If you want to leave me a message, you are in the wrong place. All new messages should be directed to User talk:Wikipedian Penguin. For reviving old threads, the same should be done. Thank you.
Lol. That was epic phrasing to welcome 2012 (End of Time). I have to go. Before I go, I wish you and all my friends Happy New Year 2012. I love you all (Brotherly Love :P). I will be a bit busy in the coming days. See my talk-page. My cousins are unbearable. I hope I am in a good state of mind when they leave my home. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:33, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and welcome to the 2012 WikiCup! The competition officially begins at the start of 2012 (UTC) after which time you may begin to claim points. Your submission page, where you must note any content for which you wish to claim points, can be found here, and formatting instructions can be found in hidden comments on the page. A bot will then update the main table, which can be seen on the WikiCup page. The full rules for what will and will not be awarded points can be found at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. There's also a section on that page listing the changes that have been made to the rules this year, so that experienced participants can get up-to-date in a few seconds. One point of which we must remind everyone; you may only claim points for content upon which you have done significant work, and which you have nominated, in 2012. For instance, articles written or good article reviews started in 2011 are not eligible for points.
This round will last until late February, and signups will remain open until the middle of February. If you know of anyone who may like to take part, please let them know about the comeptition; the more the merrier! At the end of this round, the top 64 scorers will progress to the next round, where their scores will reset, and they will be split into pools. Note that, by default, you have been added to our newsletter list; we will be in contact at the end of every month with news. You're welcome to remove yourself from this list if you do not wish to hear from us. Conversely, those interested in following the competition are more than welcome to add themselves to the list. Please direct any questions towards the judges, or on the WikiCup talk page. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) and The ed17 (talk) 17:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, it does. Penguin. Are you free? I need your help. Don't worry. It's not copy-editing etc but it is nevertheless a complicated task. I enjoy doing it but it is not working out for me this time. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:42, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've searched but I couldn't find any that you have not used. I do not think the section is too bad, but have you tried using filters? —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]16:45, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes. There's nothing more. To tell you frankly, there are a nice amount of articles commenting on "Halo" but most of the information fits in the composition section. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:57, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think Mark has told you this, but just because something is sourced does not mean it is neutral. This is better off in the Critical reception. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]18:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wikipedian Penguin! I'd like to express my appreciation for your vote for me during the 2012 GOCE coordinatorship election. During the next 12 months, I will be looking forward to your input on how I can perform my role, so please be brutally honest regarding my actions.
I am participating, and by the looks of it, it sounds fun. The article looks great, see if you can expand it further before beginning to copy edit seriously. :) —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]13:32, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Really, not anymore. :P I can't at the amount of Kbs I removed during that re-construction. Lol. But frankly, I don't want to talk any article having length comparable to SL to FAC. Lol. That's so discouraging sometimes. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It really is. I am planning to take a smaller article to FAC after LTWYL. Much smalle, but has the details. It's always the music video section that makes the article look bad. Bee tee dubs, could I get a second opinion from you? —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]15:16, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am currently reviewing an article for GA. The spotcheck results look concerning. If you look at the article--Video Games (song)--much of it is just a quote farm and really long ones are being used. Do you think this article is better on hold or failed? I have notified Sauloviegas (the nominator) of the issue. Some copy editing looks needed as well and the music video screenshot fails WP:NFCC#8. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]15:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wait the article is incomplete. I am sure it appeared in the top 10 on numerous critics' lists for both songs and videos. Moreover, I just noticed, it is recent. What do you think now? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. It did. I meant the list where they write about the best songs of 2011. I know because "Countdown" appeared on many of those lists. Please see this. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Refer to [1], which says it is reliable as long as the product has already been released and is not a future release date. [2] says that it is reliable for basic facts. Here is another comment from [3]:
If we are talking about ISBNs, release dates, formats etc., then Amazon is quite reliable. The concern as you say is the commercial nature of the enterprise - I don' t think it's a violation of WP:SPAM, but it's something a free project should seek to avoid. I would say that Amazon cites should be replaced by non-commercial reliable sources where possible - Ottobib and WorldCat are exceptional for books, while Allmusic and IMdB are great for music and film - but if an Amazon source is all that can be found, it should be ok (unless the article is going for WP:QA). the skomorokh 16:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Lol. What's that word? And I hope you know that all countries do not have those websites white they have Amazon. Added to that, the song there received only a limited release as the nominator told me. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP, I will continue the LTWYL review later. I have a headache. Please please please remind me tomorrow. As I told you before, I have a goldfish memory especially when it is not related to Beyonce. :P Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fair if someone else reviews the article now. I do not believe I said I would review the article once issues were addressed and the article was re-nominated. I do not think you will have too much trouble finding a reviewer as WikiCup has begun, and the backlog will decrease faster. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]18:22, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I finally finished the layout of the article! It looks very different, but is far more readable IMO. A quick question: do you think it's too long? I tried cutting out all the superfluous info, but it still stretches to about 18,000 words :S. This album is the biggest in years (it just went back for a 14th week @ #1 in the US and on course for a 19th in the UK), so there's a lot of info on it. I did the best I can, I think. I'm gonna submit it for peer by the end of the week, then hope to have it featured by the time the Grammy's roll around in mid February. I just want to thank you for all your hard work on it, btw =). Orane(talk)22:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Really great job Orane! Could Blonde on Blonde have been a possible model you used? Seeing you've re-written the article, I'm guessing all my advice I've given you has been rendered moot? Lol, JK. On a critical note, the blog post seems a bit misplaced however. How does it fit into the section? And the POV-captioned sound sample in the Sessions with Epworth and Tedder section too. Be sure to amend/respond to my concerns at the talk page and the prose may still need work. Otherwise keep up the great work, and may Adele's next album not make other artists in 2012 look like flops. ;-) —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]22:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And I really would not worry about the length. It's shorter than this article now, which is a song article. :/ Another suggestion, I would add a lead sentence to each of the sections discussing sessions ("Rolling in the Deep", one of the angrier and more visceral offerings on the album, was the first song to be conceived in the aftermath of the break-up. seems like a very awkward start, non?) —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]22:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Used Blonde on Blonde and this article as models ;). And will respond to you/begin implementing your changes a bit later tonight (heading to the gym soon lol). Cheers and thanks for the compliments! Orane(talk)23:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey buddy, how are you today? Thanks for fixing the typos in "Unfaithful". I have a question. Since in 2006 there was not Canadian Billboard Hot 100, but Canadian Singles Chart, do you know where I can find a useful source about "Unfaithful" charting then? — Tomica1111 • Question Existing?00:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to not be of any help, Tomica. I thought RPM published the charts, but that was several years ago. Plus, I hardly know much about charts as I find them boring (woop tee doo, this single rose three spots up this week, who cares...). Try asking someone else. Legolas should know; he's great with charts and has written some pretty good articles on classic songs. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]01:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ouuuu trust me I hate when I do researches, especially for the music videos, there are so little information about it. Could maybe give me formula? Ouuu and I know that I should archive them, but I really really hate archiving. Its so boring ! :) — Tomica1111 • Question Existing?01:52, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did you know he started out as a football (soccer) player? :D I already know what DYK I'm going to do. I'm also going to turn the songs produced into a table. This article won't look the same. Do one for Chase too. Congrats on the "Unfaithful" DYK. It's live on the main page right now. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]02:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You forgot an n, hehe. Good job. The prose may need a little bit of work, and try to reduce the use of quotations. That has been a huge problem with music articles. Thanks. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]15:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I'll have a look, but no guarantee when exactly I'll post my review. I'm working on another peer review for Calvin999, and when I'm done that I'll run an eye over yours. It appears you're taking this "to FAC in the near future." I'll try my best to give a satisfactory review then. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]02:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the Love On Top' article, you said that Hung Median is reliable for charts and nothing else. Recently, a user used that source for the release date purposes, the australian feb 21 release date, in the release history section of The Story of Us (song), see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Story_of_us_(song)#Release_History as you said that site is not reliable for release dates.....can you remove it?
I don't know. I don't get what's so important that a music video was availbale for download on iTunes on such and such date. It does not add much to the article. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]23:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't what's in the infobox enough, and then just have a brief mention that the video was made available for download on iTunes on such and such date in various countries? —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]23:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have done a fabulous job editing the article. You seemed very determined to have it become a featured article. Good luck, and keep up the good work. :D —DAP388 (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was waiting for there to be a standalone Composition section. Maybe now there will be some opportunity at FAC5. Once again, prose is a major issue and it seems that issues raised by previous FAC and GAN reviewers are still being made.
"It samples the synth line from Depeche Mode's song "Master and Servant" (Some Great Reward, 1984) which contains lyrics related to sadomasochism." - missing comma before "which".
"According to the digital sheet music published by Musicnotes.com" - musicnotes.com did not publish the sheet music. The site just hosts them. I believe it is EMI that published "S&M".
"Rihanna" gets a bit repetitive. You still have the options "she" and "the singer".
"Chris Ryan of MTV wrote that Rihanna appears to be "hollering" the chorus." - "appears" is not the right word here.
"The lyrical content of "S&M" revolves around Rihanna singing about sex and BDSM related acts" - lots of redundancy here. "The lyrical content of "S&M" revolves around Rihanna singingsings about sex and BDSM related acts"
"Rihanna explained that the song is not to be interpreted literally" - you mean "should not be"?
During the chorus, Jake Conway of Q noted that Rihanna "frostily chants" the lines "Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it."[17] After chanting the lines "Cause I may be bad, but I'm perfectly good at it / Sex in the air, I don't care, I love the smell of it," Rihanna sings the line "Sticks and stones may break my bones / But chains and whips excite me." - This is repetitive and redundant. Also, the "During the chorus" is a bit awkward as it refers to Conway here, not Rihanna.
Critics' opinions should not be here: BBC and The Music Magazine criticize here, so that info should be in the reception.
"The verse consists of Spears singing the lines "Just one night full of sin / Feel the pain on your skin / Tough, I don't scream mercy / It's your time to hurt me / Shut me up, gag and bound me / 'Cause the pain is my pleasure / Nothing comes better." - Why are the lyrics of one verse important if there is no interpretation or analyses by journalists? Better of removed.
A good effort, but look out for 'mistakes' like these in the future. And don't rush. "S&M" still needs a lot of work and serious copy editing and it will be tough. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]01:26, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
People having seen saying that it needs "serious copy-editing" for months now. I don't see how much more copy-editing needs to be done. 2/3 copy-editors have c/e the article in full, in addition to about 10+ other people making smaller c/e edits, who have been involved with the FACs. I don't know how many more people I am mean't to ask to help c/e, because with each one I ask, the article changes every time. Calvin • Watch n' Learn01:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Quantity =/= quality. My serious suggestion: maybe the best thing to do is work on your writing abilities. I'm sure after all the advice you've gotten from Colm, Boulton, etc., your writing should have improved a lot. Read prose aloud and see if it sounds right. Learn from your own FAC mistakes. Read User:Tony1's essays. Copy editors can help, but they won't spot every issue in the article. They just don't have the time to or cannot. FA = Wikipedia's best, remember. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]01:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just read the lead, for example, and I can't see anything wrong with it. To be honest, what I had originally written months ago is long gone now. It has been changed and expanded so much what the essence of what I wrote is there, but not what I actually wrote in my own words. Calvin • Watch n' Learn02:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe that is because you are strictly following a writing format that you have adopted for many articles. You have become used to it and cannot see the problems.
"It was written by Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen, Corey Jackson Carter, Sandy Wilhelm and Ester Dean, with production helmed by Stargate and Sandy Vee." - We get the idea that Stargate is a different group from Eriksen and Hermansen. Songwriters do not need to be credited with birth names in prose.
""S&M" was released on January 21, 2011, as the album's fourth US single, and third international single. "S&M" is a Eurodance and dance-pop song." - Two sentences starting with the same word.
"With the release of the remix single featuring Spears" - Hmm, I thought I told you in FAC3 to cut "featuring Spears" here. The article "the" is enough to tell us what you are talking about.
What? That makes no sense. It says "featuring Spears" already and you are telling me to include it? Calvin • Watch n' Learn
"digital sales pushed the song to the top of the chart for one week, which gave Rihanna her tenth US number-one single on the Hot 100 chart and Spears her fifth." - relative pronouns (which, who, etc.) refer to the last noun in the preceding clause. So you are saying that "One week" gave Rihanna her tenth..., not the sales.
Repetitive use of the song's title and "The song". Try "it".
"It portrays softcore sadomasochist acts and fetishes and, because of its content, was banned in several countries and restricted to nighttime television in others." - Too many "and"s.
"The video spawned a lawsuit when photographer David LaChapelle alleged that it used imagery from his photo shoot for Vogue Italia. Rihanna performed the song for the first time at the 2011 BRIT Awards at London's O2 Arena on February 15, 2011, as a part of a medley with "Only Girl (In the World)" and "What's My Name?"." - an odd shift from discussing lawsuit matters to live shows.
On a different note, I will be continuing the We Found Love (music video) peer review over the next few days. I have school projects in the way, so I cannot confirm when I will finish. If you need help with "S&M (song)" let me know, but some creativity and innovation is needed on your side. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]02:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. Listen, if I put Kelly Clarkson accusation, then where will all the information about Kelly discouraging her label from including AG on the track-listing and later discouraging them to release it as a single fit? Then her statement to MTV News, which the copy-editor on the talk-page wrote that it was an important piece of information. And that whole Leona Lewis thing moved in the background will create more confusion as it does not form part of the writing process. Similarly, moving that accusation by Kelly to composition will not look any better. See how "Halo" was after it promotion to GA. To tell you frankly, I love that format but the FAC reviewer said that one sample only should be used. Evidently, we chose the "Halo" one and decided that it better be placed in the composition section rather than the controversy section, where the Leona blabla was moved. I hope you do not start feeling dizzy while reading this. :P Jivesh1205 (Talk) 11:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't see where the sample falls into this. Anyway, there has to be a more neutral word than "Controversies" for the article. How about "Kelly Clarkson comparisons" then? Anything other than the word "Controversy" or its plural form. Regarding Lewis, that information would fall perfectly into the Writing and production because it is related to the recording and writing. This all happened before the release, so it's best to move it. Trust me, you'll have a better flow if you have a better chronology. Finally, I'm not so picky about moving the Clarkson section under composition, that can be kept as is. Thanks. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]11:46, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This and this should be good. You can choose, bit the second is probably best because the focus is on her, not the backgorund. Lol, never seen the video. Must be good. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]12:07, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry! Really really sorry! Simon, well, I hate him lol. Please forgive for misunderstanding your comment *sad* @WP, the anime is awesome too! My favourite female character is Ukyo Kuonji :) Ryōga Hibiki (talk) 13:45, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(→) Omg, that's cool! I've seen some Naruto, Bleach and One Piece too. Also, FMA (not Brotherhood). I love InuYasha (as you may have seen), Ranma 1/2, The Law of Ueki and a few other animes. I've also seen some new Japanese animes like Beelzebub, Baka to Test, and Tales of the Abyss :) And there are some shoujo titles like UFO Baby, Ultra Maniac, Fushigi Yuugi, seinen titles like Maison Ikkoku, Saber Marionette and josie titles like Nodame Cantabile :) Ryōga Hibiki (talk) 14:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't heard of any of them except for InuYasha. Oh did I tell you I've seen the infamous "It's OVER 9000" episode when I was a kid? Ah, good times. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck off you penguin, go and waddle off the face of the earth dickhead !!!
"... giving the fact that they don't know each other and the whole time were singing for their respective lovers." will be removed. This seems like personal interpretation. Feel free to re-add once you find a reliable source. Edited version needs sources as well. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]00:47, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me, there is not a single source for the video synopsis. And thanks. I like how it looks now.:) Its pretty good. And why sources in this case? Aren't we allowed to write short, not so much-detailed synopsis without sources? And about the troll xD, Is he the same one that also bothers Legolas too? Thanks Pengui. I am heading to my bed now, its like 2 AM here :S ! GN — Tomica1111 • Question Existing?00:52, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. She is MADONNA. She has millions of fans across the world. Besides, all of those artists were out during her last tour, which managed to become the best selling tour by a solo artist. I don't see her doing amazing in the US (she has pretty much been shunned there for years and years), but worldwide she is gonna smash so hard. Just off her name alone. I was disappointed by "Gimme", but the album title has restored some faith. I was almost gone out the door if it was called "Luv". Seeing as how William Orbit is on board, the album will probably be amazing. The album is certainly going to be better than Hard Candy. I personally don't give two shits about Madge's critical response. She has gotten so much shit, and so much praise over the years it's irrelevant. And the fact that Live Nation pretty much said the album was to promote a tour, I'm not too worried. Tour sales >>>> album sales. As long as I get amazing music, I am game (and at least a couple of hits). And don't get me started on Rihanna. One of my friend's was over working on a project with me after school today, and was humming to "You da One" and wondering why it wasn't on "Loud". D: Had to say that there's actually a new album out... — Status {talkcontribs23:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Madonna is nothing like Britney. Since you're not a huge fan of her, you're probably not very familiar with how she works. This bitch works her ass for everything. As you can tell from Brit, she's lazy and just not into it. Madge has and always will. The album was described to be Music mixed with Ray of Light; which marks the first time Madge has ever revisited a type of style. The album's said to be electronic, but not the shitty style nowadays. Madge always knows what she is doing. Working with Martin is perfect because he is mainstream, but at the same time he isn't. I don't know if you heard this, but here's a live demo of "Turn Up the Radio", a song that will most likely appear on the album. It certainly fits mainstream music now, but it also has Madge's '80s dance edge to it. (It will probably sound a lot different from the final version, but from the sounds of it, it's gonna be a jam.) "Gimme" better be stunning if they aren't releasing that song as the lead single. Madge apparently also re-worked an old Kelis song from her "Flesh Tone" album called "Kids". The album is certainly gonna have its mainstream aspects (it's got to, really), but it will stay true to who Madge is. And the fact that she recorded the album without a label, there's really no label input into the actual musical structure of the album. It's all on Madge. — Status {talkcontribs23:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have NO idea. xD Apparently it's been dropped from the album because it doesn't fit along with the rest. Apparently every song has some type of beat to it, even the ballads (which there was said to be 3 or 4 on it). Interscope has also expressed how they planned on releasing every song recorded; which may mean a deluxe edition, b-sides, or something like that. Warner is gonna be mad they didn't treat her better. And Interscope is gonna be over the moon with all the money coming in from Madonna AND Gaga. Disappointed with Confessions? I'd call that her best body of work. Hard Candy was a decent album, but is by far her worst. Let's not even get into Nicki. I was praying to god she wasn't going to be officially credited, and only did the "LUV Madonna" parts. Excited to see how MIA will sound though. Such an odd paring. It's hit or miss really. — Status {talkcontribs23:48, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Diva wars take my level of excitation to its peak, even to the point of having the feeling that my boxer shorts will burst open. *monster laughs* Jivesh1205 (Talk) 05:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. I'm on my computer now. I was going to ask you to find reliable sources discussing the covers and remixes of "Love the Way You Lie". If you can still help, that would be great, but I think I've got every one of them. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]11:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are welcome. You also help me a lot. Coimg to the lead:
with whom Eminem wanted to collaborate after listening to its backing track - Necessary to be in lead?
Musicians Taylor Momsen, Cher Lloyd and Alex Feather Akimov have recorded cover versions of the song, while Rihanna recorded "Love the Way You Lie (Part II)" for her album Loud. The sequel is narrated mostly from the female perspective. - Make a stand-alone sentence for Rihanna.
Thanks again. The first one needs some re-wording. Most musicians listen to the track first, so that was a mistake on my part. Will do the second one. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]12:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, do you think I should swap the last paragraph of the lead with the third? I'm thinking of making the last one sort of a legacy paragraph. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]12:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Swap? Won't the third one become too big? Hmm, a legacy paragraph always looks good but it needed? Wait first tell me exactly what you will put in it? Covers and critics' year-ends? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's the article. Please c/e the feud section most importantly, still working on others but feel free to do what you want because I hate Jay-Z. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 14:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I had a feeling you'd come to my talk page. You appeared to have been getting frustrated at Jivesh's reverts, so I gave you a friendly reminder. I felt this would get out of hand if it had continued. I wouldn't say you had attacked Jivesh, because I know you would never. If you consider this a warning then I don't know what to say. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]01:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was annoyed, because I was right from the start but no one bothered to check. At least I read the scoring rules. Even providing the link and quote about it, I wasn't believed. It's only natural to get annoyed at something when you know you were right. It just surprised me that you chose to say I was borderline attacking, and not saying that in fact, I was right. It makes me look bad when I did nothing wrong. Calvin • Watch n' Learn01:11, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I know you meant well and Jivesh was wrong. I also meant well and did not try to make you look bad. I owe an apology, if it looked as though I did. Actually, you two have been a bit harsh for some time now with each other. Its sporadic, but recurring. I felt that the same would happen here and things would get out of hand. That was the basing of my edit summary. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]01:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I mean't well because I was right Penguin! Whatever you think we say to each other on Wikipedia which you think is negative, is what we say as editors, not friends. We both know that, we've said it to each other. We don't let that affect our friendship. We have had lots of conversations via social networking as friends, no Wikipedia talk. We are very good friends and have had in depth conversations about various, as well as personal, things. But anyway. Calvin • Watch n' Learn01:37, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Even I don't think Calvin was attacking in any way. Jivesh probably missed the scoring part or probably hasn't read it at all. I had to remove a similar review from Tomica's page as well. — Legolas(talk2me)06:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's a pain logging in on a phone, so I'll just comment anonymously. Pardon autocorrect. Calvin I'm sorry then. I guess I've been cranky for a few days now. Don't ever take my words about you personally. Avi, you're right, he wasn't. 142.162.238.42 (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(Sorry Jivesh, edit conflict, feel free to re-post your message) Not yet. Before I start talking about the prose, which isn't too bad now, I think the Background section could need some organizing. You discuss the release before the songwriting. So revise the chronology. Lol, just a bit confused as to why Dean blabbers on about how Rihanna is sexy. I'm not even sure if Boombox is a reliable source for FAC. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The "no one complained" argument is a pretty poor one, Calvin. Don't be amongst those who use it. The quotation does not add to the understanding of how the song was produced. I certainly would raise it in a FAC. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is because of this drama that I told Calvin to nominate it. Talk pages are not the place to argue about all this repeatedly. Jivesh1205 (Talk)
---> Conflicts in opinion then. Calvin till when will you ask here and there if it is ready. Everyone will tell you what they think. You know what I mean by that bold they. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 14:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's fine to get input from other users of how they feel about an article heading for FAC. I looked at the FAC. I don't tbh see a place for the interview. In fact, it was published before the song was released as a single. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Pancake. Speaking of which, you might want to expand the fair-use rationale of the video still. Discuss why this image in particular adds to the article. Talk about the lawsuits etc. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And Penguin, it's completely irrelevant that Dean spoke about the song before it was released as a single. Rihanna gave an in depth interview about Complicated and it was never released. Calvin • Watch n' Learn15:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Dean spoke about the process of writing songs for Rihanna in an interview for The Boom Box, and explained that she wanted to channel Rihanna's "alter ego" and use it as inspiration for writing "S&M"'s lyrics.[5] Dean praised Rihanna for her ability to take risks with her music, and said, "I think Rihanna is sexy and will say things that other chicks won't say. Even if she says let's go kiss some girls, who really cares ... that's Rihanna. Music is about fantasy. This is what people want to do, but are afraid to do." She is talking about how Rihanna takes risks with her music and pushes the boundaries, which she does with S&M. I can't help that she starts off by saying that Rihanna is sexy. I'm pleased that this is creating such hilarity for people. And exactly Penguin, it's not about just her "sexiness," but you didn't say that to begin with. And stop putting me into edit conflicts. Calvin • Watch n' Learn15:32, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Music is about fantasy. This is what people want to do, but are afraid to do." That's the only part of the quotation that you will probably need. And even that I'm unsure of. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]15:35, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Calvin, I can assure you that User:Two Hearted River will have a problem with this. Frankly, who is Dean to say all that? Don't you see that that was her strong opinion? Jivesh1205 (Talk) 15:45, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But things were not in her favor. Her album leaked; it "was not leaked", it leaked. Proof, three people in her management team were fired. Reference? Don't have. I get all this information from atrl.net and I trust them more than people I have seen in my life. And you know she did what she could but she was pregnant since March. When was the last time you saw a pregnant woman shooting 10 videos (yes ten because there is one for "Schoolin' Life", "End of Time" and "I Was Here"). And her choreography: RTW Billboard performance + EOT at Glasto =Pure epicness. Five months pregnant in DFY slays. Her first single leaked = NOT A TRAGEDY but radios played the demo for like 6 weeks. That's very bad. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:50, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, delayed or postponed? I think it would not have changed anything. Billboard itslef commended her sales as June is one of the months where sales are the lowest. Yet, she did 300,000+ . And the magazine also mention the fact that the album leaked three weeks prior to its release. Nevertheless Penguin, I say it loud. Beyonce is a very bad manager. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 17:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
... I need to re-rite the composition section oh "Halo". Can you copy-edit after I post it. I have not really changed may things but I moved and added certain lines. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:08, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. WP, my day started so well today. :P Someone told me " It's pretty amazing that you won over so many people so quickly". :D I felt good. (No orgasm though) :P Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did you? Lol, you are indeed ahead of me. Which question? I meant the way you talk to people like repeatedly telling them "Hi. How are you? Thank you", even though they never reply. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 16:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you and I know what you mean. Could you read the Composition section of the article I've been working on? It's been organized. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]17:09, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I speak a mix of British, American and Canadian dialects. I've been to so many places, it's hard to adapt. I had an English English teacher (English language teacher from England), hence I spoke fluent BritEng at one point lol. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]18:49, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At least you could for some time. :D See the talk-page of "Halo". I think he got confused. I asked him to copy-edit BTINH but anyway, good he commented. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 18:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey- you were right that the GA review was not eligible, but you shouldn't have removed it yourself- instead, you should have contacted one of the judges. It saves the sort of fratching that occurred on that particular submission page, and stops a bad atmosphere being fostered. Rest assured that Ed and I are checking through every submission at this stage in the competition, and so it would have been caught. As I say, though, if you're worried, contacting one of the judges would be the best move. Thanks, J Milburn (talk)
[File:Ryan Tedder 3 (cropped).jpg This one]? Can you please also check the caption of the Tedder image. Nikki said something I did not understand. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 20:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
She means that the creator of that image wants himself to be credited on the caption of the embedded image. Like (image produced by ...) —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]20:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Penguin. I think it needs spotchecks now. I will have to fond someone who has the tool Nikki was talking about. Take are. See you soon. I have to go for now. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 21:05, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did not understand the first part. Who were you referring to? Anyway 2 AM here. I need to go. Leave a message, I will read it tomorrow. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 21:23, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Avi, can you please look the image review of "Halo"? I don't understand the caption thing for the Ryan image. Malleus corrected it for me but Nikki says it is still not good. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 05:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you're claiming points for the review, it needs to have been started and finished in 2012. If you're claiming points for the GA, it needs to have had significant work done on it by you, be nominated and pass during 2012. Hope this clears things up. Thanks, J Milburn (talk) 08:57, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi WP, I've been working on the Blake's 7 article, having bashed it into shape a few years ago. I think it's now approaching G.A. quality and I'm planning to nominate it as such in the next month or so. I'd like to hear from an experienced editor who is unfamiliar with the subject, so I've picked on you! Rather than clog up the review system with a not-quite-ready article, I'd like to ask you to quickly look it over to see if there are obvious problems I've missed. The article uses British English with ellipses in elided quotes, except the lead. In the 'Characters' section, I've used past tense for characters' backstories and present tense for in-series elements per Wikipedia:TENSE#Tense. Don't worry if you're too busy - I'm not in a desperate hurry to nominate and I'll still be working on the article, except during the forthcoming 'blackout'. Thanks, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The blackout is going as planned, so who knows when I'll be able to give you a satisfactory response. I'll try now. You've done an excellent job on the article. Please keep up the work. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]19:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi WP, just a note to tell you that I've moved your comments to the Peer Review page here and transcluded it on the article's talk page, so if you want them in future you'll know where to find them. Thanks for the comments btw, they're very helpful. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia isn't your life Calvin, lol. And it's for the good of everyone. SOPA and PIPA are two of the stupidest bills ever in US legislation, imo. This will (hopefully) show them. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]20:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't get mad. I didn't have time to explain in the morning before school. {{Singlechart|...|refname=austria}} - so now if you want to use the austria chart ref, you can use <ref name=austria/> in the Chart performance section. Simple as that. The refname can be anything you want it to be. Still confused? —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]18:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Nathan from DJ Booth has a bachelor's degree in creative writing and journalism from San Francisco State University. And for fact-checking, they get their information from the record labels themselves. Aaron • You Da One22:49, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The site does not appear to have any editorial oversight or fact-checking reputation, however. I couldn't find any page on the site that discusses this info. It does, however, ask that people interested in writing for DJBooth send "a professional writing sample and a paragraph detailing why you're interested in working with us." I would personally find the Yahoo! blogs are more reliable as their writers have experience working on other well-trusted magazines; Paul Grein is one of the best editors of sales and chart analysis and due to his experience writing for Billboard. Does Nathan S. have any experience working for other reliable works? I don't doubt that DJBooth's music releases are trustworthy and directly from the owners, but what about the information? —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]23:30, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well to be honest, the fact that he has a BA in Creative Writing and Journalism says a lot. I mean, my degree at the moment will lead me down that route, I could end up doing something which is not too indifferent. He has the expertise and qualifications. Aaron • You Da One23:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess seeing this is only an album review and not, we could be a bit less strict. I asked for a second opinion, so hopefully I'll get a response. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]23:36, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I get what you mean, but his degree counts for a lot. He is clearly qualified to write about these sort of things. To me, that makes the site more than reliable considering he is a qualified journalist. Aaron • You Da One23:38, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Calvin, I'm still not convinced. I asked Nikkimaria, who said that the BA is not enough to prove expertise on the topic. The site does not have any proof of good editorial oversight or good fact-checking either. I'll have to say no. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What more do you want from him? He wrote the review, he has a BA in Creative WritingandJournalism. So now not even perfectly qualified people are allowed to be used? I'm sorry but I can't believe this. I know what FA is strict but this is ridiculous. I'm guessing not even an MA or PhD would be satisfactory. They get their information from the records labels themselves, DJ Booth works alongside them. You can't get much closer. Aaron • You Da One14:14, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Penguin's talk page is not the place to debate about the reliability of Mr / Mrs / Miss A B C D... Z Jivesh1205 (Talk)
I'm not complaining for the sake of it, Calvin. It's not like I don't want "S&M" to be an FA. There's a universe of difference between a BA and a Masters. The former is not quite sufficient for someone to be considered an expert on the topic. According to the site, they'll hire just about anyone who's "an aspiring DJ, musician, writer, or just a lover of music." That is not a high quality reliable source. It's the same reason About.com isn't accepted. Bill Lamb may be a reputed, but the site isn't. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Having a BA is not something which is should be frowned upon Penguin. I am half way through doing mine and it is hard work. What you have just said is basically like saying that although at the end of it I will have a degree in Film and Literature and will be qualified to review films, I can't be used as a reliable source because a BA is not good enough? Don't take this the wrong way or rudely, but that is quite a weak, and in all honestly, insulting, thing to say, as it completely discredits 3 years of hard work. DO you understand what I am saying? With regard to ""an aspiring DJ, musician, writer, or just a lover of music,", Nathan isn't those things as I have said several times. Aaron • You Da One14:28, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh... I applaud you for your studies and goal to get a BA, but you keep missing my point. You seem to be treating this like it's GAN. I'm talking about the site as a whole, but you keep talking about Nathan. A high quality online source is a highly reliable website with editorial oversight from a reliable publisher. I'm yet to see that with djbooth.net. It's been brought up twice at RSN and has been concluded as unreliable. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]14:48, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just really surprised that you don't think a BA is good enough? If he worked for MTV or Rap-Up you wouldn't bat an eyelid. The fact that he wrote it I think should account for something. Aaron • You Da One15:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. I don't know why, but I thought you are a Charizard type. I liked Ninetales. :) I mean a liked a lot of them, but he/she was unique. Anyway, I need a tiny favor. Can you check on this section, especially on the first paragraph, cause there are some sentences that read like magazine article and I can't re-word them. Thanks — Tomica1111 • Question Existing?22:46, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Charizard is okay and I do like dragons, but I generally like water-type Pokes over fire. ... I'll be happy to have a look, as long as your edits do not interfere with mine. Cheers, —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]22:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are an excellent person Penguin. Thanks. I also liked how the first part of the paragraph looked before, but this is better of course. I have my doubts for the last sentences. — Tomica1111 • Question Existing?22:58, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
LOl, my keyboard embarrasses me more than this. Tom and Avi knows that better than all. :P Did you ever notice the amount of typos I leave? In fact, it's because of my keyboard, some of the buttons do not work properly at times. I even called "Halo" as "Haklo" once. :P Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Pretty good. Especially the part where he just stands against the garage door and shakes his head during the countdown. Brilliance. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]10:29, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have got to be kidding Penguin. Lol. Hey, these parodies always cheer me up when I am not in a good mood. PRA was your top song of 2011, right? There is a parody done by a girl but it's not appropriate for me to post it as her privates pop out when she jumps. :P It's at the top of the right box on the CD parody video page. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Remind me when it's as good as "Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)", "4 Minutes" or "Rehab", lol. I'm doing some trimming and copy editing. The language is still so awkward in many areas. I'm thinking of printing it out and reading it aloud. It's a tactic that's helped me before and it should help me now. Your advice also helped greatly. I'd appreciate you have a look at the Music video Background section sometime. It'd be appreciated. :-) —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]13:36, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fuck, I love that shade too. By the way, do you think there would be any oppose in Like a Prayer FAC in terms of sources? I think all of them are high-quality reliable sources no? — Legolas(talk2me)15:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They all look good. But you might want to add some missing information, like the minute and seconds for the VHS and Laserdisc refs. Ref#94 needs checking out too. Regarding reliability- there aren't any concerns. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]15:48, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My oppose won't have too much weight, as it was only a source review and I had promised I'd strike it out once issues were addressed. Its the prose that really needs checking. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]12:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I did not use the lyrics description as she is contradicting whatever she sings in the first verse. :D According to the lyrics, she is hurt but there she says something else. :P Jivesh1205 (Talk) 12:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can still use the analysis with attribution. ... Don't nominate it yet. Wait for "Halo"'s FAC to be closed and let me have a closer look. Thank you. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]18:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay wait. Hmm, coming to Beyonce, i am not sure. She is directly contradicting what critics and thee lyrics say. Lol. I mean, if you listen to the first verse, she sings about being cheated and later, she is like if she has not been cheated at all but rather feels insecure about love. This lady is too mysterious. :P Jivesh1205 (Talk) 18:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what's wrong. Follow WP:NOR and WP:VNT. The article's short anyway, just state that this is how one author feels. It can go in Reception if you feel it is too POVed. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]18:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Penguin. Thanks for expressing your opinions and queries on the nomination. I tried to respond as fast I could, however there are still some tweaks I am not sure about. Left my comments there. Greetings — Tomica(talk)00:15, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. You are flattering me with those comments. However, I can get it with the notes in the table. (I am boring I know) No previous list had that notes in the table, so for consistency I don't know if I should create it here. However, If I still create it, I can not previously picture it in my mind. xD And looked again the responses I gave, you didn't responded on some questions. Thank You — Tomica(talk)00:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We can compromise and I'll let the issue be and wait for other reviewers to comment. I can't promise a support before that though. I see what you mean, and consistency is very important, but I just feel the factoids are misplaced. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]00:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. Lets hope there are other reviewers who will comment on the nomination. I really want your oppose to become support, and I will go hard for it ;) ! — Tomica(talk)00:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I have resolved all the other issues, beside the one with notes. And I have another favor. I want to prepare "Unfaithful" for FA. When you have free time, can you add comments on its talk page how can I improve it? Thanks. — Tomica(talk)18:45, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. If there is something that bothered with my behavior just tell. And I think I resolve your issues. Please tell if there is something else. — Tomica(talk)22:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I like it. Its good. Sounds like soft rock, and I like that kind of songs. Can't stand hard rock, screaming and stuff. Also I listen to Bon Jovi. Do you like them?— Tomica(talk)22:38, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't heard many of their songs. But a lot of my friends like them too, so they must be good. "Human" is probably my favorite song of 2009. It's better than the crap album Eminem came out with--Relapse. I like Coldplay too. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]22:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, they are sooo good. I mean their lyrics are everyday ones, things that happen. I haven't heard of Relapse xD. Now I see that Eminem had that album. And yeah, Coldplay are fine. Have you heard "Princess of China"? — Tomica(talk)22:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay. I wouldn't call that an actual director's cut, which is usually a special uncensored version of a film or clip. I think you can fit this into the Development section, but try your best to paraphrase. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]19:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, copyediting the article before getting through the queue will be unfair to others who are waiting. How long can you wait? —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]15:47, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Wikipedian Penguin. You have new messages at Talk:Lighters (song). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I, Jivesh, thank you wholeheartedly for your much appreciated help and copy-edits on "Halo". Your kind and encouraging words helped me even more (morally). May God bless both you and the day I came across a kind and helpful person like you on Wikipedia.
Lol, not again. I am really unlucky. :P On a different note (still unlucky), I cannot find a single reliable source for these song. The irony is that they have so many views on YouTube. Jivesh1205 (Talk) 10:52, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can remove the information if there are no sources. Unreleased songs are very controversial information for an encyclopedia anyway, sorry. —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]10:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so very much for your amazing copyedit to 21. I really appreciate it. I notice that not much was changed in the "Writing and Recording" and the "Song Structure and themes" sections. Here's to hoping that these sections aren't as awful as I thought they were hahha. Thanks again, and I'll return the favour soon. You may comment if you wish at the article's peer review. Orane(talk)23:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wish I could comment, but I'm afraid that if I do so, more experienced reviewers will be driven away by the fact that it has already received sufficient input. I'll stick to the talk page if that's OK. L.O.L, I didn't thoroughly read the production sections as I've read them enough times ;-). I was just looking at the Critical reception section as from experience I know this is a section that can be problematic at times. I just did some copy editing to make the article more neutral, reduce the Adele's-fucking-awesome tone to not insult Lady Gaga stans. :-) —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]23:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, talk page is perfectly ok. And now I'm worried for the production section lol :( I think they're gonna rip through it. But yeah, the "Adele's-fucking-awesome" was subconscious. Gotta be more mindful of that (on a side note, isn't she fucking amazing?! haha). Orane(talk)23:29, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lol, I haven't read the Chart performance section, but can only imagine how it's written. Just joking, btw. I'll look at the production section once more and then Charts and impact--all before the Grammys. Best wishes and good luck with the PR and FAC, —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]23:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Contrary to beliefs, I don't love throwing the fact that Adele sold 17 million in a year (and broke records in every country and demolished Born This Way, which Gaga proclaimed 'the album of the decade' (yeah right)), in her little monster's face. And, I'll also point out that it would be childish to say that Gaga got pwned by Adele, or that Adele slayed her :P. So I won't say it.Orane(talk)23:49, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're stressing out a bit too much over the article. It's really not as bad as you would think. I don't think it would have a low chance of passing, but I'll do everything I can to bring it the the criterion 1a standard. You're job is simply commendable. By the way, I was a bit surprised to see only one image in the whole article. I'm not asking you replace the Rubin picture, but do you think the article can be illustrated in any other way? Thanks, —WP:PENGUIN·[ TALK ]00:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, could replace the Rubin pic. It was part of my plan to trim the article as best I could. Thanks for the compliments, and for your edits. Orane(talk)06:29, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
