User talk:Yvesnimmo/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Complaints

Please can you stop telling me that I am entering incorrect information when I am not. If you click on the fireflies link you will see that the song has sold over 600,000 copies in the UK. A platinum single in the UK is from 600,000 plus. Also more proof that I am not wrong is if you click on this link http://www.theofficialcharts.com/chart-news/take-that-marks-a-year-at-number-one/ its shows that FIreflies is the 4th biggest selling single of 2010 in the UK and I dont think that it would have made it there by only selling between 200,000-399,000 (silver certification) bearing in mind Rihanna has two songs certified Gold in this year and both of those are not in the top 5 biggest selling singles of the year.

Also for the Katy Perry discography i think that having the certifications in small and getting rid of some of the certifications from that page will make it more appealing and showing too many certifications makes it more over-powering so I think it would be best only showing the certifications of the main music countries such as Canada, US, UK and Australia. If the reader wants to know more then they can then click on the link of the album or single and then they can see the rest of the certifications and chart performances.

Regards (Dizzyneo (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC))

I'm have no intention of being rude to you at all, i'm not trying to have an argument either, I just always follow what I think is right but in this case I know I am right. You said that a single selling over 600,000 copies does not certify as platinum on the BPI page it states that Platinum certification = 600,000 sales. You seem to have ignored my point comparing Fireflies silver certification to Rihanna's Rude Boy Gold certification when in your case you seem to suggest that Fireflies is silver even though its in the the top 5 biggest singles of the year by sales. Radio 1 Official Chart uses its source information form the Official Charts company which counts the amount of sales of each single to get the top 40 albums and singles. Also Canada is a main music place as it is american which is where Katy Perry originates from meaning that it would make sense to show that. I have no intention of removing the chart performance of e.g Austria, I just meant having that amount of certifications seems a bit too much and overpowering and if it has that many and is going to stay that way then put the text in small to make it look more presentable and of course its easy to read or else they wouldn't other artists pages certifications in small if I think the Script discography is.

Thanks (Dizzyneo (talk) 22:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC))

Rihanna Brazilian Charts

Hello my dear! :-) I have been trying to find the proper way to list RiRi's charting on the Brazilian charts at #2. I can't figure out for the life of me the proper way to cite the Brazilian charts, Wikipedia seems to be full of non-cited and poorly-cited Brazilian album chartings. Help plz? :-) http://www.hot100brasil.com/chtalbums.html--mikomango (talk) 03:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

WOW! I took that little e-journey with you and I must admit (please excuse my language) this Brazilian chart shit is fucking bizarre! LOL. I'm sorry, I had to tell the truth...why have a charting system unless it's able to be internationally recognized? In my homeland (Trinidad), our charting system is (seemingly) calculated only at a specific time of year for a specific genre of music, but it's published and available physically and online. Anyway, hopefully a user will buy the darn magazine and let us know where she charted. I'm genuinely curious to find out, but I don't go to my local Portuguese haunts...anyway, thanks. And yeah man, I am rounding up all my guy friends to help me make the journey because Lord knows buying a car as a female is for the birds! Anyway, thanks for your help once again! xxx--mikomango (talk) 03:51, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Glee: The Music, Volume 1

Hey! Sorry for taking so long with the critical response re-write, but now that that's done, what do you think about putting this into the GAN queue? It looks like there's a backlog of about 3 months at the moment, so we'll probably have a bit of a wait on a review. Frickative 03:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Oh no no: I wasn't waiting on you at all; you could have taken your time! :) But now that it's done, and it looks great, by the way, I think it is ready, so I'll let you do that? I'm not exactly sure how that works. :\ And the waiting part's fine. :) Yves (talk) 03:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Haha, I just felt bad for taking weeks to get to it when I said I'd do it about a month ago! I'll go and nominate it now - they recently changed the process, so it's just a matter of putting a template on the talk page, then a bot takes care of the rest :) Frickative 03:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Ooooh great! And I see you've already done that, so that's awesome. I'm so excited. :) Yves (talk) 04:00, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Speak Now World Tour

To address your concerns, WP:ITALIC does not say tour titles cannot be italicized. A concert tour can be considered an opera, musical, orchestral work or play (as they all appear on the list). MOS:BOLD does not mention anything for the use of "bold" in infobox. WP:NOTCRYSTAL actually speaks of creating articles or placing content into said articles. The phrase you mention pertains to dates stating "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented." Thus, using the phrase "upcoming" is within your editing opinion. In all, any Wikipedia editor will state that there is no "my way or the highway" guideline within editing an article. Yes, there are rules set in place for obvious reasons but many of the rules you mentioned do not justify for edits. If you would like that changed, then address those concerns on the MOS talk page. But do understand that for every "fact" you throw at any editor, there is another "fact" that can be used against your argument. It's good to follow the rules but at the same time, apply common sense. When you go on vacation, do you say "upcoming vacation" or when a woman is pregnant, does she say "upcoming baby" or "upcoming birth". Yes, nothing is a guaranteed but at the end of the day, it's a vacation, a baby, a concert tour—regardless of whether its past, present or future tense. At any expense, I don't wish to start a edit war with you on this matter so I cease and desist. You are free to leave your thoughts on my response but know that I have thrown in the towel and am walking away from this situation. Itsbydesign (talk) 10:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I think this is the first time you have shown courtesy, AGF and the politeness that is expected from a WP user. I am impressed that you chose to discuss this with Yves, instead of resorting to EWs. You should edit like this Itsbydesign. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I don't know all the details of every recent interaction, Legolas, but for the record, my path has crossed Itsbydesign's before, mostly at Rihanna tour articles, and we've swapped entries on our Talk pages (his mine). I don't remember having the impression he was less than courteous or had lost his temper. He used edit summaries, at least, and as I remember, they were no more snide or snotty than mine (oh, wait).

If things are improving for you two, though, more power to you both. Now let's see if Yves has any pretzels or chips around here. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 22:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Just popping in here for a second. I've responded on Itsbydesign's talk page and I'm happy this message has been polite and professional. I also agree with Legolas' recommendation. Now I'm out for some retail therapy. Dropping off these ketchup Lay's, though: everyone loves those. Yves (talk) 23:15, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Mmm, thanks. I've never heard of these things (the brand, sure, but not this product), and they're not bad. At least, I can't (virtually) eat just one. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 00:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

And here I thought this bugger had learned its lesson. Guess you can't teach without being hard. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Beyoncé

I have created the WikiProject, if you want to join add your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject Beyoncé Knowles. Thanks, Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:42, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Rihanna discography

Can you take a look at Afro's question regarding European certs at the Rihanna discography FLRC? I don't quite understand the situation. Otherwise, things seem to be looking towards keeping it as an FL. Adabow (talk · contribs) 08:41, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing! I'm just not sure which question you're talking about. Is it the one where he says, "I'd accept more opinions regarding this"? Yves (talk) 19:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Err, well I posted this message yesterday regarding what the Euro certs actually were, but I don't really understand it, so any help or replies you can post would be great. :) Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Gladly, but I haven't really been following discussion, so I'm not sure where and what exactly you want me to respond? :S I see John has responded with a clarification of IFPI vs. Billboard Europe. Yves (talk) 22:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

So fast!

Thanks for adding the Criss picture to the Glee characters, that felt like Warp speed :) Hekerui (talk) 21:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Kanye West - Runaway (2010 film)

Are you kidding me? WP:SYNTH? You are way off base. The very second sentence of the article states that the film serves as the music video for the song "RUNAWAY." The song "RUNAWAY" ends with a vocoder solo, not auto-tune. This is part of the song that, as mentioned in this very article, is the song for which this film serves as a music video. It's the SONG... it's not video production. That is the song. The reference provided was merely courtesy to the wiki-police as evidence to anyone unfamiliar with common popular music production that it's a vocoder. This is practically common knowledge in the world of music production.

If you continue to edit, then you should be removing the entire mention of auto-tune, because that information is unequivocally false. Or, provide citation proving it's auto-tune. Not doing so reduces the value and integrity of the article and wikipedia itself.

Not to mention the fact that you undid an honest attempt to clean up a very poorly worded synopsis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ringo902 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I know for a fact that the technique is a vocoder and not auto-tune, but you have a reference that explicitly states it as auto-tune and I don't, so I guess I'll just have to leave it at that. It's misinformation, though, that's all I'm saying.

As for the grammar... You misunderstood me. I didn't say anything about grammar. I said punctuation. The entire article is poorly punctuated. You are incorrect about punctuation. Punctuation is ALWAYS included inside quotations, including song titles. Always always always. Okay, well, maybe in very rare circumstances are they not. Trust me, I have a bachelor's in English and a master's in writing. Are you British? If so, then that makes sense because there are more instances where punctuation can be outside the quote marks. But there were several quotations from people where the punctuation was outside of the quote marks and that is NEVER okay, except in British circumstances, in which case the whole article needs to be consistent. The entire article is inconsistent with its punctuation. Some places it's inside, some places it's outside. For example, in the "Background" section, the 5th sentence ends in incorrect punctuation but the 6th sentence ends in correct punctuation. I will change quotations from people so they are correct, but I'll leave the song titles alone. I disagree with you but this way, it will at least be consistent throughout.

Lastly, and I don't mean confrontational, but the quality of the writing in the synopsis could be greatly improved with some slightly different wording choices. And there are a few run-on sentences. I don't mean to offend at all. Some of the words are used incorrectly. For example, I think you mean "anguish" not "agony." Agony tends to imply physical pain, not emotional pain. I've reworded several sentences so that the language flows properly. Just trying to be helpful.

Oh wait! One more thing. I just noticed that you changed British back to English. Your reference specifically says "BRITISH" not "English." I'm confused. I thought you agreed with me? Do you know this accent to be English for certain? There are many different British accents, and Minaj's inflection is a mixture of accents, not explicitly English. There's a bit of Welsh in there. Welsh and English are both British, which is why the author of your reference chose the word British. Ringo902 (talk) 23:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, okay. I misunderstood and didn't realized you changed the British/English reference. There's definitely no need to worry about plagiarizing. I just changed a few words to make the sentences flow better. That's what I do during my day job so it's always my inclination to look for better ways to reword sentences. You're absolutely right about the car crash... we don't know that for sure. That's why I changed one of the other sentences about the dinner guests, because they only appear to be making negative comments... we don't actually hear them making negative comments, unless you count that small "Do you know she's a bird" dialogue between West and the man next to him. Just made a quick fix to the car crash line. I think it reads better now. Sorry to be a pain! Ringo902 (talk) 15:06, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Vote

Yes, uh you should go weigh in. :) Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Animal (album)/archive1. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:46, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Some genre issues

I could do with your opinion at What's My Name? (Rihanna song) with some pretty determined editors who appear to be suggesting that all Rihanna song are only "R&B" and no other genres. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 19:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I know you're on a Wiki-Break, But...

Do you have a Twitter? 75.68.52.240 (talk) 01:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Haha my wiki-break's almost over, actually; one more exam. And I do, but it's protected and I'm not really comfortable sharing it here. You could e-mail me yours, maybe? Also, have you considered creating an account? Yves (talk) 01:08, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for starting a new section, but I'm in "mobile" and don't feel like scrolling ALL THE WAY DOWN. You know what I mean?

Yes, I have. And I don't have to email you, I'm @BabyMBizzle! ;D Tweet me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.68.52.240 (talk) 01:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Beyoncé

If you want to join add your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject Beyoncé Knowles. Thanks, Jivesh boodhun (talk) 06:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey WikiProject

Hi! The Mariah Carey WikiProject is now initiated! If you'd like to join, please add your name here. Thank you. Novice7 | Talk 09:24, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Response.

Look honey, I could careless about how you feel right now. I just want you to take your prissy little mouse and fix "Castle Walls" back the way that I previously had it. Because i'm not doing it over. Plus, I did add the fucking source to the peak position for Castle Walls, but you were too busy reverting shit without looking at it. Billboard said it has charted in Canada..so it has charted in fucking Canada. Deal with it and go fix it. Georgia Peachez (talk) 04:35, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm like sooo scared! *eyeroll* But some of you people really need to grow a backbone and learn how to suck it up like seriously. Plus, I sent this like 2 days ago. Why you're just responding? I found the source for the peak position for Castle Walls and moved on. You should do the same. Matter of fact, after this message, don't send me another one. Thanks. Georgia Peachez (talk) 17:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry I shouldn't have snapped like that. It's just one of those days, and I felt that I had to take it out on someone. You reverted my edit where I added a source with it and you didn't bothered to look and revert it back, it angered me. I just wanted to let you know that I understand what you were doing and again i'm sorry. Georgia Peachez (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

It was a link from T.I.'s chart history from Billboard.com saying it has charted in Canada at #99 [1]. It was sourced next to the peak position. No biggie :) Georgia Peachez (talk) 04:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Ending the Michael Jackson edit War

Unfortunately the current edit war over the album type is rather sad but it is most certainly intolerable. Please visit Talk:Michael (album)#End the Edit War - Studio vs Compilation and part-take in the attempt to find a final resolution. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 18:40, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey

Come to my talk page, I dont wanna say it here. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

You online? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:34, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Keep an eye on the disruptive editor at Talk:Lady Gaga, can you? :( I'm in the middle of a major revamp. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Keep in tab the activities of this IP. Its a sockpuppet of our beloved User:Itsbydesign. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Come to Tbhotch's talk page. We need a thorough discussion on this. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Gladly; I've been busy lately, but I'll gladly discuss once I get the time. :) Yves (talk) 04:41, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Glee Nomination

Hello Yves! The article has passed! Congrats! About the photograph, it's not necessary, if it was included, it'd have been better. Novice7 | Talk 04:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to do picture uplodaing things from Flickr, but I've added one of Michele to the article. Thanks so much for reviewing! :) Yves (talk) 16:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. It's perfect :) No need to bother about Flickr thing :D Novice7 | Talk 13:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Taylor Swift Wikiproject proposal

I have proposed that a Wikiproject for Taylor Swift be made. Please share your thoughts here. Thanks! ℥^nding·start 22:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj song title

Ok. I think it is a little trivial, so I wont debate this longer. I Help, When I Can.^[12] 08:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Swap

Lol, you really are late Yves. What were ya doing? Some New Year's Eve *ahem ahem*? Me and Tbhotch have moved to User talk:Tbhotch#Swap2, and I'm keeping an eye like a hawk. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you could say that. Oh, apologies; I saw that section but wasn't sure where to comment. What's going on now? Yves (talk) 15:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to add your comments for Glee: The Music, The Power of Madonna. I'm a Gleek!!! — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:23, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your prompt actions on the GAR. "Will Schuester I hate you". OMG, the episode was a classic! — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:13, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I haven't seen Britney/Brittany yet since Glee season 2 hasn't come to India yet. :( But I agree, seeing the reviews and the general public consensus, the episode must have been terrible. "The Power of Madonna", I loved each and every scene of it. I was actually getting tickles and goosebumps, each and every time the Madonna references came. It made me and my sister grope around for our old Madonna records to be frank. It was successful in that term I believe. :) — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Sleazy

OK, I know I've been an ass with you before :P, but I want to know what you think about the deletion of Sleazy. --Cprice1000talk2me 02:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

User_talk:L-l-CLK-l-l#Deletion_of_Sleazy.3F <--- Discussion here, i dont think i could be clearer. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. Something like that would need a discussion anyway to decide whether it should be kept. --Cprice1000talk2me 02:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean the redirection? I've read the discussion, and while I don't agree with all of it, my thoughts are that it is a pretty small article. I then searched for reliable sources to cover the release, but there didn't seem to be too many. Looking at the eleven references the article had, I don't think that would have made "Sleazy" meet notability guidelines. Yves (talk) 16:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I know, but all I can say is, it was a promo release, so it obviously would not look like a single page, but like other promo singles, which it did. I really just wanted a thorough RfD discussion. --Cprice1000talk2me 21:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Episode Title Debate: "Journey"

Obviously the FOX site now says "Journey to Regionals" and we have to use it, but I remember prior to the season finale for season 1 constantly looking for info regarding said finale, and the episode title was always "Journey". Of further note, I've added comments to the debate on the episode's talk page where three blog posts written around the time use just "Journey" (one dated June 14, four days after it aired), and further a link to Barnes and Noble where the second half DVD simply calls it "Journey" (I'd be curious if someone having that specific DVD can check).

Clearly FOX wanted to make sure it was obvious what episode the music belonged to ("Journey" was good enough IMO), so they changed it after the second half DVD came out. I think it's worth noting that the original episode title was just "Journey", as that is what was always used; today is the first time I've seen the full title used myself. *LOL* CycloneGU (talk) 00:06, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. I'm pretty sure "Journey" was the original "official" title, and they decided to rename it (or alternately name it) to "Journey to Regionals" for some reason, perhaps to parallel the EP name or maybe they didn't want to use Journey too obviously. Whatever the reason, "Journey" was used by many sources, in reviews and whatnot, around the time of airing. Yves (talk) 00:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Another idea just came to mind. I wonder if Journey didn't like the similarity, or whether FOX wanted to make sure there was a distinction. CycloneGU (talk) 00:54, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I wondered that, too—perhaps there was a copyright/trademark/other legal issue involved with naming the work too similarly. Though they did let Glee cover four of their songs for the episode. Then again, "journey"'s a common word. It's interesting, but I don't know exactly. Yves (talk) 01:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the vand reverts to my talk page! I appreciate it! :-D CTJF83 chat 00:54, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

No problem at all! We all look out for each other, eh? :) Yves (talk) 17:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Itsbydesign

I think its time we take this heiffer to ANI. Have you seen the recent disruptions this one has been doing? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, the thing on the Janet tour? Ridiculous. I just don't even understand. Yves (talk) 04:22, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Here's the funny thing. Wrote a big essay about me at the ANI, and that I should get permanently blocked... Should I laugh or commit suicide? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:17, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Ummm yeah I saw that. Wow... Yves (talk) 17:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Alicia Keys

Hey Yves, Merry xmas! Just wondering are you an Alicia Keys fan? If you are I'm thinking of revamping The Element of Freedom and all of its singles to turn them into a GA topic. There is easily scope there its just its quite a lot of work. I've asked Candyo32 if he wishes to get involved too. The album itself is in decent nick and I've started work on "Un-Thinkable". Most of the other singles have the makings of GA but require sourcing and copy editing etc. plus the addition of the likely missing information. Drop me a line if your interested in getting involved. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 00:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Glad to see I've found another Alician! lol. =) Erm well I havent really got to the c/e stage yet although the element of freedom is in pretty bad state. I thought it was good but a second look tells me the critical reception section is way too big and the RollingStone reference is dead so it needs replacing with another review. Additionally the album was release internationally so perhaps one or two other reviews should be included in the rating table? -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 04:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Cheers Yves. Either way the section is too long and needs pruning. I'll trust your judgements on the critical reception section as on second thoughts, she is considerably more successful in the US than elsewhere. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 06:01, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem, there's not a massive rush. =) -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 06:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

yes of course... -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey Yves, that sounds like a good idea. I've noticed another user, Dan56, has begun some similar changes too so you may wish to re-investigate the article before making your own changes to save time (he may have already made some of the changes we're trying to do). -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 20:42, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Bucky Covington: Proposal for inclusion in template of American Idol as "Other Alumni"

As per your comment on reverting my edit regarding above, I have taken your advice and put an official proposal for including Bucky Covington as "alumni. Comments on page: Template talk:American Idol werldwayd (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. The comments were made by another colleague, not you. I'll contact him/her Just ignore the message regarding Bucky Covington werldwayd (talk) 01:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Random Smiley Award

For your contributions to Wikipedia and humanity in general, you are hereby granted the coveted Random Smiley Award.
(Explanation and Disclaimer)

♠TomasBat 02:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Notice regarding BLP

I've reverted your edit here; you should know better than to restore a blatant BLP violation.— Dædαlus^{+ Contribs} 09:47, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The same could be said of yourself; you didn't AGF that the IP removed an unsourced damaging statement about a BLP; most new users don't know about the edit summary.— Dædαlus^{+ Contribs} 22:30, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Glee Super Bowl Episode

My bad. I completely forgot to add the source before saving. Must be the three and a half beers I've had. The information came from The Futon Critic (http://www.thefutoncritic.com/showatch.aspx?id=glee&view=listings). Sorry about that. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 08:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The Futon Critic is as reliable as any other site, as they get their information directly from the studios. They list all showings of episodes, including repeats and until recently "Super Bowl Episode" was listed as Episode 11. Why would they have changed it unless they were given the title? It can also be seen here http://www.epguides.com/Glee/ and at TV MSN. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 08:23, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance with keeping the episode article under control and free of vandalism and unsourced material. On one hand, it is a lot of working keeping the article clean, but on the other hand I am glad that the article is receiving so much traffic and input. I am looking forward to watching the article expand in the near future! --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:33, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request, Cee-Lo vs Cee Lo

Yves, will you plz change the title of this article given the consensus that the man calls himself Cee-Lo and should be Wikied as such? :-) xoxo--mikomango (talk) 21:45, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Done, You can always hit "move" at the top to rename a page. CTJF83 chat 22:09, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Ctjf83! There is actually a discussion at Talk:Cee-Lo Green to discuss whether the page should be moved now. :) Yves (talk) 22:30, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Well damn! LOL, ok, weighed in there. CTJF83 chat 22:41, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

(lol at the "Well damn"...was that taken from "Well damn, Lo" from Imperfect Imperfections? Hilarious.) Thanks guys!--mikomango (talk) 20:12, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

BL,BC

Just created the article for Bright_Lights,_Bigger_City. Ran the error report, everything seems fine. But I know folks will delete a Wiki in a heartbeat, I just wanted to know if you thought it was acceptable (for when the haters inevitably arrive)?--mikomango (talk) 19:17, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!!! I needed some input lol :-)--mikomango (talk) 01:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

What Goes Around... Reassessment

Hey. I'd just like to know what your thoughts are about What Goes Around.../...Comes Around being a GA. I was going to attempt to fix it up to keep it at GA level, but it just lacks a lot of things, and I don't feel like it was correctly reviewed in the first place. Please, if you can, leave your comments here. Thanks so much! ℥^nding·start 23:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

So excited!!

To see how they feature "Born This Way" in Glee. Aren't you? Lol, at Itsbydesign adding ratty poo but embattling with others. Some idiots never learn. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:35, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

So excited! Amazing at how they even got the rights before it's released. I think it's amazing that they want to spread that message. :) And yeah... I don't even know what's going on... Yves (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Ya, its amazing what Glee can do when they set their mind on something. Gaga's PR people should also be credited I guess. Personally I'm waiting for the second Madonna episode that they had planned. Fingers crossed that it happens. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah? I'm pretty excited for that, as well, although I don't know if they could beat the first one. "Borderline / Open Your Heart" was one of my favourites. I'm waiting for them to cover "Material Girl" or "La Isla Bonita" in a dance sequence: I think that'd be fun. :P Yves (talk) 19:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Revert

Can you revert this goof please. We R Who We R. Im already at 2RR and id rather save my last revert for something more important. Thank in advance. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

It actually just came out, CK! Just ten minutes ago! So the source is right. Yves (talk) 19:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes i realized that right after i sent you that message lol. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Glee Live!

• "It was Lynch, in fact, who welcomed "Glee" fans to the table with a withering "Hello suckers. Congratulations…. You're all idiots!" link
• "Beyonce, who's "Halo" was chopped into a 30-second snippet " link
• "Interstitial video bits featuring Matthew Morrison and Jane Lynch, who play "Glee's" principal adult characters, provided some plot-line pointers for the uninitiated (if indeed there were any in attendance Thursday). But mostly this was a celebration of the music that provides the show's pulse." link
• "Most impressively Thursday, Michele and Chris Colfer (who plays Kurt Hummel) blurred those two approaches in a gloriously gender-bending version of "Defying Gravity" from the musical Wicked." link
• "Amber Riley's eye-popping rendition of Christina Aguilera's "Beautiful" brought a hush over the crowd" link
• "In fact, it's Sue who greets the audience, explaining why fake Cheerios were handing out barf bags because the singing we're about to hear makes her want to vomit. Classic Sue."
• "Brittany (Heather Morris) has a few moments of dialogue on stage, first talking with Mr. Schue and then to Kurt (Chris Colfer): "You look like a boy peacock who likes other boy peacocks ... One day, I will make Kurt Hummell mine. You can count on it ... even though I can't count." link
• "Vocal Adrenaline sings "Rehab" and "Mercy," but there's no Jesse St. James leading them. Bummer." link
• "Broadway-tested Lea Michele revealed herself as the most obvious pro, performing snippets of Streisand with power and presence, while Amber Riley put in very solid readings of Christina Aguilera's "Beautiful" and Brandy and Monica's "The Boy is Mine," seeming less certain of her star status but no less worthy of it." link
• "Comic relief was provided by video clips that featured Jane Lynch (Sue Sylvester) and live skits with Chris Colfer" link
• "But the scene stealer Heather Morris (Brittany), who danced in almost every number was originally hired as a dancer, brought down the house with her "dumb blonde" persona. During one exchange with Chris, she said "Kurt --one day I'm going to make you mine. You can count on it-- Even though I can't count.'" link
• "Before the festivities got underway, guys and girls dressed in Cheerios costumes handed out barf bags. A videotaped message from Sue Sylvester informed us that we were all idiots for buying overpriced tickets to the show and that we would be needing the barf bags because “this show is that bad. These kids have no talent.” The camera panned out to reveal Mr. Schuester sitting next to her as he welcomed us to New Directions’ tour." link
• "Occasionally, Morris was still wearing half of her costume from the previous song, allowing her to quickly jump into the next number. On top of that, daffy Brittany was also on hand. “Who are all these people? When did they get here?” she asked, referring to the audience, but the best part was an in-character bit with Chris Colfer (Kurt), who came out dressed in a cape and peacock feathers. “You look like a boy peacock that likes other boy peacocks,” she said. “We’re jumping on mattresses. I think your lady cape might get ruined.” Despite his love for other boy peacocks, she didn’t hide her affections for Kurt, declaring, “One day, I will make Kurt Hummel mine.” This was, of course, minutes after she declared that she had made out with every single stagehand." link
• "Mark Salling (Puck) charmed the crowd not once, but twice, venturing out into the audience with his guitar for 'Sweet Caroline.' Then he was joined by Amber Riley (Mercedes) and Naya Rivera (Santana), who nicely held her own, for “The Lady Is a Tramp.”" link
• “You know, Will, it’s summer now, and the Crisco in your hair is dripping down your back. It still looks fantastic, but this whole room smells like a deep fryer.” Even in pre-taped video messages, Jane Lynch’s Sue was still as biting as ever. And what does she think of the Glee Club’s performance? “My mouth overflows with bile. I look like a gargoyle fountain.” link
• "After an entertaining half-hour set from the Legion of Extraordinary Dancers and a half-hour intermission (at the end of which actors in Cheerios uniforms pass out barf bags), a video segment runs: Sue (Jane Lynch) appears." link
• "During a (rare) spoken bit between numbers, dumb-girl Brittany (Heather Morris) swoons over gay Kurt." link
• "As if reminding all concerned that they could be replaced, the concert also included a second dancing choir, Vocal Adrenaline (New Directions’ rival), which doubled as gospel singers for Madonna’s 'Like a Prayer.'" link
• "Vocal Adrenaline (minus Jonathan Groff who was in the audience) performed: “Rehab” and “Mercy”.
• "In between some of the numbers, a few cast members, usually Kurt (Chris Colfer) and Brittany (Heather Morris) would talk to the audience in character. I think Brittany was everyone’s favorite as her ditzy character says some of the most hilarious things and the crowd was eating it up. We were also treated to videos featuring Sue Sylvester (Jane Lynch) and Will Schuester (Matthew Morrison)." link

You may want to take the time to research before you make foolish claims Itsbydesign (talk) 16:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Itsbydesign, while it's great that you've found so many sources, the onus is on you to include them at the time you alter the article. I see you've now restored your expanded set-list without including any additional references - are you planning on doing so? Frickative 17:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Yves, hope you're well :) I want to AGF, but so far Itsbydesign hasn't given any indication that they intend to do anything with these sources, so I figure I might as well. I've been flicking through some other tour pages, eg Sticky & Sweet Tour, and I'm thinking of expanding the synopsis similarly and explaining who sings what that way, rather than through the set list - and also dropping the "Untitled" segments and detailing them similarly. Do you think that's a viable idea, or should the performers be listed in both places? (I'm also not sure about using their character names over the actors' names - IMO, it's enough to note that they perform "in character", with some concessions - eg. Brittany declaring her love for Kurt, because that's obviously not Heather and Chris, ha. The sources seem to favour actor names when discussing songs too.) I thought it best to ask your thoughts first, because as you know I'm not too au fait in this area :) Frickative 07:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I am well, thank you! Sure thing: expanding the sources and giving descriptions of interludes and skits with references sounds much better than assigning unsourced arbitrary names to them. As for the performers, I think using actor names might be better: while they are singing as their characters counterparts on-screen, in concert, that context is somewhat lacking, in my opinion. Haha and thanks for asking! :) Yves (talk) 18:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Bruno Mars discography

In the 'other charting songs' section, the positions I put are from uk chart plus, which gets infomation from the offical charts company. therefore it isn't a fan page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liamk97 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but you need to cite your information. Template:Cite journal is a good template to use for this. Yves (talk) 19:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

OCC only shows the Top 100, so I can't give a reference if you say haven is a fanpage — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liamk97 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Which is exactly why you need to use Template:Cite journal. As far as I'm aware, the only publishers of peaks below the one hundredth position are ChartsPlus and Music Week, and you still need to cite those. Yves (talk) 01:23, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Price Tag?

Have you seen anywhere that "Price Tag" has charted, because if not I guess I'll just wait until the UK charts, which I'm sured it has charted on. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 21:59, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, well that's good to know. In case you haven't seen it, User:Cprice1000/Price Tag. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 22:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Opinion on this

Go here to leave your opinion on this matter. --ĈÞЯİŒ 1ооо 00:33, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Bruno Mars lead

Hey! First of all, I want to thank you so much for your help with the Bruno Mars GAN. I was stunned at how many corrections you had done before I even saw the new review. It was marvelous. However, I need your help with the lead, as the reviewer requested that the article have a paragraph in the lead about his musical styles. I am having a great deal of difficulty summing up the section in a paragraph. Since you made such great contributions to the Doo-Wops & Hooligans article, I figured you would be better than me at this. Do you think I should use the "a universal donor" quote? I think it is a good summary of his music. Thanks again! Basilisk4u (talk) 01:25, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Kelly Clarkson Template

Did you even look at the page the link goes to? only the direct on the page had to be fixed. 98.254.114.74 (talk) 05:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Navigation templates cannot have redirects to sections per WP:NAVBOX. The link is redundant, anyway, as the link is already present. Yves (talk) 17:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

It's not a redirect, the article is in 2 sections, one for each version of the song, which are seperate singles, in seperate genre's of music, released by seperate artists, from different albums. 98.254.114.74 (talk) 19:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. Have you read WP:NAVBOX? You can't have a link that redirects to a section of an article. It defeats the purpose of navigation. Do you understand? Yves (talk) 19:35, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

do you understand it's NOT a REDIRECT.. the article is SPLIT IN TWO.. like most releases of the same song by seperate artists are.. like Clarksons A Moment Like this, among thousands of others on wikipedia. WP:Navbox says REDIRECTS are to be avoided (not removed, there are exceptions), and PIPED LINKS are OK 98.254.114.74 (talk) 20:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

also see Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken under exceptions Alan - talk 02:53, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say it was a redirect. "Redirect" is also a verb. You are still not getting the point: it does not have its own page for navigation. Yves (talk) 05:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Let me try to be more clear. WP:NAVBOX clearly says, "The link to the page on which a particular instance of a navbox appears should be displayed in black, bold type, not as a link.". Because of this, placing the link as [[Because of You (Kelly Clarkson song)#Reba McEntire & Kelly Clarkson version|Because of You]] should not be done, because you are using the octothorpe, which makes it redirect (as a verb) from "Because of You" to the section under "Reba McEntire & Kelly Clarkson version". Because the link now links to a section, it makes this specific link on the navbox not bold. Therefore, it is not acting as a navigation link, which defeats the purpose of a navigational template. The statement you are talking about, i.e. "Piped links are perfectly all right." refers to a link like "[[Already Gone (Kelly Clarkson song)|Already Gone]]", where the page is located at "Already Gone (Kelly Clarkson song)" but should show up as "Already Gone" on the template since "(Kelly Clarkson song)" is not part of the song title. This is the reason piped links exist—the part preceding the pipe is the article title and the part following shows the desired word(s) to display. Now, you brought up the example of "A Moment Like This", which was covered to greater success by English singer Leona Lewis. If you scroll down to the bottom of the song page, you can see that the link on Template:Leona Lewis is "[[A Moment Like This]]" and not "[[A Moment Like This#Leona Lewis version|A Moment Like This]]". I hope I have made things clearer. Do you understand now? Yves (talk) 06:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

what part of the page is split into two articles do you not understand? seriously? two pages were merged into one, now that one page contains two articles, one for each song. Removing the link from the template will only confuse some visitors who may be looking for that version of the song. You know your way around Wikipedia, most don't, hence why such things are done all the time on here, and have been for years. If you want it removed, GET A CONCENSUS. 98.254.114.74 (talk) 01:43, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

On the contrary: I do understand. I don't know what you don't understand about navigational templates. Did you read my explanation? It doesn't matter that it's split into two templates. Take a look at Template:Leona Lewis. You obviously seem to know your way around Wikipedia not that bad, either. Things aren't done like that. Yves (talk) 01:52, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Beam Me Up Scotty

Just a quick question on the Beam Me Up Scotty article--is it actually correct to remove Pink Friday because it was not a mixtape? The actual template uses the term album, and since the box just says "chronology" instead of "mixtapes," is it incorrect to put it there? Just curious...Thanks! Mhavril39 (talk) 07:11, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

There's actually an ongoing discussion on the template page, if I recall correctly, but the documentation states to include only albums of the same type (studio, live, compilation, etc.) in chronologies. Yves (talk) 07:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Thanks! Mhavril39 (talk) 07:15, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

No problem! :) Yves (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj template

Hi, thanks for reverting my edit to the above named template. I wasn't aware that only articles in existence should be added to templates. :) londonsista ^Prod 16:04, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Just Can't Get Enough – The Black Eyed Peas.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Just Can't Get Enough – The Black Eyed Peas.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 08:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Important message

Hello, Yvesnimmo. You have new messages at Legolas2186's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 05:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:NOTBROKEN

No, this is where you are incorrect. Once again. My duty on this website is not to stroke your ego. I would honestly like to know why your do not prefer Sacramento, California over Sacramento? Additionally, why do you care now, because you haven't cared in the past? It's just silly as arguing over to spell "Tony" or "Toni". For some reason, you foolishly think that I cannot see past what you are doing. You are trying to create conflict where none exists. You are one of those types of people where you always have to be two steps ahead of someone else and the minute that some jumps ahead of you, you maul them like a pitbull. Even so, the Wikipedia policy you referenced doesn't even come to your defense. Furthermore, many of these arenas are not located in their metropolitan areas. I route concert tours for a living and its lot more pretty to say a performer has a concert in Dallas versus Grand Praire. It doesn't change the fact that the performing venue is in Grand Praire. By your theory, Disney World might as well be in Miami. You are the only user on this site that seems to have an issue with it in the nearly 2 years that I have been editing here because its not an issue when myself or other editors do it. But that's not your reasoning behind it. I'm not longer going to argue with you and any future comments you make towards my edits will be simply ignored. So congratulations, I'm gonna give you your lame ass edit war just to satisfy you. Itsbydesign (talk) 16:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to stalk, but I tend to concur with Itsbydesign on something here. If I am looking up the name of a city in Wikipedia, I'd typically expect the name of the state behind it. Let's say I'm looking up London; how would one presume I'm looking up London, England or London, Ontario (the latter a city of over 350,000 people and by no means a writeoff - except the job market mebbe)?

While I say that, however, Itsbydesign, I do point out something here. Look at London. That's the England one. There is a disambiguation at the top of it. It points to "other uses". Look what the first entry in the list is! There's what I am looking for! A couple extra slightly annoying clicks, but I found the London I was looking for!

So respecting your preference, which is as much as I can call it, there is to my knowledge only one city in the world named Sacramento that would have an article on Wikipedia. Therefore, what is the problem with the simple [[Sacramento]] when such helpful tools like the one used for "London" are in place? This is a similar procedure to album titles as well; six artists have released albums by the name "Silver", but Silver (album) links to the disambiguation page (try clicking it), and Johnny Cash was first to release it, so Silver (album) should probably link to it. I won't argue this fact. However, with six identically named albums out, in this case it makes sense to just go to a disambiguation directly and have the user choose the one they are seeking. Sometimes it's Johnny Cash, sometimes it's Cheap Trick, and maybe it's even the EP by Jesu. So my vote is keep it as "Sacramento". You're being picky where pickiness is not necessary. No one rule is identical to every single situation that comes up; sometimes, rules can be bent and even broken in an acceptable fashion. Ask me; I've done it. CycloneGU (talk) 05:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Yves, it looks like Itsbydesign seems to have dropped his issue. What is your opinion on moving the page back to just Sacramento? It's pointless to just say "'Sacramento' redirects here" - it's kinda obvious, and if it's going to redirect there, why not just put it at Sacramento in the first place and put the disambiguation at the top, like with London? EDIT:It seems the page is now move-protected with a lot of Opposes to the move even though the target it is the primary use of the single name. CycloneGU (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Just A Heads-Up

Glee Volume 5 will probably start becoming an unsourced appearance anytime now. The Glee Wikia has picked up the information from tommy2.net, but for some reason only lists 13 tracks. I find it hard to believe they'd shortchange the previous efforts, and it suggests to me no more than six new episodes after this week's episode; if you presume two songs used each week, that drops to three new eps. So I don't think tommy2.net got it completely right this time, there must be a few more unknown tracks.

NEway, this is just a heads-up to watch for people to start adding the page or that to the discography. I may create the redirect now if it's not already done. If you're curious what we have to look forward to (I notice a Dixie Chicks cover), it's currently on page 2 on the site. I presume the artwork is correct, so I know what to look for when the shopping pages come up...which could be next week, it has a March 8 release date, three weeks from now. CycloneGU (talk) 01:57, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Great! A press release should be coming out soon then! Yves (talk) 17:25, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Ack, Billboard Misbehaving

I have been waiting for the chart update; it's happened, but the Billboard site keeps crashing on me. Either so many people are looking for Glee to break the record this week or it's just having problems. I'll update the US peaks once I can load all ten pages. CycloneGU (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

All right...how the heck do you see the charts on Wednesday? They only update on the site late Thursday morning, and you had these updated yesterday! LMAO On an unrelated note, I removed an IP's entry of a song that Glee hasn't covered (yet, to my knowledge). CycloneGU (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Haha they had a news story to accompany the accomplishment. Check the source! Yves (talk) 17:26, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

No need, I found it through links on the site! [2] And boy, they SMASHED 108 this week; they have what, seven nine songs tallying this week?! Lately their songs linger longer than a week, too; Thriller actually moved UP by about 40 places. CycloneGU (talk) 18:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

BTW, check my edit two topics above this. CycloneGU (talk) 18:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

question about swedish certifications

Hey I have a quick question - someone edited Rihanna's S&M's certifications, identifying that the single is now Gold in Sweden. The editor used this link, and after searching around on the site (I don't speak or understand Swedish, but it's fairly easy to navigate) I found the Gold certification. Now, according to wiki guidelines, users are supposed to use the IFPI website to reference Swedish sales and certifications, but I have absolutely no idea how to navigate or search through this site. I have looked around at various other Wiki discographies but I can't seem to find any (within my purview) that contain Swedish certifications. How should I manage this? I'd like to update the bare URL but I can't seem to figure out how to go about this correctly...help? :-)--mikomango (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I was pretty confused about how to best go about handling that. Thank you for being so helpful Yves! :-)--mikomango (talk) 04:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm a little confused.... I didn't think I was the one who asked you about Swedish certs was I? thanks for the complements though. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 21:32, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Glee: The Music, Volume 5

I kicked off the article. It turns out at 2:26 p.m. (less than 12 hours ago) Entertainment Weekly gave us information on the two original songs, which are now due for appearance in the March 15 episode, but in the meantime the article title talks about debuting them on March 8 which is the album release date. Bad title on their part methinks, but hey, we only quote them. I've put some minor background info; I'll let you and Frickative add further, but I am accepting of this as enough information to start the article. Glee (season 2) meanwhile now has "Original Song" in the episode list linking to itself (article not created yet obviously, though with this source I suggest we can kick off THAT article as well) with a reference to the episode list clearly showing it there.

And in this case, tommy2.net is proven wrong on the tracklist as there are now 16 tracks (both original songs are due to be included). The artwork still has not been confirmed outside of there however to my knowledge, and therefore I have not included it. I've added artist info for one more track, but haven't done so for "Kiss" and "Landslide" yet - even though I suspect the latter is the Dixie Chicks song. I also left off writers and track times, the latter which will be confirmed in the future as well (while times from the singles could be used I don't feel it's proper). CycloneGU (talk) 06:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Fuckin' Perfect

Please explain to me, why you twice reversed an edit, which to me seems legit? The template provides source, chart, peak etc. Tøndemageren (talk) 20:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

All Right, I Want Your Guess

Rumours are circulating all over the place right now that somebody is dying before the Regionals performances. E! Online and another online gazette have picked up the story. It's also generated a buzz at Yahoo! Answers, which I just found in a Google search on the subject (a lot of people asking apparently).

I've posted my own follow-up answer to another post here. Both he and I have gone into a whack of detail on the subject and how all the characters are connected on the show. I have two questions for you:

1. What is the likelihood of any of the "possible" characters I name dying, in your opinion?
2. Who do YOU think dies?

A lot of blogs say the bird dies, but apparently Tina hasn't been pictured in preview pics. from the performance (where there is an audience of Glee fans). I haven't heard whether Artie is missing from the photos too. Either way, their deaths would disqualify ND as only 11 people would be on the team, so I've eliminated them as options. Emma came to mind, but Stamos has more eps. and his character Carl would go away if Emma died. Burt has continued storylines. A lot more details are in my answer there, and I quote my top guess as Carole. It would affect Kurt and Finn, and would trickle down to BOTH ND and DA because they are on each respective team. The Warblers bird (heavily rumoured) has been considered anti-climatic by someone else (he's right on that), but still possible. Figgins is my second pick (though my sister eliminates him as we would no longer have lines like, "Ke-Dollar sign-Ha"), and Beiste might have a possible link to affect everybody as well because she brought the football team to glory (and some footballers are on the glee club). So I am making the call: Carole dies. We haven't seen her much lately.

I really am curious what you think! =) CycloneGU (talk) 05:54, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Ausiello said it would greatly affect performances at regionals, but he's been wrong about other things, like Paltrow's supposed appearance for the Super Bowl episode. After Amber Riley's response today, I'm assuming, if the rumour is still correct, the death will be a minor one and will most likely not affect New Directions. Pavarotti seems the most likely at this point; his death would have significant impact on Dalton. Yves (talk) 06:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is why a lot of people are picking the bird. Dalton Academy is rumoured to no longer be appearing in episodes right after Regionals, or maybe one or two more episodes after. People are confirming (not officially mind) that Kurt is returning, which is something I also called for happening after Regionals. Blaine supposedly comes with him because his friend needs him; that seems like something that would happen after a family member dies (i.e. Kurt can't afford to go to Dalton himself, and his father by himself can't fund it). Another rumour is that Blaine gets fired; I've discounted that. But I agree with one point of yours; Amber seemed to know nothing about the death and you'd think filming was almost wrapped by now (is it?). Maybe Amber was playing dumb so people would start more rumours? I also don't think filming is done; something published by E! Online today said to follow @JenniferArrow at the Glee filming, and there are no posts from the last two weeks about it.

I might try posting the question on Lea Michele's Twitter to see if she knows anything. But obviously if it's a major death, she'd be sworn to secrecy so as not to ruin it, so might not be worth my time to ask. CycloneGU (talk) 06:06, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. It all lined up so nicely...then it was pointed out that Carole's actress canceled another would-be appearance somewhere else (a movie?) to appear on Glee further. I still think they're going to kill a person, not the bird (though the bird might die too, who knows). My guess is shifting to Beiste; rumours were Lauren going via an obesity storyline, but she's said that she isn't the one who dies (and again it would DQ ND at Regionals, and they win, so that can't be). Beiste might fall under the same storyline; she once confessed to Will that people don't pay attention to her and I think she brought up her weight. Have you heard anything about Beiste continuing beyond Regionals? Other than her, I'm left with Figgins and the damn bird. *LOL* CycloneGU (talk) 15:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Blow

Can you revert to my last revision? Please. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Whats your view? Wikipedia:External_links/Noticeboard#Youtube_.28not_sure_where_to_post_this_O_O.29 - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:31, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Scratch that, got my answer :P - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 22:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Got This From Youtube

You must not read the news... A few months ago, about 6 gay teens all killed themselves in the same week. In response to that, the It Gets Better channel started. The Glee cast made a video for it, and Ryan Murphy stated they would be addressing it in the show. As did every other person on said show. It was on every major news site.

And I honestly don't trust anything "spoiler" wise about future episodes from ryan/etc. aside from that. After the whole Sam thing, he could be lying.

Now this is interesting. Iqbal already said Karofsky isn't dying at the moment. But Kurt and Blaine are supposed to appear AT Regionals. And rumours are that the death happens before the performances, so they can't be gone. And ND is in black (can't deny this, look at the preview pics. at Glee Wikia, those can't be faked), so it makes sense that someone will die before the show. Could Karofsky be biting the bullet and Iqbal is covering the secret, or just not know? I don't know WHAT to think anymore. Murphy is playing both sides of the coin here. CycloneGU (talk) 18:16, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Haha I think I've given up on guessing and just like to wait until things happen. And maybe a death isn't even happening. Murphy and co. change things all the time. *shrug* And I think the addressing the It Gets Better thing, I think that's still to come in the form of "Born This Way". Yves (talk) 21:11, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I read about "Born This Way". Someone said Karovsky is singing it; I say bull, that isn't happening...but if he does, I will be in complete and utter shock. Of further interest, the quote above was from a post that is now deleted at Youtube; I sent a message inquiring further and providing more details about what I think. I have yet to receive a response. =) CycloneGU (talk) 03:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

From TVLine, a new Ausiello spoiler for "Original Song".

Question: Any clues about the big Glee death at Regionals?
Ausiello: I never said the death was big — I said the fallout was. And the only other clue you’re getting is the gender of the victim: male.

All right, that screws both of my guesses (Tina and Judy). I'm debating whether the 10 episode thing for Stamos was set in stone; after all, he's now being courted for Two and a Half Men by CBS. Maybe killing off Carl would pave the way for that to take place. And Karovsky has gotta commit suicide, his character seems to be heading there...but the "happy ending" bit stalls me on that thought.

Two more weeks and we will know what happens. I'm still following the rumours. Who could die that would have a big fallout, however, but the death itself isn't a bit event? Maybe it is the bird...CycloneGU (talk) 21:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Apparently not. I would be leaning more toward Pavarotti again, at this point. Unless it could be one of the Glee kids' random relatives we've never seen on-screen or something. I won't hazard a guess; I prefer watching it, anyway. :P Yves (talk) 21:16, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

That I already saw, actually. If Stamos does the show, he might become a different character and the new person to suck up to. Pavarotti meanwhile has always been on my list, and I'm starting to lean that way. If the 10 episode deal is still valid with Stamos (as in he appears ten times, not simply over the first ten episodes), then Pavarotti and Karovsky are the only options. CycloneGU (talk) 21:34, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For keeping an eye on record charts and certifications all around the globe, and updating relevant articles, I award Yves this barnstar. Adabow (talk · contribs) 23:22, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

If it can be done, I second this. Here I was waiting for Glee to break the record for the Hot 100 entries a week and a half ago and he'd already updated them before the charts themselves were available on the site; Yves knows where to look for this stuff! CycloneGU (talk) 23:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh my Goodness: thank you so much to both of you! This means a lot! :D Yves (talk) 05:52, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Wow Adabow, you are quick. I was thinking of awarding this barnstar, when you did it. You're really amazing Yves ;) — Novice7 (talk) 15:54, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much to all of you for the nice compliments! You guys are all comparatively wonderful. :) Yves (talk) 17:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Forgive my lateness, but I want to fourth(?) the support - your contributions are indispensable and the barnstar very much deserved! Frickative 04:55, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

You people make me so happy to be here. :) Yves (talk) 07:24, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Original Song

Do we have enough to start that article now? I have a DYK submission in place for Glee Volume 5, but if we have enough to put the article page in for now, we can make it a double-hook for March 15 instead of the single for March 8. CycloneGU (talk) 04:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I think there should be enough available to make a start on it - in fact, I'll go set up a stub outline now, and no doubt we can flesh it out until it's DYK eligible :D Frickative 04:55, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree! There is more than enough information to make a good start. :) Yves (talk) 07:23, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

"Chart history" sections

Hey! I'm finally getting around to finishing "The Sue Sylvester Bowl Shuffle", and at the suggestion of Another Believer on the talk page, included a chart history section. I was wondering if you could take a quick look at it when you get chance? It was a pain to compile, and though I think I got there okay in the end, I know I've been prone to screw-ups in the past, like writing that the singles entered the US album chart Facepalm. Beyond that, do you think a section like this could be useful for other episodes? I don't know how common it is for the tracks to climb after their debut, so if they tend to enter one week and drop out the next, they'd obviously be redundant to the discography. I don't really keep track of that sort of thing though, so I figured you'd be the best person to ask :). Frickative 07:09, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Unrelated, I noticed on last week's chart (not the current) that "Forget You" reentered the chart for a fifth week in the Hot 100, no doubt fueled from the Grammy performance (also why the original "F**k You" made it to #2). It disappeared again immediately. CycloneGU (talk) 15:29, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that, too! On the Canadian Hot 100, the song has charted for six weeks! :) Yves (talk) 18:37, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Pink Friday article

Can I get some assistance on Pink Friday? Possible sock puppets/multiple IP accounts and vandalism to the same material on that article, and I don't think I should revert anymore. Dan56 (talk) 21:32, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Dan56 (talk) 22:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem! Yves (talk) 22:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

UK certifications

Hi there. I am still searching under all available names and those two do not come up in the search system. Can you write me exactly what you write to get them to show up? Thanks!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:37, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

You are right. Thanks for the help. I don't see why they make it so tricky with the wording. Take care! :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 02:00, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Gotcha! Thanks again!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 02:06, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Original Song DYK

The article is now one of two tagged for a double-hook DYK I submitted. The person who reviewed it took off the Under Construction tag; I'd recommend leaving it off through the period that the DYK appears that day, then after it goes away it might be good to readd it starting the next day. CycloneGU (talk) 03:19, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Perfect! I'm so excited for the episode! And thank you so much for the edits to the Journey EP! I'm gonna get to it, but I have a few midterms coming up, but after Wednesday, I should be able to get back to working on it. :) Yves (talk) 18:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Midterms suck. They should be abolished. =)

And yes, I noticed you'd only made one small fix so far so I thought I'd do what I could. =) CycloneGU (talk) 19:43, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Updated Guessage After Tonight's Ep.

If it wasn't for the preview pics. that have newly surfaced at the Glee Wikia, I'd say Santana was going to die - and I'm sure many will pick her as the dying character now. However, everybody is now accounted for in the preview pics. (there are seven dresses, I doubt any of the guys wore THAT), so ND is safe.

The dying character according to Ausiello is male. Carl doesn't have any roles known in the episode after Regionals; indeed, he has as of this episode dumped Emma after learning from the therapy session that she still has feelings for Will (oh boy, this will get interesting). This could lead to him jumping off the roof at the Radisson, where he apparently went to after the therapy session. So I'm sticking with my guess at Carl; ND knows who he is, and he has performed with some of them (including this evening's ep.), so it could have an impact. I have a funny feeling that he's dying. I called it last week, but all the other ideas and the 10-episode bit changed my mind. I'm back to it and that's where I'm sitting regardless of how many people say "it's the damn bird". =) I'm not going to think about the rumour the rest of this week, I just want to find out next week if I called it from the moment I heard it. CycloneGU (talk) 02:42, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watch_with_kristin/b229944_glee-dux_who_brought_sexy_back_who.html. They're making it seem like it's gonna be such a big deal, when honestly, I don't think it will be. Yves (talk) 07:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Glee: The Music, Journey to Regionals

The article Glee: The Music, Journey to Regionals you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Glee: The Music, Journey to Regionals for things which need to be addressed. Adabow (talk · contribs) 01:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay; I didn't spot your replies on my watchlist. Everything's OK and I'll pass it now. :D Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Please weigh in here Thanks, CTJF83 18:00, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Roman's Revenge

I see that you edit Nicki Minaj's articles quite frequently. I'm wondering why "Roman's Revenge" is not considered an official single from the album. Even though the remix of the song features another rapper, I think it should still be considered an official from the album. It was released digitally, and was even sent to radio. The current state of the article is rather weird, having the song itself a promo song, and the remix an official single. ℥^nding·start 02:56, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

(trolling around) I co-sign that idea. However, I believe we need to find a date when the song went for adds on the Radio & Records website, as sometimes AllAccess seems to be iffy in their stuff. Candyo32 03:05, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

(trolling around) Agree, the norm is to remix songs for single release. i don't see a reason for it not to be listed as a single from the album. its charting the same i believe... — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 03:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Haha you guys. Even if it did chart the same, there would be no way of knowing, because, as of the week dated March 12, 2011, "Roman's Revenge" was still charting as "Nicki Minaj featuring Eminem". Yves (talk) 18:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

It can just be noted that only the album version charted. ℥^nding·start 01:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Exactly... its the same as Taio Cruz's "Higher" which is charting as either "Higher (feat. Kylie Minogue)" or "Higher (feat. Kylie & Travie)" despite about a million versions of the song being released. :S — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The Travie McCoy version is reserved for the US. Everywhere else in the world, it's charting as "Taio Cruz featuring Kylie"–even in Canada. The only US charts which shows a different version is the Hot Dance/Club Songs one, showing all three artists. But it's different for "Roman's Revenge". There's no way of knowing if the Lil Wayne version charted at all. Yves (talk) 02:31, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Why can't it just be noted on the discog (featuring Eminem / Lil Wayne) ? Similar to "Takin' Back My Love" on here on the zillion different features on Enrique Iglesias' single Candyo32 02:40, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Well the Eminem version wasn't released as a single. I'm really uncertain as to what to do here. :( Yves (talk) 02:43, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

But it charted in Digital sales from the album's release. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:48, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Hahaha are you alright there? Indeed it did. And then I think it yo-yoed on and off the chart. By the way, "On the Floor" ft. Pitbull is at number ten in New Zealand today. And "Coming Home" ft. Skylar Grey at number five. Yves (talk) 03:03, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

yes i'm good thank you. yourself? :P ooh thanks for the update. don't think hung medien has updated yet. I'm over the moon both songs blew up. They're great tunes always on repeat on my ipod along with Don't Hold Your Breath. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 03:10, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

No, it hasn't updated, yet, but the RIANZ site has. charts.org.nz should be updated within twenty-four hours. Oh haha I was just commenting on your edit summary. And... don't hate me, but I seem to be the only person that isn't a huge fan of "On the Floor". :\ "Coming Home" is a great song, though, and I'm really happy Skylar Grey is seeing quite a bit of success. As for "Don't Hold Your Breath", I actually haven't heard that song, yet. I'll give it a listen. Yves (talk) 03:15, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Lol which edit summary? i make so many... o_O lol. Omg how can you not like "On the Floor"? its so mature compared to what RedOne produces with Gaga. I absolutely love it... especially when it comes onin the night clubs :P "Coming Home" is my redemptive song atm. "DHYB" currently speaks volumes bout my life although i'd change the references to men in the song to women XD — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 03:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

The one you last made to this page. :P Yves (talk) 19:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm trying something out in my sandbox. I'm really not sure how I'd work. Feel free to help out with it on the sandbox. ℥^nding·start 19:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmm I'm not sure: the infobox is supposed to be for singles, and the Eminem one wasn't one. Yves (talk) 19:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Did Anyone Notice...

...that there are now six dead links in the Season 1 featured list? Sources 61, 62, 128, 131, and 140, as well as the recap general reference, are all kaput. Do we have backup sources for those? We may have to remove information using them as sources if we cannot. CycloneGU (talk) 20:46, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that. The FOX website was revamped for the second season, and I'm pretty sure the Hollywood Reporter site was redone, as well. Backup sources shouldn't be difficult to trace, since the references are fully complete. :) Yves (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: "Born This Way" / Lady Gaga

Thanks for correcting the Lady Gaga template and "Born This Way" article. I was under the impression that the episode would feature LG songs, which explains the addition to the LG template. Your assistance is much appreciated! --Another Believer _(Talk) 16:23, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

?

Can you explain this edit? Silverseren^C 05:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Your removal of sourced content from Friday (Rebecca Black song) page

Regarding your remvoving of the following:

"Within a week after being released on iTunes it has jumped the iTunes sales chart to 19 as of March 19, 2011."

There is nothing wrong if it's presented int he context of being a specific chart and reliable secondary sources, not iTunes are reporting this, so the content is notable.--Oakshade (talk) 19:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, iTunes is a music program that doesn't sell music; the iTunes Store does. Regardless, the charts generated by the iTunes Store are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (WP:BADCHARTS). Many record labels report artists having number-one songs, but we cannot use these peaks. Also, the statement would now be incorrect, as it is no longer at number nineteen. It's not a notable chart, and not representative of sales, since the single is also being sold in many other places, including the site's official website, Amazon.com, etc. Yves (talk) 19:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

This is what Reliable Sources are stating, not iTunes. We go by reliable sources. The iTunes store, fine, call it the iTunes store. --Oakshade (talk) 19:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll also point out that even on the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (record charts) talk page, editors are clearly stating that if presented in the context of an iTunes chart in prose and is being reported by reliable sources, it's permitted. --Oakshade (talk) 19:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

That's only one user, and the discussion is still ongoing with no clear consensus. Not everything reported in reliable sources is notable enough to warrant mention on Wikipedia. Record charts are meant to represent popularity of a song, and peaks on the iTunes Store's charts are not indicative of total sales and overall popularity. If the intention is to detail commercial performance, quantitative figures have already been released by Nielsen SoundScan, the official source for sales for music in the United States. Yves (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

These MULTIPLE reliable sources reporting the popularity of a song in the song's article is extremely notable. And at least two users now on the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (record charts) talk page, who even agree with you that the iTunes chart is not reliable but it's okay to present this in prose as its been reported by reliable sources. Clearly you're steadfast intent on locking this very sourced material out. I think we're going to have to open this up for much broader community input into this issue.--Oakshade (talk) 20:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

A free tabloid? And bloggers for Forbes, who have clearly made large statistical errors in other articles regarding Black? "Extremely notable"? I disagree. Wikipedia guidelines currently do not allow peaks from this "chart". Yves (talk) 20:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Forbes (the published blogs of its reporters), The Long Island Press are very reliable sources per WP:SOURCES, and add The Daily Telegraph. Yes, for the song article, it most certainly is extremely relevant. --Oakshade (talk) 20:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)