User talk:Ericorbit/Archive19

I DIDNT DO A DISRUPTIVE EDIT

I didnt do a disruptive edit, the song "Cool On You" from Ciara, was released on a mixtape earlier today. So therefore the song should be listed because it was being considered as a song for "Fantasy Ride". So where did i go wrong - —Preceding unsigned comment added by CiaraFan4Ever (talk • contribs) 11:47, 10 July 2009

Christina's sales

I have reliable searches to change it. I can prove with the links why I did it, so it isn't vandalism. Her official website confirms she sold more than 42 million albums, and the separate sales are confirmes by Coca-Cola, Rolling Stone etc... So sorry, but I can change according to this! Piranga -(talk) 16:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Chillin and User:Tikkuy

Can you please check User:Tikkuy's contributions? After a number of explanations regarding verifiability the user is continuing adding unsourced material to the article. This time I'm asking your help Eric because I'm confused whether the user is understnading the policies or completely disregarding it! --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:56, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:SPI is backlogged

Could you take a look at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-11233?—Kww(talk) 16:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Already taken care of.—Kww(talk) 17:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Jay-Z/Ciara tour

You're right, but you don't stand a chance. LA Times review plus two very popular acts == kept article.—Kww(talk) 01:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Avril Lavigne discography

hey, thank you for putting protection on it :) Mister sparky (talk) 14:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Chillin again

Sorry to bother you again, but will you please ask User:Tikkuy to stop adding bad unreliable sources to the article Chillin. I don't think the user is stopping even after explaining to him/her about WP:RS and WP:V. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 14:22, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. I actually meant to say something the last time I reverted him, but I got sidetracked. Thanks. - eo (talk) 14:46, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Chillin

Please read Wikipedia:Lead section. This details what the introduction to an article should look like. It is meant to summarise all of the article's components, which is what the edit's that I've been making does. If you would like to contribute to the lead section, please do so, but do not continue to remove it as this is going against Wikipedia policy. Also, I have carefully looked through all Wikipedia guidelines in an attempt to find a mention of YouTube being an unreliable source, and I cannot find one. Could you please give me a link to where this is stated? Thanks. Tikkuy (talk) 14:55, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure you're quite right. The problem is that we dont' seem to be getting anywhere because anytime somebody tries to make an edit, someone else will just revert it and claim that the sources are defying Wikipedia policy in some way or another. As for the video, KarmaLoopTV was only used as a source to say that a behind the scenes video was posted on that web site. The video itself was not used as a source. The YouTube video was created by Microsoft's Zune campaign, and because of it's upload, I assumed it had been placed in the public domain. I did try to look for some more reviews, but when I added them they were taken down, and I couldn't find any more. Tikkuy (talk) 15:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Shakira discography

I added the <br>'s because the Wikitable is squashed by the infobox, it looks terrible • S • C • A • R • C • E • 14:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Remember not everyone is looking at the article with the same browser settings as you. - eo (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

You're wrong

So why don't you give all the sources of all the numbers? If they don't have sources, I'm afraind those charts have to be removed! You're giving fake sources, it's EUROPEAN HOT 100 not Europe Top 20. You think you're right but you're wrong. You're damaging Wikipedia. Besides, the sources you give look bad, I mean, the positions look bad since they have the blue number above them and it just look a mess. So, just because you didn't find that I Turn To You and Come On Over Baby charted, you're just gonna put them as not charted? you're sad and I'm gonna continue to edit it cause you're WRONG and you're a bad thread to Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terneris (talk • contribs) 17:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

You've been warned repeatedly by myself and others about sales figures, sources and the removal of sources with no explanation. You also refuse to use edit summaries, so no one knows what you're doing or why. You've been blocked for now, and when you return, take potentially controversial edits to the article's Talk Page, or at the very least provide an edit summary instead of just blatantly removing sources. - eo (talk) 17:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Chillin once more

I believe User:Tikkuy is not able to understand policies like WP:CRYSTAL or WP:RECENTISM. It seems like he is modifying original negative reviews to his own wordings and reporting as slightly mixed or mixed to positive in the article. Also using crystal like language in the lead like yet to chart on Hot 100 etc. I left a message to him regarding the change, but of course he will revert it. Will you explain to him also? Seeing as the user tends to revert any formatting of references or any removal of unsourced content, I'm not sure what his intentions are with the article. Id it a case of fanaticism? I'm confused. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh god. How do you suppose I can explain to Tikkuy about WP:RS? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

PS. I copyedited the article and formatted all the references. See the version here. But I guess User:Tikkuy will remove it. --Legolas ^(talk2me)

Chillin

Hiya. I was wondering if you could have a look at the Chillin page for me and sort some things out. For one thing, Legolas2186 is claiming that I changed the wording of a review (or something - I'm not actually sure what he's saying.) However, I haven't touched the reception section since I began the article. I did, however, improve the lead paragraph (at your request) to show the fact that reviews were more mixed than positive. Apparently Legolas2186 seems to think of this as plagiarism? Supposedly, I'm also using language that defies Wikipedia:Crystal ball, however all I am actually saying is that the song has not charted on the Billboard Hot 100. For some reason Legolas2186 does not seem to understand this...could you please speak to him about it? Tikkuy (talk) 10:06, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Whitney Houston discography

Hey Ericorbit, im in need of assistance, so im coming to you. The above mentioned page is being vandalized constantly, and my fellow editor Balticpat22 keeps reverting the vandalizm, but to no avail. Please put a semi protect on this article because this page attracts alot of vandalizm bc of its sales charts.thanks alot!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 06:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 16:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Sock tagging

Hi - thanks for blocking User:Greenock999.

Quick question about tagging - when I tag a suspected sock, should I be tagging their userpage? I always feel a little uncomfortable tagging a virgin-red userpage, lest I be wrong and I've destroyed some poor innocent's pristine userpage.

Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 11:41, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Miles Away (Madonna song)

Hey Eric. Could you please take a look at User:Paul75's contributions? The user is removing content from the article's LEAD even when being explained that content which are sourced in the body donot need to be sourced in the LEAD and it should encompass the whole article. The user is using pretext like everything is unencyclopedic and poorly written. However the article is a GA article and no opposition was faced from its reviewers. I explained it to the user, but got a snark reply that "donot have to take your permission to delete unsourced, poor content". --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:00, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Did you by any chance take a look at this problem? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:59, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Rock Songs

I made a stub on this new chart since no one else could be bothered. Music editors seem to be the laziest bunch on Wikipedia. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 14:17, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The format

The format is the only thing that I really matter to me, and it is not as it should be as I want, it says in Social Distortion discography. Stop —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan6hell66 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Stop you

You have to understand that you are not the owner of the discography of Shakira and must have the correct order. D6h!

Read my comment again. If you need to change the order of the albums that's fine, but do not just revert. By doing so, you are going back to a version of the page which has unsourced sales claims and incorrect formatting mistakes (including whitespace). - eo (talk) 17:31, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Correction...

Can I rearrange the album then?, Whereas the correct format to be?

I just want to organize the format and must be, I have nothing to do with the unnecessary sources. D6h! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan6hell66 (talk • contribs) 17:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Blondie (band)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Blondie (band)/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:59, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

List of Alcazar songs

I'm sorry, but can you put List of Ace of Base songs under "articles for deletion" just like you've done it with List of Alcazar songs? I don't see your point because both of the pages are particuraly the same. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tara Eckersberg (talk • contribs) 12:58, 25 July 2009

Modern Rock mistake about Midnight oil and Sundays

http://www.billboard.com/charts/rock-songs#/charts/alternative-songs?chartDate=1990-05-26 according this Billboard page you can see that Midnight Oil was the 2nd, and "nobody" was at 1st place. for some reason BB have no page for this Sundays's song, and looks like it caused the problem —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freddy Guarin (talk • contribs) 20:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:SPI is slow sometimes

Can you take a look at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki-11233 for me? I'm getting pretty tired of this guy.—Kww(talk) 13:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Shakira discography

Hey Ericorbit, there seems to be alot of vandalizm spawning from anonymous IP ranges, so if you could please put a semi-protection on the page so the amount of vandalizm can be greatly reduced...thanks--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 09:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Headstrong neiva attacks again

It was about time! Vanessahudgens22 (talk · contribs) and 189.13.112.149 (talk · contribs): the former (among other edits) added a Brazilian magazine to the reviews section of The Soul Sessions, while the latter added the title of a Brazilian telenovela to Joss Stone discography. Thanks once again. Funk Junkie (talk) 14:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

And one more: Joss-brasil-aovivo (talk · contribs). Don't know whether whether we're supposed to laugh or cry. Funk Junkie (talk) 22:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Two more to bother us once again: B2bx-tina (talk · contribs) and 201.58.174.112 (talk · contribs). Funk Junkie (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Pink discography

Hi, I was wondering if you could explain what you mean in your edit-summary here. Let's look at Pink's RIAA's certifications together . As you can see here, Pink' single U & UR Hand first has been certified platinum and then the single has gotten one additional gold certification immediately after the platinum. I am not sure if you're familiar with the volume of the US certifications, but Platinum=1 million units and Gold=500,000. As you also may know, there is no such thing as platinum=1,500,000 which is what we currently have for the single after you reverted my edit. For clarity purposes, it's best to mention that 1,500,000 is comprised of platinum (platinum contains 2 Golds by the way) and one additional gold. So in short, that would be Platinum/3 x Gold=1,500,000.--Harout72 (talk) 02:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

It is no accident. Here it is how it works both in the USA and elsewhere. First comes smaller-volume-presenting-certification (Gold) and second comes the bigger certification (Platinum). And often times, the record sales fails to meet the volume of the second platinum, therefore, they (the RIAA in this case) issue the certification for an additional Gold. Such is the case everywhere including Germany for example (type in Pink within this link, they have a clearer way of doing this in Germany. However, if you are going to insist on calling the additional Gold for U & UR Hand at the Pink discography an accident be sure to make the 1,500,000 into 1,000,000 as there is no such thing in USA as Platinum=1,500,000. --Harout72 (talk) 15:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes techno music can be a headache!

Hi Eric, you didn't ask for my input, but I have the Hot Dance Club Play no wait it's Hot Dance Club Songs (or has it changed again? LOL) article watchlisted and saw the revisions and talk page comment by Sashak90 regarding Beyoncé and how many #1s she has. That section is like a magnet for certain editors, I know I undid an edit there a few months back concerning Donna Summer's total and added a note to her discography page to hopefully make it stop. I definitely don't condone the edit-warring that Sasha seems to be engaging in, but they may actually be right. Going off your #1 pages for each year I counted 10 for Beyoncé:

1. "Crazy in Love"
2. "Naughty Girl"
3. "Check on It"
4. "Déjà Vu"
5. "Ring the Alarm"
6. "Irreplaceable"
7. "Beautiful Liar"
8. "Single Ladies"
9. "Diva"
10. "Halo"

which is what the list page still shows. The article said that too, until June 18 of this year, when an editor named Shikhster1123 upped the total from 10 to 11 a few minutes before you updated the chart article for that week[1]. I'm not 100% sure about this, I could have missed one and I don't subscribe to the .biz like you do, but it may be worth investigating. If that club music ever starts giving you a pounding headache, come by and visit Hot Adult Contemporary Tracks sometime, because everybody needs a little Celine Dion or Barry Manilow break on occasion. :-) Zephyrnthesky (talk) 21:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Eurythmics discography

Please restore my version of Eurythmics discography! It was so detailed and solid. I've put so much effort into composing it! If you want, you can replace the flag icons with abbreviations, e.g. -> U.S. 1000MHz (talk) 06:42, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Billboard 200

Ok. Now i understand, thank you :-) SimoneJackson (talk) 21:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Stop ReEditing People's Work!

You should stop unedditing people's work. The Chart performances I posted where real and correct. Just becuase they are a smaller island's Chart performance, does not mean that you should dis-credit them!FenechSalerno (talk) 14:19, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes well the counties charts are reresented by that radio-station. We are not the U.S. That radio station represents the countries charts! FenechSalerno (talk) 14:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Haha about For Lack of a Better Name

I was adding a music infobox to it, and when I clicked save changes I saw that you had just beat me to it by a few seconds! Haha. - Sm1ttenzd 15:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Yours looks a bit nicer than the one I almost posted anyway. I'm still new to editing and everything is a first for me. - Sm1ttenzd 15:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Where'd you get your copy of the album? Would telling me be counted as sharing illegal rips or something? - Sm1ttenzd 20:34, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Suspect

Why the warning is remained? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Simone_Jackson I admited that i was it for error (sometimes i forgot that i must enter with user and pass). This section is empty http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Simone_Jackson&action=edit&redlink=1 but i admited that i was that IP address. SimoJay (talk) 17:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok with cronology, but the answer? SimoJay (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

? SimoJay (talk) 3:33, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

10 days that you don't answer at these questions.... SimoJay (talk) 12:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I've removed the tag from your User Page, but the IP tag remains. - eo (talk) 11:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Erasure single solsburyhill.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:Erasure single solsburyhill.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Cover versions...

I have just added a merge tag to Perfect Day(that's three times its been added), but this time I have added a link to the cover versions discussion, but don't we have a concensus yet? Regards --Richhoncho (talk) 20:43, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Spam

Since when are links to officially approved fan sites "SPAM"? Get a life, dude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.5.140.24 (talk) 15:03, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

There are plenty of warnings and links to the policy pertaining to external spam links on your Talk Page. I suggest you read them. - eo (talk) 15:12, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Foreigner

Hi! I'm still new at this entire editing process, but I was not vandalizing. lol Originally, the song "Women" pointed to a picture of a nude woman, so not knowing exactly how to go about pointing it to the "Foreigner" single, I simply added the (song1), which pointed to the album, "Head Games", so I re-edited it with (song2) to point to the single. lol In any case, I thank YOU for cleaning the edits up. However, I don't understand why YOU removed the "Blue Morning, Blue Day" song page. I added the single picture, and in my opinion, that is primarily what most of us want to see on these single pages. Whether the song was used in a game or not, is of no importance to the generation who grew up with this music, but seeing these old covers brings back memories. Furthermore, the self-made single cover for the single, "Love Has Taken Its Toll", was labeled as such, and being that the original single had no picture, I don't see a problem with allowing it to be posted, so long it is properly labeled, which, as I said, it was. Lastly, it is true that thanks to ignoramouses like Bill Gates song titles have been changed from the "Long, Long Way From Home" to the cheaply written "Long, Long Way from Home" as YOU prefer today, but again, in my opinion, I believe the songs should be written the way they are presented on the covers, whether that is correct English or not, and that would mean, YOU can double check yourself, that the "Long, Long Way From Home" is the correct way. In any case, I, once again, thank YOU for your assistance, but a thank YOU for all of these pictures instead of the comments about "vandalizing" would be more appreciative. Otherwise, one chooses to not add anything anymore, and would Wikipedia be a better place if we all chose that method of thinking? I am learning, and I will continue to do my best. It's 3:16 A.M. here! Good night! Rick. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FuturePrimitive666 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

SPAM

I have read the rules, but it seems it doesn't apply to everyone. I see a lot of artist/band pages with links to fan sites. Be fair and remove all of them. Don't you people have anything better to do? I supsect this is more personally motivated than having to do with Wikipedia policy. And who made you Wiki police? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.5.140.24 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 19 August 2009

Out from Under (song)

I don't understand how songs like That's Where You Take Me and I've Just Begun (Having My Fun) have their own articles, where isn't much to say about them (and much of that little is unconfirmed) and Out from Under (song) can't have a separate page?? PlatinumFire (talk) 11:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Cascadarocks

I noticed you had some unpleasant interactions with Cascadarocks. She's blocked indefinitely now, as she was the latest in a line of socks from Xtinadbest. Detecting her is pretty simple: just take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xtinadbest/Archive.—Kww(talk) 14:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Could you take care of this? It's been sitting for a while, and I'm getting tired of monitoring the article.—Kww(talk) 18:29, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

I semi-protected it for now. - eo (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:MOSCAP trouble

Hi. I was looking for songs that had out in the middle of a song title and I saw your move because of naming conventions in the revision history of the article: In and out of Love (The Supremes song). I was wondering if the word "out" should be decapitalized in the middle of a title because I know it is a preposition like "in" or "within" which are usually decapitalized in the middle of song titles in track listings. I been having problems at The Days of Grays article with the title of the song "The Truth Is out There" and would like a final say about it by someone who seems to know about this. Should it be capitalized or not? Thanks for any input. FireCrystal (talk) 02:35, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It's strange to me too, I know, though it looks good enough for me. I'll be sure to make them understand that the project standards are higher than any one person's disagreement of a change. Thanks for your input again. FireCrystal (talk) 19:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Stop!

Dont harass my edits. I paid my dues to wikipedia but theres one thing you reverted back that wasnt necessary. It wasnt necessary to cross out my vote especially if I was acknowleding some of what you said before. Agenda. Its over now. You got other people blocked from using Wikipedia because we share the same ip address that should not have. Dont confuse me for anyone else besides who I am. This is my new username its not Kelvin Martinez. Please understand that. The Magical Source (talk) 22:47, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Blocked as sockpuppet. - eo (talk) 00:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

RBD discography

Hi, remember this?

• 21:41, 3 August 2007 Ericorbit protected RBD discography ‎ (recent IP reverting to cleanup to article per MoS (several IPs, 201.27.x.x) [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

As that was quite a long time ago I've started a review to see if the protection is still considered necessary. See the talk page. --TS 04:45, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists

Is this suitable for Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Charts I have participated actively on the discussion page, but need someone who reviews such lists to make sure I am actually on the right path, or not. My concerns are that:

• Incorrect use of one source is overriding what I consider VR's (publications and Songwriters Guild of America.)
• Inconsistancy. One artist not allowed based on opinion of inflated sales, but conclused others with suggested greater inflated sales can remain.
• Data obtained from RIAA and BPI is neither complete, existed when the artists in question existed (or only partially), and does not take into account the fact for BPI multi plat before 1989.
• Stating that the sales figures were obtained from the RIAA, BPI (and other) online databases. This I would have though is actually not referencable as the databases do not specify actual sales, and beyond what constitutes simple addition in WP:OR Eight88 (talk) 08:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Broken-Hearted Girl (song)

Hey there Eric. As the protecting admin of Broken-Hearted Girl (song), I'd like to point at that the original article, Broken-Hearted Girl, is now notable enough for inclusion. It seems appropriate to redirect the former to the latter, as well as unprotecting it. Regards. — Σxplicit 05:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Done! - eo (talk) 12:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Xtinadbest/Cascadarocks

Back again as Radarrocks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I've filed at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Xtinadbest, but if you're in the mood to block quickly to keep the edits from stacking up, I'd appreciate it. She's already made a new article I'm going to have to speedy.—Kww(talk) 13:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Done! - eo (talk) 13:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Bing Crosby Discography

This is a limited selection (and no singles). I found this: [2], where the authour states his references. Can you advise if adding this detail to the discography would be acceptable - as cannot verify from the books first hand? Eight88 (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I have been awaiting a copy of "Pop Memories - 1890-1954: Joel Whitburn" - which I finally managed to track down and received. It is very comprehensive on the chart statistics of all the earlier artists (pre-Billboard). Therefore having verified one of the source, I shall endevour to update the Bing Crosby discography. Thanks for responding Eight88 (talk) 21:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

RFD request

Hi, I have RFD'd all the redirects of an non-existent album entitled Worldwide that point to Beyoncé Knowles. One such redirect, Worldwide (Beyoncé album), however, was protected by you. It has been couple years since then, so with the time that has passed, would you mind removing that protection and allowing it to be included in the RFD as well? Thanks. --Wolfer68 (talk) 19:26, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Done! - eo (talk) 20:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Cocoamazon

This one is a little too complex to take to AIV, but I'm sure that you will agree that these edits following a final warning for bad charts warrants a block.—Kww(talk) 16:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Why wasn't this final warning sufficient?—Kww(talk) 17:08, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Because it was 5 days ago. I don't doubt for a moment that this person will keep on doing whatever s/he wants, so I'll keep an eye out and won't hesitate to block next time. - eo (talk) 17:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Charts

Hmm. He doesn't seem to talk much on his talk page based on my experience. He does seem to heed warnings, though; in the past, he'd been pulling the #1 song off the real time tracker on Sunday night but no longer does, so I have no reason to believe that he'd ignore warnings. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 04:02, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Number-one Pop Songs

Someone created the article list, List of number-one Pop Songs, which is simply a copy and paste of List of number-one Top 40 Mainstream hits. With the oddity in the chart names (online vs. print editions), I'm not sure if a db-move is in order or simply redirecting the newly created article back to the original. Thanks. --Wolfer68 (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Gone. Completely ridiculous and repeated info... and based on the editor's talk page, this person has a bit of a problem with creating inappropriate pages. - eo (talk) 19:06, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully, your final warning meant more than mine did

Hopefully, this final warning (which came after this final warning from me) plus this vandalism will generate the necessary block from you.—Kww(talk) 15:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Done. Blocked. - eo (talk) 17:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Are you trying to take credit around here?

I don't know why you have reverted what I put on here about the Billboard Hot 100 when it's official by Billboard.com and somebody has the magazine with the charts. If you want to talk to someone, go to the Pulse Music Board Forums and tell them not to post the Billboard charts until tomorrow and see what they tell you. Are you trying to take credit around here and doing it yourself, Ericorbit? - BravesFan2006 (talk) 18:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with "credit"; anyone can edit whatever they want as long as it's done correctly and no one has to clean up afterwards. But as I said before, it has to do with using a message board/forum as a source. I don't care if you or anyone else reads or posts to the Pulse forums and I'm well aware that the charts are posted there in advance; they've been doing it for years its none of my concern. The fact is that as of Tuesday or Wednesday evening, the charts are not on Billboard.com or Billboard.biz and the print magazine has not been issued yet. Check out the charts early if you want, it makes no difference to me, but I know that you know that a forum shouldn't be used on Wikipedia and its as simple as that. Just wait a day until there is a reliable source to back it up. That's it. - eo (talk) 10:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. this is just a rude edit summary, honestly. [3] Again, I know you know better than this, you've been here long enough. - eo (talk) 10:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)