User talk:Realist2/Archive 33

NJR pinging necessary

Please view the talkpage when you have the time. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 06:00, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. — R ² 15:28, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still doing work (All I need to do now is add the authors to the citations missing authors,) but MAN is it a painstaking process fixing citations. :( Did you have this much trouble with Thriller? CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just had to fix the citations on Michael Jackson the other day. It was so time consuming I asked someone to help me via a bot lol. Citations can be a nightmare at FAC, after MoS and prose that is. You also need to fix the dating on your references remember. So that they read "24 March 1995" instead of "24-03-95". This should be done for both the publishing and retrieve dates. — R ² 23:29, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PHEW! I've finished it all up. How does it look, now? Feel free to take a look when you have free time. :) Have a good one! CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:38, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arrrrgghhh. :( Damnit, that stinks. People really nitpick about THAT?! Oh well... I'll do it tomorrow, because if I do that now I'll be seeing citation templates in my sleep! Have a good one. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 23:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said on the NJR talk page just a moment ago. User:Gary King might be able to help with a bot. — R ² 23:59, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I'll do it myself tomorrow. :) So how has your day been? CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's been OK, I've been doing some studying, and reverting the usual idiots that appear on my watchlist lol. I surprisingly do much less article building these days. I mostly hand out my advise and patrol my watchlist of 115 high traffic articles. :/ That said, I do have one article at GAN. I nearly finished it back in December but then forgot about it. The other day I spent an hour or so on it before sending to GAN. — R ² 03:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I saw it. :) I was tempted to review it, but decided to work on articles older than it, not counting "Beat It", which I wanted to review, because, well... it's "Beat It"!!! :) Right now I'm in the beginning of my spring break, so I'm enjoying the extra relaxation time. I've got to soon get ready for Fall registration, though, so that's causing me a little bit of stress. Too much stress! :( And I'm guessing you're burnt out from all of that incredible work you've done. :P A bunch of us have been working on song articles. Legolas and Frcm are helping me out in my sandbox with a Cyndi Lauper song, "All Through the Night", and I've been helping them out with their Madonna articles. I got my second DYK that's on the mainpage right now, so I'm so happy about that. :) Hope all is well, and I'll get to work on NJR tomorrow! CarpetCrawler (talk) 05:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay, today has been hectic, and I haven't had the time to sit down for more than a half an hour on the computer. I'll get the ref formatting done as soon as possible! CarpetCrawler (talk) 01:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I did it for all of the retrieved dates. I have a question, when you say publishing dates, do you mean the dates that are formatted like this? "Gillespie, Mary (1988-09-18)" CarpetCrawler (talk) 02:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the date the piece was written/published/released to the public. Be it a year (for a book), or a more specific date for a weblink. — R ² 02:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've finished it now (I hope!) Are there any other issues that you feel need to be addressed? Have a good day or night. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:00, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at the referencing soon, it will be time consuming, I intend to check each weblink individually and check the formatting. I'm busy in real life today, so I don't think I'll be able to look at it until tomorrow. — R ² 03:13, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, don't worry about it, and take as much time as you need! I myself have been busy the past few days. My Uncle came out of the hospital today, so I had to help him carry his belongings, as well as other hectic situations in the past few days. Have a nice and hectic-free day tonight and tomorrow! :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, it seems I missed quite a few things you just edited. My apologies! CarpetCrawler (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I'll let you know when I'm finished. — R ² 20:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment, as you were involved in discussion

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Song_articles_incidents - Thanks! - eo (talk) 18:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Names

I know most people see someone's former name as their real name. Technically speaking, when legally changed, it becomes their real name. Many States and Provinces issue a new birth certificate that reflects the name change. The new name becomes their birth name, when you think of it. In those cases, could Previous name be used instead of Born? Just a suggestion for Wikipedia.

A couple of people have posted comments that's really wrong here. Jason, Lahaina said that Alice Cooper became a christian in the 80's, but he has always been one. He's dad was a priest. And Alice Cooper's real name isn't Vincent Furnier. He was given the name when he was born, but he changed it legally to Alice Cooper in 1974, so that's his real name now. - Michael, Stockholm, Sweden

http://www.artistfacts.com/detail.php?id=20 http://www.zazzle.co.uk/alicecooper/about Israell (talk) 06:41, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, what is this about. I can't remember speaking to you recently? — R ² 14:54, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted your opinion on it since you're one of the main editors. Israell (talk) 20:44, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your best idea would be to mention it at the WP:PUMP. I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter. Personnel I find peoples obsession with names, nationalities, races etc rather odd. — R ² 20:53, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information! I witnessed edit wars over the matter on WikiPedia and realized articles don't always follow the same guidelines. Thought there's a need for a concensus. Israell (talk) 19:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tarheelz and Lady Gaga

He did a copy-paste move. The article history is at Lady Gaga, which is also the consensus title. So, Lady GaGa was changed back to a redirect for that. (Which you'd done, then self-reverted.) —C.Fred (talk) 02:39, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources

Girls Aloud discography, a featured article that used Digital Spy as a source many times. 12bigbrother12 11:17, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Page move

Do you know of an admin that's good with page moves? I need to move Michael Jackson filmography to Michael Jackson videography, per the discussion on the FLC page. I think you have to delete/merge the history of the videography page first. Afterwards I'll have it peer reviewed, and then submit it again. I'll wait for this to close first. Pyrrhus16 14:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will get someone to take a look. — R ² 18:03, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Pyrrhus16 18:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. BTW I emailed you the other night, but didn't get a response. Can I confirm you received it? Wasn't anything bad. :) — R ² 18:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Responded. I don't check emails that often. :) Pyrrhus16 18:24, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. :) — R ² 18:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you seek Amy edits

The article is bloated and full of unnecessary information and accusing me of not knowing what I am doing is asinine and not a little insulting. --86.41.134.221 (talk) 21:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't remove sourced content without using the talk page to gain consensus. The article is not bloated, we are not a paper encyclopedia. — R ² 21:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to reason with you but instead you persist in accusing me of incompetence. If you are not careful I will report you to the mods. I know wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. I look at my screen and this is quite obvious. Please do not patronize me. Irrelevant information is irrelevant to the article. --86.41.134.221 (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where did I accuse you of incompetence? By informing you that we don't follow the same principles as a paper encyclopedia? Your easily offended. Since your edit history showed you had made only 5 edits I assumed you would not know that particular policy and was just letting you know. Chill. — R ² 22:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discography

Have a question. Is it necessary to list all the country certifications in a discography page or only the major markets? I just listed the major countries and their certifications for the Gaga discography page and volaaaa.... hate mails started pouring from the fans in the talk page. I think its correct only to list only the major music markets like Aus, UK, US or maybe Canada for certi. Don't you think? Reply back. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I believe smaller countries certifications should be left on the page of the relevant single/album. — R ² 16:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sony/ATV Music Publishing

Just expanded this and submitted it at DYK. We might get a picture of MJ on the main page. :) Pyrrhus16 13:29, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well done :) — R ² 16:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thought

Apparently (from this thread on Lara's talk) the next issue of WikiVoices is going to have a feature on "expanding the role of female volunteers". If you're still after a female voice to do the spoken versions of Michael & Janet, you might want to lurk there and see if there's anyone who sounds like they might be interested (or ask whoever runs the thing to put a specific request in – someone might think it sounds interesting). With July approaching, the pages might start getting significantly increased usage fairly soon. Speaking of which – can't remember if I already mentioned this to you – you may want to start thinking about WP:TFAR; with "never had an article on the main page" (1 pt), listed on Vital articles/Expanded (2 pts) and "date significant to subject" (1 pt), I make that 4 points, which should be enough to get it on the main page if you're willing to take the flood of vandals. – iride scent 19:35, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll think it over. I don't think any good with come of having the article on the main page. — R ² 20:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MTV Greatest Album Chart

Realist, only the final chart is a pool, read here http://www.mtv.co.uk/entertainment/greatest-album-ever/competition/mtvs-greatest-album-ever Simone Jackson (talk) 18:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at it, those results are not very important. They were selected by a few industry insiders. Jackson won the main poll via the public. — R ² 16:35, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, they selcted by qualified people. "Here's what Trevor Nelson and the rest of the MTV Base team chose to be the best urban offerings from across the globe." ( http://www.mtv.co.uk/channels/mtv-base/chart/greatest-albums-ever ). It's as important as 500 Greatest Albums list by Rolling Stone Mag. Simone Jackson (talk) 18:41, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My point is, they were only sub awards. Jackson won the main prize, there is no need to mention the lower prizes which made up the bigger prize. It's redundant. Also, these are new polls/awards, so we have no way of proving "It's as important as 500 Greatest Albums list". — R ² 16:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, because tha "main price" was relased by the people, but the "sub-award" was relased by qualified people. One list is an official list for us (the people) and the other list is the official for MTV Base, VH1 etc... P.S. When Thriller won 8 Grammys, you cite all categories in Wikipedia, not only the most important. Simone Jackson (talk) 18:49, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VH1 and TMF results are the same I believe they both give the same shortlist. Bad appears at number 43 in both the lists. — R ² 16:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, maybe TMF is part of VH1, or TMF is a chart stiled by artists and other that approve VH1 chart. I don't know.Simone Jackson (talk) 19:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe TMF is the British alternative to VH1, run by the same people. Clearly the lists are identical. If we do decide to mention it, it would only be MTV Base and VH1. — R ² 17:04, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, in this link (http://www.mtv.co.uk/entertainment/greatest-album-ever/competition/mtvs-greatest-album-ever) TMF cited only with the link and not in the rules like for MTV Base, MTV 2 and VH1.Simone Jackson (talk) 19:00, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And the VH1 and TMF results are the same. — R ² 17:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, if we do decide to mention it, we post only VH1 (and MTV Base).Simone Jackson (talk) 19:20, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, shall I have another go at adding it? — R ² 17:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

? Simone Jackson (talk) 19:48, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shall I have another go of adding the info to the article. — R ² 17:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you refer to add MTV Base and VH1 charts in Thriller? Simone Jackson (talk) 20:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you think it's still needed. — R ² 18:54, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. I add these charts. Simone Jackson (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still not warranted in the lead. — R ² 19:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

kk, whenever i need help with something i guess i'll talk to you. (i don't really need help right now so.... ya) Writergirlrocks talk 23:10, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :) — R ² 23:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

oh wait i do have a question: how do you make a list? i used to know how but i haven't been on so long i forgot :)Writergirlrocks talk 23:13, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What would you like to make a list of? How would you like it to look? — R ² 23:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i'm making a list on my user page of all the pages i have contributed to and i just want it to be straight down with bullets.Writergirlrocks talk 23:20, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try something like this;

Pages I have contributed to...

A
B
C

What you think? — R ² 23:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

oh ok. i see. ya that works. thanks :P Writergirlrocks talk 23:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, nice signature btw. — R ² 23:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the by: Don't flirt! You be going to hell otherwise! 88.217.44.251 (talk) 23:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha lol! — R ² 00:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me, but i was not flirting. i'm just trying to be friendly cuz all the people i've talked to on here get mad if i just stick to questions and stuff and don't even say hi. i take offense to that!!! Writergirlrocks talk 01:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, he was talking to me, he was just joking. :) — R ² 01:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: DS

Sure thing. As soon as I find a secure connection I will log in and protect the article. Can you also keep an eye on this dude? He seems to be screwing with your usual haunts so I'll let you have him ;-) Catch you around. Please leave me a reminder e-mail on Sunday or something so I can prot it. Cheers and take care, mate. 88.217.44.251 (talk) 23:57, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I'm all to aware of User:Alexanderfriend unfortunately. Speak soon. Cheers again. — R ² 00:01, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I'm both flattered and humbled. – Toon ^(talk) 14:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's only true, ever since that "Badly Photoshopped MJ Barnstar" :) — R ² 15:22, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. It was all an elaborate ploy for support in the eventual RfA ;) – Toon ^(talk) 16:37, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah right ;D — R ² 16:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fancy signature

OK, I have to know... how do you and others make such a fancy and cool signature? I'd love to have one, as well. :) CarpetCrawler (talk) 20:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go to "my preferences", insert the wiki coding into the signature bar, then tick "raw signature". You can model the wikicoding around the coding of other peoples signatures that you like. My wikicoding is [[User:Realist2|'''''R''''']][[User_talk:Realist2|'''''2''''']] — R ² 21:07, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, like this? :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 21:25, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Got it in one :) — R ² 21:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for helping me out. :) Have a great day! CarpetCrawler^{message me} 22:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

how do you put pictures in articles? Writergirlrocks talk 23:23, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a specific image in question? I can probably do it for you and you can see how I do it. — R ² 23:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daydream (album)

Hey Realist, how you're doing? Well, I passed the last six days working on this, and if you're not too busy, I wish you could compare with this and see if I did a good job and If I am allowed to replace with my version. I deleted some things poorly sourced (peak positions), and non-notable things (year-end charts) using Thriller and Off the Wall as models (so if you see some similarities, this is not pure coincidence). However, if you think that I deleted some important things, please, don't hesitate to inform me. Thank you. =] Sparks Fly 23:32, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get around to looking at it in the next several days. I've promised other editors that I'll look over their projects. But I will get around to it asap. Best. — R ² 23:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking: after I replace the article with my own version, it would be better if a request peer review? So, other users could make a review and when you get time you can do so as well. What do you think? Sparks Fly 23:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's up to you, I have no problem either way. — R ² 23:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I did it. So when you got time, you know what you have to do. ;) Sparks Fly 00:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll comment within the next 48 hours, I'm nearly up to date helping everyone. — R ² 01:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Buzzing you again

Here I am buzzing you again.:-) Can you take a look at "Poker Face" for me? I developed it quite a bit (fighting the IP vandalism *rolls eyes*) and would like it to go for GA eventually. You can point out if there are any bad references and anything not properly structured. Also I have a video from Young Hollywood which has Gaga talking about the development of the song and background info which is essential. Its a video from the Poker Face set which talks about teh video and the song. Check it out here. Can this be used as a source? Please reply back. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:55, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Look above, yes I can, but it will take quite a few days (less than a week though) to get to it. — R ² 11:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC) — R ² 11:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NJR

OK, so you want me to send it over to Peer Review again? Sounds like a plan. :) I'll head over there tonight, when I get home from work. Have a good day! :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 18:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, there is no harm in giving it another peer review, prose is not my strong point. — R ² 18:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, here it is. Let's see what comments we get. :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 21:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, after that you can nominate it for FAC. — R ² 21:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

what do u think: cute or 2 much work?

ive been reviewing some articles on The Carpenters, and i noticed something that looks impressive, but want to get ur word on it.

Pay atention to the titles in the infoboxes of:

let me know ur opinion. MaJic (talk) 06:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's nice, I have no idea if it's allowed though. — R ² 14:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging again

Have you had any time to write something out? Ironholds (talk) 10:01, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly not, maybe if I see you doing it, I'll point it out to you. — R ² 14:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So you opposed per the prospect of me being an admin essentially scaring the shit out of you, but don't know why that is, can't present any evidence as to why that is and then say that if you see me doing (whatever it is that scares the shit out of you) you'll point it out to me? I know the RfA would've probably been doomed anyway (one more vote here or there wouldn't have made a difference) but I cannot stand baseless votes. In future I'd suggest you'd do well to make comments based on more than "he scares the bejesus out of me, but I don't know why and can't provide any diffs or evidence of bejesus -scaring behavior" hah, look at the failed RfA candidate lecturing people about how to edit. I keel myself. . Ironholds (talk) 00:17, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ironholds, your being pathetic. It's quite clear that I do not want a confrontation with you, so just back off. I am not going to start listing the problems I have with your behavior, it's simply not worth it for me. It will only result in drama, with others getting involved. — R ² 01:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greatz00

It's nothing magic, it's the watchlist. It's at 5,203 articles at this moment. Patterns of edited articles become much more obvious that way.—Kww(talk) 12:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well my watchlist is 115 article, and I thought that was hard work. — R ² 14:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Big Boy (Jackson 5)

Hi! I have just one concern so far, feel free to check out the review's talkpage whenever you have the time. :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 20:56, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will take a look. — R ² 21:05, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

damn... got $80 to spend? ;) and have a wonderful Easter! CarpetCrawler^{message me} 09:10, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually rather broke at the moment, after spending my money on Michael Jackson concert tickets. Happy Easter. :)

LOL, I was only teasing. ;) I was just so surprised that copies existed still! And OMG, you got tickets! What day are you going?! No fair!!! :) Also, I will take a look at Big Boy tomorrow, for today is Easter and I'm just going to relax. :) Have a great day! CarpetCrawler^{message me} 23:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going towards the end of August. Dream come true. No stress about the review. Best. — R ² 00:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're so lucky! :) I would've went but my money is a little tight, plus I don't exactly have the transportation! LOL. Have a great day. :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 00:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Outdent)Big Boy is on hold. View the talkpage for details. :) And cool, I have AIM too, so if you ever have a question, or if you want to just talk, feel free to send me a message. :) I'll have to add you first, though. E-mail is jcleeREMOVECAPSnyk2@gREMOVECAPSmail.com Make sure to remove the caps. ;) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 11:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Will go through the issues asap. — R ² 12:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has passed, great job! :) Let's see how NJR's peer review goes... CarpetCrawler^{message me} 19:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's my 20th GA! — R ² 19:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easter eggs

Happy Easter! — R ² 14:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter!

On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 07:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter! — R ² 14:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gaga April 09

Hi, I recently allegedly have been accused of "goo faith edits"-which is understandable. However info. about Gaga on MTV's the hills will be added due to three sources provided. (under other ventures). I want your opinion first. Get back to me as soon as possible. ThanksI am Rorschach (talk) 03:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Lady Gaga article is monitored by many editors. If you would like to add text to the article is probably best to suggest it on the talk page, including the sources. We need to gauge whether something is notable enough to be included. I reverted you content because the majority of it was not source and nothing was discussed on the talk page. That does not mean I'm opposed to it's inclusion. — R ² 03:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will do as instructed.I am Rorschach (talk) 22:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prince related articles

i have been thinkin gon expanding on some prince articles/creating new ones. let me get ur feedback and if u have any ideas of ur own

F.U.N.K.
Prince's name change (or The Artist Formerly Known as Prince)
The NPG Music Club Music Releases --> (this one may be a bit difficult; while the recordings issued were official...actually, its difficult to explain - i will create a sandbox and show u what i mean.

Also, on a side note, regarding the videography section of the Discography, i would take it down due to no primary sources (the main one, housequake.com, shut down in January), but had my edit reverted, so i guess ill have to do a search.

If u have AIM or yahoo, we should talk on there, cuz im not a fan of checking ur page for replies once a week. lol

Peace. - MaJic (talk) 07:03, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed you my AIM. I really like the idea of an article for the name change. — R ² 10:55, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Music Week

Would you say Music Week is a reliable source? I'm going to work on this, and Music Week have got loads of articles with Sony/ATV artist information. Pyrrhus16 17:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe so. — R ² 17:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Cheers. :) Pyrrhus16 17:54, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Medal of Merit

		The Good Article Medal of Merit
		I hereby award you the Good Article Medal of Merit, in recognition of getting 20 articles to GA. Well done! Pyrrhus16 19:12, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks buddy! — R ² 19:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem ;) Pyrrhus16 19:18, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]