User talk:Yvesnimmo/Archive 4

Woot
The DYK finally went through today in a slightly modified form. =) If we still really need the Under Construction tag after 8:00 p.m. EDT (which is now midnite Wiki time/GMT due to our earlier DST settings here), then we can put it back then...but not sure it's really needed. =)  CycloneGU (talk) 18:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

On an unrelated question, I just tried looking up 12 Gauge as a separate link to redirect to Emerson Drive, who used to go by the former name as seen in their discography. It links to something about shotguns (predictably) and I can't figure out the best way to make the reference with the proper name as a band name; it doesn't seem to fit in that disambiguation. Do you think it's proper to change that redirect since it is a proper name used in music in the past? Interestingly, 12 gauge (no capital) is a DAB page. I'm thinking of moving 12 gauge to 12 Gauge (disambiguation), then redirecting 12 gauge to the article that 12 Gauge currently redirects to, thus freeing the use of the proper noun version to go to the rapper on the disambiguation page by default (he existed as an artist before Emerson Drive used the name), with an extra note at the top of that page, or maybe even just make both 12 Gauge and 12 gauge set up so one links to the other and it's a disambiguation by default...well, lots of moving I'm thinking about. Since Emerson Drive is so popular, I could just redirect 12 Gauge there as well. =) CycloneGU (talk) 19:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, 12 Gauge should redirect to the same page as 12 gauge does; it currently redirects to Gauge (bore diameter), which is the first link on the 12 gauge disambiguation page. Then anyone searching both 12 gauge and 12 Gauge can take their pick of what they are searching for. And yay for the DYK! :) Yves (talk) 22:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * So to read this correctly, you agree with making both redirect to a disambiguation page, which should be under 12 gauge by default, not at 12 gauge (disambiguation) (which actually redirects), and not defaulting either to a specific article by default (either about shotguns or music). Is this correct?
 * On a humorous note, I closed an AfD today. chortle CycloneGU (talk) 22:42, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is correct. And how is that funny? Shouldn't that be a good thing? :P Yves (talk) 23:07, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I am chortling about it because the AfD in question is a Glee episode that airs in exactly 10 days and 45 minutes on the east coast of North America. It got 8 Keep votes instantly (within 12 hours).  I could be seen as a conflict of interest having helped get Glee (season 1) to FL status, but I quoted WP:SNOW in closing.  Hence my chortle. =D  CycloneGU (talk) 23:15, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean "Born This Way"? Isn't that supposed to air in, like, four weeks? Glee doesn't return until next month, eh? Yves (talk) 23:20, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * ...what? They took ANOTHER break?  CycloneGU (talk) 23:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, you didn't know? Yeah, a four-week break, I believe. Tuesday's episode is a rerun of "The Substitute", and next Tuesday's is a rerun of "Special Education", as per the FoxFlash website. Yves (talk) 23:32, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I hope they reair "Comeback". I missed that one. =O  CycloneGU (talk) 00:50, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Per this which you sourced in the Glee discography article (for the Glee Warblers album), I have read the article in question. I do notice that they refer to the album as having two exclusive tracks. Therefore, I think it is safe to make the assumption that track 11, by all logical inferences both in the article and otherwise, must be from Night of Neglect. I think we can also make the assumption, one which the Glee Wikia does but still probably using bad sources, that Kurt is definitely returning to New Directions in this episode; since that track, "Somewhere Only We'll Know", is the final Warblers performance on the series (as again per the article the other tracks are special album-only ones, it makes sense that this would be a goodbye song for Kurt. It also ties the album release date in with the episode airing date quite nicely since the last track will then be available (granted it will hurt single sales from they who haven't been collecting those thus far).

Even if we can't source the story part yet, we can definitely source that song being used in the ep. I can't confirm any of the other ones from the Wikia (though I am looking forward to Sunshine singing All By Myself, a VERY difficult song to sing) and we thus won't know for sure until the Friday preview gets posted the week before the next episode. But the one song, I believe, is confirmed. I'm adding it with a source note, and we can modify it later. I'll let you make the call regarding adding that small story element.

In other news, I am surprised Glee only made it to #9, and that that isn't the Rachel solo! CycloneGU (talk) 02:33, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm I don't think we should assume the song will be used in "Night of Neglect", although it's probably very likely. And you are correct; the Keane cover will be used on the series, as reported by various sources. Yves (talk) 02:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I did just locate this among the Wikia sources sourcing Kurt returning to ND. Not sure it can tie it to this episode, but he did let it slip and later realized.  I love what he says after the crowd gasps. =D  This appears to be more blog than evidence, though...but apparently they posted (or are posting) a follow-up story with more actual info.  Also, regarding the Keane cover, it's a goodbye song to Kurt.  There is no logical way the song cannot be used in this episode, I feel, since Kurt is apparently already back at McKinley for Born This Way.  I've notated my annotation carefully until a better source is available.  CycloneGU (talk) 02:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I knew about that, but I don't know if it's happening in "Night of Neglect" or in "Born This Way". Yves (talk) 02:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I have to think about this. Even by Wikia's bad sourcing standards, using bad sources, even their bad source doesn't confirm his exact return in that episode.  I am going by logic, since it was previously assumed he'd return with Blaine right after Regionals (now Blaine is trying out in Season 3).  I also find the news about finding a lover for Mercedes from the reality series to be of interest.  Though I laugh that Ryan Murphy is terrified of Twitter.  If I start tweeting more frequently, it'll be because of that account.  Let me think about the song notation, since the release date of the album is, after all, the day that "Born This Way" airs.  CycloneGU (talk) 02:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Further, I am scared of a "Friday" cover. I only heard of Rebecca Black recently (and she was on Leno last nite!).  CycloneGU (talk) 02:59, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hahahahaha! That was the one where she was lip syncing, right? It would actually make my day if Glee covered the song. And I don't blame Murphy for feeling that way; people on Twitter really be opinionated. Yves (talk) 03:04, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't research the video, but there is no way she sang along in the taping of the fractured bits. Absolutely none.
 * I've also reverted the additions I made. After some thought, I decided the song could air to start off the "Born This Way" episode.  I stick with track 11 being a goodbye track to Kurt, and it has to be either in that episode or VERY early in the next one.  However, even the bad sources don't explicitly confirm the details, and as such I've had the balls to remove the information myself from the Wikia article. =D  CycloneGU (talk) 03:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha nice. "Somewhere Only We Know" is a sad but good song, and I'm excited to hear it. I think you may be right in that it will be used as a farewell song. :) Yves (talk) 03:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Wow Yves, just wanted to say fantastic start to Glee: The Music Presents The Warblers, really excellent work! Frickative  21:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yay: thank you very much! Although this canary here could never replace Pavarotti. :P Yves (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

New News
Doing as a new section, if you choose to merge with the other so be it.

Apparently the Keane song is covered for Night of Neglect. I still am not sure if the source qualifies here, but since it says it specifically, I'm not going to hassle the Glee Wikia page any further on the subject (even though the other sources linked to the information say nothing on the matter). If it's good enough, I'll add it based on my previous edit using this in its place.

In other news, I looked at a poll for whether "Friday" should be covered by Glee. About 70% say they'd rather "follow Van Gogh’s lead and lose an ear or two". =D The latest threat? The Warblers cover it. CycloneGU (talk) 23:43, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Not reliable because it's a wiki. I remember my physics teacher in high school used it to make a page to upload notes and whatnot, so that source probably can't be used. :\ Yves (talk) 18:58, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looked like a blog to me as well. But still of interest.  However, at least the song preview site can confirm the songs for us on the Friday beforehand since it likes to release that information.  CycloneGU (talk) 23:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Help with editor?
I see you recently reverted edits by Markelmitchell. However, his edits were not of good faith and he has been very disruptive in making similar edits to numerous other album articles' track listing sections. I've tried to take action the straight way by Wikipedia, but the editor has yet to respond to any warnings regarding his edits. I've made complaints against him through AVI, ANI and for 3RR. Another editor has been helpful in trying to contain this user, blocking him for a 24-hour period, but the user continues on a daily basis with disruptive edits, but not disruptive enough to be viewed as vandalism. Would you like to help in any way you can, whether its adding to the posts I've made or dealing with the user directly? Dan56 (talk) 02:52, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Talk page stalker
 * I have noted the discussion with the other user. It appears a number of the edits you are concerned about are cases of "and" vs. "&", or unexplained removal of a period.  While that in itself is not disruptive, being asked to comment and not saying a word suggests he will mould the encyclopeida how he sees fit and he expects us to accept it.  The editing in itself is not disruptive in most cases.  Reviewing his most recent edits:
 * this one seems the most likely to be adding unsourced information in
 * he merely changed a capital to a small letter here
 * he added pound signs here (Interlude 1 -> Interlude #1 for instance)
 * While these themselves are not destructive, if he is edit warring over this change, it is. And what does the back of the CD say regarding how it's written; does the pound sign show, for instance?  Personally, I would add the pound signs too, but if it's not on the back cover it probably doesn't belong there.  Is there any specific edit that makes his editing entirely destructive, however?  CycloneGU (talk) 14:17, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Moment 4 Life Cover
I am not sure why this cover is constantly being removed. Sometimes it is replaced with copies of the cover, but it is always removed. See. If I am not incorrect, this is the official cover for the song. -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  16:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The BBC, while a reliable source, is not a good source for single covers. The reason they have it is because they need a cover for illustrative purposes only. For example, see The Black Eyed Peas' "Just Can't Get Enough", whose official cover is different from the one the BBC displays. Also, take a look at My Chemical Romance's "Planetary (Go!)": the cover they use is that of the album and not of the single. The one you have linked me to can be traced to Coverlandia in November 2010. There is another Nicki Minaj song on that page, "Girls Fall Like Dominoes", in which they use a fan-made cover, as well. As far as I know, there is no official cover for the song as it has never been released as a single separately for purchase, either digitally or physically. Yves (talk) 16:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Glee: The Music Presents The Warblers
— HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:05, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Re: Nicki Chrono
Urg! Its such a mess.... she's popping singles almost as fast as Diddy and his choo-choo train (seven singles and ten official videos o_O). Hmm... I here what you're saying but Infobox#Single mentions nothing of the sort. What you linked me to what Infobox album though i guess what your suggesting and what I did both make sense. &mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  [talk]  02:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Billboard charts Q
Hi Yves, showing my ignorance of all things chart-related once again. I'm a bit lost trying to follow WP:USCHARTS. Does it only apply to singles, and if so, how do I know which charts are kosher for albums? Basically, I'm trying to write this. I noticed you took Digital Albums out of the Sara Ramírez EP and left Independent Albums, and I'm pretty sure the Soundtrack chart is mentioned in some of the Glee albums so I included that too, but is that okay? Heh, I can barely follow the UK Top 40, so the 700 US charts just baffle me :) Frickative  15:05, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi there. I actually wrote the majority of WP:USCHARTS, we didn't specifically write much about the album charts as there was never a specific issue. I guess I should explain though what i would suggest. The charts presently listed are perfectly fine. If you use a chart table as seen at WP:Record charts (with the charts already listed), then you can use the digital chart in prose. Otherwise the charts used so far suffice. &mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  [talk]  15:18, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * so correct me if I'm wrong, Lil. Hey! It does apply for albums, as well, and I suppose it's not exactly the easiest to follow for those unfamiliar with US charts. [ I'll start a discussion on the talk page for its addition right now. Maybe I'll discuss this with Lil first.] Basically, the Digital Albums chart is a component chart of the Billboard 200, and it is not used when charting on the Billboard 200 (the principal chart) has occurred. [This is analogous to the Hot Digital Songs chart for the Billboard Hot 100.] Genre-specific charts are allowed to a certain extent, as it shows performance across various "playing fields", so you'll see charts for R&B, country, soundtrack, Mexican, Christian, etc. To keep it simple, the main ones to remember for album charts are: 1) Digital Albums charting is irrelevant when Billboard 200 charting has occurred; and 2) the same thing applies for Heatseekers Albums, as this is a chart for albums from artists who have never appeared on the Billboard 200. I saw that you were working on the article&mdash;you're doing a stellar job, as usual! :) Yves (talk) 15:20, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you both very much! That was very helpful, and the genre-specific vs. component chart rule of thumb should be easy to apply and remember. Am I right in thinking that, as the charting information is currently limited and easily conveyed in prose, a table isn't really necessary unless it ends up charting in multiple territories? Frickative  16:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yup its an editorial decision. &mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  [talk]  17:04, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That's correct. Generally, I don't add tables unless there are more than four or five charts, but I think users have come to expect tables for anything that charts, so it becomes perfunctorily added. Yves (talk) 17:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot to you both! I'm really sorry to keep bombarding you with questions, but I have just one more - the Irish peak for "The Story" was added to the article for Sara's EP, and the reference gives the label for the track as Atrevida. Can it be assumed, then, that sales there have been based on just the EP track, rather than a combination of that and the Grey's album track, or is there no way of knowing? Frickative  20:37, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * No, that's okay: I'm happy to answer any questions so ask away! I believe you could say that, as the Grey's album hasn't been released (yet?) in the Republic of Ireland (as far as I can see: it's not being sold in the Irish iTunes Store, which seems to be the only retailer selling the album). Yves (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ack, I checked earlier to make sure the Irish broadcasts were in sync with the US, but it never occurred to me to check the album had actually been released there. Super illogical thinking today. Thanks again! Frickative  02:14, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * My pleasure! :) Yves (talk) 05:50, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Get Sleazy
Can you revert and watchlist, violation of MOS, OR, and other issues. - (CK)Lakeshade  -  talk2me  - 19:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm reluctant to revert the entire thing, as there are some constructive edits within the massive edits. :| Yves (talk) 19:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Everything he added is incorrect. Facebook and twitter as sources and external links? MOS violations (too many to count). Everything he added to "Notes" is not in the references, not a single source says the performances have to do with Get Sleazy Tour. It needs reverted. - (CK)Lakeshade  -  talk2me  - 19:57, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I do disagree with the ELs, and I see you've already removed them. Yves (talk) 20:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

BL, BC
Good point, my copy of the album doesn't have a comma on it. I just went with the name that was in the original Lady Killer article. I've changed it! :-)--mikomango (talk) 04:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Megan McCauley deletion.
Chime in.  I Help, When I Can. [12] 02:03, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in a pilot study
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only '''5 minutes’’’. cooldenny (talk) 18:27, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Justice?
I saw your edit on this and I was shocked that you liked Justice. Anyway, the page is in desperate need of help so I feel better now that I know there is a high profile editor watching it. It is one of the first things on my list to work on, but I'm not sure I will have much time for it. -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  18:23, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure! I will try my best to work on the page and if not I will get some sites. I love the commercial and the song and I'm surprised a like another Justice song other than D.A.N.C.E., since I thought Justice was just another artist that I only like one song by. Guess I need to listen to them more. I'm a bit too picky. :P -- ĈÞЯİŒ  1ооо  18:29, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Volume 5 UK Debut
Regarding this edit, the source may need updating (source 17). I removed the peak of 4 as added by someone else yesterday because the chart - dated for the 16th - doesn't show Volume 5 at all. I was about to remove it again, but thought I'd point out the source being used for it, which is this. CycloneGU (talk) 06:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, but I attached a source from The OCC: it's currently source 28 on the page. Yves (talk) 07:30, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj
You keep removing the charts from Girls Fall Like Dominoes, when infact the single has charted - as the [offical charts states so]! --92.17.33.163 (talk) 08:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You did not provide a reference. Yves (talk) 18:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for A Night of Neglect
Thanks for this article Victuallers (talk) 00:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

About correlation does not imply causation on Nobody's Perfect (Jessie J song)
Well, the case obviously implies a situation of correlation does not imply causation, however I wouldn't add something without thinking about it before, what would cause an album that on previous week was outside the top10 UK album charts to jump back to the 9th position, then next week, to the 5th, then somewhat slip to the 7th? Obviously a promotional move, in this case, the release of the single. Regards Eduemoni↑talk↓  05:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * In any case, we cannot use original research and the source does not mention anything of the kind. The article is about the single and not the album. Thinking about it, I'm doubting if this is the case: the article mentions the video was released on the day the album rose the chart&mdash;I am not certain what the cutoff for tracking is with The Official Charts Company, but I doubt less than one day of sales of a song would lead to an increase in sales of an entire album. Yves (talk) 05:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * 70% of the sales counted out for a debut or increase in any charts are rationed in on day, but whatever, I'm going to RfC for it. =)
 * Regards Ed</b><b style="color:#C13">ue</b><b style="color:#D35">mo</b><b style="color:#E57">ni</b><sup style='color:green'>↑talk↓ </b> 06:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * So where does the other 30% come from? The other days? Yves (talk) 06:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

List of songs in Glee (season 1)
Hey! I've been fixing up the references for the above list today, but I've run into a problem with the singles column. I'd assumed that we could substitute in an Amazon reference for the defunct iTunes Store pages, but it seems they also list the EP tracks that weren't singles. The Fox and E4 lists just show which ones are available on iTunes, period. Can you think of any other source we could use for verification? If not, what do you think of removing the column? I'm not that keen on the idea, but thinking ahead to eventual FL nomination, I guess it would be necessary if it can't be sourced. I do like that it immediately differentiates between the "main" songs and the lesser ones, but playing with the sort function, it looks as though - with the exception of the four Volume 1 bonus tracks - the non-singles all directly correlate with the N/A field in the "Album" column anyway, so that wouldn't be lost. Frickative 23:15, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm what do you mean when you say Amazon lists the EP tracks that aren't singles? I think I know what you mean, though. Amazon doesn't mark singles as singles. Instead, you have to look at a song's album. For example, take "Hey, Soul Sister". This is the "album page" for the single, and if you click on the track, you'll be taken to this, which is the "song page" for the single. Alternatively, one can purchase the song from the track listing of Glee: The Music Presents the Warblers: the album page is located here while the song page for the album track is located here, when you click on the song from the album page. You can also tell from which "album" you are purchasing a track off of from its artwork: it either has the signature hand (season 1) or slushie (season 2) while the album ones are the album covers. For an EP track that wasn't released as single, for example "Bohemian Rhapsody", you will see that there is only one way you can purchase it from Amazon, and that is through the EP (album page here, song page here). Compare that with "Vogue", which can be purchased both as a single (album, song) or from the EP (album, song). Is this what you meant? Yves (talk) 01:53, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, that's exactly what I meant! I'd added the Amazon MP3 Downloads page from the season two list, but when I sorted alphabetically and saw that it included "Any Way You Want It", I assumed that it had all the songs regardless of single status, and was thus useless. Now that you've explained, I see quite clearly that two versions are listed there for those that were both album tracks and singles, and just one for the ones that were album-exclusives. Marvellous. It seems obvious now that I understand, but I guess I didn't know how to interpret what I was looking at before. Thank you!
 * Btw, it probably won't be until mid-May at the earliest, but I'm aiming to have the list ready for Peer Review in the not-too-distant future, with an eye toward an FL nom sometime after the end of season. Is that okay with you? You've contributed just as much as I have to it, so naturally would share credit, and if it's a bad time then I'm more than happy to hold off. Frickative  02:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course: sounds like a plan! By the way, I see that some iTunes Stores have the season 1 singles still present, in addition to the season 2 ones (e.g., France, Mexico, New Zealand), so if you ever wanted to use those, you still could, if that's easier. There's also another online retailer called 7digital which I'm not too familiar with, but it has all the singles neatly lined up.
 * I wanted to ask something about the two KC and the Sunshine Band songs covered on Glee by Schue with his glee club in '93. I looked through dozens of pages of Google searches for a reliable source, but I didn't find one. Quickly browsing for one now, there still doesn't seem to be. Thoughts? I was thinking perhaps the end credits of the pilot have the song licensing information (with writers and whatnot), but I don't currently have access to a DVD. Do you think it could be listed there? Yves (talk) 03:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the links! I haven't heard of 7digital before, but it might well be worth slipping in as a general ref, given that it lays everything out so simply. Those KC tracks are such a pain! I'm running up against problems for quite a few of the early numbers, but at least there are sources verifying that they exist. The DVD credits are a good thought - I don't have access either, but I'll try asking around a few friends who might have it and see if they wouldn't mind checking. Frickative  15:50, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Girls Fall
Didn't realize you changed it before, sorry about that. I was under the impression "like" is always capitalized in a title. ℥nding · start 04:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Words like that mess me up so much. I've moved it back. Thanks for enlightening me. :) ℥nding · start 04:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

The_Black_Eyed_Peas
Just to note - in case you don't see it - User_talk:Chzz.

If I can help w/ anything else, any time... you know where I am. Cheers,  Chzz  ► 00:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Pitbull 'Give Me Everything'
Apologies for adding that chart position, it doesn't occur to me sometimes that the reference I provide doesn't become active until 19:00 tonight. Cheers for pointing it out though, will be sure to re-add the reference after the OCC make it avaliable. AlligatorSky (talk) 17:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback on Template talk:Cody Simpson
OSbornarfcontribs. 14:50, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Roll It
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rihanna_discography#Roll_It Winstonwolf33 (talk) 18:03, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Volume 6 Art
Oh, come on Amazon, iTunes, post this already...I want a confirmation of this cover art I picked up from antcomic.com that even tommy2.net hasn't posted yet. That is much different and much awesome if it's confirmed eventually, and fits perfectly since they're in New York for Nationals. Also, tommy2.net does have a tracklist, very recent post on the content page, but since we can't use them as a source I think it's premature you're putting it in the discography. CycloneGU (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well the source I'm using is TV Squad, which I referenced in the article. You think I should remove it, then? Yves (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Is it considered a valid, reliable source? I haven't heard of it, but if it's reliable, I say we can create the soundtrack article itself off of it.  CycloneGU (talk) 22:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * According to this discussion, it is. Regardless of its reliability, we can't really create an article yet because an album has to pass WP:NALBUMS in addition to WP:GNG. One or two reliable sources doesn't really count as "significant coverage" and most album articles created like that are quickly redirected, from what I've witnessed. I'd prefer to wait until a press release from FOX/Columbia, which should be not far away if the album is being released in less than a month: reliable sources pick that up pretty quickly (such was the case for Volume 5). Yves (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * How's this for a source? CycloneGU (talk) 02:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. I'd still like to wait for some official confirmation on its release date. I'm keeping an eye out on http://www.gleethemusic.com, though! BTW, have you heard the Fleetwood Mac covers? They're up on the site! Yves (talk) 18:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * So the press release came out today, and I've started the article. There's surprisingly little information available, as only a few of the songs have been performed / released / aired / whatever. Feel free to expand! The album is also on Amazon and the iTunes Store. Waiting for Allmusic now. Yves (talk) 02:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Need an Opinion
I know, in principle, that you generally wait to create an article for Glee albums until a tracklist and a store reference (Amazon, iTunes) is available. Can you please tell me, in your opinion, whether Dream With Me should exist? I have used the same principle there and it has just been nominated for deletion.

Your opinion either way is welcome (i.e. this is not a canvassing attempt). CycloneGU (talk) 17:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe the albums meets notability (WP:NALBUMS) at this time. There's surprisingly little coverage of it online; I click on many links expecting to see something about the album, but it turns out it's discussing her TV concert. :S I'm not sure how much background information exists online, but I think whatever information is out there could go on the artist's article. Yves (talk) 18:23, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Cheers. I've asked Frickative for her opinion, too.  I would think that information about the concert would actually belong in an album article as well, in fact, since the concert (on PBS June 14 I think, or something like that) is meant to promote the album, so maybe I can put that in the article and see where that takes it.  CycloneGU (talk) 18:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The articles on the concert don't seem to talk about the concert, though, which I was surprised about. Yves (talk) 02:49, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

PinkFunhouse13
Something has to be done. The user has readded the special edition cover, YET AGAIN on Born This Way. ℥nding · start 02:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:BritneyBrittany.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:BritneyBrittany.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. C T J F 8 3 20:26, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Pitbull (international pop star)


Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Pitbull (international pop star), to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Andrewlp1991 (talk) 03:25, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd like to know what the hell this message is for. Yves did not create the page, he moved it back to the proper page, with this edit, over a month ago. ℥nding · start 03:43, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj discography
I've observed your sterling work, keeping Nicki Minaj discography in shape. Is it managable, or does it need semi-protection?  Chzz  ► 01:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey! Thanks for the compliment! I'd say, for now, that it's pretty manageable and isn't a huge problem. If it does become one, though, I'll let you know! :) Yves (talk) 03:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, cool. I only noticed because, I was keeping an eye on the BLP itself, Nicki Minaj - which has had many problems. Yes, please - let me know, any time. Thanks,  Chzz  ► 05:22, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

https://twitter.com/#!/NICKIMINAJ/status/63784449170608128 <-- This is why I've been making moment 4 life platinum, i figured since she tweeted about it......I will stop correcting it though. and P.S. I don't know if its you or someone else but romans revenege was not a single, so it should not be on her singles, it was released as a pre-order track in promotion of pink friday, therefore if it must be noted it belongs in "other charted songs" or "promotional singles" which her page doesn't have yet but most artists wiki's do.The lil wayne version was promotional too. sorry for the trouble. besides that i love how you run the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.77.242 (talk) 07:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Autopatroller
Hi Yvesnimmo, just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature should have little to no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Sadads (talk) 13:53, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI, we have a huge backlog at Special:NewPages and would really appreciate if you gave us a hand as a New Page Patroller because you obviously have the experience to really be successful in supporting it. Thank you for all your contributions over the years, Happy editing, Sadads (talk) 17:25, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much! I'm on an indefinite break right now, but I'll do my best upon my return. Yves (talk) 00:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Conflict with editor
Can u please help and intervene in a conflict I am having with user Marrante over the Gil Scott-Heron article? He has continued removing sourced content I added saying that Scott-Heron is a soul artist, arguing that he is a jazz artist, but not supporting with any sources. Dan56 (talk) 16:14, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of The Other Side (Bruno Mars song) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Other Side (Bruno Mars song) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Other Side (Bruno Mars song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. Sauloviegas (talk) 21:37, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Songwriters
Hey Yves

I know you are doing a lot of edits in the music-articles in here. So I have a question to you about songwriters. How do you write them here in the en.wiki in the infoboxes - like "John Doe" og like "J.Doe"?? And do you have a explanation to why you are doing that?? Hope to hear from you Tøndemageren (talk) 18:07, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pitbull - Give Me Everything.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Pitbull - Give Me Everything.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

re: Runaway
Have you ever considered nominating Runaway (2010 film) for a GA? Article easily has the potential. Bruce Campbell (talk) 17:17, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:Yvesnimmo/Complete
User:Yvesnimmo/Complete, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Yvesnimmo/Complete and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of User:Yvesnimmo/Complete during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Doo-Wops &#38; Hooligans.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Doo-Wops &. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 18:14, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

hey
I noticed you kinda fell off the face of the earth.. I'm a little concerned. Reply to this if you see it. <span style="font-family:'tahoma bold',serif;border:1px solid Black;"> NYSM talk page  16:19, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Hillcrest School (Moncton) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hillcrest School (Moncton) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Hillcrest School (Moncton) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. Epeefleche (talk) 06:56, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Forest Glen School, New Brunswick for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Forest Glen School, New Brunswick is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Forest Glen School, New Brunswick until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:41, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ForestGlen.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:ForestGlen.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 06:47, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cool (Leonard Bernstein song)


The article Cool (Leonard Bernstein song) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * no references, original research and is not notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JDDJS (talk) 21:00, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Do It like This for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Do It like This is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Do It like This until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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 template from the top of the article. &mdash;  Lil_ ℧ niquℇ № 1  <sup style="color:black;">[talk]  01:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Party at a Rich Dude's House for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Party at a Rich Dude's House is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Party at a Rich Dude's House until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 18:44, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Fuck Him He's a DJ for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fuck Him He's a DJ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Fuck Him He's a DJ until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat  ] 16:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Fuck Him He's a DJ for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fuck Him He's a DJ is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Fuck Him He's a DJ & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:31, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Stupid in Love for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Stupid in Love is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Stupid in Love until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:40, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pitbull - Give Me Everything.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Pitbull - Give Me Everything.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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Dance: Ten; Looks: Three for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dance: Ten; Looks: Three is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dance: Ten; Looks: Three until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Legacypac (talk) 06:19, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of James Mark (disambiguation) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Mark (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/James Mark (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

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. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:34, 22 March 2018 (UTC)