Jump to content

User talk:Chasewc91/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Ke$ha-Tik Tok.ogg

I just wanted to take the time to thank you for ading a better rationle to Tik Tok.ogg file i uploaded and removing the eletion tag because i was confused what to do.Again thank you so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anesleyp (talk • contribs) 23:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

warning??

i went on wikipedia to do some research and i received a message stating that the posts i posted were false claims .. althougn they are not. although i may not be the actual person who i wrote about or added information upon (which are the rules i followed) i do work in the company. theres also proof on the sites. so please let me know on how i can send that proof to you because i dont want to be considered as a false claimer. that message scared me in a way i didnt know what to do as a matter of fact im confused on why wikipedia believes the claims are false. like i stated previously i have no problem showing more proof. thank you for your time. -byron mcneish (akon's sound engineer) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.201.58 (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Rated R (Rihanna album)

How u doing? I am asking for assistance on the matter I posted on the noticeboard. THere is a user that keeps reverting my sourced material about the album's genres, in which I quote both the artist's view on the genre and a journalist, as well as citing several other critics on the genres and musical style. He has just reverted this material without explanation, along with other minor edits in which I explained myself as well. Just see the article's history. Other users, including User:MariAna Mimi and you, have responded to him. What should be done with this matter? Dan56 (talk) 22:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

R U talkin about editors of the article or any other editors? Dan56 (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The Fame Monster

Gotcha!--Resbusha (talk) 18:01, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

GA review of "Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song)"

Thank you for your comments at the above article's GAN. However, the reviewer is vehemently denying to step down and is basically saying that the article is un-encyclopedic because it doesnot talk about anything else other than Gaga. Of course it will talk about Gaga, it is a GAga song! I honestly donot understand how he can even think of reviewing the article when rules clearly state that editors associated with editing the article are not allowed to do so. He is clearly going against rules as well as WP:AGF. Not to mention, making absurd demands like we have to contact Gaga's record company and gain their consensus regarding the article. You were previously associated with such a case in the Hilary Duff article where you were asked to step down and you happily did. However, Im completely baffled as to how an editor can be so biased when editing? --Legolas (talk2me) 06:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Will you take a look at this. Comment on what are your thoughts about how I edit and the article "Paparazzi". Be frank, if you think what I do is crap, say it. --Legolas (talk2me) 11:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

props on Right Round article

Hi, the article is looking good but I noticed a couple things that could be touched up...the repeated mentions that Kesha wanted to "make it on her own" in different sections of the article. I think only one mention of this would be sufficient, possibly with the other fact that Atlantic did not want her as a "featured" artist on the billing. Also, there are a couple other things that repeat down at the bottom "music video" section, which makes the article feel a bit cumbersome by that point (with all the repeating of sentences and facts). Anyway, it looks good otherwise and I be happy to tweak it if you are busy with other stuff. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Correctionpatrol4 (talk • contribs) 06:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Pop Songs

I thought it could be used because in the discussion, its says "I'm for including Top 40 mainstream/Pop Songs. It specifically measures airplay on Top 40 stations and there are more of those being monitored than AC stations, also an airplay-only chart" Candyo32 (talk) 01:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I'll go by what the consensus was. But wouldn't it seem better to include the pop chart since there is no genre-equivalent like the R&B/Hip-Hop songs chart? Candyo32 (talk) 01:56, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I understand that, but I mean since there is no chart of that equivalent available for pop genre songs. Candyo32 (talk) 02:07, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. Candyo32 (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Paparazzi reassessment

I have replied there. It was good that you re-opened it. I was really hurt by those allegations of biasness last time so thought of not making much noise there and re-nominate it later. Even still now that user is commenting like that in the closed GA review. Sigh! --Legolas (talk2me) 04:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Overlinking / chain linking

I refer to your relinking of "United States" and "Florida" in the article Jason Derulo. These occurred after the name of the city, and are both thus "chain" links, readily accessible at the top of the city article. The more generalised pages should not normally be linked. Please see WP:LINK. Tony (talk) 07:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip about those FAs. The issues are at WP:LINK: (1) keep them specific; (2) try to avoid bunched up adjacent links; and (3) common country-names (esp. anglophone ones) not normally linked. The link-targets need to be relevant, useful and specific. There is a dilutionary effect, and we are trying to make the wikilinking system as powerful as possible by not diluting high-value links with low-value links. It's really hard getting readers to click on links, and blue-carpeting text doesn't help. When an adjacent link is immediately available at the more specific link ("Miami"), one wonders what the point of more blue is. Tony (talk) 07:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
"Florida" is less specific than Miami, and I think the reader—if interested at all in such a link (unlikely to start with)—is best served by hitting Miami, which starts: "Miami (/maɪˈæmi/ or /maɪˈæmə/) is a major city located on the Atlantic coast in southeastern Florida, in the United States." I wouldn't have linked "United States" there (it's just too big an article), but I'm not unlinking it. By contrast, hitting "Florida" doesn't get you Miami as easily. Let's not underestimate the general geographical knowledge of readers, anyway. PS I've unlinked terms such as "entertainment", "culture" and "fashion" in the Miami article: these are diluting the useful links. WP is not a dictionary, I've heard it said. Tony (talk) 07:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Gaga credits

Hey chase, how are you? I have something to ask off you. Since you possess The Fame physical copy, can you please add the credits and personnel for the Gaga singles in the respective articles? You can add them in the way present in "Revolver". Thanks in advance. --Legolas (talk2me) 06:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Chase. Yeah, if you have monster, please go ahead and add them. Thanks again. --Legolas (talk2me) 04:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
It seems none of these credits have a source. SunCreator (talk) 23:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Where is the hidden note? SunCreator (talk) 00:33, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Wonderful job!!! Marvellous. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:45, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

German singles chart

www.musicline.de is the best source. I don't know what your trouble is with Hung Medien. I just tested with "I Kissed a Girl". Logged in, it shows "de" as one of the listed countries, with a #1 position for the song.—Kww(talk) 19:13, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Stranger and stranger with the German charts. "de" show up on swiss-charts.com, but not on australian-charts.com.—Kww(talk) 19:34, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

RE:One Time GA Review

Thanks for letting me know, I'm now working on getting some things cleaned up. Candyo32 (talk) 00:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Personnel sections

Good job with the personnel sections, however, please note the correct format as seen here. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 01:17, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Beautiful Eyes

I dont know how to fix the image issue. Can you please do it for me or make or find a quick tutorial for it please? Mephiston999 (talk) 00:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

  • Perfect, thank you very much. I also wanted to let you know that your review was fantastic and I was wondering if you could let me know of any other GA reviews you have done and have not been addressed yet or of any future reviews you will do. I would love to fix all the issues you find about an article if the review is of such good quality as this one. Mephiston999 (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Chris Brown (American singer)#Title of article

Hello, Chasewc91 . Would you mind commenting on the above linked topic, since it is about two recent article moves you made? Flyer22 (talk) 01:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Right Round

I've been doing a cleaning in the article because it doesn't see right. Right Round first appeared on the airplay chart in January here and some of the sentence bars seem repeated such as for the music video and reviews. Dance-pop is a subgenre of Dance music. Electropop is much more accurate since there isn't anything danceable the song. 76.171.249.138 02:56, 30 January 2010 (PST)

Sticky & Sweet Tour

Hi Chase. How are you? Would you mind taking a look at the above article and see if you find anything wrong with the prose? The article's GA review started and the reviewer asked me to get an independent copy-editor for the prose. I ask this because you are great with copyediting. Thanks in advance. --Legolas (talk2me) 08:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Whatever you could do, I'm thankful for it that you were able to take time out of your busy schedule. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:40, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Rihanna

Leave me alone. What was discussed was R&B, reggae and pop. You didn't participate in the discussion. Talk about that with Bookkeeperoftheoccult. Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 23:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't want to know what you think or want, just leave me alone. The singer is R&B and pop, not pop and R&B. Furthermore, it was thoroughly discussed, don't want to open another "war". But if so, I will protest until the end, because you are not a good User. Regards. Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 23:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
If you prefer, your editing in Rihanna was deplorable because it was without prior discussion. And do not threaten me again, WP:NLT. Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 23:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I remove because it's yours, and how well you said, is my talk page. One more thing, if you want the respect, do to deserve it Regards. Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 23:50, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
And you think that scares me? I am only against your obsession. I don't need your advice, or anything else, but thanks anyway Vitorvicentevalente (talk) 23:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Just wanted to add a closing comment here (where it hopefully won't be erased). Vitorvicentevalente, I'm glad you chose to back down on the recent situation at Rihanna - this is a positive sign. However, the comments above don't show much good faith, and do not jibe with your own advice to me to "speak of the article and not me". You must understand that if you don't change the way you edit (especially in regards to Rihanna), your history will catch up to you very quickly. The rules of WP are very clear. No one wants you to stop editing - we rather require that your edits comply with the rules in place. It is also best to avoid statements that can be construed as personal attacks, and I hope that you understand that Chasewc91 is a good editor who is only enforcing the rules and standards of WP. He is not always right about everything; because no one is. I hope you understand this, and will only contribute in a positive way here in the future. Happy editing! Doc9871 (talk) 02:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: hilary duff

okay 4ever was a mistake cause i saw it all capitulize in a website but most wanted is NOT A GREATEST HITS!!!! a compliation album... being general is not correct theire is a diffrence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddiep803b (talk • contribs) 02:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

RE: RE: Hilary Duff

it is it even says so on its page... i understand what you say but its not what you think its what it is supposed to be, its not like im not the only one saying that, its been compliation before and it was decided a long time ago, so i ask to please leave it alone... i dont want to block you... thanx....

i did make a mistake with 4ever and live at gibson cause itunes mexico has it like that and i contact othe people who said the name was diffrent... so i will just leave it at live at gibson...

1 more thing dignity debuted on number 4,, not 3, if i can get ur help on that... thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eddiep803b (talk • contribs) 02:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

While I agreed with the point that you made

"That is technically considered a release, in my opinion. "
Technically in your opinion is sort of a weak argument. Go back and axe that "opinion" bit is my reaction. Einar Carptrash (talk) 03:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Release history/infobox debate

If you get a chance, could you contribute your input here Thanks!! Candyo32 (talk) 04:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

One Time

Hey, just alerting you that the nominator apparently has addressed all of the issues. I'm fine with it as is, but I'm leaving it up to you to decide if it passes. Cheers, The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 00:37, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Tik Tok

Please be aware that there is nothing whatsoever "official" regarding the styling of "Tik Tok" as "TiK ToK". This is simply a stylistic preference, and is dealt with by the wording "styled as ....". The word official has no place in this note and lends undue weight to particular styles. The standard way of dealing with such non-standard formatting is to use normal English formatting with the stylistic formatting noted in brackts using the term "styled as...". Also, please take a read of WP:Vandalism to see that by restoring the wording that is favoured throughout Wikipedia, I am far from vandalising the page. Regards, Nouse4aname (talk) 12:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

No, referring to a non-standard style as "official" when it is nothing of the sort is undue weight. Nouse4aname (talk) 20:19, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Again, just because some outlets preserve the non-standard stylistic formatting of the title does not make it "official". In standard English it is "officially" typeset as "Tik Tok". You are placing undue weight on the stylistic rendering of the title, claiming that it is some sort of "official" formatting. It is nothing of the sort, it is simply the way the title is styled and this is dealt with sufficiently by the current wording. "Official" has no meaning or relevance in this context. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't know how else to put it. Just because other outlets maintain a non-standard capitalisation style does not mean it is official. This is the same wording that is used in all other such instances. The word "official" does not come in to it. Please, let it go. Nouse4aname (talk) 10:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
The song is titled "Tik Tok". The song title is styled as "TiK ToK". There is an important difference. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

santa claus lamne is not a studio album... duh!

hey bud there not if the quote of rolling stones say so, it is, ur not riable, rolling stones is... any questions? Eddiep803b (talk) 01:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

why metamorphosis is hd debut album

again your opion!!! yup santa claus lane peform badly (an embrerrasment) , but again metamorphosis is her first studio album, and santa claus lane her debut album, theire is a diffrence, (ex: christina aguilera's holiday album isisnt consired a studio album) - i understand what ur saying., but what ur doing is taking personal matters is ediiting. & consired vandalism.

I can't say that I like siding with the editors you are in a conflict with here, but, given the facts on the ground, I'm going to have to. Santa Claus Lane is a holiday album. Those may be recorded in a studio, but they are not normally considered to be studio albums, just as soundtracks are recorded in studios, but are not studio albums.—Kww(talk) 03:29, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
  • ur edits are vandalsim. people are saying what you do is wrong. & the box, of discussion people are telling you ONCE AGAIN u are wrong,,, dont be tupid and leave things alone... Iiismael (talk) 03:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
  1. ^ http://www.musicomh.com/albums/hilary-duff.htm
  2. ^ http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:7xdkylo4xpbb
  3. ^ http://www.slantmagazine.com/music/review/hilary-duff-metamorphosis/310

help pls

hilayr duffs album 4ever hilary duff should be 4Ever (album) as it was.. can u pls help? or shouldnt it be 4EVER? as some sites have it? thanx Alxknight (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Ingrid Rodruiges

Please take a look at the most recent contributions. I'm sure that this is a sock of one of the editors that was involved in the Santa Claus Lane crap, but I can't determine which one. Please see if you have a guess.—Kww(talk) 03:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

You are making sense, but I'm not certain that this editor is making edits that align with the cause of the three that got blocked. It just seems strange that after a year of hibernation, she makes a couple edits in the middle of a giant controversy, and then goes back away.—Kww(talk) 18:59, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

your recent edits

i kept the format u had, as you can see other artist as, beyonce, rihanna ecta. have soundtrack in a difrrent positions & do not have nl. as charted positions, my edits arent considered vandalism, i agree with you in the formatt, but the sales do not need to be removed & the charted positins either, for they were put by other users that can sourced that they are correct (metamorphosis, hilary duff, ect. ) sop pls keep seperated soundtrack singles & singles and take off nl chart positions, single positions were correct and other users have posted from months, ago, in which to last week have been correct & confremet.


thanks, for your help & thanx for making the page clean & fixing it Alxknight (talk) 01:05, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

alknight

though i agree with your format, soundtrack singles need to be divided into soundtrack singles, which differ, for ex: i saw a discussion in your page of ingrid.... her contributions were incorrect , but the formatt of the singles (seperated are correct) i will change it to that formatt, keep the charted positions & not add or remove any charted songs. for the sales of albums, some artist have it with sales (& vise versa) in this page it helped having sales, for i can see in discussions many people wanted to know, and the [refs] put are good resources. thanx for your help, if u want to make these changes be free to do so, if not i will in a short period of time, 

         - thanx for ur help (u have made this page clean)Alxknight (talk) 01:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

the refs, were accurated, if they were not other users would have took them away, or not? i strongly agree in seperating teh singles, for ex: if beyonce released a single for a movie it wouldnt count as a single of her discography but a single of a soundtrack.. you know what i mean??? - again the refs for albums are accurate, in which its not a fansite or blog, but rather a webiste, (guidelines say fanistes arent accurate & correct) so...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alxknight (talk • contribs) 01:30, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

  • oh & one more thing, singles as (little voice & someone's watching over me were only released in austruial) as teh endnotes have it, pls change that, i dont know if (play with fire) should have an endnote for only being released in the clubs??? - thanx chase, Alxknight (talk) 01:34, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
  • so why arent (beyonce's seperated?) i strongly belived they need to be seperated, it was before! and wasnt change until your edits. so pls leave it ass they were... i will have it in talk pages, so why can we have them as they were, wikipedia is a user-created place, so other users have the right to edit, besides you, anyone that edits have been erasred, becasue according to you its incorrect, if the seperation of singles were incorrect & use wrong, other artist-discography wouldnt have it in that formatt. - know what i am trying to come accross? the insider's page was made by a person, (which other way?) its more reliable than your ideas & beliefs! right? but i will leave them as is, until more reialble info comes in or is found.. for ex: duff's offical webiste....
  • I noticed that you put (little voice) as a single, in which it was released as a promo-single. hilary duff has even stated that she wanted to release a third single for most wanted because she never had it before, if you see in her single discography before, little voice was decided(proven) it was a promo single. & can also see in billboard too. Alxknight (talk) 01:55, 3 March 2010 (UTC) if u feel its not pls, give ur opion in the talk page, thank you

Alejandro (song)

Hi Chase, how are you? Would you mind taking a look at the above Lady Gaga song article and add tje credits for it, like you did on the others? Thanks in advnace --Legolas (talk2me) 05:27, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

your recent edits

hey chase, i have noticed that the edits you made for hilary duff's discography have been gettin'switch back, including her singles bein'diveded, so this means they like the old format though i dont agree with there format the singles i do, (we discuss this already) so thanx for controbution, to the page, i will tell users that your format is weel tought out & organize, but its theire choice not mine or YOurs, i dont want them to mark you as vandalism because of your edits (in which they are reverting) Alxknight (talk) 18:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC) thanx for your help

  • people are changing your edits for a reason? am i right? ur edits get reverted & then you tell them they are vandalising? correct? so leave it like that until something conseous? saying its sloppy is an opinion, IF USERS ARE CHANING THE PAGE BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL STAGE ITS FOR A REASON! PLS RESPECT! WIKIPEDIA & ITS USERS/RULE, OH & WHY IS THE MX posiions tehre? otehr artits dont have it & only two albums charted, should we put every country teh albums charted on? no! pls respect the page & dont give negative remarks to users & say theire vandalising when your edits are being reverted.... Alxknight (talk) 21:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
  • i am the only one? i havent reverted you, you make a change and two/three users have changed it back, there not lies cause theire is proove, tell me what gives you the right to decide how to run things? wikipedia gives the right to anyone (if the information is right & accurated) why should people let you make changes & when they add things u reverted it because its not what you like? thats not what wikipedia is for and stand for, think of your actions & respect other users descions & edits, i dont want to take this to wiki's - top. so pls be conseous of your actions Alxknight (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC) thanx
  • they change your edits before you change everything, why dont you respect the right of other users? i dont chnage the formatt because i respect & the info you gave is accurated, (as users have to) but tou are being ignorant & not respecting the rules, pls be cons, thank youAlxknight (talk) 21:20, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Right Round is now a good article

Congratulations on your hard work. I passed Right Round and listed it as a good article. Torchiest (talk) 23:21, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I've Been Warned Already

I stopped as soon as I was warned, I was not aware I was doing it. Aren't you only suppose to report if a person keeps doing it after they've been warned?--Babyjazspanail (talk) 20:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

duff's metamorphosis

though the album has always been charted as number 1, albums are put in where they are charted, metamorpohosis debuted on number 2, then went to number 1, unlike billboards 100, where songs go up, albums are put as weher they debuted and metamorphosis debuted on number 2 Alxknight (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

need your help

as hilary duff's discography, christinas aguielra page needs cleaning, her studio albums also include a spanish album & holiday album but are put seperated, pls help me fix Alxknight (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC) let me know

The Fame Monster booklet

Hey Chase, congrats on your first GA. I have one question, does the booklet of The Fame Monster have anything regarding the background of "Alejandro"? Like I have heard that in teh song, she is saying goodbye to her past lovers, and the Fernando in the song is producer Fernando Garibay. Can you clarify? --Legolas (talk2me) 11:48, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the effort. :) --Legolas (talk2me) 03:25, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Your deletion of Ridin' Solo

I accept the deletion of Ridin' Solo, but can I say that this is a notable topic. Should the song be released as a single (with cover art and music video), it would grow beyond a stub, and therefore would it be worth having an article about? Thanks, Adabow (talk) 08:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I agree completely with you. Thanks, Adabow (talk) 23:19, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Telephone (song)

There has been extensive discussion on the talk page concerning the use of both single covers. Your removal of one, and Lil-unique1's replacement of one by the other, are against consensus.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

the fighting

you don't scare me with your "threaths" i am here to edit, as so you, if you attack someone you will get attacked back i am warning you that next time you theathing me or accuse me of vandalism i will notifed wikipedia, we should BOTH stop the fighting because we are acting unproffesinal and foucus on the real isuue.. what do you say? Alxknight (talk) 04:13, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

lets discuss the problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alxknight (talk • contribs) 04:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Eddiep803b

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eddiep803b probably contains material you will find interesting.—Kww(talk) 21:39, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

why am i being accused? i have defend myself in the investigations, pls contact me with the issues that have been occuring i am willing to help in any way,

i have made a statedment in the argument, in which was started last night (i think), one wore think your point of divied singles have come to me, and i have decied i will have them in one table in my sandbox (thought) i will let you know) thanx:) hope to here from you soonAlxknight (talk) 22:27, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

can you pls tell me what is going on? i tough i made it clear that i feel being harrased, by my accusations, i will be contacting administators, i am not a duck, for i have not harrasted you, so pls be aware of yours and kww accusations not only do I feel they are personal but unfair, you know what i feel? pls think about you are coming across for once again the santa claus lane discussion ONLY came across yesterday, when i only came across teh community info box, where i came whith my opion> i have not made any movement to the official discography page but my sandbox, so why am i being harrased? pls contact me asapAlxknight (talk) 22:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

pretty hate machine

As u were helpful in reaching a consensus on the Rated R (Rihanna album) genre issue, would u mind adding to this discussion over the album's genre(s)? Dan56 (talk) 22:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Telephone Cover Consensus

Just to inform you after all the debate and survey it was deemed that the alternative cover should be removed and the colour single art should be promoted to the main infobox. Hopefully we'll have settled the issue. In the mean time a friendly piece of advice for you: be careful of falling into the 3-reversion trap. The other user involved deliberately kept reverting to invoke reactions. I stepped in and created the discussion to tackle the issue. This is probably the best way to solve such issues in a way that is fair and in a way where no user faces sanctions for overly reverting. Please can you help to keep an eye on the article until the dust has settled. Also there is a nice tidy conclusion on the talk page if you care to read. Lil-unique1 (talk) 04:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

GA review for Michael Jackson's This Is It: The Music That Inspired the Movie

Hey, I've corrected the problems you listed on the article on the GA review page, and User:Pyrrhus16 performed a copyedit on the article. Could you check the article to see if it meets GA quality, so then maybe you could pass it? Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 [talk] 14:14, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

I think I've corrected the other problem's you listed with the article, can you check to see if everything is in order with the article now? Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 [talk] 00:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
I think I've corrected the remaining problems with the article now. Crystal Clear x3 [talk] 00:50, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Telephone

I was part of the consensus which decided that 20 charts was adequate however we did say that two charts from the same region were permitted and considering she got number 1 on the pop songs chart it is significant enough to mention. Equally flanders and wallonia is counted as one chart as its one region. Lil-unique1 (talk) 02:32, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Santa Claus Lane

Meh. I still think that not showing any critical reception at all when it does exist is a bit of a compromise to the coverage. Also, are there no musical credits (bass, guitar, drums, etc.)? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:59, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

A generous help

I have to ask a generous help of you. I am on leave for an operation and wont be logging till the 19th. Will you please keep a strong eye on the Gaga articles untill that time? Please, I know I can trust you. --Legolas (talk2me) 13:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Btwn, you might wanna take a look at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song)/2, since you were involved in the original discussion. --Legolas (talk2me) 13:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments at the GAR, they were really to the point. How are you? --Legolas (talk2me) 05:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Im fine too, hoping to join full-fledgedly from Monday I hope. --Legolas (talk2me) 05:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Santa Claus Lane

Hello Chasewc91, I have just been looking at Santa Claus Lane, with a view to reviewing it. I happen to agree with the first review, but if you are willing to add more content, I would be happy to put it on hold and give you the chance to improve it. Given your response to the original review though, and the fact that you haven't edited the article since, I'm interested to know your thoughts. I don't want to put time and effort into reviewing it if you have no intention on acting on suggestions to add more material. Regards, --BelovedFreak 13:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm sorry to tell you that I've failed the article as it doesn't meet the GA criteria. Well done with the work you've put into it though, and good luck in developing it further. If you still disagree, I suggest taking it to GA review since it's now failed twice, and from what you've said it looks like you've done about as much as you can with the material available. I'm sorry it's not the outcome you were hoping for. Regards, --BelovedFreak 09:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Dignity (album)

I passed this article for GA as I was unaware that there was incorrect information in it. It seem quite well written to me and the references seemed good. Hope you agree with me! Best, Xtzou (Talk) 19:14, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Infobox chronology

Hi there, with respect to the infobox chronologies, the documentation at {{Infobox album}} says that for for most artists, for studio albums, only other studio albums should be included in the infobox chronology. Is there any reason this wouldn't apply to Hilary Duff? --BelovedFreak 19:39, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I added the references to the hilary duff discography page, I don't think I'm a vandal, because I have respect of other people work.

׺°”˜`”°º×ηυηzια׺°”˜`”°º× 17:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Right Round article

Can you please tell why I'm vandalizing articles? First of all, The Right Round article was created in January, making it more accurate to considered a January 27th release. Second of all, Flo Rida does not record dance-pop music. The song has a electronic sound. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.60.208 (talk) 00:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The Remix

Hello Chase. First of all I would like to apologize because I was not aware of the chronology info as you stated. For me it seemed logical to chronologize the releases as the same has been done for the Madonna albums also. However, since this is only a remix album, I understand your point. Cheers and happy editing. --Legolas (talk2me) 03:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

You Belong with Me

I addressed most of the issues in the GAN. (Didn't see that there were some up top too.) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 12:20, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Okay, only two issues remain now: the dead Rolling Stone link and a better screenshot. Ipod took the first screenshot, so I'll ask if they can provide a different one. Also, I can't find any archives of the Rolling Stone link; Wayback Machine and Google Cache don't have it, and it seems Rolling Stone's website's going through an overhaul right now since they currently list only 82 album reviews. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 12:32, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Ipod's suddenly gone quiet on us (no edits since the 26th) so I guess I'll take the screenshots. What do you recommend? Just taking the screenshot from YouTube or CMT.com's video footage? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 12:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Removed the Rolling Stone link. I'm thinking about taking the screenshots from this copy of the video (CMT.com) since Vevo lags terribly on my computer and won't let me pause. Are there any particular times within the video that you would recommend a screenshot? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

You Belong with Me

HI! Oh my god... I'm so sorry you had to do the You Belong with ME GAN all by yourself. Thank you so much for taking care of it while I was gone. Sorry, again, it's just that I got so caught up in real life. I can see you took care of mostly everything. Is there anything I can help in? -- ipodnano05 * leave@message 22:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Dance in the Dark

Dear Chase. The above article has been created for GA standards. What do you think about it? Also, since you own The Fame Monster, can you add a sample and correct the credits section? I did as much as I could. --Legolas (talk2me) 11:00, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

you rv

if the japan is to website. what is correct? other wise everything looks fine, why revert all edits of charts? lets take off japan for now and add another (or dont at all!) please take into consideration that all users have the right to contributed. Loquesoy (talk) 04:57, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Template markup

I have a question from one of my adoptees, which you might be able to answer. How do you construct a template so that quotation marks appear in the final product? An example would be the display of song titles at Template:Tracklisting, which I see you edited recently. Thanks - Draeco (talk) 15:37, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

dignity (hilary duff)

your contributions to dignity (album) reaaly made a diffrence, i have added my own contributions, all are correct and accurated, i hope you understand and work with my edits, changing what you think are un-needed, improvements ect. but please dont chnage everything and rv to your previous edits which i have notice in the history page of dignity (album) that you do, remember all users have the right to make contributions and "stalking pages" aren't use here, i am not trying to attack in anyway because i respect the changes you have made and admire your work, so thank you and hope to hear from you soon :) Loquesoy (talk) 04:04, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

it seems you are stalking me, how is a picture of gwen stefani relevant? conceous was used when another user contribuuted, with all respect why everytime another user makes a change or contributes you revert without conceous, i help a page, rather tah delete it, added background info, and made it more organize, i feel that you are abusing (quote never said you are) but what i feel your not taling a look and working with other users, because last time i check users have the right to edit (when thy are accuarted) just because its not excatly your way or page you dzily supervise dosnt mean its bad! pls understand what you are doing, i have here to help and contributed not completed destroy a page and make it my way, we need to work together & if a page was certife it dosn't mean it cant be chang or contributed, so rather than a revison to users help contribued :) Loquesoy (talk) 20:55, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I would note that this is the second time in less than an hour that the above editor has accused other editors of stalking. This is bad faith conduct while the editor is busy going about making inappropriate edits and warring to maintain his version. Please desist from this behavior, Loquesoy. Wildhartlivie (talk) 21:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

i have to apologize to you chase, i made a mistake and didn't use my words wisely, what i ment to say by stalking is seeing changes i make a bad, without observation, a mistake, i respect your work and praise your dedication to pages, honesly thanx for taking into accoun my edits and working them in, the only thing is can we add promotion, it seems to be missing and seperated reception into to sections - commercial & critical under reception? again i am sorry for my out there words i meant to halp to you chase i hope you dont see me as a rude/bad editior im just trying to help you! is everything ok? Loquesoy (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

when it talks about background, it means how the album game to be. [for ex: she spent 20 days in japan and was ispired by the culture or if she was planninng madonna/justin timberlake to colobrarte], the fact that her previous album failed, but it dosnt fit the critera, its a statement, unlike it failed so the studio pushed for a new dancealbum or smethin (you know what i mean?) but nothing supports that information, what i put is that she was planning to colobrate with timbaland/madden's but it didnt happen and the reason for a three year gap was so she can take her time... (you see thats a background) i respect what you did, but the statement belongs more in hilary duff (album) or somewere else, thanx :)Loquesoy (talk) 00:24, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

cont. dignity (album)

WP:OSE IS NOT USED HERE! (Micheal Jackson's Thriller) .I am letting you know so you wont (RV), if you have an issue it has a talk page :), secondly the information of Hilary Duff has nothing to do with Dignity, really just inforation needed on the previous album page...so, unfortanly the excuses arent okay/right, and the revertion you made(RV) isnt valid. so that should end the discussion!, i will no longer discuss this in your talk page, but again be aware i will make the changes, that are valid and have resources. thanx Loquesoy (talk) 00:39, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Eddiep803b.

Could be right. I'm traveling, and will look at it more closely next week.—Kww(talk) 01:14, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Blocked.—Kww(talk) 15:52, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

User_talk:Rihanna_Knowles#Right_Round_genres

See discussion page. Rihanna Knowles 00:54 May 25, 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga

Looks like Pandora.com is publishing false info about Gaga! Yikes! Amir.manraj (talk) 20:34, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your kind words about my work, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Gaga: Queen of Pop (2nd nomination). Much appreciated, -- Cirt (talk) 22:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

"It's so unfair for Taylor Swift"

Sounds like I'm kidding.

I mean the if Fearless's Platinum cover fails WP:NFCC#3a and WP:NFCC#8, then Glee 3's Deluxe cover fails, too. It should have been nominated for deletion so far, since the deluxe has different background color, a deluxe brand (just like Fearless's Platinum version did)

What do you think about this? I'm about to upload Platinum cover again Silvergoat (Chinese: 銀羊) 17:49, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Keeping covers makes people happy, we don't have to follow every single rule at all. :) Silvergoat (Chinese: 銀羊) 02:46, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Rollback warning to Candyo32

I se you warned Candyo32 about him using Rollback to "rollback" good faith edits and I would just like you to know he has continued for example see: diff diff. I dont know if anything should be done about this, but he needs to understand what rollback is for. STAT -Verse 03:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chasewc91/Archive_2&oldid=1190134032"