User talk:Decodet/Archives/2010

Ashley Tisdale discography
Hi Decodet, first of all, well done on all the work you have contributed to FL-class discographies. Its very impressive (and i aspire to be like that someday!). I come bearing a question, looking through the FL nom for the above article, I noticed you've added references to ChartsPlus (or at least it looks like it was you!) for the chart positions not compiled by the OCC. This is an example:

"'The Official UK Singles Chart for the week ending October 27, 2007'. ChartsPlus (Milton Keynes: IQ Ware Ltd) (322): 3."

Just wondering, I'm trying to get a similar reference myself, can you help me clearing up what are the numbers at the end? I'm working on an FL myself and this is pretty much the only record archive which anyone will consider reliable. Thanks for any help you can give me! --SteelersFanUK06  HereWeGo2010!   18:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * My God you're a genius. Obviously you can tell the page number, as the chart positions will be the same for each page on the .pdf. Never realised this! Thank you so very much. We might even get another FLC out of this, I'll let you know! Thanks again! --SteelersFanUK06  HereWeGo2010!   18:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Tganks very much for your help, the article in question is the Interpol discography, just waiting on word back from the reviewers now. Thanks again. --SteelersFanUK06  HereWeGo2010!   23:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Billboard Brasil
So I know you said you'd be willing to help people verify postions but would you be willing to fill out the magazine verification when needed as Kww linked to on the discussion page? Not for all of them, perhaps just the number 1's on the chart? Jayy008 (talk) 23:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

no, I wandered the same thing but it's now allowed. I mean Kww showed on the discussion a form for magazine verification rather than online. I think basically you fill in date, amongst many other things using this. Since you have access to the Brazilian magazine. I don't think you'll need to buy it to fill in these things? However, that page looks very confusing to me, maybe you understand it better. Jayy008 (talk) 00:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey I Want to Know What Love Is & Pop chart please. And Beyonce's "Halo" is that's ok. If not then the first one will be good. Thanks for your help! Jamie Jayy008 (talk) 01:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes please, I think it's allowed because there isn't a main chart like the "billboard hot 100"? It's just airplay to begin with. I will leave it down to you though it you think it's appropriate. Jayy008 (talk) 11:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Leave it then, I think. The main chart I'm glad that's there. Thanks for all your help. Jayy008 (talk) 16:11, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Lol, Thanks I will, much appreciated! :) Jayy008 (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I Want to Know What Love Is "Succession box"
I was wandering if you could help me again, I've put the succession box on the page for that song and used the date "from December, 2009" do you know the exact date it reached #1? Jayy008 (talk) 16:57, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh I didn't know that. That's good thank you! Jayy008 (talk) 23:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Brazilan charts
I find the references on I Want to Know What Love Is suspicious. Do they really print the charts so small that both the Hot 100 Airplay and Hot Pop charts fit on the same page, in this case page 81?&mdash;Kww(talk) 01:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Please add your input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs
Hello, I think you may be interested in joining the discussion HERE. Thank You.—Iknow23 (talk) 11:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Music Week: Ashley Tisdale/Paramore
I'm sorry but Music Week doesn't give me positions 101-200 which is where I know a couple of her solo songs have charted. (It's not a very good site to be honest). However I can give you all the positions 1-75 if you like? However, they can all be found at [www.chartstats.com ChartStatsUK] and it doesn't require subscription that site also gives you positions 76-100. Kinda wish I never bothered now, all the information on the site I can get from anywhere except tour sales. Hope this helps! Just give me another message if you want me to paste their positions 1-75 for you. Jayy008 (talk) 22:28, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

That's ok, sorry I couldn't be of help. Jayy008 (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

"Alice" chart position
Hey Decodet, I removed your Billboard.biz citation from the Bubbling Under Hot 100 chart position for Lavigne's song "Alice." The link didn't work. I tried accessing Billboard.biz and I needed to register, which wouldn't suffice as a reasonable reference. I tried Googling for a reliable and non-forum non-blog site with the same information and couldn't find anything (I did find forums and blogs, though). So for now, the item is tagged citation needed, but if you can find another reference for this information, that would be great. – Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  06:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
 Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  18:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Source: "Rude Boy" at 23 in US?
Hi, I just reverted your recent edit to Rihanna discography, where you changed the peak position in the U.S. for "Rude Boy" from 64 to 23. What's your source for this? The two sources currently referenced in the article say nothing and 64, respectively. Please provide a source when (re-)making a change like this and, in future, please also include an edit summary. Thanks! &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 01:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Verification
Can you check this edit? .&mdash;Kww(talk) 19:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'm mainly interested in validating that the details of the citation are correct about the physical magazine.&mdash;Kww(talk) 20:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm even more suspicious now. The position matches the one in hot100brasil.com.&mdash;Kww(talk) 04:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

FYI:. Please help me in watching over this carefully.&mdash;Kww(talk) 17:04, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

"Alice" Japan Hot 100
Please see this discussion on the Avril Lavigne discography page regarding your recent addition to the soundtrack single "Alice". An edit war is brewing and discussions within edit summaries should be placed within the article discussion instead. If your addition is reverted again, please do not revert it back and discuss it on the article's Talk page until a consensus is made regarding its inclusion. Thanks. =D ~ [ Scott M. Howard  ]:[  Talk  ] ~ 17:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Jonhmayer-fã
Think you could pop over to and offer him some help? I've had to revert nearly every addition he's made because I just couldn't figure out what he was trying to say. He's contributing to Portuguese wiki, so I presume he's Brazilian.&mdash;Kww(talk) 17:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It looks like he's trying to be constructive, so I didn't like having to undo so much of his work.&mdash;Kww(talk) 18:37, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

A new category/list for Ashley
I think Ashley (Tisdale) should be also be included in the "American voice actors" Category http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_voice_actors well- know actors like Tim Allen and Lacey Chabert are listed there.I also wanna thank you for all your contributions about Ashley Vicenzo08 (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I just did it myself, I hope you approve it Vicenzo08 (talk) 05:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Future films
I do the same as Oliviawildes. I don't think filmographies or discographies should include unreleased material. MOS:DISCOG agrees. I don't know where a filmograpy guide is.&mdash;Kww(talk) 18:00, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga Discography
Sweden has a much larger market (with its Platinum-award at 40,000) then New Zealand and Ireland (platinum-award at 15,000 for both). I really think you should have removed one of the latter. The sizes of the markets should always be considered since there seems to be 10 peak policy. Regards.--Harout72 (talk) 22:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * That will be very logical. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 22:53, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

That's ok, I appreciate it.--Harout72 (talk) 22:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Charting
You know better.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:25, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Your citation claims the single charted before the either the single or the album was released.&mdash;Kww(talk) 01:42, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, I'm convinced that you made a mistake in the citation. I don't think of you as an editor that intentionally makes false edits. If you look at the November issue of the magazine again, and it really says that Te Amo charted (even though the November issue was published Oct 10 and the album was released Nov 20), I'll be very surprised. I bet you meant to cite a later issue.&mdash;Kww(talk) 02:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * If you've verified it, go ahead and put it back. &mdash;Kww(talk) 06:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

July 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Airplanes (song). When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. STAT -Verse 18:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


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

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Hellcats
Hello. I'm not sure if it's you that added Tisdale's salary but the source doesn't say anything about her salary. A mistake? Jayy008 (talk) 22:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I know, sorry! I don't know what happened. I think my Laptop mixed up all the refs, when I clicked source 29 Blog.Zapit came up. No idea how it happened. Either way I'm surprised The CW pay that much for their cast! Jayy008 (talk) 00:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it definitely is, there's loads of sources reporting the same thing, I guess Aly isn't getting the same lol. Good work on the Hellcats articel by the way!! Jayy008 (talk) 00:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * PS, I know it's easy to forget (I do!) but please try to use edit summaries. Jayy008 (talk) 13:17, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I saw you reverted this edit In the reference, nothing says that the song peaked at #7 in Australia, so you didn't have to revert that edit.  ×º°”˜ `”°º× ηυηzια  ×º°”˜ `”°º×  19:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced peaks on Rihanna discography
Hi, decodet. Was this edit summary directed at me? I reverted those peaks 10 times before now, so I'm guessing you were aiming your comments my way.

As it happens, I did check Billboard, each and every one of the 10 times I reverted. Each and every time I checked, the songs were unlisted at the cited refs. I did not find the song at Billboard's site when I searched (even now, searching for "Only Girl (In The World)" copied from the BB ref you provided, and pasted into the search bar, it doesn't come up), and so for me, the case was pretty clearly unsourced content, indifferentiable from malicious vandalism.

The fact that 10 other edits by 9 editors added (what looks like) the same info suggested that the numbers were probably accurate, and not really vandalism. However, none of those 9 editors managed to provide a source, and only one editor even provided an edit summary. That edit summary said, "Look at the references in the song's page", which I did, finding that that article used the same non-supportive references as Rihanna discography.

I feel like a damned fool reverting the same change over and over again, but it's a FL and in any case deserves to have reference citations supporting its claims. I wonder what was so hard about all the other editors adding actual refs for their claims, since they appear to have "known" about these peaks for the last five days. I'm glad you came in and added the refs (and provided an edit summary). You set a good example. &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't seem too angry to me, but I think we agree it's frustrating doing all this work when it seems we're (all) working against each other at least as much as with each other. Also agreed that the main thing is the article's now reffed. Thanks again and cheers, &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 09:53, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Styling mods for Ashley Tisdale discography
Hi, Decodet. I think Ashley Tisdale discography looks really nice. Good work! One thing (the only thing I found) that might improve the look is changing the column widths for the titles in the albums tables. In keeping with the principle of "Similar columns between sections and tables should ideally be kept at a consistent width" over at DISCOGSTYLE, and since there appears to be no serious space problem, you could make all the tables use the same  suggestion. They're probably different now because you copied the examples from WP:DISCOGSTYLE, which are presumed to come from two different articles. I think they make good starting points (especially since albums tables and singles tables can be so different), but we should feel free to be flexible and adapt the tables to the articles where it helps. Still, it's your decision; see what you think. And keep up the good work! &mdash; JohnFromPinckney (talk) 06:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Work on Ashley Tisdale discography
Hi, Decodet. Have been viewing your edits on Ashley Tisdale discography and Ashley Tisdale, and it seems really good! For your contributions, nothing less than the Tireless Contributor barnstar.


 * Thanks for the message! No, I'm Portuguese. Pedro João [talk] 20:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is. So you like Ashley Tisdale as much as I? Pedro João [talk] 20:39, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Ashley Tisdale
See ACTOR It doesn't say exactly not to merge them, but merging them messes it up when using the sortable table. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT  (Talk)  03:17, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. And nice work you've done on her articles! :) ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT   (Talk)  18:25, 13 November 2010 (UTC)