User talk:Extraordinary Machine/Archive 4

Just a question

Are you aware of any Wikipedians who are capable of creating OGG files for music? I was going to ask User:FuriousFreddy, but since he has taken a departure from Wikipedia (hopefully not permanent), I obviously cannot. Do you know of any? And happy new year to you! —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 15:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. By the way, I am aware that you saw my candancy at RfA. Just ignore it, as it has failed because of one incident. Thanks! :) —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 16:12, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again, EM. I'm having a difficult time referencing a source at Luxurious (song). I was wondering if you knew the correction citation and could perhaps do it for me (if it isn't too much trouble)? Thanks!

This is the source. —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 03:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No? Well you could have at least dropped me a line. All right, thanks anyway. Happy new year! —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 15:32, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it appears as though you did. Excuse my lazy eyes today, as this is an example of New Year's Eve night. Nonetheless, let's continue contributing this year too! By the way, don't leave Wikipedia, because your edits are excellent. (November is quite impressive.) Happy new year! —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 15:48, 1 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Heaven (Ayumi Hamasaki single)

Where are you getting that this article is a song article? "HEAVEN" may be an Ayumi Hamasaki song in itself, but this article is about the single, which has multiple tracks and other such distinguishing factors. Calling the article a song article is misleading; a reader would probably think the article was about one particular song rather than a collection of songs. Furthermore, in reading your talk page, I see that you've moved other pages from "single" to "song" before, particularly F.E.A.R. (single), which was moved back after someone discussed it with you. How is the case of this single, and the other Ayumi Hamasaki singles, different from that case? Kamezuki 01:14, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked over Wikipedia:Naming_conventions#Album_titles_and_band_names, and I didn't see anything concerning singles--just songs, albums, bands and the like. What part of this policy states that singles should be listed as songs? Like I said before, this article isn't about a song; it's about a single, which contains multiple songs. If the title of an article contains "song" when the article is not solely about one song, it can be misleading. I realize that nowadays, many of the "singles" released in Western countries are actually just one song and may not even be packaged in a physical medium; however, in Japan (and possibly in other countries), which has a single-driven market, singles are treated differently and cannot, and should not be lumped under the term "song". Kamezuki 00:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank alot for your helpful tips on the policy. I'm very glad you tell me or I would not even read the policy all or even fix it. You are a very nice person. Darknshadow 23:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A problem with your username

I just want to say that I first listened to 'Extraordinary Machine' about two weeks ago, and I love it. My problem is that every time I see an edit of yours on RC Patrol, it makes me want to listen to the whole album. Maybe if I grow tired of it, I'll have to whitelist your edits :). -- MicahMN | μ 18:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happen to the Confessions of a Broken Heart article?

What happened to Lindsay Lohan's article on Confessions of a Broken Heart? I was more than shocked that it was deleted. I, as a person who often visits Wikipedia, am not satisfied with the actions you have taken. I don't "like" Lindsay Lohan but her video is really interesting and I enjoyed reading that article. When I checked back 2 weeks later, it disappears. Where is your common sense? Why don't you delete the Hung Up Madonna song? It's just a music video, song, single like Lindsay's! Please stop being biased or I have to report you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.8 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 6 January 2006

Response

Wikipedia is wrong then. Songs are not spelled out the way you insist they been when remixes have been created. I must refrain from reverting though, since you say it's part of the MoS. However, the archived talk page is ridiculous. I just discovered Wikipedia today and may not know much about it, but why would a talk page be archived if it exceeds 30KB? Judging by a few articles that are very good, they are over 50KB! The article on my favourite singer Mariah Carey approaches that distinction! That's just the main article itself though... why should a talk archive be treated the same way? 64.231.72.45 23:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have a talk page called Hollow Wilerding? What do you mean that I've been reported for evading a block? Could you please answer my question? 64.231.72.45 23:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? An administrator check my IP? You are losing me here. Could you answer my question and explain what you are attempting to tell me? 64.231.72.45 00:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? 64.231.72.45 00:18, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I not receiving a response? 64.231.72.45 00:25, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to investigate for myself what you had mentioned since you were rude and did not respond to my question. The administrators' noticeboard link you gave me did not help until I noticed a "Hollow Wilerding" in the directory. I see that they had IP addresses beginning with "64", the same as mine. I am not Hollow Wilerding though and am no way affiliated with them. If you choose not to believe me, you may conduct that user check you were mentioning. Could you respond to me now? 64.231.72.45 00:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have your hands full with HW and her ways :-O so here's a WikiCookie to snack on while this saga continues. -- getcrunk juice ^contribs 09:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Once Moore album cover.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Once Moore album cover.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there 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.

Mind matrix 00:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit by Lil_Flip246

Following your catch of the non-NPOV edit by this user, (s)he asked why; I hope my stepping in to respond was not too presumptuous:

I don't understand why you removed that section on Lindsay Lohan. Why? -Lil_Flip246

On behalf of Extraordinary Machine, as I also am a major contributor to this article, I see two reasons why your passage was deleted: One, it was laced with POV, and an editor's personal point of view is not in keeping with the objectivity required by an encyclopedia; second, a lip-sync episode or two when an artist clearly can perform is hardly Milli Vanilli-ish and, therefore, its encyclopedic value is dubious. Questions? Please feel free to write me. RadioKirk talk to me 00:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Radio Kirk talk to me 01:28, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that you were presumptuous at all. Extraordinary Machine 18:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :) Radio Kirk talk to me 19:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Britney Spears trivia section is a bit too long,I was just trying to do a cleanup Batzarro 05:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Need To Merge

There is no reason why 'Boy (I Need You)' should be merged with the Charmbracelet album article, as indicated on it's page. The song is a definite full-fledged single and has enough information to validate it's article's existence. In the case of 'The One', it could be debated, but like such songs as 'Last Night a DJ Saved My Life', 'Lead the Way', and 'Underneath the Stars', all of which are promo-only singles, it had been given official singles treatment. Therefore, I really suggest the tag for the 'Boy (I Need You)' article be removed, but I understand if you would like it to remain on 'The One' article. - Grey Pursuit January 6, 2005 (UTC)

About Lindsay Lohan's song

What happened to Lindsay Lohan's article on Confessions of a Broken Heart? I was more than shocked that it was deleted. I, as a person who often visits Wikipedia, am not satisfied with the actions you have taken. I don't "like" Lindsay Lohan but her video is really interesting and I enjoyed reading that article. When I checked back 2 weeks later, it disappears. Where is your common sense? Why don't you delete the Hung Up Madonna song? It's just a music video, song, single like Lindsay's! Please stop being biased or I have to report you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.15 (talk • contribs) 09:08, 9 January 2006

Confessions of a Broken Heart

What happened to Lindsay Lohan's article on Confessions of a Broken Heart? I was more than shocked that it was deleted. I, as a person who often visits Wikipedia, am not satisfied with the actions you have taken. I don't "like" Lindsay Lohan but her video is really interesting and I enjoyed reading that article. When I checked back 2 weeks later, it disappears. Where is your common sense? Why don't you delete the Hung Up Madonna song? It's just a music video, song, single like Lindsay's! Please stop being biased or I have to report you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.21.154.9 (talk • contribs) 09:08, 9 January 2006

Wow, r u crazy delete Madonna song? it's better than lindsay song it reached 7 not like Lindsay--Hotwiki 06:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Can u help me in the Britney Spears article?, User:Triggy keeps putting back the album pics and current version is better than his. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotwiki (talk • contribs) 06:45, 10 January 2006

Your help is needed...

Someone is pretending you gave them a barnstar when their history has no mention of you editing it. The link-[1]J.J.Sagnella 13:36, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalities

Hi, hopefully you can find time to weigh in on Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Proposal: it's time we put this one to bed. Mark ¹ 18:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kclarkson.jpg

Image:KClarkson.jpg......i marked it promotional photo...whats the problem??--Jaysscholar 23:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN/I

You seem to be missing a point. Indeed a good contributer, but a poor communicater. That tagline is rubbish; "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit!" should be changed to "The free encyclopedia that anyone but vandals, sock puppets, and people who have been accused of unproven situations can edit!" 64.231.176.254 00:17, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See this conversation. I have created a new account and have all rights to access it. From this moment, I will refrain from speaking to you. Thank you. Solar Serenity 01:20, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hey, may I call you Extra? ;P Thanks very much for your help, your posts on WP:ANI were very informative and useful. I see the blocked user above still insisting, as she has done all along, that she has a "right" to edit. Sheesh, I feel like requiring an essay from her on what the word "blocked" even means. Bishonen | talk 03:26, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Karen Dotrice

With a great deal of input, my first article from scratch is up for Featured Article status (self-nominated). Feel free to visit and vote! Radio Kirk talk to me 18:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Karen Dotrice.jpg: It's included to show what she looks like today. Given that many readers likely would be drawn to the article to satisfy their curiosity ("Say, whatever happened to the little girl from Mary Poppins, anyway?"), I felt was encyclopedic to show a recent pic. Would it make more editorial sense if moved into "Later life"? (Edit: I just answered my own question and moved the pic.) As for fair-use rationale, what do I need to add that's not already there? Radio Kirk talk to me 18:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add: I have added a line explaining the belief of fair use to the pics used in the article. Radio Kirk talk to me 22:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stay Away From Madonna

You are obviously a jealous Mariah fan. Please stop tagging Madonna pages we liked it the way it was now you come and fuck it up. You are a cunt. You fucked up computer nerd mariah scary fan! Just stay away the sites r fine fucker! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.11.81.235 (talk • contribs) 04:00, 18 January 2006

Comment moved from talk page

Hello there - the following was left on your user page. I've taken the liberty of moving it here, to your talk page, where it should have been originally. --PeruvianLlama^(spit) 23:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote:

Please do not add commercial links — or links to your own private websites — to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. See the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 20:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I did no such thing. What are you talking about? I only included a trival fact quoting Spears comments about her politics re the gulf war and blindly following the president. This is not a comercial link, nor is it not my own private website. Did you get the wrong person? 64.121.40.153 23:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"No. of chart topper"

I received your message and I should've explained my reasons for adding that information. Looking at the older singles article, one can easily point out their differences in comparison to the info featured in later singles (ex. "We Belong Together", "Boy (I Need you)", etc.). In many of the later articles, the "number of chart topper" information is put in paragraph form, as opposed to the comprehensive charts of "Vision of Love" and "Emotions". My incentive was to have a uniform style in what info was displayed in the charts displayed (which can also explain my boldfacing). Now, we can either use the initial "No. of chart topper" info as part of the chart information, or make it into a lengthy, page-elongating (and not to say unappealing to the eye) paragraph for all the singles, including "We Belong Together", which is large enough as it is. Of course, we could remove it all together, regardless of an articles size.

In an unrelated matter, I had posted a message here a while back which I didn't get a response to concerning the "suggestions to merge" tags added to singles such as "There's Got To Be A Way", "Boy (I Need You)", etc. I understand that your a very respectable and widely-recognized editor on Wikipedia and you probably get barraged with message left and right, so it's okay that you may have overlooked it. Nonetheless, in message I pointed out that whoever posted these tags provided no reasons for why they should be "merged" to their parent album in any of the discussion pages. I personally see no need to merge, considering some of these tagged articles were full-fledged and prominent singles. One could argue merging promo-only singles such as "Underneath the Stars" and "Last Night a DJ Saved My Life", but others are just ridiculous, in my POV.

So anyway, I just wanted to point that out and maybe you could help in my dilemma. And i apologize for writing such a tedious message and for any grammatical errors (I'm rushing this one). I hope we can settle all this drama soon, but I'll continue editing the articles to be in uniform style until then. Again, sorry and I appreciate that you've looked over my edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grey Pursuit (talk • contribs) 22:05, 22 January 2006

Thanks

I just wanted to thank you for the welcome to Wikipedia. I don't know how users, such as yourself, (with what is clearly a much greater sphere of page-editing influence) can handle all the vandalisms and random unsubstantiated garbage that gets posted on these pages. I'm dealing with it already and I only have a few articles. Oh well. Thanks again.

Regards, Irongargoyle 22:23, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

Hello. I am the user IP who you sent a message to regarding an edit I conducted in your sandbox. I apologize for any harm or foul I may have committed, but it had not been to my knowledge that sandboxes are used for the purpose of the user who created it. I had been correcting grammar errors, and did not intend on hurting the page. The second part of your comment stumps me since this is a public computer, yet if my knowledge is up to par, then it is possible that you are referring to Lawrence Jedbottom, a speed vandal, who commonly edited under the Toronto Public Library IP address. If this is the person you do not suspect me to be, then it is my turn to apologize. 192.30.202.12 19:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did some research concerning the person you had suspected me to be. I have concluded the following:

Lawrence Jedbottom, a speed vandal, has not possessed access to a computer in several months, and has been indefinitely banned from both the Toronto District and Toronto Public libraries.
Patrick Lam, a common vandaliser of a number of websites, has been banned from all Toronto libraries, and has not possessed access to a computer for a very long amount of time. He is believed to have resurrected himself on a mirror-site of Wikipedia, although the full details are unknown.
Courtni and Cruz Wilerding, who had intended to speed-vandalise Wikipedia following a number of contributions, have been banned from the Toronto District Library, but not the Toronto Public Library, however, they will soon be banned indefinitely from both. They do not own a computer.
The Willy on Wheels vandal does not reside in Toronto, as far as the library catalogue is aware of.

192.30.202.12 21:14, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationales

Hey, thanks for getting back to me. I don't know if you've looked at the inages in Karen Dotrice (and, thanks for the congrats!) recently, but I think I have added sufficient explanations to the images. No doubt you'll let me know ;) Radio Kirk talk to me 19:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I voted object at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lindsay Lohan, but please do not take this as an insult towards the Lohan article or your contributions to it. In fact, I have had the page on my watchlist for several months, so I'm aware of the effort that has been put into it (a lot of it by you). I just didn't think that it was ready for FAC yet. On the other hand, I think it's nice that Wikipedia has such a solid article about a contemporary celebrity, and I have added it to the Wikipedia:Good articles list. Above all, don't worry if the nomination fails or if you didn't get to deal with everybody's objections. You'll always get another shot, and what you learnt from the nomination can be used to help improve the article. Extraordinary Machine 20:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; you may have seen my tongue-in-cheek response. I'm actually working on some of your suggestions as I type this. Thanks for GA, too! Radio Kirk talk to me 21:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Hey, just letting you know that the offer still stands :). Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cool, just let me know when you're done thinking... Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support. Jkelly 23:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lindsay Lohan

Hello again! I believe everyone's concerns have been addressed. Please feel free to revisit. Radio Kirk talk to me 18:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe your concerns are now addressed. :) Radio Kirk talk to me 19:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your vote! I'll continue to tweak in the meantime. Radio Kirk talk to me 20:23, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another FA?

Hey there. How u doin'? Ive been working hard on "We Belong Together", and I was wondering —if you were not too busy, that is — if you could take a look and do two things:

give it a copy edit. I was in a rush the last time I got to it, and I'm not sure that it flows as well as it ought to.
be my peer reviewer? I'm pretty sure that if I send it to peer review, nothing will happen (I know this from experience). If you're not too busy, just give me a few pointers on how it could be developed, what's missing, what's superfluous, etc. Basically, do you think it could be featured in the near future. Dont sugar-coat anything, if you think it clearly isnt ready, just say so (and why). I won't be offended.

Thanks in advance. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 04:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I give you the Editor's award for your contribution to "We Belong Together". Thanks. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 23:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Welcome back.

It's good to hear that you're cutting back the Wikitime enough to keep yourself from getting overwelmed. I cleared my entire watchlist when I came back, and I unenabled automatically adding pages to the list. This way, I can keep myself from watching 4700 articles every day (that was my old watchlist count). --FuriousFreddy 20:54, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Claus & Mariah

I created the article because the info about Mariah's single was deleted from the Santa Claus song article, and it has to be somewhere. Now I remember that there was a vote for deletion for this single, but the outcome was "no consensus" which I interpreted as status quo. I posted about this on the talk page. regards, Alensha 17:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poll

Dear Extraordinary Machine, I would like to invite you to my 1st poll, Best DCOM. Thanks! : ) Tcatron565 9:47 am CST 2/04/06

comment

Let me point out that you have them too! And they're not for anyone's eyes but mine! Unless I invite you, like the poll that I asked you to do. Tcatron565