Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 18:37, 26 October 2011

Take That

You may care to check your information at ASCAP.com. I have reverted Patience and quoted a reference, do you want to amend the others? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

No worries, i'll sort it, thanks for pointing it out!

Yids2010 (talk) 01:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Take That

Why is the release date of The Flood wrong? If you look below, you see that the release date of Denmark was October 15 and we always write the first release date above, don't we? So I don't see anything wrong with the info I wrote... Hello...--79.216.213.42 (talk) 20:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

because it wasnt officially released on that date, see the sources provided, the one you refer to was a leaked promo. Yids2010 (talk) 15:17, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Armbrust _Contribs 00:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Take That discog

hey, thought i'd explain some of my changes on here. 1) IRMA does not certify it's singles, so the irish flood certification is false. 2) their is no existing reliable source for the irish album chart pre-2000, so even if albums charted highly their is no way of proving it so they can't be included. 3) mediatraffic.de is a very very bad source for anything and it always contains mistakes. if it does indeed get it's sales info from music week, then find the music week article. 4) i removed the eu and italian certifications because their positions are not included in the tables. per WP:DISCOGSTYLE they should not be included. - i could not find the irish cert for the ultimate collection in the irma site, thats why that was removed. Mister sparky (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

haha it's cool, i don't always read things either lol Mister sparky (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

No worries mate! Yids2010 (talk) 22:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

i removed the italian one cuz the positions aren't in the table, i wasn't saying it doesnt exist lol. Mister sparky (talk) 22:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

It's live... and it may be more helpful than not

See Misplaced Pages:Future Films Schmidt, 07:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Tt progress.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tt progress.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (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 "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:55, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

This has already been discussed and the deletion file has been removed as it does not meet WP:CSD guidelines. Yids2010 (talk) 12:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

User

Hi Yids. I just wanted to ask a question. There is this user, Fatty2k10 who is continuing to remove sourced stuff (Gary Barlow now X Factor judges) and acting in an agressive manner, how can we stop him doing this? --SATURDAYmight. (talk) 09:14, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Itsbydesign

Yes, I know he's a trouble some user. There's no indication of why he's removing the information and sponsors are as important to the article, not some dumb rule he pointed out. Just keep in mind his one point, "not to cut/paste quotes", else if he fails to provide reasoning and continues to vandalize, raise an ANI thread and report him. Misplaced Pages does not need disruptive users like him. — Legolas 05:10, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

trying to figure out

I'm trying to figure out the purpose of this. Why would using a redirect to the template better than using the template itself? Am I missing something here? Best regards.--Muhandes (talk) 07:27, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Widespread edit war

Everyone needs to calm down and look at things more closely. Taking Shine (Take That song), for example, I discovered that the references to the Belgian Tip charts weren't correct: Swisscharts.com does not reflect Belgian Tip positions. I used the singlechart template, and now we have correctly referenced positions. I looked at the Czech chart, however, and it was fine: the reference indicates what to place in the search bar, and, when you do that, the Czech position shows as described. Everyone slow down, stop reverting each other, and actually check the material that is being put in and taken out. If this keeps up, it's possible that I'll block everyone involved.—Kww(talk) 17:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your involvement, it is very welcome. Yids2010 (talk) 17:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I've determined that you were dealing with a long-term disruptive editor, Pesf. His strategy, however, seemed to be removing blocks of good data along with a little bit of bad. You really should go over the articles where you have been reverting Madiera1234 and check the material. There's probably at least one real problem mixed in with the invalid reverts.—Kww(talk) 19:46, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and yes I will check over the articles right now. Thanks again.Yids2010 (talk) 01:18, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Kidz (song)

Continuing on the spirit of our mutual understanding, in Kidz (song) you added a certification giving top40-charts.com as the source. You were probably not aware that top40-charts.com is on WP:BADCHARTS and should be avoided. I removed the source and tagged with "citation needed", and rather than remove it, I ask that you either find a reliable source or remove it yourself. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Another one on the same article. You added a certification, however, the source is not specific enough and does not in fact verify the fact - neither the song nor the band appear on the page. I did not touch this line, so I just ask that you either provide a specific source, or remove the certification. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Rule the World

I'm sorry but this is more of the same. Following Kww's advice I went over some of the deletes Madiera1234 did, and indeed Madiera1234's modus operandi is to remove good material with bad. In this case, you added to Rule the World a certification with a source that does not verify the fact. Neither the band nor the song appear on the page provided. On the spirit of our understanding I did not remove it, and I ask that you either provide a proper source, or remove the certification yourself. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

And I'm afraid another one on the same page. here you added another certification without verifying source. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 08:45, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Although I notified you of the above a week ago, you still have no corrected it. I really do not want to remove this, per our understanding, but you have to do your part of the deal, which is to either find reliable sources, or remove the material yourself. For now, I replaced the inappropriate sources with {{cn}}, but they should not stay there without a source. Please advise me on how you think this should be handled. --Muhandes (talk) 23:27, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

This applies to the Polish chart for Kidz (song) as well. --Muhandes (talk) 00:16, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Im trying to keep control of these users deleting loads of information and pretending to take away or change something minor. Thing is the sources that were provided gave the correct information but as time moves on they are moved or lost when they were correct when posted. Same goes for alot of articles, not just the Take That ones as im sure you are aware. I haven't had loads of time recently, bare with me, or by all means help me out as you did with the German Progressed chart. Yids2010 (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

They don't just remove an unsourced peak, they, for example, remove one unsourced peak and 4 or 5 sourced charts. I will remove the unsourced peaks myself then and re-add them when i find the source if that is what you wish? Yids2010 (talk) 22:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I think that would be the appropriate way to handle it. --Muhandes (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for handling these. I see that the pages were semi-protected, so I took them off my watchlist again. If you ever need me to put them back on let me know. --Muhandes (talk) 08:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

No problem mate, thanks for your help and I will do. Yids2010 (talk) 09:55, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Gary Barlow

You have on multiple occasions removed fully-referenced and accurate information from this article without reason. Please refrain from doing so. If you wish to request its removal, do so on the Talk Page and provide justification for doing so within Misplaced Pages's guidelines. Jammy07 (talk) 17:33, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

If you feel so strongly about mentioning it then put it on the The X Factor (UK) article as it is about the show not individuals. It will continue to be removed from the Gary Barlow article as there is proof. What tabloids say is one thing but no statements have been made regarding it and insiders say it never happen. The definition of an inconclusive story. Yids2010 (talk) 17:38, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Barlow is mentioned specifically as being involved in the incident rather than any of the other judges. The story has been widely reported and not just in the tabloids, the references show. If you wish to remove it discuss it on the talk page of the article in question, not simply here. Jammy07 (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

They all quote one tabloid, The Sun, which carried an exclusive story heading when it was printed and the twist on the story is categorically denied on the last paragraph of the original article here. I understand you are acting in good faith but it is not appropriate for the article as there is no conclusive evidence. Best Yids2010 (talk) 22:44, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

TT

What is your problem with my edits PLEASE LEAVE THEM ALONE!!!! --Equalizer2011 (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

This has got to be one of the lamest edit wars I have ever seen. Seriously? Over including the century in a year and two line breaks? Yids2010 and Equalizer2011 you are both hereby warned that you are edit warring in violation of the three-revert rule; continuing to edit war will result in both of you being blocked from editing. Edit warring is not an acceptable way to resolve an editing dispute, even if you are right.

Equalizer, you do not own "your" edits. Below the "Save Page" button on every edit window appears the text "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." —KuyaBriBri 18:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)