User talk:Kww/04022009

Who needs an archive when you can just look here?Kww (talk) 13:01, 10 May 2008 (UTC) Or here?[reply]

koka

mediatraffic. ok sory but i think its's simply intresting. but if u don't wont whot can i do :(. sory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kokuna (talk • contribs) 12:30, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and Licensing and Independence and Reliability

I think we have to accept that any reliable guide to Pokemon will have to be licensed. I think it is evidence of notability in itself that so many different publishers license the intellectual property of Nintendo to write pokemon guides and they are published and apparently sell well. Any detailed article about pokemon would have a legal obligation to be licensed or else it would be in violation of copyright law, which I think would make it unreliable. So I do not think it's legitimate to require books about fictional characters to not be licensed in order to be considered independent 3rd party sources. It is the legal obligation of anyone writing about a copyrighted fictional character to get licensing unless they're writing criticism or parody which would not require it. Felisse (talk) 15:28, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for your reply, that was very nice. I think I did not fully convey what I meant. I think it's completely possible for a topic to be notable without having parody or critique written about it specifically. This is especially the case for items that are primarily directed at children, who are less likely to be interested in creating criticism. So that if fifteen different authors write about something, even if they are (as adults) not interested in it themselves (which would lead to criticism or parody) but mainly in the money they can make off kids who are interested in the documented minutia of the subject matter (what does it eat, what are its powers, etc), that still estabilishes notability of the subject matter and is independent enough to be consulted for an article even if it is the only source. Since the only reason it is being licensed is that it would be illegal not to, then I do not think the licensing should discount it. Felisse (talk) 15:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:N says: " "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject including (but not limited to): self-publicity, advertising, self-published material by the subject, autobiographies, press releases, etc.[5] " and note 5 says: "Works produced by the subject, or those with a strong connection to them, are unlikely to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large. See also: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest for handling of such situations." This shows that the purpose of independence of sources is to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large. And it is true that a single licensed guide would be hardly any evidence of interest by the world - but you note that "licensed" was not one of the affiliations listed by name, and I believe this is because licensing needs to be taken on a case by case basis as to whether it constitutes affiliation. I therefore think my interpretation is legitimate under the current wording of WP:N.

Thanks

Thanks for informing me of that! I had never seen that page before.Jdot01 (talk) 18:12, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hang on

you changed my {{hangon}} and sayed it was improper well how to i stop it from being deleted now what do i need to type --gdaly7 (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)--gdaly7 (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You So Much!

A thousand thanks for you!! And I wouldn't get angry if you'd take it off..Thank you so much. You don't know how much this means to me. I can't believe it! Uhmm...what did that admins said?Kikkokalabud (talk) 01:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gypsy woman

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gypsywomanrare.jpg take a look at this picture! I doubt it's real coz it was from a blog. and when i clicked the blog, it was invalid. could you check it out? Kikkokalabud (talk)

Need your help

Someone just made a single page for Scream_(Zac_Efron_song). And they made a template for him. They even put in that he will have an album soon. Could you help me nominate both for deletion? Kikkokalabud (talk) 22:32, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey the template isn't a bad idea! Why that everybody hates me on Wikipedia?

Pedrovip (talk) 20:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

Come Back To Me

I just made a new page for Come Back To Me on my sandbox. What do you think? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kikkokalabud/Sandbox/Come_Back_To_Me_(Vanessa_Hudgens_song) Kikkokalabud (talk) 07:38, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information

I've added new information! Kikkokalabud (talk) 03:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finish!

I've finished it! So, what's the nexy step?!Kikkokalabud (talk) 00:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OKIE DOKIE!

Hey, I just half-did it. I'm just searching for a lot of informations! Kikkokalabud (talk) 06:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Come Back To Me

Someone just made an article of that page. Unfortunately, Say Ok didn't. I just got a message on my talk page from a Bot thing and it was like "thanks for uploading those pictures" i thought there was a talk to delete that page? Kikkokalabud (talk) 10:19, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering...I found a ton of information about Come Back To Me, Say OK and Sneakernight. I wanted to put it on the album page but it would ruin the page. So I wanted to ask you if you could tell me how to make a discussion if Hudgens' singles would have their own pages since I got tons of information.Kikkokalabud (talk) 03:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Singles infoboxes

I'm not sure if Wikipedia was a hard guideline on this, but I'd personally go for this version as a full single infobox sort of clutters the article. Hope that was helpful. Funk Junkie (talk) 22:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. :-) Funk Junkie (talk) 22:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just come across another issue: adding single covers to album articles isn't non-fair use per Wikipedia:Non-free content? Funk Junkie (talk) 00:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought so too, but some time ago I had single covers I added to Angie Stone and India.Arie album articles deleted, and these singles didn't have their own articles, so it made me think it all over. Funk Junkie (talk) 00:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, I think I'll use this method from now on whenever I come across cases like those. Funk Junkie (talk) 01:26, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mug shots

I started a thread here: Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Mug_shots. Would you mind giving input? Thankyou. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:50, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You Me At Six

This is the first time i have edited the article, i deleted the template by mistake, but i must protest the deletion, because they are one of the biggest bands on the Uk scene, and as you can see have been nominated for awards, and this article can be improved drastically within minutes, and it is my intention to do so when i next get a chance today. DavidJJJ (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Extensiontf

The case page looks alright to me. It seems that some of the CheckUsers are a bit busy at the moment. I'm sure if you ping a CU on IRC, they'll be able to handle your request ASAP. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 17:13, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moving

I did warn them the night beforehand; and if you checked, you will find her name has the accent in it.--Andrzejestrować ZP Pbjornovich (talk) (contributions) (email) 13:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re "...intrusion."

No problem - in fact it is probably a good thing to have the occasional sysop action queried so that I can ensure that my criteria is valid. It is sometimes apparent that when an admin does not care for their actions to be subject to criticism (in the proper sense) otherwise good actions get picked to pieces for not being "perfect". So, if you spot anything else don't hesitate to bring it to my attention. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Undefeated (album)

Your case is a little tl;dr, which may be why some people think it's not compelling. I do agree with you though, it's a horribly b0rked article. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry. tl;dr means "too long; didn't read". Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:53, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Lists and the GNG

Based on your comments, I added Wikipedia:Notability/RFC:compromise#Proposal_A.4:_Lists_may_be_exempted_from_the_GNG, a proposal to "exempt" list-form articles from the GNG. Personally, I think they may actually be covered, but I would appreciate your comments, and it would be useful to see where consensus lies on this issue. Hiding T 16:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aaliyah/Babygirl

Aaliyah was so called Babygirl!A lot of people called her that that was one of her nicknames.Have you realised that in most of every song Timbaland did with her with his rap he says Babygirl?It's true. Marexl (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

reply

There's a lot of junk in the history, and everything's in the archives. Keilana|^Parlez ici 20:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miley Cyrus

Turns out one of my friends somehow got my password and did that, not me. Sorry about that, the password has now been changed. Geoking66_talk 03:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protection

I completely agree: this is obviously an organized campaign to start a rumor. Block and protect as needed, and watch for sneaky attempts in other places. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 03:25, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done: must have been within seconds of your post on my page. Any idea where they are coordinating this? Antandrus (talk) 03:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miley Cyrus

Instead of deleting everyone's question about it and threatening a full pp, why don't you just post the truth on the talk page? I would think that would be easier, yeah? Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 03:41, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WTB

Let's throw another sentence in there, then, which gets to the point that the character's fictional experiences are a kind of example introduction to the philosophical (and pseudoscientific) worldview which the filmmakers are advancing. Naturezak (talk) 02:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Her fictional experiences are offered by the filmmakers as an introduction to a philosophical worldview that combines novel, and in some cases scientifically unsupported, ideas about quantum physics and consciousness." Naturezak (talk) 03:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good for me! Naturezak (talk) 03:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sock puppets.

• HHNRecordsPR was banned from posting any more infomation on this site. Since that was everything I wanted to say, I placed my signature at the end of the comment. Also, since you are looking into the posting history, you can clearly see I placed my signature there after they were banned. Question, If I was HHNRecords, Why whould I disguise my identity if I thought I was posting the comment under the GhostDog21 user name? I know the person HHNRecordsPR, and just like me, they are not with the label either. I'm not sure why they picked that name, dumb idea. That person told me the reason they were banned was due to them having the label name in thier user name, and it seemed like they worked for the label, which is B.S. I noticed on the history of G-Unit Records and Shady Records that there are user names with the label in them, Heck, there is even an administrator with G-unit in their user name, and they make contributions to the label articles. • GhostDog21 (talk) 12:07:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article needing attention

I posted about an article in dire need of attention at WPP:MUSIC. Dunno if you'd be interested in working on it but I know you as a strong editor of music-related articles. I just can't find the energy or time myself. —Hello, Control ^Hello, Tony 14:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kww please look at the talk page on Aaliyah.I left something important. Marexl (talk) 23:48, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lohan

I stand corrected. Having never violated BLP, I never needed to know... :P Dev920, who misses Jeffpw. 12:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability RfC

B.6 seems like it could be a viable compromise position with some modification, so I have created a set of notes for improvement/revision (User:Vassyana/RFC notes). I'm attempting to address as many points as possible while maintaining a coherent approach and principle. I believe that I address your concerns in the notes, so I would appreciate your feedback on the notes sandbox talk page to ensure I'm on the ball. Thanks! Vassyana (talk) 15:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

False vandalism charges

Hi. Please note the IP removed many chart positions and even a source on V (Vanessa Hudgens album). It was the same thing on Vanessa Hudgens discography. As you can see, these edits *are* vandalisms. Therefore, my warnings against this editor are totally justified. For the sales in the U.S., I don't know if this info is true or false, but this change came from a vandal, and I've supposed it was false. As I see you have reverted my changes, I will request arbitration by a third person. Europe22 (talk) 20:45, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but frankly, I have a doubt on your good faith, as, for example, you let the IP do this change, that was clearly a vandalism (= ref removed and false chart positions)... I've asked an administrator, Garion96, his opinion. Europe22 (talk) 21:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has added the entry positions, not the peak positions. For example, the SNEP, that compiles French singles, albums and digital charts, says "Come Back to Me" was #12 on January 2007. See this link. You can find the same information on aCharts.com (see: "Peak positions" column) and on Lescharts.com, with the same chart trajectory. However, the IP user added #15 as peak position. See : this edit. As it was probably a mistake of the IP (he has mixed up the two colums "Entry positions" and "Peak positions"), I think it was not a vandalism of his part, but changes made with good faith. And it's probably the same thing in your case. Sorry. (Nevertheless these chart positions must be corrected). Sincerely. PS: Sorry for my bad English, and if you want, I will correct the chart positions and add references! Europe22 (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

For this. henrik•talk 14:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I was too quick on the block button there. A second later I came to the same conclusion as you, it wasn't really malicious edits. Too often we just communicate in canned templates, without trying to talk to new editors. PS. you're doing a great job of hand-holding now. henrik•talk 15:27, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy userpages

Regarding the userpages, if the user is making constructive edits in the encyclopedia, then I'm willing to let them have a little latitude with their user pages. The ones I get on are the ones where their only edits are to their userpage. I saw a user today who was using his user talk page as a blog, and that's explicitly covered under WP:NOT. There's another one I watch who tends to use his userpage for some kind of classroom Survivor standings page; I think one of those pages was sent to MfD. Again, it was once it got to be that he wasn't editing the encyclopedia but was here just for the tracker thing. —C.Fred (talk) 02:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale for warning

Hey, thanks for pointing it out. I wasn't aware that the user had already been listed at WP:AIV, and had added my warning as a last one before a block was necessary. The warning your provided stated further edits may result in a block, while the one I provided, was a last resort with will block. Additionally, it looks like the user has stopped editing so a block is not necessary. However, if any additional edits the user has are not constructive, then he would qualify for being blocked. If you see that the user does so, I'd say post it again or WP:AIV or let me know and I'll block him. Let me know if you need further clarification and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 03:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When I Grow Up

Please stop deleting all the charts on the When I Grow Up page. They're all accurate and they are of importance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeahboyyy (talk • contribs) 18:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but how do you get a peak of #2 for Sweden? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeahboyyy (talk • contribs) 20:05, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

alright i understand but how come you won't let the UWC be on the discography page or any of the others? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yeahboyyy (talk • contribs) 16:15, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PCD

Thanks for the heads up! I fixed it, with a Shout Out to you!! :) Ctjf83Talk 21:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please

Number 1, frankly, it doesn't concern you, so I would appreciate it if you would mind your own business. #2, I moved MY comment, not his. I never touched his. #3, putting comments like that happens all the time (it happened on the Main Page talk for example). You can back up whoever you want to, but please do not stick your nose in other people's business unless you are specifically asked. Thank you. Anakinjmt (talk) 12:06, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"just a hair"

Don't even worry about it, no offense taken, I understood. - eo (talk) 19:59, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, what he is doing now is unacceptable. He just reverted "When I Grow Up" again and I gave him a final. - eo (talk) 20:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008-present

She got to present, which is 2008. If she got to 2009 or so, it'd be altered, the same way a larger number of episodes will be added as having her participation, as well as other movies and actualizations. G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 17:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not?... There isn't an automatic database backing things up for anything else either, that's absurd!... What's the difference?... Like I said, as for the rest, if any other alteration is verified it shall be done. In case you don't know, Wikipedia is a continuous work!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 17:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Every article in question!... If you're that lazy or undevoted!... I don't see people on IMDb complainting, they'd have gone on strike by now!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, don't ever tell me to stop. It's my trouble, not yours!... I don't complaint!... And why do you alter it yourself anyway?... Army brat!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 17:29, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE Foreign Languages Skills

Please see WP:RSUE. Non-English references not preferred.--Startstop123 (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Webkinzman

Thanks. I was about to make an ANI report but I'll see what happens with your request. Ward3001 (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on an ANI report. You might want to comment after I post it. I'll let you know when I finish. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 18:28, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I'm starting at AIV just to see. That would be faster. If that doesn't work I'll move it over to ANI. In the meantime, if you wish, you might give him another level 4 just so there'll be a fresher warning for the AIV folks. Thank. Ward3001 (talk) 18:31, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've probably already seen, but he got a three-day block and stern warning. Thank goodness we didn't have to do ANI. Thanks for your help. Ward3001 (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Lil Wayne talk page

Ehh, not sure. There seems to be some occasional legitimate discussion taking place, and the IPs have to edit somewhere, right? As long as there are people reverting the vandalism, we should be fine. GlassCobra 09:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Miss Independent (album) AfD

I have amended your AfD nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss Independent (album) by adding a second, related article. American Side is the alleged first single off the album. I think it makes the most sense to hit both articles with one AfD. Nobody else has commented, so I don't think it alters the process. Let me know if you have any problems with this. —C.Fred (talk) 14:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see Kurt Shaped Box gave User:MSoldi an indefinite block tonight. I've noted that on the AfD; the article may be blatant enough information that it's speedy deletable. —C.Fred (talk) 00:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pedrovip

I've chimed in with a comment at User talk:Pedrovip, so it appears he's accepted that user talk pages are where incoming comments from other editors should be added. —C.Fred (talk) 14:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About Miss Independent edit

Well, I just add the correct name of the song "I'm Back"...because the song just has leaked on internet. Only it. Voices4ever (talk) 15:02, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

United World Chart

I don't see how it's an unreliable chart. Let me put this in capital letters LOOK HOW MUCH OTHER UNRELIABLE CHARTS ARE ON SONG ARTICLES WHICH YOU GUYS DON'T TAKE OFF OTHER THAN THE UNITED WORLD CHART (not shouting) which is what you think is unreliable. And I don't see how it's vandalism either, and why must you intervene in my conversation with Yeahhboy. People should know how well a song does across the globe or how big of a worldwide hit it is. But I can never get through you guys, you guys just don't understand and blah, blah, blah, whatever about the dumb rules. Hometown Kid (talk) 05:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image policy

I left you a reply on my talk page. Please help out with the image problems for Aaliyah so you can help to restore the rest of my good faith edit, as soon as you can! :) Lliaa (talk) 04:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Webkinzman

Hi, thanks for the update. Sorry I didn't jump on it sooner. - eo (talk) 14:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hot 100

What parade I put????--Vitor Mazuco (talk) 16:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC) I know hot 100 brasil does't put,but what parade I put in brazil???--Vitor Mazuco (talk) 16:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC) Chek this link http://www.jovempanfm.com.br/paradas/50mais2007.php is the parada brasil in radio jovem pan--Vitor Mazuco (talk) 16:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC) Jovem pan is an important radio in Brasil about hit's!!!--Vitor Mazuco (talk) 18:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC) This radio is radio airplay!!--Vitor Mazuco (talk) 20:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC) Ok what parade I will put????--Vitor Mazuco (talk) 21:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block

You've been blocked 24 hours and I've removed your rollback rights, you can ask for them back later, for using rollback in an edit war, on Breakout (album). Rollback should only be used to rv vandalism and similar edits. Having it means you can be trusted with it and using it in an edit war is abuse of it on both counts. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: ANI, AIV, acronyms unite

Hey there! I'm glad we have a chance to talk, because I think you misunderstand the issue. It's not that everyone has a desire to discuss things (though I certainly prefer that route), but rather, at that time, I and another administrator did not see reasonable grounds to block Jdxboom. Some administrators probably would've issued a block, but only the trigger-happy ones. This way, we got to see if he was truly going to make an issue of this; then he was blocked. So you see, it's not an issue of too much discussion, but rather just the time which you reported him at.
P.S. Since you're blocked, it's fine if you reply here. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 00:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't understand the nature of it I guess; I glanced at the contributions list and didn't see any reason for concern. My apologies, this is truly a one-in-a-million mistake. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 01:31, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): my error, I missed the copyvio part, I have restored rollback, my apologies Request handled by: — Rlevse • Talk • 00:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan

I'm still skeptical about things being sourced from MySpace on this article, but that wasn't, and isn't, the fundamental issue. The issue is, as they have it, there is no source given for the statements about Lohan calling Palin homophobic and anti-environmentalist. That is a rather large WP:BLP issue. There are sources given at a later, relatively innocuous statement that Lohan criticized media coverage and urged voting for Obama. That isn't much of a WP:BLP issue. It goes much further than MySpace good or MySpace bad. It's a liability as it is in the link above. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Britney Spears

Before posting a reply, just look what i said for that picture edit. I specifically said that it is temporary and should be immediately removed once a brand new picture of Britney is uploaded which is a recent one and a press cutting, not a fan-art. --"Legolas" (talk) 12:08, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I did not know that this was a forum: http://jbbs.livedoor.jp/bbs/read.cgi/music/3914/1044805378/582 --Albes29 (talk) 19:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

semi-Circus

I was just thinking the same thing, actually. - eo (talk) 17:26, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:Ilikestella

I already gave a final this morning, plus there were several other warnings in between yours and mine. I blocked - enough is enough, really. - eo (talk) 18:45, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ANI

Thanks for alerting me about this. I knew that revealing personally identifiable information is bad, especially on a place like Wikipedia, so I used the template in question. When I saw how it was worded, I wanted to try and clear it up as best as I could. Guess it didn't make too much sense, but thanks for helping. I greatly appreciate it. :) --(GameShowKid)--(talk)--(evidence)-- 04:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Soapfan06

I'm having trouble with Soapfan06 who never uses edit summaries when removing content from Britney Spears. Be on the look out. Thanks. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 06:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA nom

Go get going already. Cheers, HiDrNick! 04:23, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kevin, so as background I spent a lot of the first five-six months of 2007 "in the trenches" at AFD and I often came away not very happy about the project. I was never involved in many fiction AFDs, that I can recall. The thing about Bulbasaur is that it always seemed impossible to even find this sort of article unless you were looking for the information in it. But for reasons that I don't comprehend, these articles instill not just passion but rage. And it spilled over into this horrid war. The highly-partisan notability wars left a very bitter taste in my mouth. TTN could do no wrong. LGRdC could do no right. All the socking made me ill. I remember Jack Merridew was a nice guy to me, even helped me fix up my user page, but when it was revealed he was a sockpuppet, virtually none of the editors who had fought on Jack's side apologized to the editor who exposed the sockpuppetry. The uninvolved admin who brought it to the noticeboards was also savaged without apology, as I recall. (I seem to remember you were one of the fair-minded ones in this, but the episode illustrated to me how ridiculous the partisanship had gotten.) When I saw your name at RFA I remembered the months of bitterness. I looked through your Wikipedia and Wikipedia Talk edits for the last couple months, and saw that a huge number of them were still around these issues. Mostly the RFC and TTN, true. I'll be honest, I didn't consider that the RFC is very much disengaged from the day-to-day trenches, and I think it's a fair point. But the first diff of yours I clicked on was one where Phil Sandifer said he felt like his proposal was getting a toxic reception and your one line response was that the only toxicity was coming from Phil. It looked like more of that horns-locked, bitter and unproductive partisanship to me. --JayHenry (talk) 16:20, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need help on Natalee nomination

I left the below on AuburnPilot's talk page, however he emailed me from his blackberry that his internet is down. Can you manage it? The vacancy will occur sometime between now and midnight Greenwich (I think 9 pm your time). Usually, Raul puts it in later in the day, within a couple of hours of the witching hour. I'm using a computer in a public library in England, and odds are I won't be on when it happens. If worst comes to worst, there's another vacancy when the Oct 9 article clears. Anyway, here is what I wrote him:

• I suggest that we nominate as soon as Raul schedules October 3. For the quickest word, I suggest watching [1]here. Then replace noitulovE with the code you will find in my sandbox (there is a link at the bottom of my user page). Nominate on behalf of Kww or yourself and claim 5 points. I am in Europe right now with limited internet access or I would do it myself. If we don't, I think the Grand Prix article will be nominated and we will have to replace the fairly popular U.S.S. New Jersey, which could lead to spite opposes.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:35, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brandy Norwood

I did not add a picture to her page. I only moved them around, so you are sending messages to the wrong person. As far as my talk page, you don't have any proof of any of your accusations, so stay off my page. Wjmummert (KA-BOOOOM!!!!) 01:01, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Sorry I got confused, it was the other way round, I've changed my position to support. Sorry for the inconvenience. Regards Ijanderson (talk) 20:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Kww, I've responded on my talk page. Best wishes. Acalamari 21:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:Ilikestella

Understood, but to me this is someone who clearly has no regard for any policies whatsoever and ignores any communication left on his talk page. Note he was blocked for 48 hours because of the Brazil information he kept adding to music articles, then once his block expired he went right to a discography page and added Brazil. Aside from the bunch of "got milk?" images he uploaded, his Talk Page is filled with prior image copyright problem templates. I certainly don't expect editors to have every Wikipedia policy memorized, but this editor in particular has been around for months and obviously doesn't care to at least read the page(s) about image use. - eo (talk) 11:40, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't even worry about it - RfAs are tough and rather flawed in my opinion, but there ya go. We just have different approaches to how we would have handled this editor and that's fine. I just feel that it is extremely unfair when a specific editor constantly requires other people to clean up after them, especially if s/he makes no effort to learn how to do it correctly... whether they read guidelines or just reach out to someone to ask for help.

Anyhoo, if your RfA doesn't pass just take in all the comments, process it and go for it again in a few months. - eo (talk) 12:18, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TTN

You should be aware that the TTN situation is being discussed at WP:Requests for Arbitration#Request for_clarification: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.2FEpisodes_and_characters_2. So far, there is no consensus that TTN's recent behaviour is disruptive.—Kww(talk) 21:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Got archived a few minutes ago. Now here.—Kww(talk) 02:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice(s). They were informative. - jc37 09:17, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Zachri29 (talk · contribs)

Blocked for a week. I just don't see why people continue to do that... J Milburn (talk) 15:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ScienceApologist

To be honest, I haven't interacted significantly with SA for months. I get the impression his civility issues have improved a fair bit, but I honestly don't feel able to judge either. I'm sure, if there's problems, that there's plenty of people to bring them up. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 03:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

You did the right thing in stating your position on sourcing. The fact that people are opposing you on this diff makes me not want to bother editing here any more, and it's certainly why I don't interact with most Wikipedians. You've got my support vote, whenever you want to try again. -- Logical Premise^Ergo? 20:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC) (Death to unreferenced stuffs!)[reply]

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

Your message

Blocked indef. As for the block, I'm pretty sure it's in effect. I'm not sure why the rangeblock finder seems to work for every block except that range. Spellcast (talk) 09:11, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I'm new to this AfD thing...thank you for your assistance! FinFangFoom (talk) 17:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pedrovip's images

I'm inclined to agree about the images, especially the Headstrong one. The only way I can see him claiming copyright is if he did the mashup, but even then, there are underlying rights held by the label, so the image isn't usable. I think you're on the right track, giving him a few more days to see how (if) he responds. I don't remember MSoldi's edit history off the top of my head, but I certainly agree that this isn't new behaviour. —C.Fred (talk) 01:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My images was only to try. I never uploaded a image. Wait, there is more. My image "Cisco Adler.jpg" is not copyrighted.

Pedrovip (talk) 16:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

I just took an image out of the Sneakernight infobox because of the copyright issue. The other two userboxes, at the time I looked, had CC images. —C.Fred (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you think they're obvious copyvios, tag them for speedy deletion (I9, blatant infringement, or I3, wrong license tag). If they're borderline, send them to IfD—though it wouldn't surprise me if half of them get speedied. —C.Fred (talk) 02:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A thought

Words have value in context. Please allow me to remind you of the number of supporters your RfA thread did attract. It would be easy to over-value those critical or neutral observations in this context. Your evaluation of constructive criticism needs to remain balanced. You shouldn't under-value the judgment of those who were favorably impressed. --Tenmei

Responding to your subtle and familiar choice of words in the best of all possible worlds: See this link to Bernstein's 70th birthday frolic -- Christa Ludwig sings "I am so easily assimilated." In my view, the best part of this YouTube excerpt is the enthusiastic delight of Bernstein himself at the end of the clip; and perhaps this becomes a good context in which to remind you that Candide was not at all well-received when the operetta first appeared on Broadway in 1956. --Tenmei (talk) 14:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holloway edit

Sorry about the result of the RFA and thanks for the gracious message.

Would you look at this diff and see if it makes sense? Dutch is Greek to me, and as I recall from the FAC (I think), this was your source.[2]--Wehwalt (talk) 07:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your RFA

Best wishes for your RFA...( altough the result this time doesnt seem good ) -- Tinu Cherian - 09:03, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA comment

Hello! As per your message on my Talk Page: "I'm going to try to interpret this resounding defeat as a statement that I should choose my words more carefully in the future, and remember that every statement I make gets recorded forever, just waiting to get carefully transcribed onto my next RFA." No, you did not fail -- the system failed you. And the people who picked apart isolated verbiage to create a phony history of your work have done a huge disservice to this project. There's nothing wrong with you -- keep up the great work. Ecoleetage (talk) 10:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ecoleetage (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Your RfA

On this occasion, your request for adminship was not successful. I hope that you will continue your useful contributions to Wikipedia and may consider standing again in future. Remember, a majority of editors commenting did support your candidature. Warofdreams talk 11:41, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Pity. I suggest that, over the next few months, you provide evidence of your ability to hold a well argued viewpoint while still being able to act impartially according to consensus. With such examples the next run at adminship should be considerably easier. Thanks for the thanks. LessHeard vanU (talk) 12:34, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All is for the best, in this, the best of all possible worlds

I'm sorry it worked out that way. It is true though, that you will be more knowledgeable and experienced in 6 months time. It will also give you time to clarify how you feel about things. In any consensus based discussion, make sure all you write is firmly based in the polices and guidelines. Take time to help you users. A firebrand or zealot, however well-intentioned, is more likely to abuse the tools than someone who is patient with newbie mistakes, who looks to improve rather than delete, looks to buid/expand rather than fault find. Anyone who made it all the way through Luceifer's Hammer, and who quotes Voltaire probably has the native intelligence to learn the nuances of the mop-and-bucket cum ratchet set. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 13:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check the quote on my user page. Definitely not the best of all possible worlds, but... the possibilities... Shenme (talk) 17:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I have no ambition to be an admin, or to take responsibility on WP for anything more than my own work. The points that were brought up against you struck me as unjust and downright silly in many cases.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You deserve it

		The Original Barnstar
		For tireless work which is obviously not appreciated enough. Wehwalt (talk) 20:25, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: double redirect elimination

Oh, all right, that makes absolute sense. I think I came to the page through a link, so I experienced the double redirect firsthand. Next time I'll fix all incoming links to the correct capitalization, that's something I should have done anyway. If there's no incoming links, the only thing left is that the search box ATM directs you to If I Were A Boy if you enter "if i were a boy", so a reader would still drop out at the double redirect.
I kinda wonder, that's just another case where multi-redirects would be very useful if they were supported by the software. I can't imagine that implementing them in MediaWiki is that hard, or taxing …
Amalthea^Talk 11:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rihanna

Hi
Heh, yes, I know, I should have first tagged the image as a copyright violation, and then removed it from the article. It took me a little longer then with the previous image to find the copyright holder. :)
Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 15:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I followed this edit to the article yesterday and assumed that we didn't have one, since they replaced a placeholder image. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 16:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mention it

Hah! Just sorry I didn't jump in when it was... you know... open. Better luck next time, as you clearly should have made it this time. Hiberniantears (talk) 15:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Identified (Vanessa Hudgens song)

Someone just made a page of Identified (Vanessa Hudgens song) and I doubt it was real since it has no sources at all. Do you think it would be nominated for deletion?Kikkokalabud (talk) 10:19, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ControlFreak

Yep, I saw the warning you gave him. Since I had his talk page on my watchlist that's what made me saw he uploaded again images. I probably would have indef blocked him if you didn't beat me to it with that final warning. I guess this will be his final chance. Garion96 (talk) 01:36, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will keep on eye on that editor. Garion96 (talk) 11:09, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your taxes

Take a look at this. It clearly states that a nonresident married to a resident only has to declare Arizona-derived income. If your income is from sources outside of Arizona, it need not be reported to, or taxed by, Arizona. :-> Watery Tart (talk) 02:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dang, it's stuff like that that makes me wonder why anyone bothers to get married at all! It is simply more expensive taxwise, and 12 times the headache. Watery Tart (talk) 02:23, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scrubs (My Bad)

Wondering why you keep deleting this episode, considering there is no consensus and you don't have the authority to move the page. If you read the discussions on the talk page you'll realize no consensus was ever reached. Anyway this episode is notable due to the first appearance of Jordan Sullivan (a main character). I want to edit the episode, but its impossible if I have to spend half an hour trying to find it and then you delete it anyway. Tej68 (talk) 02:05, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Britney Spears - Circus.jpg

I gotta say, I don't see it. I wouldn't be surprised if this were the real deal. :) --Amalthea^Talk 02:55, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Blum

I woulld like to thankyou for your very fast assistance on the AfD talk page. I have left appropriate messages on Klipfontein's. Again, Thankyou--intraining ^Jack In 03:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop reverting good edits!

Like u did here.
R u just reverting to get your edit count # up?
Why dont u make an actual worthy edit. 70.108.106.197 (talk) 10:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bad link

Sure it does, I inserted the ids myself to make sure all my old links keep working. :) --Amalthea^Talk 20:33, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That did the trick, although I just made it prettier. Cheers, Amalthea^Talk 20:40, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My Shoes

Hey! Sorry for the late reply, for some odd reason I hadn't noticed your messages before. Anyway, I'll look for sources right now. Funk Junkie (talk) 20:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Checking Billboard.com, I found out that those peak positions for "My Shoes" are fake, and that "Outside Looking In" and "Jump to the Rhythm" are Jordan Pruitt's only singles to chart on Billboard to date, so I've just removed the charts table in the My Shoes article. There were also fake positions in In Love for a Day, which I promptly removed as well. Funk Junkie (talk) 21:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. Funk Junkie (talk) 21:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply.

I'm not sure RFPP is the way to go as page protection might be overkill. But I do think a "Articles for Redirect" or using AfD to discuss redirects would be good. The thing I'd want is someplace to discuss them that either the person doing the redirect or the person wanting the redirect undone could go to. As it stands the "redirector" can go to AfD (and TNN is doing that all the time) but the other side of the discussion can't do anything other than edit war. So any solution that both sides can use would be great by me. AfD isn't that, and shouldn't be used for that IMO. If it became "articles for discussion" as some have proposed that would work, but I think it needs to be something like "Articles status as delete, redirect,or keep". I'd be fine with page protection if it was needed for a redirect as long as there was a clear way to get that protection removed if it could be shown new things had happened or guidelines were otherwise met.

Good thoughts, and good discussion. Thanks. Hobit (talk) 02:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Marliesposter.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Marliesposter.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Stifle (talk) 09:34, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as to why you rejected my fair use claim. The girl is missing and presumed dead by the police. Although technically she is still a "living person", this problem seems sufficient to permit fair use of the image. The article in which the picture is used makes specific reference to the poster, as well. Or is this just a problem with me filling out forms incorrectly?—Kww(talk) 11:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a reasonable fair use image, but you need to add an appropriate image tag as well. {{non-free fair use in|Marlies van der Kouwe}} will probably do it, but WP:TAGS/FU has a full list. Stifle (talk) 12:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recreating I Want It All (High School Musical song) article

Hey...I want to recreate I Want It All (High School Musical song) article in this way. May I revert the redirect and change the original article? Is it still failing WP:MUSIC#SONGS? Message back, please. Voices4ever (talk) 15:35, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did what you said...so, on High School Musical 3: Senior Year (soundtrack) I added all the informations available at the moment. Thanks. Voices4ever (talk) 18:17, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alis.Payan

I held off on whacking Rachelfan2 until the results of that Checkuser come out--and that IP last edited last night. However, I did find another possible sock based on the Camp Rock 2 non-article's history, Rachel.Lynn (talk · contribs). Blueboy96 14:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have email. Orderinchaos 15:03, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I decided to spike Rachelfan2 as well ... didn't see that she and Alis.Payan were the ONLY editors to that Beverly Hills article. Meatpuppetry at the very least. Blueboy96 18:41, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ezequiel.Pena tagged and bagged. *sigh* As far as I'm concerned, this user is banned. Blueboy96 12:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've already made Camp Rock 2 (film) a protected redirect to Camp Rock, and also protected the Camp Rock 2 redirect. I'm holding off on Beverly Hills Kids and Teens for now--though I have the salt shaker ready just in case it's created again. Blueboy96 12:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

14 socks confirmed--including seven we didn't know about. And the range has been hardblocked three months. Good grief ... Blueboy96 17:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, all - and thanks for bringing it to AN/I :) Orderinchaos 04:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heyheygimmesoccermeko?

The user has completely avoided talk pages, and has not edited any Nicole Wray articles, so its hard to pin down, but this certainly fits the M.O. of adding unsourced rumors to R&B singer articles, no? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for exlaining the difference between the two editors. If you need semi-protection on any articles that are frequent targets for them, let me know and I will see what I can do! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 11:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked at the edit history of those two articles, I would agree that it certainly passes the duck test for Soccermeko's standard pattern of behavior. I have semiprotected the articles for 1 month. If he shows up elsewhere, let me know... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:19, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Parker Impressions

If you think there is no need for impressions, then go to frank caliendo, he is a impressionist

if you watch Nicole Parker on MADtv she is a impressionist and she collaborate with characters, too me it is a insult to take someone impressions where she has performed them on the show since 2003, so i beg to keep her impressions on her page because she has done allot for MADtv and i think her impressions is one thing she does great with

Nicole Parker Impressions

If you think there is no need for impressions, then go to frank caliendo, he is a impressionist

if you watch Nicole Parker on MADtv she is a impressionist and she collaborate with characters, too me it is a insult to take someone impressions where she has performed them on the show since 2003, so i beg to keep her impressions on her page because she has done allot for MADtv and i think her impressions is one thing she does great with —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madtv12 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Nicole Parker

My reason is that her impression list has been on her page for a very long time and then you decide to come in and delete it, i understand what you mean...but you are basically telling me that she as a impressionist is not as big as Frank Caliendo or Darrell Hammond.

Now she has done all her impressions on MADtv since she first came on the series, and too me it is a slap in the face...because it makes no since because you have Mo Collins, Stephnie Weir, Michael McDonald, Aries Spears, Etc who all have Impressions on there list so can you please just not focus one person when there are allot other talents...no offense but your basically saying Nicole Parker impressions are not out there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madtv12 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a sample

Well, that is what we can expect over the next 36 hours. At least that one was rational. Judging by my two prior TFA experiences, a lot are not. And, as I've indicated, I think Joran is pond scum, but fair is fair, if we refer to Natalee as an honors student, we have to give Joran his due. Maybe they got together to discuss their MENSA applications?--Wehwalt (talk) 12:02, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of reactions of Danity Kane breakup

As I stated on the other editor's talk page who removed the fan reactions, your removal of the reactions by fans simply because they are fan opinions is unwarranted. I could see if these reactions were a lot or were not sourced, or both, and do not enhance the article, but they are not a lot, are sourced (with valid sources) and do enhance the article. Not to mention that I made sure to word the reactions in an encyclopedic manner. There is no Wikipedia policy that states such reactions cannot be included. There are plenty of articles on Wikipedia, including Good and Featured articles, that have fan reaction information.

If you would rather I not include the exact quotes, and instead relay what fans thought in my own wording, like I did with a bit of the reaction some fans have had to Dawn Angelique Richard in regards to the Danity Kane's breakup, then I am fine with that. But information on what fans think is absolutely allowed. Flyer22 (talk) 19:38, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As stated on my talk page, okay, I cut it down, and did not use the exact quotes. Flyer22 (talk) 19:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surprise

It's the barnstar for your help that you gave to me and other ones! Pedrovip 21:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

That message in my talk page, really meaned a lot to me!

Pedrovip (talk) 20:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

.

What templates actually do? editprotected was because a user was posting M. + M. are gay. It is vandalism. Pedrovip (talk) 15:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

How many time is a user blocked

I wanna now, if i will be blocked, how many time? I already seen a user blocked 24 hours, and another 1 week. But what is the real deal? Pedrovip (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

It depends on the scenario; if the account is made only for vandalism, it will be blocked indefinitely. If it's a long-time abuser, like the Grawp mob, it will be blocked on sight. There are also short-term blocks for disruption or for compromised accounts. Blake Gripling (talk) 03:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From Geniusdream

We have both resolved the war in editing, we have agreed already about the issue and I'll be working on the article, Sarah Geronimo for about 2-3 days to find references and re-edit the article as we have agreed. --Geniusdream (talk) 03:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is indeed weird

But the bot seems to work now. All is good. --harej 00:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Geniusdream

I dunno, it could be him, since the anons just kept on reverting my revisions to the ones by the fanboy. Blake Gripling (talk) 01:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What Wikipedia's Not, "Not a Forum"

I'm posting here. This doesn't belong on the main page if I'm going to discuss my specific case, but you're a good detective. Thanks for paying attention. You saw what spurred my interest in this particular topic of discussion. The user in question who edited my remarks in a talk page has been a very busy beaver. I know he's asked my permission subsequently to edit my remarks, but I'm not so certain he's ever found it necessary in previous cases.

His overbearing edits made me curious. Upon examining the edit history of changes he's made attributed to "not a forum" (which are numerous) very many of which are on talk pages and some user pages. I do not have the experience to determine how justified these edits are. All I can say is that they had the effect of scaring me and shocking me.

In one case, he had gone into a user's space that was being used to work on a Wikipedia page and took away the entire page. Again, I am not knowledgeable enough in these matters to say how this could have been justified. All I can say is that I cannot see how someone could ever be justified going into someone's personal workspace that is being used to work on a Wikipedia page, summarize "not a forum" and take out all of that person's work. I'm not actually complaining at this point, I am just absolutely bewildered about this situation. --VictorC (talk) 05:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Ahh... okay, I should have assumed there was history there. I was in the States the whole time, but I assumed since it basically became an international incident, nearly leading to trade sanctions, etc., that most informed Europeans would be aware of it. I saw on his user page that he was from Spain and thought he possibly just wasn't aware of the significance of the whole Holloway story. Thanks for the heads up. I'll just steer clear. --JayHenry (talk) 02:09, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from --Geniusdream (talk) 12:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

It's not that, its just that others are just vandalizing the page, like editors that are only IP addresses and furthermore, when others revert the article, the references provided will be disregarded.

--Geniusdream (talk) 12:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion on identity of user

See: this dif's edit summary and this dif's edit summary. The account dates to 2006, so it might not be who I think it is, but the grammar seems quite, um, familiar? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think not. SM's grammar is marked by a failure to grasp verb tenses and the proper use of auxiliaries. This is more tough-boy gang slang. I wish we only had one bad editor with bad grammar to deal with, but there's an unfortunately large quantity.—Kww(talk) 18:27, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Anyhoo, later... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of album covers -- Danity Kane article

If album covers can only be used in articles about the albums, then why would Wikipedia have these options when you upload an album cover?

Options:

How will the album/single cover be used in Wikipedia?

• in an infobox about the album/single.
• in a header at the top of the article about the album/single.
• in a section devoted to the album/single.
• in an article about the album/single's artist, used to identify the artist's work.
• for some other use.

You see? I was going for option #3. Although I was not for both album covers being within the article. A different editor had recently added the second album cover. But having the first album cover...I feel is an enhancement to the article's readability, seeing as it is their debut album. Plus, it is in the section about the album. Flyer22 (talk) 00:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Besides that, I provided a fair-use rationale for that second use to go along with the fair use rationale for its first use. Flyer22 (talk) 00:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Responded on may talk page, of course. Remember that I only want to use one album cover in this article, their debut one, when you list this issue at NFCC. Flyer22 (talk) 17:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Insulting Category

WP:NP

There is nothing less insulting than being called hilarious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Syphon8 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

from --Geniusdream (talk) 05:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

How come the article was improved, it now has lesser references and besides the length of an article doesn't really matter, read one of the guidelines in wikipedia, it says that putting information in this site is unlimited for as long as it has references. --Geniusdream (talk) 05:55, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Montage images as navigational elements

At least five administrators (User:Coren, User:Edokter, User:Fish and karate, and User:SoWhy) disagree with your application of that guideline. Please, read the discussion at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_October_23#Image:Companions.jpg before reverting again. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 13:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. You're oversimplifying my position, again. I agree that a serious reexamination of exactly how much fair use is "minimal" is appropriate, but you are being repeatedly pointy in trying to impose your own position on the matter. You might want to note that you score very few points by building up strawmen to knock down. I've commented on the image debate as well. — Coren ^(talk) 18:46, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not misrepresent my opinion. As each image is unique in it's application, you cannot simply transpond my arguments for the Companions image to the Cheeta Girls image. — Edokter • Talk • 20:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• To both Coren and Edokter; I mispresented nothing. Both of you are in support of fair use images as navigational elements. That's what I was reiterating. Regardless, it's a moot point. There's been so much fury created over the image that the disruption (which isn't me) is the fury over it. I've responded appropriately. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to confirm that Hammersoft is misrepresenting my views, to add to his continuing disruptive antics. I wonder if an RFC may be appropriate. fish&karate 23:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Refactoring

I refactored your IFD at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 October 29 to be in sequential time order, adding it to what would have been the bottom of the list when you added it. This is how IFDs are added, rather than at the top, per Wikipedia:IFD#Listing_images_and_media_for_deletion item #2 "list the image at the bottom of that page". Trying to help, --Hammersoft (talk) 16:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nicole Parker

I Just Added the new impression list

is that ok?

reply back A.S.A.P Thanks

GTD-5

Just ran across your GTD-5 article, very nicely done. I always thought the hardware architecture was elegant. I did 2nd level T/S for GTE '84-'87, taught L1/L2/L3 maintenance and met a few of your peers during trips to Phoenix. Best regards, Chuckiesdad (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation?

How would it be a copyright violation if the photo was taken by ME during her concert in LA? Im gonna put it back since this is an up to date photo of Tina. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WalaCce (talk • contribs) 14:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Its not possible to post it directly from my camera anymore since everything was already backed up in my computer and deleted from the camera. What does OTRS stands for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WalaCce (talk • contribs) 16:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well all i did was move the images to my computer and save as a bitmap to gain a higher resolution but when I tried to upload it here that format was not accepted, so I used a program to turn it into a Jpeg, I dont know why but that infos about the camera model and etc disapeared.

When I changed the format the images were all duplicated and I probably deleted the original ones or at least some of them. Im new here and when i was uploading the photo I was asked to put a copyright tag, but it has no copyrights! Its just a photo taken during a live concert, one can even see that the quality is not that good too.--WalaCce (talk) 17:26, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WalaCce (talk • contribs) 19:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: WP:BADCHARTS

I do. I was already aware of most of them, but thanks anyway! I felt free to add the Polish National Top 50 to the list as it was missing. Should we also add the Portuguese National Top 50 (even though it never had an article)? Funk Junkie (talk) 19:54, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just done. Feel free to have your say. Funk Junkie (talk) 20:29, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone typed the wrong number?

OK. How about you do the number thing because I am horrible at nominating pages for speedy deletion. I just figure out why, and back some of them up if I think it is necessary, like a lawyer? I don't know.

Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Really!

K50 Dude(K50 Dude's talk page) —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Hey

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

Pedrovip (talk) 12:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

Cookie!

{{subst:REVISIONUSER}} has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. {{subst:if||| {{{message}}} ||subst=subst:}} To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

I given you a cookie! I hope you can be my friend and tell me about new articles on Wikipedia. Pedrovip (talk) 12:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)Pedrovip[reply]

Ali Lohan AfD

Thanks for the heads up, got it now. StarM 03:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		This is for all the excellent edits you made to Wiki. Thanks, Pedrovip (talk) 18:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hoaxes

"Am I just getting better at spotting them, or are there more and more of these things?" Maybe both. By the way, someone's nominated me for a 7th rfa without asking me first. Should I run with it or just say no, not now? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:17, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Singles, songs and music videos

Were disputes over what qualified for singles, songs and music videos ever get resolved? I think it's a stretch saying someone singing some silly song on some show satisfied specs for a music video. Gimmetrow 18:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of any broad consensus on the topic. Can you be specific as to what performance you don't think qualifies?—Kww(talk) 18:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be specific, "Really Great" is performed in character (poor singing voice) to the melody of "London bridge is falling down". I also find it very odd to think adding a soundtrack to a movie clip makes a "music video". Gimmetrow 18:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll support you that in-character performances don't count. As for soundtrack addition: if they just take a 2:30 second section of a show and run a song in the background, I would argue that that isn't a video. If they take a song and build a clip montage over it, I think it probably would count.—Kww(talk) 19:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Tisdale discography

Alright, I re-added the references, I deleted them by mistake. Sorry. —Riomet(talk) 15:24, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

Hey, I found two new peak positions for "He Said She Said" and "Not Like That" (songs by Ashley Tisdale) but the name of the chart is Bayerische Single-Charts...where's Bayerische? My source is german, you can check here [3], searching by Tisdale on Bayerische chart...Thanks so much! —Riomet(talk) 19:08, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. —Riomet(talk) 11:10, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your bot idea

Regarding this, any idea where to start, I think it's a great idea. — Realist^2 14:44, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and sorry

Oh sorry for that reverting. Read the talk page. Gimmetrow and my comments. I am trying my best to clear the incorrent things in the article, used Gimmetrow's comments and guidance as help so can i try working on my version of the article and using Gimmetrow's comments to improve. Just like what i did before you reverted it to Gimmetrow's last version.HanniMontLol(talk) 14:43 , 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Now that made my day

—C.Fred (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Sadly, {{Cookies}} already exists, so I couldn't reply, like I wanted to, with a redlinked template. Nonetheless, thank you for the redirect. That made my morning. —C.Fred (talk) 15:15, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Uninvolved admin

If you are looking for uninvolved admins, start a thread at WP:AN or WP:ANI. You will get a lot more opinions than mine. Alternately, if you believe there to be widespread sockpuppetry, you can file a report at WP:RFCU to ask a checkuser to look in at it. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:Spam blacklist

I have no problem whatsoever with those being added. I have only ever participated in comments/discussion in that area, however — I have not nominated anything nor have I blocked any sites myself. If you do decide to suggest a block on those, let me know and I'll agree! - eo (talk) 19:16, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 16:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AIV

That's alright - I "go by the book" simply because I then don't have to make value judgements, but I have no problem if an admin takes a different view. I noted that one report hadn't vandalised since the final warning, and then checked it again with a view to removing it, found they had resumed vandalising after my comment was made - so I blocked them for 31 hours... In the end, we all work to the benefit of the encyclopedia. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that if there was a "separate book" for death hoaxes then the number of such incidents will increase; there is nothing better a troll likes than being noticed. A death hoax is vandalism as much as "is a poopy" stuff - warn 'em, report 'em, and clear up the mess they made. I have a fairly standard blocking notice for vandals, "X hours standard vandalism block", to try and cut down on any thrill they get for being found out. It comes down to personal approaches, and this is mine. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:52, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Protected for the requested 3 days, but if the hoax is taken down speedily then it can be returned to semi. If you are keeping an eye on things, let me know if you need the status changed. LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dd deluxe.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dd deluxe.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

.

gdaly7 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

BADCHARTS

My mistake. WP:BADCHARTS should include the fact that airplay charts are not permitted under WIKI:CHARTS. Many airplay charts have been removed from many FAs.Reqluce (talk) 12:12, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Concept album

If you have a chance and the inclination, could you stop by concept album and drop some suggestions on the talk page? The article is an unholy mess and I don't even know where to start. Thanks in advance! —Hello, Control ^Hello, Tony 21:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I wrote an update on User talk:Star Mississippi if you want to read it. It's heading is -Hi, Update- DellLaptop! Talk 00:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image removal

I did everything according to the Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. I think the changes should be reverted and the image/article be submitted for review. Bab-a-lot (talk) 02:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Writing

In All Honesty, That's How I Write My Comments Everyhere.

Wikipedia, IMDB, Youtube (Can't Bold There), etc.

(Well, Capitalizing Has Been A Newer Thing) But Bolding, Double-Spacing Sentences, etc.

I Even Did Those Things On School Papers. That's Just How I Write.

It Has Nothing To Do With Trying To Get Attention, Really.

As For Distracting & Annoying, You're The Very 1st Person To Mention That & I've Been An Active Member On Wikipedia For Over 2 & 1/2 yrs.

Besides I've Seen People Use Colors Which Trust Me, Is 10x More Distracting.

I Understand Why You Might Find It A Tad Annoying But I Swear It's Not My Intention To Annoy You/Anyone & It's Absolutely Not For Attention. Just A Habit. :-D

Baby16 (talk) 19:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Sorry I Wrote So Much :-D

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

Brandy Article Reply

Just In Case You Don't Get Back To The Article, I Decided To Post My Reply Here. I Hope You Don't Mind. And I Took Out The Bold & Spaces In The Sentences For You.

Firstly, What I Meant Was To Rename It "Brandy (entertainer)" Instead Of "Brandy Norwood", My Mistake For Forgetting To State That Part. Simply Because According To Wikipeda & I Quote "...use the most common name of a person or thing..." Basically The Most Recognizable Name. I See What You Were Saying Too. "...that does not conflict with the names of other people or things...". That's Why I Meant "Brandy (entertainer)" I Searched That Title & It Does Not Exist Or Redirect Anywhere. I Also Checked "Brandy Disambiguation" Just To Make Sure.

Brandy Is Not Only The Name People Know Her By But It's Also The Name She Uses Professionally As A Singer (On Her Albums) & Actress (Movies & TV Shows)

Secondly, Calling Her "Norwood" Throughout The Article Makes Sense, I Apparently Wasn't Fully Awake When I Made That Edit (lol)

Baby16 (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How much longer

Ok, neither you or User:Star Mississippi are answering any of my comments and the sockpuppet case on me is 10 days old and in the notes for the suspect it said if the the accuser didn't request check user in 10 days the case would be closed it's been ten days and it hasn't closed. Someone just pleae answer me. -DellLaptop! 00:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your conscientious efforts and hard work. UWC "will" drive you mad haha Eight88 (talk) 04:25, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is this chart reliable?, I've seen people use it to skip around the "Brazil Hot 100" thing and using this for a "Brazil Singles Chart". Cheers. — Realist^2 15:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mirror. I updated WP:BADCHARTS to note that.—Kww(talk) 15:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. :-) — Realist^2 15:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

UWC

The UWC is clearly on WP:BADCHARTS, and that reference was clearly to the UWC. mediatraffic.de is already on Xlinkbot's list of sites to remove when it is added, and I am preparing for getting it placed on the spam blacklist. If you have an alternate source for information, please feel free to use it.—Kww(talk) 16:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(This discussion is in connection with changes made to Wish You Were Here (album)) I'll leave your latest revert as is, but some comments as to why another user probably reverted your change, and I did it as well: It's a little confusing to point to a list of depreciated charts when the site name is not the same as the chart name, especially since part of that list deals with site names (URLs). It's also confusing that the site name is something that you intend to add to the list, but are already deleting entries before completing that task. It's also confusing that the depreciated list appears to be a list of articles that have been deleted, with the presumption that if the article is gone, that automatically blacklists the chart, and I don't see that as being necessarily so. It seems to me that charts, websites, and WP articles about charts and/or websites are three different things, and are being confusingly meshed together. I also wonder if the arguments against these charts, as presented in the article deletion logs, apply to the site or collection of charts as a whole, or just portions of it, and other portions might be reliable. I note that the depreciated chart list describes it as "United World Chart/Global Top 40 Albums" which could mean only a list of top 40 albums is in dispute (which is not the particular list being removed as a reference in the Wish You Were Here article). Hopefully these issues can be cleared up, otherwise deletions like this are going to be contested. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 16:54, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion was at Wikipedia talk:Record charts#Deprecated charts, and the consensus was that all those charts were to be deleted. The text we are talking about says "The album sold 21 million copies worldwide.<ref name=mediatr>[http://www.mediatraffic.de/alltime-album-chart.htm United World Chart, last update in 2007]</ref>. I don't know how much clearer a reference to the United World Chart can be. The reason I do this work before getting it on the spam blacklist is that it's confusing to people. They make another change in the article, and then can't save it because it contains the blacklisted URL. If I get all references out of article space first, that doesn't happen.—Kww(talk) 17:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't notice one issue: "Global Top 40" is a mirror of the UWC album chart. I'll see if I can make that clearer in the listing.—Kww(talk) 17:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bling bling

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for keeping Wikipedia clean of crap, fake charts amongst many other things. Enjoy, but for the love of god, archive your talk page already! :-) — Realist^2 16:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I Ask A Favor, Please?

I was wondering if you could help me with an editing problem. I was editing the music video section in the article "It's Over (Jesse McCartney song)" & I added a citation & quotes, along with some other things & now everything after the music video section is gone from the page but when I go to the edit page it's there. Since you have more experience can you help me? Please & thank you!

Baby16 (talk) 21:23, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know how to fix it or what was wrong. Thank you for trying to help me.

I appreciate it!

Baby16 (talk) 21:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Fiction proposal

Just a heads up, a proposal I informally made a while ago has now been formally offered at Wikipedia:Notability (fiction). The aim is to identify a pragmatic approach that reflects what is actually done on AfD, as opposed to an ideological approach. So while it's unlikely to appeal to partisans on either side, I think it represents a good and workable compromise. Any comments at Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction) will be greatly appreciated. Phil Sandifer (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Tisdale

Hey, are you or were you reviewing Ashley Tisdale's article? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:43, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not, I would never do that to an article. I would be happy to take over the review, as I noticed some things that need to be fixed, that's if your cool with it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your blessing. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 18:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Netherlands chart

Would you mind voicing your knowledge on this discussion, a little confused. Thank you in advance. — Realist^2 18:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFC update

I know it's been a long and tedious process. But the analysis of the RFC discussion is underway, so that an objective party can give an honest assessment of the common ground. One of the analysts requested some context on the dispute. So I'm trying to help him out. You'd be helping things along if you could check in quickly at the talk page, if only to offer a quick comment. I'm asking you because I know you've been involved pretty heavily throughout the dispute, and have seen all kinds of opposition to WP:N. Randomran (talk) 07:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DJ, Take Me Away

Hmm, I'd say just merge them all to a list. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

White slavery

Yes, I did see the subsection, but the article seemed to deal with the concept in a historical sense, so I thought it better simply to link to the article as a whole. No biggie either way. And yes, in the month that the US has elected a black president, to keep using terms like that . . . --Wehwalt (talk) 01:38, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CHARTS

so... why you leave all americatop100.com charts and deleted Chile charts with this source too? Ecuador, Bolivia, Mexico, Colombia... you leave these and deleted only chile charts? and you deleted CHILE TOP 100 but leave ARGENTINA TOP 40? suck! TOP LATINO is sourced for a blog and no DELETED? i dont understand ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.82.194.246 (talk) 17:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Top Latino <-- This is a Blog!!! and continue in Wikipedia and Mexico Top 100 <--- This is by Americatop100.com a unofficial website and you deleted all Chile Top 100 sourced by these and Mexico Top 100 continue here...? explain me please.

(talk) 17:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yeah ... sure this is all so stupid other blogs charts continue here and others charts with the same source are deleted and other no... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.82.194.246 (talk) 18:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking

Can you please unblock me and "PopSinger623". We really want to make articles and things like that. We really didn't do anything wrong. We are in the same ip address so we can't make articles on either one of our user names. Help us! :( Hyp3rpimp96 (talk) 21:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Guidance Barnstar
		I've been watching your recent attempts to rehabilitate a pair of blocked users. Looks like a lost cause, but thank you for trying, and don't be discouraged, this is a valuable effort. A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 12:42, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Popsinger

Hello,

I restored his 'bogus article' per this edit. The user didn't know how to restore it from the history, and you can see I unblocked him, here an administrator had told me to write an article, or expand one per this edit if he wished to be unbanned, so I felt that he should be allowed to edit his user talk.

The Helpful One 15:18, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Hate This Part

Alright, I understand about the German chart and I will try to find a reliable one, but what's wrong with the Bulgaria singles chart? It's definitely more reliable than the media traffic charts. 67.172.94.65 (talk) 17:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

alright gotcha!

67.172.94.65 (talk) 00:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: Being ignored at ANI

Hey there, which incident should I be looking at? The link you gave me just brings up the main page without directing me to a particular section. - eo (talk) 21:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, Kww. I want to ask if you can delete an page that i created that is called 'User:Rogerchocodiles/monobook.css', which i downloaded from another person, an theme for Wikipedia, but i hate it.. Please remove that page! ROGERCHOCODILES 09:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)Rogerchocodiles[reply]

Can you check this?

Can I get your opinion on something? Honestly, tell me if I'm overstepping here... I'm kind of in a disagreement with User:Alextwa because s/he feels that an album review from The Times does not belong in the Keeps Gettin' Better: A Decade of Hits article. Basically, he keeps removing it; I keep putting it back. His claim is that the album review is "too short" and "not detailed enough". I realize it's not a pages-long review, but my argument is that The Times is a very reputable publication and the review's length should not matter — this is not a blog we're talking about here. There is a discussion on the album's Talk Page, if you want to chime in. This is not a huge deal, I just want some fresh eyes on it in case I'm being ridiculous. Thanks. - eo (talk) 12:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

stop vandalizing

Please, stop vandalizing the article Enjoy the Ride (song). There are many, many other song articles which haven't charted in any of the charts and are still separated atricles, so I don't understand why you keep wanting Enjoy the Ride not to be a separated article. STOP THAT!!! Will it make your life easier if you keep doing this....??? Seki rs (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

enjoy the ride

Oh My God...what do you have against this article... stop being rude Seki rs (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a question from Tau'ri278

Hi i am Tau'ri278, I am from the Stargate Wikia and we just had a problem with someone whos name was 'Kwwsucks' and we assumed he had a run-in with you. Have you had any problems here with anyone of that name? or anyone at all? This guy/girl seems like they just want attention and are willing to vandalize pages to get it.

If you have any infromation on this please write to me on my Talk page. Thank you for the help in advance.

Tau'ri278 (talk) 01:19, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kww, I looked into it and i think you might be correct in assuming this leonhart/zbeeblebrocks guy. I will inform some people at Stargate Wikia about him, I don't know if he has changed as it looks like he did here or if maybe a younger sibling or idiotic friend got the same idea. Oh well, thank you and we will continue to have our eyes out on his progress.

Live Long and Prosper, Tau'ri278 (talk) 01:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Permanently banning myself and others

I was a bit surprised to see you calling for the ban of myself, Jim Butler, Hans Adler, and Levine2112 for life [4]. Would you care to justify your remark? II | (t - c) 02:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts

Do you think branching out a section for unreliable web links was good. My feeling was the chart section was starting to look a little complicated, to a section dedicated to web links seems wise. — Realist^2 21:26, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?

I don't know what you're talking about.. I make contributions to Wiki! Not all the time. So, how are you? ROGERCHOCODILES 11:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you sign my guestbook? Please.. ROGERCHOCODILES 11:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that. I will contribute better but i'm just an normal user! ROGERCHOCODILES 15:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:-(

Just to clarify, I still have the title of best user page don't I? I haven't lost that? :-) — Realist^2 16:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't!

The positions of "Don't!" on the Billboard charts are clearly located at the top of the page that is sourced. Thankyoubaby (talk) 16:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably unaware…

…That you have a query here, specifically asking for you. DiverseMentality 06:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re comments on Talk:Miley Cyrus

The comment I removed was made by one of the socks that inserted the original rumor from the gossip site. I was just cleaning up. --NrDg 18:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

World Singles Official Top 100

So the World Singles Official Top 100 is part of top40-charts.com? Ok, then, but please say so in the edit summary in future, as the link you provided was inadequate to prove the chart was amongst the dodgy ones. Thanks, Blood Red Sandman ^(Talk) (Contribs) 15:36, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh!

I forgot to suggest adding that to the article...ARGHHHHH!--Editor510 ^drop us a line, mate 21:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Punkox

It seems like they're starting to do this here again. See this edit where they put their edit back using their ip (dynamic, I think you know that by now?). You were also right about that they don't seem to act upon warnings. Any suggestions? --Kanonkas :  Talk  22:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block Punkox indef, semi-protect all the Jessica Simpson articles for a few weeks.—Kww(talk) 23:50, 14 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like NrDg got this one, I think. --Kanonkas :  Talk  00:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your note on my talkpage re: SSP

Hey, thanks for the explanation! I think my reluctance to wade in is more about that "reasonable doubt" bit--people in my real life know: I am a doormat. Give me the SLIMMEST splinter to hang good faith on, and I'm right in there believing... til I get stepped on. But from what you showed, some of them are just flat-out blatantly obvious--maybe I'll get my feet wet by doing a couple of those. Thanks for the encouragement! GJC 04:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support

Now it will be your turn. We need to get all three of the Holloway Trio up there!--Wehwalt (talk) 12:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Charts

Sorry about what's been happening recently, I feel like I'm opening a can of worms, a can I should probably reseal before I do more damage than it's worth. Me and you share pretty much the same philosophy when it comes to this stuff. — Realist^2 18:28, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Sorry

I'm sorry if you thought I vandalized User talk:Kurt Shaped Box, well I did not vandalize that page, I deleted the top talk page rule becuase I thought it is a wiki and anyone can edit a talk page there way. 68.34.4.143 (talk) 02:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFPP

Hi there,

Sorry about that, I missed some of those links! Protected for 2 weeks as requested.

The Helpful One 21:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Motormater and Override (Transformers)

Can we at least have a talk about the method of merge on the talk pages? Shouldn't this be up on the talk pages of those articles for a little bit, while people who write about the character discuess what to merge onto what pages? Mathewignash (talk) 22:51, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO~

I prefer someone call me Frankie instead of Brian Yau~

By Brian Frankie Yau 18:00, 20 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.218.142.94 (talk)

Image copyright problem with File:Sarah Geronimo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Sarah Geronimo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

		Merry Christmas!
		DiverseMentality is wishing you a Merry Christmas! Hope you have a great Christmas day and a happy holiday season. Stay safe! DiverseMentality 08:32, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joyeux Noël

Joyeux Noël, Kevin. --Pixelface (talk) 03:08, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Season's Greetings

Wishing you the very best for the season. Guettarda (talk) 01:45, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We're watching, keep on good work! NVO (talk) 19:35, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Comments about LyricWiki

I don't have a problem with your edits, but your comments such as "it's simply copyright violation on a massive scale." are incorrect. LyricWiki actually does pay royalties. True, not to all, but not due to lack of effort. Many publishers have been contacted, but most haven't responded to the site owner's attempts. From what the owner's been told, LyricWiki is one of only three lyrics sites that pay royalties. Thanks. KieferFL (talk) 04:35, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image for deletion discussion you should know about

I saw you recently deleted File:Vancouver Seeds VI CD Cover.jpg from Carolyn Arends. There is a image and media for deletion discussion going on at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2008 December 30#Vancouver Seeds VI CD Cover.jpg. Aspects (talk) 15:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The_View_from_Here edit

You removed a large section from The_View_from_Here. Your initial comment was something to the effect that an improper attribution was supplied; however, you didn't bother to provide any guidance on how to cite the text you deleted. Rather than simply vent your spleen by deleting things, please make an actual contribution to Wikipedia by assisting with creation of an appropriate citation.

I have restored the text. Your current comment that says your edit was obviously correct is erroneous. If the edit was self evident then I wouldn't be objecting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crath (talk • contribs) 16:41, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image Replacement

This commet is from File talk:HesABullyCharlieBrown.jpg.

This Image needs to be replaced with a screenshot of the title, is there anybody who is able to accept my request? 68.34.4.143 (talk) 19:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go fuck yourself!...

Delete this!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 14:31, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whiner!... You try to prevent people from doing their job just because they're trying to remove their own words from a talk page!... That's petty!... I was just doing my job and just because you son of a bitch got insulted you blocked me, huh? Never mind, I never intended to keep talking to you. Well, apparently you don't like to delete things!... Maybe you like to be insulted or ass kicked!... Oh, but don't worry, I have many ways to proceed my job: another computer, or perhaps using another person's account that might "lend" it to me!... We're through!... G.-M. Cupertino (talk) 10:51, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

G.-M. Cupertino

I see that you're having some trouble with Mr. Cupertino as well. He's been a problem editor for a lot of us, which is why I had an arbitration case taken against him. I'm not entirely sure how it works once the case is open, but as I understand it you are welcome to say something if you want to. The arbitration request is here for you to see, but don't post here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/G.-M. Cupertino. If you're willing to include evidence, then post it here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/G.-M. Cupertino/Evidence. Thanks. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 17:00, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interested in joining?

We need good people: Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Charts - eo (talk) 13:42, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Page: I quit

I'm no longer anymore finding secret pages. But i'm planning to make contributions to Wiki soon. I'm sorry i can't donate to Wikipedia, i'm too young and i don't have a credit card. Happy New Year! pedrojoão 16:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Hero

Unless it is on ANI, I don't see discussion as wasted time. I am aware of BRD, I cite it often, and if you had taken the time to look at the talkpage, you would have noticed there was advance warning of what I was going to do, and that it was you who did not get involved in the discussion. This is an extraordinary cover that is taking an extraordinary amount of space in the original article. A cover version is not relevant to the original artist. A cover that sells 500,000 copies is notable in its own right. Woody (talk) 00:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

United World Chart

Sorry, I won't do it again. - Decodet (talk) 16:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Symptoms of You (Lindsay Lohan song)

someone created an article for a lindsay lohan song Symptoms of You (Lindsay Lohan song), it was never a single..it should not have a page.....i think it should be deleted as soon as possible....can u help me nominate it for deletition........

Anywhere But Home (talk) 09:40, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not deleting the archive of the N. Parker section, there is no reason, its my page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madtv12 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Punkox

I reported PunkoXofb to NrDg, as he was the original blocking admin of Punkox (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I wouldn't quibble if you blocked him yourself.—Kww(talk) 23:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Thanks for the heads up on the vandal. I was away, but it looks like all is settled and the user is blocked. Thanks. Orane (talk) 02:31, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KWW, I DELETED THE ISSUE AND NOW ITS BACK ON THERE, I DELETED AND I WANTED IT GONE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madtv12 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Chart guide

Yes, it's definitely useful. Just one question: why is the word "Ultratop" everywhere? I also didn't quite figure out what each symbol means; perhaps an explanatory legend could help. I also noticed there are a few missing links, such as that of the Austrian and the Argentine certifications. Funk Junkie (talk) 17:16, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure about Ultratop operating the other sites? I thought SwissCharts.com did so. Anyhow, I thought it might be a good idea to use the link names, such as 'LesCharts.com', 'ItalianCharts.com', and so on, so as to avoid any possible confusion—it's just a thought. I'll fill in a few empty spaces; let me know if you find something you don't agree with. Funk Junkie (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Funny one

"...sucked into the Disney morass..." Gimmetrow 00:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PopSinger623

Well, the user contacted me, and I assumed good faith. It is easy enough to reblock, and I (or any admin) will do so at the slightest sign of a resumption of previous behavior, as I indicated in the unblock message. Prodego ^talk 01:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I unblocked him, that means I take responsibility for that unblock. I unblocked the user because he said he wanted to edit productively. If he shows any signs of not, he will be blocked again. No big deal. Prodego ^talk 02:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And thus, reblocked. Prodego ^talk 02:05, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No damage was done. Prodego ^talk 02:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops...

Soory about that. I found it with no deletion notice and I had no idea it was a reposted AfD deletion. Thanks for letting me know. How can I help fix the problem? --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:08, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• On my way. Thanks for alerting me. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, she's gone on a four-day vacation. Talk to ya soon. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All set. It's admin only now. Signing off...--PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just Dance

Hey Kww, can you please check "Just Dance" to see whether the divisions for the charts in 2008 and 2009 are correct? I'm not exactly sure. Please help. "Legolas" (talk) 06:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey can you come to WP:Record charts for a discussion on where a single should be placed if it charts in two different years. P.S. : I would appreciate if you would atleast reply back to my messages. "Legolas" (talk) 13:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, but we do need to form an opinion about this situation, User:Realist2, User:Ericorbit, User:Efe all have different opinion about it. "Legolas" (talk) 13:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My Life Would Suck Without You (Kelly Clarkson Single)

Hi, thanks for the message. I have protected the redirect as you suggest. It will expire at 02:55 on the 19th. Kind regards, --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:59, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rihanna

yeah, u right sorry User:Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 15:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kanonkas

Thank you Kww for voting in my successfully closed RfA! I'm glad that you trust me. Ping me if you need anything (I hope I can be useful for you now!). Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  18:24, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Independent sourcing for Elements of Fiction

I believe you have expressed the opinion that current draft of WP:FICT is too lax on the grounds that independent sources are required to demonstrate that an element of fiction is in some way notable. Instead, could you accept the arguement that an element of fiction that is the subject of substantial real-world coverage from a reliable source could demonstrate notability at some point in the future? It would not be unreasonable to assume that if there is good quality coverage from sources that are not independent, then an element of fiction may be important enough for independent commentators to write about it as well. If you agree this may be the case, then perhaps we can compromise on the current draft of WP:FICT, and this guideline can be rolled out for community approval. I feel agreement on this version is close, so I would be grateful if you could give serious consideration to making you willingness to compromise on this point at WT:FICT. --Gavin Collins (talk) 10:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BLACK LIST

I'm gonna put in a request, but for now, that will have to do. Did you even go to the URL? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IHelpWhenICan (talk • contribs) 02:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well...

I suggest you don't edit their page if you've never heard of them. I'm not being mean and I'm not saying you have to be a super fan. Anyway that URL is to the band members official Myspace blog. The news was so new, the reporters weren't on it yet. Anyway, I suggest you go to that URL if you need proof. As I said. "IF YOU GO INTO EDIT MODE, YOU CAN SEE THE URL I GOT THE INFO FROM." —Preceding unsigned comment added by IHelpWhenICan (talk • contribs) 02:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'll put in a request to take it off. But I copied the entry so you could see for yourself

• Wednesday, December 31, 2008
  

HAPPY New YEAR!!!
As I commence on my annual New Years ritual of cleaning out all the junk in my room ( I tend to be a pack rat) I realized I have more than just materials to clear out before 09. I have lots of emotions both good and bad that need to be put in their proper place. Many of you gave me great memories and pictures, scrap books, and letters and bottles of patron, lol, that I got caught up reminiscing for hours on my bedroom floor. I re-lived moments, remembered some of my favorite fans, wondered how they were doing and how they feel about the changes that are taking place. In these last two years I've experienced some great accomplishments but also some of the deepest depression and unhappiness I've experienced in my life. Going through the pictures I remembered how hard the fight was to look that happy for our fans. replayed all the different issues going on under that top layer that was presented to the public. And how getting those reactions and letters was the only way I could do it again in the next city. Our blessing sometime come in disguise, so being fired doesnt always mean what you think.
I know there's probably no way I can really make you understand, but what I found you guys understood about me in the things you wrote to me is "you seem very honest, down to earth, and real". You guys always asked me to keep it real and stay true to myself, so I hope you understand I am doing just that, and to continue the way I was I'd have to do the opposite. You won't see me on whatever the next installment of MTB will end up being or a apart of what DK will become, but when you do see me next there will be no doubt that I'm doing just fine! (In mary j blige voice lol) you guys will recognize this representation of D.Woods from the split second glimpses I was able to show over the past two years, I hope yall will stay down and continue to support. Happy New Year!
PS...shout out to Carlos from d.woods web, anthony from the Bay, and imelda from Ireland, and all yall I can't name cuz there's too many! Xoxoxoxo
DWOODS
missdwoods.com
Independence Day is coming —Preceding unsigned comment added by IHelpWhenICan (talk • contribs) 02:46, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget WP:GNG

In the AfD for Get On Your Boots you state the article should be protected against recreation until its release date as that is the earliest it could chart. However, this doesn't take count of the general notability guideline which any article can meet (and this one does) at any time. Given that this is U2's first proper single for a while it is obviously getting coverage in reliable sources which a quick google news search shows. --JD554 (talk) 09:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then surely GNG would say that. --JD554 (talk) 11:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it works perfectly well this way. The SNG's are wikiproject driven and give guidelines about what probably meets the criteria for notability, whereas the GNG gives general guidelines which may pick up things which don't meet the specific ones. Seems sensible to me, but I suspect we'll end up agreeing to disagree. By the way, I wasn't trying to ruin your day, at the moment I've got clear blue skies and the sun streaming in through the window warming my back and I'm looking at what's remaining of the snow on the ground. I hope your day is as nice as mine  :-) (I really mean that). --JD554 (talk) 11:57, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It must my Canadian ancestry, but a year of sunshine would bore me stupid. Still here in the UK when we can have four seasons in a day I have to be thankful for what I can get! Cheers, --JD554 (talk) 12:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lindsay Lohan

can you tell ward to stop removing the movie screenshots....Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Can I get both of you to cease reverting for a while?

I accept your comments as done in good faith. I don't doubt that you want what is best for the article. But I think if you honestly compare my edits, reverts, etc. to those of ABH, there is a vast difference between the two. Although I don't think you intended this, I think you message to ABH and me will inspire ABH to ignore any legitimate reverts or warnings I make. That's his style. But again, I respect what you say and I don't mean any of this to be a personal attack on you. I can take the high road and stay away from ABH for a while. But since you have volunteered, I hope you'll do what needs to be done about a problem editor who, although at times well-intentioned, clearly does not understand Wikipedia and often makes no effort to learn. But thanks for your message. Ward3001 (talk) 16:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, for your comments as well as your efforts on Wikipedia. Cheers! Ward3001 (talk) 16:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

lindsay screenshots

what about the already existing screenshots of lohan in parent trap and antother world Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and what about christian bale's article......he has a picture of him in the movie Equilibrium.....and anothe one in the movie The Machinist .......and he is a living person......why is it ok for his article and not for lohans.......Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

if u dont reply i have no choice but to revert......Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why is everyone ignoring me.......are you all having a meeting or somethingAnywhere But Home (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My Life Would Suck Without You

Hi
You'd really have them drag that one through DRV? That seems like a waste, too. Typically, if the reasoning behind a deletion debate changes significantly enough, I'd always think that the history can be more ore less ignored. The question that remains in this case is whether it already has with the release, or if it clearly needs to pass WP:NSONGS.
Sorry that I'm leaving you alone in that debate, but it doesn't quite seem worth it; if someone wants to work on it in earnest and not just post the typical two liner then he has my blessing, it can always be redirected or brought to AfD again in a week if it doesn't chart.
Cheers, Amalthea 21:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not re-add the csd template as it no longer falls into that category. jenuk1985 (talk) 21:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kww. You have new messages at Jenuk1985's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thank you for your feedback. Trust me, I do want to go through the proper channels and procedures. However, I just feel this entire process was a bit of a waste of time, since this article IS going to keep re-appearing and several people DID maintain that the single was notable. Now I don't even know where to work on the article, since people keep messing with the logs, talk pages, etc. Perhaps someone will just have to start from scratch (again) in a few days. Thanks again for the note. -Whataworld06 (talk) 22:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's at User talk:Cameron Scott/My Life Would Suck Without You now if you've lost track of it, no need to start from scratch. :) --Amalthea 22:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NSONGS

First, if you haven't already, I'd suggest reading the footnotes to WP:BIO. There you will notice part of the purpose of some of those "sub" parts (i.e. how NSONGS is a sub of MUSIC). Part of the purpose of these "auto include" parts is to ensure coverage across the political spectrum and throughout history for like topics. But it also talks about how these people likely do have sources out there that would eventually allow for these people to pass the general N guideline. This helps address the issue with recentism of content. Most media produced in the world in the history of time is not available online, and large chunks that are online are only available via paid access. This means that say a song from 1959 that charted in 1959 could be included under the SNG guidelines (assuming a source for that is located), even though it could fail the GNG (a Top 40 chart does not provide substantial coverage to pass under N). And the song fails the GNG mainly because the content is not easily accessible. In essence the SNG guidelines are developed to help people determine what is notable in the absence of notability via N. They are designed to be more inclusive, not exclusive as each states at the top of each of these notability sub guidelines. As to forbid, it doesn't forbid any other than those that already fail N. Its more the other way around. And V (if proper applied) will kick out anything else as unsourced. Hopefully that helps. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boldness

Bold does have its limits. On the other hand, I confess, I'm surprised to see you back in the guideline discussion. After nearly 48 hours without you contributing to any of the major threads on the talk page, I had assumed you had abandoned the discussion.

My hope, of course, is that by the time you read this you will have already posted something to the talk page indicating a better sense of how you can be persuaded that this is the best compromise available and that it has consensus, or that you will finally present the much-awaited example of an article that would be wrongly kept under this guideline. Phil Sandifer (talk) 17:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't change my comments

You have neither disappeared nor vanished, and if there was any credible threat to you or anyone else, you wouldn't edit under any name at all. Do not take it upon yourself to change the contents of my statements at any time.—Kww(talk) 20:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do not refer to renamed users by their old usernames. Doing so is incivil and unnecessary. It adds nothing to constructive discussions. --A Nobody^My talk 20:33, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Labor Pains

Hi Kww. When you get a chance, would you mind looking at my comments at Talk:Labor Pains#Release date? If you agree perhaps you could make a change. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 22:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another one

Sorry to bother again, but could you take a look at Talk:A Little More Personal (Raw)#WP:CRYSTAL and see if any action is needed. I've also just created three sections on Talk:Lindsay Lohan that you might want to take a look at. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 16:24, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS

I think I was reading an old revision (when I last read the guideline closely) that didn't include the bolded phrase in the lede. However, it seems to have been bolded in the "nutshell" since before I got here. That's really very odd because I can remember a few dozen AfD discussions which would have been easier (maybe) if I had just said "RS==independent" and linked to that part of the guideline. Hmm. Protonk (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

United World Chart

Ooops! sorry didn't realise, just saw it used on some other articles and thought it was official. Wneedham02 (talk) 22:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Untouchable(Vanessa Hudgens Album)

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

head up

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption_of_wikipedia_to_push_an_unpopular_policy

Get your tinfoil hat out. Apparently you are in cahoots with Phil to make a stir about FICT so that it will be "canvassed" on AN/I. Protonk (talk) 13:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TLC

Hi. Just to let you know, you restored some content I fixed here on the TLC article. After reading WP:BADCHARTS, I'm guessing you wanted to remove the content about the United World Charts which falls under that policy. I went ahead and rolled back your edit because it added some inaccuracies (TLC has only won four Grammys, not five), an incorrectly formatted reference to a fansite of all things, and a wonky version of the awards chart that some IP tinkered with. I did however manually remove the United World Charts content per WP:BADCHARTS. Pinkadelica ^Say it... 01:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

support for fiction

I want to tell you that it is your somewhat unexpected support which at the last minute has caused me to also support the new WP:FICT. A good compromise is something that neither side really likes, but would prefer to the alternative of continued fighting and risk of total loss. What of course I will continue to defend is full and detailed content, whether merged or separate. DGG (talk) 03:40, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion?

What is your opinion on the notability of American Idol Hot 100 singles? It was just created on 20 January; quite frankly I was about to nominate it at WP:AfD but thought I'd get another opinion beforehand in case I was being a bit too critical. Seems too AI fangush-y to me. - eo (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I didn't notice it was started in 2008 - a year ago - still not sure of its relevance. Thoughts? - eo (talk) 21:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I went ahead and nominated it - apparently it was nearly deleted before. Chime in if you feel like it, we'll see how this one goes, either way: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Idol Hot 100 singles (2nd nomination). Later - eo (talk) 23:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brexx

Hi, can you please give me the low down on the edit behavior of Brexx, so I can spot his socks. Just found out that "Anywhere But Home" was a sock. — R^2 14:07, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

American Idol Hot 100 singles

I have made some changes to American Idol Hot 100 singles and since you voted Delete in the AfD, I would appreciate you looking at the article and telling me what you think. Aspects (talk) 19:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be?

I think so: Special:Contributions/4.224.186.180

Alis.Payan: contributions from the range

Hello Kww. At ANI you mentioned going through the last 100,000 edits to find anon contributions by this editor, so you may not have seen the CIDR gadget yet. The option is called: Allow /16 and /24 – /32 CIDR ranges on Special:Contributions forms.

When I checked Special:Contributions/200.88.94.0/24 I found hundreds of edits to show-business articles, so most likely they are all Alis.Payan. There were some scientific-looking edits from 2007 and earlier, but very few.

The block log for this range shows that the last previous block was only a softblock, but I agree with you that a 6-month hardblock is worth doing if checkuser approves it. EdJohnston (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The AnonEdits tool does sound useful; how can I get it? EdJohnston (talk) 14:55, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And...

The creator of the Katelyn Wyler article was User:BreeHills12, no other contribs, blocked per WP:DUCK (note the "12" in the username). Cheers, Black Kite 19:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neuro emotional technique

Hi I am the original poster, and was wondering what you didn't like about my research? I spent a lot of time and effort into it, only to find it keeps getting deleted. I thought encyclopedia articles were supposed to be explanatory as opposed to a paragraph or two. If you are familiar wit Neuro Emotional Technique and have better background knowledge of it, I would love to talk with you and perhaps we can come up with a better post. Please contact me if you would like to do so, as I think it might make for a post that we would both be happy with.

KBenSD KBenSD (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neuro emotional technique

Thank you for your response, you have some valid points. I will spend some more time with the article and see what edits would work for the benefit of the article as a whole - not just for you and me :) KBenSDKBenSD (talk) 19:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

an elaboration on that "good article" bit

Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Good_article_status

I get the feeling like my proposed change isn't much different from the previous wording that wasn't acceptable to you and Gavin (I was gone for that debate and I can't be arsed to dig through the archives). Can you drop by and take a look at it. GG seems to be pushing back against the GA thing and it is a battle I'm not interested in fighting if we don't actually mean GA status, but rather "this article could never possibly be improved from a permastub without huge masses of PLOT info", then we should probably yield a bit. Let me know if I'm giving away the cow w/ the milk. Protonk (talk) 00:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Peace
		The Barnstar of Peace is awarded to users who have helped to peacefully resolve conflicts on Wikipedia. This barnstar is awarded to Kww, for his willingness to comprimise and negotiate, and his incredible help in building a better wikipedia. Ikip (talk) 17:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for closing the Despues de Todo AfD, Ikip (talk) 17:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another Brexx sock??

I think we should keep an eye on Martzi Xmas (talk · contribs). Edits look suspicious. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 18:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Protection Program

With respects inre this edit diff, The cast listing at IMDB for this completed film lists Allison Liddi as director[5]. It also shows she is also know as Allison Liddi-Brown[6]. While certainly IMDB has credibility problems in many areas, consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films accepts their cast listings as reliable once a film has been completed. The listings in the provided New York Times source also confirms Allison Liddi-Brown as director[7], so we have confirmation and further verification. Further, the cast listing at IMDB[8] and at the New York Times[9] both WP:Verify the information. Since neither is a primary source and the information is not controversial or inflamatory, with respects I will be returning it and show it as attributed to the Times. Good catch. Schmidt, ^MICHAEL Q. 04:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mr._Krabs.jpg

I'm curious as to your standard of evidence. The image is clearly a screenshot from a Spongebob Squarepants, and "Mr Krabs" is the name of a character in Spongebob Squarepants. What do I need to say to persuade you that the image is speediable as a copyright violation?—Kww(talk) 12:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with children's cartoons, and not having seen your edit summary there was no way for me to connect the image with Spongebob Squarepants. Deleted now. Stifle (talk) 13:42, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very long

This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving. Stifle (talk) 13:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or just kill it with fire. Protonk (talk) 14:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
		Man, you are way more patient than I; I think you may have been involved with a guy who got into an edit war with himself :) Keep up the good work ! Duke53 | ^Talk 05:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]