User talk:Diamondsandpearls

Welcome!

Hello, Diamondsandpearls, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 00:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source for Image:Jody Watley Italian Vogue2008mini.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Jody Watley Italian Vogue2008mini.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 00:06, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the Jody Watley pic from Vogue

Also -- some of your edits are actually affecting the article itself. You're supposed to sign your posts on the talk section -- not in the actual article. (Mirror Ball 19:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC))

Image copyright problem with Image:AVITONE+BLACK+LOGO mini.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AVITONE+BLACK+LOGO mini.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:07, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:AVITONE+ORANGE+LOGO.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:AVITONE+ORANGE+LOGO.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Jody Watley, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Mhking (talk) 05:42, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to Jody Watley. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Mhking (talk) 05:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jody Watley, you will be blocked from editing. --Mhking (talk) 19:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, having read the guidelines, I'm unsure why my changes are cited as vandalism and reverted. I replaced the very ambiguous 'label owner' in the header, and replaced it with the actual name of her company, which should be notable. I provided the link to the company website as a source. Examples: Sean Combs isn't just a label owner, rather noted owner of Bad Boy. Berry Gordy isn't listed as just a label owner, he is noted as the founder and CEO of Motown, etc.I was simply trying to distinguish the fact, rather than the generic 'label owner'. Avitone has in fact released her music since 1995, Affection, Saturday Night Experience, Midnight Lounge. The Makeover, and numerous singles - including her last three top tens. Please explain why naming her label is seen as vandalism and disruptive? I will start here before dealing with the other issues.Thank You. User:DiamondsandPearls(talk:Diamondsandpearls)--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)^[1]--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Edit. Avitone Recordings

Respectfully, having read the guidelines, I'm unsure why my changes are cited as vandalism and reverted. I replaced the very ambiguous 'label owner' in the header, and replaced it with the actual name of her company, which should be notable. I provided the link to the company website as a source. Examples: Sean Combs isn't just a label owner, rather noted owner of Bad Boy. Berry Gordy isn't listed as just a label owner, he is noted as the founder and CEO of Motown, etc.I was simply trying to distinguish the fact, rather than the generic 'label owner'. Avitone has in fact released her music since 1995, Affection, Saturday Night Experience, Midnight Lounge. The Makeover, and numerous singles - including her last three top tens. Please explain why naming her label is seen as vandalism and disruptive? I will start here before dealing with the other other edits.Thank You. User:DiamondsandPearls(talk:Diamondsandpearls)--Diamondsandpearls (talk) --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 02:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your article contributions, such as the edit you made to Jody Watley. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. --Auric (talk) 21:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Virginmega.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading File:Virginmega.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 22:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Images Related To Article.

My company is copyright owner of photo's, and we have uploaded photo's to enhance article.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 06:33, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Jwaffairs mini.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Jwaffairs mini.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 06:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jody Watley & sister

In looking into this, several notable sources (including Blender magazine) have noted Watley's porn star sister, while other sources say she does not speak to or about her sister. If anything, I'd suggest that notation in the article would qualify; barring that, an official bio (and no, one on her MySpace page would NOT qualify, as there is no confirmation that the MySpace page is truly official and not a fabrication in and of itself) or statement from Watley itself would be the best source of what is true one way or another. Conversely, a similar official statement/bio from her sister (if indeed she is her sister) would suffice. --Mhking (talk) 03:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. You missed my point. My point is not with the subject of whether or not she is the sister or not, that's really a secondary issue. Other people seemed stuck on that point. That is not my issue..

My issue is in relation to the relevance to the article with regard to Shalamar, where one learns of this. What is the relevance to The Shalamar Years (1977-1984)?

Was Michelle/Midori doing adult films these years, while Watley was launching her career in the group? I deleted the info from the 'Shalamar Years 1977-1984) section, and simply placed it where it was at least in some context. It was reverted.

If you read the article, it appears totally out of context to the the subject, arbitrarily placed.

Where is the source that these films were also occurring in 1977-1984?

If there is no context, and no highly regarded source according to Wikipedia it should be removed. Blender Magazine wasn't even around in 1977-1984.Blender Magazine, was first published in 1994. In addition, if Blender printed the information, they could have simply gotten it from Wikipedia. With all due respect it is debatable if Blender would be considered notable source. As well, it would be impossible for them to have printed anything in 1977-1984 because the magazine didn't even exist.

This is not me trying to do a is she or isn't she - it's all irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. How does it relate the The Shalamar Years - other than someone deciding that the subject matter related to 'porn' should appear, regardless of how out of context it is. That is my issue.

Why for instance wouldn't this appear in the article at whatever point Watley was in her creative career? If it's a must for a very limited group people.

Once again, I'm not a part of the if Michelle/Midori is her sister or not. I tried to be clear about this, but it's the only thing you replied to, and nowhere in my comments do I recall challenging if she is her sister or not. I simply stated, she isn't mentioned in the Jody Watley 'Bio In My Own Words'. I am trying to improve the article, with regard to the artist career, which is what a bio is supposed to be about - not to do family tree investigations.

In terms of the whether or not the Myspace Page is Jody Watley, clearly it is - it's 'Official Jody Watley', with personal photo's, behind the scenes video's, blogs and links to her record label, publicist, booking, etc. She also makes reference to Wiki editors in giving references/sources to her bio, it's doubtful someone other the artist would go to such lengths. I would add, I know for a fact her page is not a fabrication, and if required I could certainly give verification that the page is that of Jody Watley. Do you need a notarized letter, a video post declaring the page is indeed her page? Respectfully asking.

In addition, if you are going to imply the 'Jody Watley Official Myspace Page" could be a fabrication, why have you (not you personally, rather Wiki) listed the Michelle Watley Page as a reference - when there is no information on that there which indicates she was doing pornography in 1977 - 1984 nor do I see anything that says they are sisters. I'm sure there must be a great number of people who share the same last name in the world - but once again, I am not focused on is she is or isn't she a sister or not. But since you mentioned it, how do you know that page actually belongs to Michelle Watley/Midori or not? How do you know that page isn't a fabrication? Is there a different standard?

Lastly, why am I not allowed to change the language from 'porn' to 'adult', as it's and in line with the mainstream?

Why not simply move an improved sentence to later in the article?

For instance if Michelle/Midori started doing adult films in the 90's or 00's (?) - wouldn't it appear later in the article in that context?

Example: Reportedly known to have a sister named Michelle who adopted the professional name of 'Midori' in ( list year she assumed the name with source/reference), who went on to star in adult films during this time... or something to that effect. Though it would still be completely out of context to Watley's music career, at least it wouldn't be so arbitrary.

Lastly, I still don't understand why this isn't left to the 'Personal Life', in the first place with a highly regarded citation for people who want to know about her family.

Those are my numerous questions. Not if she is her sister or not. Thank You.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 01:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Avitone Recordings Reversion of Page.

The information I added was deleted and replaced by a less effective sentence without reference regarding what Watley said at the launch of Avitone. You can't psot she was quoted as saying something and not provide the source, link or reference of the article of the actual quote. That's why I removed it and replaced it with a quote and a link - but it has been reverted. Where is the source where she made the quote about what the intent of her label was to be? I am looking for the an additional article with quote and reference from Billboard Magazine, because not unlike Prince's NPG, Aimee Manns Superego, or even The Beatles Apple - all which served primarily as a vehicle for their music. --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 01:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Avitone Recordings is an independent record label formed by singer/songwriter Jody Watley in 1995, established after Watley departed ways with MCA Records. The singer is said to have formed the label as a vehicle to support her own musical evolution outside of the major label system. Watley's fifth studio album, 1995s Affection, was the labels first release.

Upon Avitone's launch, Jody was quoted saying that she looked forward to using the label to establish new artists. To date, however, the only releases to come from Avitone have been Watley's own material.

The sentence "Jody was quoted as saying the she looked forward to using the label to establish new artists." Is misleading and in fact not what she was quoted saying according to our records.

In one of the first major articles upon forming Avitone was with the respected Billboard Magazine.

According to Billboard Magazine June 24, 1995 in the 'The Rhythm and Blues Column written by J.R. Reynolds', excerpt and headline: "Watley Takes Control of Own Destiny With New Album on Her Avitone Label." Do-It-Yourself Success: After forming Avitone Records last October for her own recordings veteran vocalist Jody Watley says she is in a better position to determine the destiny of her upcoming album "Affection" due July 11. This is consistent with her quote with the announcement regarding ADA [1]

The Billboard article article goes on to say: Watley chose Bellmark to distribute Avitone based on label president Al Bell's reputaton as a creative marketer since she says "The company's success with The Artist Formerly Known as Prince's "The Most Beautiful Girl In The World".

There appears to be no early mention of her intent, beyond a vehicle for her musical growth.

This information was also removed though relevant to the history of the label and why she chose this distributor initially. Much the same as the notation of the Prince dispute with Warner Brothers at the time. The extra detail provides relevant insight - in as much as both artists continue to work in the new paradigms in the music business and started doing so in the 90's.

Avitone Label History.

Note should be made that referring to the label as 'dormant' is a matter of opinion. Avitone was licensing music, not dormant. Simply because a company isn't always releasing high profile releases or product, does not mean it's dormant if you know anything about business. The term "reactivated" is also seems more opinion than actual fact. Where is the reference that the label was "reactivated"? It seems someone is editing this article who really isn't clear on the business model. This type of editing does not add to the article.--Diamondsandpearls (talk) 01:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shalamar

As Jody Watley has her own article, I am at a loss to understand why details of her own career need to appear in the Shalamar article. This appears to be duplication and overkill. The other group members do not have similar solo career description there; nor should they, as they have their own individual articles. Also 'influential and trendsetting solo career' smacks of POV. Care to re-consider ?

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The other members don't have similar descriptions because they have not had the same broad post Shalamar careers. There is a clear distinction to be made here. The additions to the article were minimal recognizing that Jody Watley does have her own in depth sourced and referenced article. I might add her article begins with a Shalamar section, although other members such as Howard Hewett and Jeffrey Daniel do not. All facts including "influential and trendsetting solo career" are referenced and sourced in the article and not of opinion. It is in the context of article. If too many additional facts have been added, I will trim however, I disagree with your argument. --Diamondsandpearls (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, whether the other members did, or did not, is not relevant to my argument, nor largely to the Shalamar article. The Shalamar article should be predominately about the group. Watley has her own article where details of her career / life should be listed. It is your opinion that the additions are minimal, but if it slews the Shalamar article towards that member's own achievements, then it is contrary to WP:UNDUE.

The "influential" phrase is not directly referenced, is an opinion, and in contravention of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch. If it comes from one source, that source needs to be specified. The reader should be left to determine her influence based on the facts presented (in her own article).

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:16, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jody Watley may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:17, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shalamar

Please could you stop vandalizing the Shalamar article.

For the record, Jody Watley's dubious claim to own the Shalamar name is being tested by lawyers right now and it's not looking good for her. And I am Jody Wallace, not Jody Watley so please stop confusing me with her.

Thank you

Jody Wallace (talk) 21:28, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Diamondsandpearls. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Diamondsandpearls. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Snemini.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Snemini.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. B (talk) 14:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Diamondsandpearls. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Diamondsandpearls. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Jody Watley

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Jody Watley, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:23, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

^ www.avitone.net

[1] www.avitone.net

[1]