User talk:Duphin

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Fair enough. The initial impression I was under was that this was being done to avoid a WP:3RR block, but it would appear that is not the case. Thank you for being civil and up-front.

Request handled by: - Vianello (Talk)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Not a problem. You aren't required to sign in or anything, it just caused me to mis-guess your motives since it occurred during a dispute. Mostly my fault, really. - Vianello (Talk) 23:20, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for feedback/2010 September 6.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Chzz (talk) at 14:10, 13 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Edit summary

Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 22:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

February 2011

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Burlesque (soundtrack). Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Muhandes (talk) 13:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Gossip (band). When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. M62 motorway (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aerial (album)

Hi there. Can you please specify where it says that the sales of 1.1m are excluding US sales? Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 07:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, i explained on your user talk page :) --Duphin (talk) 14:22, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I moved your answer back here, there really isn't a reason to break the discussion to multiple pages.

Hi, i put "not including US sales" because the figures are provided by EMI who are are her label worldwide (except the US) so the figures do not include those from her US label, hope that explains :) --Duphin (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reliable source saying that?--Muhandes (talk) 14:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the source it lists EMI's top performing albums of 2006 and their sales, which means that those are only EMI sales and if Kate is on a different label in the US then the sales from that label are understandably not included. --Duphin (talk) 14:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point. The article itself does not say EMI is the label only outside the US. Do you have a reliable source that says it? If so, then add it to the article and it would all make sense. --Muhandes (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry i missunderstood, i'll find a ref now and add it to the article, thanks. --Duphin (talk) 14:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added a link to Kate's then US label Columbia Records in the "Label" section of the Aerial page, hope this is enough or shall i find something else? --Duphin (talk) 14:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think a source would have been nice, not necessarily in this article, but at least at Kate Bush. But I'm not going to press on it anymore. --Muhandes (talk) 16:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Director's Cut - Kate Bush's new album

Please stop removing Director's Cut from the Kate Bush discography. A discography is merely a list of albums released by the artist. It doesn't matter if they're live, studio, greatest hits, or singles. The list on the main page is not complete--it doesn't include The Whole Story or the live EP and, in my opinion, it should, but the consensus has been to keep the list to the main releases and put the others on the discography main article. You keep taking Director's Cut off the list and stating it's "not a studio album." I don't think you know what the term means. A studio album is recorded in a studio, as opposed to a live album, which is recorded on a stage with an audience. Obviously Director's Cut is a studio album. It is an album of 11 entirely re-recorded songs. Kate herself considers (and has states so in multiple articles and interviews to which there are links) that it is a "new album." Remixes, for example, just take the individual tracks and play with them, but these have been entirely re-worked, with new vocals (some of which are in an entirely different key), new lyrics, etc.

By continually changing this on your own private whim you are comiing close to vandalism. Obviously the regular editors of this page have decided to respect Kate's designation of the album as new and have a section for the details of it. Please respect everyone's wishes and leave it be. There is a section on the Talk page which discusses this, and that's where you should bring your "dispute" if you want it to be seriously considered. Thank you.--TEHodson 21:02, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Watch the Throne

I reverted your recent edit to this article. There seemed to be no mention of the album in that source. Dan56 (talk) 03:11, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry it looks like they havn't updated that part of the database yet, if you look at this part ( http://www.ariacharts.com.au/pages/charts_display.asp?chart=1G50 ) it shows that the album has been certified Gold, sorry for the confusion. --Duphin (talk) 11:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

50 Words for Snow

Couple of concerns here. The above referenced article was created by User:Destin, yet on your userpage, you claim to have created the article. Can you clarify the discrepancy? Additionally, the above referenced article does not meet the notability criteria for articles about albums in accordance with WP:NALBUMS. While the artist is notable, this does not automatically infer notability for albums. Can you provide significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject to support notability? If not, the guidelines call for redirecting the article to the artist. Then once significant coverage can be found and added, the article can easily be restored. Please advise whether you will be either providing significant, reliable, and independent coverage... or redirecting. I will act accordingly. Best regards, Cind.amuse (Cindy) 13:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CK5

The article I deleted wasn't about an album by Crystal Kay — its entire content was CK5 is a Fullsize Chevrolet SUV and Pickup enthusiast website. Complete with product reviews and message forums. Classifieds and other sections are available only to registered, supporting users. Policed by the canadian nazi Cancan, and run by steve, aka coloradok5. Badass website! Bearcat (talk) 17:39, 24 September 2011 (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) 13:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]