User talk:Calvin999/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Calvin999. 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.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

We Found Love

One of my favorites videos of the year. So flawless. And btw, I included it in the Criminal article. Xwomanizerx (talk) 23:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I haven't heard Criminal nor seen the video. I didn't even know it had been shot in England. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 23:19, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Good, but is it necessary to include a picture of her in a Britney article when Rihanna gets mentioned very little? BenWasHere (talk) 00:57, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Nearly two paragraphs are about RIhanna lol. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 10:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Looks more like half of that paragraph, but we can keep it. :) BenWasHere (talk) 10:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

She is mentioned in both. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

ok BenWasHere (talk) 20:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I'M TIRED

An IP is making nonconstructive edits on several Beyonce articles. P"lease do something. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I think you've done everything! lol Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Lol. I meant he deserves a warning. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Why don't you warn him then? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:57, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Am i allowed to do that? Don't i need to have some kind of rights? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Noooo I warn people who vandalise, remove AfD template and add WP:OR all the time. Well, not all the time, only when those three happen, which is frequently. I must have warned 5 people for removing the AfD templates on Skin and Fading. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Ahh okay. So it's better i do not leave him/her any warning. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I just warned him for adding Original research lol Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Message regarding the Skin (Rihanna song) deletion debate

Hello. This is a generic message that I am sending to all of the Wikipedia contributors who have aired their views on this deletion debate. Since you last contributed your perspective, the article has been significantly expanded. You may wish to change, alter or expand your argument in light of these developments at the discussion page. Thanks. SplashScreen (talk) 21:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Coldplay cover of WFL

Coldplay has covered "WFL"... I think it's pretty awful (and does nothing for Chris Martin's voice), but hey, it may be notable.--mikomango mwa! 23:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Ohh that's what the IP user mean't on the talk page of We Found Love. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 23:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I figured as much. It's a pretty terrible cover, but if enough people cover it I guess it will warrant a sub-section?--mikomango mwa! 04:27, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Defintely does not warrant a sub-section lol. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 09:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank goodness. It's pretty awful!!! lol--mikomango mwa! 19:30, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: Te Amo

Yes, Stargate produced the song. What difference does it make? Simply calling it a Latin song is still vague, and it's not a genre. Latin pop and Latin jazz are, but just Latin is not. Pancake (talk) 18:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

You said "Latin infused beat". Put it down as Latin pop then on the article, that's what it is. It's already been critically sourced as a latin song. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 19:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

End of Time

This is false. The last video is for "Dance For You". I smell an article to be created soon. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah that's why I reverted it..? lol. And she is releasing a deluxe edition track? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 13:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, i know. Lol. Well, she has done this in the past with "Ego". Not yet but she needs to release "Dance For You" to US urban radio. It has a 14 weeks-long run at the top of the US Hip Hop R&B songs chart written ll over it. "Schooling Life" is also single-worthy. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:07, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

End of Time and I Was Here are most single worthy in the UK. The UK loves her ballads and End of Time was promoted as well. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 13:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Hey Calvin, i need this article

Beyoncé agrees. The multiple Grammy Award winner cut her first Warren song this year when she recorded "I Was Here" for her album 4.
"When Diane first played me 'I Was Here,' I got chills," she recalls. "My album was just about done but I knew that this song had to be on it. I knew it was going to be a very special song. It just fit where I was in my life and expressed something I believed and wanted to share.
"As an artist," Beyoncé adds, "you want your music to mean something or to help someone get through something, and when a song has a great message and meaning, it is what you strive for."
The two plan to work together again on the forthcoming remake of "A Star Is Born," starring Beyoncé, according to Warren's manager, Merck Mercuriadis.

Cannot find it online. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't know. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 13:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I saw it here

www.ukmix.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=80903&start=9625

That's why i love these forums so much. They have everything about Beyonce but they forgot to add the link. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:24, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't think you could use forums on here? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 13:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Of course i know. What i meant is that they know about all her latest reviews, interviews, albums, songs, charts, etc. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, so you have found the website then? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 13:33, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

No. It has not yet been published online. The information is from a magazine. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 13:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

"All references must have a publisher"

You summarized your edit to We Found Love by saying,"Don't just undo my edit then, change the work parameter to a publisher parameter. All references must have a publisher/". Where did you hear that? Can you point me to some Wikipedia guideline or page that tells us that?

All this time I've been thinking that a publisher isn't mandatory if we have identified the website (as work). Especially since loads of refs just point to Billboard, for example, without mentioning whatever publisher was current. Rolling Stone, Amazon.com, BBC, etc.; all similar. But I've just had a long look at the link to Template:Cite web I gave you in my summary, and it seems I've been going the wrong way, preferring work to publisher. Still, I'd like to see something more definitive than that. So, can you point me to something sort of official? (And BTW, sorry about the revert.) Thanks, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 17:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Whenever there has been a missing publisher in any of my GANs, I've always been told to include it. I was under the impression that it doesn't matter if you don't have a work parameter, but you must have a publisher parameter, just like it doesn't matter if you don't have a date parameter, but must have an accessdate parameter. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, but that last bit is funny, too. I am sure I have read people's opinions that we don't always need both. The classic example is a reliable source (here, I don't just mean "reliable" in the Wikipedian sense of being a knowledgable expert, but in the sense that their published info isn't going to change or disappear on us), where the info is clearly dated. If the BBC puts a story online it will have a clear publish date, just like when The New York Times publishes a story on so-and-so date. With that date (and page number, URL, etc.), we've got enough to let any reader find our source for verification. This is really different from dynamic sites which show "latest news" contents, and stuff like Billboard's rollover of "this week's charts". So now, here's the same question about dates: have you seen anything authoritative (beyond some whiny Wikipedian at GAN) about having to have both? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 23:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

For saving "Fading" and "Skin" from the brink of deletion!!! You are the best!!! mikomango mwa! 01:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 11:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

"We Found Love"

Uploaded one screenshot: File:We found love ss1.jpg. LOL. Is it okay, or do we need another one? Novice7 (talk) 04:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

No that is great! Thank you. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 09:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

YW :) Btw, I also made another screenshot which shows Rihanna with a lighter and the bf with cigarettes in his mouth. Is that needed? Novice7 (talk) 11:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Where would it go in the article? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 12:10, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

The same Synopsis section. You can use the {{Multiple image}} template. Novice7 (talk) 12:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Can I see the pic? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 12:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

This one :) I uploaded it to Tinypic. You can upload it to Wikipedia. Novice7 (talk) 14:05, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Does that not infringe the whole "two living persons" thing? lol. And I don't know how to upload picturessss :/ Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I think it does. I had forgotten about this thread lol. Novice7 (talk) 03:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Question

Can you please give your opinion about this? Thanks in advance. :) - Saulo ^{Talk to Me} 00:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

"Fading" back

Hi Calvin, I've started reviewing "Fading" at Talk:Fading (song)/GA2. I haven't started with the prose, but I've done the rest and spotted a few issues. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Done the review. The ball's in your court now. Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 12:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Question about Marry the Night

Who told you that "Digital download release takes presedence over radio release."? I'm just wondering because I have never heard about this. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 18:05, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

All articles follow this. Rihanna articles do, there has been been discussions about it as well. And because I am from England, I guess we look upon digital release as a single, not radio. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:09, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Can you give me a link to an example, preferably an article that you have not been involved in? —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 18:18, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

I really do not agree with this. A radio release (US) should be preferred because it is simply logical. How can you tell me that "Fly" is getting released after "Princess of China" now. Pardon me but it's a bit ridiculous. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 03:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Because PoS is released digitally on October 25 and Fly on October 28. I've always followed this because I've been corrected when I've used the radio release. If it can be shown that radio should be used, then obviously I will change it. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 11:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

This what we have always been doing. If i am not wrong, it all got changed because of a Rihanna article. A US radio release = release, simply because US counts airplay. With 200 AI, you can reach top 3 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart. (Not counting downloads). ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Probably because of what happened with Man Down and California King Bed, no? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:30, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

MD was released before CKB. It's crystal clear to me and the world outside Wikipedia. If you do not add the US radio date in the infobox, what's the use of having it in the Radio and release history section? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) MD was released to radio before CKB, but CKB was released digitally before MD. That's where it came from. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I see May 3 for MD and May 16 for CKB. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

yeah, then the whole thing about digital takes presedence thing came about and the order was changed to CKB first and MD after. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I do not agree. digital takes precedence is meaningless (if i can say so) when it comes to the US. If you do not consider a US radio release date, it should not even be in the release history. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Where is that discussion? I want to see who participated in it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

With all respect i owe to you, this is kind of ridiculous. (I am not trying to be rude... It's only the truth). ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I can't remember, I just remember it got changed because of those releases. But if it is a rule that US radio signals a single release then I will change the relevant articles. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes do so, you know people are criticizing Wikipedia because of this and that. Lol. See you later. Take care. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Why? It makes more sense to me... Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:04, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Lol. I prefer not to show you what they wrote on atrl.net. You would die laughing but here it is: Never believe Wikipedia. I could edit the page and say it was released in Antartica. Byeeeeeeeee. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:08, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Whattttt. That's stupid. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:09, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

It might be stupid for you but it makes sense. People here want to call "Party" a single (It is not a single). And i will have to abide by it although the entire Beyhive knows that it has not yet got the Beyonce type of single treatment with a nice commentary from Columbia. But Wikipedia simply won't agree. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Party is a single... Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay, it is a single. I will not comment any further here on this. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Because by your own reasoning Jivesh, a radio release date constitutes a single in America (as well as the fact that it is being digitally released). Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

It was not released to radio. And i will re-construct the article in two days to prove it. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 01:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

But the article says Urban radio?! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 12:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

It was not released to Urban radios. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

But this says it was, and I assume you wrote it?! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon!

Yes, i corrected it as my friend asked me to do and you know there was then that discussion on its talk-page. By the way, the fifth one and the last three here are not awards. It is not the right place to place those things. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

So, it has or hasn't been released to Urban radio?! lol. And I class them as awards/barnstars., it's still someone giving recognition for what you do. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Okay as you wish. No, it was never released. Allaccess is shit for Urban releases. R&R is the best and i have other sources to prove it. I will edit "Party" tomorrow. I am tired. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Fading

	Yet Not Gone
	Congratulations on bringing "Fading" to good article status! Hope the review process was to your liking! Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :). Btw, it says it's been failed on the Good Article Nominations update on my watchlist :/ Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:07, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Huh? I passed it and posted it on WP:GA. Perhaps because the old "failed" box is up there? Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:13, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Look here. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:14, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

That's a load of... Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I've ask the GA bot person why it's done it. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I may have had to remove the old Failed GA nomination thingy Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Just leave it, it's the Bot's fault. Can you put the AfD one into the article milestones please? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I'll get on that. Not quite familiar with this template, so... Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:41, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Best Think I Never Had

for BTINH, its August 9 for CD Single and September 2 for remixes ep......you have no proof that BTINH was released as a digital download in the UK on July 3, unless you can provide an iTunes or Amazon source that states the digital release date for July 3, then you cant add it.. lots of release dates get pushed back, just because Digital Spy is not up-to-date, doesn't mean, wikipedia has to be that way too........ digital spy has many out-of-date secnroios, first with BTINH, then Wet, then Fly, then Countdown......they all got pushed/back or cancelled, but digital spy didn't update that's all.......for uk release date, you have to check itunes uk or amazon uk, places where you can actually buy the song, not a random site that reviewed the song......so please don't revert, im helping, not vandalizing... Tara1717 (talk) 20:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't care about that. It's no excuse for you removing part of a Critical reception section, an entire Chart performance section, all four sub-sections of the Music video section and the Live performance section. That is why you got warned twice. And Digital Spy is one of the most reliable sources you can use for Wikipedia, it is not out of date. And yes, I will revert you, the first time I thought you removed almost have the article as a result of a mistake, but the fact that you did it again constituted vandalism, which is not helpful. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 20:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

It actually was a mistake believe it or not.......i don't know how those other stuff got removed....all what i was working on was in the release history....my computer was acting up...again, sorry for the misunderstanding....Tara1717 (talk) 21:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Skin

Hey i saw "Skin" was kept. I am very happy for you. So, i think i will also create articles for "I Care", "Start Over" and "Rather Die Young". I will try to see if i can collect enough information about "Schoolin' Life" as well. (It has to be a single). I love it very much. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 08:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I would only create them if they have more info than Skin, because if they have less, they might find reason to AfD it, and if there is less info, more people might vote delete. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I will take your advice into consideration. Have you ever had a look at the Afd of "Freakum Dress". It was never-ending. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:28, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

OMG, a re-direct, a delete, an overturn and a keep. haha. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 19:03, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Lol. Look at the third one. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 02:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Listen top the song here on YouTube... A troll has started but can't stop... The time has come for you to teach him a lesson... There are two songs hidden in my post. Let's see how clever you are. Lol. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 05:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Nice one

I gotta say Aaron, I was just reading the music video section for "We Found Love", and I'm really impressed! I think your grammar is very much improved; it reads very clearly. Nice work buddy :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 22:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I wrote the entire article, apart from the Covers section :) Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 22:44, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I see, its definitely one of your best! Keep it up :) What do you think of the video BTW?--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:12, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I wrote Talk That Talk too :P. I like the video, it's very cinematic, but i don't think she should have used such strong sexual and drug related themes. This is her third video in 10 months which has caused a backlash lol. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 23:13, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Please participate

Here. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:18, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Rehab (Rihanna song)

What do you mean by "no, it's not"? The song charted on the Slovak, as well as on the Czech airplay chart(s), which are officially titled Rádio Top 100 Oficiálna, resp. Rádio Top 100 Oficiální. Either there are supposed to be included in the brackets names of the charts (such as Canadian Hot 100, Dutch Top 40, etc) or recording industry organisations (IFPI, RIANZ etc). But I'd rather say you want to confuse readers actually, thinking that rankings of this single's release were based on sales in both of the discuussed countries, which is false. Uzerakount (talk) 12:48, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

But they are published by [[IFPI] etc., you put the recording association. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 13:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I have updated the record org. IFPI with relevant singles charts for Slovak (Rádio Top 100 Oficiálna) and Czech (Rádio Top 100 Oficiální) singles entries, which was correct. It seems you are confused about what is what actually. See some of singles entries in the Rihanna's article:

"Austria (Ö3 Austria Top 75)" - Ö3 Austria Top 75 is the name of the Austrian singles chart, NOT the record org./publisher itself, which would be Musikmarkt actually.
The same as for "Denmark (Tracklisten)" - Tracklisten is a Danish Top 40 singles chart, NOT the name of the relevant record org. Those are IFPI Denmark along with the Nielsen Company for Denmark.

For no reason, you wanna keep one and the same record org. (IFPI) for Slovakia and Czech Republic, even we have relevant singles charts articles for those countries (ie. Rádio Top 100 Oficiálna) and (Rádio Top 100 Oficiální) on Wikipedia. FYI: Almost every European chart is published on behalf of IFPI - which is a general link in fact. Uzerakount (talk) 14:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

IFPI is the publishing company for those countries! All articles use IFPI!!!!!!!!!!! Stop this now. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 15:03, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you think that I mind your nonsense. I have updated a huge number of songs articles with the mentioned Slovak/Czech airplay chart links - amongs them were also several GA articles -, and noone complained but you. I think you are in troubles on your own. Do I mind? Nope ,-) Uzerakount (talk) 18:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Not everyone keeps such a close eye on articles as I do, and it's never been an issue bought up in any of my GANs. Byeee Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 19:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, you definitely proved you have a "closed" eye, instead a "close" one. Cheeeeeers ,-)

Princess of China

The European Hot 100 chart by Billboard Magazine was the only official European singles chart until last December when it was discontinued. There is currently no official substitute for it, and even the chart that is referred to here is called "European Top 100." It is not the same chart. It's highly questionable to accept statistics from personal, private or unofficial charts and make it appear that it's the same chart. Widr (talk) 17:33, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Lot's of articles still have it? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Lots of people don't know the difference or they just don't care. Many websites are running their own charts and claiming to be real, but that doesn't make them official. Widr (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC).

Hi

Hi, wanna be friends?

Tara1717 (talk) 23:25, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Breakin' Dishes

I probably don't need to tell you... but I will. Done my review. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I know lol, thanks. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 00:29, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Please don't stop

	Breakin' Dishes
	Well, these are still in one piece. You seem to do a good job "Breakin' Dishes", so let's get started! Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:49, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

haaaa. Thanks! Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 23:52, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Here's the sample: File:Rihanna - Breakin' Dishes.ogg. Novice7 (talk) 06:22, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :) Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:56, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Sorry

Hey Calvin, how are you? Please do not think i was avoiding you. I came for only a few minutes. I woke up early to revise. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 03:02, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Lol, I know, I was just surprised to see you on that that time. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:02, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Anyway, hope you are fine my friend? ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:06, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes I'm good, how are you? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Really bad. My paper today (Maths > Mechanics Part 1) was terrible. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:12, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

That's sound hard. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I feel like crying. I see my chances of getting an A in Maths fading. The minimum marks i am expecting are this.

Paper 1: 64 over 75
Paper 3: 65 over 75
Paper 4 (today): 28 over 50
Paper 6: 43 over 50.

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:17, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Would you not be satisfied with a B? Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:21, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

To be frank No. And my mom will keep telling me my whole life that i scored a B. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I think it's bad that you wouldn't be happy with a B. I would have loved to have even got a C in Maths (I was really bad at it, my worst subject), I even tried re-sitting and missed getting a C by 1%. Let's be honest here, a B is hardly shit. For my GCSEs, I got A*, A, B, B, B, B, B, C, C, D. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:28, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

For me GCSE i got 7 distinctions

English A*
French A*
Chemistry A*
Maths A*
Additional Mathematics A
Physics A
Biology A

I really do not want to disappoint my parents. My dad works really hard to give me everything he can. But my parents are too demanding. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:32, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

That's what I mean, you are clearly good at it, I don't understand why you would be disappointed with a B. You can only do as best as you can. It's like in my French GCSE, I was predicted to get an A, and I got a B overall (Our French GCSEs are made up of 25% Speaking exam, 25% Reading exam, 25% Writing exam and 25% Listening exam). I got an A* for my Speaking, but overall, I was 4 marks off of an overall A, and I was really disappointed, but that's how it goes. Whatever you get, you get. I got 98% for my Graphics and Design exam, and 100% for the coursework, and got an A* overall, and was really pleased. So it kinda compensated for my French grade. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC) Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I have to go. Take care. Happy editing. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:38, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

But Calvin, my parents are different. They do not like the word compensate or phrases such as i am not the only one who worked so bad or the papers were tough this year. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:45, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

We've had this conversation before, and you know my opinions. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm, i forgot. Lol. Please tell me again. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 18:49, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's fair how your parents pressure you like this, your not exactly doing poorly at school, you are doing well. Pushy parents, as it's called in the UK, tend to in turn push their children away from them as a result of pushing them at school, and they rebel against their strict regimes. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 18:52, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

There's much truth in what you posted. Thanks for being here for me Calvin. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 04:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Please let us know what you think

My friend, as you know, Beyonce's new album 4 is being handled in a catastrophic way (i do not know if this is a correct word). Please voice your opinion here so that we can decide which format will suit "Party" that best. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:35, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

When nominating a FA/FL

When nominating a FA/FL remember to use this template: {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} and add it to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. For "name of article" you would put "Hard (song)" and for "archive number" you would put "archive2". So, it would read as: {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hard (song)/archive2}}. Just for future reference as I was trolling your edits. (: - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 05:57, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleting material with (temporarily) unreachable refs

Hi, Calvin. I noticed your recent edit to Rihanna discography and I thought I'd drop you a note. I have no problem with the deletion of Bubbling Under peaks, even if they're well-referenced (although they often aren't). The thing is, sometimes web sites aren't immediately responsive, or the server is being restarted, or there's some temporary glitch in the network, or your browser is impatient and times out. In any case, it can well be that an online resource is temporarily unavailable, so we needn't rush to remove it and the claims it's supporting. Give it a little time (maybe you did in this case). As it happens, the ref you deleted opened up right away the first time I tried it.

In general, I wouldn't just delete something I think is probably a good link (or was a good link); first I'd try to find an alternate source, then if I didn't find anything (or if I weren't ready to spend the time searching) I'd tag it with {{Dead link}} so that maybe somebody else can dig something up. That template also serves as kind of a warning that the material might get deleted soon (whatever "soon" might turn out to be).

Again, I won't shed any tears for the disappearance of Bubbling Under numbers from a Hot 100 column, but I would have waited/tagged the ref first, and replaced the 110 with a dash ("—") second (seems sensible to leave the Hot 100 column, even when empty, IMHO). Maybe that's an approach you'd like to consider in future edits. Regards, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 10:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I know the link doesn't work, I just tried it, once again, and it will not open. It was the same one that was used on Wait Your Turn, which also showed the link as not working, and that was over 2 months ago. Trying to find sources for the Bubbling Under chart nearly 2 years after the song charted is extremely difficult. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 12:26, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

I just tried it again, and it works for me. I wonder what browser you're using. In Internet Explorer (ver. 6!) it opens fine for me, in Firefox 3 it opens, but Firefox helpfully (I mean cluelessly) strips out the XML structure, so all I'm left to look at is run-together gibberish: "Hot Videoclip Tracks2009-12-19405SinglesRihannaWait Your TurnSRP/Def JamIDJMG161...". But it does open, at least for me. What error or result do you get? Have you tried different browsers? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 13:09, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Still doesn't work for me. It's just a white screen. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 14:04, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Timbaland

I can't count the grammatical mistakes on two hands! All around, this is not a good article. Timbaland BenWasHere (talk) 14:07, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Lol why are you telling me this?! Work in improving it :) Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 14:24, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

hmm... good question lol :) wll do! BenWasHere (talk) 14:45, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Rude boii

Calvin, I apologize for not being able to close the Rude boy GAR. Real life call was too big to avoid. I'm back now, any help you want I would be happy to give. Great work going on the Rihanna articles I see. PS, "We Found Love" music video is just so haunting! — Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:11, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 14:38, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

See

http://www.rap-up.com/2011/11/05/rihanna-reveals-talk-that-talk-tracklisting/

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

It says below that it is not the final sequence. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:44, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 17:47, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Signature test

Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk

Great ^^^^. Thanks for these lovely words. Really made me cheer up. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 12:05, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

:) Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 12:21, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Pon De Replay

I understand you want a sourced thingy for Pon De Replay as an R&B song, so I did that but you changed it back, why though, when I've done as you've asked for init?MariaJaydHickment (talk) 21:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that Discogs is a critical source written by a credible and professional reviewer though, and another review also reverted you, so I am obviously not the only one who realizes that Discogs is not reliable enough for genres. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 21:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Yahoo Music is that alright for you or are you gonna find a problem with that?MariaJaydHickment (talk) 21:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Isn't critical commentary. I don't think Yahoo is reliable enough either, as they are usually derived from blogs, and we don't use blogs. I wrote the article for Pon de Replay as part of preparing it for GAN, and I look through a lot of reviews, and I never found one which specifically that stated is an R&B song, I would have found it if it existed. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 21:15, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

For fuck sake bruv, grow up will you, Yahoo is reliable so is Discogs, Windows Media Player, iTunes is as well don't like it grow up init?MariaJaydHickment (talk) 21:18, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Up yours http://www.amazon.co.uk/rihanna-pon-de-replay-Music/s?ie=UTF8&keywords=Rihanna%20Pon%20de%20Replay&rh=n%3A754576%2Ck%3ARihanna%20Pon%20de%20Replay&page=1 that is reliable, so I think I won MariaJaydHickment (talk) 21:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Keep going mate, keep going. It's not me who looking worse and worse with your disrespectful comments. If you want to get blocked, you are going the right way about it. Don't say I didn't warn you. And why have you given me a list of CD's on Amazon for Pon de Replay? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 21:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I think you're blind mate, get your guide dog to point it out to you, look on it, and guess what, would you believe it...? Oh my days what's the genre, R&B, oh, it's reliable and you get me blocked and I would report you for being sexist and treating me as shit 'cause of me being a woman, if you don't want that I'd go and shut up or if not I will report you and we'll see 'cause I've got the upper hand you're being out of order to another member, no wait a female member on here, I'm sure Wikipedia don't want that would they?MariaJaydHickment (talk) 21:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

We Found Love

LOL fail. I never even noticed this. Yeah, it's definitely way too big now to not have its own article. — Status {^talk_contribs 21:42, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I created Rihanna's We Found Love yesterday. I'm not really sure how the Music video section should be condensed once the info has been moved from We Found Love to Rihanna's We Found Love, like, what should be left and what shouldn't? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 21:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I watch your page. :P I've pasted it into the article, and I think it should be moved to (video), since "Rihanna's We Found Love" isn't the title of it. Thriller is like that because that's how it's labelled and such. Following the first paragraph in the background section, could be removed. The synopsis is fine as it is. Some of the reviews could be removed, and the controversial and comparisons could be chopped a bit down in size. Think of these sections as the lead to the video article. — Status {^talk_contribs 21:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

There's not much point in saying that you think the title should be changed if you are going to change it anyway lol. I think shortening the paragraphs will make it the same length it was before the addition of Britney, kind of making the move into a separate article a bit pointless. I'm reluctant to crop things a lot. Looking at it as a separate article, I'm surprised at how big it is. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

LOOL. Impulsive me. xD I personally wouldn't worry about it, and think that a "see also" tag should just be placed in its place for the time being. Yeah, it's pretty big! :) Imagine with it the awards ~~it's going to get~~ it may receive. Still needs a lead as well. :) Too bad the video doesn't have a "We Found Love" title in it for the infobox image. :( — Status {^talk_contribs 22:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Lol. I think Agyness Deyn should be added to the info box as a Narrator. Yeah, a tag needs to be added, but the Music video section needs to be really cut now. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:16, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you think that the domestic violence case between Rihanna and Chris should have its own article? I mean, it was a pretty big deal an d there is a hell of a lot of coverage about it. Should Criminal's article be linked as a "see also"? And already did it. Haha. I meant as in deleting the music video section on We Found Love and just having the title "music video" then "See...", for the time being at least. — Status {^talk_contribs 22:22, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't know. It's a good idea. Lol, why suggest after you edit! lol. Yeah you could do that, I removed quite a lot from the Background and Critical reception section on We Found Love. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you know of any admins online right now? — Status {^talk_contribs 22:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't really know any admins :S. Why? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Ah, alright. I'm in need of one to do a history merge. xD — Status {^talk_contribs 22:52, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Promise

This time i am telling you for sure. If you wait for me till Wednesday, i will craft an amazing one for you. Just post me all the reviews of the songs. And i men it, ALL the reviews. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 03:24, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. The second paragraph of the critical reception was what was in the composition section, it was basically reviews, but I know it shouldn't be like that. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 11:02, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Another discussion, this time regarding "Love on Top"

First of all, my sincere thanks for your participation in previous Beyonce-related discussion. I request you to please weigh your opinion here. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 06:36, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Re:

*world crashes down* Kidding. ;) I don't understand what you mean? Less than four letters = losercase. Unless it's a noun of course. — Status {^talk_contribs 15:21, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh. Well, I wanted to make the article, as I will be taking it to GAN, eventually. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Cockiness, love it. ;) LOL, I could really care less buddy. :L It will sure be able to be removed though. Sucks JustJared is banned as a source... they have full song credits and a review. :( — Status {^talk_contribs 15:26, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Lol okayyy. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:29, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Have you heard the snippets? :D I am really excited! — Status {^talk_contribs 15:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

It sounds very dance/club orientated this time around. The first six sound basically the same. I like the sound of Drunk on Love, sounds a bit like Te Amo. Don't like the sound of Roc Me Out. Watch n' Learn sounds like she is trying to get the reggae feel, but not really pushing it, it's a bit half hearted. Farewell sounds nice. I'm not that really feeling what I've heard, 90% of the songs sound the same. I'll still buy it, obviously, but on first listen, I don't think it's as good as Loud. Loud set the benchmark for her career, and I'm not sure if Talk That Talk is better. Loud had such a variety of sounds, that's what made it so good. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:53, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. I am very disappointed in her working with Luke. Glad to see her working with Dream again though; too bad they are only the bonus tracks. Loud was the shit at first listen, yes. At least she has six songwriting credits on this baby! After this album, she really needs to take a damn break. I can't pick out any singles from the snippets. :( Still excited though; it's Rih. Even if the album sucks, the artwork is sure to be fire. :D — Status {^talk_contribs 16:03, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

That's the thing, instead of taking time out to experience life and see the world apart from going to arena to arena, she will get a new perspective on life and things to sing about. I feel like with this album, because she hasn't done what I just said, she has made a generic dance pop album. This is stuff that she would have done in 2005/2006. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:06, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Rumor Has It (Adele song)=

Hi, yes my username is based on one of rihanna's new songs....anyway, there are a couple of users who keep reverting my edits to Rumor Has It (Adele song), it was never released as a single...and Billboard recentley reported that it's release got scrapped and that the label is releasing Set Fire To The Rain instead.........i told them that they have to provide sources to prove that it's a single, but they didn't provide anything.....they can't keep information that is false and unsoruced.....there is no proof that it was released as a single, and they keep putting that fake cover art...what should i do?...Your help will be appreciated... Cockinesss (talk) 22:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

You've done nothing wrong, apart from breaking the 3 revert rule. It's 'not a single, there is no source for it. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

He reverted your edits....what should we do?..shall we report him?Cockinesss (talk) 22:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I just reverted him and explained why he was wrong. He didn't even provide sources confirming that it is the fourth single. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Do you have Facebook?...I always like making new friends.....Cockinesss (talk) 22:48, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I do...lol Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 22:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

What is it?...ill add you....Cockinesss (talk) 22:58, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I haven't given out my Facebook to anyone on here. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 23:00, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

You Da One/Talk That Talk source

I see that you're developing the YDO article. I hope this will come in handy - [1]. SplashScreen (talk) 09:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

How do you know? lol. Thanks. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 11:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Talk That Talk snippets

Convinced by her new album ? Pixelyoshi (discuter) 16:23, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

No. Lol. But I think with anything, you need to listen to things a few times before you decide if you hate/dislike/like/love something. At the moment, I'm not really feeling it as a whole at the moment. But that might change, they are only snippets, after all. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm loving the snippets, but I'm also shocked...the "dirtiest pop record ever" recorded? -- http://www.vh1.com/music/tuner/2011-11-09/album-preview-rihannas-talk-that-talk-is-the-dirtiest-pop-record-since-madonnas-erotica/ -- WOW.--mikomango mwa! 20:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you Calvin. I'm still waiting her first compilation lol. I loved her before Rated R. Now, her albums are good but less than her previous efforts (GGGB and AGLM eras)... Why doesn't she another powerful ballad like "Unfaithful" ? Pixelyoshi (discuter) 13:44, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I just listened to You Da One in full on Rihanna Unlocked on facebook and I actually quite like the mixed of subtle reggae vibes and dubstep. I'm not a huge fan of Music of the Sun or A Girl like Me, I do like half of Good Girl Gone Bad (mainly the singles), I really liked Rated R and I absolutely loved Loud. I will probably end up really liking Talk That Talk, but I can't really give a definitive answer yet as to whether I like it or not because I've only heard snippets, and you can't really judge it wholly it 30 second clips. But I do really like You Da One. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 13:48, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you will know newt week if you like or not ;) Pixelyoshi (discuter) 13:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I meet her next week :O Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 13:55, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Best Thing I Never Had

User:Jivesh boodhun keeps adding in the release history section of Best Thing I Never Had that it was released as a digital download on July 3, he fails to provide a reliable source...he's putting Digital Spy as a source, which is not reliable...anyway, i went to Amazon.co.uk and iTunes UK and i can't find Best Thing I Never Had with a july 3 date...all i see is a remixes ep with a september 2 date..........Cockinesss (talk) 19:20, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Digital Spy is a very reliable source. It is one of the most reliable and frequented ones that we use in music articles. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 19:22, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Not really, they were wrong with Wet and Countdown and many others...they said that Wet is gonna be released on August 29 but it didnt and same with Countdown, they said it was gonna be released on October 30 but it wasnt...anyway, if it was really released on July 3 as a digital download, why isn't it on iTunes UK or Amazon UK?Cockinesss (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I see you don't have any answer.......just becuase he's your friend, doesn't mean you have to defend him...he's not always right......if it was really released on July 3, then it would be in Amazon UK or iTunes UK and the release date would show that, but there isnt any of that.....the song charted in july in the UK due to downloads from the album, which was released on June 27 in the uk......for release dates, the sources should amazon or itunes, places were you can actually buy a song.....not a random site like digital spy, digital spy makes mistakes, it made many mistakes before with countdown and wet and marry you and many more...Cockinesss (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Cockiness, I went out this evening with friends, just because I didn't answer straight away, doesn't mean I won't eventually, I mean, I've been pretty swift on replying to you so far. Believe it or not, I do actually have a life outside of editing on Wikipedia. I don't care if my friends are right or wrong. If they are right, they are right. If they are wrong, they are wrong, and I have no problem with disagreeing with someone on something. Best Thing I Never Had is the second single, I remember her saying it at Glastonbury. You need to learn to wait and be patient with replies, the world does not revolve around you. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 23:13, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I know that it is the second single in the UK...all im saying that there is no july 3 date for the uk...here is how it is:

June 27 : Album released in the UK, one week later it debuted at the UK Singles Chart due to strong digital downloads form the album.

August 9: Best Thing I Never Had UK CD Single

September 2: Best Thing I Never Had - Digital Remixes Ep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cockinesss (talk • contribs) 23:44, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Ask Jivesh to come and look at this then. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 23:52, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Your opinion on Lift Off (song) and Marry You

Hi again, i need your opinion regarding Lift Off (song) and Marry You, are they songs, singles, or promotional singles?

I can't find any radio adds for Marry You and i don't see it on iTunes or Amazon, and no proof that the cover art is real, because the source they gave is this and that site often puts fake covers and it says that its a promo single, so, what do u think?

With Marry You, it seems that it's in the same situation as Wet (Nicole Scherzinger song), yet Marry You is listed as a single and Wet is listed as a promo single....

As for Lift Off, it was only listed by Allacess while R&R, which has so far listed all releases by Jay-Z from WTT and other albums, does not list it.Cockinesss (talk) 16:59, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I can't actually see sources in either which state they are official singles. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:04, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

So, shall i change them both to songs?Cockinesss (talk) 17:30, 11 November 2011 (UTC) User:Muhandes keeps reverting my edits when i change Marry You.Cockinesss (talk) 17:31, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

You are right in that there are no sources for Marry You being a single, it's not. But Lift Off was released to US radio, and when a song is released to radio or given digital download, it generally means that it is a single. See Raining Men (song), it was only ever released to radio, yet it is the third single from Loud (Rihanna album). Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 17:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

User:Mister sparky reverted your edits on Marry You, what shall we do?

Cockinesss (talk) 19:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

oh btw, heres another calling marry you a single, with the release date. as you say yourself below, "a very reliable source. It is one of the most reliable and frequented ones that we use in music articles". just saying, you need to be consistent with your decisions. Mister sparky (talk) 01:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Where is the release date? If there is no release date/you can't find one, then it won't be permitted to be listed as a single. All singles have release dates. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 01:25, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

erm the bit that says "Released on Monday, Aug 22 2011".... looks like a release date to me. Mister sparky (talk) 23:46, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Use it then. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 23:48, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

R

What do you mean how to upload pictures? — Status {^talk_contribs 00:21, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Like, can you upload a picture? lol Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 00:30, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Of course? :P LOL, IKR. What in the world is this... — Status {^talk_contribs 01:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Okay, because I think it would be quite good to have a double image comparing Rihanna "drowning" and Britney "drowning" lol. And what is IKR? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 01:37, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

So you want some screenshots? "IKR" to the message on my talk you just left, silly. xD — Status {^talk_contribs 01:38, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I think a double image to go into the References to popular culture section showing them both drowning would be quite good, to show the comparions lol. But what does IKR actually stand for, that's what I mean't lol. I'm going to bed now, it's 1:40am :O. See you later. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 01:41, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, it stands for "I know right". xD Goodnight. They should be uploaded and on the article by the time you awake. ;) — Status {^talk_contribs 01:42, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Lol okay thanks. 15:25, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Comments

Thank you for your comments on the review for "Disturbia", I am fairly new to reviewing so it would be great if you could give any input you may have. I have put the article back on review. Basilisk4u (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

That's okay. Generally speaking; dead links, unformatted references and a flurry of prose issues would normally constitute a fail. But the article has been waiting a long time. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 01:42, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I think that a lot of these things can be fixed fairly easily though, as opposed to some others at the GAN. I kind of want to clear out some nominations that are very far from GA criteria out of the backlog. I have looked at Degradation Trip and Love Always and I think they need a lot of work before they can be considered for GA and should probably be quick-failed and renominated once they have been fixed. Maybe if you have time we could clear out some of those articles from the GAN to make room for other nominees? Basilisk4u (talk) 03:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't really review anymore. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

This is what i call an amazing song

[2]

★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 07:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I also like it :) ! — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 12:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

I do love this song. I listened to it 15 times yesterday. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:22, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Where can i download it for free? I need it on my mobile. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:26, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Youtube? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:27, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

That won't work for me. ★Jivesh 1205★ (talk / ♫♫Give 4 a try!!!♫♫) 15:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Hey, we haven't talk for a while, cause I was very busy in real life with my school. Now I have some free time. I wait for prose comments on the "Disturbia" review. And just to say that We Found Love (video) looks great, but why there is not any info about the video in the article for the song. Maybe you can write just the main aspects from all the sections? Cause it looks very poor without any info. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 12:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I did cut the sections down, but it just wasn't right. There is so much info, that cutting it right down just wasn't informational to the reader. Lots of articles have only the link to another page in a section instead of having prose. It doesn't make it look weak at all, because there is not any prose. It's much more concise to have to no prose and the link instead of lacking prose. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:24, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

MOS:SUMMARY. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 15:48, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 15:53, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Articles should have summaries if they have subarticles. Until then, stick this on. Remember that although you are writing a summary, ti should still be sourced because it is part of the body. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 16:22, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Not sure how this works. Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 16:23, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

You did it right. No worries. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 16:29, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

That's what I meant. Thank You Penguin ;) ! — Tomica1111 • Question Existing? 17:59, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Re:Rumour Has It

I never said it was. I reverted because he was edit warring and violating the 3RR. Toa Nidhiki05 17:58, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, and in turn revert to it being a single.... Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 18:42, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Pon De Replay IS an R&B song

All music says it is and in the wikipedia page itself "Musically, "Pon de Replay" draws influence from the musical genres of dance-pop and R&B infused beats" so we can keep it like that yeah?MariaHickment (talk) 20:06, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Do people not read edit summaries???? I SAID: Don't put sources in the lead or info box, write actual prose in the Composition section... Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 20:07, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll give you that but can we have it as R&B, dancehall, dance-pop as in the article there is a statement that says Pon de Replay draws influence from the musical genre of dance-pop and R&B infused beats? MariaHickment (talk) 20:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

So if you knew that was there, why did you add the same source to the Lead and Info box?? Calvin • ^TalkThatTalk 20:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Dunno, but thanks for adding it ;)MariaHickment (talk) 16:59, 13 November 2011 (UTC)