User talk:Lk95/Archive 2

Date formats
I don't know if you notice or care, but copypasting the UK albumchart template with the same date format for both British and American artists is improper. British and many other nations use date-month-year, or dmy (13 February 2016) as opposed to America, which uses month-date-year, or mdy (February 13, 2016). Please make sure you adapt this for every album article you add templates to, otherwise it's lazy and work for others to do.  Ss 112  17:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You are still failing to adapt date formats, as you did at Taking One for the Team. Learn the date format of the article before you add the template.  Ss 112  15:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Cite your sources
You have been warned multiple times to cite the sources you are looking at for your edits and you still refuse to. From now on, cite the webpages you look at for the new peaks you add or you will be reverted, warned and possibly even blocked for repeat occurrences. You know by this now.  Ss 112  20:12, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

German template
Also, can you please look at using the Germany4 version of Template:Albumchart and the Germany2 version of Template:Singlechart? You know as well as anyone else that the German template you use all the time doesn't link properly. Those versions require you to actually add the ID number (in the URL from offiziellecharts.de, which you obviously use). Please look at the page and think about using them in future, otherwise the templates you add redirect to the offiziellecharts.de home page. Thank you.  Ss 112  15:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Reverting my edits on the German Wikipedia
There was absolutely nothing wrong with my edit at de:Megaloh; your subsequent edit had literally no difference except you spaced it better and added the Austrian peak. That was not worth a revert. Don't revert people for no valid reason just because you're mad or you'll be reported. I have a friend who can speak German and I will report you there if you persist.  Ss 112  15:29, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You also did it at de:Santigold several days ago only because I put the Swiss peak in the "wrong place". It's petty and you need to get over it. You don't have exclusive rights to editing chart positions on the German Wikipedia.  Ss 112  15:32, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I very well gave a reason in the summary bar for reverting your version. I don't claim any "exclusive rights" you speak of, I just happened to update several charts on the German Wikipedia quickly because I had the time to. When I'm busy I don't have time to edit stuff anyway so there's absolutely no reason I could be mad. I reverted you because you repeatedly didn't stick to the format template which is lining up the chart row to the middle. Call me petty but it's honestly annoying to always correct it afterwards and it sticks out like a soar thumb for the following editors. I found no other way to make you aware of this than to revert it. -- Lk95 17:01, 16 March 2016 (CET)
 * "Repeatedly"? It was once (as from what I can tell the Santigold edit was because I put the Swiss chart after the American position). It's clearly unintentional and a minor error which doesn't need reverting. If I did it on every page I edited on the wiki I might understand, but one instance can be corrected without the need to undo another's edit.  Ss 112  16:44, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Reply
Multiple wrongs don't make a right. Troye Sivan is an Australian artist and date for Australia is dmy. As for the other chart positions' date formats, the Czech chart updater is a serial offender for date rigidity and US chart updaters (besides myself) usually don't care either way. Like your reasoning, I was in a hurry and that was my way of showing you that the date was wrong because I have warned you about it before (see above on your talk page). I don't hold grudges.  Ss 112  18:14, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

New Zealand and Australian charts
Not once before have I seen you edit any New Zealand peak. I think you clearly know I do that when they update, and you've stalked my edits and tried to take over what I do as an attack against me. Let it go. I am very close to reporting you after this, it's gotten ridiculous. Stop before you go any further because you're upset at me. Nobody owns the right to update charts but when you've never done this before (and you're adding unsourced peaks to discographies), it's very obvious.  Ss 112  04:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not forbidden for me to update charts. I indeed haven't done these before but I can now or is anything wrong with my other edits as well? I only added one unsourced peak by mistake (which you had all the rights to revert), all the others are correctly sourced. And again, I've never stalked you. Just updating a plain chart, nothing more and nothing less. I'm not mad in any way. -- Lk95 05:36, 25 March 2016 (CET)
 * Of course you're going to say that. You're still trying to keep up the charade of being civil. When an editor starts doing something they've never done before, like you just did, it's really telling. You've never displayed interest in New Zealand charts at all and how you even discovered what time they update is a mystery unless you've looked at my edits in the past. Stop following what I do and engaging in disruptive editing tactics against me, it's obnoxious and against Wikipedia policy.  Ss 112  05:06, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Per WP:HOUNDING: "Wikihounding is the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance or distress to the other editor. Wikihounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia." While you didn't follow me today, this does apply to following edits. It's very coincidental you singled out the NZ charts to start updating.  Ss 112  05:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there any particular reason you have now taken to updating Australian certifications on Wikipedia, or is this merely another thing to interrupt something you know I do? It's funny that you raised the "tit-for-tat" thing elsewhere on your talk page, because it seems like that's what you do when you decide to start doing something you've never done before. Is this about you taking me updating the German Wikipedia personally, like somehow updating Austrian chart positions on their native Wikipedia (the German Wiki) is an action against you that you feel you need to get back at me for? I don't understand, but it seems very much like it.  Ss 112  09:06, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You seem to be a bit paranoid because I didn't even know you updated certifications until now. As I told you before, if charts update earlier than they normally do and I have something different to do at that time, someone else usually updates them and I have no problem with that (see Austrian charts). I'm not sure why everything you see me doing on here is to you like a "revenge" thing on my part or something because it's not. When I see things that aren't updated on here yet even though other sites already reported them, I update them (I also added German and UK certifications in the past week). Simple as that. No hard feelings. -- Lk95 11:22, 14 May 2016 (CEST)

I'm sure it seems like paranoia, but from where I sit it isn't. Several weeks ago it seems you suddenly decided to deduce what time the Australian chart updates/Noise11 publishes its data for seemingly no reason, as from doing it regularly I know you'd never done before. I don't know how else you would have found out what time these sites update without looking at the edit history of the list of number-one singles of 2016 in Australia, and doing that, you would have seen that I regularly edit the page. So now you're using a site sourced on that page by me to go around and update certifications before I or anybody else can, and considering what we have edited in the past at the same time and had some issues with, from where I sit, it's a little hard to believe it's just a sudden random interest in Australian chart data.  Ss 112  10:31, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I also update the German version of the site you mentioned and as I've been updating the site for several months now I found out where to get that data from because there were already links provided that redirect to Noise11. To find out at which time the new article would be up, I browsed through the history of said article. I just recently found out that they also include certifications as I hadn't read the articles in their entirety before but instead used ariacharts for updating. -- Lk95 13:02, 14 May 2016 (CEST)

Disambiguation link notification for May 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of number-one hits of 2016 (Germany), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wizkid. 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) 12:07, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Sigala
You removed a reference with one edit and with the other two changed certifications. Please remember to provide an edit summary with all your edits, like I do, to explain your edits because it makes the probability that any given edit is reverted. (Or better, add a reference...)-- Laun  chba  ller  11:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

UK charts
Just want to let you know, when the host says "Coming up", it doesn't necessarily mean the next song up, because clearly you have a trigger finger ready to go on the page when they say that. I'd be wary.  Ss 112  15:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Take Her Up to Monto/Note
In future, do not restore your edits after you've been reverted and told Hung Medien doesn't work when using the single or albumchart templates if the artist or album has an accent or other special character in their name/its title, as you did at Take Her Up to Monto. I also don't understand why all of a sudden you've chosen this week to start updating Belgian and Dutch charts—I could guess the reason, but i assure you you don't need to worry about doing this in future. This week was an exception; I've got it covered, as I always have. Thanks.  Ss 112  14:19, 15 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes I noticed that mistake though I thought it was just a matter of removing the accents from their names instead of adding manual templates. I know how it works now. I actually didn't plan on updating both charts today but since I noticed they hadn't been updated yet I decided to do so. I check them every week like lots of other charts. -- Lk95 16:34, 15 July 2016 (CEST)

Australian certifications
Thanks for copying my entire style. Now you're directly citing ARIA because you can't find Noise11 articles. It seems you're really intent on interfering wherever you can on the English Wikipedia, doing things that you know others do at exactly the same time, and I find it disruptive and vindictive. You have said in the past "I look to see if it's been updated already", but the fact is that you don't give anybody else time to update anything because you're rushing around doing it at the same time or a minute after it's updated.  Ss 112  08:19, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No matter what I've done on Wikipedia, you've come along any time I've been late or anything and copied exactly what I do. You never cited sources on the English Wikipedia until I asked you to. You never adapted date formats until I asked you to. You never inserted line breaks when adding a ref into a wikitable until I did. You never used the proper German single or album chart templates until I pointed them out. You never started adding Billboard 200 manual references until you saw me do it. You never tried to update any Australian information on Wikipedia until you decided for some reason to come along and do it before me. You copy everything I do and I find that you are intentionally interfering with what I do. You can claim you don't all you like, but your past and present actions say differently. You seem to always do these things after some perceived slight against you. Oh no, I updated the Australian page on the German Wikipedia before you. Now you better come back and update all the certification information you can possibly find here. Like, come on dude. You know I do that every week and you're disrupting it.  Ss 112  08:27, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You tell dozens of users what to do and revert them on a daily (I see that on article histories), I'm not an exception. Why shouldn't I actually take your hint when it actually helps me improve my edits? Yes, you did tell me those things. That doesn't change the fact that I updated German charts, Swiss charts, etc. before I saw your name on chart-based edits on here (before you insist on telling me I only did that after you started, I didn't). As I told you before, I check various weekly charts (including Australian, Belgian, etc.). When I opened ariacharts today, it had already been updated for like 10 minutes (I know them or noise11 provide new data at about 8am UCT) and usually someone added all the new certifications already. If not, then I do. Also, I look at how certifciations from previous weeks were linked so that you or somebody else don't revert me afterwards. If that was you that linked them, then yes, I copied that style. Besides, I don't think about whether it was you who invented that style or somebody else. Why claim a "style" anyway? I'm pretty sure someone else at some point in time standardized the style of chart/certification templates already. Plus I'm not by any means salty about your edits on the German wikipedia. It actually takes off some work load of my hands. -- Lk95 11:11, 30 July 2016 (CEST)
 * Those things I listed that you picked up were not said as if you doing them is a bad thing, I was just pointing those out to link them to you copying my style in order to do things "correctly" before me. It's nice when people take up what I ask (unless I think they're directly wrong, then you are right, I "tell" them so—but I don't have the power to force anybody to do anything, as I'm one user and it's Wikipedia), but when I don't say anything to them about, for instance, the Australian chart, and—not directed at just you, as multiple others have what I term "interfered" with me updating them—they then clearly see how I have done things and sometimes mere seconds before I save the edit, have done it already—that, edit conflicts and such, is annoying for anybody. They could have good intentions like you say you do, but it's hard to know, and oftentimes it's done incorrectly and that's even more frustrating. It's not necessarily the "style" that I'm trying to claim, it's the actions that suddenly another has taken it upon themselves to do and then has to one wonder, "well, why?" (Edit: I acknowledge that you told me why and thank you for explaining that, and what I'm saying may seem like paranoia, but when from where I'm sitting the process doesn't need improving upon and others then try to, it's frustrating is all.)  Ss 112  09:30, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Copying my references
Please stop copying my exact reference style. It's really annoying to see you doing it as a replacement for me, and I'm not going to warn you over it again. I'm not acting as if it's copyrighted material, but I have never copied another user's style, and nor should you. Write the reference up yourself, using your own phrasing. I frankly don't care that you said "why should I not try to imitate your style, considering you've reverted me for [whatever]?" I wouldn't revert you for doing your own referencing; I'd be relieved. Write it up yourself. There's no one right way to do it, so there is entirely no need to copy exactly what I've done.  Ss 112  16:40, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * So if I didn't copy this style - and how should I know that you came up with this reference style? I don't follow your every step - there would be no consistency among album articles at all and it would look out of place. What other reference style would I come up with? It would most likely be the exact same if I had to write them up on my own. There's not much diversity. Besides, I don't usually update French album positions as I assume you do this every week. -- Lk95 18:49, 17 August 2016 (CEST)
 * So you copied it from somewhere, despite later saying you assume I do it every week? That seems a bit contradictory. I came up with the exact wording of the reference you used earlier on multiple pages. The actual title of the site is "Le Top de la semaine : Top Albums - SNEP", so that's a point of difference. I've seen others shorten the publisher parameter to just "SNEP". I'm wary about all of this because people have been accused of sockpuppetry for less. Some editors actually do monitor particular sets of pages very closely (as in, every change made to them) and if they see the exact same reference used in exactly the same manner by two different editors, even though a CheckUser would show us living in two different places, it looks fishy as hell. (Frankly, sockpuppetry is using multiple accounts in a disruptive manner, but some may still look at the same style used by two users and wonder.)  Ss 112  17:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes I did. And I know that because your name is showing up on most music-releated articles that involve recent chart changes so it doesn't seem far off to assume you're responsible for them as well (it's visible on article histories so it's not hard for me to look that up). I see your point though, it's certainly not my intention to do this because I only meant to edit them with the reference/style to be as accurate as possible, not in the sense to copy your style. I apologize if it came off as such. -- Lk95 19:24, 17 August 2016 (CEST)

Again jumping in ahead of me
I'm pretty sure in the past I've asked you to not be an annoying editor and jump in ahead of somebody by updating the rest of a chart before they can do it themselves. You just did it over on the German Wikipedia, where I was updating Billboard chart positions. I know you do that some weeks, but you literally started doing it the same minute I did. I know you're going to say "Dude, I didn't, I do that every week", but when I have looked, in the past you've done it later. In future, if I start doing something there before you, don't be disruptive and try to do it first. It makes you look desperate for edits or something.  Ss 112  09:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Stalking my edits, yet again
I'm getting really tired of this. Is there a day that goes by where you don't stalk my edits to look for something to do yourself first? There is no way that you could have discovered already that "Starboy" had gone to number 1 in France yourself, unless you were either looking at its English page for some reason hours after you last edited it, or, due to all the "coincidences" over the time we have been editing much the same music topics, that you added it to the German Daft Punk article by having looked at my edits. Frankly, you'll probably find some excuse as you normally do, but this needs to stop. This has happened too many times for me to be just "paranoid" or for you to be claiming it was just coincidence and that you just so happened to check the French chart in the middle of the week coincidentally right after I was doing it (in fact, the timestamp tells me you added that nine minutes after I edited the French number-ones page on the German Wikipedia. I find it extremely hard to believe that that could be merely coincidence considering the French chart probably updated hours ago, and especially after this has occurred at least two dozen times over the past two years). There is no reason for you to be looking at my edit pages this much to find things to edit. Do your own thing.  Ss 112  22:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Offiziellecharts.de
When offiziellecharts.de updates later and you re-add the peaks, please do the better thing and just restore them without reverting my edits. In future, if you see that somebody has added the German peaks without offiziellecharts.de having updated, you can revert them as that information is unverifiable. The German Wikipedia is a different matter and a project that is much laxer on referencing and music articles in general, but here, verifiability is key (perhaps there's a bit of leeway when the timeframe for the actual chart to show the data is certain—like the UK chart, but with the German charts I'm not sure as it seems to change every week now). Sorry for having to revert you a bunch of times, it just seemed the easiest option to get the message across.  Ss 112  17:43, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Germancharts.com has already updated, that's where I got the chart positions from. My problem is that I don't know how to add a proper link or use manual referencing when I could only access these peaks through other Hung Medien sites (ultratop.be for example) but Germancharts themselves don't provide any data beyond the Top 10 on their home page. I thought it would be confusing for future edits to add a note with a link that leads to the song's page from a foreign Hung Medien site. From my experience, that has only happened once or twice since I started editing so I don't think it's a recurring event. -- Lk95 19:53, 7 October 2016 (CEST)
 * I guess it could be a little confusing, but I've provided temporary Ultratop links for the German album peaks now. It shows the data, even despite not being Germany's chart porta and it will only be there for a short while after all.  Ss 112  19:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Waiting until charts actually update
In future, please only add German peaks to Wikipedia when the chart has updated, unless you add the additional source you're getting the new peaks from. Several minutes ago, I checked the Metallica album page, and the German peak of number 1 was not there yet. It just updated, but there was no guarantee of when the chart would do this, and you could not have known when it would. I know you think nobody sees you, but I do also see you updating singles peaks before the chart pages have actually updated, but I just don't want to rollback your edits that many times. I don't think you need to be told, as you've been editing Wikipedia since the late 2000s, that information added to Wikipedia needs to be verifiable at the time you add it. It isn't going to hurt you to wait.  Ss 112  15:05, 25 November 2016 (UTC)