User talk:Thestreamer/Archive 1

Dutch Top 40

The Dutch Top 40 (archived at top40.nl) is generally preferable to the Megachart 100 (archived at dutchcharts.nl). The Dutch Top 40 is a combined airplay/sales chart, while the Megachart is sales-only.—Kww(talk) 13:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Non-standard charts

Please don't add charts to articles if they are not published on a periodic basis. How can a reader compare or track albums on the "Columbian Albums Chart", "Peru Albums Chart", or "Venezuelan Albums Chart"? They aren't published, there's no way to tell if it's a weekly figure, a daily figure, monthly, or annual: there just isn't enough data in your source to justify adding these charts.—Kww(talk) 16:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Single vendor charts

Per WP:Record charts, charts reflecting the sales of a single vendor aren't to be used. The charts you added for Chile, Columbia, and Turkey were all single vendor charts.

Please don't add these charts.—Kww(talk) 01:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:GOODCHARTS

Please restrict yourself to the charts listed on WP:GOODCHARTS and Billboard. Charly1300.com is not a reliable source of reliable charts.—Kww(talk) 03:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

She Wolf / Shakira

Dear user, You recent edits keep breaking wikipedia rules and you don't seem to care or be bothered about the fact that there are rule pages. I would like to point a few things:

• A component chart makes up a formal chart. All IFPI related charts specify the difference between album sales and singles sales digitally and physically. Any chart which publishes a seperate digitial chart does so because the main chart incorporates both digital and physical sales. Only charts listed at WP:GOODCHARTS should be used.
• RIAA is responsible for US certificates. Although the source confirms that "She Wolf" has passed the sales thresh-hold for platinum singles in America the song is not certified platinum until RIAA puts it on their website. Simply selling the right amount of units does not warrant a certificate. The sales have to be verified. RIAA has yet to annouce the single as platinum.

It semes like you are personally attached to editing these articles, perhaps because you are a Shakira fan. This is fine because i am too. But this doesnt mean we can inflate the details or portray shakira in a better light than reality. You reluctance to discuss your choice to edit these articles in this way is also being noted because your behaviour is now displaying disruption. users who persisitantly display WP:IDHT will only result in a ban from editing. If you look at any other major release e.g. Beyonce's I Am... Sasha Fierce or Whitney Houston's I Look to You we simply don't EVER include digital charts. the only time digital charts can be used is if the album doenst chart on the main chart]]. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 20:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC))

The only time you can use the digital chart is when the album doesnt chart on the main chart. When it does chart on the main chart you DO NOT use the digital chart. This is period and is explained at component charts and WP:record charts. By the way the incident has been reported to wikipedia administrators. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC))

So I am right about French Digital Albums Chart it's not a component (talk • contribs) 21:47, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

You erase my message ! Example : French Digital albums chart, week 41, Renan Luce was number one (2 050 copies sold) but when you watch the Top 200 french albums chart he's not in the chart. I can not be clearer (talk • contribs) 21:48, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

"If a chart can indicate a No.1 position for the sale of 2,050 copies then that chart is inappropriate for WP - anyone buying 100 copies of a track can materially alter chart positions - as being insufficiently authoritative or independent." this comment was left by User:LessHeard vanU do you not see the logic of what he is saying?.

He has made it very clear as to why the chart cannot be included. In your example the album did not chart on the main top 200, in that case the digital chart is allowed but where the album HAS charted at the top 200 using digital charts is not acceptable. The ONLY reason you want to include the digital chart is because the album reached number 1 there whereas it only reached number 7 on the top 200. its quite a simple argument really. no other major album release e.g. I Am... Sasha Fierce or I Look to You or Battlefield (Jordin Sparks album), Memoirs of an Imperfect Angel or even Doll Domination to see what i mean. Oh and if you look at your history i have not erased anything. Jeeze! the rules are there for a reason - to be followed.(Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC))

I'm sorry but this is not a valid argument, for example in the french singles chart it is also possible by selling 100 copies to be in the top 100, yet it is an official chart! (talk • contribs) 21:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

can i draw your attention to User talk:Thestreamer#WP:GOODCHARTS. Someone else has already raised the issue about the validity of charts with you. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:50, 22 November 2009 (UTC))

SNEP does not state that the digital chart is seperate from the main chart. On WP:GOODCHARTS it says that these are the recommended charts. You're argument does not make logical sense. A song selling 100 copies cannot chart in the top 100 french singles. The general consensus (view of the wikipedian community) is that if a release has charted on the main chart e.g. French Album chart (Like She Wolf has) then you do not use digital charts. This is even explained at WP:record charts. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC))

I can assure you that it is possible for singles chart top sold 100 copies and to be in the top 100, Now in the french singles chart only the first 10 can sell over 1,000 copies unlike the french digital singles chart, the top 50 sell over 1,000 copies.(talk • contribs) 22:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes but for France the general consensus it is not valid, because the digital chart are not included in the "main" french albums chart (talk • contribs) 22:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I made a genuine mistake, confusing the song with the album. it is no reflection of the argument or content. The digital chart would not be allowed for the single either.(Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC))

French Digital Albums chart

Whether the chart is technically a component chart or not, it is certainly not significant to include. The main chart for France is already listed, and the article has 24 listed charts. Per WP:Record charts, that means that six of them need to be removed. When there are already too many charts, there's no good reason to have two from France.—Kww(talk) 22:39, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Record Charts

Just to let you know only charts associated with the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry can be used on wikipedia. You can find a list of associated charts at ifpi's official website. (put into google). You'll find that Ukraine is not listed. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC))

Undoing edits

Do not undo other editor's edits without providing some justification. In this edit, I removed succession boxes because the links and sources provided for those charts did not provide any information that indicated them to be true. With this edit, you put them all back. You didn't provide any explanation, and the succession boxes are still not supported by any sources.

Your insistence on undoing other people's edits and refusing to listen to other people's input is becoming disruptive. Please try to learn how to edit cooperatively.—Kww(talk) 23:23, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Single Certifications

This is becomming stupid now. Please can you start paying attention to the rules. Wikipedia states that sources must be specific and verifiable. Can you explain to me how a photo of shakira holding a gold certificate proves her album went gold in Switzerland. Which part of the source tells us that it was switzerland that the album went gold in? If you do not change your editing behaviour we will have no choice but to recommend you are banned from editing. You are continuously paying disregard for the rules and for community consensus. Your edits do not have a WP:edit summary and you are constantly redoing your own edits even though others have provided explainations for why they are wrong. In future please discuss new additions to articles before adding them otherwise you could earn yourself a ban. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC))

You are so funny, you always add a ton in your comments when it comes to me is crazy, always pretending to be the victim, you're so pathetic. You know what ? I will just wait than swisscharts.com publishes the certification and then i'd like to see your face. And one last thing it isn't you who will decide if i'm banned or not, so, calm your joy ! And i think the reverse is also possible(Thestreamer (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC))

This has nothing to do with being victimised. I am impartial to other editors and to articles. I edit based on fact. My comments above are neutral. I used the term "we" when talking about the ban because i was referring to the wikipedia community. Many editors (just look on your talk page) have commented on your need for clarity when editing. Additionally many have also commented that you do not seem to be aware of the rules. Please do not use offensive or insulting language on wikipedia. Learn to be critical of one's edits and not of the individual editor. It has nothing to do with who got what right first, it is a simple matter of facts. Unless sources are specific and verifiable then they cannot be used. You do not need to remind me of the rules when it comes to bans, i am more than aware of the procedure. My comments above where to help you (that's why i asked you to discuss your edits) and i was merely pointing out that if users cannot learn from their editing mistakes there could be a case for a ban. I'm sorry if you felt otherwise. I cannot be banned for pointing those things out to you, but you could be banned for not being civil. Keep that in mind for the future. It would be ashame for anyone to get banned over something as trivial as this. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC))

Bla bla bla ... I don't understand why you tell me about your life, I said you that I would wait for confirmation of swisschart.com who publishes certification, another week to wait, end of the discution (Thestreamer (talk) 00:13, 30 November 2009 (UTC))

Edit warring again

With this edit summary, you stated that my original statement in this edit summary was false. What part was false? There is no article for "Le Clan des miros". There is no article for "La Superbe". The "French Digital Albums Chart" is a minor chart. The navigation box you are adding is useless, because it cannot be used to navigate.

I'm am removing the useless navigation box again. Please stop constantly restoring material that other editors have removed. It's tiring and annoying.—Kww(talk) 23:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

your argument is invalid, it's not because there is no article in EN wikipedia that it's forbidden to enter this information, you just have to add a source (Thestreamer (talk) 11:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC) (UTC))

My argument is quite valid. Please read Wikipedia:Navigation templates, and understand that the purpose of a navigation box is to navigate between articles. A navigation box that doesn't contain any articles cannot possibly allow people to navigate, because it doesn't contain anything to navigate to.

Please try to understand what a truly annoying editor you have become, and try to behave better. You make changes that aren't quite right, and whenever someone attempts to correct them, it winds up with a long discussion on your talk page where you insult them after you continually re-enter the information. That's disruptive. It destroys the cooperative effort involved in editing Wikipedia. Please stop behaving this way. I'm removing the navbox again. I'm not the only editor removing it, which shows that there is no consensus to include it. Do not put it back.—Kww(talk) 13:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

So imagine what you say is true, if Shakira would be number 1 on French physical albums chart we would have the same problem as the album "Tour 66 : Stade de France 2009" by Johnny Hallyday and "Le clan des mirors" by Renan Luce don't have a page, you see, then, that your reasoning is not at all reliable (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_French_number-one_hits_of_2009) (Thestreamer (talk) 14:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

The problem is solved because I just changed the internal link to French Digital Albums Chart by List of French number-one hits of 2009 and then it's possible to compare the number 1 on all year (Thestreamer (talk) 15:03, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

No, you just made it worse. Let's try this simply, on two different points:

1. Navigation boxes are to navigate. The purpose is to present a set of links that are all connected, to allow people to navigate up and down the links. They are only useful for things that have a relatively complete set of articles. The French Digital Albums chart will never have a relatively complete set of articles, and the List of French number-one hits of 2009 is already a list. A list doesn't need navigation. Again, please read the links that people provide you. What part of Wikipedia:Navigation templates are you having trouble with? How does adding this succession box to She Wolf help anyone navigate? If you really think this information is necessary, then a succession box is not the way to do it. If you must, create a category of category:French Digital Album Chart number-one album, and then add that category to relevant articles. That's a way to group a bunch of randomly scattered articles into a logical grouping. A succession box is not the right way.
2. When multiple editors remove your changes, it is your obligation to stop putting the material in until you get consensus to add it. Read WP:BRD to try and comprehend the flow. Stop adding anything about the French Digital Albums chart to She Wolf until you get consensus to add it. That should be a very simple thing for you to do. Just stop adding it until you can get more editors to agree that it should be added. Two different editors have asked you to stop adding it. It's time to stop adding it until you can get a consensus to add it.—Kww(talk) 15:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit again? Do you have any intention of reading and listening to arguments from other editors?—Kww(talk) 15:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to meet constantly the same thing, in this case I'm sorry but you're wrong, and do not leave me the argument "everybody edit your message" you are only two (Thestreamer (talk) 15:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

and you have still not answered my question, if Shakira was number in physical sales, there would have the same problem(Thestreamer (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I would have the same problem, because most songs on the French physical singles chart don't have articles either. Succession boxes are only useful when the preceding and succeeding articles nearly always exist. They are for navigation, not for information. I've started a discussion at WT:Record charts#Succession boxes. Please actually participate.

And one thing to understand is that it doesn't matter if you think I'm wrong. The point is that you haven't got consensus for your change, and because you haven't got consensus, you need to stop adding it.—Kww(talk) 16:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Now i don't want to get involved in this but a third editor has asked you to stop adding the French Digital Albums to the navigational boxes in successions section. The WHOLE point of a nav. box is that you can click on the predecessor and successor. With the French Digital Chart you cannot. Further more there is no need to clarify that the chart included is the French Physical chart. Disquenfrance.com lists the charts as the french singles chart and french digital chart. You do need to stop now. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:24, 3 December 2009 (UTC))

Just for information, there is the same problem for Argentina ... continue discussion on this page if you like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Record_charts#Succession_boxes (Thestreamer (talk) 16:43, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on She Wolf (album). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. —Kww(talk) 16:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Reported for 3RR violation here.—Kww(talk) 16:37, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours for revert warring. Secret ^account 22:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Number-one in France

Hi Thestreamer ! I know that, as I'm very interested in the French charts. But when it is not specified, it is automatically a physical sales chart. Apparently that's the rule on WP. --Europe22 (talk) 16:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

If there are more than 18 countries in the chart list, it's possible to remove the Digital Chart because sales are not important but it should nevertheless be clear I think that's it's the physical chart, at least until that SNEP decided to combine them once and for all(Thestreamer (talk) 16:22, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Why are there twice the same succession boxes (they are in the "Chart procession and succession" and in the "External links" sections) ? Why reverting me twice ? Europe22 (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Chart performance it's for peak position and Chart procession and succession is for numbers 1, to know the number of weeks spent in first place(Thestreamer (talk) 16:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't talk about the charts table... You don't reply to my question : there are the same successions boxes twice in the article. Why is it needed ? Europe22 (talk) 16:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I did not understand your question, it's corrected now (Thestreamer (talk) 16:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Please stop this

The information you are trying to introduce has been removed multiple times by multiple editors for multiple reasons. This time, your introduction of a non-standard table directly contravenes WP:Record charts, which indicates that trajectories "may be mentioned in the article text when there is sufficient reason to do so and that key facts "may be mentioned within the article text". If you continue down this path, your next block will be much longer, and an indefinite block is almost certain if it continues. Don't make mention of one album reaching number one on one chart your sole mission on Wikipedia.—Kww(talk) 17:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Digital vs Physical Charts (round 2)

Ok let me make this very clear, the consensus (from the all the previous discussions) was that you DO NOT include the french digital chart when an album has already charted on the French Album's chart. SNEP makes it clear that it provides only two charts, the French Albums Chart (main chart) and the Digital Chart. other providers such as the official charts company in the UK publish 3 charts (phyical, digital and main). Therefore we assume (correctly) that the main charts is a culmination of the digital and physical charts. This has been clearly explained. Please do not re-add the digital chart to The Element of Freedom. Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:13, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

You missed me! Well, I will not go into your game, but I'll just tell you again that the digital chart is not combined with the physical chart in France so there is no main chart as you say, but as you do not like to be contradicted I'll let you believe what you want Thestreamer (talk) 22:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I dont play games i edit by fact. I've presented the reason above which clearly proves why what I have stated (and all of the other editors who've also had run-ins with you over this issue) is correct. You were asked (and failed) to present evidence proving that the french album chart does not include digital sales and were unable to prove that the digital chart is not a component of the main chart. Therefore the argument is closed. it has nothing to do with me being contradicted or not. I admit to when i have got things wrong and im always open to other suggestions. But when it comes to a clear breach of rules without a WP:consensus then i do get especially annoyed as people like yourself repeatedly show WP:IDHT {Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)}

Look at the website of SNEP, described how the albums and singles chart are made, we can read that only sales at 500 stores in the panel (representative of stores in France) are counted, Digital albums are not counted in this chart, in 2010 we can expect that to happen but for now it's still not the case. I hope to finally have answered your questions. [1] Thestreamer (talk) 01:00, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Jena lee j'aimerais tellement cover.jpg

⚠

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Lәo_(βǃʘʘɱ) 05:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, that's because I'm creating right now the article for this song. Thestreamer (talk) 05:03, 30 December 2009 (UTC)