User talk:U990467/Archive 1

Choice of music charts in tables
Hey, U990467 (rolls off the tongue, don't it). Your editing has been prolific recently and it's good to see that you're concerned with making so many discography pages easier to read and up to a good standard of formatting, which is always helpful.

I notice on several of them you've been arguing with a couple of fellow editors about whether the charts used in each album and singles table need to be identical: I thought I would point out that WP:DISCOGSTYLE, the set of guidelines that were developed to help resolve disputes like this, states that "there is no set inclusion criteria for which charts should and shouldn't be included": rather, they can be any citeable chart on which the "relative success of the artist on that chart" is greater. Take Ariana Grande's, for example, a page I tidied up recently (not through like of the artist but simply because it was so messy). Her chart peaks in Belgium and Sweden, limited in quantity they may be at the moment, are higher than those registered for Austria and Germany: hence why I chose them, and why the other editor has attempted to revert you back. When she has more charting singles in those territories, perhaps a more informed choice can be made. Again, there is no specific guideline that says all the peaks have to correspond across tables: they do not "have" to as you appear to imply.

In regards to crediting featured appearances on singles as "with Mika", for example, instead of "Mika featuring Ariana Grande", I don't personally understand why shouldn't be the latter since "with" implies both artists were credited as lead artists when this isn't always the case and the artists was clearly defined as featured. You point another editor to "Dilemma"'s listing on Kelly Rowland discography as justification of this, but 1) I believe this to be a mistake since nearly all sources credit it as "Nelly featuring Kelly Rowland" and the two given on the page next to "with Nelly" fail to verify this as valid, and 2) this doesn't prove any point about how featured credits should be handled as it's listed in the lead artist table anyway. Since "Popular Song" and "Bang Bang" credit Mika and Jessie J as lead artists respectively, there's no reason that Grande should be credited as a lead as well when there is no suggestion that she is.

I hope I've explained this well enough, so that the pages you're working on become a little more stable – if you have any more queries, don't hesitate to contact me (since I'm not an Ariana Grande fan in any way you may know something I don't). Enjoy your day! I Am Rufus  &bull;  Conversation is a beautiful thing.  09:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Your edits on Lorde discography
Hello, U990467. I have recently noted your edits on Lorde discography. Although I assume good faith edits, I want to inform you that the sale figures notes for albums are not required for a featured list (check Beyoncé discography for example). Other than that, your edits are highly appreciated. Cheers, Simon (talk) 04:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Ariana Grande discography
Hello, I think that Ireland should be listed, because it was listed there before. Someone came along and removed it and replaced it with another country. (120.144.29.28 (talk) 08:54, 18 August 2014 (UTC))

Hello
I came to tell you that "One Last Time" is not an official single because it's free and wasn't released for sale. I saw your edit here. Also Republic Records said this is not an official single, this is free and wasn't released for sale. Eliluu (talk) 20:12, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I think "One Last Time" is still a single because of the heading. When the link of "One Last Time" goes dead, it will be listed as a promotional single. U990467 (talk) 3:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No, the song isn't a single because Grande never said nothing about it and a "promotional single" is free. On itunes always songs appear in itunes saying "Single" of the heading, never will say "Promotional single". See Promotional recording and stop please. Now, i saw your editions here. Ireland charts has more relevant peaks that Belgium, i think user Sufur and me told you about it, so stop please. Don't revert the edition, if you has a questions, tell me.  Also, see this, section "Promotional singles and you will see You Are What You Are a song by Aguilera on itunes as single because heading, but in Christina Aguilera discography is a promotional single, so again, don't revert the edition of other users, i will be make edits on Grande discography. A promotional single is free, don't revert please. Eliluu (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * PS: i see that you edit on Grande's articles, so Can you update article Ariana Grande, please?, some of her records are here, and . I hope you can update the article :).


 * The position for "One Last Time" is controversial. Maybe you can ask other user like C.Fred and Sufur222. What? U990467 17:31, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I agree with Eliluu. Since the song has been made exclusively available through one retailer for no cost, and will of course be removed from the store after a temporary period (hence my archiving of the link), it is thus a mere promotional single. I Am Rufus   &bull;  Conversation is a beautiful thing.  19:58, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Grande discography reversion
U990467, that WikiProject is no longer valid -- however, there is currently a discussion on that topic on the talk page. You're welcome to join in. --Musdan77 (talk) 05:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

November 2014
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Taylor Swift discography. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. ''Stop removing the UK sales. It does not matter if they change everyday. Wikipedia sticks to the fact explicitly stated in the abiding source'' — Indian: BIO  [ ChitChat  ] 12:31, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Meltdown (Stromae song)
Hi! Source. Answer me on my discussion page. Eurohunter (talk) 12:40, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No. Check below other no singles charted songs. They separate charted songs from singles. Singhle was released with own cover and credited porformner as Stromae with other guest appearance. Eurohunter (talk) 17:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * "Bâtard" and "Humain à l'eau" are charted songs. But they are listed as single on Discographie Stromae. Hung Medien's classification is not entirely reliable. —U990467 (talk) 12:07, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Where you see their? You must chcek "DISCOGRAPHIE" → "DISCOGRAPHIE SINGLES", there are only singles. I think there can be too small but never too much:). "CLASSEMENTS" are all charted songs and singles, "CHANSONS" are charted or no charted songs and singles by artist. You can also check format released and his date. Please answer me on my discusiion page. This is you talking with me no I watching your discussion page in searching new meassages. I know English discussion system is nonsesnse. Eurohunter (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
 * "Ta fête" and "Ave Cesaria" are real singles but they only don't add cover... Check this. I don't have now link for "Ave Cesaria" but I saw that. Eurohunter (talk) 13:49, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * "Bâtard" and "Humain à l'eau" are definitely not singles but "Meltdown" yes. That are facts. Eurohunter (talk) 15:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your edits but I confirmed this is single. Eurohunter (talk) 19:04, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 * You also added Ultratip chart in footnotes. I think that haven't sense because there is Ultratop 50 list. Eurohunter (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Ariana Grande discography
Please do not re-list "Brand New You" as a promotional single without citing a source describing it as such. While your statement that not all "singles" released on iTunes are traditional singles is true, your claim is original research without a source describing the song as anything other than a regular single when the source currently in the article says "single". "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material" (per BURDEN). –Chase (talk / contribs) 03:30, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello
Hi. I undid your good faith edits on the song 'Glory'. The policy you link to says that if a song has won a major award then it is notable, hence the revert. Its Golden Globe win was picked up by newspapers and other sources worldwide, so it has received that type of publicity already, as well as mentions in movie reviews. Wanted to come by and explain, and good to meet you along the Wikipedia paths and park benches. Randy Kryn 15:46 1 February, 2015 (UTC)


 * OK. I will expand that page. Maybe you can help me. U990467 08:23, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Nice work. I did an edit run-through, but you put the page in pretty good shape. If the song wins the Academy Award there will, of course, be more to add. Is a summary of the songs lyrics appropriate on such pages? Maybe a mention of authorship, I think Common wrote the song, and Legend wrote the music, but am not totally sure if Legend had any input on the lyrics. Randy Kryn 11:47 2 February, 2015 (UTC)


 * "Glory" was written by them both and produced by Legend. I'm not sure whether Common wrote the song while Legend wrote the music, either. U990467 13:20, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding 1989 (album)
Despite Wonderland being its own single on iTunes, that's just how any individual song is labeled. Wikipedia conventions only have singles that are intended to be promoted on their own in the infobox. For example, Venus (Lady Gaga song) was released as a digital download, but it was just promotional and did not get a radio adds date or individual promotion (she did a medley with Do What U Want on The X Factor UK, but outside of that it was all album-based promotion), and also did not get a music video (unless you count the G.U.Y. video, which I don't; DWUW, the actual second single from ARTPOP, didn't get a music video either, but that's besides the point. It was supposed to have one, and it seems like it was actually complete then scrapped). Wonderland's case is a bit different as it was released as its own single, but it's only because the song was originally Target-exclusive in the US. Taylor could just release the deluxe version on the US iTunes store, but she probably doesn't want to do that at this point (plus, she probably wants to keep the voice memos as an exclusive). The other deluxe tracks are getting the same treatment.

Taylor didn't even call it a single herself (https://twitter.com/taylorswift13/status/567565826451316736), so I'd say Style is the current single. Wonderland could be the 4th single, but it is not at the moment. Hooky-i-vanisher (talk) 07:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I know that "Wonderland" is not the single main promoted by Big Machine now. You took Gaga's "Venus" for example, but "Venus" has been officially announced to be a promotional single (http://www.mtv.com/news/1716187/lady-gaga-venus-preview-artpop/). "Wonderland" has its clear digital download single release. No source calls it a promotional single. So we can just list it as a single. In order not to fail WP:NOR. You can see "No Better" by Lorde. —U990467 16:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Glory (Common and John Legend song)
Hi. I notice that a few weeks ago, you added a secondary photo to the Glory (Common and John Legend song) article of Common and his mother? I'm guessing that you just saw it in the Common article and copied it, but I figured I'd let you know that there's an entire Commons category of pix from that event, including a number that feature only Common and not his mother, since I think a photo of Common without his mother would be more appropriate to the article and section in question. For example, if you think a shot of Common writing something in a book is a good choice there's that is just of him. Otherwise, we can just create a cropped version of the one you used. What do you think? Nightscream (talk) 23:56, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe this one is better. —U990467 23:23, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Wonderland
The bonus tracks from the physical album is already available for purchase in the iTunes store. It may have charted the billboard hot 100 but it is not an "official" single. Shake It Off, Blank Space and Style are the only released singles from 1989. I believe there has been a misinterpretation on that part. I already addressed that to the main page and the 1989 article admins. Please check your facts. I will be removing it again. Please don't "undo" it. Thank you. Mat 1997 (talk) 21:11, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * It has already been discussed. See before. —U990467 19:21, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Ariana Grande
Austrian parade currently more important with the Belgian parade and parade that will change the Belgian will be just the time I return the parade Belgian moment I put the Austrian parade, okay? Shooky123 talk 15:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * What is your definition of "Important"? The ranking of Global music industry market share data will change every year. But in mix figure, both Belgium and Austria have similar size music market. That is indelible truth. Belgium has more mature entertainment association (BEA) than Austria. Ultratop is also one of the most typical record charts in Europe. Grande also has more songs charted in Belgium (11) than in Austria (5). —U990467 21:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Austria currently ranks higher than Belgium but you're so you follow Belgium and Austria would be OK then I will leave Belgium, Good day! Shooky123 talk 16:59, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Ariana Grande on the Main Page
Hi! I just wanted to let you know that List of awards and nominations received by Ariana Grande – a list that you created and I took towards featured list – is currently on the Main Page of Wikipedia as Today's featured list. Cheers. -- FrankBoy   CHITCHAT 00:30, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Focus Edits
Hi, I noticed that you keep deleting the focus video I'm putting in the infobox on the Focus (song) page, I've already replaced it twice so I'll do it again but can you please tell me why you keep deleting it so I can understand. Thank you!

stephilippou


 * We actually don't need to put the video in the infobox. You can see her previous singles' page (take Problem (Ariana Grande song) for example). We can show both music video and lyric video at the same time in External links ,but we can't do that in the infobox. You can also refer to other good article nominations (Chandelier (Sia song) and Blank Space).


 * Ok Thanks for responding I understand your reasoning now!
 * Stephilippou (talk) 04:27, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Focus dispute
I opened a discussion at Talk:Ariana Grande discography, please respond. By the way I looked at the Hillary Duff article, that song remained the lead single of the album, unlike "Focus". 90.192.207.49 (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I can list "Focus" as the lead single on the album page if I do. Source:http://www.directlyrics.com/world-premiere-ariana-grande-dangerous-woman-full-audio-review-news.html U990467 (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It is no longer the lead single, it has been cut from all but the Japanese edition of the album. Reply further at Talk:Ariana Grande discography.
 * It was listed as a pre-order single on the album page. Source: http://itunesbuzz.com/ariana-grande-dangerous-woman-japanese-version-2-pre-order-singles-itunes-plus-aac-m4a-2016/ U990467 (talk) 16:47, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

90.192.207.49 (talk) 17:13, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

File:Out of the Woods promotional.png listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Out of the Woods promotional.png, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. — I B  [ Poke  ] 14:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Stefan2 (talk) 14:50, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Files for discussion
See Files for discussion/2016 May 2. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:51, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Stefan2 (talk) 23:03, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

!voting & closing AFDs
Hi U990467, I've reverted your AFD close at Articles for deletion/Take Me Away (Avril Lavigne song) as you cannot !vote and then close it, Plus "Keep and Merge" isn't a valid outcome - It's either kept or merged,

I would advise that you read WP:BADNAC and WP:CLOSEAFD,

Repeating this could lead to a block so as I say it'd be best if you read those,

Cheers, – Davey 2010 Talk 15:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

So how to close the discussion? It has been a week and seems that no one cares about that page. If you are asking my opinion, it's Keep. How about you? U990467 (talk) 15:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)


 * If you don't know the first thing about closing them then needless to say you shouldn't be closing them and I woud strongly recommend you don't close any more not until you have a basic understanding of it, Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 16:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

May 2016
It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on a biased choice of users' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote—in order to influence Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Take Me Away (Avril Lavigne song). While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large. Thank you. Chase (talk &#124; contributions) 21:58, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Fifth Harmony discography
I don't want to get into a debate about which chart columns to include, but Spain is a bigger market than Belgium, so I reinstated that chart. But, having just remembered that WP:DISCOGSTYLE says "There is no set inclusion criteria for which charts should and shouldn't be included, but a good rule of thumb is to go by the relative success of the artist on that chart", and upon discovering that an hour after my edits, a user named reinstated the New Zealand chart, market size really shouldn't matter as much. Fifth Harmony have probably sold more even in a slightly smaller market like New Zealand than Denmark, considering their multiple top 40 hits there and one number one compared to just one top 40 hit in Denmark.  Ss 112  16:08, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Dangerous Woman Tour
Per WP:BRD, don't edit war, use the talk page. - SchroCat (talk) 17:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Dont push this so that I have to take you to ANI: use the flaming talk page or use AfD. – SchroCat (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Fail WP:Notability and WP:SIZESPLIT. Only two references (one of them is a fan site) and most of the information can be found on the album page. U990467 (talk) 17:53, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * You are speaking bollocks. Of course it's notable (did you bother to do any actual searches to find sources?) Secondly, you misunderstand SIZESPLIT (and have possibly done so deliberately. As you obviously haven't bothered to look at it, SIZESPLIT states "If an article or list has remained this size for over a couple of months". (Emphasis added) it's an interesting concept you have of what constitutes "a couple of months". I'll not sink edit war, as you have, but you really should have tried AfD, not continued to redirect the page. As a formal warning you are at WP:3RR, so any further reversions of the page will be filed with the administrators. – SchroCat (talk) 18:03, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I agree, U990467, that you should not edit war. Per WP:BRD, you should have opened a discussion on the article's Talk page.  If you had made a persuasive case there, other editors would agree with you.  Instead, you have been edit-warring.  That is very bad behavior.  WP:BRD is the correct way to resolve editorial disputes. Please stop edit-warring. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:21, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dangerous Woman (album)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dangerous Woman (album) 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 Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dangerous Woman (album)
The article Dangerous Woman (album) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Dangerous Woman (album) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cartoon network freak -- Cartoon network freak (talk) 15:41, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Taylor Swift discography
We don't need encoded line breaks most of the time to separate titles on different lines, as the title column has a defined width at the top (style="width:17em;"). It doesn't significantly "elongate" or affect any other column, and I don't see why that even matters. Also, when you're reverted, please don't return to restore your edits. That's disruptive. If you truly feel it needs to have a line break, you can open a discussion. Thank you.  Ss 112  21:03, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Taylor Swift discography
It appears you attempted to revert me on Taylor Swift discography, but failed due to intermediate edits and/or the fact that I never added a width for the album column. I really don't think it's necessary. Not every column needs a defined width.  Ss 112  20:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Discography edits
Hi. Can you please stop adding line breaks to titles, especially if you're piping a link in order just to add  somewhere in the title? You did this again, this time on Camila Cabello discography, and it is of really no benefit to the page. So columns might widen a little without them...so? I don't think that matters. As long as they're not wider than the page, it's fine. If the page inserts a line break somewhere, it happens. We don't need to add them ourselves most of the time. Only in rare cases would I agree it really warrants inclusion. I informed after I reverted you on Taylor Swift discography for it, and they concurred that it was pointless (and pointed out it may violate WP:NOPIPE). In cases like this, please don't revert somebody again if you're reverted, indirectly or directly. It would be best to discuss if it really bothers you that columns widen a little without a line break. Thank you.  Ss 112  16:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)