User talk:Tomica/Archive 33
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tomica. 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 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | → | Archive 40 |
DYK for Tunnel Vision (song)
 | On 4 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tunnel Vision (song), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the song "Tunnel Vision" by Justin Timberlake features several voyeuristic references? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tunnel Vision (song). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 08:33, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Diamonds World Tour
Hey Tomica! Listen, I'm not intentionally trying to revert your edits on the box office score data table. I actually agree with what you and Status are saying. It is much simpler to see it all together. However after seeing how it looks, its all squished together and doesn't look as good as I thought. Also you said that Wiki articles tend to have one table. But Rihanna's 'Loud Tour' and 'Last Girl on Earth Tour' articles have more than one table AND have a box office score data section. Like I said, and I believe many agree with me, the box office data deserves its own section. But as I said earlier, I do agree with you and Status. And I know that not all articles have to look the same. But it all looks squeezed together. Thank you and I hope you understand. — TheMadonnaMusicCN (talk, contribs) 8:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Tbh, no I don't understand you. First of all Loud Tour and Last Girl on Earth Tour articles are a total MESS. I tend to maintain Diamonds World Tour through its run so it can be a good article one day. On Wikipedia every articles tends to be different, it doesn't mean if this one it's like that his relative has to be like that too. What I want to say it's I don't think they are squished actually they are better and more understandable. And yes, articles tend to have like one table on Wiki, look all the filmographies, discographies and videographies. — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:02, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well i'm glad we're talking this out so you can understand. Personally, I understand how you want this article to look good and be maintained. I'm glad that you watch for vandalism and unnecessary changes. However, I don't think it looks as good as some thought. I'm not citing an unreliable source, in fact i'm not doing anything wrong. There is nothing wrong with having a tour dates table and a box office score data table. You were perfectly fine with a 'cancelled shows' table that Status created. Besides it looks much better and more spacious as opposed to being squeezed like I said. It was quite confusing to me when I first saw it all close together like it was. — TheMadonnaMusicCN (talk, contribs) 10:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- You do release how hard is for people who have to bother; for example they go to the box office score, see it and they are like "oh from which date is that score so they have to scroll up to the other table with the dates to find the exact show... why bothering with that actually when one table is good for everything. There are columns with title, rows, sources everything. I really can't understand you sorry. Probably you will be reverted as that table is the best solution to date. — Tomíca(T2ME) 16:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Is it really that big of deal for someone to scroll down a little bit more to see a tour gross? Everyone is acting as if its a huge ordeal when its so simple. You can't even fit the percentages in when its all one table. As I said, there is more room to fit everything and it flows nicely. I don't see why everyone is so anxious that we have two tables on one article. It's not a big deal and I don't think people reading it would have a problem anyway. If it was such an issue and a "bother," then many articles would have been changed earlier as a result. Its ridiculous how people who edit wikipedia react at something so simple. — TheMadonnaMusicCN (talk, contribs) 4:12, 4 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.11.29 (talk)
- You do release how hard is for people who have to bother; for example they go to the box office score, see it and they are like "oh from which date is that score so they have to scroll up to the other table with the dates to find the exact show... why bothering with that actually when one table is good for everything. There are columns with title, rows, sources everything. I really can't understand you sorry. Probably you will be reverted as that table is the best solution to date. — Tomíca(T2ME) 16:36, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well i'm glad we're talking this out so you can understand. Personally, I understand how you want this article to look good and be maintained. I'm glad that you watch for vandalism and unnecessary changes. However, I don't think it looks as good as some thought. I'm not citing an unreliable source, in fact i'm not doing anything wrong. There is nothing wrong with having a tour dates table and a box office score data table. You were perfectly fine with a 'cancelled shows' table that Status created. Besides it looks much better and more spacious as opposed to being squeezed like I said. It was quite confusing to me when I first saw it all close together like it was. — TheMadonnaMusicCN (talk, contribs) 10:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Come online
— AARON • TALK 21:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Justin Timberlake - The 2020 Experience.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Justin Timberlake - The 2020 Experience.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
){kind=link}
GA review for Half of Me
Hi there! Just letting you know that I have started the GA review for "Half of Me", and will be leaving feedback shortly. WikiRedactor (talk) 20:33, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
- Well that went quicker than expected! I've put it on hold for a week for some minor issues, but I'm sure this can all be easily fixed! WikiRedactor (talk) 21:14, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I really don't think this will fly :-/. We don't distinguish between deluxe editions, bonus editions, re-releases. — AARON • TALK 09:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- I will create the article per Thriller 25 example. I don't see a reason why it will not pass. It charted separately, I have 4 reviews for critical reception, and enough material to stand on its own. — Tomíca(T2ME) 09:54, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- So did the re-releases of Mariah's Emancipation, Leona's Spirit and Alexandra's Overcome but they don't have separate articles. It's just a different version of the same album with a couple of new tracks. It's nothing that can't be in the original album article. The charts section even says it charted as the original album. — AARON • TALK 10:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, but fueled by the sales of the re-release. There isn't a policy saying I can not create the article because it's the re-release. Obviously GGGBR received big coverage, span 4 singles including two worlwide hits, it had reviews meaning can attain its own article. Even it was certified as GGGBR in New Zealand. Coverage = Notability.— Tomíca(T2ME) 11:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, but I don't see why it can't stay in the 'GGGB article. I don't really see the need :-/ — AARON • TALK 11:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Because the article will be too long when we work on it, the album was successful. And because simply "Take a Bow", "Disturbia" and "If I Never See Your Face Again" are not Good Girl Gone Bad, but Good Girl Gone Bad: Reloaded. There is need because there are separate reviews also. Again, I recall on Thriller 25. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, but I don't see why it can't stay in the 'GGGB article. I don't really see the need :-/ — AARON • TALK 11:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, but fueled by the sales of the re-release. There isn't a policy saying I can not create the article because it's the re-release. Obviously GGGBR received big coverage, span 4 singles including two worlwide hits, it had reviews meaning can attain its own article. Even it was certified as GGGBR in New Zealand. Coverage = Notability.— Tomíca(T2ME) 11:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- So did the re-releases of Mariah's Emancipation, Leona's Spirit and Alexandra's Overcome but they don't have separate articles. It's just a different version of the same album with a couple of new tracks. It's nothing that can't be in the original album article. The charts section even says it charted as the original album. — AARON • TALK 10:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Also for the charts, see Pink Friday: Roman Reloaded – The Re-Up. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:02, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thriller 25 in an anniversary album, and it has like 30 songs on it. The Re-Up is a box set, not an album. I don't see how it's a box set though. I don't think this should be separate either. It's a good idea, but I don't why two articles are needed for the same album. — AARON • TALK 12:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Still with the new songs, it contains the old ones, GGGBR has so different editions and new songs on them. Even it has more info than Thriller 25. So by your logic Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes and Rated R: Remixed shouldn't exist either? It's basically the same album just remixed? And I was talking only about the charts on Minaj's album, I don't care what's that shit xD. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Remix albums are different to re-issues on the same album though — AARON • TALK 12:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- How are they different? They are basically the same songs just remixed... and most of the times have poor information. The reissues have even more songs into them. Look Aaron, I don't mean to argue, I will create this nevertheless of everything, because I believe it satisfies the standards to be standalone since it's not gonna be the first reissue album article. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. I just don't see how a re-issue of an album with a few extra songs requires an article. — AARON • TALK 12:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- How are they different? They are basically the same songs just remixed... and most of the times have poor information. The reissues have even more songs into them. Look Aaron, I don't mean to argue, I will create this nevertheless of everything, because I believe it satisfies the standards to be standalone since it's not gonna be the first reissue album article. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Remix albums are different to re-issues on the same album though — AARON • TALK 12:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Still with the new songs, it contains the old ones, GGGBR has so different editions and new songs on them. Even it has more info than Thriller 25. So by your logic Good Girl Gone Bad: The Remixes and Rated R: Remixed shouldn't exist either? It's basically the same album just remixed? And I was talking only about the charts on Minaj's album, I don't care what's that shit xD. — Tomíca(T2ME) 12:16, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thriller 25 in an anniversary album, and it has like 30 songs on it. The Re-Up is a box set, not an album. I don't see how it's a box set though. I don't think this should be separate either. It's a good idea, but I don't why two articles are needed for the same album. — AARON • TALK 12:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Music video screenshots
Hi there. I have seen you have uploaded some music video screenshots to some GA-class song articles. I'm busy expanding on "Wings (Little Mix song)" and would like to add a screenshot to its music video section but I'm too stressed to do it in case I violate some rule and then it gets taken down anyway. I see you're an accomplished editor, so I thought maybe if you could add a screenshot to "Wings" so that I can avoid any trouble. I'd sincerely appreciate it. - littlemixlove • (talk) 19:05 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Sure, just tell me which screenshot you want me to upload (tell me the exact minute and second). — Tomíca(T2ME) 19:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- 1.49 please! Thanks a billion! - littlemixlove • (talk) 20:36 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- It's perfect, thanks again! :) - littlemixlove • (talk) 21:10 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- 1.49 please! Thanks a billion! - littlemixlove • (talk) 20:36 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Good Girl Gone Bad Remixes.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Good Girl Gone Bad Remixes.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Orphaned non-free media (File:Rihanna-Whats-My-Name.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Rihanna-Whats-My-Name.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:34, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
){kind=link}
GA review for Sad (Maroon 5 song)
There were only very minor spelling errors when I did the review, so I fixed them myself and passed the article. Good work! WikiRedactor (talk) 14:58, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- Woooooooow, thank you, that was pretty fast! ^-^ — Tomíca(T2ME) 16:55, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Good Girl Gone Bad: Reloaded
Hello! Your submission of Good Girl Gone Bad: Reloaded at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:39, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Rihanna Diamonds World Tour.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Rihanna Diamonds World Tour.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:10, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
){kind=link}
RE: Kisses Down Low
Hi Tomica, Yeah I agree its a pretty good single! She needs to perform and promote it a few times. I defo feel the vibes on this one. I'm glad she's decided not to include "Ice" on the album. I'm excited for the Beyonce and Michelle Williams collabo! — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 16:40, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
- Im assuming so since "Ice" and Lil Wayne are not mentioned in the album's press release which describes Talk a Good Game as being led by the single "Kisses Down Low". Makes sense really as "Ice" sounds like a "Motivation" b-side. I think the label will invest. Its the first album release since Universal shut down Universal Republic while resurrecting Republic Records. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 18:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)