User talk:AtomicMarcusKitten

"Use of vocab"

Hehe, thanks. I'm flattered (there's another one for you to look up ^^). I will try to use simpler words, then. Doesn't make sense if you have to look them up. Oh, and please sign your comments on talk pages by using four tildes (these: ~). Otherwise, a bot will do it for you and that doesn't look so nice ;). Janfrie1988 (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm studying English at the university, so I should be able to speak it, I guess ;). Also, I have spent half a year studying in Ireland. Oh, by the way: You forgot to sign the post in which you apologised for not signing your posts :D. Are you also German? Janfrie1988 (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice that you like German music so much. Usually its the other way round, i.e. Germans (as half of the world) love music from English-speaking countries and notice little else ;). I try not to be to single-minded concerning music, but of course there is some stuff from Britain that I love, too, particularly the new generation of singer-songwriters like Kate Nash, Amy Macdonald and, more recently, La Roux. Maybe that's also why I like Lena Meyer-Landrut so much. I think the influence of these ladies on her is undeniable ;).

Postscript: You are from Britain, right? Otherwise: no offence ;). Janfrie1988 (talk) 01:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lena Meyer-Landrut discography

I am going to leave your reversion here as I mainly wanted Janfrie1988's input on this as he happens to be the main contributer of the article, and he has briefly commented in the edit summary here. In the future; however, please refrain from reverting edits like you have regardless of how sensible your own edit may seem to you, especially, when another editor asks for a discussion (as I have here), that constitutes an edit-warring. Regards.--Harout72 (talk) 17:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm aware it was not originally your idea of separating the songs, but you reverted an edit stating your opinion in the edit-summary. It's best to discuss in the talk-page of the article first and not revert other editors' edits who simply ask to discuss major changes. By the way, it was not a warning, just a suggestion to help you not get warnings in the future for edit-warrings.--Harout72 (talk) 18:20, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Whole Again sales figures

I'll add it if I find that source :P KingdomHearts25 01:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, you were right lol >:( KingdomHearts25 (talk) 12:49, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Oh my God, sorry , I confused Poker Face ->The Day You Went Away =.='. I really sorry Truongbaohan (talk) 17:19, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hey, no probs it's allright! I'm 19. Well it's not that important I think, my opinion's still based about the fact what Heidi said, if this makes any sense at all. There are quite a few interview, articles where she talks about her time in Atomic Kitten/how everything begun etc. but I never really found any interview where the other girls spoke about her. It's allright, I'm good with that I'm not resentful really, I think everyone's got a second chance it's fine! I know the editing on the 'best selling' page wasn't very clever in first place, it's just because I thought they sure have sold more than Atomic Kitten. It's been my fault.. Once again everything's ok and I'm happy about your reply to me! But there's one thing I didn't understood, it was quite hard for me (not that my English's bad) but I really didn't know what I had to do, to make sure that you'll receive my message at first but you did get it but now you say I should use your discusion page wich I did so does that mean you haven't seen my message first?? Sorry but I really didin't get this last bit because I thought I did everything allright even with the signature help! LOL xx--Applepie4577 (talk) 09:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops?

Is this what you meant to say? [1] - eo (talk) 22:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No Angels

To answer your questions:

No, they're currently not working on a new album (at least there's no source telling so) - so thank you for reverting this bullish.
When it comes to Nadja, I just can repeat, what the Bild Zeitung-source says: There hasn't been any official statement yet, and Khalid Schröder, the band's manager, does still not know if she will re-jon for the second lef of their acoustic tour. We'll have to wait and see... :( ... Noboyo (talk) 19:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sad news actually. I think they'll continue performing as a trio, considering that they'll alaways get more promotion as a band than as solo artists. Time will tell... Noboyo (talk) 08:31, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, AtomicMarcusKitten. You have new messages at Dabomb87's talk page.
Message added 21:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Girl Group

It has been tagged as unsourced for 3 years. Please provide sources before returning content. Active Banana (^bananaphone 15:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no requirement that I discuss removal of unsourced content that has been flagged for 3 years before I actually remove it. But I have started a discussion section there now where you can if you wish attempt to make a case for returning the unsourced claims or yell at me for bringing the article into better compliance with our policies. Active Banana (^bananaphone 17:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gaga discography

If we are going to track the peak chart positions of songs and albums, we should include the country's certifications too, where applicable (for instance, Ireland does not certify singles which is why none of their certs are included in the singles table). At the most, the number of certs will only reach 10, which isn't too much IMO. We should try to be as fully representative as possible of her performance in the ten countries we're tracking, not just narrow down the certifications to the biggest of the markets we're tracking. –Chase (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I maintain the position that we should be as fully representative as possible of how she has performed in the countries we're tracking. An abridged version of her single certifications won't be as representative as it is at the moment. –Chase (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I admit...

to some frustration, but (IMO) think that not remaining calm will not help my position.—Iknow23 (talk) 20:41, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TY. You have a good start, middle and end of the week :) Prolly be seeing u around...like at a 'certain' discog page, LOL!—Iknow23 (talk) 21:08, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Well I gtg & rake leaves...right now b4 it gets dark & ~~cold~~!—Iknow23 (talk) 21:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges, as you did at Talk:Kesha discography. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Toddst1 (talk) 05:20, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I shouldn't be blocked because the edits that i contribute to articles are always good. Recently, I've helped get Atomic Kitten Discography and No Angels discography to a high standard, and are currently in the middle of being reviewed. (I know my contributions on the discussion pages haven't been good recently, but i'm only 16 and learning!) I'll stay away from discussion pages in the future...if you unblock me. Alls I did with the Lady Gaga discography was change things to get it to that of a high standard, that i saw as helpful, but i got a load of abuse back. Moreover, I didn't mean it when i called 'yves' an airhead, i just did it as a joke, which he/she obviously cannot do. You should be focusing on blocking the pedophiles of wikipedia. (yes, i know you still have my page on your watchlist, please remove it. Thankyou.) So, yeah, if you unblock my account, i promise to stay away from discussion pages, if not, fair enough ;DDD

Decline reason:

Promising to stay away from discussion pages is the opposite of the communication style we need: all edits should be done by WP:CONSENSUS, and that's the purpose of article talkpages. Joke or not, we do not partake in personal attacks against other editors - using the term "airhead" is not funny: it is an attempt to discredit another person's edits, and discredit the other person. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

I'm sorry for doing the stuff i did. I won't do it again. I won't stay away from discussion pages, just approach them in a civil manner...PLEASE unblock me! I'd make a new account, but ive done a lot of stuff on this account!

Decline reason:

I have looked at all of your recent edits. You have responded to warnings about uncivil behaviour with further uncivil behaviour, you have ridiculed other editors, you have made a joke of your unconstructive editing, you have indicated contempt for the suggestion that you should follow Wikipedia methods, and for the suggestion that you may be blocked if you don't do so. Only when you find that you are blocked do you claim to be "sorry". Frankly, your apology does not ring true. Finally, threatening to use a sockpuppet account to evade your block is never a good argument for unblocking. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

but i am sorry!!!!! I was going through a hard time, but its all been sorted today! :PPPPP PLEASE unblock me! I only wanted to make another account to keep track of the no angels and atomic kitten discography as I nominated them for fl, and now no one will do them!!!! IM SORRY! ILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN!!!!

Decline reason:

This, your previous requests, and your edits do nothing to convince me that unblocking you would be a benefit to the project. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:51, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

yes i would help!!!! I always do good contributions to articles. Please unblock :D

Decline reason:

Your apparent inability to respond appropriately to the concerns raised here leads me to doubt that you have a sufficient level of maturity and competence to edit constructively in an environment like this. I suggest you consider the standard offer for blocked users and try again in six months. You will need to appeal by emailing WP:BASC directly since I have revoked your ability to edit this page due to your frivolous unblock requests. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:06, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

can i please be unblocked now? It's been 6 months and i've learnt my lesson. I want to improve articles, but i only want to do it on this account, and i still check wikipedia dayly to ensure articles don't get violated and if they do i undo them anonomously as i can't on this, and i've done work on some articles latley via this anon account. So please! :( I was only 16, i'm 17 now haha.

Decline reason:

Your edits (while evading your block nonetheless) do not inspire much confidence, especially your recent edit warring on Atomic Kitten and Atomic Kitten discography. I am now semi-protecting this talk page as your talk page editing privileges were already revoked; I am also block the IP you are using. –MuZemike 02:49, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Deletion discussion about List of Atomic Kitten songs

Hello, AtomicMarcusKitten, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that some editors are discussing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Atomic Kitten songs whether the article List of Atomic Kitten songs should be in Wikipedia. I encourage you to comment there if you think the article should be kept in the encyclopedia.

The deletion discussion doesn't mean you did something wrong. In fact, other editors may have useful suggestions on how you can continue editing and improving List of Atomic Kitten songs, which I encourage you to do. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Help Desk.

Thanks again for your contributions! Novice7 (talk) 11:04, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]