User talk:Ericorbit/Archive04

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 06:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

in reference to Prince
Hi - saw your reply to the changes on Prince - I did not add the list of women that he dated - that was already there. I only added the facts about his two past spouses. I'm happy you did remove it. I didn't believe anything in that paragraph. I didn't even think to delete that section - glad you did. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by --cf 02:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

What Goes Around Video Summary
thanks for letting me know i need to organize it better, but you really need to read it all and see that it is in a wikipedia manner and that is so long due to fact of the video being NINE MINUTES long. I will revise it though but its not outta control as you may have suggested. -- Gregxscene 02:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Invitation.
Hello, I noticed you are down on our noticeboard as being intetrested in LGBT issues - would be interested in joining WikiProject LGBT studies? We would be delighted to have you join us. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Need people with an opinion
Hey there. I noticed that in the past, you have participated in a discussion about Filmoraphies and lists of works in general here. There is now a RfC discussing this and more aspects here. It would be nice if you took a look and gave your comments on those matters. Thank you. theroachmanTC 11:09, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Prince and biting newcomers
Hi. First off, let me say that I appreciate all the hard work that you have done (especially with reverting unsourced material from the Billboard-associated pages every Wednesday evening). However, please use caution when deleting people's hard work, as a simple revert can give the message, "Your addition is not good enough, get lost." (Not that I'm implying that this is/was ever your intention.) Now, regarding the Prince article. Looking at the history, it is evident that User:Lexlutha was trying to add to the article, not destroy it, but didnt know how to properly format the sources. Instead of reverting all his additions, the least you could have done is to show him how to properly format the information, or better yet, simply do him the favor of personally formatting the source. It would save a lot of time, and it also won't give new, inexperienced uers the feeling that their work is no good. Again, I appreicate your hard work, but hope that you'll take what I've said into consideration. Thank you. Oran e ( talk  &bull;  cont. ) 06:03, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I guess it's just a simple misunderstanding then. And as I said, don't worry, I know you do good work. Cheers. Oran e  ( talk  &bull;  cont. ) 06:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

hey
im guessing you edit a lot of music pages

i find something annoying in music wikipedia pages, which is unofficial remixes that are editted by ameteur musicians attempting to recieve exposure, therefore adding themselves to music pages with "remixes" which are not official remixes. That is what i delete, that is not vandalism - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LightSpeed1 (talk • contribs).

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Your insistence that Shakespears Sister was a duo is inaccurate.
Since writing my first Shakespears Sister biography in 1998, I have been priviliged to be-friend Siobhan Fahey having become involved in the curation, construction and maintenance of her official website siobhanfahey.com. As a result I have gained addditional knowledge of the history of Shakespears Sister. Of course, in reversal, it could be said that I have provided Siobhan with knowledge of Shakespears Sister (back catalogue, release dates, chart positions etc) and all the things that an avid fan "would" know. However, I have also gained much inside information that a fan wouldn't necessarily know. Of course, as Shakespears Sister was seen as a duo and having gained additional knowledge from only one member, critics might add that an biography written with one member's "inside" information may result in the biography becoming bias. The fact is that Shakespears Sister was formed by Siobhan Fahey and it was in fact for only one song "Stay" that the group was a duo. Whilst it could be argued that Marcella made an essential contribution to Shakespears Sister's first UK hit "You're History", if one were to look at her overall contribution to the debut Shakespears Sister album and indeed direction of Shakespears Sister it would not meet the criterion of being termed a duo. Alas, my biography will be based on my knowledge of Shakespears Sister's career backed by information found in magazine, newspaper, television and personal interviews. It could be said that much of what is wrote in such media could be, by its very nature inaccurate. However, when using such sources in correlation with one another it is easy to spot inaccuracies (Siobhan's birthdate being one)on more than one occassion.

Dean Lucas - geocities.com/djohnl_2000/ and siobhanfahey.com. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.47.31.5 (talk) 06:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Ummm OK, I really don't know what you're trying to convey here, but the only objection I really had to some of the changes made to that article (which occurred months ago at this point) was the complete removal of all references to Marcella Detroit. Regardless of what her official status was in the band during whatever phase or album, she did make contributions to the band, performed right up front with Siobhan during live performances and appeared in the videos and on album/single covers.  I don't know the behind-the-scenes politics, but to delete Detroit from the article completely shows a bias in my opinion. - eo 13:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Mims
Stop changing Mims to direct to a disambiguous page. Mims the rapper is more well-known than some city in Florida and Mims, Florida links from his article. - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs).

Um, okay, it isn't just my personal assessment that Mims the rapper is more well-known than Mims, Florida. He had a number one hit on the Hot 100. Mims, Florida is some stupid city in Florida. On top of that, both link to each other. I'm really sure when someone wants information on Mims, the hot 100 number 1 artist this week, they are in reality interested about the city in Florida. It all makes sense now, or maybe people are just stupid. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs) 11:24, 1 March 2007

Oh, and since you feel there needs to be disambiguation pages for every article, I will make sure to change all of them for you. Like "No Doubt" directs to the band, but perhaps the band isn't so well known! Perhaps albums by other bands are more popular and so we shall fix that. Rihanna links to Rihanna, but maybe the user meant Rhianna! And we need a disambiguation page for that! Jennifer Lopez links to Jennifer Lopez, but maybe the user meant the meterologist! So we better create a disambiguation page for there too! Oh all these examples, yet Mims and Mims, Florida need a disambiguation page.. it all makes so much sense! I'll get to work on creating all these disambiguation pages though just for you. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs) 11:29, 1 March 2007

So what is your argument towards Jennifer Lopez the singer and Jennifer Lopez the meterologist? How do we know for sure the metereologist is less well-known than the singer, huh!? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 1 March 2007

I'm just saying, he is more well-known than a city in Florida, and his popularity is growing. Why is THAT so hard to understand? Besides that point wasn't to relate him to Jennifer Lopez, it was to provide an example of a name where a disambiguation page doesn't exist. Jennifer Lopez the singer is to the meteorologist as Mims is to the city. They are both more well-known respectively. DUR? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs) 14:05, 1 March 2007

I don't mean to be insulting, it is just that you rush into fixing a change someone has made without considering their point of view, and if some step needs to be taken (such as having the Mims (rapper) page moved to Mims) then you should explain that to the person without immediately reverting what they have done. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs) 18:25, 1 March 2007

Thank you! I'm sorry if I was rude. It just happens all too often that any changes I make are undone. I guess if they go against policy than that should happen, but it does get frustrating. I really appreciate your contacting an admin for me! I'm glad this was resolved, and again I apologize. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.165.38 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 1 March 2007

Here we go 'round the Mimsy-grove
I performed the move. The disambiguation/redirect history is buried in the deleted edits. If that page gets turned back into a disambig or a redirect, they should technically be undeleted. Jkelly 23:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Your turn -- Fall Out Boy favour
Hi. I have a bunch of images of Fall Out Boy to upload, but don't which band member is which. Can you help me identify them? The first is at commons:Image:Fall Out Boy 2006 1.jpg, but there are a lot more, including nice closeups of members like this one and this one. Can you help me out here? Jkelly 00:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that I've figured this out. Jkelly 21:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It took me a while with Google images, but I'm pretty confident I identified them correctly. At least the drummer is always easy.  Thanks anyway.  Jkelly 22:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hot 100 running total
Hi Eric

You replied very quickly to my correction! I was still putting an explanation and link on the talk page when your message appeared. Let me know what you think. -- Phildav76 19:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

why are you such a prick?
Just because YOU..one insignifcant nobody...thinks something is not useful, does NOT give you the right to arbitrarily remove it from a page. If something is factual, and not specifically against Wiki's TOS, then you have absolutely NO right to remove it.

Keep removing things like that (and you know what you are doing) and you will soon see ALL of your edits changed.

But thanks for giving Mac users yet ANOTHER bad reputation. Sadly for Apple, most are annoying little pompous pricks like you. Again...keep it up, and you will see your edits removed arbitrarily. And considering you have dedicated your entire worthless life to editing these pages (seriously...don't you have anything better to do with your life? I know Boston is a boring city, but surely you have SOME kind of life outside the internet...don't you?) I don't think you'll want your edits removed...Your choice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.205.169.95 (talk) 10:21, 8 March 2007 (UTC).
 * First, I have no idea what you're talking about because you forgot to mention what article I edited. Second, your comments on my page is the only edit in your history, which means you're too much of a pussy to come to me and mouth off with your normal User Name.  What a surprise, you also forgot to sign your post.  Quite pathetic.  Follow me all you like; I really don't care. - eo 12:10, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Buck the World
Done. Jkelly 18:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Buck the World name
what cant i change the article name to Buck The World becuase if seen on many websites that its called that. --Peterm1991 21:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

there is a link on the page that states the name of the album is Buck The World XXL Magazine --Peterm1991 22:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It is Wikipedia's "house style" to not not capitalise indirect or direct articles in the names of works. Other publications will have their own styles.  Jkelly 00:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

thanks
thanks for he help to do with the Buck the World article p.s. is the "t" supose to capialised --Peterm1991 18:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Pet Shop Boys
Hi - Thanks for your feedback. I accept your reversal of my edit, as a more experienced Wikipedian. However, I can't agree that my edit was "vandalism" as you labelled it. I wrote in good faith that a certain urban legend exists. It certainly does exist, at least in the UK, which is where I hail from. I also wrote that the legend lacks any evidence. But the existence of the legend is (at least arguably) relevant to the topic of this article, and in particular to the section where I placed my edit. "Vandalism" implies an intent to degrade/impair the article, and I had no such intent. In my view, a statement "there is this story but it is unsupported" is actually constructive, as it will educate other readers who have previously heard the story. As a general point, I'm not sure what makes an edit "unconstructive". To my thinking, in an encyclopedia, any accurate statement placed in the right context is constructive. There may be a fine line between labelling something "unconstructive" and becoming POV. For clarity, would you have objected to the same material, if it had appeared in an article on "urban legends"? Best regards. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.29.98 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 10 March 2007

It's Raining Men
Hey! Just wanted to give you a quick thank you in helping me keep the Geri Halliwell info in the article and ( try to ) stop DXRAW's undying attempt to remove/revert it! smileydude66 09:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Why Can't AT40 have a succession Box?
Hey there. I was wondering why a song that was #1 on American Top 40 can't have a succession box for that. Is there a rule that says that only charts can ave succession boxes on a songs page?--Dr who1975 22:50, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Charts
I will stop boldfacing the #1's, but I think some notes are needed on the Charts tables. It's very common for album cuts to chart, and I think it should be noted if a single was an album cut or Christmas single. TenPoundHammer 23:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Admittedly, I was putting the weeks for some #1's. I'll stop doing that. TenPoundHammer 23:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Duran Duran Discography and "Gloss!"
Hi,

I don't mean to be rude or misunderstanding but I have put hours of hard work and effort into all criterion's of Duran Duran. I can't tell you how hard I have worked on the discography and now it has all vanished and made uninteresting again! I managed to clean up all the mess and made it suitable and enjoyable for the readers which ninety percent of the navigators were happy with. I am struggling to figure out a valid reason for your actions but your actions were indeed superfluous. Please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. DuranDuran 21:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Billboard Hot 100 - April 7th, 2007
Why do you always change song positions? I know it isn't "official", but they always turn out to be correct. Here is the Billboard Hot 100 for April 7th.. how could all of this be made up? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.164.104 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 28 March 2007

Right, but they always turn out to be correct, and people spend a lot of time making these changes which can then be verified through Billboard by tonight or tomorrow morning. Of course it isn't a fan site, but again, since Billboard has released the Billboard Hot 100 to registered members, can it not at all be trusted that those with access to this information are providing legitimate content? I mean, could all of what I just posted really be made up.. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.164.104 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 28 March 2007

Okay, okay.. it isn't credible. I understand that. You still didn't answer my question though.. do you really think all of that could be made up? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.164.104 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 28 March 2007

Duran Duran
Firstly I would like to thank you for getting back to me in a very high registered and polite manner, you do not get that often! Thank you, I do now understand your reasons and appreciate you explaining it. I found on numerous websites that the title to the new Duran Duran album is "Gloss!" and was wondering (as you are more experienced then me in Wikipedia) if we can keep that title as a working title. Thanks for your understanding and sorry for the inconvenience. DuranDuran 13:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply
Hi. Yes i did put the title there and do not worry i fix the link! Thank you for the flag complement as i did put them there! have a good day! DuranDuran 13:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Billboard Succession Boxes
Thanks for the advice, I will change the template - its one that was already out there and I was just copying and pasting into other articles. If you would like to go back and change all the ones I already did that would be great, but I will continue going backward with the new changes you suggest, but I don't want to go back just yet and change all those others around - so help would be appreciated. Thanks again! Ejfetters 19:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thanks and question
It's a pity about the "black hole" on the administrators' noticeboard; usually that happens when a user who has a long and complex history of disruption is reported, but this one seems pretty straight-forward. I suppose one option might be to file a request for comment, but they tend to be long and drawn out, and because the user's IP is always changing I doubt he/she will be bothered about it. Hmm... Extraordinary Machine 20:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Blondie
No problem.... I'm glad you're also keeping an eye on it. That kind of stupid vandalism really annoys me because it's harder to spot than some of the other stuff. I suppose next time we look, Deborah Harry will have won a Nobel Peace Prize. Cheers :-) Rossrs 00:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)