User talk:Calvin999/Archive 21

A cup of tea for you!

 * Thanks :). I always try and review other nominations to balance out my own. I do have an album at GAN atm hehe —  ₳  aron  11:42, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Welcome! By the way Aphrodite is still waiting for your review :P It's a very very small article! Also, I mentioned "song", but no worries, I'll review the album too :) --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 13:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of WonderBoy1998 -- 14:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes
The article Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes 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 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of WonderBoy1998 -- 15:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Updating Template:Infobox album
Hi there, As a regular contributor to articles in the WP:MUSIC project I believe the following discussion will be of use to you. Please could you take the time to read the proposals at Template_talk:Infobox_album regarding the updating of Infobox album. Kind regards  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  00:45, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Half_of_Me

Your GA nomination of Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes
The article Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of WonderBoy1998 -- 16:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Template Deletion
Hello,

As you've previously spoken at template deletion discussion for album track listing templates you may wish to participate at the following discussion Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_September_11  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  15:35, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * For what template??? —  ₳aron  16:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Template:Extra track listing though I'm interested more in the discussion rather than the outcome tbh.  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  16:23, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for List of songs recorded by Nicki Minaj
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

FAC for Fijación Oral, Vol. 1
Hey there! As you may be aware, and I have nominated Fijación Oral, Vol. 1 for FA late last month. However, since the nomination has been opened, activity has been very slow. It would be greatly appreciated if you could take a moment to leave some comments and help revive the discussion. Thanks! WikiRedactor (talk) 20:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Your Body (Christina Aguilera song)
Sorry for the delay. Let's start working on the article! &mdash; HĐ (talk) 04:49, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yep  —  ₳  aron  10:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems like you're on a wikibreak, so maybe next time we could do it together. By the way, enjoy your wikibreak and come back soon. Sincerely, Simon (talk) 15:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Fearless (Taylor Swift album)/GA1
Aaron, you opened this review four weeks ago, but haven't yet posted anything to it. I was wondering whether you intended to start a review soon, or if the nomination should go back into the reviewing pool. Please let me know as soon as you can. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:52, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes I will do it ASAP. I really haven't been on here much and have tried my best to review all the nominations that I had opened, and this is the only one left now. —  ₳aron  09:59, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

A little belated, but...
As an additional note, I just wanted to thank you now that "Love the Way You Lie" is (finally) a featured article. Your godly GA review, patience and words of encouragement are greatly appreciated! — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  18:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Signs of appreciation like this make me want to stay on Wikipedia. Since "S&M" was promoted I have barely been on here. Not because I don't want to be, but I almost feel as though that I have fulfilled what I set out to do just over two years ago: to make "S&M" an FA. —  ₳aron  20:29, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Get active again soon; there are more FAs and GAs to write still, as well as more GANs to review. Feel free to ping when you need help. — WP: PENGUIN  · [ TALK ]  23:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I will try; I've literally just started my Masters degree in London and I'm there quite a lot so time will be a lot less available now. You can see from the section below that it's taken me a month to complete reviews. —  ₳aron  21:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

GA for Saturday Night
Hey Calvin! I've noticed you usually review music articles to make them GA-worthy. First of all, congratulations for all your work; second - I've been figuratively working my butt off to make Saturday Night (Natalia Kills song) a decent article, and maybe making it a good article. I tried adding it to the Good article nominations thread but it keeps getting deleted, so, if you don't have anything in your hands for now, could you check out the article and maybe tell me what are its problems? Thank you,  ρedro  joão  14:05, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Pedro João, there's a bot that builds the Good Article Nominations page. It looked on the article's Talk page, didn't see the proper template, and deleted your addition. What you need to do is follow the nomination steps on the instructions page: it tells you the right way to start a nomination. Good luck! BlueMoonset (talk) 23:32, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christmas, With Love, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:42, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is. Our final nine were as follows:

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:


 * wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
 * wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
 * wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
 * wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
 * wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
 * wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
 * wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
 * The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
 * Finally, the judges are awarding the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:53, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Leona Lewis Album Cover - Christmas, With Love.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Leona Lewis Album Cover - Christmas, With Love.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

File:Leona Lewis Album Cover - Christmas, With Love.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Leona Lewis Album Cover - Christmas, With Love.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup!
Hello Calvin999, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The competition begins at midnight UTC. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders: *The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page. *Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started the review in 2013.) We will be checking. *If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself. *Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens. *Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked. Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 — ₳aron  09:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2013 WikiCup
Hello, Calvin999, and welcome to the 2013 WikiCup! Your submissions' page is here. The first round will last until the end of February, at which point the top 64 scorers will advance to the second round. We will be in touch at the end of every month, and signups are going to remain open until the end of January; if you know of anyone else who may like to take part, please let them know! A few reminders:
 * The rules can be found here. There have been a few changes from last year, which are listed on that page.
 * Anything you submit must have been nominated and promoted in 2013, and you need to have completed significant work upon it in 2013. (The articles you review at good article reviews does not need to have been nominated in 2013, but you do need to have started and completed the review in 2013.) We will be checking.
 * If you feel that another competitor is breaking the rules or abusing the competition in some way, please let a judge know. Please do not remove entries from the submissions' pages of others yourself.
 * Don't worry about calculating precisely how many points everything is worth. The bot will do that. The bot may occasionally get something wrong- let a judge know, or post on the WikiCup talk page if that happens.
 * Please try to be prompt in updating submissions' pages so that they can be double-checked.

Overall, however, don't worry, and have fun. It doesn't matter if you make the odd mistake; these things happen. Questions can be asked on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 — ₳aron  09:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Only Girl (in the World) - genre
Would you figure it out for the genre for Only Girl (in the World)? I can't edit because of User:Tomica's rule.

Having "euro-pop dance cut", I don't know which one is for genre euro-pop or dance music. As for eurodance which is not found source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.177.187 (talk) 06:53, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Christmas, with Love
 Harrias  talk 12:04, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!
Hello Calvin999, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition will begin at midnight tonight (UTC). There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! , and


 * Hi- just to let you know that a copy-paste problem meant that your submission page wasn't created correctly. It's fixed now. Thanks! J Milburn (talk) 14:34, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

UK digital albums
Do not readd the UK digital albums position in the article Christmas, with Love, and is it a component to the UK albums chart. Rnb and Dance charts are not component because they're like the UK album charts expect in a different genre. 和DITOR E tails 16:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * All charts are based on commercial performance. Show me where it says that UK Digital is not allowed to be included in the chart table. Also, I don't accept your Other stuff exists excuse as a way out. It is used too easily. How about you present me with a proper, valid argument, as to why that chart shouldn't be include, in your opinion. Reminder: "When used correctly though, these comparisons are important as the encyclopedia should be consistent in the content that it provides or excludes" - Other stuff exists.  —  ₳aron  16:37, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * All of WP:BILLBOARDCHARTS applies to adding UK charts, and I think this should give you a good idea why not to add the digital albums chart. 和DITOR  E tails 16:53, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That link leads nowhere. I think you mean WP:USCHARTS, which does not mention UK charting rules for the chart box. The UK does not have nearly as many charts Billboard. We don't have components. —  ₳aron  16:56, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Popdust
Hello Aaron, is Popdust acceptable for use in song articles? prism  △  13:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe so. Or I might be thinking of Popjustice? —  ₳aron  14:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You used it on Birthday Cake (song), if I'm not mistaken. prism   △  14:54, 4 January 2014 (UTC) (by the way, have a look at the Rated R review)
 * I don't know. —  ₳aron  15:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga
Hello Aaron, how are you? Just wanted to ask, do you have any Featured list plans for List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga? You are quite experienced with it as I can see. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 12:05, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah I did start on it a few moons ago but had IP trouble with it so I let the storm pass for a while. —  ₳aron  22:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe its quite stable now, we can maybe meat it up gradually? — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 08:00, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll probably go back to it. There are several I started but didn't finish. —  ₳aron  23:02, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Long time no see
 → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  01:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Notice
Hey, thought this discussion would be beneficial with your input, since this user is about to go through Wikipedia and nominate every album track for deletion if it was not a single or promotional single, including those in the Rihanna WikiProject. I know you work hard on the Rihanna articles, which will also be affected, so any input to this would be greatly appreciated.  Gia co bbe  talk 23:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Not exactly what I was going to do. If anything, I was going to nominate for deletion the ones that have not received significant attention. In many cases, the tracks from an album that get released as singles/promotional singles are the only ones that achieve such attention and therefore become notable enough to be habe their own articles. It isn't because of how hard users work on articles. Because of this, it would be excessive to have an article for every track on an album. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 00:14, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * And who are you to decide which ones "have not received significant attention" ? What have you contributed to Wikipedia? I've had to revert and warn you about removing pictures from Katy Perry's recorded song list as it's an FL requirement. Any non-single article exists because they have received enough coverage, charted, been nominated for an award or received a music video. It's such a stupid thing to say that singles get more coverage; OBVIOUSLY! That's why they are singles; are used to promote and make money. We live in a digital world now, and that means that non-singles often receive the same if not more coverage than singles do now. Not every album has an article for every song. Far from it. I am vowing that if any of those articles, whether if I worked on them or not, are deleted, then I will never edit on Wikipedia or contribute to this encyclopaedia again. Everything I would have worked on, and others, will be gone, making our service, time, effort and hard work a complete waste of time. Who are you to blaze in and command that you want all of those GOOD ARTICLES deleted? If they were "irrelevant", they wouldn't have made it through the good article nomination process in the first place. There's really nothing you can do about them; they only need one of the following: a chart position, significant media attention in the form of interviews or reviews, or an award nomination. I don't see the point of being on Wikipedia anymore with people like this. The community is collapsing thanks to people like you. Most of the people I started editing on Wikipedia with 3 years ago are gone because of incidents like this. —  ₳aron  14:09, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't decide it lacked notability- WP:NSONGS did. As mentioned, one cannot disregard WP:NSONGS. You didn't have to make patronizing statements "community is collapsing thanks to people like you". XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 17:23, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * My sentiments apply regardless. —  ₳aron  18:46, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Leona Lewis's fifth studio album
Hello! Your submission of Leona Lewis's fifth studio album at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 05:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Request
Hi Aaron, I'm feeling a bit embarassed by asking you this, but, if you have the time and willing to, could you write me a brief synopsis of this video? It's just that you're experienced in writing music articles and some of my sentences for the synopsis I've been trying to wait didn't end up so well. Just ping me so I know your answer. Thank you in advance. prism  △  18:52, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Well at least someone appreciates my service to Wikipedia. I might be able to do it at some point this weekend. —  ₳aron  18:54, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick response! I don't really understand what you mean by the first sentence, but I've seen that you have contributed a lot to music articles and I do truly respect you as a Wikipedia user. It's kind of sad to see that my song articles are potentially getting deleted, in spite of not following the notability guideline. I think we should contest this guideline somehow. As you've said, we've entered a digital era and there should be all of the information for each song available in separate articles, at least if they're not a stub or a poorly constructed/sourced article. The worst thing is that GAs could get deleted. Is there any place here in which we could suggest a new rule regarding the music articles? I've been here for 5 years though I'm still not familiarized with every rule and gudieline. Sorry for the long text. prism   △  19:09, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That is what I meant in my first sentence :) —  ₳aron  12:09, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, OK :) prism   △  12:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * It's situations like those which makes me want to hang up my boots. Wikipedia is so different to just a few years ago. Most of my friends have gone now. —  ₳aron  12:26, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I can't say much about that as I've been inactive during most of my Wikipedia time, though these guidelines are obviously unfair. The 2013 revision of WP:NSONG has really made it worse. prism   △  12:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * To me, as long as it's well written and not too short, then I really don't see the problem. —  ₳aron  12:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * And reaching GA status should also be taken into consideration, which apparently will not be for "Double Rainbow". prism   △  12:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see a problem with that article anyway. I just don't get it lol —  ₳aron  12:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer, whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:


 * and were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
 * scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
 * scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Featured topics/She Wolf.
 * scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
 * has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Leona Lewis
There was one for a long time to prevent people from edit warring; it got removed without any explanation here. Acalamari 12:36, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well it wasn't me, I changed it back to British. —  ₳aron  12:40, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I saw that you changed it back; the summary was never aimed at you. :) Acalamari 12:42, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leona Lewis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Radio 1 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

The Lotus GT
Hi there, Calvin999. What a long time since we last corresponded with each other. I can see that you are now not working for the Lotus (Christina Aguilera album) topic anymore, so I have nominated "Your Body" for a GA. The article is now passed, so the topic is now suitable for a Good topic. I have named you as the main contributor the the topic (with most song articles are written by you). Here is the link. Cheers, &mdash; Simon (talk) 09:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey. I know, I'm not terribly active on here anymore. Not because I don't want to be, I just don't have the time! Ah yeah I saw, will be so nice to see it as a Good Topic! —  ₳aron  14:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Hiiiiii
Hello. What's up? Was it performed or something like that? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 08:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey. Hope it just charted! :D —  ₳aron  11:45, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Help Please
Dear Calvin would you help me to professionally Enlarge the article of You're Mine (Eternal) like This one? It Would be highly appreciated. fidelovkurt 17:38, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep —  ₳aron  17:39, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank You so so so Much! okay now regarding the section of Development and background, which information shall be used? And how can we upload a 30 second permitted audio sample of the song? fidelovkurt 17:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Has she spoken about the song? Maybe a bit of info about the album being pushed back and the delays. You'd have to find someone who can upload a sample, I don't know how to do it. —  ₳aron  17:51, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, Now let's focus on expanding the Music Video section. You know the structure followed on other articles [Synopsis and Background and reception] here'a detailed links about the premiere of the original Music video.

|Billboard |Entertainment Wise |MTV |Music.Yahoo |complex.com |Idolator |GossipCopfidelovkurt 18:18, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I just mixed up with the table LOL I wanted to add Italy's release date which is Feb 14 i mixed up with the table :( fidelovkurt 13:58, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Italy? The URL says LB? Italy is IT lol. Italy's release was on the 12th, not the 14th. See here Also where is the Italian radio date? It doesn't have the date in that link. —  ₳aron  14:02, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Lol, sorry, how can I set the release dates for each country ? fidelovkurt 14:21, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I added Canada but the table is screwed once again lol fidelovkurt 14:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Don't Worry I've done it —  ₳aron  14:31, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I have seen that you have removed the background and development since its not relevant however concerning this single it all started when Carey announced a Super pip announcement on her Facebook page on Feb 10 2014.... here are the detailed links... tell me how to reform them in the Background and development section   ... its related to a Charity movement titled All I want for Valentines Day is literally giving you my heart.... fidelovkurt 15:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah I removed the other stuff because it's more relevant to the title track article. But yeah if you want to add the info about it being a charity movement then add a Background section again with this new info —  ₳aron  15:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay No problem at all, but tell me about how the body work of the section should be? fidelovkurt 15:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Just write it then I'll go through it. —  ₳aron  15:38, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Main Page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of the article List of songs written by Emeli Sandé know that it will be appearing as the main page featured list on March 10, 2014. You can view the TFL blurb at Today's featured list/March 10, 2014. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured list directors, or , or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. Thanks! ©  Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 22:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

 

Songs written by Emeli Sandé have been recorded for her debut studio album, Our Version of Events, as well as for other artists' albums. Sandé collaborated with Naughty Boy for many of the songs on Our Version of Events, including the album's lead single, "Heaven", which peaked at number one on the UK Dance Chart. The idea for the song was conceived after she and Naughty Boy had a "deep conversation about religion". She collaborated with were Grammy Award-winning producer Emile Haynie and American singer-songwriter and pianist, Alicia Keys. Sandé has appeared as a guest vocalist on Professor Green's song "Read All About It" and Labrinth's song "Beneath Your Beautiful". Sandé co-wrote the song "Half of Me" for Rihanna's seventh studio album, Unapologetic (2012), and "Trouble" for Leona Lewis' third studio album, Glassheart (2012). In August 2011, record executive Simon Cowell named Sandé his "favourite songwriter" of the moment.

Edit war
Sorry, I didn't threaten, it was just a small warning to say that if we continue to edit war, the 3RR rule will be violated and we'll be reported to the Edit warring noticeboard. To avoid this, consensus must be reached - any disagreements must be discussed and resolved on the article's talk page. Thanks – Hiddenstranger (talk) 02:41, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Spinning Around FA Nomination
Hi Aaron! Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering whether you could comment on the FA nomination page of an article I worked on, "Spinning Around". The reason I am asking you to comment on it is because my IGCSE pre-boards and boards are about to commence and I want to wrap this up before they start. Thank you so much in advance, and it is not necessary to comment if you don't have the time :) --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 11:05, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

My FLC nomination
Hello Aaron! Could you please comment on my FLC, for List of songs recorded by Natalia Kills? I worked really hard on it and I really want to get it passed. Thank you :) Prism   △  11:49, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=595593291 your edit] to You're Mine (Eternal) may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * rap, and have a sound that’s current yet also classic."

Re:Wikicup table
Hi Aaron, the problem seems to have sorted itself. J Milburn (talk) 13:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't realise that Wikilinks had to be added, it didn't say to do that. —  ₳aron  13:47, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you clarify which of the articles in the topic you've done significant work on this year? The rules for topics do say that you can claim articles on which you have done work in previous years, and that seems to apply to all of them apart from Your Body (Christina Aguilera song), as long as you have done significant work on at least one of them this year. If you haven't done much work on any of them this year, then I'm afraid the topic will not be eligible for WikiCup points. J Milburn (talk) 19:58, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well I've not worked on any this year. That's a bit of an unfair rule considering I did the vast majority bar one article. So my co-nominator would be able to claim the points despite having only done one of the articles, the same one done this year. That was the only one left to do, and my co-nom did it. It's basically because of me that this GT even exists. Take it I'm going to be eliminated now... —  ₳aron  19:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the difficulty with topics, and that's why there is a separate rule for them; however, I'm sure you can see that it may well upset other competitors if you were able to claim points for a topic on which you've done no work this year, while we're removing DYKs, GAs and even FAs from them because of the limited work they've done this year. If this means that you won't progress, I can only apologise and note that it has been a particularly tough first round this year. I hope you can appreciate that this is not meant to imply that you have not done good work on this topic, or that the topic is in any way unworthy. Thanks, J Milburn (talk) 19:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * But it took me ages to do all 10 articles! It's essentially me who made it a GT. I don't see how that could upset other competitors when it's me who did 90% of the work. If anything, it would upset me the other way round, with my co-nominator claiming points for all the articles that I wrote. Means that I could never have nominated this for GT and claim points in either year. —  ₳aron  19:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * It took you ages last year. You could have claimed points for every article in the topic on which you had ever done significant work if you had done significant work on any article this year. You can't get much fairer than that. A central rule of the WikiCup, for a number of years, has been that you have to have done work on anything you're claiming this year. Topics are more lenient than any other content type, but you are still required to have done some work on them this year. I am not trying to take away from the amount of work you have clearly done on the topic, I'm just observing, and you agreed, that you haven't done any work this year, which is one of the things that matters for the WikiCup. J Milburn (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well I'd rather withdraw myself from the cup than be eliminated. Let's put it that way. —  ₳aron  20:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you feel that way. I will mark you as "withdrawn". J Milburn (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I do. It's really pissed me off. Can't be bothered with it anymore, especially as now there is no incentive. I've been really active in the cup for the past two years and made it to September both times. Can't believe that despite me making Lotus a good topic, I can't claim it as such. It's extremely contradictory that my co-nominator could collect all the points for having contributed to only one of the articles in his own right. —  ₳aron  20:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * If your conominator had only worked on one article at all, and that was this year, your conominator would only be able to claim for one of the articles- a whopping three points. If you had done significant work on any of the articles in the topic this year, you would have been able to claim for all of the articles on which you had ever done significant work. Again, the rules on topics are more lenient than any other content type, and have been quite clearly written on the scoring page for years. I'm not sure what you feel is contradictory about these rules, but I'm sorry that this has frustrated you as much as it has. J Milburn (talk) 21:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I disagree that for a Good Topic claim you have to have worked on at least one article this year. There is more involved in a Good Topic as you don't know when you will be able to nominate it, especially if it is quite a large topic. I see it that it has become a Good Topic this year because of work previously done that took a long time, and that is what should count. It's still me who did 10 out of 11 articles, and that should account for something. It's not like I've not put any work into it. It's hard to make a large topic a Good Topic in the amount of time that you propose it be done. And I'm annoyed I can't proceed because of it. Without me, there would be not Good Topic here. And that is why it should count. —  ₳aron  08:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 February newsletter
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:


 * , a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
 * , a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
 * , another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:


 * , who helped take Thirty Flights of Loving through good article candidates and featured article candidates, claiming the first first featured article of the competition.
 * , who claimed the first featured list of the competition with Natalia Kills discography.
 * , who takes the title of the contributor awarded the highest bonus point multiplier (resulting in the highest scoring article) of the competition so far. Her high-importance salamander, now a good article, scored 108 points.

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Note
When you revert edits, be sure to not revert every single contribution like what you did on this diff. Why you reverted my fixes?! Just review your edits/reverts before finalizing them. Zyma (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of You're Mine (Eternal)
Hello! Your submission of You're Mine (Eternal) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 01:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * It's been two weeks since the above was posted, and no action has been taken on doing a QPQ or addressing the close paraphrasing issues raised. This is a final courtesy ping; absent a response, the nomination will be closed as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay I will get to it. —  ₳aron  18:27, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Please see new note on DYK nomination page. Yoninah (talk) 09:56, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 March newsletter
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. , who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.

With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for You're Mine (Eternal)
The DYK project (nominate) 08:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

April 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=602400588 your edit] to Mariah Carey videography may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * | Jim Sonzero

Award 4 U
Awarded to Calvin999 for being part of the 25,000 Edit Club Vjmlhds (talk) 02:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks —  ₳aron  13:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Happy birthday to me!
22 today :-/ haha —  ₳aron  16:09, 23 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Happy birthday!  prism  △ 18:06, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you —  ₳aron  18:33, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 April newsletter
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's, whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included, who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and , who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from, tiger from and The Lion King from. We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to and  for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.

192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 17:56, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

You're Mine (Eternal)
I've reverted assuming good faith, on the basis that two versions of the song were released simultaneously to download and radio. Much like "Love Never Felt So Good" by Michael Jackson, where a version featuring Justin Timberlake was also released at the same time. And if you look at say "Pour It Up" by Rihanna, the hip-hop remix was not featured on any album etc, but it was released for download and given its own infobox. As the production was the same and both versions were released simultaneously both versions of "You're Mine" charted as a single entity on the charts and therefore a separate infobox is not really appropriate but nevertheless the Trey Songz version got a video, promotion and release. That qualifies it as a single really. If there was more information I'd have made a separate infobox etc but as there isn't this is a good compromise.  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  20:43, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * "Pout It Up" remix was released after and separately following the release of the original. I'll tell you why it doesn't qualify as a single: Trey Songz is not on the album. It is just a remix with a video, much like what the remix of "Beautiful" with Jeezy was supposed to be with the unreleased video. The Spanglish version also got a video too. —  ₳aron  08:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * wow I'm surprised someone as accomplished as yourself is making such remarks. Since when does a song have to feature on an album to be a single? "Pour it up (remix)", "Turn it up (remix)" both dont feature on albums yet they are singles. Also, regardless of the fact the Trey songz version is a remix it still has to be classified as a song or single. Evidently its a single (a version of the song featured on the album). By your logic and opinion above if they Trey Songz remix was released on a different day it would be fine to make a different infobox and have Trey Songz chronology featured. This is not supported by any kind of reliable source or guideline. Its not like im a noob, I too am an accomplished editor, I was surprised that you're telling me to get a consensus. Its not the first time you have been short recently (see discussion about Me. I Am Mariah. What happened to the sense of community and friendship? Maybe a formal discussion about this is a good thing because the treatment of singles and remixes is obviously NOT consistant.  → Lil- ℧niquԐ 1 - {  Talk  } -  11:07, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Trey Songz has never been referred to by Mariah or anyone else as being the official single release. It is her solo version which is the main release, the one that has charted. The Trey Songz version and video were there purely as a means of appealing to a wider audience. The remix of "Pour it Up" is a remix which doesn't appear on the album, that's why it just says "single by" in the info box without any reference to the album, unlike the original solo version above it. You can't add Trey Songz into the singles chronology implying that he is a featured artist on the single when above it under the artwork it only mentions Mariah and everywhere else in the article it is referred to as an "other version." It's the labelling of what is and what isn't that is inconsistent. I'm only telling you to start a discussion on the talk page about it because whenever I have added or removed something that someone else disagrees, they revert it back and tell me to do exactly the same. There is not only a difference of opinion here but there is also inconsistency of labelling on the article on your part. I'm not being short with you, I'm just getting to the point and telling you how it is straight up instead of pussyfooting about the subject. —  ₳aron  11:28, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thirsty DYK
XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 18:44, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Setangan Berloemoer Darah
Hi, your review of this DYK nomination is incomplete. Please see the template, above. Yoninah (talk) 23:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Thirsty (song)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Thirsty (song)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:03, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Turn Me On (David Guetta song)
Can you revert to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turn_Me_On_(David_Guetta_song)&oldid=606727761, because source says club song. 183.171.176.207 (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Possible help
Calvin, regarding this revert and notice, I'd first like to thank you for your assistance. The "G.U.Y." page has been facing lots of fancruft over the past couple months, mainly from socks of a disruptive user named who inflates Lady Gaga's success. User was topic-banned from Gaga articles back in March for persistent inflation of critical success, mainly on the Artpop page. Since then, he began socking to evade the topic ban. ,, , and myself have had to keep a close watch on the Artpop and G.U.Y. pages for his socks. His most recent socking got him blocked for a month (which expires in one week). However, if this IP is another sock of his, I have a slight concern your notice could be a case of WP:BEANS and prompt further disruption. Of course, there's also a chance that this is some other unrelated Gaga fan intent on fancruft or just some other disruptive user altogether given the IP's other edits and vandalism notice from a while back. If this was a registered account, this would be less difficult to determine. His signature move is inflating things like "mixed reviews" to "positive reviews". Perhaps you could lend a hand in monitoring Artpop-related articles for fancruft/socks? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 00:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah that's fine. But it doesn't matter who it is, I warn anyone who vandalises or edits without just cause. —  ₳aron  13:21, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Understood, just hoping it doesn't backfire. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Ms. Chanteuse...
Hey buddy :) Have you heard it yet? I want to know what you think. Very impressive and solid. I wasn't expecting so much raw soul. She really sang to her current limits. Definitely worlds ahead of Memoirs (my least favorite to date from her) & E=MC2. Put a big smile on my face and trickled down several tears.-- Peter Griffin  &bull;  Talk2Me   00:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No I haven't. It won't let me listen to it on iTunes Radio because it's for the US. —  ₳aron  12:27, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Calvin, regarding your addition of credits to the MIAM song articles, thanks for that. But do you by any chance have the catalogue no. or the iTunes ID for the album? If so please add it. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 13:07, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * From where? —  ₳aron  15:45, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I added the "Thirsty" sample in hopes you (as the author of the article) would write an appropriate description etc. Maybe you didn't notice, but it is still bare. Please add one.-- Peter Griffin  &bull;  Talk2Me   20:15, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Help
Could you help me expand the article of Carey's upcoming single You Don't Know What to Do ? thanks a lot fidelovkurt 18:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi
I miss you. Can we talk someday? Jivesh 1205 (Talk) 08:49, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes of course! —  ₳aron  09:50, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposal
You might be interested in giving input here. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 03:29, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Sale el Sol GT
Hi Aaron! Been a long time since I was on Wikipedia. Whenever you have time, could you please comment on Featured topic candidates/Sale el Sol/archive1. I have nominated Sale el Sol for good topic. Not canvassing around or anything, but I just hope the nomination ends quickly (regardless of the verdict). Anyway what's up? I haven't seen you working on any articles lately. --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 16:39, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey yes I do have some comments to post on the GT proposal but I will do it when I have the time to go through them all properly. Yeah I have been making edits here and there, haven't really got time for full blown overhauls at the moment. —  ₳aron  12:28, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I was fooling around a bit and I was a little disappointed seeing how things are going, I don't know why. A lot seems to have changed during my hiatus. :/ --WonderBoy1998 (talk) 17:59, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 June newsletter
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's, whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.

The round saw this year's first featured portal, with taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from, a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of.

The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. and 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thirsty (song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thirsty (song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Prism -- Prism (talk) 15:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

FA review
Hi Aaron. Do you wish to check the prose or non-free media files in Megadeth, my FA nominee? The review page is here, so your input will be appreciated. If not interested, please respond here so that I know whether to contact another editor. All the best.--Retrohead (talk) 21:07, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thirsty (song)
The article Thirsty (song) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Thirsty (song) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Prism -- Prism (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thirsty (song)
The article Thirsty (song) 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Thirsty (song) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Prism -- Prism (talk) 22:42, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Linking
Regarding this edit, is there any particular reason why songwriters (and songs) would be linked more than once within the table? Just curious.  Snuggums ( talk  /  edits ) 13:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It was mentioned in one of my FLs, and I applied it to all of them, and no one ever said not to. Like I said in my edit summary, if you sort any of the other columns, the ones you left linked won't necessarily be the ones left at the top again, and could theoretically be at the bottom of the table or elsewhere. —  ₳aron  16:18, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks for explaining, I'll keep it in mind for future FLC's.....  Snuggums ( talk  /  edits ) 17:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)