User talk:Calvin999/Archive 23

A cheeseburger for you!

 * Thank you. —  ₳aron  07:31, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of John Cunningham (RAF officer)
Hello! Your submission of John Cunningham (RAF officer) 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) 12:13, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

A consolation barnstar for you!
Haha. Thank you :) —  ₳aron  10:51, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/American Oxygen
Please see my comments there. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:46, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Reverts (Nicki Minaj)
If you would have read my edit summary, you would have seen that reverting my revert was not immediately necessary. I suggested having a conversation on Nicki Minaj's talk page, of which, is currently underway. Simply participating there would have been more helpful. For future reference, it is best to form a consensus instead of engaging in an unnecessary edit war. --GoneIn60 (talk) 08:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * A conversation isn't needed and a consensus isn't needed. She was born in Trinidad, she identifies and being Trinidadian and not American, and as we have never seen any documentation saying she has American citizenship. Rihanna was born in Barbados, identifies as being Barbadian, and thus we say Barbadian throughout her articles, despite living in America. —  ₳aron  08:27, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * We also know that she moved Queens, New York, when she was 5 with her family that legally immigrated to the United States. In order to attend public schools, she would have had to be an American citizen. Where she was born does not override the location in which she became notable per MOS:BLPLEAD. Furthermore, we have reliable, secondary sources that refer to her as an American artist. On Wikipedia, secondary sources override primary when the two are in disagreement, and/or when the number of secondary sources is significant. --GoneIn60 (talk) 08:33, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Where is her documentation or copy of it saying she has attained American citizenship? Even if this is provided, it makes her Trinidadian-American, or Trinidadian (with American citizenship) for her bio info box. You can't escape the fact that she was born in Trinidad to Trinidadian parents with a Trinidadian passport. You can't just omit the Trinidadian part out because she lives in the United States now. It doesn't work like that. The people who refer to her as solely American, as you mention, are massively misinformed. She is not American in any form. —  ₳aron  08:44, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Did you not look at the primary Nicki Minaj article you reverted in this edit? It stated "Trinidadian-born American", which is correct. Remember, this is not about your opinion or mine. This is about what reliable sources state, whether they are wrong or not. This is a fundamental principle that governs policy on Wikipedia. We should be able to trust that secondary sources are properly vetting this information. We do not need to do the research ourselves or have direct access to primary sources.
 * I suggest making a change to how we've approached this. In all the song articles, we can change it to simply say, " [Song title] is a song by Nicki Minaj". Her nationality and citizenship is not important there. The artist's primary article is where that distinction matters. From here on out, let's continue this discussion at Nicki Minaj's talk page. --GoneIn60 (talk) 09:02, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * But the reverts you made reverted them to solely American, not Trinidadian-American. All song articles use the nationality of the artist. I think it's best to have her bio as "Trinidadian songwriter and rapper", and the info box should say "Trinidadian (with American citizenship)", providing that sufficient documentation can be sourced saying that she does in fact have American citizenship. This is the correct way to say include it. —  ₳aron  09:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Clearly we're not getting anywhere. You are ignoring Wikipedia policy concerning reliable sources. You are also ignoring the Manual of Style guideline I referenced above, MOS:BLPLEAD, which states, "the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident" should be used. I'm going to continue the discussion at Nicki's talk page. If you'd like to join the discussion there, please do. We need to give this maximum visibility, and your talk page isn't going to accomplish that. --GoneIn60 (talk) 09:14, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * But she is clearly a citizen and national of Trinidad, too, so as long as a source for her being an American citizen can be found, it would be fine to include both nationalities. Angela Lansbury attained American citizenship, so she is referred to as being British-American. —  ₳aron  09:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

I need an Administrator to do something for me please! If you see this, please comment back here!
Thanks! — ₳aron  08:28, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Bogus speedy deletion tags
Do not re-add declined, bogus speedy deletion tags to articles, as you did at I Am (Leona Lewis album). Wily D 11:14, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Show me where it got decline? Because I can't see who did it. —  ₳aron  11:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, seriously, giving me bogus template warrings, redirecting pages from the mainspace to elsewhere, re-adding bogus speedy deletion tags, and so on, leaves me wondering whether to it'd be wiser to block you or protect the page to prevent your continued disruption. Wily D 11:19, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * At no point have I seen anyone say "I'm closing this deletion request". I'm giving you warnings because you are not paying attention! A mainspace article used to exist which I was editing, and it was moved to the draft space a few months ago, the same draft which has the entire edit history of multiple editors for months and months. Some Leona fan/new editor has blazed in hurriedly created an article which nothing more than an info box and some confirmed songs, who has since copied and pasted all that me and others have been working on for months in the draft, and you keep adding it all back and accusing me of blanking, when it was never there in the first place! I listed the new mainspace one for deletion because it's not fair or correct to simply copy and paste 10,000 characters worth of prose from the draft and not give due credit, it creates a problem with the history. Plus, the album has no release date yet, which make the mainspace one you accuse me of blanking not notable according to guidelines, which is why it was placed in a draft space in the first place! Do you understand now?? —  ₳aron  11:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Fixing cut and paste moves ain't hard. That doesn't justify adding bogus speedy deletion tags, nor re-adding declined speedy deletion tags.  I'll fix the cut and paste move.  If you engage in any more disruption there, I'll take away your ability to do so, by blocking your account and/or protecting the page. Wily D  11:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Well it was duplicated content. And why have you moved it into mainspace?? It doesn't have a release date, so it fails music articles notability guidelines!! That's why it was placed into a draft!! Now IP users are going to attack and bombard the article with a load of unneeded, unsourced and poorly written information. That's why I wasn't asking for a history merge, it's too early. And don't threaten me, it's not appreciated. All I'm doing is adhering to policy and guidelines (which you are now violating because the album doesn't have a release date). —  ₳aron  11:43, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not a threat, it's a warning (because we're all happier when editors voluntarily stop disrupting the encyclopaedia). Adding invalid speedy deletion tags to articles is not adhering to policy or guideline.  Placing invalid warning template on user talk pages is not adhering to guidelines and policies.  Redirecting pages from the mainspace to other namespaces is not adhering to policies and guidelines.  All of these things are unacceptable disruption.  If you want it moved back to draft space, start a discussion on the talk and get a consensus.  The article appears to meet WP:N and looks in decent shape, so there's compelling reason to unilaterally move it to draft.  That you don't want other editors editing is, frankly, tough, see WP:OWN.  A history merge is necessary to meet the licensing conditions, so there's nothing to discuss on that issue.  The licensing isn't negotiable.  Wily D  12:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It's written like a threat, and I haven't been disruptive. If anything, it was the other user who was being disruptive. At least I said why I was removing the pasted content. Have you given him a slap on the wrist, too? Probably not. I clicked the most relevant tag for deletion that I deemed it to be, which was that the same content was already in the draft space. How am I not adhering to policy? We don't include music articles with no release date in mainspace, and that is exactly what you have done. So you are not adhering to policy. It's funny, because someone else moved it to the draft space for the exact reason for which you think it should be in mainspace. How confusing is that. Who is adhering to policy and who isn't? It's certainly not you. You are purposely going against music article criteria for having it in mainspace without a release date or even a national chart. What do you have to say to that? This is what I have to say: Notability (music) (Emphasis on the "generally, an album should not have an independent article until its title, track listing and release date have all been publicly confirmed by the artist or their record label." part). —  ₳aron  13:13, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Talk:The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari/GA1
It is over four weeks since you opened this review, yet nothing has been done with it. If you'd prefer, I can arrange to put it back into the nominations pool with no loss of seniority. If you do plan to do the review, please start it soon. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Aaron, I've just found a couple more GAN reviews that were opened the day before the first one that you also haven't done anything with. May I suggest that until you do these reviews—or until you've relinquished them back to the nomination pool—that you refrain from starting any more reviews, as you did a couple of days ago with Talk:Princess Alice of the United Kingdom/GA1? The ones still awaiting attention after nearly a month:
 * Talk:Amadeus VI, Count of Savoy/GA1 (March 18)
 * Talk:Marie Jeanne Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours/GA2 (March 18)
 * I hope you can devote the necessary time to the three from March before moving on to Princess Alice. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:24, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes I will don't worry. I've got more than 160 reviews to my name, far more than any other people that I can see at first glance in the nominations list. That shows that I do do reviews. As I've said before, I have been really ill for about 3 weeks and am getting better now, so I haven't been online for either long periods of time or at all. If I open a review, it will get done, whether it's the next day or next month. It's a guarantee that I will do it instead of the nominator potentially waiting three or four months or longer (which does happen). They will all be done this weekend. —  ₳aron  08:08, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Aaron, sorry to hear you've been ill. Thanks for confirming that you will get these old reviews started in the near future. Hope you're fully recovered soon. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for American Oxygen
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Precious
  music of the sun

Thank you, Aaron, for quality articles such as S&M and Love the Way You Lie, List of songs recorded by Rihanna, List of songs recorded by Ariana Grande and American Oxygen, for good topics such as Music of the Sun, for reviewing GAs - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! —  ₳aron  09:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Only Girl (In the World)
Hello there,

Following on your from your message to me asking me to refer to WP:USCHARTS, I noticed it is advised that a "singlechart" template is to be used 'where possible'. I thought it would be correct to alter the charts on Only Girl (In the World) to this template having previously seen it.

Many apologies if I was at fault.

Ellis.o22 (talk) 11:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It can work sometimes, but for some of them, I've used a written article. Also, using the template forces Billboard to be linked every time in the table, which causes WP:OVERLINK. That's why I prefer not to use the template. I don't always reference to the artist chart history, either, perhaps to an archive date. When I've left messages to you before, it's been about included Dance Airplay with the other dance charts are present, for example, not about templates. —  ₳aron  12:32, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Caligari review
Thanks for reviewing The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari! I believe I've responded to all your comments at the GAN, but let me know if you had any more thoughts! —  Hun ter   Ka  hn  18:28, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for the review, and thanks for the barnstar as well! —  Hun ter   Ka  hn  20:53, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

SHMG
Whats unconstructive of my edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickyRozay (talk • contribs) 21:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * see WP:NALBUMS; an album doesn't warrant a separate article without a confirmed title, full tracklist, and release date. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:19, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm 23 today!
Wahhhhh —  ₳aron  07:45, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Enjoy your birthday! Snuggums (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 12:12, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) —  ₳aron  18:46, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Happy birthday, all the best. :) Jonas Vinther • (speak to me!) 14:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. —  ₳aron  17:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thanks! — ₳aron  17:44, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
<b style="color:#00cc33">Harrias</b> talk 16:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Fidel Castro
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Pentemont Abbey
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  16:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Re:DYK Medal
Hallo ₳aron, thanks a lot, much appreciated! Actually I already lost my hopes to get it :-) Cheers, Alex2006 (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * That's okay :) I dished about 7 of them out! Thought I'd give the table an update. —  ₳aron  16:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

FA comments
Hi Aaron. Can you leave comments or vote on Master of Puppets, an FA candidate of mine? The review page is here. Appreciate your time.--Retrohead (talk) 08:59, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi. I will try and get to it at some point. —  ₳aron  09:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of awards and nominations received by Lorde/archive3
Would you mind leaving some comments? Thanks, HĐ (talk) 09:54, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I will at some point soon.  —  ₳aron  10:02, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Shetland (cattle)
Hi Calvin,

You may want to quick fail the GAN for Shetland (cattle), because I just discovered that from the beginning, the article was a complete copyright violation of this page. (I must admit that I'm rather disappointed at all the wasted time and effort I put into copy editing the article only to find this.) -- Biblio worm  20:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll quick fail it. I can't get that link to work though? —  ₳aron  08:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

WikiCup 2015 May newsletter
The second round one has all wrapped up, and round three has now begun! Congratulations to the 34 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our second round. Leading the way overall was in Group B with a total of 777 points for a variety of contributions including Good Articles on Corona Borealis and Microscopium - both of which received the maximum bonus. Special credit must be given to a number of high importance articles improved during the second round.
 * was one of several users who worked on improving Ulysses S. Grant. Remember, you do not need to work on an article on your own - as long as each person has completed significant work on the article during 2015, multiple competitors can claim the same article.
 * took Dragonfly to Good Article for a 3x bonus - and if that wasn't enough, they also took Damselfly there as well for a 2x bonus.
 * worked up Alexander Hamilton to Good Article for the maximum bonus. Hamilton was one of the founding fathers of the United States and is a level 4 vital article.

The points varied across groups, with the lowest score required to gain automatic qualification was 68 in Group A - meanwhile the second place score in Group H was 404, which would have been high enough to win all but one of the other Groups! As well as the top two of each group automatically going through to the third round, a minimum score of 55 was required for a wildcard competitor to go through. We had a three-way tie at 55 points and all three have qualified for the next round, in the spirit of fairness. The third round ends on June 28, with the top two in each group progressing automatically while the remaining 16 highest scorers across all four groups go through as wildcards. Good luck to all competitors for the third round! , and  16:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Meghan Trainor discography/archive1
Would you mind leaving some comments? Thanks, <b style="color:Red">All About That Bass</b> (<b style="color:Blue">A word??</b> / <b style="color:Purple">Stalking not allowed...</b>) 05:32, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The inclusion of the first three albums has been discussed at length on Talk:Title (Meghan Trainor album). With the consensus to list the three albums, it was decided that Trainor has enough material for a discography. It saddens me that there is nothing in your comment that I can improve on. Can I please get a reply from you as to how Trainor is less notable than Lorde, Iggy, Charli, AshleyTisdale and Carly? I believe that the FL is not the place to discuss deletion. <b style="color:Red">All About That Bass</b> (<b style="color:Blue">A word??</b> / <b style="color:Purple">Stalking not allowed...</b>) 11:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi MaranoFan. I wasn't apart of those discussions about listing those three albums in her discography so I can't comment on that. My oppose is not representative of me thinking that you haven't worked hard or that there is nothing you can improve on. I can see you've spent time on it (I know it is time consuming when multiple tables are involved), and there were things I can see an issue with. But, as I believe the list is not notable, I didn't see the point of listing things to improve, because, with respect, you can't just make up new material to include in order for me to think that it would become notable. With regard to the other singers you mention, it kind of falls under WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. We aren't talking about those singers respective discographies here, we are talking about Trainor's, and my oppose with the reasons given still stands. However, when people say WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS to me, it does annoy me, so I will give a comment about each of those singer's discographies that you mention. Lorde's I would have opposed on the same basis as Trainor's; Iggy Azalea's I would have supported, because she has released essentially two albums (both have different material), has released more singles and has made a lot of guest appearances; Charli XCX I would support because has released two albums, a fair amount of singles, multiple guest appearances and multiple songwriting credits for other singers; Ashley Tisdale I would support per Azalea and XCX with regard to two albums and a lot more singles than Trainor; Carly Rae Jepsen I would probably abstain from voting, because yes she has released two albums with a third on the way, but she hasn't released many singles. Meghan Trainor has the smallest discography out of all those whom you mention. —  ₳aron  11:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Andrew II of Hungary
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 21:15, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Stoppit
Lookit, thanks for listing it at ANI, I have replied there. I never made a personal attack against you, certainly against your arguments, but that is the rough and tumble of RfD. I was never incivil or rude to you and the record shows that. Can't we just get along and make the encylopaedia better? I have held out the olive branch and you have turned that down. There is nothing else I can do. If I have genuinely hurt you, I sincerely say sorry, because that is not my aim: I want to improve Wikipedia and argue vigorously but politely. I never swore at you, I never cast aspersions at you, never said anything wrong about you, so there was no personal attack. I was just arguing, as we do, for what I thought was the best outcome for various redirects. I may have a different style from you, but I am sure we are both aiming to make Wikipedia better and that people come in different directions is good, not bad. But you have to get used to the cut and thrust of it. I don't take personal offence when someone disagrees with me: if you look at WP:RFD, you'll see even on the current listings I changed my mind because User:Tavix had a better suggestion than I did. I'm quite willing to be wrong but I am not nasty. Si Trew (talk) 12:48, 6 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh, but you are, Si. You just seem not to realise it. Like me, you can be extremely gruff sometimes and in venues such as deletion discussions it really doesn't work very well. Aaron, best just to ignore when this sort of thing happens: RfD is a particularly rarified area and Si has made it his home. - Sitush (talk) 12:52, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, . It's such a shame to see something like this happen. If only some humility had been shown toward me, none of this would be going on. I know I didn't do anything or say anything wrong, so I know I can sleep well at night. —  ₳aron  23:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Archiving to prohibit me from editing then leaving a stinking notice thanking me? Now that is bad faith. How pathetic. I don't know what's happening to the quality of editors on here. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b> 19:01, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

AN discussion
Since your AfD nomination of the Meghan Trainor discography has been mentioned by a few editors, you may wish to comment here. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:23, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Notice to anyone who has come here to warn me, gang up on me, accuse me of anything or otherwise negative comments
I'm not interested. No one is bothering to come and politely talk to me about what is supposed to have happened. I don't even know where it has come from, or what even has happened fully. All I know is that my name is causing tension on ANI and two AFDs, and I don't know why. Slapping warnings on my talk is very bad faith. I'm an editor with 5 years experience, and I am a heavy contributor to Wikipedia. Any such post will be removed. A warning isn't going to help me or you or anyone else resolve this. People who aren't even involved in what's going on are getting involved when they don't know what they are talking about.

Unless you've come here to calmly, politely, nicely discuss with me what is happening, or to inform me of new details about any of my nominations for review, then I will not engage in the conversation. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b> 15:08, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay. Since you admittedly don't know what has happened, let me explain. In this edit, which was made by your account, you made one brief comment and three comments by other users were removed. You say you've been here for 5 years, so I'm sure you know how to read diffs. It may have been a mistake, but you can see that it clearly happened. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 20:20, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

A beer for you!

 * Thanks for your kindness. To think all of this has come about over two tiny things... I literally don't know what's going on. No one over at that ANI thread can even be bothered to come and talk to me, instead, they are all ganging up on me and talking stuff amongst themselves. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  14:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


 * It's no different in the way they are defending an editor who has left nothing but disruption in their wake and are, instead, vilifying those standing up to the disruption. I have noted that they are not vilifying an administrator, Drmies, for taking the same stand.  That says volumes, don't you think?  -- <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #0099FF, -4px -4px 15px #99FF00;">WV ● <span style="text-shadow: 4px 4px 15px #FF9900, -4px -4px 15px #FF0099;">✉ ✓  15:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)


 * You definitely didn't deserve that much heat, Calvin. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 22:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I'm still getting heat. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  12:57, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at Blank Space
Can you take part in a discussion at Blank Space's talk page? The thread is Talk:Blank_Space. Thank you in advance. -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 02:20, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking for my input, I'm not getting involved in discussions for the time being per recent issues by others against me. Sorry. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  13:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Featured topic candidates/Overview of Lorde/archive1
Would you mind leaving some comments? Thanks, Simon (talk) 09:31, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking for my input, I'm not getting involved in nominations for the time being per recent issues by others against me. Sorry. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  13:03, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Osorkon IV
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:32, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK
Hello! Your submission of Thelma (1910 film) 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! North America1000 17:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

FAC
Hi Calvin999, per the FAC instructions you are supposed to wait at least two weeks before nominating another article when you have something archived at FAC. I don't see any particular reason to give an exception to the rule in this case, so I will be removing your nomination. Thanks. -- Laser brain  (talk)  19:52, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Another article? I thought it just applied to the one I had nominated previously? Not other articles? — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  21:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's any other article. From the instructions: "If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator". Thanks. -- Laser brain  (talk)  21:44, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Well that's a bit silly really isn't it. I can understand not being allowed to re-nominate an archived nomination to give time to work on it, but not on a completely different article. 07:43, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The discussion that resulted in that rule is about five years old now: Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/archive43 (specifically, the section "Restrict nominations from an editor after an archived nom". I wonder if it's outlived its usefulness. -- Laser brain  (talk)  11:08, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it is outdated. I don't see why it should apply to a separate article. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  11:09, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You're Mine (Eternal)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article You're Mine (Eternal) 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 SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

GA Cup
Hey, it looks like your eager to start reviewing articles for the GA Cup, however, since the GA Cup does not start until July 1, any reviews started before hand do not count. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! :) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 11:25, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh okay. I misread it as 1 June! I thought it was strange that only about 10 people were signed up. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  15:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Never thought I would see someone use the talkback template again...LOL!!! Anyways, no worries; just over three weeks to go!-- Dom497 ( talk ) 13:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Really? I use it all the time! — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  10:56, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Angel Haze discography FL nom
Hi, have addressed all comments you left at the nomination for Angel Haze discography, is there anything else that you can see needs fixing for you to !vote support? Thanks for looking into it so well by the way, really helped me out.  Azealia 911   talk  19:43, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If you wouldn't mind looking at my nomination, too, I'd appreciate it. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  20:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Thelma (1910 film)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Hey!
Would you mind looking at this. I'd appreciate it. Thanks!— Prashant 18:44, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Sure. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  19:00, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Ah thank you! Very kind. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  19:26, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could looked at my nomination for "Only Girl (In the World)"?  — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  19:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar
Thank you for the barnstar! I worked a lot on that article, so it's much appreciated. As for the "Dear Future Husband" article, I will look over your suggestions for its improvement and start working on it. Anyway, thanks for reviewing both these articles. --Markhoris (talk) 21:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You're Mine (Eternal)
The article You're Mine (Eternal) 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:You're Mine (Eternal) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 13:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of You're Mine (Eternal)
The article You're Mine (Eternal) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:You're Mine (Eternal) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 17:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Article on Babur
Please take a look at Babur and also the talk page of this article to see whether you agree with the general shape the article is taking now. I am writing to you because you made some edits on this page which i agree with. Soham321 (talk) 05:59, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've said I want no further involvement with it. I've said all have to say about it. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  08:25, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bitch Better Have My Money
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

ANI
You've been mentioned at WP:ANI with regard to the Babur article. You should have been informed by the person who mentioned you. - Sitush (talk) 11:11, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Anushka Sharma
Hey, can you please review it for GA? - Yashthepunisher (talk) 16:52, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Peer review/Mayabazar/archive1
I request to give your suggestions to improve this article here. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:51, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Living for Love
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:16, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Honeymoon (Lana Del Rey album) redirect
Hello, I'm a little curious why you redirected Honeymoon (Lana Del Rey album) to Lana Del Rey when the original article had reasonable notability and it had reliable sources. I haven't reverted the edit but I just wanna know the reason behind the edit. -- Anar  chyte   10:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello. It has no track listing, no artwork, not enough sources, no release date, and no title, to name but a few things. It is not notable until it has a confirmed and official track list, a release date and a title. "September 2015" is not reliable or specific enough, and is subject to change. Anyone who reinstalls the article and removes the redirect will be warned on their talk and reverted. Anyone who continues to do it from that point onwards will be reported. Thanks. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  10:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Leona - I Am
Why on earth did you revert my edits?....I saw you had a dispute with that ip user cause there was no tracklist and you were right to redirect.....but now Amazon has the tracklist for the standard and the deluxe editions....so why did you revert?....

Amazon I Am Deluxe Edition

Amazon I Am Standard edition
 * This is not confirmed by Leona herself, or Island Records. Things posted on Amazon are liable to change, and often do so. It's not reliable for track lists. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  08:00, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

But Amazon gets their information directly from the record label. It just seems to me that you are not a Leona fan and your just vandalizing her articles. Numerous other articles on Wikipedia use Amazon, so I just don't really understand.
 * How do you know that? Why would Island reveal a track list through Amazon? I just went on Amazon and searched "Leona lewis I am" and it didn't return anything. Not that I have to explain myself to you, but I'm the one who has made the Leona Good Articles a GA in the first place. I am a fan, but fandom shouldn't come into this. You're clearly a fan who thinks only you have the right to edit the article. I'm not vandalizing, you are. You are directly ignoring the redirect and ignoring the edit history. Didn't you see that someone was blocked yesterday for doing what you're doing? Continue, and you might be blocked, too. If you feel so compelled to help constructively, then edit the Draft:I Am (Leona Lewis album), but I will be looking at the edit you make to make sure you're not adding unreliable info. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  08:12, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

You don't see the links above?... You searched on Amazon US, that's probably why it didn't return anything...the links I posted above are from Amazon.co.uk....Anyway, I think you are really underestimating the reliability of Amazon.....It's not ebay....Amazon is a reliable site and if you ask any other user, they will tell you that it is reliable. And no I wasn't ignoring the history of the article, I saw that the ip user got blocked because there was no tracklist. But now there is a tracklist, so how dare you say I'm vandalizing? When all I'm doing is posting reliable info. And also Leona herself stated on Twitter on June 18 that the album is being available for preorder soon, and now, 1 week later it's available for pre-order on amazon, so you can see that Leona was telling the truth. And also, if the tracklist was made available on iTunes instead of Amazon, would you be also saying "Why would the label reveal the tracklist via iTunes" or will you say that iTunes is reliable?....If iTunes is reliable, then Amazon is reliable as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BBHMMM (talk • contribs) 08:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The first link shows an unconfirmed track list, the second shows nothing. I did search on Amazon UK, actually. I've had enough experience on here to know that Amazon for track lists and release dates are not the most reliable. I'm done with trying to explain to you and you not listening. Please don't post here again. Again, the IP wasn't blocked just because there is no tracklist. The article as a whole is not notable yet, and it is premature. As I said, if you want to make helpful edits, edit the draft I posted above. Apart from that, goodbye. (And sign off your posts please, typing ~ ) — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  08:35, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

2015 GA Cup
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

GA review of Andrianampoinimerina
Hi Calvin999, Thanks for being willing to review the Andrianampoinimerina article. He's arguably the most important figure in the history of Madagascar, so any feedback you can provide will help ensure the article is at the level this figure deserves. - Lemurbaby (talk) 06:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * That's okay. I hope to get to it by tomorrow. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  07:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Single on iTunes
Hello Calvin. I was completing a discography's "Singles" section and i have a question probably you would know. If a song is aviable on iTunes for digital download, should we add them in the singles section? I mean it says "Single by X" on Itunes, so does it means that it's a single? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.130.18.56 (talk) 16:03, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Only if it has been released as a single. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  19:15, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Melt My Heart to Stone
Irrespective of whether this song should have a separate article, two of your edits were inconsistent with the procedures for proposed deletion set forth at WP:PROD. PROD is a one-shot procedure for uncontroversial deletions: it can be used only once, and can be opposed for any reason or no reason. After removed the proposed deletion notice, it should not have been replaced: "If anyone, including the article creator, removes a  tag from an article, do not replace it, even if the tag was apparently removed in bad faith." It is suggested that the removing editor give a reason, but it is not required. See WP:DEPROD. Moreover, Erpert did give a reason on the talk page. The subsequent warning you gave to Erpert was clearly improper, both because it is inconsistent with the prod procedure, and because the warning you gave applies to discussions at WP:Articles for deletion, not the removal of a prod notice. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:58, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Simply removing isn't a reason. No reason was ever given, either. What is on the talk page is not a reason, unfortunately. He simply asked why it didn't meet criteria, and said that he thought it did. Sorry, but rules are rules. And we apply WP:GNG and WP:NSONGS. The article in question was a miserable fail on all counts of notability criteria, and was subsequently redirect. Any attempt to re-create it will again result in being redirected. Thanks for leaving a comment. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  17:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Adele
Hi Calvin (or Aaron)! I know you're busy with GA Cup, but can you take time to review List of awards and nominations received by Adele that is nominated for featured list here? -- Frankie  <font color="#6E7F80"><small style="font-size:85%;">CHITCHAT 15:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

GA Review
Hello Calvin! I wanted to remind you that you were reviewing an article Iggy Azalea that I nominated for GA. The review takes just a week but now more than two weeks have passed. Kindly finish your review without further ado. Musa Talk   20:50, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello yes all reviews will be completed tomorrow. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  21:00, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

"Come Dancing" GA review
Hi Calvin999: I have a couple of questions regarding the review on the "Come Dancing" article. I feel that most of the other issues pointed out could be fixed within a 7 day on-hold period: please advise. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 21:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Although it is usual to simply list the person by their surname, there are two Davies brothers in the band (Ray and Dave, both of whom were mentioned multiple times throughout the article), not to mention the sister that inspired the lyrics (Irene) and uncle that was channeled in the video (Frank). I'm uncertain as to how to list them without causing confusion.
 * Aside from the genres, I don't see any problems with sourcing. I'm not sure what else need work in that category.
 * Many music GAs only feature the single sleeve artwork. I don't think any other pictures are needed.
 * Hi. I generally thought that article seemed outdated and needed bringing up to date. Although, I do think I was a bit hasty in review to fail it now that you have bought my attention to it. I will un-do the outcome and place it on hold. Thanks for coming to my talk page and discussing it with me, I appreciate it. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  08:01, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you: I'll get to work - if there are any specific issues you have with the article, let me know. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 14:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the barnstar, by the way! I've done some work on the article - I've fixed the issues you pointed out above and I did a little work on the pictures. If there's anything else I need to fix, I'd be happy to oblige. Beatleswhobeachboys (talk) 22:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Just saw this. Thanks. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  07:59, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your recent GA review
Hi Calvin999. I heard about your recent GA review of The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill. Speaking as a fellow reviewer, I hope you'll take it in stride when I suggest that you alter a few aspects of your behavior before you perform your next GA review, as I hope you agree that this review could have been handled better. If it's all right, I'll briefly cover a few points: That's it; if you have a response feel free to leave it below. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 05:11, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * We start a review by reminding ourselves of the Good article criteria and Good article nominations/Instructions. I believe those reviewing instructions are good and they should be followed.
 * We nearly always give the nominator a little time to respond to our review, as the nominator might be able to act quickly to improve the article to GA quality according to our suggestions, which is of course our goal (unless a truly egregious offense has taken place, e.g. plagiarism or active maintenance tags).
 * We do not archive the review, as others may have something to say. We, as reviewers, do not need to have the last word.
 * We maintain a professional attitude, even a cheerful attitude. We do not adopt a "How dare you" attitude. In general, most nominators are easy to work with and are happy to please their reviewer.


 * Hello. I've reviewed 198 nominations, and this is the first time I've encountered a problematic nominator. I sense your bias toward Dan56, but he hasn't exactly got everything right, either. I don't feel it is fair of you to just come here and post on my talk and not his. He shouldn't have re-opened and re-instated the nomination, he doesn't understand the definition of quick fail, he started an edit war (he only stopped because he knew he would violate the 3RR twice if he did so again), and he is being aggressive and unreasonable. He's got the hump because his nomination failed. Big deal, it's happened to all of us who nominate articles at some point or another, and we always obviously feel disheartened because we wouldn't nominate if we felt it wasn't good enough. Thank for posting here, although I did find it a bit odd that you're saying 'feel free to leave a response' to me on my own talk page! Lol. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  08:32, 14 July 2015 (UTC)


 * You're right, ha, it certainly is your own page; I suppose I am used to closing like that. I have never met Dan56 before. Agreed, he shouldn't have re-opened the nomination. I felt it was important enough to come directly to you and state those four suggestions above. Thank-you for knowing that I meant no disrespect. Of course, thank-you also for reviewing! Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 12:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Lead single vs first single
Regarding your edit summary here, what exactly is the difference between the two? They tend to be used synonymously. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 19:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * First single isn't necessarily the same as lead single. "Fire Under My Feet" was released in the US, but it wasn't promoted. "Thunder" is being promoted as the lead single for the album, whereas "Fire Under My Feet" was promoted as the lead single for the album in the UK. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  22:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Just thought I'd ask. <b style="color:#454545">Snuggums</b> (<b style="color:#454545">talk</b> / <b style="color:#454545">edits</b>) 22:16, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Holiday notice
User:Calvin999 — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b> 20:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Bitch I'm Madonna
Materialscientist (talk) 00:53, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Meteorite (song)
Hello! Your submission of Meteorite (song) 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) 13:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Trying to..
.. understand this revert you did to the templates I corrected in TAOLG article. Why? —<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF">Indian:<font color="#FF033E">BIO  [ <font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0">ChitChat ] 09:10, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Because they didn't need "correcting". There's nothing wrong with them. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  09:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Usage of a template is always preferred over hard-codes for the chart jargons. Why are you against using templates I would like to know? —<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF">Indian:<font color="#FF033E">BIO  [ <font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0">ChitChat ] 09:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * But it doesn't say anywhere that templates must be used or that they should replace coding. I don't like how the templates can't be edited and I don't have to use them. They actually can be a problem sometimes. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  09:20, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

2015 GA Cup - Round 2
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:52, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

YGM
10:51, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Meteorite (song)
— Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:42, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Dance stuff
Hey, I like what you're adding here, looks good! Just saw this addition, shouldn't J-Blow be in there somewhere? - eo (talk) 11:36, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've only got as far as adding those two at the moment. Thanks for that though, I've never heard of him so wouldn't have come across him. I don't know who else has achieved a string apart from Jennifer Lopez. What do you think should be the lowest string of number-ones? — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  12:01, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the penny just dropped further than ever before. J-Blow =/= J Lo. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  14:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dance Club Songs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hard (song). 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) 08:58, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Apology
Aaron, I owe you an apology for my comments on the "Man Down" FAC. Looking at other reviewers' inputs, I now realize that I was harsh and that the article really is a lot better than I perceived it. I know I created quite a mess, and whether or not you forgive and forget, I just want us to move on, on a positive note. The Wikipedian Penguin 12:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I accept your apology and I've already forgotten about it. I know from previous work I've seen you do that you edit and edit and edit to achieve perfection, so I could kind of understand what you was doing because that's what you do with articles you work on. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  15:35, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks Aaron. The Wikipedian Penguin 18:44, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Talk:The Bourgeois Blues/GA1
Calvin999, if its not much of a bother, would you mind giving two cents in the above GA review I'm conducting? Basically the nominator and another co-editor of the article is questioning my concerns about sentences being unsourced and whether or not music composition requires a source. Well I did explain to the best of my ability and would also be grateful if you can voice your opinion on this. Thanks for "Devil Pray". —<font size="2" face="Courier New" color="#6F00FF">Indian:<font color="#FF033E">BIO  [ <font face="Tempus Sans ITC" color="#1C1CF0">ChitChat ] 13:41, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yep — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  13:58, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey
These statistics were published in Billboard. They aren't online, but were published a long time ago. (Utzdman55 (talk) 21:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC))
 * Hi. Billboard never refers to any of these people having that many number-one's. This is a list of Hot 100 achievements, not pre-Hot 100 achievements. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  21:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I'm sure Billboard says something somewhere about those #1s, but why go through all of the trouble of making two pages when you could put it in one? You have Pre-Hot 100 charts there anyway from slightly before the Hot 100. Why not just change the name to List of Billboard chart achievements and milestones? (Utzdman55 (talk) 22:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC))
 * I've never seen Billboard articles mention those singers. And we have to draw the line somewhere, the article is already extremely long. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  23:18, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Billboard articles don't mention them, but the statistics do. Tsort.info, the source site, gathered data from a complete database of popular music (1890 on) from Billboard published by an organization called Bullfrog. The site is down, though I went through the internet archive and downloaded the master file of every song that has ever charted on Billboard. Each song has a "Whitburn" number, from Joel Whitburn, a chart stat finder whose books are already in the article as additional sources. The PDF file is 15,888 pages long. Adding here isn't really adding. The list only keeps the top 10 or 5. Since the data is correct and available that we should put it to use in this article. See here for more information. This page should encompass all of popular music so it is unbiased as possible. Let me know what you think. (Utzdman55 (talk) 01:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC))
 * I've already said what I think. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  11:06, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Auld Lange Syne (Mariah Carey).jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Auld Lange Syne (Mariah Carey).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Auld Lang Syne
I did tell you. It's right there in the edit summary. If you don't want people turning up with tags, don't upload non-free images without rationales- you've really got no business getting grumpy with me. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:54, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not getting grumpy. But simply saying it needs rationale is not what I said. I said not telling me how or where to do it. I had to look at other examples to work it out for myself. I've uploaded artwork before and no-one has ever told me to put rationale in. They must have just added it themselves. — <b style="color:#595454">Calvin999</b>  07:39, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of When Christmas Comes
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article When Christmas Comes 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 Eurofan88 -- Eurofan88 (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of When Christmas Comes
The article When Christmas Comes you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:When Christmas Comes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eurofan88 -- Eurofan88 (talk) 19:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)