User talk:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Please refrain from removing the albums from "comedy" as that is the correct genre and you obviously have no knowledge on the albums. If you would like to discuss any changes please do so on the articles "talk pages". Tyros1972 (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2013 (UTC))

Please stop If you redirect an album article (e.g.), please don't remove its categories. If you need to respond to me, please post to my talk. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:39, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

No worries. I have you to catch my mistakes, so if I don't do it once in a while, I'm not going to worry about it. No need to contact me on this in the future, just fix it. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou for adding people to Category:Indian actresses. There is still lots and lots more work to be done, but thnkyou for helping.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_January_8#Category:Film_soundtracks_by_nationality.
Message added 01:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I was just about to redirect those. Thanks for doing it for me.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

nice job on the singular list. it looks so much better. i'm hoping to do some similar updates as well to other charts and lists, but it's taking me a while. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 04:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Yeah, it really needs to be done. I was just going to do the 2012 list, but then I recalled an FLC that failed due to such format (as it was said to fit perfectly fine in just one single list). Clearly, all 4 of those lists can. Only 12 artists have ever topped the list!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:11, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Can you check one of your sources on this list? This one says Next Big Sound uses all the social networking sites you list but it doesn't say they're used to determine the Social 50 (at least when it was first launched). I found this one that explains how the methodology changed only recently. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 04:18, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, it cites that Next Big Sound uses those websites, and Billboard states that is where they get their information. Thanks for the link. I'll add that information into the article!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:27, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I've adjusted the lead accordingly to the article!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

You are being totally obnoxious and refusing any sort of discussion. You didn't even notify me of the move request for Sotsugyō (Yuki Saito song). ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You don't own it and I've started a discussion with the move request. I figured when you moved it back so quick, you must be watching it. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've never said that I owned it, but you aren't engaging in any sort of discussion. I don't sit on that talk page 24/7, and it's common courtesy to notify the creator of an article of any move discussions. That's all I asked. And the move "discussion" ended before I even saw it because I've been busy with other things. Just please show a little common courtesy whenever you start such a discussion and notify the creator and anyone else who has contributed significantly to an article. It makes things much nicer on the site. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 06:48, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't realize someone moved it and closed the move request without allowing for discussion. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

No problem as that wasn't you doing that. However, please at least notify me (or any other article creator) when you are requesting the article be moved. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan!

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Koavf's talk page.
Message added 20:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Mediran's talk page.
Message added 09:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Good merge. I was thinking about doing it myself, but wasn't too sure how reaction would be.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 22:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Might as well. As long as the list remains manageable, there's no need for two different pages. Can't make the article any better than the lead for the list right now. Again, good work. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I did a lot of improvements to the article for Keep in a Dry Place and Away from Children. It's no longer about the soundtrack, but about the film itself. I see that it's won some awards. None of them are individually big enough to keep on that basis alone, but maybe some of them together might squeak by notability standards? I see where it was screened again in 2001 at a small film festival, but it's just one year shy of being exactly 5 years. It's close-ish, but I'm not entirely sure that it's enough to keep it. Part of me wants to say yes, but I'm not entirely sure if it actually passes, so I thought I'd invite you to take a second look at it and see what you thought.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at WP:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 January 23.
Message added 22:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	For fixing the references on List of Billboard Social 50 number-one artists, I award you this barnstar! I was dreading doing it and was very pleased and surprised to see that you had done it for me! Thank you so very much! keep up the great work!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 00:38, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for readding the links. I couldn't make heads or tails of the new site at the time when I removed the old links. Widr (talk) 22:28, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

I saw that your nominations successfully deleted the Satellite Award winner categories earlier last month, but I noticed a couple of categories that were created in December that are now being added to articles, Category:Satellite Award winners and Category:Best Drama Actress Satellite Award (television) winners. The second category should be easy to delete since it is a duplicate of the Category:Best Television Drama Actress Satellite Award winners that was listed, but I am not sure about the overall category. Since they were recently created I was not sure if you were aware of them at the time of your nominations. If you feel they are inappropriate, I would appreciate it if you would nominate them for deletion since you seem to have a good track record there. Thank you for any help, Aspects (talk) 05:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Jax 0677's talk page.
Message added 14:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, you may want to comment at the merge proposal. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 21:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for your constant unblinking work on albums! I'll follow your WikiProject example in the future... Gareth E Kegg (talk) 02:20, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

You were the first one brave enough to edit one of the BillboardID templates. Did the documentation help, or did you just figure it out?—Kww(talk) 20:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

:) I needed the documentation to find out that these existed. I knew you had created something when I edited Carry On (Fun song) and I couldn't figure out why it was coming up as illegal artist. That was just trial & error on the artist name (does it use the period for the band or doesn't it). Someone created a stub for "You Can't Get What You Want (Till You Know What You Want)", which I knew had charted, so I used the singlechart template and I got the illegal artist note again, so that's when I referred to the documenation which led me to {{BillboardID/J}}. I wouldn't have been brave enough to add it, though, if it didn't say it was ok to do so in the documentation. I'm glad there are people like you working on this kind of stuff on wikipedia. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 20:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind voicing your opinion on this article "Girl U Want". A while ago I added the information on Robert Palmer's cover version, however recently there has been some reverting/discussion back and forth between me and another editor over whether the information should be in the article. Aside from the original version needing some expansion, the Robert Palmer version is reliably sourced and relevant as it was a charting single. Many thanks. Ajsmith141 (talk) 11:17, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Record charts‎.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Category:Mice albums, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:21, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello there, wouldn't be better if you use three nested tables instead of using a single table, it is not easy to understand its content and it is hard to manage. Regards Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 04:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at User:Eduemoni/sandbox, I've created a sample table there. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 04:55, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

There is both a visual and maintenance improvement, the current table used is not rendered correctly, and the new format could be template'ed, which would show the edit button on top of the table for editing the values. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 03:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem with the current format is its scalability, the bigger it gets, the worse it is rendered and the harder it becomes to manage it. Trust me, i've already edited tables like that and nested tables suit better in this case. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 03:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

He has a tendency to argue keep in every TFD, usually with the argument "X does not link directly to Y, Y does not link directly to Z, therefore this template is useful." (See here, here, here. Only thing I can think to add right now. Same argument every time. When called out on his mantra, he points out Throckmorton as an example of his argument working, even though far more TFDs for his templates have closed as "delete" than as "keep". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 21:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm impressed with these, very nice. NYSMy talk page 23:35, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• Thank you so much. I hope to have one for the 90s done shortly. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:30, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you reconsider your vote as I have nominated Category:Los Angeles, California for renaming to be consistent with the category's mainpage being named Los Angeles pbp 19:14, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll keep it as is per the discussions in previous CFDs. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Template_talk:Albums_category#By_type.
Message added 18:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

If you really want to add this to non-studio album categories, go for it, but you will probably put forth a lot of (valued!) effort that isn't necessary once the template gets fixed. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you talking about the edit to the AC/DC compilation albums category? Sorry, that was a test edit that I failed to revert. As I replied on the template's talk page, I will let you and Rich handle things first. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Template bugs There is a lot to do with that template to make it more flexible. I'm glad that we're on the same page though and that you're working hard to help me categorize albums. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to drop in and say thanks for your help on the Vince Gill Icon page I made! Cjones132002 (talk) 17:21, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Calvin999's talk page.
Message added 09:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

 — AARON • ^TALK 09:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

There appears to be a misunderstanding at WP between the words, "single" and "song." A song being a creation that is heard, whereas a single is a method of marketing that song. A couple of times there has been a discussion about this at talkpage of WP:SONGS and the conclusion was that these should be two distinct and separate categories. The current wording of WP:SONGS and the relevant categories support this view. The current wording for each category is

• Songs written or first produced in XXXX.
• This category includes articles about songs issued as singles]] (45rpm phonorecords) which were released in the year XXXX

Therefore the contention is that they are two distinct and separate category schemes. Why should a song released as a single in the same year as creation no longer be listed by creation? Doesn't make any sense whatsoever, What say you? --Richhoncho (talk) 07:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

• The description itself says the singles category includes articles about songs issued as singles, which is why every XXXX singles category is a subcategory of XXXX songs category. So, you are incorrect when you say a song released as a single in the same year as creation is not being listed by creation. It is by the scheme: Category:XXXX songs > Category:XXXX singles > song article. If they should be treated separately, please remove Category:Songs as parent to Category:Singles. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I would like to see you comments and additions to User:The Banner/Workpage28, the draft for a topic ban proposal regarding Jax 0677. Hope to hear soon. The Banner talk 12:07, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Reply - The navboxes I created that were in TfD either should not be there and/or were started before April 25, 2013. Also, I am permitted to respond to charges against me and those as to why a template should be kept with relevant statements. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It appears to me that you rather enjoy the debate in TfD over the quality of your navboxes. You try to do the minimal possible, stretching the limits of the requirements, just so you can defend them and fix them based on the arguments so they can be kept. If you are going to continue to create navbox templates, I suggest you concentrate on artists that no doubt can use them. You are wasting too many people's time in TfD, including your own. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Reply - If you take a look at the navboxes that I created after April 25 , you will see that I have done just that. Additionally, I have recently created navboxes such as Template:Acid Mothers Temple and Template:Cannonball Adderley which are quite lengthy. I find it hard to believe that there is insufficient improvement based on my recent navboxes. The number of navboxes sent to TfD is not indicative of how many navboxes should be there in the first place. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

The ones taken to TfD are too borderline. If you focused on navboxes like these two, you'd have no problem from anyone. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Reply - If that is the case, then where does it end? {{IPFW}}, {{University of Northern Iowa}}, {{Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology}} and others with more than 6 total links have been taken to TfD when they should not be. If people did not take templates with suitable potential to TfD in the first place, per WP:POORLY and WP:TOOSHORT, this would not be a problem at all. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Do not put it on others to clean up your own mess. Sorry, but you can't excuse yourself for being a bad editor by citing pages that have to do with poorly written articles or articles that are too short. Even worse, is that you continue to mention those months after discussions about your templates have taken place. You're not a newbie, you need to show a willingness to grow and learn and work with the community rather than continue with shoddy work. I have seen no support for your side from others, so you really should stop complaining and start listening. What you have done, you seem to have done so begrudgingly. You may want to consider taking a wiki-break. This project is never ending, so it's not like it won't be here when you return. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Reply - I do not disagree with "Do not put it on others to clean up your own mess". I have listened, as evidenced by the fact that no one can present a shoddy music navbox that I started in the past 30 days. I have improved my work over the past 30 days, and over the past year. No one can prove that I haven't done so in the past 30 days WRT music navboxes in particular. The university navboxes were an honest mistake, and I did correct Template:Vincennes University. I don't know how to make it any clearer that I have improved my work as of late . If a Topic Ban were meant to punish, I might support it. Since a ban is meant to protect Wikimedia, I don't believe a Topic Ban on anything other than university navboxes would protect the encyclopedia. Let me rephrase my question. How short is too short for a navbox? --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

My dear friend worked hard on the article and your assessments in her opinion do not match the qualifications on the project. You've made it "start class", then "C class", and when she asked me to allow it to be reassessed again, you made it "start class" again. Have you really looked at the article to see if it meets the music assessment requirements?—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Apparently, you removed the C-class rating that I gave it on April 17. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:58, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It was my understanding that it would be a means of reassessing rather than a disagreement with the upgraded assessment.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:18, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

As you are named in the proposal: the proposal is filed here The Banner talk 15:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Netherlands squad 1983 FIFA World Youth Championship has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. C679 05:19, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure if the following templates fail WP:NENAN.

• Template:Digital Summer
• Template:Aranda

What do you think? The Banner talk 14:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Good day=) Why did you move my articles about songs to the albums???? I think, it won't be anything bad if the seach in Google is refered to these articles in Wikipedia . With respect --ВікіПЕДист (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Is A Bad Wind Blows in My Heart a stub now or not?HotHat (talk) 18:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Certainly not. Nice work. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Koavf's talk page.
Message added 21:32, 12 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:48, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello; you recently participated in a discussion about Category:Reissue albums, which I closed as "no consensus". The category has now been re-nominated for deletion; you may be interested in participating in this second nomination. The discussion is here. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:15, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

First of all, thank you for all the work you do on albums articles. I wanted to ask why you removed the category "Comedy Albums" from this article. At first I thought that the "Homer and Jethro albums" category would be a sub-category of category:Comedy albums by American artists, but it isn't. Was that your intent? Should it be made so? Or should the article just be placed under Comedy albums by American artists also? Your thoughts truly appreciated. All the best, 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 02:52, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

You are correct. When looking at the Homer and Jethro category, what I thought said comedy albums actually says country albums. This should now be fixed. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:29, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, and placed in superior category. Well done as always. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 14:56, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Question for you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Number one modern rock hits of 1988 when you have a chance czar · · 17:42, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Replied for clarification request czar · · 17:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

This page isn't consistent if you put Adam Gontier on the list then why isn't Zakk Wylde on the list? To settle this I have started a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rock_music. You are more than welcome to join in.-- Everyone Dies In the End (talk) 07:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

G7 is faster then C1 when the creator empties the category due to a typo. Especially right after it is created. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I have opened a discussion about the restriction here. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I wanted to let you know that I added the Personnel section on Move Like a Sinner page (as well as some additional info). I was wondering, if it would qualify for a C-class article now, or is there anything else missing? Best wishes, Mayast (talk) 16:36, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_July_22#Category:Chicago.2C_Illinois. Since you were involved in the previous discussion about Los Angeles categories, you may want to weigh in on this similar discussion about Chicago categories. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 12:53, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Star, I duly note your comments about Category:Love and Death (band). Thank you very much for your attention, and for convincing me to take a step back on things last May. I have enjoyed getting back to band, album and song articles. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

per WP:NSONG criterion #1, charting does make a song notable, provided it is on the main chart. In the UK, the cut off point is 100.--Launchballer 17:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

That's not what it says. A song may be notable if it has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts. It still requires coverage in multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label. So while charting may help make a song notable, charting in and of itself does not. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:47, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Star,

I noticed that you reverted my merger of the Billboard number-one comedy albums lists. Before merging the lists, I responded to your comments on the talk page and waited a week for a reply; when there was none, I assumed that you were OK with the merger. I can advertise the discussion on WikiProject talk pages if you wish, but I feel as though we haven't yet tried to work out a mutually satisfactory solution between the two of us. I would be grateful for your comments in the merger discussion, particularly if you would explain what you would like these articles to look like. Surely, you don't want them to stay as they are now, with the main list and the two sublists both presenting the exact same information.

Neelix (talk) 19:51, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	I give this barnstar for standing up against vandalism. Keep up the good work. 𝕁𝕠𝕣𝕕𝕒𝕟𝕂𝕪𝕤𝕖𝕣𝟚𝟚 21:02, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Billboard Year-End Pop 100 Songs of 2006, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! ModelUN (talk) 02:15, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I am letting you know that I have undone your redirection of the above song to Fits of Gloom because if you look at the infobox, there is information there not sourced in the artist page and per WP:NSONG criterion #1. If you still think this page should be redirected, take it to AfD.--Launchballer 11:09, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

You really should read WP:NSONGS in its entirety. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:18, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to [[:If You Knew Suzi]], without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style guide#Redirects: "Finally, note that consensus has determined that everything written here about categorizing album articles applies to redirects about albums as well. These can—and should—be categorized in the same fashion as full-fledged articles...". I am fixing similar edits to redirects in my watchlist. Please would you fix the rest. Many thanks, Peter Loader (talk) 18:22, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not going to do that because that would be dumb. If You Knew Suzi redirects to If You Knew Suzi..., which is already in the same categories as the redirect. That's like categorizing the album twice. The note in WP:ALBUMS is intended for redirects for albums that take you to the artist's article or their discography page. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:44, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you are right — I missed the bit about Category:Redirects from albums in Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style guide#Redirects. Sorry, Peter Loader (talk) 21:19, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

The deletion of the Twelve Inches on Tape compilation series page, for the reason given by the one person who suggested it (User:Tokyogirl79), seems to be a violation of WP:JNN. Somebody tried to delete the page back in 2010 and failed. I don't understand why it got deleted, and seemingly pretty fast this time after being up for about 3 years. -- WillieBlues (talk) 06:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

• Actually, I wasn't the one who deleted the page. Starcheerspeaknewslostwars (the person whose talk page this belongs to) was the one who PRODed it. The problem with the page was that it lacked any sourcing to show that it was notable. The thing about notability for albums is that the albums must show notability outside of the people/bands that recorded them. Notability is not automatically inherited by notable bands having recorded a series of albums under this title. I can't really find any true sources that would show that this series shows notability, which is why I deleted it based upon SCSNLW's rationale. I'm aware that in many cases sources from the pre-internet era don't make it onto the internet, but we can't keep an article because sources may exist. We have to know that they do. If you want a copy of the page to work on and look for sources, I'm more than willing to transfer a copy onto your userspace. Just let me know on my talk page. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
• Also, the length of an article's existence means little to nothing as far as notability goes. Most of the time all it means is that the article didn't get noticed until then. Other times all it means is that it might have gotten by on previous standards of notability which are now considered to be obsolete because more strict rules took their place. That's a pretty common reason for long existing articles' deletions as well. In any case, the article in question was deleted after a 7 day PROD period. How that works is that someone (in this case SCSNLW) puts a deletion rationale on the article page. Other editors are given 7 days to either endorse or oppose the deletion. If they oppose it, they can remove the deletion rationale and then the nominating editor can choose to nominate it through AfD if they wish. If the 7 days pass and nobody opposes it by that time, an admin can delete the page at the end of the week long period. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

This is a major album in China by one of China's major rock bands. Imagine you've just merged a U2 album. Can you please restore it, and if you want to delete it put in an AfD. Thank you. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

No information was lost as it was only merged to the artist's page as well as being redirected. It's not an insult and does not have anything to do with it being a major album. If a U2 album was a single sentence or two with no substantial content, I would have no problem merging it as well. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:29, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I've restored the articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I've tagged the articles with a merge request. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:34, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

You do realise that we have barely no coverage of Chinese rock bands? In ictu oculi (talk) 18:55, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

What's your point? No information was lost in the merge. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 19:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

• I see there's a previous conversation above with User:Nihonjoe which politely requests "please at least notify me (or any other article creator) when you are requesting the article be moved. " that request applies to merging album stubs into bands as well. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:21, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Billboard number-one alternative singles of the 1980s/archive1.
Message added Holiday56 (talk) 09:08, 22 August 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

had no idea. thanks for the change. it's just that we have a lot of vandalism in U2 pages so I was making sure everything was ok. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 17:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Shirley Jones is well known for this song from her hit film Carousel. How can you say thats not so? Caden ^cool 02:48, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't explain Beauty and the Beast and Memory. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Please revert your edit on "You'll Never Walk Alone". You clearly know nothing about Shirley Jones. Caden ^cool 02:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

As long as you revert your edits on Beauty and the Beat and Memory. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:54, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You said: "not notable and not defining. we don't categorize for every artist who covered another song". Um, you have got to be kidding me. Miss Jones is notable for this song from the hit film and its soundtrack. My God, I cant believe you. Caden ^cool 02:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you already educated me about that. I'm talking about "Beauty and the Beast" and "Memory" --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:59, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Until you revert your inaccurate edit, I will not communicate with you any further. Please refrain from making edits on subjects that you know nothing about. Thank you. Caden ^cool 03:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

LOL. You can be bold and do it yourself just like you did before. You haven't broken the 3- revert rule yet. I will do the same to the articles you categorized incorrectly. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok you were right about "Beauty" and "Memory", But you are so wrong with "You'll Never Walk Alone". Caden ^cool 03:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

And I've admitted as much. You noticed I didn't remove any of the Oklahoma songs at all. Please assume some good faith. Wikipedia does need its patrollers. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 03:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Assuming good faith goes both ways. LOL You weren't exactly AGF with me. And yes wiki needs its patrollers and you are doing a good job with that. Also you have done some very helpful edits with categories. Caden ^cool 03:33, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Can you explain to me why User talk:David Biddulph is reverting my edit back to your edit? I thought I explained my self to you. Caden ^cool 21:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

You did explain yourself to me. You should ask him. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

I did ask him and I've heard nothing back. Caden ^cool 21:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Please, can you try to notify before redirecting any song into a general album article? That way I can explain at least the reason I have to create a separate and single article for each one, or we can open a discussion page about it. Thanxs a lot! --Mer RZ (talk) 01:11, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

What you did was recreate articles that were created and had already been redirected in that previous incarnation. You created Ride On (AC/DC's song) when Ride On (AC/DC song) already existed. Next time just use the existing redirect to recreate the article. I also recommend incorporating more significant sources to establish the song's independent notability. There's a reason they were redirected way back when. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:37, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

There's no information in the links you said but the re direct link into the album article. --Mer RZ (talk) 20:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Should new pages for Guttermouth discography, Uproar Festival 2010, Uproar Festival 2011, Uproar Festival 2012 and Uproar Festival 2013 be created? There is an RfC at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Media, the arts, and architecture. Thanks! --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, As a regular contributor to articles in the WP:MUSIC project I believe the following discussion will be of use to you. Please could you take the time to read the proposals at Template_talk:Infobox_album#Time_to_Update_the_Infobox_for_the_Industry_and_Accessibility regarding the updating of Infobox album. Kind regards

Hi, thanks for rating "Atlas". May I ask why did you rate it as start-class? What stopped you from rating it as C-class or even B-class? ;) I'd like to know which part still requires some work :) Chart positions are missing, obviously, but we'll have to wait a few days for that ;) — Mayast (talk) 23:21, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Two reasons I guess: 1) it's a new release and it will soon have additional on which it can expand, and 2) I usually try to stay conservative in my ratings to be on the safe side. So, taking another look, it probably can pass with a C rating. I rarely give B-ratings because I feel that requires a more indepth review of the listed references. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 23:35, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply :) So you don't have any tips for improvement, and in your opinion the article just needs some more time? ;) — Mayast (talk) 23:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

For what's there and just being released, it's pretty well done and inclusive. I would imagine there will be plenty of more coverage in the coming weeks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:11, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that :) Thanks a lot! — Mayast (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You have new messages at RazorEyeEdits's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Why did you change "Nwa Baby (Ashawo Remix)" to "Nwa Baby"? "Nwa Baby" is the title of the original song and not the title of the remix. The title of the remix is "Nwa Baby (Ashawo Remix)". You need to stop messing around with it. Also, "Oyi Remix" is the title of the song featuring Tiwa Savage and not "Oyi(song)". "Oyi (I Dey Catch Cold)" is the title of the original song.

The name of the article should be the title of the actual song not a specific mix of the song. If 5 different mixes of the song were popular, there would only be 1 article for the song with info about each version in that article, not 5 different articles for each version. They are correctly titled now. If you disagree, I suggest you request the articles be moved following the steps at WP:RM/CM. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I understand that and I appreciate everything you do. There are not different versions of the song. I just don't want people to get confused, that's all. I don't want to go back and forth with moving the articles. If you don't revert what you did, the articles will still like that. It's not really a big deal. I'll just make note of it the articles' paragraphs. versace1608 00:25, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello,

As you've previously spoken at template deletion discussion for album track listing templates you may wish to participate at the following discussion Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2013_September_11#Template:Extra_track_listing → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 15:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

If Time Machine reaches Oricon number one today, then it might be worth restoring the original article: [1] -AngusWOOF (talk) 00:38, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

I didn't redirect the article, I only assessed it as redirect-class on its talk page. A song doesn't have to be number one to have an article, just coverage in "multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label." Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:48, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I hope not to bother you, but as long as you are the only person who have helped me before, I decide to write to see if you can solve some of my doubts. I was working on the article: List of songs recorded by A-Teens. I tried to make a table, and I did. However the contents table doesn't work. I mean, when you click into the letter heading of the content table, it doesn't go to the song it should go. Also, I figured out how to change the borders in 1.5px,but it only work in the title headings, and not on the rest of the cells. So how can I do to put the same border to everything? Please, if you can solve any of my questions, it would be very much appreciated. Thanxs in advance, --Mer RZ (talk) 06:27, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

The albumchart template was broken for the BillboardChristian parameter. I think I've fixed it. Could you go back and check if the articles you tagged with not in source for that parameter are working now? Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Looks good. Thanks, that probably helped out a number of other articles as well. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for responding to WP:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 September 27#Category:The Incredible Hulk .281977 TV series.29. Please see Category talk:The Incredible Hulk (1977 TV series). No reply to my post after 2 years.

Also, could you tell me what I did wrong with the redirect attempt? --Musdan77 (talk) 22:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Because there are multiple series with the same name, the article for The Incredible Hulk (TV series) should really be renamed due to the ambiguity. There's nothing wrong with the redirect, although the rest of the page should be blanked. A bot will move the articles automatically, it can just take days to complete. However, since there's a discussion going on at the same time, you probably should let that run its course first and add the CFD tag on the category so users are pointed to the discussion. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Quick question, are you an administrator or do you just review articles? By the way, how did you rate the Phendula album article a Start-Class? versace1608 (talk) 00:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I tend to remain conservative on my assessments, but taking another look, I can definitely see it warranting a class-rating of "C" with an intro, another section of prose, and a complete track listing with writers and length. At first glance, it looks like a bunch of individual song articles being thrown in giving it a "fluffed up" appearance. Information on individual songs from an album should really be condensed. And no, I am not an admin. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your accessment. I appreciate that. versace1608 (talk) 00:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, thank you for grading articles I created including, Heaven (Jay-Z song), Forbidden Fruit (song), Let Nas Down, Like Whaaat, All Me (Drake song), you marked these as "start" class, and I am wondering what would be needed for them to be at least "C" class. The main point of "start" class implies a lack of reliable sources, which all five definitely have in excess, and all articles cover basically everything about the subject that is known (or what I could collect from a GN search, and 20 or so pages of GHits). Is there anything outstanding that keeps them from being C-class to you? Also if you feel that any have "improved" since you graded them feel free to re-class. STATic message me! 17:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

There definitely looks like improvement. I look at amount of content as well as the number of reliable sources. In general, I remain conservative in assessing song and album articles but I will take another look at these ones. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 20:27, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

From further looking, in some places you graded them the day, or the day after they were created so start-class was pretty appropriate. I am not contending that they all are C-class, but "All Me", "Forbidden Fruit" and "Let Nas Down" look deserving, if not fairly close IMO. I know you are probably busy, but as the original grader that is the only reason I bugged you in the first place aha. I just wanted to know if there is any specific borderline contentwise, since reliable sources or WP:OR are never a problem with articles I create. The assessment of WikiProject songs is just a direct to the main general assessment page, while WikiProject Albums has a specific check list of things to have, which makes it much simpler to get articles up to at least C-class, without having to bother someone with looking at it them. STATic message me! 01:51, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, can you please take a look at the Oliver Twist article and re-grade it. It certainly can't be stub. I added an accolades section today, Thanks in advance! versace1608 (talk) 00:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for grading the Solar Plexus album. Can you please look at the Oliver Twist article and see if it deserves to be regraded? versace1608 (talk) 19:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for redirecting! - Had I known it was redirected twice already I'd of just done it myself so thanks :)
Regards, →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 00:11, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

I was patrolling expired {{PROD }} taggings and I noticed that you had tagged Leading Ladies (album). I also noticed that you had not notified the original article creator, who in this case is currently an active editor. I have now done so. I urge you, in future, to make such notifications when you nominate an article for Proposed Deletion. It is not required, but I for one will not delete such articles, and will instead notify creators. The PROD template displays a notification template that can be simply cut&pasted, and Twinkle, if you use that, will do such notifications automatically. DES ^(talk) 20:06, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

The editor in question is not active. He quit editing on October 3. He gave up his username, User:Robcamstone, which was changed to User:Vanished user iojhij329ujsd. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I've noticed you've been involved in discussions about the use of the term "Luxembourgish/Luxembourgian" etc. in the past and I would be grateful if you could make an input into the (hopefully last) discussion on the topic at the Luxembourg Wikiproject. Thanks! Brigade Piron (talk) 09:13, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

When someone removes reference quotations from article footnotes and instead links to a Google Book the article faces the strong possibility of link rot since access to individual books on Google Books, and access from different global locations constantly change. The reflist footnote citation, which should be supporting article body text, then becomes unavailable to readers and there is no evidence that the claims in the article are reliably sourced. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:56, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

The URLs to google books don't even matter. The citations refer to a specific page of a specific issue from a a real magazine or book that exists. It is not subject to link rot, because the information provided can allow the material to be sought out even if the URL changes or disappears. Just providing a URL by itself is bad because it becomes near impossible to recover a page if it has moved without any other info to associate it with. Wikipedia "does not require that all information be supported by a working link, nor does it require the source to be published online." I recommend you use the {{cite book}} and {{cite journal}} tools for proper citing of references. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Visibility of the actual source statement for a sourced comment is beneficial to readers. Otherwise we wouldn't worry about link rot at all. If a hardwired sourced statement has been provided then removing it back to the instability of a link does not benefit readers. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't care about the link itself, it's just provided as a quick reference. I can have a published book that is nowhere to be found online but I can still use it as a valid source with a proper citation. I just recommend that you use proper citation style (in which you can even use "quote=" as one of the parameters). It will make the article better, however, if the quotations themselves can be incorporated into it. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:49, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, thanks for your edit on the Fire of Zamani article. I named it "Fire Of Zamani" because there were promotional pictures of "FOZ" (the album initials). I'll wait until it comes out on October 28, 2013 and will make changes to it if neccessary. versace1608 (talk) 01:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Even if it is nicknamed FOZ, standard rules for titles of works as described in MOS:CT is to leave prepositions in lower case. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 13:50, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you please take a look at the Kukere article and gave it a new rating. It's currently rated a stub but it's certainly not.versace1608 (talk) 06:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits. I had plans to add a sentence or two about the featured singles to the Iyanya article. I guess I'll have to write it before adding links to in the navbox template. Everything you removed from the template can't have their own articles. I don't like creating a bunch of stub articles. I've created enough already. versace1608 (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. It's just that if they don't have their own article, they shouldn't be in the navbox. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:39, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, why did you remove the Nigerian songs category? Doesn't Iyanya songs qualify to be in that category? versace1608 (talk) 14:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I created Category:Iyanya songs and added Category:Nigerian songs as a parent category for it. That means all songs in "Iyanya songs" is also being categorized as "Nigerian songs". --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:37, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Why did you nominate the the Iyanya category for deletion? Did I do something wrong? versace1608 (talk) 14:21, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Since Iyanya only has articles on albums and songs, which are now in the more appropriate Category:Iyanya albums and Category:Iyanya songs, respectively, there is no need for a category just for Iyanya. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:30, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay got you. Thanks. I didn't know that. versace1608 (talk) 14:34, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

You didn't do anything wrong. You had put them all in the one category, but when I split them out into the albums and songs categories, it basically emptied out the Iyanya category, so that's why I nominated it. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 14:36, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm learning. I am not really good when it comes to Categories. versace1608 (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

The track list I put for the album is the official track list confirmed on their facebook page

You didn't include it as a source in the article as required to verify. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Now That's What I Call Music! 86 (UK series) 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/Now That's What I Call Music! 86 (UK series) (2nd nomination) 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. Drmies (talk) 17:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks for correcting me. Hey, who's going to be the hero and nominate the lot? I haven't seen a single one that deserves an article. There's no need to keep any of it, since the NOW website contains tracklists anyway and a link in the main article would suffice. Drmies (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Good question in which I don't have an answer. I've redirected many of the albums from various other countries (Hungary, Poland, etc.) and some of the non-numbered editions. Even the US ones, which I have helped contribute to, the best info I'm able to find are Billboard chart positions and Allmusic reviews - hardly "significant coverage". A good rewrite of Now That's What I Call Music! that summaries the different series as well as its history would probably be best, but I'm not sure I want to volunteer for that. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 18:44, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there! When you had a look at Santa Maria (Kenshi Yonezu song) for WikiProject Songs, you gave it a B rating, but since the B-Class criteria wasn't in the WikiProject Songs box, it appears as a C-Class rating (even though I'm sure that didn't used to happen). Would you be able to go through the talk page and check the criteria? --Prosperosity (talk) 02:55, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Seeing as you tried to redirect this, you may be interested in Going Left Right and its corresponding DYK nomination.--Launchballer 01:19, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the necessary improvements to the article. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 06:32, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Greetings Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. You nominated Category:P-Square for deletion. I don't really care if it gets deleted. I just want to know the meaning of "cfd bundle nom"? versace1608 (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Because I requested the deletion of a number of different categories that have very similar content as Category:P-Square in one nomination, thus I bundled them together. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

For your information, I have heard of the word respectively, I do know what it means and I have not seen anyone use that word in a sentence.

Hello, You deleted the Category:Slim Burna a while ago because it had only 2 subcategories and 3 articles, and nothing that wasn't just as easily navigated from the main article. Recently, I have created more sub categories and pages that are not easily navigated from the main article including templates for Category:Slim Burna, I wish to improve it. Can you help?— Al Gomez (talk) 08:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Templates, image and sound files aren't articles so really aren't something readers need to navigate to. A good template will already aid in navigation; the template you created does not. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish. Eponymous categories like you want are best for individuals or groups that have a lot of related articles that readers may be interested in. Images are just aids for those articles; one doesn't learn anything from them by themselves. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 10:15, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the information, I understand now — Al Gomez (talk) 14:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

dont understand what source you are looking for? Singer passaway before it can do any promotion thus the only official source is company utube channel or itunes? is that not euff?

You should read WP:N and WP:NMUSIC#Recordings to understand what is required to establish notability for any topic, in particular songs and albums. Not every recording deserves an article. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

the source is from official site, isnt that euff to prove? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shujuan5210 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

It proves it exists, but it doesn't prove it is notable. You must find coverage in sources that are independent of the label and artist. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Well i feel very confuse. one article edit by diff user.. giving diff excuse of so call notable. May i know who can i trust? How do you guy call it so call notable? Ok seen she passaway there is NO way to prove notable as there is no promotion for this i refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_Away_%28Rottyful_Sky%29 How abt this page, do it notable? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Way_%28Rottyful_Sky_song%29 Seriously i dont know how u guy Define the so call notable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shujuan5210 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

I dont understand. Singer of cos is to performing in music show. what etc they can do? For singer they only attend music show and get top chart that all. There nothing more i can drag out as all are music show. what etc u want me to drag out? video? it already listed in Mnet. wikipedia is a encyclopedia, isnt you guys should record down everything? u dont expect singer pass away and than start to list down their history?? I use to search wikipedia for history, i guess i am wrong. Because all info are subjection selected. BTW not all singer are like MJ that is so notable. Diff country had their own way of notable. The standard that you make are more likely for singer like MJ, by the time he make it that high.. history data already lose half way.

Is there any number of word need to write?

There is no minimum. At least one sentence that says something like, <name of song> is a song by so-and-so recorded in 20whatever for the album <name of album>. Of course, a little more background than just that would help. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:26, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 December 7#Template:Aranda and others. 213.144.224.123 (talk) 22:27, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars, hope all is well? Can you please take a look at the "Khona" article and rate it? Thanks in advance! versace1608 (talk) 03:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey. I noticed that you tagged the article for deletion, citing it was "too soon". I figured, I might as well chat about this with you, explain what the situation has been regarding the Hottest 100 articles. It may not change your opinion, but I figured it's at least worth a try.

For a good number of years (possibly since the Hottest 100 articles started appearing on Wikipedia), it has been a habit—possibly to the point of being unwritten policy, so to speak—to set up the articles prior to the commencement of voting, usually around the time the top twenty albums are announced. If you have a look back through the previous Hottest 100 articles, you'll notice that this has been the case for a while. Now, this is done without any precepts of advertising, as none of the regular contributors are employees of the ABC, and all of us chip in to eliminate any crystal balling and vandalism during the voting period (since it is rife during this time and the actual countdown itself).

Now, we've had people in the past try to delete the articles, mostly because they do not see them as being part of the encyclopedia itself. We know you're not one of those people; you've made your intention not to hinder us abundantly clear, and we have full respect to you for it. However, we would like not to re-establish an article because it was lopped off at the initial stages. After all, as the story at WP:INSPECTOR tells us, we shouldn't demolish a house that's still being built; we have the foundations and frames set up, we're just waiting for the bricks to arrive.

I hope I have convinced you enough to retract your proposal for deletion. I will understand if you choose not to retract, but I also hope you understand my side of the situation as well. I also hope you respect my coming to you first; I'm not entirely keen on removing notices for deletion without consulting the person who placed it there first, as that's how edit wars start, and I would like to try and avoid that if at all possible.

--JB Adder | Talk 05:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your considerate message, but I just don't see any reason why foundations need to be built before actual encyclopedic info is even available. I believe that is what user-space is for. When it's ready to go (BAM!), you just move it to mainspace. At the very least, remove or hide the empty table cells. Placeholders do not belong in an encylopedia. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 08:39, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I have closed the CFD discussion of Category:Holidays and observances by frequency (undefined) etc as "delete all".

However, to achieve this some templates will need to be updated. Would you be kind enough to do that? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mayast,

We would like to advocate for MusicBlvd.com, a competitor to MetroLyrics, both licensed lyrics providers. We are trying to get Wikipedia to verify that MusicBlvd.com is indeed compliant with copyright and and lyric licensing laws.

You can see MusicBlvd's response here - Dear Wikipedia, We Love Musicians More than Lawyers.

This is in response to this Wikipedia thread by other editors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Songs#Music_Blvd_lyrics_Links

MusicBlvd.com should be added under the "Lyrics and Video" section in the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs

Can you please help us in setting the record straight?

Thanks

Trystanburke (talk) 22:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Flux Pavilion page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	In recognition of your continual, valuable contributions on WikiProject Albums Keep up the great work, take care. Tanbircdq (talk) 09:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.