User talk:Realist2/Archive 2

An update on our earlier discussion on The Wall
I've checked and it is certified 23x Platinum by the RIAA. This means it has sold 46 million CDs in the USA or more, because the RIAA count it as a single album due to length (see Wikipedia page on the RIAA). http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?table=tblTop100 Any album under 100 minutes counts as a single album even if it spread accross multiple CDs as is the case with The Wall. It is around 82 minutes. HIStory...each CD is over 70 minutes clocking up a total of over to 140. So looking at your earlier comment: "take HIStory as an example again the RIAA gives it 7 million units so its sold 3.5 million copies. worldwide history has sold 36 million unis or 18 million copies. The wall has sold 15 milllion copies or 30 mil units" HIStory = 7x Platinum = 3.5 million copies The Wall = 23x Platinum = 23 million copies This means that The Wall has, in the USA, outsold HIStory globally. The reason that HIStory is often called the best selling multi-disc album Present estimates for HIStory (cited by Wikipedia) are around 18 million copies globally, 36 million CDs. This cannot compare to the 23 million copies/46 million CDs of The Wall in the USA alone.(The Elfoid 17:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC))

Michael Jackson mug shot
Why did you delete this photo Image:Michael-jackson-mugshot.jpg from the section "2003–2006: Trial, acquittal, and aftermath" in the Michael Jackson article? – Ilse@ 19:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

re: morphine
The edition I have is up to 2003 only, and my page 661 is on sources relating to LMP-MJ marriage. I'm not sure it's "safe to say" that he was taking morphine in 1993 if he was taking it in 2004. That's a decade apart. I have a few books on the "scandal" and none of them say that he was taking morphine- they all say he was treated for demerol and tranquilliser dependence. Also refer to "The Bad Year" by Rick Sky and "Unauthorized" by Christopher Anderson. I have a couple of others to and no where does it say morphine. But if you feel you HAVE to have it in there (I'm not sure why you do) then that's fine. I just think it's inaccurate, that's all. Marnifrances 04:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you think it's necessary to put that in, then do. I'm not sure what it's in relation to actually. Is the information accurate? If you feel like it needs to be in, then put it in the 2004 info, not the 1993 info. Thanks so much I appreciate the contact :)Marnifrances 13:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I quite clearly made a statement on your talk page, proving once and for all, that The Wall has outsold HIStory. And yet you still put it back on the best selling music artist page. 23 million copies (46 million CDs) of The Wall have been sold in the USA. The RIAA says it, various respected Pink Floyd sources say it, various new bulletins about Pink Floyd make reference to it. In terms of US statistics, it has only sold 23 million units in the USA, yes. But speaking globally, you must talk about the total number of actual copies sold, or total number of CDs. The unit system for sales used by the RIAA has not been addopted by every country of the world so cannot be used to calculate sales figures at a COMPARATIVE level; it would be impossibly complicated. HIStory has sold more Official RIAA Units (USA) but not more copies. I left you a quite polite statement on your talk page explaining this, and you did not even do me the courtesy of replying to it before removing my statement. I consider this impolite, rude, petty and offensive. I am not saying The Wall outsold HIStory, I am saying there are sales figures and claims of equal levels of reliability. Some people say HIStory sold more, any and every source of reliable sales figures say The Wall did. I'm not saying put up that The Wall outsold HIStory, only that HIStory cannot be 100% stated to be the best selling album. Until someone proves it's sold more than 23 million copies (46 million CDs), it cannot top The Wall's American sales alone (globally it's over 30 million copies/60 million CDs, but a precise figure has not been calculated in some time now wheras the US figure is from the late 1990s). Please treat me as another human being who's contributions are of some value instead of casually brushing them aside just because I didn't shut my mouth and let you do what you want when you tried to persuade me of your point of view. I did not perpetuate MY editing until I found a source proving once and for all my evidence is stronger than your own. I also warned you of my actions so if necessary, a debate could ensue. If administrators become involved, it'll be a clear stalemate on who's sold more, meaning we'd have to take out any figures anyway. Please look at things in a more mature light and be more polite with me in future, and be aware this debate is not over. I am quite prepared to request the opinions of administrators to settle this debate (and lets get someone netural; I know you're friends with half of them because you seem to want most of the Michael Jackson pages semi-protected to help guarantee only your point of view gets stated). You also removed other edits which were quite reasonable. e.g. The Beatles are the best selling band of all time. Given the other 2 best selling artists (MJ and Elvis) are not bands, it doesn't need sourcing that The Beatles outsold other bands now does it? Please consider my words, and act accordingly. To debate and argue with me I can understand, but to rudely ignore my words is not remotely fair or mature. I am quite surprised, given your dedication to protecting Wikipedia from vandals and the abuse your talk page suggests you may have received on here for some of your own edits. Then there was your comment about me on the MJ talk page, suggesting I attacked your later comments purely because of this debate; That insults me deeply. Just because some people hate MJ doesn't mean you have to venomously attack anyone who doesn't support him 100%! I am a committed fan to all of the music he's ever produced too, just one that is striving for a more realistic view than you seem willing to accept. Yours sincerely, (The Elfoid 12:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC))

Blanking your page does not give you permission to ignore my legimitimate, honest and respecatble comments
Check the history, ANYONE can tell what you just did. Ignoring me like this is most discoutreous, and not something a true Wikipedian would do. I find proof that withouta shadow of a doubt I'm right, so you just decide all conversation has to end? This is unfair, respond to me with something decent within two days or I shall find out what the Wikipedia Administration makes of this debate and your clear lack of politeness. (The Elfoid 10:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC))

Best selling music artist
You seem to revert every edit I make, making me think this is a personal attack now. Which I resent. Anyway...I wasn't adding the sales of Beatles members after they left to their total sales. I was explaining that whenever they tour it increases album sales for The Beatles so the band are still receiving live promotion. Another good example would be how The Jackson 5's album sales went up whenever MJ toured. And look at Heaven and Hell (band). They've had unbelievable impact on the album sales of Black Sabbath.

The fact that The Beatles (well, two of them, and three of them until recently) are still active has helped contribute to their high sales. PERIOD. (The Elfoid 15:58, 13 September 2007 (UTC))

And my reply to you

 * "Stop filling my talk page I really dont want to communicate with you"

I'm not enjoying talking to you either, but that's besides the point ant not relevant.


 * "Im not going around reverting your edits, we happen to watch the same pages, if you look at the edit history of some of these pages you will find that I have contributed to them for longer and with more frequency than you so maybe you are following me."

My point was just that every thought I have seems to be wrong in your eyes. I can understand some disagreement, but almost everything I edited...but only after our first argument.


 * "Stop going around researching my edits."

I read your talk page, that's it. And not against the rules.


 * "stop using article talk pages to grab other peoples attention to our debate, dont tell others of my edit history."

Don't ignore perfectly legitimate comments?


 * " Do not go around signing off like I do, I dont find it funny."

I wasn't. I was merely adding some formalities to comments to show that I am taking our disagreements very seriously.


 * "Dont threaten me with administration."

If I feel you are doing wrong, I think it's fairer to warn you than just report you. I was being nice.


 * "Dont call my edits invalid because of an association to the michael jackson wikiproject, you dont know me."

That's not why I did. I just think anyone who's user page explains without a doubt that Michael Jackson is their lifetime hero is bound to be a little biased. I don't have a problem with that, I just take it into account. I don't go near the Iron Maiden page anymore since I know I'm biased.

I will leave you alone when you give me a decent reply. I have provided you with evidence that The Wall outsold HIStory. It has sales figures approved by the RIAA, and similar companies around the world were provided by HIStory. Prove me wrong! Find evidence that there are over 46 million HIStory CDs around (excluding the single-CD release in 2002) and I will accept your argument. Can't you understand that's my problem with you? Not the disagreeing, just the way you outright ignored the RIAA - and me. If the RIAA says you're wrong, you have no right to put something on Wikipedia in disagreement with that given the source's frequent use on Wikipedia itself.

Finish this HIStory debate and I will disappear from your life. Heck, to avoid future trouble I'll just not touch the Michael Jackson pages for over a month if you like. Just treat me with some respect.(The Elfoid 19:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC))

Verifying adminship
Per your thread at WP:ANI, you can always go to this page to verify whether someone is really an admin. —Wknight94 (talk) 18:59, 16 September 2007 (UTC)


 * And also per your comments: admins don't have any special authority that allows them to unilaterally decide content disputes. Any admin who goes makes an edit with the summary "the article must say this, I can decide because I am an admin" will draw a lot of comments because that isn't an appropriate edit summary. On the other hand, most admins do have a decent amount of experience, which should be taken into account when dealing with them. Any admin should be willing to explain the reasons for what they say if you ask politely. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 21:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the headsup
Some of it'll be hard to prove, some is easy. I'll not have it all done by then since I'm going away tonight, but I'll have enough to have it retained until I finish work. (The Elfoid 15:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC))


 * The last point, where I put the tag, is from something that was televised. I don't know how to cite it correctly.(The Elfoid 16:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC))

Warning vandals
Please avoid comments like this one. I can understand that it is annoying when people vandalize a page you've worked on, but there is no need to insult them. A simple message that their edits aren't appropriate is much better. You might consider using the templates found here. --Onorem♠Dil 17:27, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Slash
I changed some of your edits before your message arrived, I would have discussed them otherwise. Sorry!

I've cut the details down, and simplified the language in parts. The mention of Gilby Clarke I feel is worth keeping however, since he was a close friend of Slash's. (The Elfoid 17:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC))

Micheal Jackson Picture
Im sorry about how my comment looked, i am a big fan of Michael jackson that why i don't want the mug shot as the main picture, i think a picture from the dangerous era would do good yes, i'm sorry my comment came out the wrong way so i just wanted to address that as i have no plans to cause any problems, so lets find a good picture. (also the idea of having a picture with two different picture of him was just a thought since then the younger generations could see him in all of his glory?) - Gaogier

Some little niggly thing
Hi there - just a suggestions after noticing that little saga at WP:AN. Just a quick tip no need to hit me back --Ben chat 12:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Even with cases the really tick you off, don't make a personal attack i.e. "this user is so stupid" -Realist2 11:31, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: nomination for deletion
This should walk you through the whole process. Feel free to leave me another message if you have any more questions.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 20:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Sure
Busy today, will look in next few days though. I need to look at the details of what can and can't be used first.(The Elfoid 19:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC))

Slash
That section should be under themes and genres really. It's genre crossover stuff. People have put it in 'personal life' a few times now - we have no idea if Slash/MJ ever interacted out of a working relationship. So lets keep it there.

You watch the page more than me, hope you can keep an eye on it.(The Elfoid 17:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC))

Thanks. I'm pretty much the only person looking after every page related to Van Halen, done a fair bit of work for Thin Lizzy and am looking into sorting out Dio soon. Can't handle it all myself!(The Elfoid 20:05, 13 October 2007 (UTC))

ok
I do have a life outside of Wikipedia, can't always get stuff done. I'll think it over soon don't worry!(The Elfoid 19:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC))

Best-selling music artist
Please stop. If you continue to blank out or delete portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.  Funky Monkey   (talk)  20:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Fox News source on MJ page
I agree Fox News is not 100% reliable but it's also notable information due to the attention it attracts. Compromise, state the information but rather than "MJ did this" include "Fox News reported that..." to make a point of the source. (The Elfoid 15:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC))

3RR Michael Jackson
WARNING - You have currently violated the 3RR on the Michael Jackson article. You have in fact reverted edits to this article 4 times in the last 24 hours. Consider this your final warning. If you continue breaking the above rule, you WILL be reported and you WILL be blocked from editing for a period of time. Thanks.  Funky Monkey   (talk)  11:24, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Mugshot debate
Note my suggestion. A straight vote's both not Wikipedia policy, and won't get us anywhere. Most people against the use of the mugshot have no reason except "It's an ugly photo", and see that as justification. I'm open to suggestions and stuff, so as I put in the comment I left you can remove stuff as well as add it and I won't complain. I just want something so definitive, so concrete, we can slam it in the face of anyone who ever argues about it ever again. And that's whether I win the argument or not - I just want it over.

If you agree I have a better idea than you did, I'd appreciate it if you removed your little poll from the page since it would no longer be necessary. If not...we'll see what happens I suppose.

(The Elfoid 23:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC))

Mortitz B
Hi. In situations where I contact contributors to an article to stimulate participation, I generally try to pick arbitrary but objective criteria such as has contributed in the last X-months. That is why I contacted Moritz, not because I agree with his politics. One of the great things about WP is that the majority of contributors bring us to center on most issues. But even the most polarized among us often brings some good to th project if we can endure the uglier issues. Cheers! And keep up the good academic work. --Kevin Murray 15:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Slash
The connection with Slash debate on deletion of it, I just edited. Thought I'd let you know since it's further up the page.

Edit wars do not mean delete something. Think how many editors view the page and DON'T delete it. He has been referred to on TV as Michael Jackson's friend and as I said, he's the longest standing musical partner Jackson's ever had that I know of. One of a few to be named in songs, to write his own music (intro to Black or White), few to make a regular appearance. Being "guest rock guitarist" is a role in all Jackson albums Thriller onwards. That he made his position permanent says a lot. Only one to appear in music videos AS A MUSICIAN.

Plus I'd guess, other than Paul McCartney, no one who's been on a Jackson album's been as successful.

(The Elfoid 18:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC))

Vandalism
Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. 66.31.140.195 23:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Reverted edit to Thriller (album)
A cursory Google search shows a Rolling Stone article concerning this and I'm pretty sure they are a reputable source: HalfShadow 20:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

MJ PICTURE
Gao: Hello, please will you place the bad quality image in the article and the white house one as the main image, Thank You, also can you invite me to the michael jackson wikiproject?

Rea: I wont change it simply because its a good thing its gone, that picture was in the article twice it was non sensicale to keep it. There isnt a way to invite a person to it? Im confused what do you mean? Realist2 (talk) 19:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Gao: Nevermind about that okay, i just dont think that new picture is going down well with alot of people :(. That is all im going to Say Say Say.
 * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9cM9JZaaIg Click Here

Rea: it might not be brill but its better than 2 of the same pictures. Realist2 (talk) 19:51, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Gao: Did you click that? Well okay ill leave it up to you, i could change it if i liked and you wouldnt be able to change it back but i wont, ill just go with you.

Rea: yes i did it was a link to a youtube video of say say say with that annoying paul mcCartney. I really didnt understand your point about me not being able to revert you? how is that exactly? Realist2 (talk) 19:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Gao: Because i own the copyright to that image :D

Rea:---

Gao: i need to get hold of billy jean 1981 home demo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaogier (talk • contribs) 20:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

its not a picture its a track that comes in teh thriller album —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaogier (talk • contribs) 20:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)