User talk:Ericorbit/Archive14

Siouxsie and the banshees
On wikipedia, I remark that there's the following consensus : on a page about a band, one doesn't publish a picture when only the singer appears on it with no other band member on his/her sides. I read many bands pages and that's always the case on wikipedia. The Cure, The Smiths, Joy Division, killing Joke, etc... You replied me "there are plenty of band articles with member-pics". Can you give one instance on wikipedia ? carliertwo (talk) 05:09, 1 august 2008 (UTC)

Triping
Didn't realize that Triping was blocked again. You missed one of her accounts. Kww (talk) 18:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Reminder about RBD discography
You are receiving this message because you are listed as the protecting admin for RBD discography. The page has been semiprotected for longer than 2 months without an expiry date set. Because Wikipedia relies on contributers to make the encyclopedia, I'm asking you to review your decision and either I hope that you will do one of the two in order to reduce the backlog of pages that have been semiprotected for very long period of time. If there are other pages you have also protected, I will try not to give more reminder, but I hope that you will double check your protection log to pick up and pages you might have forgotten. Thank you. -Royalguard11 (T) 20:03, 6 August 2008 (UTC) Why am I receiving this message?
 * Unprotect the page if protection is no longer needed, or
 * set a reasonable expiry date for the protection instead of leaving it on forever

Moved
I moved this article to a more accurate title List of artists who reached number one in the United States, as there was a lot of info that predated the Hot 100, the title was somewhat inaccurate. It will also stop people complaining about those older artists like elvis, it allows the full inclusion of any artists #1's irrelevant of date barriers. It's also inline with other articles on US #1's. — Realist  2  16:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's now more inline with this article. List of artists by total number of U.S. number-one singles. — Realist  2  16:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You might be interested in this, seems billboard have scrubbed Elvis off the List. . — Realist  2  16:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's only a matter of time before Mariah overtakes The Beatles. I kind of expected her to do it with her recent album but looks like it will just have the one #1 single. Maybe if M. Jackson got off his bum and did some work he would have more #1 singles, he can certainly still get #1 albums. — Realist  2  16:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Britney Spears discography
Thank you for protecting! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.141.103.7 (talk) 16:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Rock music WikiProject
I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 09:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Sugarland (duo)/(band)
How is that naming conventions? A duo are not a band. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, if that's the case, then we'll need to CfD Category:Sugarland (duo) songs, Category:Sugarland (duo) albums and Category:Sugarland (duo) members again. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Because they did have (band) in them. When I moved the page, I asked for the categories to be moved too. (I still think it should be duo). Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that a band was self-contained (e.g. The Beatles) whereas a group isn't (e.g.... Rascal Flatts, who have several unofficial backing musicians). Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Any chance you could do the cfd for me? I'm the fool who got them re-named a couple times before, and I don't want a "you again?". Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay. You forgot the members one tho. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Figures. No one ever touches talk pages when I come near them. That discussion's going to sit there forever, just like when I queried the closure of the CFD of Category:Songs written by Leslie Satcher (only one song in it, no hope for expansion). Wouldn't you delete a category like that? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 11:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What do you think about the Leslie Satcher category though? Keep in mind Category:Songs written by Anthony Smith was deleted and it had two songs in it. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 12:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I Kissed a Girl protection
The protection of I Kissed a Girl was warranted but excessive. A two week protection is too much for such vandalism, and do please remember to place the sprot tags onto an article when protecting it. 91.110.235.111 (talk) 19:43, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Another category move
Could you please move Category:Eagles (band) members to Category:Eagles members? It's been sitting in speedy rename for a while now. Thanks. Oh yeah, I re-nominated the Leslie Satcher category, you might want to weigh in there. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fearless (Taylor Swift album)
Can you please take a look at this afd? People are calling for a keep when it's clearly too early for a page. I think some major trouting is needed. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Lovely Day (song)
Hi there, eo. I have a couple of questions I was hoping you could answer. I created the page for the Bill Withers song "Lovely Day" and have been cross-referencing and trying to find other versions of the song. I found "It's Gonna Be a Lovely Day" by S.O.U.L.S.Y.S.T.E.M. featuring Michelle Visage on the Billboard #1 Dance lists for 1992 and 1993, and "It's Gonna Be...(A Lovely Day)" by Brancaccio & Aisher on the same list for 2002, and I wiki-linked both songs to the article I created. Do you think that's right? I wouldn't ask if the songs were just cover versions, but I'm pretty sure they're both samples, and I'm not sure if the same applies in that case. I did mention both versions in the article, but if I'm wrong just take the links back out (and sorry for being a pest). Also, does the article look OK to you? I think I've learned a lot since I first encountered you through wikipedia a few months back. Thanks. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I added succession boxes to the article, although that's something I've never done before (I just copied and pasted the ones from Situation (song) and changed the fill-in info). Feel free to change it if there's something amiss, and thanks for looking at the article. And for the kind words :) I'll have to check the B&A version out, as I can't place having heard it before. Zephyrnthesky (talk) 21:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

This Billboard 100 issue
Since you are the lead music person I'm coming to you. You/we really need to erode the specification of "Billboard Hot 100" on all these articles unless you actually want an article dedicated to billboard Hots 100 hits only. It doesn't make sense to do it like that anymore. All article should be aligned to "U.S. number one hit", irrelevant of pre Billboard dates. I don't think this should be just the article title, but any other info in the article that tries to distinguish the charts. We can make a new article dedicated to Billboard Hot 100 only if you think it's worth it though. It's become an urban myth that the only chart that ever existed was billboard hot 100 and Elvis has 17 of them. Lets set the record clear. If you want me to help you I can, maybe I will watchlist some of ya articles to help you? — Realist  2  03:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones, this needs a name change. — Realist  2  03:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * We need to get all these articles together and give them consistent name changes. Do we say U.S. or United States, do we bracket the title eg (U.S.)/(United States)? It's all a mishmash at the moment and I would love to fix it. Look, I know we have had our disputes but I'm well over that and looking forward to sorting these good articles. — Realist  2  05:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, OK. Lets work on it from the 21st of August onward, I'm busy over the next few days. We can set up a sand box, add all the titles that need changing to it and from there agree upon a consistent formatting of these titles. After that it's a case of making corrections to these articles to show that it's not just billboard. Obviously the sub billboard charts like Pop don't need changing. I have no idea why you guys over there need anymore than one chart lol. — Realist  2  14:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

UWC
Regarding this, do you think we could try and get media traffic banned as a source? I believe UK MIX was stopped. I really hate that fake chart. — Realist  2  04:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Sugarland again
Why not just move it to Sugarland and put a hatnote for Sugar Land, Texas? We don't even need the dab there, since the DeNiro film was evidently cancelled. Could the dab then be speedied as a G6 because the hatnote would serve the same purpose? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 11:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 11:30, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's singular vs. plural. Doesn't need disambiguatifying IMO. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 11:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I've already got a hatnote for Sugar Land, Texas. Should I hatnote The Sugarlands as well? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 11:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I just did the same thing with BlackHawk (band)->BlackHawk, over a redirect. They're the only use of that particular CamelCased spelling, so I figure the hatnote makes them legit. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 14:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

However
However it is an important chart. Hot Digital Tracks is more of a component chart than Hot Digital Songs. Plus, why should the Pop 100 have one and not the Hot Digital Songs? As far as I'm concerned, the only non-component chart fro singles in Billboard is the Hot 100. Tcatron565 (talk) 15:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Everybody Else Does
Everybody else posts Those charts so Get over Yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NickGossiplover (talk • contribs) 05:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Brazil Hot 100
I vaguely remember people deciding that Brazil Hot 100 was absolute crap, and shouldn't be listed. However, I can't find any traces of that discussion. Ring any bells? Kww (talk) 22:34, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Radio Disney Hot 30
It looks to me like the Radio Disney Hot 30 fails WP:CHARTS, so I started a discussion here. It's clear to me that it doesn't convey notability ... I'm more worried about trying to maintain the column in articles where notability has already been established. If I could find a verifiable source, I wouldn't bother to push it, but my feeling is that I'm going to start taking it out of hundreds of articles. Before I do that, I like to have the feeling that there is support for that decision, and that I haven't just failed to find a source. Your input is welcome.Kww (talk) 14:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Merged singles
I can't find any argument in WP:FU that indicates that the single cover can't be merged into the parent article when the single article is merged. I've been merging the Disney singles, and when I do, I merge the cover along with the article. If you can point me at what part of WP:FU you believes that violates, I'd appreciate it. For now, I've reverted [], because it will fuel the fire towards bringing back all these single articles I've been working to merge.Kww (talk) 20:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Editor Conflict
Hi, I was wondering if you could help me. I seem to be involved with some weird edit battle with KM*hearts*MC and an anon IP user. How I got involved was, I agreed with KM's edit to KylieX2008and this editor got really upset and began to call both myself and KM "stubborn" and "stupid". He/She continued to make claims about not having freedom, etc. Additionally, he/she has gone through my contributions and reverted edits that I have made to other articles, which I believe is being done out of spite (am I not sure if he/she is doing the same to KM). With every edit this user makes, their IP address changes, however (according to WHOIS), the IP belongs to the same company, Telekom Malaysia Berhad and Opal Communications (located in Kuala Lumpur/Manchester), which why I believe is it the same person, probably using a public terminal. I feel that this person is going to continue to "throw a fit" and continue to revert my edits. I am not really sure if this problems constitutes blocking but tts already starting to be annoying and quite frustrating to replace my edits. I have complied a list of the IP address I know he/ she are using. I am sure there is more. Dancefloor royalty (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * 60.50.180.146
 * 92.3.235.83
 * 92.5.147.35
 * 219.95.23.27
 * 92.5.19.194
 * 219.95.23.27
 * 60.50.181.20
 * 60.50.179.194
 * 60.50.187.58
 * 60.50.180.178
 * 219.95.20.219
 * 12.110.142.4
 * 12.50.66.66
 * 92.2.124.217
 * Thanks for the advice. I will see what I can do. I think I may have confused you. KM is not the IP user, me agreeing with his/her edits is what caused all of this. Dancefloor royalty (talk) 01:26, 29 August 2008 (UTC)



RFC: Clarifying "notable single"
As a frequent contributor to articles related to music, you are invited to review this RfC and comment, if you see fit! Best regards, --Winger84 (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Mittageisen
You posted wrong information about the Mittageisen single ---> wrong producers + Wrong copyrights. In fact, here are the correct details mentionned on the sleeve : "produced by Mike Stavrou/Nils Stevenson", "Love in a void (copyrights : Sioux, Severin, Morris,FENTON)" and not by McKay ("Love In a void" was composed in early 77, before the arrival of McKay in the band). Other point, I'm gonna rename that page 'cse the actual page is about the german release of june'79 which was very confidential. The uk release released in sep'79 is slightly different : first, it's called "Mittageisen/Love In a void" and not simply Love....  and both songs are mentionned in red on the front of the sleeve. Two, it is also slightly different in its form : it's a double A side single (on each side of the label, there's a A written) which means that the band decided that both songs are the same importance. carliertwo (talk) 16:09, 30 august 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) You can't post on an article and being an administrator of the same article at the same time. --> risk of being partial 2) As it was previously written "redirected from Love In A void" at the top of the article, this page appeared to be about the single and not about the song. 3) Below the Siouxsie & The Banshees article, the singles are mentionned and 'Mittageisen' is amogst them. So, if one clicks on it, one thinks one will have access to the Mittageisen page. I let the name of the MIttageisen article as it is and I'm gonna erase the informations about Love in a void as there's no need to put them on this page as it's henceforward an article about the Mittageisen song. carliertwo (talk) 16:46, 30 august 2008 (UTC

Beat Goes On (Madonna song)
Can you check the August 4th and May 22 versions of the deleted article Beat Goes On (Madonna song)? The reason given for deletion was that there was no evidence that the song would be released as a single. Even though it was not released as a single as far as I can tell, a remix of it was on the Get Stupid video interlude on Madonna's Sticky and Sweet Tour. As such, an article about the song should be allowed. Please restore one or both of the versions with their edit histories so I can create an appropriate article without having to start over. Thanks. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Category:Songs written by Robert Lange
Is this category a speedy renaming criterion? Since I moved the parent article to Robert John "Mutt" Lange, the category should match, shouldn't it? Rockfang disagreed in the speedy rename category, so I thought I'd ask you since you've moved categories for me before. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Janet Jackson Dioscographies
Can you please look into this? There is a normal one, a singles one and an album one, as a result of User:Jarajet89 Eight88 (talk) 08:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem
Thanks for your uploads. You've indicated that the following images are being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why they meet Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page an image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

Image:Erasure single SWM.jpg
 * Image:Erasure single fingersthumbs.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --15:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Goldfrapp Satin Boys Flaming Chic.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Goldfrapp Satin Boys Flaming Chic.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleting of The Grass Roots material
I've had to edit one part of The Grass Roots article many, many times. One part features a partial list of their hit songs, with chart positions NOT included. I edited it this part of the article to include the chart positions, feeling it would be more convenient to have the positions there than scroll down to a whole other part of the article. However, everytime I return to the article, my edits have been taken out, forcing me to re-edit the same section over and over. Is there a way to lock off this part of the article, so my edits can remain without being deleted by someone else? --Putnam269 (talk) 18:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Heart Nothin at All.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Heart Nothin at All.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 14:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Paper Trail
wait... what did i do wrong? i added a tracklist confirmed by 4 MAJOR sources... whats wrong with that? Ba11innnn (talk) 01:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Why is this a problem, what is the matter with adding Hot Digital Sslaes chart, reply or else Hometown Kid (talk) 09:57, 15 September 2008

Unblock requet at WP:AN
I would like your input, if possible, at this thread of WP:AN. As the admin who gave the indef block, I think your response would be appreciated. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 04:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks.... I left a comment there. - eo (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've responded to yuor comment there, and have gotten no response for over 24 hours. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Komeda Plan 714 Till.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Komeda Plan 714 Till.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:39, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Lennox INAM.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Lennox INAM.png. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 04:08, 19 September 2008 (UTC)