User talk:Efe/Archive 17
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Efe. 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 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
Happy Winter Holiday
Hope you have a wonderful winter holiday. — Realist2 16:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
RfA for Suntag
Hi, a user who you turned down for rollback rights on November 22 here, User:Suntag, has filed a request for adminship here at which his request for rollback has been discussed.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I'll try to review everything regarding the denied rollback request. Hope I could get enough time. --Efe (talk) 07:33, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I need your help again
Hi Efe, good morning. I need your help once again. There is currently a debate at Wikipedia talk:NFC as to whether a small number of fair use images should be used in this article. The reasons given by user Black Kite (and others) is that they fale criteria #1, #3a and #8. I strongly believe that they do pass #1 and #3a, but i'm not sure on how to explain that they pass #8. I know that they pass the criteria but i'm not sure how to explain this in words. Would you mind helping me explain? Thank you.
I feel that the images pass criteria #1 and #3a because:
Criteria #1: *No free equivalent is available, and the chances of getting permission to use the images under a free license (which would serve the same encyclopedic purpose) is highly unlikely.
Criteria #3a: Several images in this article were deleted a long time ago in a previous discussion. There was concencus to keep the images which represented the major characters of the game. Regardless of the fact that many of these users were people who were part of the GTA Task force, this clearly showed that there was still strong concencus to keep the images. Also, 5 images are currently in use. This is clearly not an excessive amount. JayJ47 (talk) 22:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
- I am afraid but the only to save those images is to improve the fair use rationale especially the purpose and also the captions-add captions that restate what is being discussed in the article which describes the character in question. --Efe (talk) 08:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Daniel Martin Moore
The page for recording artist Daniel Martin Moore was deleted, but I feel the subject is notable enough for wikipedia, especially with some further developing of the article. Moore has an album out on Sub Pop, a very notable record label whose artists nearly all have pages of their own. Given the existence of articles for his peer musicians (including non Sub Pop artists such as Ben Sollee) and his associations with notable figures like Joe Chicarelli and Jim James. Jedifoot (talk) 05:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)Jedifoot
- Hi. Thanks for dropping by. Releasing an album and being signed in a notable label do not make the artist itself notable; it should be on the performance of the album/singles released, at least reaching the main American chart. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (music) for further information about notability and WP:CSD A7 why the page was speedily deleted. Please also contact me if the subject has at least met one of the criteria, and if you are still willing to improve the article using the deleted version, I will restore it. Thank you for your contribution to WikiPedia. --Efe (talk) 12:01, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
Deletion of Article Michelle Kopasz
Hi,
I am new to wikipedia and was creating my first article and found that it got deleted today. so please guide me what i did wrong, i know there was few things left to be completed and it was incomplete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeeshannaqvi (talk • contribs) 06:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. Thank you for your contributions to WikiPedia. Regarding the deleted page, I suggest you read Wikipedia:Notability (people). The fundamental reason why the page was deleted under WP:CSD A7 was that it failed to include why the subject is significant. --Efe (talk) 12:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
New TK Article - Need Help
(Tkmark (talk) 03:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC))
I just wrote a new article on TradeKey. First of all, I work for TradeKey.com and I have tried my best to keep the tone of article non-salesy. I have seen the articles of several other B2B websites on Wikipedia too. For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Sources
Here is the article I wrote and I need your help to see if the content meets the guidelines. I printed out and read the guidelines you had sent me previously. I really appreciate your help and time. Here is the link to TradeKey article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tkmark/Sandbox
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Best Regards.
- There's actually no problem with the article now with regards to spamming. The addition of certifications are great. However, in my experience with other editors, I am afraid of WP:COI; you are writing for an article of a certain "org" in which you are a member/worker/employee. I will be attending a conference tomorrow and I am afraid, too, I cannot handle this matter until Saturday and will delay you. So, I referred you to Mr. Acalamari for the mean time. I'll be back on the business, soon. Thank you for understanding. --Efe (talk) 00:12, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
(Tkmark (talk) 03:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC))
Great... Thank you very much. Please do write to me when you get back.
Best Regards.
- Sure. Meanwhile, if you have pressing questions, please direct to the person I mentioned earlier. --Efe (talk) 04:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Dear Efe,
I have made the change as you suggested. Currently, there are 3 third party sources that I have mentioned in "References". Kindly let me know if it can go live now. Best Regards. (Tkmark (talk) 05:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC))
- Tkmark, do you have a reference for this "TradeKey received ISO 9001 Quality Management and ISO 27001 Information Security Management certifications and became the world’s first online B2B portal to have received both the certifications."? --Efe (talk) 11:56, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Dear Efe,
I don't have any third party reference for this. But I can provide you with a list of top 10 B2B portals who are not certified yet. Because any ISO certified B2B will state the certifications on their website.
How about I remove "and became the world's first online B2B...." and change it to:
"TradeKey received ISO 9001 Quality Management and ISO 27001 Information Security Management certifications in April 2007 and August 2007 respectively."
Kindly let me know. (Tkmark (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC))
- Being the world's first online B2B would help the article stay in Wiki. I am afraid certificates alone wouldn't make the subject that significant. It will be deleted under WP:CSD A7. --Efe (talk) 06:47, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Poker Face (Lady GaGa song) - Images
It might be worth nominating them for deletion. Personally I only nominate song covers for deletion if they are almost all identical "special editions" etc. However, I do agree that they could fall under criteria 8. We will continue to be reverted. Saying that, if we do delete them, they will only be recreated... — Realist2 15:32, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe we can tag them as NFCC #8 non-compliant. I love "Poker Face". Happy New Year Realist! --Efe (talk) 11:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
If you are interested, I am offering $20 for making the article a GA article. I can send the money or you can get it to GA class, which ever way you want.
Dan56 (talk) 04:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry Dan, it might be weird, but I don't edit here for "profit". But if you like, I will try to improve the article. Happy New Year! --Efe (talk) 07:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Happy New Year
Happy New year to you too. Hope this year brings you joy and success. Orane (talk) 08:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Signpost updated for November 24, 2008 through January 3, 2009
Three issues have been published since the last deliver: November 24, December 1, and January 3.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 45 | 24 November 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 46 | 1 December 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| ArbCom elections: Elections open | Wikipedia in the news |
| WikiProject Report: WikiProject Solar System | Features and admins |
| The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 1 | 3 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Interested in joining?
We need good people: Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Charts - eo (talk) 13:46, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm on! Thanks for the invitation. --Efe (talk) 03:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Category:Igbo rock singers
Hi, I'm puzzling over your deletion of Category:Igbo rock singers, which was Speedy Deleted as "empty" on January 3, although the category had only been empty for a matter of hours at most, not the minimum of 4 days that is required. Could you please explain what transpired? Thanks. Cgingold (talk) 13:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
- It appears User:Thomas.macmillan removed three cats including Category:Igbo rock singers on January 3, followed by his speedy tagging of the category page (C1). The category page did have an entry prior to the tagging, and it was only Lachi, so after the cat has been removed from the page, the category appears empty. Any page categorized under Igbo rock singers cannot be checked in its history so I presumed it was actually empty. Now that you have reverted his edit, the category appears red. --Efe (talk) 05:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply, Efe. You've identified a key point -- the fact that it was tagged for Speedy deletion -- which I had no way to know since that info was "lost" because it was removed from the User's edit history once the category was deleted. The other key issue is the 4-day minimum requirement before Speedy deletion. Were you aware of that, and if so, what went wrong here? Also, have you speedied other categories in similar circumstances? I'm concerned about this because I'm deeply involved in the WP:CFD process, and I suspect that this sort of thing is probably happening on a wider scale. Any insight you can give me would be most appreciated. Cgingold (talk) 10:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, I am aware. Sorry but we actually cannot trace links to every category page once they have been removed in a page. What usually happens is that, in my case, when the category page has been nominated for speedy deletion (empty category CSD C1), I will only check when was the cat been created. So if it has been created for more than four days—in my deletion history usually up to one year, and is empty, I will ultimately delete it. In your case, a user removed the cat from the page and nominate the cat page for deletion (C1). --Efe (talk) 10:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply, Efe. You've identified a key point -- the fact that it was tagged for Speedy deletion -- which I had no way to know since that info was "lost" because it was removed from the User's edit history once the category was deleted. The other key issue is the 4-day minimum requirement before Speedy deletion. Were you aware of that, and if so, what went wrong here? Also, have you speedied other categories in similar circumstances? I'm concerned about this because I'm deeply involved in the WP:CFD process, and I suspect that this sort of thing is probably happening on a wider scale. Any insight you can give me would be most appreciated. Cgingold (talk) 10:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Sales info
This source has US sales info on Beyonce and Usher amongst others. — Realist2 00:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Wow, nice link. Thanks Realist. BTW, I think this could be useful for Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Charts. --Efe (talk) 05:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you...?
Ask users to review an article that is currently up for a GA nomination? Or is that like cheating? (Moon) and (Sunrise) 04:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Moon. Sorry but I don't understand. --Efe (talk) 05:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Anyone not involved in a GA nominee can review it. --Efe (talk) 05:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
re: Hot 100 number-one hits of 2009 (United States)
Yo yo yo! I really think that Beyoncé songs in these lists should be shown as is listed in Billboard, since Billboard is the main focus of these articles and the main source. Yes, she uses "Knowles" other places, such as credits in film roles, but the same logic applies to Janet Jackson's releases after around 1998 (when she is credited solely as "Janet") and/or John Mellencamp's releases as "John Cougar" before he dropped his stage name. Since the listings in Billboard are ultimately decided by record labels and management of artists, obviously her first-name-only was specified by someone in her camp. No? - eo (talk) 11:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Not actually a big deal for me Eric. Its just it has been agreed that we should use her full name. And for consistency purposes, too. --Efe (talk) 11:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I was just also thinking of accuracy, cuz if one were to look on Billboard's website or open up the chart pages in the print issues, there is no "Knowles". - eo (talk) 11:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- That a valid reason too. Maybe we can ask other's input? --Efe (talk) 11:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, that's fine with me. I'm just thinkin' if we change Beyoncé, then others will think "well why not change 'Janet'"? or any other "featuring" credit, for that matter. You know how those are - usually a mess! - eo (talk) 11:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm really worried about consistency. OK, I will change BK to B first until we get a consensus. Anyway, its not detrimental. --Efe (talk) 11:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm thinking consistency in her song/album articles is cool ("Knowles") but here it should be the other way. Anyhoo - chime in here: Talk:Hot 100 number-one hits of 2009 (United States)#Knowles or no Knowles? - eo (talk) 11:46, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'm really worried about consistency. OK, I will change BK to B first until we get a consensus. Anyway, its not detrimental. --Efe (talk) 11:40, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sure, that's fine with me. I'm just thinkin' if we change Beyoncé, then others will think "well why not change 'Janet'"? or any other "featuring" credit, for that matter. You know how those are - usually a mess! - eo (talk) 11:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- That a valid reason too. Maybe we can ask other's input? --Efe (talk) 11:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I was just also thinking of accuracy, cuz if one were to look on Billboard's website or open up the chart pages in the print issues, there is no "Knowles". - eo (talk) 11:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
A note from the GACC
Hi there Efe!
| |
|---|---|
|
The Good Article Collaboration Center has been restarted, and since you are a member, we are asking for your help in making the articles Seinfeld, Sarah Palin, and President of the United States good articles. We hope to see you there. Cheers. --LAAFansign review 19:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC) |
- Notice delivery by xenobot 13:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I see you deleted this on 1 Jan. I have no personal investment in it other than having renamed it from Iceberg (Fashion House) a while back, but I came across it because it was linked from several articles, which seems to me to be de facto evidence of its value (plus it's unquestionably a real company). I only found out about the deletion because a bot placed a notice about the proposed speedy deletion of Iceberg (Fashion House) [a redirect] on my talk page yesterday, but it too has already been deleted (surely that can't be right?). Can the article be resurrected? If it's to be proposed for deletion, I'd like the opportunity to comment first. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Chris. Yes, the page can be restored. It was actually deleted because it failed to establish any significance. It appears that the subject has not more than ten links here in Wiki, and its something. --Efe (talk) 00:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- How do I go about getting it restored? Colonies Chris (talk) 09:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Are you going to improve it? If I restore the page now and nothing happens after, it will be speedy deleted again. --Efe (talk) 10:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'll have a go at it. Colonies Chris (talk) 00:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Restored. I added a tag to alert other users its in the middle of a revamp. --Efe (talk) 06:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'll have a go at it. Colonies Chris (talk) 00:00, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Are you going to improve it? If I restore the page now and nothing happens after, it will be speedy deleted again. --Efe (talk) 10:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- How do I go about getting it restored? Colonies Chris (talk) 09:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Hot 100 number-one hits of blah blah blah
Please don't just make a huge, sweeping change like this without consensus. There are WAY too many pages that would be affected if tables are preferred by other editors. I find the non-table version to be more organized and easier to read, for one. Not everything needs to be in a table and these have been fine for, well, a long time - why fix what isn't broken? - eo (talk) 12:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- I am really busy tonight, Eric. I would be willing to discuss this stuff probably tomorrow. I am just wondering why did you removed/reverted everything that has been added above the table. You know, I am trying to expand them for future FL nominees. I am looking at List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2002, List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Albums of 2001, and two more. All are featured. --Efe (talk) 12:23, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- And by the way, the image is free; I just uploaded it tonight. --Efe (talk) 12:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll be willing to discuss. I'm actually serving jury duty now too, so things are crazy here. If I removed anything I shouldn't have, apologies. The image is not something that is needed for this list, and honestly if I ever see them in other lists, I remove them. They're straightforward lists and the use of an image does not add to the content or help to explain the information - in my opinion, images (in this case) are just decoration. But that can be discussed too. I personally do not like the tables, however, because this would involve such a huge undertaking (changing ALL the lists), I think consensus is necessary. - eo (talk) 12:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- Is it fine if we open the discussion on the project's talk page? --Efe (talk) 04:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- 1) Thanks for the barnstar!!! 2) Don't be sorry; I understand your excitement. 3) I went to the peer review and left my comments. It'll all be a repeat to you cuz it's basically the same thoughts I left for you before. Anyhoo - keep up the good work and let me know how I can assist after the peer review is done! - eo (talk) 11:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Is it fine if we open the discussion on the project's talk page? --Efe (talk) 04:33, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'll be willing to discuss. I'm actually serving jury duty now too, so things are crazy here. If I removed anything I shouldn't have, apologies. The image is not something that is needed for this list, and honestly if I ever see them in other lists, I remove them. They're straightforward lists and the use of an image does not add to the content or help to explain the information - in my opinion, images (in this case) are just decoration. But that can be discussed too. I personally do not like the tables, however, because this would involve such a huge undertaking (changing ALL the lists), I think consensus is necessary. - eo (talk) 12:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- And by the way, the image is free; I just uploaded it tonight. --Efe (talk) 12:27, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
File:James Blunt 1973 Alternate Cover.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:James Blunt 1973 Alternate Cover.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Peripitus (Talk) 08:13, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 2 | 10 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 19:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
IP You Just Blocked
You just blocked 72.189.167.143, and they keep adding vulgar words to their talk page, replacing the warnings. Just thought I'd tell you.--Iamawesome800 03:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I protected the page for 6 hours. --Efe (talk) 03:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
The Metal Observer: article deletion
How's things? A while back you helped me in making Sepultura's Arise a good article, so I'll be asking you for an assistance in something. It has come to my attention that The Metal Observer has been nominated for deletion for since March 2008. Only admins can delete pages, right? Would you know one willing enougth to that? That article has been generating controversy for some time now... and since it has already been scheduled for annihilation, that process might provide some closure for all the parties involved. Musicaindustrial (talk) 16:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just wanted to note that I was also asked this question and responded here. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, admins can delete them but through speedy tags and AFD discussions. It appears that it has been renominated for deletion, dated Jan 13. IMO, the page is doomed for deletion. First, the recreator failed to provide third-party sources that would establish the notability of the subject. This means that there is a failure in addressing the concerns brought in the first AFD. Second, that criticism is an original research, but was already removed. --Efe (talk) 06:21, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Single Ladies
Hi Efe, do you think that the Single Ladies page should be separated for Charts of 2008 and 2009 as per WP:CHARTS? Because the single charted in Hot Dance Club Play and Hot Dance Airplay in 2009. Please reply me back.. Cheers "Legolas" (talk) 08:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, per Wikipedia:Record charts. Cheers, Legolas. --Efe (talk) 08:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Cool, I'll make the changes. Thanks for your input. By the way i wanted to include the archive image that you are using in my talk page, but can't seem to do it. Can you help me out in that? "Legolas" (talk) 08:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sure. Its done. --Efe (talk) 09:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot. I checked it. The single charted last year, and only achieved peak position this year. So I changed your edit. --Efe (talk) 09:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot Efe, I really appreciate your help. "Legolas" (talk) 09:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Always welcome. --Efe (talk) 09:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot Efe, I really appreciate your help. "Legolas" (talk) 09:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot. I checked it. The single charted last year, and only achieved peak position this year. So I changed your edit. --Efe (talk) 09:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Sure. Its done. --Efe (talk) 09:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Cool, I'll make the changes. Thanks for your input. By the way i wanted to include the archive image that you are using in my talk page, but can't seem to do it. Can you help me out in that? "Legolas" (talk) 08:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Charts in two years
Hey Efe, there's still confusion regarding charts in two years. According to User:Realist2 the year when the chart reached its peak position should be moved to the year, unlike that you said (when a song enters a chart). Can we have a discussion regarding this at WP:CHART? Cheers "Legolas" (talk) 12:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Would be good. Please set up a discussion there. --Efe (talk) 08:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Already set up. Please come there and share your thoughts. "Legolas" (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Poker Face
Hey Efe, you recently made the Swedish Single Chart peak for Poker Face (Lady GaGa song) to 1. Can you add the chart procession for it? I am unable to find the list from my place as server is down :( "Legolas" (talk) 11:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Legolas. Good evening (Philippine time). I actually did not add that peak position. It was an IP. Now added. --Efe (talk) 11:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, good evening (Indian time)
. Thanks again Efe. Really appreciated. "Legolas" (talk) 11:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't have to say w******. You are always w******. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 11:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- LOL !!! "Legolas" (talk) 11:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- I don't have to say w******. You are always w******. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 11:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh, good evening (Indian time)
2009 time!
- Thanks Acalamari. You too! --Efe (talk) 11:35, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Happy New Year!
Best To Reply At My Talk Page. Thanks.
- Just Stopping by. Yours Truly, M.H.True Romance iS Dead 14:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
.
- Thanks Muslim. Hope this would be a good year for you. --Efe (talk) 06:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Efe, Happy late Christmas and New Year. ;) I hope 2009 is starting to be a good year for ya. ;) Also, good work on Viva la Vida and Death and All His Friends, maybe that could be our next GT, along with its singles. :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, been thinking about it lately. But we are in trouble with "Viva la Vida". --Efe (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- I know. I wanted to continue working on the article, but there's too much edit warring over there, so I decided to abandoned the article. Also, I was trying to work on "Lovers in Japan", but its so hard figure what type of sound the song has, so I abandoned that as well.
I'll probably work on "Lost!".Never mind, I see your working on that article. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)- The reviewers were asking more than GA criteria required, and the fact that the article was passed to GAN prematurely, it will be a damn hard work.... Lost!? Oh yeah. It caught my attention yesterday. And the fact that I love its drums. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- Reviewers? How many of them are reviewing the article? Well, I was gonna tell the user who nominated "Viva la Vida" to withdraw it, since the article was yet from GA standards, but never got to it. Yeah, its a good song, but nothing compares to the sound of "Lovers in Japan". :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- They're two now. Another user looked into the POVish nature of the chart performance section, citing those words like "successful", etc. I haven't heard "Lovers in Japan". Blue, don't you know that I have heard only four Coldplay songs? First was "Violet Hill" on TV, and then "Viva la Vida", both once. Then "Yellow" on youtube, long after the article was promoted to GA, then "Lost!", many times. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 06:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Reviewers? How many of them are reviewing the article? Well, I was gonna tell the user who nominated "Viva la Vida" to withdraw it, since the article was yet from GA standards, but never got to it. Yeah, its a good song, but nothing compares to the sound of "Lovers in Japan". :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- The reviewers were asking more than GA criteria required, and the fact that the article was passed to GAN prematurely, it will be a damn hard work.... Lost!? Oh yeah. It caught my attention yesterday. And the fact that I love its drums. Hehe. --Efe (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
- I know. I wanted to continue working on the article, but there's too much edit warring over there, so I decided to abandoned the article. Also, I was trying to work on "Lovers in Japan", but its so hard figure what type of sound the song has, so I abandoned that as well.
- Yeah, been thinking about it lately. But we are in trouble with "Viva la Vida". --Efe (talk) 01:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hey Efe, Happy late Christmas and New Year. ;) I hope 2009 is starting to be a good year for ya. ;) Also, good work on Viva la Vida and Death and All His Friends, maybe that could be our next GT, along with its singles. :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks Muslim. Hope this would be a good year for you. --Efe (talk) 06:51, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just Stopping by. Yours Truly, M.H.True Romance iS Dead 14:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Wow, I somehow can't believe two users were reviewing the article. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard; did you show them example GAs or FAs about "successful"? You haven't listened to "Lovers in Japan"? Its a good song. Go to YouTube and watch the video, its pretty cool. What about "Clocks"? "Violet Hill" is a good song, along with "Viva la Vida", "Speed of Sound", and "God Put a Smile upon Your Face". If you listen to their new EP, I recommend listening to "Rainy Day". :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:41, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh my, "Clocks", too. The first reviewer failed the GA. --Efe (talk) 23:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just wondering. I know, I saw the comments left by the reviewer. I guess what needs to be done now is, I guess, fix the article and maybe take it to GA reassessment or re-nominate it. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:31, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest working on the article early in February. Its Grammy season and MTV will be publishing news articles for each Record of the Year nominee. Its going to be helpful specially that the background section of "Viva" is weak. --Efe (talk) 02:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, with all the coverage its gonna get it, might be better to work on the article afterwards. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean afterward? --Efe (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- IDK, I wrote it so fast, that I didn't get a chance to read what it means. :P Hey, what should our next music project be? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- IDK, too. Do you have any idea what is our next GTC, aside from Viva? --Efe (talk) 08:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I did have hopes to work on Justin Timberlake related songs, but like you said, its hard to find any info. about them, so that's off the table. Maybe Destiny's Child... -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- Limited sources, too, unless we have offline references. You have a copy of their book? It would be good. Ah, why don't we go for "Yellow"? --Efe (talk) 08:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- I guess. I'll check my library's catalog and see if I can find their book. I'm fine with working on "Yellow", that's probably the break we've been needing. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 16:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Limited sources, too, unless we have offline references. You have a copy of their book? It would be good. Ah, why don't we go for "Yellow"? --Efe (talk) 08:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
- Well, I did have hopes to work on Justin Timberlake related songs, but like you said, its hard to find any info. about them, so that's off the table. Maybe Destiny's Child... -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- IDK, too. Do you have any idea what is our next GTC, aside from Viva? --Efe (talk) 08:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
- IDK, I wrote it so fast, that I didn't get a chance to read what it means. :P Hey, what should our next music project be? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean afterward? --Efe (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed, with all the coverage its gonna get it, might be better to work on the article afterwards. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
- I suggest working on the article early in February. Its Grammy season and MTV will be publishing news articles for each Record of the Year nominee. Its going to be helpful specially that the background section of "Viva" is weak. --Efe (talk) 02:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Just wondering. I know, I saw the comments left by the reviewer. I guess what needs to be done now is, I guess, fix the article and maybe take it to GA reassessment or re-nominate it. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 23:31, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
| I award you The Tireless Contributer Barnstar for your tireless work on the articles related to List of number-one hits (United States), both, in expanding many into content lists and updating them. I came to look at Hot 100 number-one hits of 2008 (United States) (yes, I'm a music fan), and several minutes ago, I was very shocked to see how much that list and related lists have improved with your help. Congratulations, and keep up the fine work, Efe (talk · contribs). |
- Oh.That's very kind of you. Thanks Ryan. --Efe (talk) 05:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. And I don't give barnstars very often, so consider this a unique thank you from me. — RyanCross (talk) 05:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- I will. Thanks again. --Efe (talk) 05:12, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. And I don't give barnstars very often, so consider this a unique thank you from me. — RyanCross (talk) 05:08, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 5, Issue 3 | 17 January 2009 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:31, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Hot 100 number-ones of 2009 (USA)
Hey Efe, lets go developing this page also like you did for 2008/2007 etc. you did a marvellous job!!! "Legolas" (talk) 04:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks. I would love to. But, we'll wait until 2010 before we can edit the page like how 2008 list appears now. We go updating them every week because Billboard magazine publishes the chart every Thursday. I invite you to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Charts. There is a list of lists there that need attention. Happy working with you Legolas. --Efe (talk) 05:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- That i know. But atleast we can develop the tables like 2008, and keep the songs in there. Then we don't have to wait till the end of the year, and then find all the articles again from Billboard. also we can include the most important news from now on, like GaGa topping the US charts etc. Cheers! "Legolas" (talk) 05:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- OK. --Efe (talk) 05:53, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- That i know. But atleast we can develop the tables like 2008, and keep the songs in there. Then we don't have to wait till the end of the year, and then find all the articles again from Billboard. also we can include the most important news from now on, like GaGa topping the US charts etc. Cheers! "Legolas" (talk) 05:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Rearranging Madonna single pages
Hi Efe, i'm in the middle of rearanging all the Madonna, Britney Spears and Rihanna pages according to WP:SINGLE. Most of them donot comply with the guidelines. You can see my work for "Give It 2 Me or Disturbia". Can you please keep an eye just to make sure i'm correct? Cheers "Legolas" (talk) 12:25, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- There's actually no convention over which arrangement to prefer. What you see in the project page is not a suggested arrangement. As long as the succession of contents is logical, its fine. For me, all lists and tables should go after the prose, per MoS. I checked them. Seems fine. They're watchlisted actually. --Efe (talk) 12:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- But still, lets comply with the guideline. By doing this we can come to a consensus. Anyways i also base my rearranging on the GAs. All of the GAs follow a particular order. Hence i follow that. It will be sweet of you to just keep an eye. By the way, the discussion for the single charting year at WP:CHARTS, have we reached at a consensus? "Legolas" (talk) 12:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yep. I do watch them. Not only GAs, but FAs. And FAs do follow the guideline. --Efe (talk) 12:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- But still, lets comply with the guideline. By doing this we can come to a consensus. Anyways i also base my rearranging on the GAs. All of the GAs follow a particular order. Hence i follow that. It will be sweet of you to just keep an eye. By the way, the discussion for the single charting year at WP:CHARTS, have we reached at a consensus? "Legolas" (talk) 12:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey can you come to Poker Face (Lady GaGa song)? Some IP is contiuously adding the number of weeks in the song charts. "Legolas" (talk) 12:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be out later. If IPs persist, try adding "WP:Record charts" to your edit summary so that they will know what they're doing is against the guideline. --Efe (talk) 12:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yup, sure. Thanks again. Have a nice day (or night). "Legolas" (talk) 12:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Its night already. Hehe. Good night, Legolas. --Efe (talk) 13:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh yeah! Its Phillipine time. Well good night then. Its still evening here. "Legolas" (talk) 13:04, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oh yeah! Its Phillipine time. Well good night then. Its still evening here.
- Its night already. Hehe. Good night, Legolas. --Efe (talk) 13:00, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yup, sure. Thanks again. Have a nice day (or night). "Legolas" (talk) 12:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- I'll be out later. If IPs persist, try adding "WP:Record charts" to your edit summary so that they will know what they're doing is against the guideline. --Efe (talk) 12:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Re: Yellow
Let's go first with a peer review and then see where it goes from there. I'll help out with whatever feedback is given. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 03:53, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- OK. --Efe (talk) 04:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, would it be a good (or bad) idea to maybe open a PR for "Clocks"? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
- No problem, I think. Two FAC? --Efe (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- You know what, after the results of "Yellow" then open a PR for "Clocks", since there's somewhat of a backlog at FAC right now. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- OK, Blue. I see no probs. --Efe (talk) 00:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, cool. I was just wondering, cause I think "Clocks" could serve as another FA potential. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Majority of Coldplay articles are FA potentials. hehe. Have you any plans of bringing the mother article to FAC room? I mean Coldplay. However, it's one of Gary's babies. --Efe (talk) 00:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- I know, but "Yellow" was their break-out and "Clocks" made them even more famous, which made me think that both are FA potentials, because of their standards. :) You know, I haven't thought of getting Coldplay to FA, but goal numero uno was to get them to GA status, which did happen. Yup, its one of Gary's "babies", I watch over the article, and you work on their songs. How 'bout a collaboration; the three of us work on the article and get the mother off all articles to FA. :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Good idea. I know Gary will like it. But, not now, IMO. For now, our target is "Yellow". --Efe (talk) 01:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, let's do that in the future and focus on "Yellow". :) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 15:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Good idea. I know Gary will like it. But, not now, IMO. For now, our target is "Yellow". --Efe (talk) 01:12, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- I know, but "Yellow" was their break-out and "Clocks" made them even more famous, which made me think that both are FA potentials, because of their standards. :) You know, I haven't thought of getting Coldplay to FA, but goal numero uno was to get them to GA status, which did happen. Yup, its one of Gary's "babies", I watch over the article, and you work on their songs. How 'bout a collaboration; the three of us work on the article and get the mother off all articles to FA. :P -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Majority of Coldplay articles are FA potentials. hehe. Have you any plans of bringing the mother article to FAC room? I mean Coldplay. However, it's one of Gary's babies. --Efe (talk) 00:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Alright, cool. I was just wondering, cause I think "Clocks" could serve as another FA potential. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- OK, Blue. I see no probs. --Efe (talk) 00:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- You know what, after the results of "Yellow" then open a PR for "Clocks", since there's somewhat of a backlog at FAC right now. ;) -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 00:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- No problem, I think. Two FAC? --Efe (talk) 00:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, would it be a good (or bad) idea to maybe open a PR for "Clocks"? -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 21:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)