User talk:Ericorbit/Archive23

A discussion to be aware of

I've pretty much given up on Vitor Mazuco.

• My warning
• his followup
• my reply.

No action to take today, but thought you should be aware of the problem.—Kww(talk) 19:22, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Sigh, ok let me know what happens. - eo (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Hiya!

Miss you. How are things? LOL I was looking at the pop music articles (for uni research :P) and thought of you!! Tc xx Extraordinary Machine (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Things are great, miss you also... come baaaaaaaaaack! - eo (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Jay-Z

Hello Ericorbit - I notice that you're rv'd the Jay-Z stat (from 10 to 11)regarding his # of #1 albums on the Billboard 200 page. The only source that I have readily available to check this is the Wikipedia page Jay-Z discography, which lists 10 albums as reaching #1, with three of them collaborations, a point that raises other issues. Nonetheless - I'm wondering what your source for 11 is. It would seem to be significant, as you rv'd the Elton John stat (also confirmed by the Wiki article on his discography) because it was unsourced. I won't put a tag for Jay-Z - I'm assuming that you have a WP:RS - just wondering what it is. regards,Sensei48 (talk) 13:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

User, vandalism.

Hello Ericorbit, been a while since anyone vandalised but here we go again lol. This user as I posted before refuses to listen to reason by their own opinions and things they make policy on here. We resolved it last time but I can't edit Celine Dion articles because of edit warring, anything that makes her seem "less than the greatest thing in the world" gets reverted. First today alone it was removing sales because in their opinion the website wasn't good for sales only certs (despite it being listed on Wikipedia:GOODCHARTS) now he's gone and removed a certifications from a page because "it was a ringtone" that was certified, not the song, I checked the RIAA website and it's 2x Multi-Platinum. I think it's a case of simply uber-fan of an artist that hates another artist. Highly irritating. I have left no warnings "officially" as templates because the user would just remove them and won't listen to reason. Please could you tell him he does not make policy on here or something like that, please :). Thanks as always Eric! Jayy008 (talk) 23:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Please, look closely to the "All I Want for Christmas Is You" article. Recording Industry Association of America awarded it as a digital single with gold on December 13, 2005. Next certifications are for a master tone (gold: 12/11/2006, platinum 12/12/2007, 2x platinum 12/15/2009). You can see that by reading the type which is "MT". The digital singles are indicated with "DI". RIAA certificates albums and singles, and "in 2006, the RIAA announced the formal launch of a Master Ringtone Sales Award, updating its 47-year old Gold and Platinum program to recognize the growing popularity of enjoying music through cellular phones." Legend: ST - standard (physical) releases, DI - digital releases, MT - master tones. You can check it here[1]. I hope that Jayy008 will revert his own edit. Max24 (talk) 23:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I am refusing to work this out with the user, I will just wait until you see and judge for yourself. Jayy008 (talk) 00:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look at all this in a bit. Need caffeine. - eo (talk) 12:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Eo! Jayy008 (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Eric, I'd like to bring something to your attention and maybe get some help from you. For some time now I'm dealing with Petergriffin9901 (former sockpuppet, later on probation) and Jayy008 (many warnings in the past for disruptive edits). They joined Wikipedia not so long ago. Both are Mariah Carey fans. Both have the tendency to write only good things about Carey in the articles and to inflate her sales. That is the main problem.

I edit mostly Celine Dion articles and I have created many of them over the years. However, it seems that Carey/Dion fans can't live in peace here. Jayy008 and Petergriffin9901 went through Dion articles and made some changes. When I did the same with Carey articles, they coudn't handle it. After some discussions Jayy008 apologised me twice over the last days saying he was "hasty", so I hope he will do it again.

Jayy008 and Petergriffin9901 work together. The last example is "All I Want for Christmas Is You" and I can't wait for you opinion. The fact that the "All I want For Christmas is You" became "the world's first holiday ringtone to be certified 2x platinum by the RIAA" is mentioned already in the introduction of the article. However the table at the bottom contains certifications for the single. That's why writing there 2x platinum instead of gold is misleading, as the single was certified only gold (ring tone is 2x platinum). RIAA certifies singles and ringtones separately for a reason: they are two completly different things. However both Jayy008 and Petergriffin9901 want to inflate Mariah Carey single certification, despite the source, as their idol will look better then. Max24 (talk) 17:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

LOL, that's hilarious, Eo knows I do not inflate things, it's pointless, doesn't make the artist look better, makes the artists' fans look stupid for being "obsessed". When I edited Celine Dion articles, I made constructive edits, when you edit Carey articles, you make vandal edits, Eo will judge for hiself, there was no need to make up things. Jayy008 (talk) 17:25, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

←OK guys, a couple of things here. I see what Max is saying: per the RIAA website, the 2x platinum award is for the "master-tone" (ringtone), which I think is notable within the text, but misleading the way it is in the certifications table at the bottom. I would change this to say "gold" or else differentiate it somehow to show that the ringtone is the one with the multi-platinum certification. That said: there are some more issues with this article. The charts section as a whole is a mess. There are far too many component charts there, particularly the RingTones chart and U.S. sales/airplay junk. "Pop", "Digital" and "Ringtones" need to go. Also (more importantly, I think), it is waaay wrong to separate tables for U.S. and everything else... simply because that is what it implies: "Here are the United States charts, and here is all the other stuff, international, grouped together" - obviously showing a U.S.-centric POV. Don't know if any of you were here years back, but there was a major problem with that set-up in many song articles and the consensus at the time was to stop doing it this way. The charts table needs to adhere to WP:CHARTS. Peter & Jayy - you may wanna browse thru through all of Mariah's song articles and make sure they are done correctly. In a case such as this, I personally don't have a problem with an extra line in the certifications table to show the ringtone 2x platinum award. - eo (talk) 17:26, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

First off, I only put digital songs on that article because when it reached #1, Digital Songs wasn't a component chart, so it's allowed. I have no objection to having it "gold" I would just rather there actually be a rule to say that the box has to only include digital or physical sales. If you think that, I will go through and merge U.S. and International and remove Pop and Ringtone charts and I request Max recieve a warning for inflation of sales, I'm a fan of Celine Dion and I would like to help on her articles, but I can't because as soon as any edit doesn't inflate her sales they get reverted by Max. He recently refused to include U.S. sales because they was lower than he though and in turn they was added by him after a discussion in favour of the opposite. Jayy008 (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

As far as a "rule" is concerned regarding certifications tables, that's not something I can just declare and make everyone follow. We'd need to bring that up at a centralized area to get consensus: perhaps the talk page for WP:SONGS or WP:CHARTS. I don't think there is anything in place right now that states only "certain" types of certifications are allowed. This may open a huge can of worms, however.... allowing ringtones certifications in a song article may also lead to everyone adding ringtone certifications to discography pages, and can you imagine that mess with digital certifications, physical certifications and ringtones certifications? Yikes. - eo (talk) 17:35, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

That would be an awful hot mess, I would never do include more than one, I usually include the highest one, that's what people generally use. But I'm not fussed, I'll leave it down to you. Jayy008 (talk) 17:38, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Just butting in here for a sec, Max I find what you are saying very hypocritical. Ever since I've returned editing you have been trying to have me blocked (unsuccessfully). I have tried to only be at peace with you, which as we all know you have not attempted at all. I also know that Jay also began with a nice attitude with you, however that turned sour after your unexplained and ridiculous reversions. I hope you can learn to edit in peave with us Carey fans.--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 03:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Infodisc.fr

I've read on your user page that you're a part of Wikiproject Record Charts. So I'd like to ask you about this: WP:Charts says that Infodisc.fr is a good source for the French certifications. And I agree as they are copied from SNEP official website. What about the exact sales numers that can be found on this website as well? The site itself says that these are just estimations made by Infodisc.fr team, so they are not official. Should they be used in the aricles or is this site good for certifications only? Here is the link to example sales: [2]. Max24 (talk) 17:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Hm, not that I want to pass the buck or anything (ha), but you may want to bring this up at Wikipedia talk:Record charts. In particular, User:Kww has done a ton of work on the GOODCHARTS/BADCHARTS table; he and others that frequent that Talk Page a lot more than I do may be able to give you a quicker answer. This to me looks like something that may require a consensus. - eo (talk) 17:30, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Which is what I told him to do, but he ignored me because he didn't want it included. Jayy008 (talk) 17:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

This is what Kww posted on my talk page on that matter yesterday, I like to get advice on matters before reverting "It's not a black-and-white issue, and I would love to see all of you start talking things out first and reverting second. You are far from the worst on that issue, so don't feel like I'm yelling at you. Anyway, all sales estimates are estimates, made by different people at different times from different data. The question shouldn't be one of using InfoDisc's estimates or not, it should be evaluating whether InfoDisc is more or less reliable than the source Max24 is using. Sometimes, the best choice is to list a range of estimates. Look at List of best-selling music artists for an extreme example. You probably don't have to go that far, but it's worth looking at."—Kww(talk) 19:16, 24 March 2010 (UTC) and since there's no conflicting source, because Max simply removed the data without a new source, then there's no argument. Jayy008 (talk) 17:53, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Wide-ranging approach to Sales/Shipments/Certs

Hello Eric.

I'm one of a few editors talking about the perennial difficulties of sourcing and separating sales and shipments for music-related articles. While you may have already noticed it and decided not to add anything, I have made a new proposal (sub-optimally placed at WP Talk: Record Charts) which might address several concerns or cause quite a ruckus. I'd be grateful if you could find time to look over the discussion there and add whatever remarks you feel useful. Thanks! — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 13:48, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Source

Hey. What's your take on Wikipedia:RSN#Technorati? No one ever wants to answer my RSN questions. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:11, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi there. Wow, I forgot all about technorati. Anyhoo, I see a response by User:Blaxthos and that seems to be the way to go. I'm guessing you've been to the magazine's website and snooped around a bit? - eo (talk) 10:25, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Max24

Hello Eric, can you please look at my UserPage, a random IP has made 3 edits (nothing I can see though) however, when I compare edits everything the IP did says something about "Max24" so I'm assuming it's the user I've had problems with above as an IP, is there a way you can check this? Thanks, Jamie! Jayy008 (talk) 23:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

? Jayy008 (talk) 23:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I see someone is screwing around with you and vandalising your page.... happens to the best of us. Seriously, it's usually just some pissed off kid who's upset because you had the nerve to revert an edit or not allow vandalism. If it gets bad, semi-protection can be put onto your page. - eo (talk) 10:01, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Eo, I know it was only an IP, but Idon't understand why the edits put "Max24" on my page, is there a way to check if it's Max24 just not signed in? Jayy008 (talk) 18:45, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Where do you see Max24? - eo (talk) 18:53, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh dear, I had no idea things had gotten bad, I thought it was just 3 edits, the ones I was talking about were the first edits by This IP this is the one that looks fishy] The other one was deffo some obsessed Mariah Carey fan who didn't like the fact I reverted his edit he made changing Up Out My Face to #1. Jayy008 (talk) 18:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Ooohhhh, those. No idea. It was a few weeks ago too. Obviously some jerk trying to screw with your page - it happens. I don't think it was Max24, doesn't seem like something he'd do? - eo (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's my fault I should check the history and report it straight away. And well, I think he'd do anything to be honest. He's one of the biggest registered-vandals we have on here. Jayy008 (talk) 19:21, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Record chart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Record_charts#Edit_table SJ (talk) 1:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC 1)

I caught this one and took care of it. Simone, usually I maintain that table is there's something tricky to do in it. Otherwise, you can feel free to perform the edits yourself.—Kww(talk) 00:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't modifie that table. SJ (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC 1)

Jonhmayer-fã

He makes my spider sense tingle, but I can't place him. Anything particularly disruptive I should focus on?—Kww(talk) 16:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

If it's either of those two the edit-warring will begin soon, and we can respond to that. If not, there isn't anything distinctive enough to hang a sockpuppet report on.—Kww(talk) 17:06, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

New billboard chart policy

As per consensus at WP:record charts there is a new guide to using Billboard Charts available at Billboard charts guide. Mainstream Top 40 (Pop Songs) (formerly known just as Pop Songs) is no longer deemed a component chart - there is no evidence to support this motion.Lil-unique1 (talk) 19:36, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes i think adding a link on good charts for billboard is a wise idea. by the way its been moved to WP:record charts/Billboard charts guide. Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:17, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Re-itteration (All I Want For Christmas Is You)

Just to clarify, isn't saying ringtone certifications can't be included in the infobox the same as saying if it's a physical song it can't be included? Only digital can? I thought it was simply "Single certifications"? Jayy008 (talk) 23:04, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

My assumption was that a ringtone certification was separate from any physical or digital sales. Obviously ringtones have a different threshold for certification, otherwise it couldn't be platinum for the ringtone and gold for the single at the same time, right? - eo (talk) 10:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I just looked at RIAA on here and it says ringtones have the same certification threshhold (Even though it says Riaa has silver which is a lie), I do see what you mean, but I've always been under the impression that you include the highest certification that's listed on the first party website as long as it says single (Whether it's physical, digital, ringtone), maybe it should be made a rule that ringtones aren't included? Jayy008 (talk) 14:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I could bring it up for discussion? Also I see you have Billboard.Biz that's so cool, is it good? What type of things can you do? Is there like a search thing where you choose and album and it tells you it's sales (first week, total, anything)? Jayy008 (talk) 00:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd bring it up for discussion. I always thought of a ringtone certification as "separate" from single sales, i.e. I don't think physical/digital sales of a single are combined with sales of a ringtone. But maybe I'm wrong? In my personal opinion I don't think ringtone certification is really notable enough for an article. And yeah Billboard.biz is cool.... I've been a long-term subscriber, and when you pay for .biz you automatically get the print magazine in the mail too. There is a wider array of charts to look at and more archives to search on .biz. I also like the layout better... I think .com is way too busy and flash-intensive. It does not have exact sales figures, as they come from Nielsen Soundscan, and that would be a whole separate subscription service. Ever since .com did that big overhaul there is a lot more available to people.... for years you could only get the full charts and all those archives on .biz but then Billboard opened it up to everyone, which I guess makes things a lot easier for sourcing articles. - eo (talk) 11:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Got it, thanks for the info! I might get it but it's like twice the price if you're not in America :/. Yeah I'll bring it up for discussion only because next to it it either has DL or whatever the ringtone appreviation is, but what happens with Physical? I'll just see what people say, someone has reverted my edit anyway which changed it to Gold. Jayy008 (talk) 17:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Unusual You

Hi, I noticed that you put a redirect on the page "Unusual You" (The Britney spears song). At the time, i thought the re-direct was a good idea as discogs was the only source we could find. I always knew it was real as i own a copy of the CD Single. But now, there are reliable sources confirming the singles release. The Music Charting Industry confirms that the CD Single was released on 15 September 2009.[3] Also, it states that it was released worldwide, not just in Australia. If you look at 3 on that site, it states the pacific countries where it was released. It tells you where the CD Single was released and the EP was released. However, on the Unusual You CD single, it doesn't give a pacific area, which means it was released worldwide. I think that giving one of the most reliable sources on the net, that Unusual You can be a single on Wikipedia. Is it possible to put it back up? Thank - You--Apeaboutsims (talk) 02:22, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Done - eo (talk) 21:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Bubbling Under Hot 100

heya, do you or do you know anyone that has access to billboard.biz to source positions on the bubbling under chart? i'm trying to reliably source the psb ones but cant find anything. or if you know anywhere else that sources them? thanks :) Mister sparky (talk) 20:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

ooh thank you! well presumably we can use them. chartsplus for uk 75-200 position verification can be used and thats subscription only. could you give me the links to add them to the refs? or can u add them? :) Mister sparky (talk) 20:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

thank you! :) Mister sparky (talk) 20:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

another thing, sorry, does that book or billboard.biz have the canadian album chart positions? Mister sparky (talk) 21:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Why, yes it does! It's not something I ever thought to look for before, but .biz has Canadian singles, airplay and albums. - eo (talk) 11:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

ooh wonderful! would you be able to tell me psb album positions in canada? i added the certifications yesterday but would also be helpful to have the album positions. and any singles positions that are missing? sorry if i'm being cheeky... :p Mister sparky (talk) 19:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Argh, it's coming up with nothing, for both singles and albums. I'm guessing their archives are spotty for Canada albums and the Canadian Hot 100 is so new I doubt PSB have charted anything on it. I don't know where else there is an archive of Canadian charts. - eo (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

awww dammit. rpm magazine has an archive. but it means looking through every single chart they appeared on to find the peak position. i did start looking but it got too tedious after a lil while! i managed to find please (3), actually (16), disco (83) and behaviour (34) and discog (33). but theres lots missing and some of those must be wrong cuz they have quite a few albums certified... Mister sparky (talk) 19:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Certifications discussion

Please join this discussion Jayy008 (talk) 01:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

u r stupid —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.250.182 (talk) 01:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

uh huh. - eo (talk) 10:20, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Ingid Rodrigues

Crappy editing after third final warning. Her edit to Hilary Duff discography includes obvious falsehoods that cannot be viewed as good faith edits, such as sourcing Irish single positions to Swiss charts and Vietnamese positions to United Kingdom charts. The material itself seems to be copying bad and unsourced charts from articles to the discography, so I'm not sure that "vandalism" is exactly the right word. I'd apply WP:Competence is required and block on the basis that even if she means well, her presence is damaging and she doesn't seem to listen.—Kww(talk) 22:46, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

48 block given. We'll do the usual drill - if this doesn't help the situation, a longer block next time. Hopefully there won't be a "next time". - eo (talk) 00:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Billboard.biz

I wasn't meaning to stalk or anything LOL, but I was on a user's talk page and saw that you had a .biz subscription. Do you mind checking the peaks of Justin Bieber, Trey Songz, Chris Brown, and New Boyz songs that have charted on the Rhythmic Airplay? & about the login requirement you can use webcitation.org and click "Cite This Page" to use it. Candyo32 (talk) 00:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I can look, but I didn't think rhythmic airplay was a chart that is recommended for use? That's a component chart and these artists already have significant number of hits on the main Hot 100 and R&B charts. - eo (talk) 17:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Youtube as a source.

Apologies i assumed Youtube was credible on Ciara's page because it was from MaximTV's OFFICIAL chanel. Additionally its recieved coverage from Rap Up. Is this more preferred [4] compared to the youtube source?Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Last time i debated this, the following admin said this on my talk page. Do you think it would be ok to replace youtube with this source here?Lil-unique1 (talk) 17:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Tv ratings

Hello Eric, how are you? I'm just wandering where I stand on this. Recently I sourced all the 90210 season's ratings. The ratings that are there are overnight ratings (I didn't add, just sourced). However, a user removed the latest two and added others possibly preliminary ratings or final ratings, and for consistency in the article I reverted, so that all ratings were the same (overnight), was I okay to do this? Jayy008 (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey singles certifications

Hello Eric, On the above mentioned page, a few editors and myself have added certifications to all her singles available to us. However for a few coutries and time periods such as Australia proir to 1997 and New Zealand are very difficult to find, and many editors use such things as old book sources. I have tried to track them down but to no avail. However there is a website MariahDaily that has them listed, so I'd like to know if we could use that source for certifications we cannot find elsewhere. This site has proven to be reliable for many years and I alongside a few frequent editors believe so too. Here are the two links for the pages, here and here, you'll see the certifications I mean. What do you think?--PeterGriffin • Talk 23:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I support using Mariah Daily for facts only, as they've never been wrong and have Biz subscription, it makes it easier. Jayy008 (talk) 23:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I also support. I've often found info on MDJ which has been official and verified. The website has recieved official info from Mariah's management in the past.Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

A favour?

hey eric, hope you're good. could you take a look at User:RyanG222 please? he's being a nuisance on almost every article he edits and refuses to listen to advice and completely ignores all warnings by all other users. thanks :) Mister sparky (talk) 20:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

i cannot revert his edits at the Pixie Lott discography anymore as i'll be in violation of the 3RR, its sooo annoying lol Mister sparky (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I see what he's doing. I've asked him to explain his edits on the article Talk Page before editing it again. I ask that you do the same thing, if he begins a discussion. Perhaps if he won't talk to you on his page, he'll work with other editors there. I won't have a problem blocking him if he continues, and I doubt other admins would either. If I'm not around don't hesitate to take it to WP:AIV. - eo (talk) 20:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

thank you :) and looking at his contribs, it's not just that article he's been annoying people with lol Mister sparky (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Could you also take a look at User:Dropmoy? thanks :) Mister sparky (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoopsies

I removed your warning because the existing reference given for that row of the chart supported the information he added.—Kww(talk) 17:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

OK thanks for catching that. - eo (talk) 17:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

user page

Looks like it's been deleted by someone. The best answer is to move it to an appropriate sandbox page and add {{NOINDEX}} to the top, leaving the user a message as to why.—Kww(talk) 20:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Your rude edit summary

Hi. Instead of insulting my edit on the article of Vanity 6 (album) like you did here, why didn't you just tell me in a nice polite manner that there was a better way to do a track listing? There was no need for that edit summary of yours. It was rude. Caden ^cool 23:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Don't see how it is rude. I just set up columns and showed a better way to do it. Wasn't meant to be insulting. - eo (talk) 23:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Airplay, Billboard & Digital Charts review

Hello, i was wondering if you could give your opinion of the following as part of the final review process for WP:USCHARTS before it is fully promoted to policy. [5]. Thanks. Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Aspirin-c

I think we need to give him another day or two. It could be User:TrEeMaNsHoE, and could also be Brexx. We'll know for sure soon.—Kww(talk) 13:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

You were right - it was confirmed as Brexx. - eo (talk) 10:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Kylie Minogue

heyy, just thought as an admin i'd let you know, maybe you know a way of fixing it, at the moment there is a Kylie Minogue singles discography, a Kylie Minogue albums discography and a Kylie Minogue discography all currently active... Mister sparky (talk) 16:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Argh. OK let me look - eo (talk) 17:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

ANI for User: Lukek26

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic of the Janet Jackson discography which User:Lukek26 has been mass editing and reverting to incorrect edits. Thank you. Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Looks like he's been blocked already. No complaints from me! I'm gonna predict a lot of 189.xx.xx vandalism to Janet articles coming up. - eo (talk) 10:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Diana Ross discography

Hi, eo, this anon user User:86.134.140.31 has vandalised this discography, even after you let them know about such things on their talk page some days ago. Can you keep a look-out on this, please? Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 19:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Britney Spears articles protected

I put a lot of Britney Spears articles under full protection because of an edit-war going on between Petergriffin9901, GenieOFbritney, and Genieofmusic . It's pretty clearly a sourcing dispute, but everyone keeps calling everyone else a vandal so it's just not going anywhere. Since I've put the protections in place, I'm pretty much prohibited from taking a side in the dispute. Anything you can do to help these three actually agree on something would be greatly appreciated.—Kww(talk) 14:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

You May Delete But..

Hello To may who this concerns You may delete my Band and singles and albums and the rest But...

My User:UsLovePop/Liam, User:UsLovePop/S1 and other page do not delete. They have links to prove my pages like videos on youtube and Bebo and more links. You may delete the rest but not the ones about me personally Thank You

UsLovePop (talk) 04:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)Tuesday 27 April, 2010UsLovePop (talk) 04:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Can't Be Tamed page move

Thanks for doing this. I was actually having a conversation on the albums talk page because I wasn't quite sure whether both articles should be disambiguated or not. My intentions the entire time were to always keep it simple. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)