Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:15, 25 May 2010

Welcome to my talk page! Please feel free to bring discussions here from other pages, but please use a diff or quote. Please use diffs when talking about edits. If you leave me a message on my talk page, I will reply on my talk page, so you may want to watch this page. I check my watchlist regularly. I usually add talk pages to my watchlist if I comment on them. And don't forget to sign your messages with four tildes, like this: ~~~~ Thank you.

Welcome

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

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

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! JBsupreme (talk) 16:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Copy editing for Lisa the Vegetarian?

Nope, User:Scartol copyedited it for me. I've removed it from the list. :) Theleftorium 14:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Request for assistance in completing contribution

KCKN disambiguation (moved here from User page)

Hi John:

I was doing pretty well for the past few weeks. I came back today (12-20-09)to complete the contribution: "KCKN (defunct)". I have really gotten off track and cannot get my ending section/paragraphs sraightened out. Hopefully, you can help me.

On a related matter, one of the editors was asking how this might be better distinguished from the similar, "KCKN, Roswell, NM". My suggestion is the in be changed as follows:

KCKN (defunct in Kansas)

Do you think this would clearly separate it from the present KCKN (AM1020) in New Mexico?

Thank you. Jack Lester

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jack Lester (talk • contribs) 20:00, 20 December 2009

Thanks...

...and I hope you have a great time this Christmas season. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 13:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Poker Face (lady gaga song).

I apoligize for getting rid of quotations, i was mistaken and just removed them and left the "bolded title". I see u have reverted my "good faith edit", thank you. Hope u can understand. Bye for now. --Huik01 (talk) 05:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: "World single of the year"

No problem! :) Apparently the info came from the United World Chart website, which mantains year-end charts (though not all of them matched), but since the UWC was deemed unverifiable, it cannot be used on Misplaced Pages. However, the IFPI does publish official global year-end charts listing the best-selling albums and digital singles of the year (under "Top 50 Global Sellers"). Hope it helps! Funk Junkie (talk) 18:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Woop

I was unwittingly reading a fakepost that said it was called Duggar Trash, my bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! --96.243.180.45 (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

That must be why the R is included in RS. ;-) — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 03:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Rude Boy

Billboard says Rude Boy debuted at 93. Candyo32 (talk) 14:50, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Documentation

Excellent job on the singlechart documentation. Do you think an example of mixing singlechart calls with manually formatted entries would be a worthwhile addition?—Kww(talk) 05:11, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, I think it would be useful, and your question made me wonder why you couldn't see it; I was pretty sure I'd put it in there. Turns out (apparently) that I hadn't, but I have been doing exactly that over in the sandbox to get familiar with how the template works. I guess the manual thing didn't make it over to the doc with all the other stuff I tried to cram in there.

I'm beat right now and must sleep (rather than mess something up), but I'll be glad to add it in later, along with whatever else (like lie corrections) we think of by then. ZZZzzzzzz — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 05:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Fencing

The error is really strange... I will immediately investigate and fix the problem. Thank you for your message. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 19:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Simply inexplicable. I applied the same script to the same page (old revisions placed in this sandbox) and everything was fine. Really odd also the double edit of the page (it was in auto mode!)... maybe a bug of the pywikipedia suite. Please, let me know if you see any other problem. Thank you! -- Basilicofresco (msg) 20:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Rihanna 2006 Tour

Thanks for the help. Bearian (talk) 23:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Barber's pole‎

Now that you cleverly eliminated the link to "some building" that had a red and white ONLY barber's pole, I would suggest you find another. Eliminating links connotes other responsiblities -- and I am sure you are up to the task. Such a picture is missing from this article. It was not put there gratuitously, or to promote some English barbershop. Happy editing. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC) Stan

Good job!. Much better than the link, I think. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC) Stan

Collaboration is good. We now have a better 'product' for our 'customers.' 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2010 (UTC) Stan

re:Rihanna discography intro

Howdy. First, I really appreciate all the work you're doing with the discogs - I know it ain't easy when dealing with the pop-music stuff. Anyway I'll keep this quick cuz, well, ya know, it's Saturday morning and I'm hungover and not fully caffeinated yet, heh. Anyhoo, I didn't mean to insult or anything by calling it pretentious... actually, I had started to write this long diatribe on the talk page about how overly-detailed the intro was, and then I just thought 'screw it' and axed the header. I dont know exactly when or how, but discog pages suddenly began to get more and more verbose in the intros. Personally I don't like it, but several featured lists have them, so not much I can do there. I think someone as relatively 'new' as Rihanna doesn't need this gigantic, release-by-release description of her music output. If anything I'd love to see it cropped a bit but I am very familiar with how 'the fans' are. Did I say I was gonna keep this quick? - eo (talk) 14:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't template experienced users

Please don't use impersonal templates to warn experienced users, like you did to Okip here. It's considered bad practice. Fran Rogers❇ 23:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

thanks for the heads up john. Okip 23:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Jeodin

Re: this warning. Next time, I'd use {{subst:uw-vandalism4|Lass uns laufen|'''You must not add charts listed at ] to Misplaced Pages articles'''}}. It's obvious that he isn't listening, and in those cases a short block is the only thing that seems to wake them up. Sometimes a final warning does the trick.—Kww(talk) 14:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Leave me a note next time instead of warning directly if you are reticent. I've left numerous level 4 warnings for BADCHART violations, and have never had a problem getting follow-through from admins.—Kww(talk) 03:10, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Jeodin.—Kww(talk) 21:34, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Somehow, Kevin, I won't miss doing my weekly reversion of Friend Jeodin's efforts. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 23:42, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Italics

LOL. That was some essay. Personally I feel that its ok with the italics. Its an MOS issue that online sources are not to be italicized. However, the work parameter forces the italics jargon on the word added in it. Adding italics cancels it and renders the final version as non-slanted. If we need to change, we should change {{cite web}}, {{cite news}} etc so that user's can chose to italicize whichever source they feel like. --Legolas 11:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

RE:

I didn't uploaded the image. I just completed what the notice said. So, whatever. Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 02:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Please don't bore me. I have already changed what you said. If you don't like, do whatever you want, propose the elimination of the file, whatever. One more thing, my talk page is not your garbage, where you can put whatever you want. Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 03:32, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Real nice attitude. You get to write on my Talk page, but I'm not allowed to write on yours. Right neighborly of you. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 03:47, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes I'm nice, thanks. You're always complaining. You can write in my talk page, but then I put in the archive, and give my answer in your talk page, like any other normal user. Do you understand? Or do you need a cartoon? Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 04:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

The reason I have continued to revise your edit, is because your wrong. If your where to go to www.billboard.com you will see your mistake for yourself. Every single that reaches #1 on the Hot 100 has always had the following weeks ending as the date the #1 single was issued, this is a fact that seems to be unknown to you. For example yes "Rude Boy" reached #1 on Thursday, Ma —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.12.100 (talk) 15:05, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

"Rude Boy" Is The #1 single for March 27, 2010 not March 18, 2010!!!!!!!

If your were to go to www.billboard. com you would see that every #1 single has and always probably will be issued with the following Saturday, as the day the song was issued not when it reached #1. So yes "Rude Boy" reached #1 on Thursday, March 18, 2010 but it wasn't issued until Saturday, March 27, 2010. This is the practice of Billboard, if you have a problem with it you should write them. It was an honest mistake that you keep making, we all make them but I will fix it once again. Remember go to the website and you will see for yourself, so you wont continue vandalizing someone elses work!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.12.100 (talk) 15:10, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Brodie Pasten

Hello JohnFromPinckney, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Brodie Pasten, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to television programs. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 21:58, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Wait, you really believe this is a real television show? Starring Sandra Bullock?

I am quite convinced that this article is a joke made by some guy who has included members of his family in a description of a fake TV show, where siblings, parents, etc. are played by famous people the author thought would be funny. Google has heard of this name only from WP; the IMDb articles for Sandra Bullock, Madison Pettis, Michael Poryes have no mention of this "project", and IMDb's search returns no matches for "Brodie Pasten", either as person or show title.

Maybe it should be deleted as a hoax. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't read the article closely enough to see the cast members. My first (and only) thought was that creative works aren't eligible for speedy deletion under A7. Thanks for digging in a little. — Malik Shabazz /_Stalk 22:54, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

No, no: thank you. It was easier for me to see what a farce that article was after I reverted a series of that user's other facetious edits. Cheers, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 00:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

UK R&B Chart

I brought it up in Record Charts because it wasn't archived, so I asked if I could use a non-clickable link based on the Music Week ref, it was turned down but most people just said that the chart isn't needed or shouldn't be used when it charted on the main chart. It's somewhere on Misplaced Pages:Record charts discussion page, I don't know exactly how long ago it was though, sorry! Jayy008 (talk) 22:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Fortunately, the beings on my planet are equipped with powers unknown here on Earth, and are aided with a level of technology unparalleled in this part of the galaxy. My clairvoyance told me that the discussion began some 19 days and seven hours before the note here, and by mentally flipping through the posts from that time period that I had memorized when I scanned through the WP server logs last Friday during my lunch break, I was able to divine this URL: Misplaced Pages talk:Record charts#UK R.26B Chart. Wow, I'm good (no need for you to kneel). ;-) — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 01:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Lol, well I'm glad you found it. Jayy008 (talk) 00:12, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages: Record charts

Hello, I will be glad to support it, but I think still that the old certifications should be shown, not simply a date of when the new ones came into effect, if that's changed then I will post my support. Jayy008 (talk) 15:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Having problems posting

Hi John I got your message regarding my post. I think I figured this talk thing out. I can understand why you think I might be starting a campaign. Please note that I am not. What would you suggest I do to make my post permanent. Understand it is hard to get the controversy off Twitter (as it seems one sided and out of context) as well as you need to understand the symptoms to catch it on the video. What would you suggest so we can work together and make everyone happy. I am not breaking any rules or the five pillars that I can see. Jrfoldes (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your post! I have moved it down to the bottom, so that the postings appear in (rough) order from top to bottom. It is the usual way.

The short answer is that you need reliable sources indicating that this is a notable controversy. That means the YouTube video showing 1-1/2 minutes of commercial for the show is not useful here, because nowhere does a character say something like, "That's our brother PJ, he's got bipolar disorder." The article you included as a reference from bphope.com may explain about BP, but doesn't point to PJ in Good Luck Charlie (and how could it? The show hasn't aired yet.) to indicate a clear example of BP. No Disney official has even hinted at BP in the show, so no third-party source has remarked on it in print or on-air. There's nothing connecting PJ and BP except you, and even if you were a doctor and PJ were a real person, it still wouldn't be good enough, until your diagnosis were printed in a scientific journal or your discussion of PJ's condition at a press conference were reported on by the TV stations.

What we do have is a bunch of tweets (hardly the most reliable of sources) from you, the same individual who's trying to add this "controversy" which, apparently, nobody else has heard of. And these tweets indicate (a) that you think it'd be "awesome" if PJ had BP; (b) that you know Disney has not set PJ up as a BP character, but that you think "they should"; and (c) that you want to start a campaign promoting the idea you're trying to claim is a controversy over in Misplaced Pages. Do you see that this is an obvious conflict of interest? Those tweets only make it appear to other editors that you lack a neutral attitude to that aspect of that article, so your edits automatically appear suspect. The lack of an article from, say, The New York Times or even the E! Web site make WP editors move toward reverting your edits on that matter (and, unfortunately, any other edits you make in the future will get scrutinized more closely as well). What you need is a reliable, third-party source connecting PJ and BP (and then it needs to talk about some controversy, which is another thing, too).

Does this help you at all? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll try to gather more evidence before I attempt to repost this or any other entry. Please note the discussion is being made on secure message boards so obviously no ref link can be made. Please don't make the assumption that no one else has heard of this "controversy". I would like to remind you that those are just my tweets and they are easily taken out of context w/o the other parties, which if I were in your shoes I would assume it was made up as well. Thanks for the help in clarifying Misplaced Pages policies. You were much more informative then the other moderators. Jrfoldes (talk) 21:12, 27 March 2010 (UTC) P.S. Can I now be entitled to a "haw-haw" moment should Disney go with the bipolar thing? :-P

Well, whatever may be brewing behind the walls of the message boards, we can't do anything about it on this side until it breaks into the open on its own (usually means mainstream media: gossip and entertainment rags first, then newspapers and serious mags).

And WP doesn't really have moderators; you've been interacting with editors, which is what you and I are. They may have more experience than you, but stick around and some day you'll be helping newbies find their way yourself. Good luck! — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 21:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Another Note

I think you may have accidentally removed some entries by other users (I actually just edited them) in error when you deleted mine. Jrfoldes (talk) 19:48, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not worried, but I'll look at it. By the way, please consider using more meaningful headings. Something like, "Inadvertent reverts on Good Luck Charlie?" might have been good here. Thanks, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

As expected, looks like separate, deliberate edits on my part. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 21:30, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Record Charts / Billboard Components

I've made an alteration to the table. Does this help? Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:32, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

do you think the new table suffices? of course there is much debate to be had about which charts are deemed component charts so the exact position of the charts could change.Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:50, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

No, I'm still unhappy (sorry). I'm working on describing what I think we could improve on it. It's not terribly simple (but you knew that already). — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 18:03, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Confused: From the current table prototype it looks like Rhythmic Airplay Chart is a component of Hot R&B/Hip Songs (as well as of Hot 100 Airplay), but in your tree analysis above, that doesn't seem to be the case. Which is right? — JohnFromPinckney (talk)

Apologies. I've got my wires crossed. Apoligies. i've been through that many billboard and wikipedia pages i've gotten several things wrong. I've modified and simplified the table. I've also used more instructional comments from your flow diagram (its not complete waste). what do you think now? Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:02, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I can't keep track of the details anymore, but the form of it looks okay to me. Good work. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 02:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Radio adds

I don't like it either, but when a song's only released to radio, it isn't allowed to be called "Release history" if it only has radio a radio release. But if it has both they are separated, I'll try and find you the discussion, but trust me it's a lot of reading! I argued it out alot lol. Jayy008 (talk) 18:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

A better example is "Blah Blah Blah". 'Release' means being sold as a 'single' independent of the album track with a DIFFERENT digital release date from the album or a physical release (CD or other).
Radio date is NOT generally recognized as a 'release date' as it is a 'promotion date'. Radio adds is the date that the Record Label wants it to start receiving Radio play. Many insisted that the 'radio promotion date' be included in the table of 'Release history' and not just mentioned in the article text. A compromise position seen at "Blah Blah Blah" is to indicate that Radio material is included in the section with the use of section title 'Radio and release history' and then listing each portion individually in a table. Thus the infobox 'Release date' = the earliest date in the 'Release history' table and NOT the 'Radio add date(s)' table. I am open for possible alternate titles from 'Radio adds' or 'Radio add date(s)'.—Iknow23 (talk) 01:28, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I edited "Put It in a Love Song" Radio adds > Radio add date(s). I believe that I prefer this better also. Less confusion with the possible thought of Radio 'advertising'.—Iknow23 (talk) 01:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Please note text 'made available to U.S radio.' instead of 'released to U.S radio.' Sometimes it is seen as 'officially sent to impact radio' or similar but should not contain the word, 'release(d)' as when discussing radio.—Iknow23 (talk) 02:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay, whatever you say. I'm too uninformed about that area to understand what the differences could be (and I don't know what impact radio is). I have to confess that I don't even fully comprehend the idea of the single (and here I am meddling in all these music articles!). I'm still interested in seeing the discussion about the "radio adds" term though. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 02:23, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Radio adds, Radio impact, officially impacts radio...are terms that the industry uses for the date that the Record Label wants it to start receiving Radio play. I prefer your edit even more :) to 'Radio add dates'. In addition to adhearing to WP style (you point out), it also looks much less awkward because the parentheses are removed. I had adopted someone else's resolution as seen at "Blah Blah Blah" and that is how 'they' did it. I am more than happy to now adopt your tweak. I do compromise and I am willing to accept improvements if I agree. :)—Iknow23 (talk) 02:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Great, then we're very similar; I'm glad to do things your way as long as that's the way I wanted to do it. :-) And thanks for helping me separate "Impact Radio" (I figured, a Clear Channel competitor) from "sending something so as to impact radio". Me get now. Ugh. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 02:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

ROFL. Great!—Iknow23 (talk) 02:51, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

New billboard chart policy

As per consensus at WP:record charts there is a new guide to using Billboard Charts available at Billboard charts guide. Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs) (formerly known just as Pop Songs) is no longer deemed a component chart - there is no evidence to support this motion.Lil-unique1 (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Jubilee♫clipman 06:18, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Jeodin

I think you should take it to level 4 the next time: immediately resuming an edit-war that resulted in a two-week block isn't something you have to go through four steps again over.—Kww(talk) 23:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Check. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 23:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Ur warning

I already have appoligized for the edit summary i got pissed but then i tried to undo what i did but it was already done STATicVerseatide talk 01:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Record Charts

Hey John, You left a length post on the at talk page of WP:record charts which i've attempted to address. Can youy please take a look then we can decide what to do next. =)Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:53, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Yup, I'm clean!

Young, fresh and new. SnapSnap (talk) 13:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Admins

Excuse me, but that was rude, we want to ask an admin because they can tell us if it's possible even for a fansite to be used as a ref, if it is, then it will be brought up for discussion on Carey's page for anybody to support or object. Jayy008 (talk) 01:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes I see what you mean, but it's not a decision, all we want to know is if it's possible, and an Admin can tell us. It's as simple as that, if it goes beyond that, then everybody can join in if it goes as far as discussion. Because the rule is fansites aren't credible, but I want to know if there's even a point of bringing it up for discussion. Jayy008 (talk) 01:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

When you put it that way John, it makes sense. Misplaced Pages isn't a classroom where students ask a teacher for permission, it's a community of editors who make rules and decisions together. I agree, however some editors Iv'e dealt with are stubborn and will not take that as an answer, which is why the word of an Admin is helpful, though I personally don't deem it necessary. Now in terms of knowledge, I can tell you Kevin probably has some of the most extensive knowledge and judgement on Misplaced Pages. He's never made a biased decision, and has always acted truthfully and good faith, and doesn't do things secretly. These are traits even most Admins DON'T have. Iv'e seen Admins do foolish things, things that could have costed them their position. This is why I always go to Kevin and will continue, I just would also appreciate the input of an Admin, not for the advice, but just for skin deep, to be able to say and Admin approved, for the more stubborn editors.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

No no, the rude part was it just seemed very deemening, but if it wasn't intentional I apologize. I always like to ask an Admin where I stand on something, because they have power to do a lot of things on here not just blocking and protecting. Kww is very experienced yes, but he cannot do those things, so I only trouble non-admin's if I think there's no other choice, I always believe an Admin has the title to help others, I don't like troubling other users when there's no need when it's not their "job" so to speak. Sorry for the mis-understanding :) Jayy008 (talk) 12:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey John, I really appreciate all the effort you put into explaining it in a friendly and educated way. I want you to know your opinion is very welcome when we present our argument, and look forward to working with you and more editors like yourself in the future!.--PeterGriffin • Talk 15:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Peter. I feel bad that I got Jamie upset. He's another user with more experience in music articles than I have in WP in general, so being demeaning was about the opposite of how I'd like to approach him. I wanted to find out his (your) reasoning, then found myself arguing against that reasoning, when I really was trying to understand what I missed.

I get rather verbose sometimes, but I'd rather spend some time writing (and reading) clear explanations than having people get upset with me through misunderstandings. It appears that this time I hit that middle ground where I failed both, at least for a while. I hope it's all clear now. Thanks again for your friendly words. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:GOODCHARTS editing

There's a little bit of a trick to editing GOODCHARTS. It was an accident, but it's so good at keeping vandalism down that I've never been able to bring myself to fix it. Go give it a try: go to WP:GOODCHARTS and click the "edit" button, and see if it doesn't take you a moment to figure out what to do.—Kww(talk) 15:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah! Now I see!

And... damn! That's pretty tricky. I had to take a couple of runs at it. But I'm in. Now I can finally add the Pinckney Hot 147 Punk/Country Ringtones Chart. ;-) — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 19:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Airplay, Billboard & Digital Charts review

Hello, i was wondering if you could give your opinion of the following as part of the final review process for WP:USCHARTS before it is fully promoted to policy. Discussion. Thanks. Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:10, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Rihanna: Live in Concert Tour

Hello. Thanks for the information. I was referencing a photocopy of a ticket from her show at the Mezzanine. The ticket stated, "Rihanna Live in Concert". However, the website seems to have deleted the image so I will begin to see if I can find another copy. On the Def Jam website News section, it does mention, "The Live Tour" as a title but whenever I try to access the article, it redirects back to the main page. Since the tour was over four years ago, its becoming hard to find information about it, but I will continue to look. I did not know about the WP:SWAP feature. I thought reverting the edits would work. I believe the title "Rihann 2006 Tour" was a title the creator came up with to create the article. Thanks for your input Itsbydesign (talk) 07:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

street single

New one on me. I'm tempted to treat it as a leak.—Kww(talk) 15:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

OLJO

I can't see any reason to treat http://www.oljo.de/eurochart_eu_chart/eu100.shtml as reliable. Can you?—Kww(talk) 03:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Of all the various "Eurochart"s hanging around, Billboard's is the only one I know to be reliable. It is a mirror of another chart, but I don't have a URL for that chart online. Replacing any or all with the Billboard chart seems reasonable. {{singlechart}} calls it the "Eurochart Hot 100".—Kww(talk) 15:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Is that (singlechart usage) a good thing? Are you using "Eurochart" as some generic term, meaning something like "a chart of European singles"? I've been understanding it as a specific (branded) chart name, which may be why I'm confused.

If {{singlechart}} is expanding to "Eurochart Hot 100", but pointing to a Billboard thingy which we call European Hot 100 Singles and Billboard calls "European Hot 100", I think we ought to change the {{singlechart}} code to the latter. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 00:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Done. You can look at articles in Category:Singlechart usages for Billboardeuropeanhot100 to double check my work.—Kww(talk) 03:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Cool! It's like the story about the guy who has elves doing all this work while he sleeps. ;-) I did add a tweak to the template, so that the ref line also uses "European" instead of "Eurochart". You may have left that deliberately, so feel free to revert if I've messed it up (it was also my first-ever template edit, I believe). Thanks again, Kevin! — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 10:11, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Jaan00732

So far I've been assuming that this is a bewildered refugee from Spanish Misplaced Pages. I'm having a hard time still believing that. Can you come up with any good faith explanation for this edit summary? The actual revision id flagged is this one.—Kww(talk) 22:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I agree, he's out to make me regret assuming good faith for him. For a while thought it was just a problem of ability, but his last edit to Rude Boy, adding United World chart, cinched it for me; I now believe he's a deliberate menace.

I also studied his claim of self-reversion and couldn't work out how he managed what his summary claimed. I know I have performed a simple reversion and then, before saving, seen one or two little things I might as well change at the same time... suddenly the reversion is the smallest of the changes I'm making. For Jaan's edit, though, it seems to be a completely different thing.

He's going slowly enough at the moment that he hasn't needed a block (IMO), but when he decides to be active, the block ought to come quickly. It's a bloody nuisance cleaning up after him. He's actually got 7 notices (after my welcome) on his Talk in 3 days, so we've been plenty friendly, helpful, and lenient. When and for how long he gets blocked is up to, er, some admins. Those decisions are why you get the big money. ;-) — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 23:06, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

If it starts again, I'll indef him until he agrees to behave. The cleanup has been a real pain, sprawling over multiple edits on multiple articles. On Spanish wikipedia, he has simply been copying our chart tables onto theirs, eliminating all sourcing and referencing along the way because Spanish Misplaced Pages doesn't support {{singlechart}}.23:14, 7 May 2010 (UTC)—Kww(talk)

Ha, niiice. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 00:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked here now, and I don't really expect him back. He's making friends on Spanish Misplaced Pages now.—Kww(talk) 02:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

What a strange little gremlin. Odd pattern of vandalism. Can't say I'll miss him. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 00:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

User:RyanG222

I've had to report User talk:RyanG222

• Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic the distuptive editing of discographies and vandalism by RyanG222. Thank you. — Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Your comment

I was talking about three warnings for things I didn't do. About those personal attack notices I have said sorry to that editor. STAT -Verse 23:02, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

2nd ANI for iLuvrihanna24

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Iluvrihann24's POV-pushing, disobeyal of community opinion/practises and repeated disruption of Rated R, Rihanna discography and "Te Amo". Thank you. Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

re... sorry. I only notified you because your reverted an edit of Iluvrihanna24 which i've brought up at ANI. Thanks for the advice. In fututre i'll try and be a bit more specific. And yes im aware of WP:CANVAS and that's not my intention here. But again thanks for the heads up. Lil-unique1 (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I've reverted lots of her edits. Lots and lots of them. It was practically a hobby until I got smart enough to unwatch a few of the Rihanna pages.

The thing about WP:CANVAS is that it's rather easy to get tangled up in it even with the best of intentions, yet it's not widely enough known by editors (until they tangled in it). — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:46, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I need your help

Unfortunately you are the only admin I can trust and can give a reasonable answer without talking in riddles. Who do I complain to when a user is going in removing all references from an article then posting said article for speedy deletion. This individual has done this three times and has even had a valid entry deleted. I know they are doing it deliberately towards me as some of the articles aren't even related. If I can give you the name of the articles can I get your help, even though I had to fix them again?