User talk:ResolutionsPerMinute/Archive 1

"R U Ready"
Hey again! Just created an article for "R U Ready", lead single from Salt-N-Pepa's last album. Hope I'm not bothering you by asking for your help in adding additional charts :) QuestFour (talk) 19:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ It's really no trouble. It's the first goal listed on my userpage, after all. ResPM come to my window 20:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Short descriptions
Hello. I noticed some changes to the short descriptions for song articles. According to WP:SHORTDESC, a short description should be "a concise explanation of the scope of the page". Often, articles are about various aspects of a song and not solely about one single commercial release. For example, Boom Boom (John Lee Hooker song) was changed to "1962 single by John Lee Hooker". This description ignores the fact that the article discusses recordings by other artists. A better short description (with emphasis on short) would be "blues song written by John Lee Hooker", "blues song first recorded by John Le Hooker in 1962", or simply "blues standard" (as it was). Similarly, for Come Together, the short description was changed to "1969 single by the Beatles", but the article discusses various versions including popular ones by Tina Turner and Aerosmith. To be more accurate, the description should not be restricted to one single; identifying the writers or "rock song first recorded by the Beatles in 1969" is one easy way to avoid an overly long description, but still be correct. Separate composers and lyricists are often not identified for popular music, so the broader "writer" is used to include both (although some descriptions have been incorrectly changed to "written and composed by" when only one person is identified). If you have any questions, please ping me. Thanks, —Ojorojo (talk) 19:17, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

"5 Miles to Empty"
Greetings! Just created this one, could you please add the charts and expand it (eg. track listings and formats)? I'm kind of embarrassed as I think I'm the only one in your talk page requesting things like this...appreciate you doing it even though you don't have to, and a million thanks for your work here :) QuestFour (talk) 16:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅. ResPM come to my window 17:15, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Iceland YE Chart
Hi, thanks for adding Iceland charts. It seems you have added Icelnad Year-end charts for 97, 98 and 2000. Do you have sources (links) for other years? I'm most interested in years 1994, 95, 96, 99, 2002, 03 and 04. Thanks in advance -- Max24 (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find any YE charts from 1994 to 1999 during my first run-through, but I'll look again. As for 2002 to 2004, I couldn't find any more weekly charts after 2000 that weren't compiled via popularity polls, but if I missed one, please fill me in. If you'd like to look around the site yourself, go here, click "Ítarleit"/"Advanced", select "Dagblaðið Vísir – DV (1981–)" in the "leita í öllum titlum" box, then search for a keyword or artist in quotes. You may have to search week-by-week if certain issues don't show up. ResPM come to my window 15:08, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks :) -- Max24 (talk) 17:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I just found a year-end for 1994 here. No wonder I missed it; it was published on a different day and the text is sideways... Go figure. I managed to track it down from this advert, so I'll look around for more of them. ResPM come to my window 15:31, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Great! You're the best!! :) -- Max24 (talk) 17:39, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

OK Computer charts
Hi! an editor just added the US year-end charts for OK Computer, could you please add the remaining charts from the other countries? Ellokk (talk) 22:36, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, but just keep in mind I prefer adding year-end charts to song articles. Albums aren't really my strong suit. ResPM come to my window 23:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Noted, and thanks! Ellokk (talk) 08:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Iceland Chart
Hi again :) On the 1997 Iceland Year-end Singles Chart there is Celine Dion's "I Love You" at #21. Do you know what was the peak position of this song on the weekly chart? Or is it a mistake (it wasn't a single in other countries). Thanks in advance, Max :) -- Max24 (talk) 18:39, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure it's not a mistake. Íslenski listinn seems to be based on airplay, so songs can sometimes chart without a single release ("Mile End" by Pulp for example, which wasn't released as a single but was featured in the popular film Trainspotting, which most likely attributed to its chart-topping success in Iceland). "I Love You"'s peak position was #7 according to this issue—it was at #9 this week, but see the second column from the left. ResPM come to my window 17:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Discussion
Hello. Please see this discussion. Bionic (talk) 07:43, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion
Hello. Please see this discussion. Bionic (talk) 07:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Copyright violation
Hello, I tried to source release dates for articles such as Running with Scissors ("Weird Al" Yankovic album), but User:Gen.Quon is arguing that linking the PDF for magazines violates WP:COPYVIO. Please try to respond. Thanks.2603:8081:160A:BE2A:BC32:2EC5:83C5:B878 (talk) 22:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This is the first time I've heard this since I started seriously editing in 2018, and I've never had edits reverted because I cited a full magazine. Many experienced editors I know don't seem to take issue with this, but they may or not be from different countries, where copyright laws are different. Whether or not this is IP discrimination, you should try to discuss this with Gen.Quon or at the Teahouse and try to get a few more opinions. Meanwhile, I don't see a problem if you just leave the url out of it. Although editors can't verify the information, it's better than nothing. Just use the template.  ResPM come to my window 22:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I took it to the Teahouse. Can you try to discuss with them if you can? 2603:8081:160A:BE2A:BC32:2EC5:83C5:B878 (talk) 22:50, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll temporarily add the page to my watchlist and respond if I can. I'm on Wiki constantly, so I'll notice any changes. ResPM come to my window 22:55, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi all. My concern was with the direct link to a PDF copy of a magazine; since this is unlikely to be an "official" upload, I reverted it because I don't want a copyright vio on our hands. Adding the citational information (e.g., page, title, publisher), but leaving out the URL would suffice as a fix.-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)  03:48, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Commercial release date vs radio airplay
For The Impression That I Get, User:QuestFour is arguing that the release date should be the commercial release date and not the date for radio airplay per Template:Infobox_song. I have tried to discuss this with them and they are not putting a source. Please try to discuss with them.2603:8081:160A:BE2A:44DA:8FC:B24B:70B4 (talk) 22:12, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think I need to discuss it at all; QuestFour is right in this case—the commercial release date should be used. I've recently asked this at Template talk:Infobox song and was given the same answer by another user. However, if the date is uncited and does not appear anywhere else in the article, the best thing to do is remove everything except the year. "The Impression That I Get" was released in 1997 (as a single and on its parent album), but nowhere in the prose does it say "January". Ergo, "1997" is the most reliable date right now. ResPM come to my window 22:45, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Angryjoe111 and no infobox sources
Hello, User:Angryjoe111 keeps removing citations from infoboxes regarding the release dates of various N'Sync related articles (i.e. No Strings Attached).I had tried to discuss with them. Please try to discuss with them if you can. Thank you.2603:8081:160A:BE2A:BCAE:63F:A7D2:B29B (talk) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not in the mood to associate with other users right now, but I agree with Angryjoe111's logic. You don't need to cite information in the lead (that includes the infobox too) if it appears cited later in the article. See WP:CITELEAD. Also, I'm starting to receive backlash for release-date-related edits, so I would appreciate it if you gave me some time to clear my head. ResPM come to my window 01:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)


 * It would be nice if I was pinged in this discussion instead of having to unintentionally come across my name in the section heading. I have replied to the user in several edit summaries such as, but was constantly met with silence or limited engagement suggesting why their edits were justified. For the removal of citations in the infobox, WP:CITELEAD indicates that editors should balance the desire to avoid redundant citations in the lead with the desire to aid readers in locating sources for challengeable material. The discussion of release dates in the infobox has primarily been based on the song's first physical release according to several WP:GA reviewers, and has been disputable among promotional songs eventually released as singles such as "It's Gonna Be Me". The date the user added was the Billboard magazine publishing date, not the song's radio release. I added the earliest CD single date from the UK but is attributed to its release on Amazon, while the US physical release date was acknowledged in two separate Billboard issues and what led to its number one peak on the Billboard Hot 100. Should I use the UK date in the |released= parameter since it was the earliest reported physical release, or should I use the US date since it caused the number one peak?


 * ResolutionsPerMinute, I am sorry that you got dragged into this discussion. I have a great amount of respect for the edits you make on Wikipedia, especially with the difficulty of updating chart positions in various music articles. In regards to the infobox release date parameter concerns, maybe request an WP:RFC in the appropriate WikiProjects to gain consensus from other users. Hopefully it would also clarify the definition of a "commercial" and "promotional" release. — Angryjoe1111 (talk) 07:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * If it were up to me, I'd choose the earliest release date, even though I do prefer the commercial release over the radio release. This is exactly what Template:Infobox song says, but several users and many IPs have polarizing views on this, leading me to revert many edits on Breathe (Faith Hill song), Angel (Shaggy song), and Butterfly (Crazy Town song). I'd love to start an RfC, but unfortunately, I've reached my limit right now. I hate asking favors, but if you have some time, I'd appreciate it if you could commence this RfC in my stead. I'd rather sit on the sidelines and not get involved with something that has me overwhelmed. If you can't, though, that's cool. I'd rather focus on other topics right now anyway. ResPM come to my window 12:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JamesWaltzingAlongsongcover.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JamesWaltzingAlongsongcover.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Italian Year-End Charts
Hi! Sorry for the late reply but I just saw your message. I was able to find 2005 and 2006 YECs so far.

2005: https://web.archive.org/web/20060506075305/http://www.fimi.it/dettaglio_documento.asp?id=637&idtipo_documento=1

2006: https://web.archive.org/web/20070112111437/http://www.fimi.it/dettaglio_documento.asp?id=763&idtipo_documento=1

Just download the attachment at the bottom of the page and you’ll be able to see the Year End Charts. Lorenzoact (talk) 19:07, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated! If you find YE charts for 2000 or 2001, please let me know. Thanks! ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 19:12, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Typo on Sing mv date
Thanks for picking that up. Didn't realize my keyboard had autocorrected the date. -- Carlobunnie (talk) 00:03, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * It's fine. I'm trying to get this article to GA status, but things have been going slow, so I appreciate any help I can get. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 00:56, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

1997 UK year-end charts
Hi – I'm puzzled by your edit here... I have a copy of Music Week's 1997 year-end charts, and it definitely has Backstreet Boys at no. 38 and Robbie Williams at no. 39... where are you getting your information from? Richard3120 (talk) 23:23, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry about that. Before my last round of edits on Everybody (Backstreet's Back), I saw that its UK YE position was 39, so I got confused and double-checked with a sketchy source online, which said its position was 39. I may have had a lapse of judgement there, especially since I was getting drowsy. It happens. I'll make sure not to do that again. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 23:37, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * No problem at all, I don't blame you... the reason I asked is that the figures that were collected for UK sales from 1994 to 1997 have been endlessly debated by chart watchers, and appear to have been changed over the years by the OCC, so it wouldn't have surprised me if you'd found a source which had "updated" figures and placings. End of year single charts on the OCC's website only go back to 2005, but the end of year album charts go back to 1995, and the rankings on the 1995 and 1996 charts on there are substantially different from those that were published in Music Week at the time. Of course, the OCC have never explained these retroactive changes. Richard3120 (talk) 01:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of He Liked to Feel It
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article He Liked to Feel It you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 07:20, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of He Liked to Feel It
The article He Liked to Feel It you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:He Liked to Feel It for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 09:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of He Liked to Feel It
The article He Liked to Feel It you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:He Liked to Feel It for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 19:42, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Happy to have worked with you during this review yesterday; it was great how quick you responded during the GAN backlog and even though you missed a few things, that is to be expected when there's a good amount of changes requested! --K. Peake 11:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review too! I'm so glad to finally have contributed to a GA, and I learned quite a few things that I'll use from now on. I'm not that busy, so I can usually respond hastily. If all goes as planned, I plan to post a couple more nominees over the next month or two, so keep an eye out. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Destiny (Zero 7 song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Destiny (Zero 7 song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 10:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Destiny (Zero 7 song)
The article Destiny (Zero 7 song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Destiny (Zero 7 song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 16:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Destiny (Zero 7 song)
The article Destiny (Zero 7 song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Destiny (Zero 7 song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 17:42, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of JCB (song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article JCB (song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Ricky Martin invitation
آرمین هویدایی (talk) 19:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the invitation but unfortunately I am not interested enough in Ricky Martin to join. "Livin' la Vida Loca", "She Bangs", and "Nobody Wants to Be Lonely" are the only three songs by him that I enjoy. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 00:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of JCB (song)
The article JCB (song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:JCB (song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 16:00, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of JCB (song)
The article JCB (song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:JCB (song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

"Please don't add LP3"
Hi, Thanks for a information and topic about it. Now, everything is clear and I understand it. I thought that the LP3 is the same as the other charts in articles about songs, but now it's clear to me, that it's not the same. Thanks your quoting a link about it, I read it and it's helpful for me. Thanks for a note about it. Maybe I can help you in deleting it from many songs where I wrote about it?--Takoden (talk) 03:16, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I always remove LP3 if I see it, but I'm not a user who usually engages in mass deletion unless it's obvious vandalism—it's over my personal workload. Since I mostly edit articles for songs released in the 90s or 00s, I can usually keep chart information in line there, but based on what I've seen, users generally add LP3 to articles for songs released during the 80s, which is slightly outside my core interest range. Looking at your contributions, it looks like you added LP3 to a lot of 80s articles, so I think you can handle that decade while I watch over the more recent ones. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:15, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sing (Travis song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sing (Travis song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sing (Travis song)
The article Sing (Travis song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Sing (Travis song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 13:00, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sing (Travis song)
The article Sing (Travis song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sing (Travis song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm Not Dead singles in Australia
Hey! I just wanted to say first of all, thank you so much for all of your hard work in adding release dates. Your finds have been INCREDIBLE! That's pretty much all I do here on Wikipedia these days because it can be very difficult to source these things and a lot of users don't really bother putting energy into finding them, so it's so great to see another editor adding them as well! Secondly, I was wondering if you could find and add the release dates for Pink's I'm Not Dead singles in Australia. — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 17:13, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your thanks. I'm currently searching through every ARIA Report archive from 2001 to (tentatively) early 2006 and am currently in March 2004, so I'm about halfway done. However, since I like Pink, I'll go ahead and search for them. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 17:28, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * No rush at all, you can just get to them when you get there! I was looking myself, but boy is it a lot to search through! — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 17:31, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I've found the release dates for all the singles released in Australia except for "Leave Me Alone (I'm Lonely)" and "Dear Mr. President". Based on my findings, I suspect "Lonely" was released on April 30, 2007, while "President" was released on July 9, 2007, but neither song is listed as a "new release". ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 18:00, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

MOS
Nice to meet you. I do not understand why you reversed my edit. I was only trying to make the page look tidier (as well as adding some new information); I think that quotation marks should only be used for exactly that: quotations - and not to highlight or place emphasis on a word or title.

Anyway, I do not want to argue over something as ridiculous as this, so I wish you well and I hope you carry on being a good Wikipedia editor. Gregwholikestrains (talk) 02:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry I snapped at you like that, but I don't tolerate incorrect formatting. Song names are quoted, not italicized, and "the" is never capitalized in the middle of a sentence. Also, you need to remember to cite your sources. If I see uncited material in an article I edit a lot, it gets removed. No exceptions. If you add a citation to that information you added on "Love Is the Law", then there's no longer a problem. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 02:48, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

That's okay, but I disagree with you here on the use of quotation marks. I think that italicising the name of something places emphasis on it without making the page look untidy. I'm quite thorough with grammar and punctuation, and seeing quotation marks used for words and sentences that are not being quoted, really annoys me. Bold and/or italic font is enough.

I was not using the definite article (the) in the middle of the sentence, but using it as part of the band's title; so therefore it is a proper noun, e.g. The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, The Who, The Stone Roses, The Verve, The Seahorses etc.

Also, regarding my lack of a citation, well, I cannot see any other citations within that opening paragraph, so I do not know what the problem is. If you are a Stone Roses, Seahorses or John Squire fan (or indeed someone who appreciates good music), then you will know that what I have said is true and therefore I do not believe that a citation is necessary for such a trivial piece of information.

I just want to end this by saying that I have seen the front of your profile; I have Aspergers Syndrome too. I do not wish to cause a row or risk having my account blocked, but it clearlt seems that I have brought a knife to a gun fight here. If you don't want to accept my constructive changes then that's up to you, but I would not have made these changes if I did not think them necessary; I am not one of these people who vandalise pages just for a laugh. I can accept that you want to keep the page formatting as it is, but not the fact you will not accept my information without a citation.

Good day. Gregwholikestrains (talk) 12:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Listen, I know some of these rules don't make sense, but that's just how Wikipedia is formatted according to the Manual of Style. On Wikipedia, we don't emphasize song names; we "quote" them; italics are for albums (WP:SONG). On Wikipedia, band names are written with a lowercase "the" unless consensus decides against it (MOS:THEBAND). On Wikipedia, text does not need to be cited in the lead section if it appears cited later in the article (MOS:CITELEAD). On Wikipedia, all material likely to be challenged must be cited (WP:V). This is why I'm telling you to at least skim the MOS, because if you don't follow the guidelines, you may end up getting getting blocked. Start small. Correct grammar, then work your way up. That's what I did, and now I have four Good Articles to my username. I know these are a lot of rules, and it'll take time to learn them, but you'll be glad you did. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

That is stupid. Gregwholikestrains (talk) 21:04, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't know what to tell you. If you think it's so stupid, then don't edit. Simple. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 21:14, 13 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I have a life Gregwholikestrains (talk) 02:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Fantastic. Have fun with that &#x1F609;. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 03:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Sing (Travis song)
Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

UK Year-End Singles Charts
Hi RPM,

I'm not a regular Wikipedia contributor, but am a massive fan of your input to the UK chart sections of songs. I have been researching year-end singles charts and have found myself frustrated at the lack of available information for the 1990s: can I ask how many Music Week editions you have with 90s year-end charts, and if you could share the top 100 data for these years?

Kind regards,

Ben :) 83.244.233.102 (talk) 03:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)


 * You can access online archives here, although some issues are incomplete, so some year-end charts are missing. Sometimes I include the url and sometimes I don't. Some users feel that using the url is a copyright issue, but I'll let you decide whether or not to include it. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:18, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Oh wonderful, thanks so much! You and Richard3120 fight the good fight :)

Song genre, reg The Wallflowers "The Difference"
Hi ResolutionsPerMinute, I saw that you removed the "Rock" genre I had tagged for this song--stating that a nomination for a Rock grammy, does not make the song a rock song. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, could you point me in the direction of some specific guidelines on genre? Being that the Grammy awards are governed by the RIAA, I would imagine that a major nomination would be enough of a governing body to suggest a style of music, particular since none was listed. Please advise me on how I can offer proof of genre. --UnsungHeroWiki (talk) 22:49, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking, and I'd be glad to help. First of all, you should know that when it comes to music genres on Wikipedia, we tend to be exceptionally picky. Genres must be sourced, and they must come from high-quality sources, which means that the sources should be reputable, trustworthy works. A good place to see which sources you should and shouldn't use is at WikiProject Albums/Sources (don't let the name fool you; it applies to songs too). When it comes to awards such as Grammys, they tend to be loose with categorization, and that's why I removed the genre. In that sense, "rock" is no different than "pop" or "dance". What specific style is it? Is it just "rock" or "alternative rock" or "roots rock" or "pop rock" or "jangle pop" or et cetera? See what I mean? Another good rule is that if you can log into the site and change the content (AllMusic, Discogs, 45cat, fan sites), then you should never cite them. That's basically the long and short of it. I'd be happy to answer any more questions you may have, or you may prefer going to the Teahouse to get feedback from more editors. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 23:14, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

@ResolutionsPerMinute Gotcha! I see what you mean about genre. So I need to find a reference to that song's genre from one of the "Generally Reliable Sources" listed? Is it enough if a reliable source (that is on the list) refers to it as a general "rock" track--or do I need to find a source that cites one of the more specific sub-genres you mentioned (alternative rock, roots rock, etc)? From what you're saying I gather that is preferential to have a more descriptive sub-genre cited, but in cases where a citation to that sub-genre can't be found -- is it better to leave the Genre blank than cite such an over-encompassing genre like "Rock"? Thanks for your response and your help! UnsungHeroWiki (talk) 23:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, if you can find a reliable source that just says "rock", it's okay to use, but be sure use common sense. For example, I once saw something where an editor removed "pop" with a reliable reference because it wasn't technically a pop song in any sense (I think it was by the Beatles or U2, but I can't remember exactly). As such, if you see a source calling a Pearl Jam song a "pop" song, it's probably speaking figuratively. It takes a little while to figure out how all this works, but you'll start getting the hang of it if you keep visiting articles and noticing the patterns.


 * By the way, you don't need to ping users on their own talk pages, and to ping, use the template or one of its redirects :).  ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 00:00, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks RPM, I appreciate you taking the time to help me out! I checked out your user page, and those useful links you have there will be helpful for me. My focus on Wiki is to improve some music articles for bands or songs. I'll be sure to tread lightly until I get the hang of things :) All the best! UnsungHeroWiki (talk) 00:22, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Finland chart issue with "Doctor Pressure"
Hi again, I was going through the charts for "Doctor Pressure" and noticed that the Finland template is broken. I attempted to fix it using the manually searched page as a reference but could not replicate it with the template parameters. If you are available, can you see if this can be resolved? Thanks. — Angryjoe1111 (talk) 08:38, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've taken care of the issue. The problem is the slash, and changing it to its url code, %2F, will usually fix the issue. I don't think this works for all punctuation, however, as I can't find a workaround on the Finnish template for apostrophes, which led me to drop the template on What's in It for Me and Can't Get You Out of My Head and cite manually. If coding the punctuation doesn't work, it might just be worth it to add a full citation. You can bring this up at Template talk:Single chart if you want, but I don't know if any fixes can be applied at this time. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 12:01, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

The Anthem - Edit
Hi there- thanks for your edit, I found it very helpful and you had so much better info to add. I have a hard time interpreting instructions on Wikipedia (have also tried using YouTube for this) so I learn most through example (and clearly some trial and error). I used the next song on the album as my example when attempting to bulk it up. See here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girls_%26_Boys_(Good_Charlotte_song) Should the info about movie release be removed there as well? Thank you again. NuttMerg (talk) 19:48, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, this information should be removed since A.) it does not belong in the article's opening sentence and B.) it's totally uncited. I've noticed that there's been a big push lately to trim down IPC content on Wikipedia, so you should be careful with what you add and where it comes from. If you want, you can use "The Anthem" as a template to expand "Girls & Boys", because all the information I added there can be found and sourced easily. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 19:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Soak Up the Sun
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Soak Up the Sun you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 14:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Soak Up the Sun
The article Soak Up the Sun you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Soak Up the Sun for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 20:00, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Soak Up the Sun
The article Soak Up the Sun you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Soak Up the Sun for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Single release date
Regarding this edit of yours, the release date you indicated was Monday, May 1, 2006. Most major-label singles are released on Tuesday in the US. Also, there's one typo in the year, which brings me here to ask for another look at the source material which you cited but which is offline.

For "But It's Better If You Do", RIAA Gold and Platinum report the release date as May 16, a Tuesday. What do you think? Binksternet (talk) 17:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The source is online, but I decided to stop including the urls to World Radio History since several users see them as infringing links. The typo was a goof. As for the date the RIAA provides, that's the US release date. Music Week is a British publication, and it clearly states that the UK physical release date of "But It's Better If You Do" is May 1, 2006. I can add a Release History section to clear up the confusion. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 17:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I respectfully thumb my nose at those who complain about the worldradiohistory.com PDFs linked in your citations. I find them very useful, and I hope you return to using them.
 * Yes, a release history section would help, showing at least the UK and US release dates. Binksternet (talk) 17:53, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with your opinions about the links, but I don't want to risk getting in trouble over them until the confusion is cleared up. I ensure to analyze print sources extremely carefully, but I tend to hit the wrong key from time to time. I've added the Release History section. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 18:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Red Hot Chilli Peppers Australian release dates.
Hi, just letting you know that I have replied to your request on my talk page.Nqr9 (talk) 23:56, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

“Because we want to” Billie Piper
Hi! I admire your work. I have just looked into the Billie Piper page, and was looking for information about the Poppets adverts she did circa 1998 (in TV and as the back cover Ad on Smash Hits) I can’t seem to find anything at all, I’d really love to know if you recall these, maybe I’m making it up? 😅 I’d really love to hear from you, will check back in a week or so 🙂 86.5.243.61 (talk) 20:59, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, this is the first time I'm hearing of Poppets. Regardless, Wikipedia is not a pop culture farm, and any information pertaining to pop culture should be notable enough to warrant a few sentences. A television advert in which the song allegedly appeared does not seem notable enough to include in the article. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 21:09, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

A Quick Question
In several articles, you have removed genres from music templates on the grounds that they aren't sourced, but you never replace them with genres that are sourced. Why? 47.36.25.163 (talk) 02:55, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Because searching for reliable sources takes time, and I have more constructive things to do besides getting into fights with genre warriors. ResPM  (T&#x1F508; &#x1F3B5;C) 03:19, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

User:ResolutionsPerMinute Page Help
@resolutionsperminute Hello! I really want to addd a userbox list with scrolling like yours would you be yas with providing that code? ChromiumOverload (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm having trouble rendering the code correctly, so with your permission, I can copy and paste the code onto your userpage. Is that okay? ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 17:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello! Thanks soo much I just needed permission i pasted it myself! Thanks for the help! :) ChromiumOverload (talk) 17:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I was saying that I could have pasted it onto your userpage myself, but this works too. You're welcome. BTW, you don't have to ping users on their own talk page. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 18:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Your user signature.
Hello! I think your user signiture is really cool and i was wondering if you could post it on my user page so i can make some changes and set it up for myself. ChromiumOverload (talk) 04:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Run Away (I Wanna Be with U) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Run Away (I Wanna Be with U), to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Run Away (I Wanna Be with U) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Using Template:Start date
Hi. I've just noticed that you added release history sections to several Bee Gees song articles last year, and perhaps a variety of other music artists' articles as well, and formatted dates using Template:Start date. Per the template's documentation, it is only for use inside infoboxes and other places where it emits microformats. Otherwise it is a misuse. If you've introduced it to a range of other articles, please consider removing it if you go back to edit those articles and notice it there. There are other templates that can format dates automatically, but this one should not be used outside of infoboxes. Thank you.  Ss  112   06:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I understand. I only did that to avoid making typos. I'll stop. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 11:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of I Wanna Be Bad
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article I Wanna Be Bad you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 10:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of I Wanna Be Bad
The article I Wanna Be Bad you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:I Wanna Be Bad for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of I Wanna Be Bad
The article I Wanna Be Bad you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:I Wanna Be Bad for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kyle Peake -- Kyle Peake (talk) 08:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Imitation of Life (song)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Imitation of Life (song) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 21:40, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Imitation of Life (song)
The article Imitation of Life (song) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Imitation of Life (song) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 22:20, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Imitation of Life (song)
The article Imitation of Life (song) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Imitation of Life (song) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 17:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

"Over and Over"
why couldnt i edit nellys over and over to say that it a r&b track  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipf95 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Because you didn't add a citation. Don't be a genre warrior. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 13:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * how do i do that — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philipf95 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you mean how do you cite sources, see Help:Referencing for beginners. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 19:07, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Len steal my sunshine cover section
I just added content on their covers section when i found out about the song, i was wondering what it needed for it not to be removed. Tennisfanrf (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll keep it in if you re-add it with a reliable citation, but someone else may remove it if they decide that it is not a notable cover. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 23:08, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

There are Template:Single chart and Template:Album chart entries for zobbel.de, yet you're telling users not to use it?
Hi. I just noticed your post on HumanxAnthro's talk page late last month. You do realise that zobbel.de has both a Template:Single chart and Template:Album chart entry citing the site, right? Which certainly seems to indicate some users in the past have considered its data reliable enough to cite. I'm of the opinion that until you lobby to get that removed and zobbel.de placed on the websites to avoid list, it's not a binding consensus nor broadly considered unreliable. As noted in one of the discussions you linked to, it republished data only available to UKChartsPlus subscribers, which is helpful, "personal blog" or not. This discussion has no consensus, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Record_charts/Archive_14#Are_these_charts_reliable? this is the opinion of two editors], which is still not a consensus. I think you should start an RfC or neutrally worded discussion to get a consensus instead of instructing users not to use it before there is one. Thanks.  Ss  112   20:46, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Just because there's a template for it doesn't mean it's good to use as a source. Discogs and YouTube, for starters. I've also encountered a few discrepancies with Zobbel's chart placements: Zobbel says "Who Let the Dogs Out" was the best-selling single of 2000 when numerous other sources list "Can We Fix It?" as the year's best-selling single. To summarize, I don't trust that site, full stop. FYI, I've tried lobbying for multiple decisions in the past but have gotten absolutely nowhere. I'm not too eager to be ignored again, so I'd rather just let someone else take care of it. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 21:12, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Are the templates for Discogs and YouTube you're referring to not the external link templates for them? In regards to the external link templates for those sites, I think it's fine to link to Discogs as a general guide, but not as a citation (as it's user-generated), and links to YouTube videos from official channels are okay in moderation (for example, as a link to a music video to cite its views). I agree that there are some discrepancies, but every database has them. That does seem like a particularly glaring one, though. Tobias or whatever his name is obviously got that one wrong. I've read there apparently are discrepancies between Zobbel's 101–200 figures and whichever other available source there is (I'm not too familiar) from the 1990s, but I'm not sure how widespread the issue is. Either way, the 101–200 of the UK charts isn't an issue anymore as it was discontinued, and Zobbel only extended himself the other way to 1994.  Ss  112   21:25, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * There are still inconsistencies for song that charted within the top 100 that the OCC has archives of. On this page, scroll down to Matchbox 20's entry. Zobbel lists the peak of "Real World" as 119, but OCC says it reached number 92 on the same chart week (31 October 1998). Considering all the other peaks for the band match on both sources, something's not right. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 21:54, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Noted. Will bear its glaring errors in mind going forward, but either way, I haven't cited it very often. Anyway, I wanted to ask, do you often come across song or album articles with a "Year-end charts" heading but not a (matching) "Weekly charts" heading? Not that it's their responsibility to fix whatever else, but I just raised it with HumanxAnthro as I saw they were adding year-end chart positions with that heading but not weekly charts headings for the existing peaks listed on the articles, and said it would be helpful if they could add the weekly charts one too. Do you already do this if you come across examples?  Ss  112   01:52, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you talking about something like what's on "Paradise" where Canada doesn't have a weekly chart for Kaci's version? If so, I've seen that sometimes, particularly recently with Canada. I sometimes add year-end charts if I can't find a weekly chart. "Shadow of the Day" for example, where I added the year-end Eurochart position but couldn't find a weekly peak since the physical issues of Billboard published only the top 15 songs at the time. I didn't check any online archives since I didn't know what the three-letter code for the Eurochart was. I've also added Venezuelan year-end charts for 2005, but I'm unsure if any weekly charts exist for that year. My point is that I try to search for weekly charts if I can. In the case with "Paradise", Kaci's Billboard page doesn't have a Canadian Singles Chart entry, so I'm not sure if a peak can be found unless an archive somehow saved one. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 02:27, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh no, I meant strictly the headings, not the actual charts. Like when there are weekly charts listed and somebody has come along and added a year-end chart table under a sub-heading in the charts section (like so), but the pre-existing weekly charts table doesn't have its own subheading. I meant if you notice(d) this, do you then add a subheading for the weekly charts table (like so)?  Ss  112   02:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the clarification. Yes, I've seen that, and I add a missing header if I come across one, but that hasn't happened a lot since about 80% of the articles they've visited already have year-end charts. I think I've encountered only five of these, give or take. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 02:57, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If you get some time, you might want to check HumanxAnthro's recent edits to find some more. I've already added a few where I've noticed it. Also, first time I've seen the heading "Commercial performance statistics"...  Ss  112   03:04, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Hale and Pace's Oddbods
A California-based live audio engineer called Michael "Bink" Knowles, known as Binksternet on Wikipedia, keeps taking out the Hale and Pace programme Oddbods from their article as he doesn't like the references from the BBC provided...can you find any better info/refs about this show? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.173.56 (talk) 17:47, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
 * TV shows are not my area of expertise. Furthermore, it is not my responsibility to add citations to information you add. It's your responsibility to find better sources. ResPM  (T&#x1F508;&#x1F3B5;C) 17:51, 7 April 2022 (UTC)