User talk:UniquelyJames

May 2017
Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Strength of a Woman (album). This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Ss 112  21:59, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Stop hand nuvola.svg You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Strength of a Woman (album).   Ss  112  22:23, 17 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Stop hand nuvola.svg Your recent editing history at Strength of a Woman (album) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.  Ss 112  23:05, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

@ Ss 112  I made sure there was proper citation for my edits. Every time I add correct information to the Target Bonus Tracks edition of Mary J. Blige's "Strength of a Woman," you keep removing it. And now, you are reverting my changes back to the standard 14 track edition, which IS NOT even the Target Bonus Track version. You haven't cited that at all. You are just being rude and disrespectful for no reason.--UniquelyJames (talk) 13:24, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You clearly did not look at the article. The Target track listing has not been removed; I reformatted your Visual Edit-based contribution, which added information in an undesirable horizontal format with no spaces. You then added writers, which are not covered by the source used at the top of the Target bonus track section. I then reverted this; you persisted and were reverted, then reported. So therefore, you did add unsourced content. I saw no tags added in your edit. Do not restore unsourced material and do not edit war on pages when you've been reverted.  Ss 112  13:32, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * "Rude and disrespectful" how? By reverting you for adding unsourced content? That's Wikipedia policy and you should be reverted for doing so. If you don't like it, that's not my problem. Read WP:Verifiability. It's one of the basics of editing here. Please keep your replies to one page. There is no need to write on my talk page if you've already replied here once.  Ss 112  13:36, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @ Ss 112  I did provide appropriate citation for my source. You can hover over the number 8 in the brackets on that page. More specifically, it was to this link (https://www.discogs.com/Mary-J-Blige-Strength-Of-A-Woman/release/10223316). I only added the writers and producers to that section because you continuously removed my edits. I was only trying to add the writers and producers from what I saw you type in from the standard edition. I was under the assumption you would see these details and stop removing it. --UniquelyJames (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You changed one source in one edit here from Target's website to Discogs. That's the only edit in which you provided a citation. You claimed "citation provided" here when you did not add a new citation with that edit. You then claimed "re-added [...] with appropriate citation" here, when you did no such thing with that particular edit. "I only added the writers and producers to that section because you continuously removed my edits"? You only added writers and producers after I reformatted the section. Also, I did not write the article or provide the original track listing, so claiming that you "saw [me] type [it] in" is incorrect, because I did no such thing to the standard edition listing. The Discogs source does not provide writing credits for the two bonus tracks, so that should not be added unless you can provide a source that states who wrote them. I don't know what else you have to say.  Ss  112  13:56, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @ Ss 112  I am not trying to be in an editing war, so I'll just let you do whatever you'll do with the page. The reverts that kept being done were not correct.  I was only trying to fix them.  My edits were being removed even before I added the writers and producers to the Target Bonus Tracks tab (which you say weren't on the source I cited). I apologize for saying YOU added information to the standard edition track listing when it was someone else. That wasn't the point I was making. I was simply stating I referenced the writers and producers from the standard track listing for the "Target Bonus Tracks" track listing since the tracks with the exact same name will have the same writers and producers. This was a ridiculous experience and I see how Wikipedia has false information on it. I did not expect experience such aggression over this. Edit the page how you want,  even if it isn't correct. --UniquelyJames (talk) 14:09, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The 16-track Target edition is there now, because the Discogs reference verifies it; I restored the two missing tracks after realising I mistakenly removed them after re-formatting the section. I'm not sure we need to list all the writers and producers again when they're listed in the standard edition section directly above. We would really only need the writers and producers of the bonus tracks, but the source at the moment for that section does not say who did write or produce them. Also, you don't need to keep copying my signature to reply to me; I add talk pages to my watchlist.  Ss 112  14:18, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * You don't have to list them all out if you don't want to. I was only re-listing the tracks out because Track #6 and Track #15 are inserted into the Standard Edition track listing, which reorders the numbers. I figured people would have wanted to see the breakdown of the songs in that order. But it doesn't matter. You can edit it how you want to. UniquelyJames (talk) 15:48, 18 May 2017 (UTC)