User talk:VerySwaggful

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, VerySwaggful! I am Worm That Turned and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for your contributions. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out Wikipedia:Questions, or feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or type {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

Worm^TT 07:29, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you read the blurb I left you on the other page and that the resolution of the Like a Surgeon issue is acceptable to you. Worm^TT 08:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Album/single covers[edit]

Lescharts.com (or any other steffan hung / hung medien website) is not a reliable source for covers. Often multiple covers are uploaded to the website some are clearly fanmade ones such as LIKE A SURGEON. Even the BBC is guilty of using fan-made covers. E.g. here: BBC Radio 1 Playlist uses a fanmade cover for Diddy-Dirty Money - Ass on the Floor even though a proper cover already exists. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 19:58, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Ciara-like a surgeon s.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ciara-like a surgeon s.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:00, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting[edit]

Hi there! I would just like to tell you to please be careful when reverting to an earlier version of an article. Constructive and non-constructive edits can often be mixed together, so use of the preview button is highly recommended. Regarding your edit to Lady Gaga discography here, you undid the previous edit, which was the update of a record certification. Just a note for next time. Thanks! Yves (talk) 02:27, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Like a Surgeon[edit]

We already went through this several months ago and we resolved the issue that "Like A Surgeon" was a single. So why have you now decided to go back on that and decide that its not a single after all? You need to learn to engage in discussion with others otherwise you could easily find yourself blocked/banned for disruption!. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 19:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You yourself agreed the issue was resolved. The label confirmed "Like A Surgeon" as a single, then it was added to radio in the United States. Because the album flopped promotion was halted. Songs do not need music videos to be called singles equally they don't have to chart. Billboard is the US chart provider and they reviewed the song in their singles section. Its a well known fact now that Ciara has experienced issues with her label and single choices. Hence references to the 'flop' singles were removed by most websites (e.g. "Go Girl"). Yet the Billboard references come from a physical magazine and so will always exist. They clearly talk about the song as the third US single and its release to radio in June. Its crystal clear from where I'm stood. I don't understand why people take the whole 'Stanning' thing too seriously. All artists experience dips in their career... as an encylopeadia wikipedia should be factual, that means reporting facts even if individual editors don't like it. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 11:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard singles reviews only happen after single release. So that in itself is proof that the single was released. Urban/R&B releases are more notorious to source radio dates for as there isn't a fully functional archive. At the time of release, both me and Candyo32 worked on the article and the album's article. I can assure you that the radio date was in June 2009 but like I said we couldn't source an exact date but we could source a June 2009 release. If you have further issues bring it up on the article talk page instead of mine cus I'm fed up of defending a consensus that formed, which you were part of. As for Go Girl, you cited an MTV article which called "Never Ever" the albumis first single and "Go Girl" a promo, whereas I cited an article from MTV that earlier on clearly said "Go Girl" was the first single. You can't undo a single release... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 23:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Block[edit]

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

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

Request reason:

I am here to appeal a block that says I'm a sockpuppet of VictoriaJusticeFan. Firstly, I have never edited the page about Victoria Justice and our contributions don't match a single bit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/VictoriaJusticeFan1. So, why am I being tried for sockpuppetry?--VerySwaggful (talk) 02:40, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

We sincerely apologize for the mix-up. I have taken the liberty and fixed the mistake. Elockid (Alternate) ^(Talk) 13:00, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Request reason:

How am I a sock of TrEeMaNsHoE, when all I have done is upload new info for pages, and stated my opinion on subjects. Plus, the sock violation says I am guilty of using multiple accounts, when I havent. Icreated my account this year and according to TrEeMaNsHoE's contirbutions, they haven't edited since November 2009: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/TrEeMaNsHoE --VerySwaggful (talk) 19:51, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

TrEeMaNsHoE has not edited because, as you know, you are blocked on that account. Hence this sock account. --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 21:45, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Orphaned non-free image File:Ciara 1, 2 step.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Ciara 1, 2 step.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. 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 Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:48, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]