User talk:Journalist/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Ragib 2 July 2005 22:35 (UTC)

Signing on talk pages[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you have been signing your name on talk pages by inserting a link to your userpage manually, but there is a more convinient way: insert four tilde characters at the end of your message, like this: ~~~~. That will insert your name (as a link to your user page) and also the date and time when you wrote your message. Hope that helps! Teklund 3 July 2005 19:19 (UTC)

Mariah Carey images[edit]

Thanks for providing the sources for the images! I think they both qualify as fair use so I put them under that. You may want to remove the boxes above with the red borders, at least I don't think they look very good. :-) Teklund 4 July 2005 09:07 (UTC)

Biggest-selling female musician[edit]

VFD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Biggest-selling_female_musician Vorash 6 July 2005 19:03 (UTC)

I don't understand your POV, and why you are writing so much about World Music Awards SHOW. It's just a show !! This is not an organisation , like IFPI or RIAA !! All they care is to orginise a great TV show nothing more !! Vorash 6 July 2005 21:23 (UTC)

You talking about "credible and valid source" . Show is a credible source ?? Vorash 6 July 2005 21:24 (UTC)

Its impossible to compare artists based on "Per-Year" sales. Its clear POV !. For example Nana Mouskouri has 40 years old career and Alla Pugacheva has 30 year career, but Mariah's carrer is only 15 years old. Vorash 7 July 2005 12:25 (UTC)

I don't understand why you continue to put this WMA's Year awards to Celine and Mariah ??!! There is no doubt that both Mariah and Celine have the highest "per-year" sales ratio, but these facts can be applicable only if all artists have the same career's length. Vorash 8 July 2005 02:14 (UTC) Both Mariah and Celine have the shortest 15-year career among all contenders. Also, other contenders like Madonna and Whitney Houston have many soundtrack albums, these albums not counted by World Music Awards Vorash 8 July 2005 02:27 (UTC)

I would like for you to cite the sources that you used inorder to arrive at the conclusion that "World Music Awards show doesn't count the record sales generated prior to its inception in 1989". If that was the case, they could not have awarded best selling artists of the Millennium. Remember, Michael Jackson also sold his bulk in the early 1980s. Furthermore, Mariah an Celine are not the only artists to ever win the Diamond World music Award. Other artists have won it, eg.Rod Stewart, who received the award in 2002 (Im not so sure about the year). He began in the 60s. How can the world music give him any awards if they only counted since 1989? You have absoulutely no proof to support your claim. I'm going to revert your changes until you provide a link that substantiates your view.

Where did you get the idea that they do not count soundtracks? Whitney Houston has five World music awards for her sales of 'The Bodyguard Soundtrack' . She even received a Legend World Music Award (in 1998, (Im not sure)), which is nearly as good as a the Diamond award, but not qiute. This award is not based on the sales for the particular year, but rather accumulated sales. Cant you see that the WMAs are legitimate and credible???

This is what I do not understand. First you say that WMA just want to put on a good show. You claim that they do not count sales at all; awards are based on votes or something or the other. Then you say that they count sales, but not since 1989. Make up your mind, what are you trying to say? Journalist 8 July 2005 03:50 (UTC)


I didn't say WMA don't count sales ! I sayed that they got the numbers from record companies, so whats the point to quote them , if they are the secondary source any way ????? Its the same thing with Guinness Book of World Records which is also the secondary source Vorash 8 July 2005 08:53 (UTC) Also why are you saying that Whitney Houston got WMA for 'The Bodyguard Soundtrack'? YOu have no facts to support this Vorash 8 July 2005 09:05 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you STOP YOUR THREATS !!!!!!!!. "left Mariah's article alone" is a threat !!!! Don't threaten me !!!!! Vorash 9 July 2005 15:25 (UTC)

HOW HAVE I THREATENED YOU?. Telling you to leave an article and stop trying to destroy its content do not constitute a threat. Now you are gonna 'play the victim' just because you cannot answer any of my questions. You finally figured out that I was right; WMAs do count sountracks and they do not discriminate, that is why you are trying to change the subject and make wild accusations. If you felt threatened, that was not my intention, Im sorry that you feel that way, but Im not apologising for saying what I said. You are biased and you need to realise that your arguments are devoid of any logics and accuracy. Journalist 9 July 2005 16:21 (UTC)

I just wrote that sales are innacurate as record company says !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why are you calling it TO DESTROY ARTICLE CONTENT !!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????????? I didn't destroy anything !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Vorash 9 July 2005 16:28 (UTC)

It also wasn't my original idea !! It was originaly wrote by some anonymous user Revision as of 10:32, 8 July 2005 , and after that i deleted it Revision as of 10:36, 8 July 2005. And so after some thoughts i decided to rewrite it in more appropriate manner in order to prevent Vulgar notes in the future ! Vorash 9 July 2005 17:08 (UTC)

I will also agree to add Madonna's Label website sales figures to her discography !!!!! Why it should be a problem ??????? YOur thoughts about me are TOTALLY WRONG !! I am not a Madonna fan !!! I like MANY artists !!! Hundreds of them !! My goal is to verify as much information as possible and to present it to Wikipedia users. Madonna has 1000s of fan sites , she really don't need my support !!! I also didn't say that "WMAs descriminates against any artist from the 1980s". I said that they started to give awards in 1989 !!! This is a truth !!! Also about Whitney Houston your assumption about 1994 maybe right , but this is only an assumption , this is not a fact !! Vorash 9 July 2005 17:34 (UTC)

I participate on the Biggest-selling female musician article as a part of my work on the List of best-selling music artists. There is no other purpose of my work there. 95% of List of best-selling music artists were contributed by me and as you can see i am the one who putted Alla Pugacheva there. Allla Pugacheva is the #1 and Madonna second. So how can you accuse me of being Madonna fan ?????? Vorash 9 July 2005 17:52 (UTC)

Well, World Music Awards yearly-awards are giving based on numbers supplied by record companies, but these nembers are "checked" by IFPI.IFPI compares these numbers with certifications by IFPI's National members. They just check in order to prevent large exaggerations. The main problem is that they say based on what they give yearly-awards, but i can't find any information about the Milenium Award ! I can't find the information about what exactly they declared there and based on what data they gave the Millenium Award. Vorash 01:06, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey's 70 million differnce between 150 million on her site and 223(in her discography) is very strange ! Mariah Carey Discography is frequently edited by many anonymous users, but almost always there is no big differnce in numbers when they edit her discography. So i realy can't understand why it can be. 150 million is also can't be a mistake because this figure also appear on Sony site and on Universal site. And on Universal site you can see clearly 75 million US records figure which looks very reliable and similar to 80-81 million US records figure presented in her dicography. Vorash 01:31, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

155 million records WW - 45 million singels WW = 110 million albums WW. 110 million albums WW / 61 million albums (US) = ratio 1.8. 1.8 can be true. See here for example IFPI European Awards 1996-2001 MAdonna has 17 awards (WW/US ratio 3), Celine Dion 33 (WW/US ratio 4) and MAriah Carey only 7 awards (WW/US ratio 1.8). Ratio 1.8 can mean that she is more puplar in US.- Vorash 02:05, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

According to Talk:List_of_best-selling_music_artists the Certification process that exist in many countries is "on-demand" process. THey say for example that "Most of Elvis Presley's albums were not certified before 2002" by RIAA. IFPI compare data of record companies with certifications that are supplied by IFPI National members, but since many record sales are not certified in those countries (because this is on-demand process), IFPI cannot check all data. Vorash 02:46, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Journalist, i don't understand why you changing US sales data of Madonna and Mariah??? According to RIAA new list (from June 20 2005) Madonna sold 60million albums and Mariah 57.5mil. According to Discographies Madonna sold 63mil albums and Mariah 61.5. We also don't have any data about Barbra singles sales , so its impossible to determine who is the first and who is the second ! Vorash 15:06, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Certification process that exist in many countries is "on-demand" process !!! It's a fact !! Go to RIAA Link or any other National Federation site and see by yourself, you should specifically ask and pay for any certification !!! MOst of Elvis Presley records were not certified before 2000 , so how can you say that Certification and sales are the same !! Record sales of artists like Alla Pugacheva also were not certified at all, because there was no certification process in USSR/Russia. It doesn't mean that she didn't sell 250 million. About Mellenium award why should i care if it was "special" or not, the important thing is to know based on what data it was given !! About Legend Award they don't say anything about specific parameters for this award and that's why i wrote that we don't have any info about this award. Vorash 10:18, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Hi.

Please don't add images snarfed from "fansites". Unlike the rest of the Internet, we have standards when it comes to copyright violations, and most of your images flout those standards.

chocolateboy 7 July 2005 00:46 (UTC)

Removing content is considered vandalism[edit]

Please stop removing content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Extraordinary Machine 01:09, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the entire reference section on the Mariah Carey article, and deleted all inline citations within the article. Additionally, while NPOV violation does not count as vandalism, you added POV words such as "expansive" and "impeccable". Extraordinary Machine 01:21, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing: Remember to always sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful. Extraordinary Machine 01:28, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that. The only reason why I did that was because I believed that we had all come to the consensus that so much references were not needed. (see the talk page). If I did anything wrong, that was not my intention. Furthurmore, how is 'expansive" POV? I only wrote it because:

  • Its true;
  • That was how her voice was described in the 'diva' article.

Journalist 01:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


It was concluded that citations at the end of each sentence weren't needed; however, that doesn't mean that all citations should be removed. Additionally, you removed a reference which wasn't an inline citation. And just because something is said on one article does not mean it can be said on others; the Diva article is POV-ridden, and should not be referred to in this case. A five-octave range is, by definition, "expansive", so instead of adding "expansive" to the section, you could simply provide a few references in the references section verifying claims that Mariah has a five-octave range. And, to reiterate, "impeccable" is a POV word. Extraordinary Machine 01:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality[edit]

Hello, Journalist. I am sure that you are aware that some editors have shown concern over you edits of the Mariah Carey article. I am sure that your edits are made in good faith, but please remember that the Wikipedia follows Neutral Point of View policy, and that at certain times we must restrain ourselves and hold back our opinions regarding an article. Only that way the project can work properly. Trust me, I have more than once wanted to change the wording of an article in order to show how great the subject really is, but bear in mind that not everybody shares the same opinion, even if said opinion is the opinion of the majority. We do not work under democratic ideals. Rather, we try to stablish a consensus at all times. I would suggest that you took a short break from editing the article, took a deep breath, and then tried to explain your point of view on its Talk page. I am sure that all editors will come to terms, eventually. Thank you for your attention and have a good day. --Sn0wflake 03:11, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand the situation, this sort of mistake is quite common. Such events are generally handled on a casual and friendly manner, but at times our heads can get a little hotter than one might desire. I do have some experience in cases such as this one, since the editor who I consider to be my most valuable ally on the Wikipedia and also the person who nominated me for Adminship was also the first and only person who made me irritated enough to reply to him with a curseword. So these things do not always for the worst. I hope you can overlook this incident and continue enjoying your stay on the Wikipedia. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 00:31, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Images on the Mariah Carey article[edit]

In reference to Image:Cry.jpg, Image:Sing.jpg and Image:MariahCarey4-05 300x298.jpg, please do not upload images to Wikipedia without providing information on their source or copyright status. I'm glad that you want the Mariah Carey article to be as aesthetically pleasing as possible, but I must stress that according to Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Fair use, all images uploaded to and used in Wikipedia must be fair use, and have sufficient information on their source and copyright status. Thank you. Extraordinary Machine 23:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Extraordinary Machine is right on this one. It is okay to assume promotional images as fairuse, but that does not seem to be the case here. I would suggest that you contacted any experienced user involded on WP:FPC about the status of the images in case you are unsure or can't provide information. Cheers. --Sn0wflake 16:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Allow me to explain something rather confusing...[edit]

The Canadian singles chart is the most screwed up chart in the world. I'm a Canadian myself, so I would know this from living here my entire life. Unlike the Billboard charts, UK charts, and Australian charts, it is very difficult for a popular song to actually reach the Top 10 of the Canadian singles chart unless it does not appear on an album, and a single disc alone. (Examples include Elton John's Candle in the Wind; The Spice Girls "Goodbye".) Due to this menacing mess, the MuchMusic and MuchMoreMusic Canadian music stations weekly countdowns are taken into effect, because at least popular songs can chart, even though a single disc is technically not released. I'm sorry if this sounds all very mind-boggling, but I don't know how else to put it. I will source the information immediately, although it will probably be removed by Saturday, as that is when the new charts go in effect. Thank you for understanding. DrippingInk 14:45, July 24, 2005 (UTC)


mariah carey[edit]

sorry about getting to Mariah carey a little later, for futre reference, you can go on the Wikipedia IRC channel or just post on WP:VIP. I blocked the user temporarily as it is an AOL shared proxy. Happy editing! Sasquatch′↔T↔C 03:10, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Michael Jackson article[edit]

Thank you for correcting my screwup. What happened was this: I was trying to edit down the page, because the disclaimer at the top said that at 46K, it was too long. In the edit window, only the portion up to the section on Jackson's nosejobs was shown, so I just assumed that my changes would only affect everything up until then, and that I'd have to click on the "edit" links for the sections following that, but when I finally hit "save page," to my horror, I saw that EVERYTHING after that was gone! The earlier version was visible on the History page for that article, of course, but I didn't know how to restore it. (How DO you do that, btw?) I left an emergency message on the Talk pages of a couple of other, more experienced users I know, and one Administrator, but obviously you got to it first. Thanks again. Nightscream 8.9.05. 1:21 am EST

Oh no, you didn't seem bossy or harsh at all. You were quite polite, particularly since you didn't outright assume I was a vandal or troll, an accusation I've had to contend with over the past several months from other users who attacked me for my contributions to the Wolverine page. It led to a revert war, and now the page is protected, and I'm currently embroiled with a back-and-forth with a couple of other users who constantly accused me of "deliberately" trying to antagonize people, who act as if they own that page, and show nothing but contempt for any greater level of detail that I try to contribute to it, often using the most transparent logical fallacies to argue their position. So your comparatively polite message was a welcome relief. Also, you say that you just cut and pasted the material, but how does doing so retain the links? And good job on giving his Discography its own page. I was trying to figure out how to edit down the page, and I'm embarassed that I didn't think of that myself. Nice chattin' with you, Journalist.  :-) Nightscream 8.9.05. 1:51am EST


Tireh[edit]

Hello My name is George I see you left me a message on Tireh's page saying that the srticle was not informative enough, i updated it including all the information i could get my hands on, however the information is doubling. Is there anyway i can fix this? 172.154.170.153


I'm very impressed with the way you have adopted and improved the Tireh article. I don't understand the technical content, but it definitely looks more polished, encyclopedic, and NPOV than before. You are a good Wiki citizen. — Pekinensis 21:18, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Hello journalist, Im sorry to bother you again, b ut someoene keeps changing the information on Tireh's page, According to his website he can go lower than a grand staff piano and higher than a c#8 i even have a clip of him singing a f8, and it seems that someone took adam lopez's information of the page can you revert the edit and is there anyway to block people from changing it, i have a suspisionit was adam himself who edited the page.

Thanks

George

The 100 Useless Facts[edit]

I'm glad you enjoyed my "100 Useless Facts" list. How'd you come upon it?

Which ones don't you believe? Then I'll tell you if they're all true or not.

-Sebastian Prospero 00:04, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Well, I'll tell you. They're all true. I know it sounds hard to believe some of them, such as #55 and #56. And by the way, as much as I hate to say it, I'm really proud of #48. -Sebastian Prospero 00:44, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re:RfA[edit]

Hi. I just want to tell you that even self nom's are accepted by most of the nominees.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 16:54, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks[edit]

Thank you for the welcome sign on my talk page! Hulk (talk · contribs)

Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting[edit]

This was not nonsense although it badly needed expansion. I have now expanded it a bit. I think you will agree that it now does not deserve to be deleted. DES (talk) 05:58, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: Im sorry for the misunderstanding. However, at the state in which the 'article' was in, it did qualify as 'nonsense'. To avoid further misunderstandings, please do not save pages until you are finished writing, or simply leave a note in the edit history or something. OK? Anyway sorry again. Journalist (talk · contribs)
If you Check the history, you will see I never touched the article until after you put the delete tag on it -- I found it on new page patrol, saw the attribution to Swift, and decided to do a quick google search to see if I coulf verify and expand. All the current contnet is the result of that quick google search.
I would also argue that although severly lacking in content, the original version was NOT nonsense, and had it been deleted I would have taken it to VfU as an improper speedy. It was not giberish, and it was not "so completely and irredeemably confused that no intelligent person can be expected to make head nor tail of it." what it was was a poor sub-stub. an expand tag would have suited the case well, IMO, but not a speedy tag. DES (talk) 06:12, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's exactly what I'm telling you. I saw that and I said "Oh someone has found a title by Swift, but dosen't know what to write about it, beyond the title." The fact that I knew that Swift was, in fact, a "master of satire" and did write "tracts" helped. A quick look at Jonathan Swift would tell anyone this much. a quick google on the article title would find LOTS of quotes attributed to the work.
Lots of people, IMO, overuse the "nonsense" speedy delete criterion. Note that WP:PN gives a long list of things that are not patent nonsense, including "Poorly written content", "Incompetent and/or immature material", and "Hoaxes"
I am cool in that I was never hot at you -- i think you made a mistake in using the nonsnese tag, that is all. I would hope that you would not use it if you saw another similar page. I am firmly convined that the original version of the page did not merit speedy deletion, and that if a similer page were to be speedy deleted and i noticed it, I would put it on VfU instantly. Check out my recent votes on WP:VFU to see my general views on such mattes, if you are interested. That is my entire point, no huge issue. DES (talk) 06:43, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :)[edit]

Thank you for welcome:) --dex 20:03, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is an amazing project![edit]

Thank you and much appreciated. Though I have visited the site on more than one occassion, today I chose to join and see if I could contribute too. This project really thrills me as I believe it exists in the true spirit of the World Wide Web! Sylvan Valladares 20:52, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support[edit]

Thanks for the vote of support at my request for adminship! Coffee 08:34, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Population cycle[edit]

I have rewritten the population cycle article. I would be grateful if you could have a look at it. Capitalistroadster 11:32, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support on RfA[edit]

Thanks for supporting me in my RfA. Since I don't think I've interacted with you before, I assume my contribs list was what won you over. ;-)

By the way, your sig is broken. You need to replace two of the >sup>'s with >/sup>'s so it won't make the rest of the page suped. It doesn't show up because MediaWiki automatically ends sup tags at the end of a line; but things like Pilaf's Live Preveiw don't do this, and get confused. Thanks! JesseW 21:10, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warm welcome[edit]

Hi there journalist!

Thanks for your warm welcome and advice! I'm very very new, and stumbling around. Your help is much appreciated!

Somena 21:48, 25 August 2005 (UTC) (see I got that part figured out! ;) )[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Journalist/Archive_1&oldid=1085960863"