit]

Sorry. I didn't mean to use threatening language. I'm just fed up of people making false changes to the article. There has yet to be a credible source for Fight For This Love's alleged sales topping 750k and also some user keeps undoing the single chart template... Lil-unique1 (talk) 18:50, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i didn't realise it hadnt charted. i just kept restoring it back to the last version that used the single chart template. obviosuly this is something im gonna have to be more careful of in the future. Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ping[edit]

I have sent you an e-mail. --Tenmei (talk) 02:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Pictures/Last Christmas by Ashley Tisdale[edit]

Dear Kww, I do not know how to take a picture from a website and put it on a Wikipedia page. I read the coments on Liquidlucks talk page about my request for an alternate cover for Ashley Tisdale's version of Last Christmas that you left. Amazon.com has song cover's that are only released to them. How was I supposed to know that there are TWO official covers for Ashley Tisdale's Last Christmas?. Please send back a message. From Dbunkley6-talk. —Preceding undated comment added 18:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

The Party's Just Begun[edit]

Dear Kww, I need you to take this reference which is an image(http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/images/B000LPS3TE/sr=8-12/qid=1263584508/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=229816&s=music&qid=1263584508&sr=8-12) and make the image into the cover for the The Cheetah Girls song "The Party's Just Begun". Take this reference which is an image(http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B001SQCKZI/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=163856011&s=dmusic) and make the image into the cover for The Party's Just (Ming Remix) which is on The same page as "The Party's Just Begun". I think it's important for people to know that some song's that come in the format of a cd single and digital download have covers. Please make this request. I BEG OF YOU! Send a message back. from Dbunkley6 - talk

Re: WP:BADCHARTS[edit]

Please do not come to my page writing ridiculous statements on how you feel "implicitly accused vandalism." If you had a problem with the source or paragraph that there was long before I touched and all I did was restore, all you had to say is we need a better source and you should refer to WP:BadCharts which I would have clearly said ok sorry about that you were right, but instead you come to my page and unnecessarily add extra nonsense on top of that with a rude attitude.

I'll tell you what Ill add my "explantation" when I find a legitimate source, Thats what you were complaining about, and in the future next time you got to someones talk page keep the conversation on wikipedia only and not on your personal feeling which i do not care for. You have a good day Kww A Star Is Here (talk) 22:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your absolutely right. I need to explain myself more thats fine but you came off kind of strong but hey when you work hard on wikipedia you can see why people love to protect what they do. You have a good night kww. A Star Is Here (talk) 01:46, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography split[edit]

Hi Kevin, I'm currently in the process of splitting her discography into singles and albums. Can you help by changing the Disocgraphy page to "Mariah Carey albums discography" and adding a disambiguation page as I don't know how to do. Your help would be GREATLY appreciated. Thanks! Jayy008 (talk) 16:53, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it now, I simply cut and pasted everything from "Mariah Carey discography" to "Mariah Carey Albums Discography" and added a re-direct from the original discography to albums discography. Take a look see if it's all fine please. Jayy008 (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with it? Why did you put it up for deletion? Jayy008 (talk) 18:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will do, thanks! Can't it just be moved into "Mariah Carey albums discography"? Once the other one is deleted? Jayy008 (talk) 18:19, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It will let me do it now I can move the discography straight to a new page, should I? It will not affect deleting the other one because that's "Mariah Carey Albums Discography" I will move it to "Mariah Carey albums discography" no caps. Jayy008 (talk) 18:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Kevin. Let me know! Jayy008 (talk) 18:25, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for saving it. Is it all my fault or has something happened before on the page? Right I do believe it is because of the amount of releases I can do a lot of work to both pages if they're separate as I have added alot of info to the singles page and I will add some to the albums when it's separate. Once it's done it's done because her catelogue is only going to grow it is already a mess. You help would be appreciated but if it's to much work I will find an admin. Jayy008 (talk) 18:37, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ps. I also did the same for the singles page, but I did edit it out in a different way, I pasted the boxes but changed some links and move them around, does that affect it too, will the singles page have to be deleted aswell? Jayy008 (talk) 18:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kevin, you said a few hours but it's been a day so I assume it can be touched again. What is going to be done? I absolutely think it's neccessary but can you look at Singles Discography to see if I did something wrong with that too, I did cut and paste singles off the main discography but I didn't see how I could have moved it a different way for singles. Get back to me when you can, Jamie. Jayy008 (talk) 18:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Mariah Carey discography#Splitting the article.—Kww(talk) 20:50, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help Kevin. It's highly appreciated. Jayy008 (talk) 22:26, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable UK chart sources[edit]

heya, once again the issue of reliable-ness of uk chart archives has lured its ugly head in flc discussions again courtesy of Goodraise. he point blank refuses chartstats, so i changed to everyhit.com, which the bbc uses so is definitely reliable, but he's said that fails as well! do you know of any other ways that would prove reliability of a source? otherwise future uk chart places in flc discussion discographies is doomed if goodraise is a reviewer Mister sparky (talk) 19:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hey, thanks. i have been looking but so far have only found the 1 bbc article that uses it for film soundtrack sales. it seems that the only uk source goodraise will accept is chartsplus, which i've included for a position outside the top 40, but i don't want to add them for each position in every discography i work on from now on just in case it's goodraise that reviews it. using one source which has a single page with all the positions on is much tidier that having a different citation next to every position, which i think is what he wants. Mister sparky (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

have found quite a few examples now of third party usage of everyhit.com: the BBC, by British MPs in policy discussions, by Reuters and even in Norway. Mister sparky (talk) 13:38, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! you are so much better at phrasing things and putting the point across than i am :) Mister sparky (talk) 17:38, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Chart macros[edit]

Sorry, I just don't like them. They might be practical, but they are visually confusing and unaesthetic, and they also seem to contain a few inaccuracies. I much prefer the "Singles Chart" format. Funk Junkie (talk) 00:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply again. I agree that {{cite web}} is more complex than the chart macros. My only suggestion for now would be the use of the "Singles Chart" format, which is more understandable and has been on Wikipedia for ages. Funk Junkie (talk) 17:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discography[edit]

Just thought I'd let you know, the page is deleted as far as I can tell. Jayy008 (talk) 23:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaire referendum[edit]

"that's an easily made misinterpretation of the sources. I'll add a paragraph back in today or tomorrow with solid references. In short, the previous party would not have had a referendum, and the changeover was orchestrated to have one" Okay, but if so, then why was the referendum already planned for 15 January back in 2009 when the old government was in office, and when will it be held now? —Nightstallion 23:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you show me a source for the referendum actually being scheduled while the UPB was in power? All I remember from that time period is vague promises with no action. It was a major bone of contention, with a lot public pressure and noise on the radio, but my memory is that the referendum did not get scheduled until after Nicolaas's defection and the resulting change of governments. The sources I used support my memory. If you can find one that contradicts it, I'll research and try to figure out the contradiction.—Kww(talk) 04:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When did the government change actually occur? From what I've gathered, it seemed to me that the referendum was not held on 15 January as planned; at least I have not found ANY report on the referendum having taken place... —Nightstallion 09:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Macros[edit]

Please Kevin, can you add Macros to Record Charts. All these random IP's keep changing it but they don't just change the format they don't add sources it takes ages to add these macros and it's annoying when they're removed. I can add them Record Charts if you? Jayy008 (talk) 17:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Son of Bitch/You Mother Fucker[edit]

Dear Kww. What I edit on Fuego (The Cheetah Girls song) is none of your business, YOU SONG OF BITCH AND MOTHER FUCKER. Leave me alone on what I edit, reguardless of you opinions. from Dbunkley talk.

Indeed. --TheReaderOfOz (talk) 23:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm quite interested to know what it means if you're both a son of a bitch and a mother fucker... AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They don't seem contradictory to me. You could contract it to "incestuous puppy" for brevity, though.—Kww(talk) 23:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[edit]

Dear Kww, I apalogize for my last message over the Fuego section. from Dbunkley6 talk. —Preceding undated comment added 19:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC).[reply]

aCharts and the German Singles Chart[edit]

Hi, I must thank you again for assisting me with the charts at the Right Round article awhile ago. I still cannot find a licensed source for the German Singles Chart, however. I registered an account for the Hung Medien sites and went to one of the sites that was not GermanCharts.com, as WP:GOODCHARTS suggested. But it would not show me the charts. Would aCharts be appropriate to use for this case? –Chase (talk) 19:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I tried Australian-Charts.com with the same song and "de" didn't show up. But oh well, Musicline.de worked. Thank you very much! –Chase (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kevin[edit]

Thank you very much for adding macros to Wikipedia: Record Charts. You should re-enter your app for adminship! You help alot on here. Anyway with the Macros Germany never works for me. Can you give me an example of how Germany does work please?

PS. Splitting the article I think the consensus is clear, have you informed an admin on the matter?

Thank you, Jamie Jayy008 (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland IRMA[edit]

Can you also help with Ireland please. I must be mistaken but when the macros were first introduces didn't the Irish macros take you to the individual song? On a different website where you had to include artist and song in macro not year and date. Jayy008 (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks, can you reply to the above aswell please. Jayy008 (talk) 20:29, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bonaire referendum[edit]

Hello! It appears that the Bonaire referendum had been rescheduled to March 2010, according to this article [9]. Thanks for trying to find it...I couldn't find the new date anyway either! Scanlan (talk) 23:15, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're most likely right. If that's the case, the election probably won't take place. May I ask where you read the results, as I'd love to read them. Thanks for the feedback! Scanlan (talk) 23:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

German Chart[edit]

Not for me, all the edits I make I use the back to front name tag and it comes out like this...

this first

and when I click the song title I get

this second Jayy008 (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Kevin, I will look out for that in future. Much appreciated! Have you found an admin willing to sort out the history problems on the discography? Jayy008 (talk) 00:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

=== Mariah Carey ===

Thank you Kevin! Jayy008 (talk) 15:49, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey discography 2[edit]

See Mariah Carey discography. The two discography articles both seem to exist. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

Ok, but they will removed, because they think the Billboard Brasil is a Bad Chart, that's why i did put the link, no phisical magazine. Thanks. Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 13:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sock question[edit]

Are you the one who files the renewed sock cases on accounts related to Xtinadbest? If you are, I came across another account tonight I suspect is related as well: Fridacry. I tagged it as a possible. Wildhartlivie (talk) 11:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this user editing the Hayden Panettiere article as well, and just reported it here. An obvious duck to me. Nymf _talk/contr. 14:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Innocent Heart[edit]

Hello Kww. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Innocent Heart, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Was banned for socking, no indication that the ban was for creating articles. Article appears to meet A7. PROD or take to AfD if required. Thank you. Ged UK 18:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Mimmirocks[edit]

Re your message: Done. I wasn't familiar with this particular sock. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replied[edit]

I replied to you on my talk page. ☺Coppertwig (talk) 00:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irish Certifications[edit]

This link to Irish certifications page is broken. Perhaps because they're updated it for 2009 inclusion? Can you take a look? Jayy008 (talk) 09:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jayy008 (talk) 16:57, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian charts[edit]

Yeah, it's wrong. The Pop chart is featured on page 80, while the main chart is featured on page 79. I have also to say that the Pop chart is clearly a component chart. It's an airplay chart but featuring only Pop songs. Decodet (talk) 15:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk: Mariah carey albums discography[edit]

Hey Kevin, since you usually take place in Mariah Carey discussions, maybe you would like to voice your opinion here--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non Free Images in your User Space[edit]

Hey there Kww, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot alerting you that Non-free files are not allowed in the user or talk-space. I removed some images that I found on User:Kww/sandbox/Southend. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use images to your user-space drafts or your talk page. See a log of images removed today here, shutoff the bot here and report errors here. Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the note. I have added a comment above Loverdrive and Matthew Riva that I suspect of also being socks. These user names are blocked on Italian wiki for being socks of the same user... as is ItHysteria. Nouse4aname (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Angels Cry (Remix)[edit]

Hey Kevin, The above mentioned song is one of the new efforts from Mariah Carey. The wikipedia page on this article has no cover photo, however I have it on my computer from the internet. I was wondering if you could tell me how to put the picture up for the article. I notice that photos from living people must be in wiki commons, however I'm not really sure how it works with album, single and movie covers. Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 05:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Kevin, I didn't get a response from you, have you seen my message?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, seems to make sense, Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 00:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion criteria G5 - A discussion[edit]

Hi there. I've started a discussion at WT:CSD - G5 that I'd value your input on. Thanks. Ged UK 10:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Innocent Heart[edit]

It was Mimicrywiki. MrKIA11 (talk) 15:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:[edit]

So, put just "Billboard Brasil" there, without link? Vitor Mazuco ^Msg 15:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

one thing[edit]

See [10]. If someone reverts so many times, then, instead of reverting again, go to WP:3RRN, or to WP:AIV or to WP:RFPP. You can revert later when the user is blocked, and someone might have solved the dispute meanwhile by doing some good edit. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno, I prefer waiting. It helps to cool things off, even if it means that the article has to be a little wrong during half an hour. Different styles :) --Enric Naval (talk) 21:43, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting Many Edits[edit]

Hey Kevin, I never figured out how to revert multiple edits with one attempt. Can you explain to me how to undo more than one edit at a time?Thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 13:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not able to do it. If I go to the edit history and click on two different editing periods, then all I see is the Compare Versions macro, nothing more. I don't see a save change button.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 23:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I seem to get it now, thanks alot. It's pretty cool your fluent in 4 languages. I'm fluent in Spanish, however I prefer to stick to the English Wiki. What language to you use for your editing and profile?--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 11:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page Protection[edit]

Hi there, it's no problem. Thanks for dealing with it, just logged in briefly and took a look at my talk page history. Persistent one isn't he?! Cheers, Nouse4aname (talk) 14:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whitney Houston[edit]

Please join this discussion Jayy008 (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet[edit]

Hi Kevin, I saw you edit on EricOrbits page, I was wandering if you could explain to me briefly what a sockpuppet actually is? Jayy008 (talk) 17:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Kevin!! Jayy008 (talk) 18:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Honk honk[edit]

Lol, it was an international mixing of idioms. Though now that you mention it, the loud honking of a goose is probably closer to the sounds I'd imagine him making than the rather endearing quacks of a duck. ;) BTW, have you noticed the rather obvious socking at Hilary Duff discography?[11] It's not entirely in Brexx style but diffs like this [12] gave me pause. Siawase (talk) 17:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it seems very unlike him to have that kind of skill. But there are just too many socks around these types of articles. Siawase (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WTF[edit]

Whyd u delate I Made it by Kevin Rudolf who are you to be able to do that in less than a day —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott i am (talk • contribs) 23:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It hasent charted yet because a week has not passed since its release date so that it has a chance to chartScott i am 23:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott i am (talk • contribs)

Why cant u chill and just let the article stay there are articles of less importance u can redirect. Just like that guy that unredirected it sayd it has a cover wait a couple days for it to chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott i am (talk • contribs) 05:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay whatever will u unredirect it after it charts?Scott i am 23:48, 9 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott i am (talk • contribs)

Please add your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs#Singles release date is when FIRST being SOLD as a Single, NOT Radio Airplay[edit]

Hello, I think you may be interested in joining the discussion HERE. Thank You.—Iknow23 (talk) 11:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, Kww. You have new messages at SchuminWeb's talk page.
Message added 14:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BREXX![edit]

I think he's back, I have informed the other user who deals with it aswell but I thought I'd let you know, if you look at Up Out My Face or Angels Cry you'll see I have reverted edits that are possibly by him. Using an IP. Jayy008 (talk) 16:51, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Kevin. Jayy008 (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help with something[edit]

Hi Kevin, I see in pages history people reverting for exmaple "Reverted to edit (a number) by Kww" skipping like 5 other edits, I do I multiple revert? Jayy008 (talk) 15:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just making a random example using your name, I didn't mean it by something I saw in particular and thank you! Jayy008 (talk) 15:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't do it :s, it's confusing me. Jayy008 (talk) 18:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

H.A.T.E.U.[edit]

I made all the edits to H.A.T.E.U. which I was going to change back at the end of the day, it was to show how much at flaw this new policy would be if it was implemented. What is your opinion? Songs we know which are singles, aren't singles on Wikipedia because Radio isn't a release, it doesn't count, which means it was never released, which means it was never a single but we know it was. Jayy008 (talk) 18:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also Macro problem[edit]

Bye Bye (Mariah Carey song) or I'll Be Lovin' U Long Time. If you check the Macro for Slovakia it keeps linking back to the current chart not the archive. Can you check it out when you have a minute and reply to the above. Jayy008 (talk) 18:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My mind is playing tricks on me, I always thought it linked to the graph page. Meh oh well. Thanks for the quick help! Jayy008 (talk) 19:11, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Shakin' It 4 Daddy[edit]

Hey KWW, that is one hell of a list of sockpuppeteerings. Thanks, I think a redirect is a good move. Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 15:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey albums discography (Glitter album section)[edit]

Hey Kevin, Jay and I don't seem to agree on a certain point, so I'd like to consult you and hear your opinion. In the above mentioned page, Jay believes this source is sufficient for the 2 million WW claim. I don't agree that it should be used as the source is from 2002, over 8 years ago. What do you think? Should it be used? Thanks alot.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 20:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll leave it until another, more recent one comes along.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 20:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Macros[edit]

Please click here somebody has brought something up about the Macros. I think it's a pointless argument. But he keeps reverting the Macros on one particular page. Can you please voice your opinion there and clear up his issues. Thanks Jayy008 (talk) 23:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jay, my argument is in no way pointless. You just do not understand how citations are to be formatted.. I am sure it would be relevant if you actually had some knowledge. Kww, I have been notified that you are the creator of the macro. First of all, it needs some improvements. For example, within the citation for the Billboard Hot 100, Nielsen SoundScan is required, specifically in the work field, as the charts are complied by them. The publisher is Billboard, obviously. Access date and the published date are also required. In other markets such as Australia, ARIA is not a link within the citation. It should be written as Australian Recording Industry Association in the work field, and Hung Medien should remain as the publisher. The same situation applies to several other music markets. The only reason I reverted the macro upgrade was because of those issues. Before the upgrade, the charts were all verified with perfectly formatted citations. My edits have been considered 'vandalism' by Jay, when it overall was a misunderstanding of why I reverted such. Sorry if I bothered you. • вяαdcяo chat 06:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have issues with the linking within the citations, is there any particular reason that you did not simply edit the template to provide the linking you request? If you want me to do them, I can, but I would like to do it in one pass, so please provide me with a detailed bug list. As for "access date" and "published date", those are problematic. What is the "published date" of an archive? I guess I could provide optional arguments for these so that editors can provide them if they desire, but I can't automatically create them.—Kww(talk) 06:37, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not experienced with editing templates like that. I took a shot, but completely ruined it. No pressure, but once you get a change, I could help you do it. • вяαdcяo chat 06:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YSR[edit]

Who the hell are you to tell that the bloody late YSR is not an evangelist bugger? I have been with him for long to know well about him and his motives. Due to the fact that he/his family are rich, powerful backed by foreign christian evangelist missionaries, the hard-core truth about ysr and his family are being kept away from pubilc. BUT TRUTH IS TRUTH. NO AMOUNT OF UNDO's can erase what ysr has done and what his son ysj is doing.

You prevent me from executing to let the truth be known to the common man. Are you also an evangelist being funded by ysr family? You would do justice if you stop undoing my reliable information.

MR YSR IS DEAD, he is no more.

Xtinadbest deja vu[edit]

I added comments to the sock case and also another username who came in to the Innocent Heart page to remove the template again and posted a comment on the talk page that used the same bad English and punctuation. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Macro[edit]

I have noticed on Russian Roulette that when you upgraded the Macro, nobody reverts it. But when I upgrade it they ALWAYS get reverted. Is there a reason for this you can think of? Jayy008 (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see! Is there a way to stick the chart format as one, so the format can't be changed back once it's done? Jayy008 (talk) 19:29, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Say like if somebody upgrades a Macro, could there be an automatic filter if someone removes or reverts it to make it dis-allowed. Like what Wikipedia does with Bad Websites, it automatically blocks them. Jayy008 (talk) 23:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see what your point. It's just a consensus did put Macro's "allowed" and it takes so long to upgrade, when they get reverted, it's highly irritating. Any idea where I'd put a request? Or discussion perhaps at Record Charts? Jayy008 (talk) 00:12, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank for your help Kevin as always. Next time an account reverts it I'll let you know and for now I'll ask a page be semi-protected (When it's IP's). Jayy008 (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request to review edits[edit]

As someone who seems to actually read edits made by IP users rather than blindly reverting them without even supplying a reason in an edit summary, can I ask you to review the edits that User:Wetman reverted [13], beginning at Pope Callixtus I through blah blah blah? Thank you! MM207.69.139.146 (talk) 03:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Sk8er Boi[edit]

Please see my response at the above talk page. Regards, Nouse4aname (talk) 10:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Chart[edit]

Was that an accident posting that on my page? Jayy008 (talk) 14:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I really didn't do that, I think I was taking it off not adding it :S When I use Brazil I only use Magazine Ref. Jayy008 (talk) 18:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hilary Duff articles[edit]

Hello, there's a great deal of unconstructive edits at Hilary Duff album articles from editors who wish to ignore the fact that a holiday album from the singer exists and refer to her second album as her debut studio album. This is incorrect information and I have warned the editors and asked them to provide sources, but they refuse to do so and the disruption continues. Could you possibly assist in this issue? Thanks, I would greatly appreciate it. –Chase (talk) 02:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between a soundtrack and a studio album is that soundtracks consist of music recorded for a film or TV series. The difference between a studio album and a holiday album is the lyrical themes. Also, since holiday albums have no parameter in the album infobox, what could they be? They are not compilations nor EPs (most of the time, they are not the latter, anyway), they aren't soundtracks, and they aren't video albums. This may be a matter that should be taken to Template talk:Infobox album but I would still like to reply to your message anyway. –Chase (talk) 21:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested in commenting here. –Chase (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Macro reversion[edit]

This user, new account Jayy008 (talk) 21:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you think it was justified? He reverted something before reading. Also he's done it again, ignoring both of us. Next step? Jayy008 (talk) 18:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess, but now I will conclude it as Vandalism if he continues to ignore us. Jayy008 (talk) 19:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

singlechart template[edit]

I do not revert them all the time. I have only reverted them on the "Blah Blah Blah" article, and I believe my reasoning was fair. And if one chart uses the macro, they must all. I did not restore no such source. According to that edit with the link you provided, I reverted content that was simply unsourced. Everything on Wikipedia must be verifiable. • вяαdcяo chat 21:39, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The macro is fantastic. The only problem I have with it is the way it formats citations. If that was somehow corrected or enhanced, I would support the use. But on the article, I am always watching the page, formatting and updating references when required. • вяαdcяo chat 21:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Macro's[edit]

Hi Kevin, I have made this a temporary solution. I am beginning to add this to all macros I personally upgrade

"Chart Macro's {singlechart} are allowed to be included on Wikipedia. Per Wikipedia:Record Charts the page which tells you which charts and formats should be used, they're not compulsory but they are recommended as they create automatic and stable links straight to the correct website. They take very long time to upgrade so please do not remove them once they are upgraded. They look something like this "Australia (ARIA)" and then a chart position."

As a hidden note above the charts, I make it take up a whole page to make sure people read it, and you have to drag the page down to edit. Jayy008 (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re: holiday albums[edit]

me and other users have took the wrong aproach in showing that santa claus lane is not Duff's first studio album, (we recognize that) but Chase continues editwars with other users. what is your opion? and what should we do? -thanx Iiismael (talk) 00:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does looking at these raise any flags for you?[edit]

Not so sure, was thinking of checkuser: [14] [15] [16] - eo (talk) 14:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well one of them is obviously down to his last warning because of his behavior on my page. Regardless of whether or not there is 3RR, its obviously abuse of multiple accounts anyway. Perhaps a checkuser request is in order. At the very least he'll have to choose one account to stick with. - eo (talk) 15:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Boys: Alex B[edit]

Kevin, I can't seem to fix something on her chronology. The next single after Bad Boys is Broken Heels as everyone knows but somebody did something and I can't get it to go back into the Chronology. Take a look when you get a minute please. Jayy008 (talk) 16:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: List of Sonny With a Chance episodes[edit]

I know about the 3 revert rule, I wasn't about break it. ;) Quasy Boy 18:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brexx[edit]

Howdy, I found another user, Ahmedfarhat, added them to my original brexx report that you added to... but could use an opinion on it, maybe i'm jsut seeing Brexx so much i'm overly suspicious now, Brexx has had over 10 accounts banned just this month, and the month isn't over yet.. Also, if you can stop by the talk pages of Kelly Clarkson and All_I_Ever_Wanted_(album) maybe you can decifer what's turning into an arguement there (since you've been a long time editor here). She has a new single coming out, and it's confirmed, but there doesn't seem to be any reliable sources for wikipedia yet. One IP is arguing that a USAToday blog is a reliable source and USAToday charts are accepted, but since it's a Blog, not a USAToday article (forsay), I don't believe it is reliable under guidelines. Any input you have may help there. Both those articles were submitted for semi-protect. Alan - talk 04:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong this time, as i hope you will discover soon. I restored those edits cause they said the true, the song has been released on iTunes february 23. Angel (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, i'll do next time... Angel (talk) 00:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Brexx Overload[edit]

no problem, i'm just coming across some brand new accounts of his now... and what appears to be a new IP block Alan - talk 03:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability[edit]

I am for the most of the time careful about sources (avoiding blogs, forums, etc.), but I am puzzled about the unreliability of the website, which is a compendium of all famous people's religious views. Can you elaborate a little? Thank you! (You have been way more polite than the other editor I interacted tonight, and you seem very reasonable) Wandering Courier (talk) 05:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chart Macros[edit]

Hi Kevin, can you make some visual changes to the American macros. Some of them are "U.S." and some are "US" is there a reason for it? I think it looks slightly messy. Can you make them all the same? Jayy008 (talk) 14:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's perfect. Thanks. Jayy008 (talk) 12:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

island territory[edit]

"Island territory" is the preferred English-language nomenclature in Netherlands government sources, Netherlands Antilles government sources and the local press. See [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], and [22] The Tom (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]