User talk:Yvesnimmo/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Sam Tsui

Hey! I recently made a few changes to the Sam Tsui page which were undone, and would just like to explain a few of them before attempting to re-edit them. And just as a disclaimer, I'm not sure how this is supposed to be handled, but I actually AM Sam Tsui and was simply intending to update the article and also just make it more coherent and easy to understand. For example, saying "using multiple pitch variations...ranging from tenor to baritone" is actually somewhat nonsensical as relates to the MJ Medley, which is (as KurtHugoSchneider's Youtube channel states) is an SATB arrangement; namely the top part is considered soprano, and the bottom bass. Removing the "labels" section of the information box was simply because while there were digital releases through Sh-k-Boom and Mudhut, "Sam Tsui" is not actually signed to these labels, so that's incorrect. Saying "former" member of the Duke's Men of Yale IS in fact verified on their website by virtue of his no longer being on the roster of active singers. Adding other popular videos such as the Love the Way You Lie Mashup or Lady Gaga Medley are again simply derived directly from the Youtube channel, which is already sourced several times throughout the article. I certainly wished to remove "American Baritones" from the list of categories because this is simply not true - baritone is a classification of a kind of male voice, and one really shouldn't be considered both a tenor and baritone, even if he sings in the ranges of both. Similarly, tenor as a category generally includes classical male singers, which I (Tsui) am not. Changing Chinese to half-Chinese, again, is just a matter of fact. And as the source myself, I guess I'm confused as to how i can make this simple factual change. In general, I guess I'm just asking how I can get some of these changes through without always having the article be reverted. Many thanks, Sam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samtsui.music (talk • contribs) 08:30, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your hasty response - I don't intend to be difficult, but a few things. One: The arrangement IS in fact SATB, as it clearly states on the video for the page itself - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R12QVtuB0_Q, "To download the sheet music PDF (in SATB) for this song:" The pdf itself, which is available there, is written in SATB - and again, an arrangement is considered SATB if it is written as such, regardless of what kind of voice is singing it. A tenor is entirely capable of singing such an arrangment, with it still being considered SATB. So I would love to be able to change this, as the source itself defines the arrangement as SATB. Secondly, in that very Duke's Men website you linked to, "Sam Tsui" is NOT on the roster of active singers, but is listed as "class of '11", as an alumnus. Third, I must emphasize that it's misleading to list Mudhut and Sh-ka-Boom under "labels", as there is in fact no verifiable source that Tsui is signed to these labels, but merely engaged in Digital Releases. In fact, the Youtube channel lists Tsui as "unsigned" which I believe is amore verifiable source. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samtsui.music (talk • contribs) 17:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, first of all "using multiple pitch variations" make little to no sense from an a cappella singing/musical standpoint. The article quoted is not only uncited (and unsourced, as neither myself or Kurt were interviewed), but the article itself contains a number of sentences written in English with incredibly poor grammar, so to quote this phrase specifically (which is non-idiomatic English) seems inappropriate. Secondly, a male is absolutely capable of singing an SATB arrangement - check out Chanticleer, or any number of groups containing male sopranos or altos. If a piece is arranged SATB, then even if a male is singing it, it remains an SATB arrangement. "Ranging from baritone to tenor" certainly does not make sense, as there is not even a baritone part in the arrangement, and the lowest part is in fact bass. Again, I do not mean to be difficult, but this is a minor edit that would make this piece of information more clear. I guess as regards the Duke's Men, will I at least be able to change "member" to "former member" as of 2011? I guess the difficulty I'm finding is that I'll of course always be listed as a "Duke's Man class of 2011", but I think it would be misleading to call me a member of the Duke's men, say, years after i'm no longer attending Yale or singing with them. Again, these are not huge deals, but would be nice to make clearer Samtsui.music (talk) 17:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Again, I'm not suggesting that Tsui IS either a soprano or alto - but the the verifiable truth is that he performs an SATB arrangement, which is both true and verifiable from the pdf arrangement itself. Part of what makes the video unique is the fact that he DOES in fact perform the parts which would usually be sung be women and other voice parts - thus, he is a tenor PERFORMING an entire SATB ARRANGEMENT. Again, "tenor to baritone" really does not make sense. Samtsui.music (talk) 20:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Glee: The Music, The Christmas Album

Not sure if you've heard about this one yet, but someone just linked me to the tracklist at Tommy2. No other sources on it at present (except a placeholder Billboard page), but worth keeping an eye out for :D Frickative 15:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Interesting!! I wonder if it's the same as the "Tbd" album on Amazon.com? Neither of the two sites reveal a track listing, so I'm not sure. I certainly will keep an eye on it! Looks interesting, because I thought that album would be Volume 4 and not this one. I don't know if they will sing these on the show, though... there are twelve of them, and they have never done that many in an episode. Maybe they will only include some of them, or this is just an extra Christmas release, like "Last Christmas" was (speaking of which, I wonder if that version is the one on this album). In any case, the SuBo song is probably "O Holy Night", as it's the only one on her album. I wonder why Billboard has the album up when no other retailers or news sources do... Speaking of Tommy2, I'm doubting whether it's a reliable source or not. What do you think? Yves (talk) 16:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I think for Wikipedia purposes it might not meet the requirements, but it does have a proven track record for accurately publishing all previous Glee titles and tracklists before other media sources. I agree it's unlikely all the tracks will make it on to the show, though it would be a shame if none of them do - I love a good Christmas song! I think with past releases it's taken the media a couple of days to a week to catch up once Tommy2 have got the titles up, so hopefully there should be some more info available in the next few days. Wondering why it's taking so long to get Volume 4 out though! Frickative 17:08, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Not sure, though, because there are different faiths in Glee, and there are no Hanukkah or Kwanzaa songs or anything like that. I'll wait until there are at least a few reliable sources before mentioning it in the season two or list of songs page. Yves (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm inclined to believe it, but I've checked the RS noticeboard and Tommy2 got a 'no' in 2007 and a 'borderline, only for uncontentious facts' in 2008. That said, I've done some quick Googling and a cast Christmas album was mentioned as early as May, and re-confirmed by Murphy a few weeks ago (with the mention of a November release date), so perhaps it could be mentioned in the season two article with Billboard as a ref for the title? I don't mind if you'd rather wait, though. This has given me a little push to finally get on with that merchandise article :) Frickative 21:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Nice work! :D Go ahead and add it! As for the tracklist, that would be considered contentious now, right? And remember to just mention November as the release date: who knows, maybe TBD is Volume 4, eh, or maybe they'll be released not far apart from each other? You never know. Yves (talk) 21:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Frickative: you never told me about this on MSN? =O

Certainly exciting! CycloneGU (talk) 02:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Ooooh look: it's on Barnes & Noble and the Japanese Amazon.com (as an import from the US), but it's not on any other Amazon.com country sites. Release date confirmed! :) Maybe it is the same one as the "TBD" one on Amazon.com? Can't know for sure, though. Yves (talk) 21:38, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

A Christmas episode is confirmed! http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/10/20/ask-ausiello-spoilers-glee-desperate-30-rock/ but nothing about songs or the album is. Yves (talk) 01:49, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Jessica Mauboy discography

Its already been set for a November 5 release. Sony have been telling fans on her facebook, mypsace, Twitter, in the media, they've done adds for it on iTunes and yesterday they released a snippet of all songs off the album. I don't think it'll be delayed. ozurbanmusic (talk) 22:21, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Amazon release dates

You have to be very careful with iTunes and Amazon. In the UK singles are released on Sunday or Monday to make the most of the chart week which runs from Sunday to Sunday. (its different to the US and Australia). However for pre-releases Amazon nearly always had multiple dates. Below the track list it usually has a section which says release date and genre etc. If you scroll to the top of the page there's a blue box in the left-hand corner that says "This album/single will be available on October 24, 2010". -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 20:12, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Why does it say the release date and the original release date are the twenty-first? :S Yves (talk) 20:18, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Amazon always does that because 21 October will be the date it goes active in Ireland as Irish singles are released on Fridays to coincide with their chart week. Its very confusing but I can assure you that if you tried to buy the single on the 21 you wouldn't be able to because its not going to active till October 24. -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 23:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Apology

I thought I had added references to specific episodes. I generally do so, but in this case maybe I skipped a step. Apologies, and thanks for the kind note. 72.70.255.210 (talk) 22:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I have a username, and usually forget to log in. And I have had numerous IP addresses too. I cannot keep track of them all. If I do log in, it is as Qermaq, and I have extensive experience in a similar MediaWiki environment elsewhere but that was years ago. I try to adhere to standards, but you are probably aware that a dabbler is at a disadvantage because knowing every standard requires being up to date in the loop. I just try to be fair, correct, and use my best judgment and normally that's enough! Good talking to you. 72.70.255.210 (talk) 22:10, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh hey, re: the change you mentioned - the sources are already in the article. Read later in the paragraph, what I changed was already sourced but was not completely changed. I was just gnoming - I don't see how I could have made it more clear, advice is always welcome. 72.70.255.210 (talk) 22:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Featured Artist?

I remember reading somewhere once that it's "Guest singles" - was this a change in the last couple of years as well?

And sorry, that was my IP there...I never notice when it logs me out. -.- CycloneGU (talk) 01:14, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, it was you! haha i didn't realize. hmmmmm i've actually never seen it like that; i was just going by other FLs, and Swift is the featured artist on those singles. Yves (talk) 01:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I fully agree she's featured artist; I actually heard the one song today! I found in the history the person who changed it back yesterday and left a note on the talk page. CycloneGU (talk) 01:30, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Yeah, I actually changed it to be in a separate table myself a couple of months ago, but was shot down, and when I brought the discussion to the talk page, the idea wasn't welcomed. Yves (talk) 01:35, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Wait a second - they shot down the correct treatment? I would argue vehemently that "Half of My Heart" is a John Mayer single, not a Taylor Swift single. The treatment being applied is now correct and anyone who wants to give a different opinion can't really refute that. Separate tables are correct. CycloneGU (talk) 01:37, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you agree. I think someone used the argument that it passed FL without that being raised as a concern, but that doesn't mean the article is perfect. Actually, if you ask me, the article should be demoted from FL; it is not representative of Wikipedia's best work and is unsourced in some areas (which FLs never should be). Yves (talk) 01:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Maybe we can work on that and simply remove unsourced material that we can't find a source for? Maybe I'll study this one for a while; Glee is pretty drab this week with no new episode. I'm gone allday 2morrow, tho.

I've also revived the discussion on the talk page. CycloneGU (talk) 01:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I see that! Well, first of all none of the peaks for featured singles are sourced. Also, the peak for "Crazier" in the UK is not referenced, no ref for Fearless peak in Germany, no ref for Taylor Swift peak in the UK, no ref for "Breathless" CAN peak (it is actually incorrect, according to the allmusic source), and "Jump Then Fall" and "Crazier" Australian peaks are not referenced. Pretty bad for an FL. I'm disappointed. Yves (talk) 01:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

After I do my Facebook gaming, I'll take a look at some of these if I can figure out good places to find them. AllMusic I tend to use for some rating information, in fact, so if the one is wrong I can change it. But I'd rather have an actual chart source even so. CycloneGU (talk) 03:04, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Looks like you found some sources (and the gaming is going strange, I'm chasing ghosts in Frontierville now and have to harvest Pumpkins), and the person I left a note for does want to try to help. Go ahead and watch my talkpage, I've said to carry on the discussion there and it lets you also keep tabs since I'm gone during the day 2morrow. If you want to make another arrangement (such as your talk page), I'll let you get in touch with him under my last post there, but I don't mind hosting the discussion and helping a bit myself. =) CycloneGU (talk) 03:49, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Alan H Barnett

The above account has been reported to vandalism notice board and should be indeff blocked shortly. Active Banana (^bananaphone 18:04, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for correcting me about the use of the "m" (minor edit) button. I guess I lent too much elasticity to the term...I have corrected my mistake. Thank you Yves! :-) (mango 21:05, 22 October 2010 (UTC))

Personal Attack?

I did not attack the person, just said don't be dumb. There is a difference. Don't overreact, and also don't post beginner templates on my wall Superbowlbound (talk) 21:51, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Alright, i respectfully disagree, but whatever. Anyways, the album booklet does not have times, but its on the CD. Do I use the same template? Booklet has lyrics and the "hidden messages". Also all those notes that I am not going to add in because its way too tedious. Superbowlbound (talk) 21:59, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Also the times are different (shorter than songs actually are. ie Mine (song) is listed at 3:50. different from what is listed and time one Itunes, which are already one second off. Is the album considered correct or the times on the disc?) Superbowlbound (talk) 22:03, 22 October 2010 (UTC).

i mean the times listed on the disc/album are different than their length in iTunes OR their length in the Article. As in the CD says 3:50 for Mine; article says 3:51, and (my) iTunes says 3:52. which one is considered accurate? Superbowlbound (talk) 22:09, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Joe McElderry

I am curious as to how Digitalspy is an unreliable source when it is already being used as a source for the page? Furthermore, I know that these tracks are in fact covers because I have the CD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.100.153.30 (talk) 22:11, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Speak Now

I just have to ask, how is an External Link that posts the lyrics to an album inappropriate? Besides the link you posted states "There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article..." Besides, MetroLyrics doesn't fall in the lines of a "link to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product". Ga Be 19 16:38, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I guess I can see the reasoning on WP:ALBUMSEL, but I don't on WP:ELNO. Ga Be 19 17:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Billboard problems

Sorry. Physical magazine reference is the only way to go for now. The position you are looking at didn't get stored in the database correctly, and that means it isn't showing up properly. When this link returns data, that means it has been entered into the database properly and you should be able to use normal references. Until then, there's no magic trick I can offer.—Kww(talk) 23:28, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

RE:Whip My Hair

Some people are idiots. How can a lead be PR-red when it needs to cover all aspects of an article? And deleting positive reception because it is "redundant?" These people must not look at GA's much. Candyo32 12:30, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Could you contribute to the discussion here? Thanks in advance. Candyo32 20:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Glee: The Music, The Rocky Horror Glee Show

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010

What the hell are you talking about plagiarizing?!?! Theuhohreo (talk) 14:42, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't have to use my own words because I referenced the source it was from! and even so, all you need to do is put "quotation marks" around it and it's done! Don't gotta make it a big stupid ass thing... Theuhohreo (talk) 15:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Glee Christmas Album

iTunes has a tracklist. I'm putting the rough start to the article together and uploading the cover art, also from iTunes, and thus removing the redirect at the same time. Please follow up behind me as you might have a better idea what else can be put there in the meantime. My concern: the album name on iTunes has a hyphen in it, while our page has none - if the official name has a hyphen, we'll have to move the article and fix the title properly in the article, too.

Give me a few minutes and it'll be ready for you to work on. It's ready for you and Frickative to add stuff to, the shell (without references, mind) is now up. =) CycloneGU (talk) 03:57, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Perfect! I was actually gonna start working on it today, and you're one step ahead of me! Props! :) Yves (talk) 04:09, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's kinda funny as I was checking out of curiosity whether any new songs popped out given the Halloween episode is tonite (no more did, predictably). I think they just put the album in there today for pre-order. I thought I'd save you and Frickative the basic work, and I've updated her as well. CycloneGU (talk) 04:10, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Haha well okay. I'm working on it right now. By the way, do you think you could upload a slightly larger image? The rules are that it can't be more than 300 × 300, but this one is small in comparison to the infobox and just looks weird. Thanks in advance! Also, do you know what I realized a couple of weeks ago? Even if we have a tracklist, and know Glee always does covers of songs, it's actually WP:OR to link the songs names, eh? Like even the song "You're a Mean One, Mr. Grinch": there is probably an infinitesimal chance it isn't the one from the Dr. Seuss film adaptation, but if the sources don't say it, we can't assume it; there is a chance it could be a completely different song with the same title. Until verifiable confirmation is to be found, I think what we (myself included) have been doing with linking songs is not really right... What do you think? Yves (talk) 04:21, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

All I did there was put square brackets around the title. I presumed it would link correctly, but there were two redlinks. Many songs are unmistakable, but there are a select few I'm not familiar with. I don't know what other song refers to Mr. Grinch, it's either the Dr. Seuss one or the one from the movie where Faith Hill was involved with "Where Are You Christmas". My suspicion is it's based on the movie version. What else COULD it be?

On the other hand, I'm sure everyone agrees songs like "O Holy Night" and "Angels We Have Heard On High" obviously have no issues as they are traditional, but any others that come to mind that you're not sure about? My uncertainty is with just the first two, the rest I've heard many times by many artists (again with exception to the Grinch one, which I've only heard in the movie and related soundtrack). On the other hand, track 1 Wikilinked when I put it in, while track 2 didn't. CycloneGU (talk) 06:19, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Image now updated to 300x300; original copy was iTunes, new one came from Amazon which is already that exact size. CycloneGU (talk) 06:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! "Deck the Rooftop" is not a Christmas carol: I believe it may be a mashup of "Deck the Halls" and "Up on the Rooftop"? As for your question, yes, I do believe everyone would agree a song like "Angels We Have Heard on High" is the traditional one, but one cannot be sure. Per WP:OR and WP:V, it has to be published in a reliable source to be eligible for inclusion on Wikipedia. For example, say one were to look at this page from an area that doesn't celebrate Christmas, and is thus unfamiliar with Christmas music: would someone from Saudi Arabia be able to tell you there is one standard carol called "Angels We Have Heard on High"? Not really, and until we get a reliable source, I think it would still be considered WP:OR to wikilink it, no matter how absurd that sounds. I know; I am really wanting to link it, too, but per Wikipedia policies, I do not think that is what we should be doing. Yves (talk) 06:48, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I beg to differ in opinion on "Angels We Have Heard On High" because I have never, in my 30 years on this Earth, heard any other song by that title. If you want to look up Hanukkah carols, if such a page exists, or other holidays' carols, go ahead. If nothing with that title appears there, then there is nothing else it COULD be. If we can't Wikilink "Angels", then we really ought to remove every single Wikilink from that article until the album's release; this includes "O Holy Night" and "Jingle Bells" as well. All three are literally traditional songs and cannot be anything else, so I still beg to differ.

In any case, I'll do a search for information relating to the Christmas album. CycloneGU (talk) 14:27, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Alright, found this reference to "12 classsic Christmas songs" (though you're right, the one title seems suspect), in addition to this reference to how "the separation of church and state doesn't seem to apply to McKinley High"; in other news, did you see this from the LA Times? They muse about whether Lea sang O Holy Night before or after this was taken. CycloneGU (talk) 14:35, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hahaha yeah I saw that. I know, and I agree with you: I have never heard of another song called "Angels We Have Heard on High", but the thing is, you don't know what they're going to do. It could be a song they wrote, with the same title! Or it could be a different song, with a change in title. I still think it is WP:OR, possibly with elements of WP:SYNTH, to link the songs to the pages. The few songs I linked were because the press release and Billboard mentioned the songs were Christmas classics. Yves (talk) 22:25, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

When one source states "12 Christmas classics", I'd think that gives us leeway to presume the songs are old standbys and not unique. CycloneGU (talk) 22:54, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Ooooh: where does it say that! Yves (talk) 22:58, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Look four messages up in this string. =) CycloneGU (talk) 23:04, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Haha, found it in the EW reference, anyway (don't know if RTTNews is a reliable source; site looks amateur, and articles don't seem of very good quality). But I'm confused: how is "Deck the Rooftop" a Christmas classic? Or "The Most Wonderful Day of the Year"; the song is "The Most Wonderful Time of the Year"? It would be WP:OR then to assume, if at all, it's the same song with a change in lyrics, eh? Yves (talk) 23:14, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with your last statement, those two titles stand out to me as well. CycloneGU (talk) 23:19, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Section Break

Okay. I will not link them for the time being. Yves (talk) 23:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I do think linking 6-12 would be legit. though. Last Christmas originates from the group Wham!. The rest I think are traditional, as is track 4 which is already confirmed who the original artist is. I don't know 1, but it looks like you have a source for it. That leaves 2, 3, and 5 I wouldn't link, if any. CycloneGU (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what "O Holy Night" sounds like. :S Maybe, I do, but the name's not coming straight to me. "Merry Christmas, Darling" is a song by The Carpenters that reached number one on the Billboard Christmas Singles chart. And you know what? I think I'm going leave out writing credits for now: a lot of carols were translated/written/composed by bishops and priests and things, and it is yet unknown what the album will official credit in terms of composers. And I don't want to do any WP:OR. For example, the words of "Angels We Have Heard on High" were translated from French by James Chadwick, but the melody is from the hymn "Gloria" but arranged by Edward Shippen Barnes. Yves (talk) 23:40, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with leaving writers out. There is no doubt about the song itself, but the writers for traditional carols even on Allmusic are just labelled "Traditional" with no composers, so those ones in particular will have no issues. Everyone does their own melody; you should hear SHeDaisy's "Deck The Halls". CycloneGU (talk) 02:49, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

As for O Holy Night..."O holy night, the stars are brightly shining...it is the night of our dear Saviour's birth..." *looks to see how many mirrors he's shattered* CycloneGU (talk) 02:54, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Finn

Per WP:UNDUE I think only Cory should be in the infobox, and the other 2 should be in casting. CTJF83 chat 06:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with this, and for the same reason :) There is precedent for doing it that way - eg. Jack Harkness, a GA which lists only the primary performer in the ibox, and mentions a single-episode child actor in the body of the article. Frickative 15:07, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmm I don't know, though: look at FAs like Jabba the Hutt and Jason Voorhees, they list all portrayers, though FA Bernard Quatermass has just "Various", but that may be due to the large number. I feel like just putting Monteith would be POV because people would think there is only one portrayer for this fictional character... maybe we could have something like a (see casting) below it? With only one portrayer in the infobox, it seems redundant to have "Portrayed by Cory Monteith" as well as "Cory Monteith as Finn Hudson" as the caption. But if we had the note below the main actor, I would be okay with that. Yves (talk) 22:23, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

The 2 examples you gave are different, in they are in different movies and completely portrayed by different people. Cory is the main portrayer, with just very minor, few minutes portrayals by different kids. If Cory was all of a sudden ousted, and someone came in brand new portraying Finn in all subsequent episodes as an adult, then it would be reasonable to list Cory and the new person. CTJF83 chat 22:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay. I still think it's misleading to only have his name there without at least a note or something. Would you prefer the idea of a quick mention in the lead paragraph? Yves (talk) 22:38, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Ummm....I mean we don't wanna give UNDUE wait to the two kids portraying him, cause obviously Cory is the main portrayer...so I don't have an answer really about the lead.... CTJF83 chat 22:41, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

More Non-Christmas-Related Glee Stories

Jessalyn divorces and, somewhat more exciting, might there be a Taylor Swift episode of Glee? CycloneGU (talk) 14:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Haha thanks for the links. Poor Jessalyn; I love her! A Taylor Swift episode would be bad, though. Yves (talk) 23:00, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

This Edit

I've restored WIlted Youth's edit to Glee: The Music, The Christmas Album because your Wikilinks go to places that redirect to other pages. He simply fixed the Wikilinks themselves to direct correctly; the titles remained unchanged in the prose. CycloneGU (talk) 22:10, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I am aware. But it doesn't. They go right to the article. They do not need to be "fixed" because they are not "broken". WP:NOTBROKEN applies, and it is extremely unlikely the redirects will ever change to point to another article. What else could "O Christmas Tree" or "God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen" direct to? It's also a waste of coding and article space. Yves (talk) 22:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen redirects to God rest you merry, gentlemen; we should be linking to the direct article, not linking to redirects. Same thing with O Christmas Tree redirecting to O Tannenbaum. I steadfastly insist we use the standard article in the Wikilink, but I will agree that the title on the album should not be changed as they don't use that title. WIlted Youth had the correct idea, and I didn't change it when I saw it before you did because I recognized it was correct. I know what you are referencing says it's not necessary and could even be detrimental; however, I think in cases like this one it should be observed. What happens if the redirect page gets tampered with and unnoticed? The article exists, but we aren't linking to it because of the redirect missing.

Again, this is just my opinion. CycloneGU (talk) 22:39, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, I think we should follow WP:R2D - unnecessary invisible coding makes editing harder for Wiki newbies, and I don't think possible future vandalism is a compelling reason to ignore an established guideline. But I'm really only chipping in because the first discussion I ever had with Yves was about this exact guideline, so seeing it pop up made me smile :) Frickative 22:59, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Cannibal

Can you revert the last edit on Cannibal. Im getting pissed off. Thanks - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:13, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Done. :) Yves (talk) 19:16, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you :) - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 19:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Anytime! :) Yves (talk) 19:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Soooooo, i may be away from October 31st - November 3rd. Could you watch; Tik Tok (song), Blah Blah Blah (song), Your Love Is My Drug, Take It Off (song), We R Who We R, Cannibal (EP), Animal (Kesha album) and Kesha discography. Just watch for vandalism and stupid edits basically. The only three that may give you trouble is Cannibal, Animal and We R Who We R, i can gauruntee people are going to add Sleazy and another cover and try to change the tracklisting on Animal and Cannibal, just revert it if they do basically. Would be great if you can do this, lemme know if you cannot :) - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:47, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Sure! They're all on my watchlist, anyway. I cannot guarantee all unconstructive edits will be taken care of, because I have an exam coming up and an assignment due soon, but I will do my best. :) Yves (talk) 03:59, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries, thank you :) im sure you'll do a fine job. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 04:10, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Roman's Revenge

Please keep an eye on that being removed, would you? Afraid I can't stop anymore users taking it out as I've hit 3RR. Thanks. –Chase (talk / contribs) 03:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Will do; I'm keeping a close watch on it. Yves (talk) 03:58, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Help?..

Hi, could you help me out? I was just wondering how to upload a picture i took myself with out it getting a copyright tagg? --L.Geee 11:16, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

The Black Eyed Peas

You're very welcome. Yes, I've noticed it. I'm trying to figure out ways of fixing their articles up. One step at a time I guess. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, that's be great. Some of the articles are such a mess. I was thinking of maybe putting a Wikiproject together, but I have no idea if they already have or what. I looked, but yeah. Might be easier, and I'd be great to get other people involved. Something like, Wikipedia:WikiProject Britney Spears would probably come in great use. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:12, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I get what you're saying. It was just an idea. I'm gonna go check around their pages and see what all needs to be done. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, so I made a page of additions that I think need to be added. Feel free to add anything to it. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 00:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj's Birthplace

Nicki Minaj was Born in Trinidad and Tobago in St. James as she mentioned at her concert in Trinidad if you dont believe me check youtube where she says she is from St. James and the daily newspapers says she was from St, James. Nicki Minaj could not have been BORN in Queens, New York and then at the age of five she MOVED there,that makes no sense she was in Trinidad for her early childhood until the age of five, billboard.com also says that she was born there. @Yvesnimmo

• Billboard.com says she was born in Trinidad. @Yvesnimmo

744cody (talk) 02:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

MTX Tatra V8

I added a link to the video - dont you belive your own eyes? That video got 3.4 million views within a week - thats the most publicity MTX cars will ever have! —Preceding unsigned comment added by HerrDalton (talk • contribs) 05:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC) http://www.tatraworld.nl/2010/10/19/kanye-west-in-runaway-prelude-with-mtx-tatra-v8/ http://www.askmen.com/cars/car/tatra-mtx-v8.html http://www.mtv.com/photos/kanye-wests-highbrow-runaway-references/1650768/5360978/photo.jhtml http://www.carplacekc.com/tag/tatra-mtx-v8/ http://www.vh1.com/news/articles/1650692/20101023/index.jhtml Aint that enough? —Preceding unsigned comment added by HerrDalton (talk • contribs) 05:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

That - Jalopnik should be relialble: http://jalopnik.com/5672557/what-is-kanye-west-driving-in-his-new-runaway-video And the point is that MTX Tatra was limited series production that even wiki has only a photo and "oneliner" about it. It's reffered as MTX Tatra Sport in the text and MTX Tatra V8 under the photo. And you are concerned that the article will grow too big? Even the Askmen.com (unreliable) source has some decent data about it - but not wiki? I think im not overreacting here, but this video dragged the MTX Tatra V8 into the minds of wider public that it has ever been... —Preceding unsigned comment added by HerrDalton (talk • contribs) 07:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC) Yeah, how come one can be so uptooth? You should go there http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTX_Tatra_V8 and delete that revision too, just to show off your rigid standards, please HerrDalton (talk) 21:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Fergie discography

Well other charted songs are more like songs that weren't released as singles and just charted. Both "Finally" and "Labels of Love" received radio and digital download releases. Are you trying to tell me it has to be released as a CD single to be considered an official single? That's not what I've been told yet again when I tried to discuss "Woohoo" being an official single. Are they wrong then? I don't understand what exactly the qualifications of a single is. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean. I think there should be some kind of qualification added or something. It seriously drives me crazy. If you'd like to change it back, I can put them back. I'm currently converting the style. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 23:47, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I only got rid of Paradise City, as it's not actually her song. Yano what I mean? :P ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 00:00, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

According to the part of on, it is only a "song" not a "single." And thanks for reminding me. I almost forgot to put it into the album appearances section. Doing that section now. Then I'll get onto the promo singles. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 00:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Question about album count

Hi, Yves. A quick question: why'd you change the count of studio albums on Rihanna discography from 5 to 4? — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh, that was because she has only released four studio albums. This is because in the [highly improbably] chance that the album gets cancelled or pushed back or delayed or something happens that brings about its non-existence, it would count, so she would never have released five studio albums, right? For an artist like Rihanna, the probability is infinitesimal, but existent nonetheless, and if it was cancelled, it would be like, "Oh wait, JK nvm there aren't five studio albums." *change back to 4*. Per WP:CRYSTAL, it's not definite until it happens, right? Yves (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Right, totally agree. Only: we've already got Loud listed in the table (and can't get rid of it anymore, not that I haven't tried). So the problem for me (beside the OMG-let's-not-wait-even-a-second mentality) is that the counter box thingy doesn't match the number of items in the table. Yes, its breaking CRYSTAL to have it in the table, but now there's a mismatch. IYSWIM. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 11:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

True, but looking at the studio albums table, one can know the album hasn't been released, so it's not really a mismatch. Yves (talk) 11:58, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Glee template

Oops... my bad! I thought the episode has to have aired first, before being added. :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:14, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Just the Way You Are

Thank you for changing it the chart year for Just the Way You Are (Billy Joel song) to just 1978. I wasn't sure when the actual peak occurred in the UK, so I didn't want to change it. However, note that WP:YEAR would not apply in this case because dashes refer to a date range, chart peaks are singular years, which is why WP:CHARTS actually recommends separate charts for different peak years. I didn't do that in this case because I did not know the actual peak dates for this song. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 18:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Flo Rida Album

Well, Flo Rida tweeted that his album name would be "The Only One" http://twitter.com/official_flo/status/10892447100 No offence though. User:72.56.248.23 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.56.248.23 (talk) 22:39, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Volume 4 Source

This good enough? It's a blog, but it links to spoilertv.com - specifically, here. CycloneGU (talk) 04:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, spoilertv might be a blog too..and its source is here...which might also be a blog...I'm still looking for better. CycloneGU (talk) 04:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
All right, tommy2.net posted it. They even have artwork. Since they've proven pretty reliable for Glee releases so far, I am willing to accept that as a valid reference. CycloneGU (talk) 05:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, they have been pretty good in the past, but since a track listing is considered "contentious facts", I would like to leave it for now. I think it's best to wait, because I'm still really reluctant and iffy about using it as a good source. I don't see the harm in waiting; a page on Barnes & Noble, Billboard, or allmusic should be up within the next couple of days, and I'd be much more comfortable with one of those as a source. :) Yves (talk) 08:47, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:OR

Hi

can you please tell me what did I do wrong here? you mentioned WP:OR and "rm redundancy". and why not to use both templates: The Black Eyed Peas & The Black Eyed Peas singles? part about charts i understand :)--ArmedRadar2307 (talk) 21:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

ok, now i understand :)--ArmedRadar2307 (talk) 21:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

of course it's ok :) when you said that there in only 1 chart I thought you said that when there will be 2 charts I can add them to article, lol--ArmedRadar2307 (talk) 13:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

"The Time (The Dirty Bit)"

I didn't remove it. They did. If you check iTunes and all the releases, it doesn't have the second The. And it's also been removed from their site posts, etc. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 20:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I changed it a bit fast. But it seemed pretty legit to me. And are you talking about the blog post by them? I don't think that really qualifies as it could be incorrect. The song was released as "The Time (Dirty Bit)" so it should be called as so. How about changing the info to say "also know as" instead of "previously"? ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 20:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

From all the releases, and their website announcing it's release http://www.blackeyedpeas.com/home/news/812629 I think it's safe to say that the second "the" was removed from the title. Added the sign, btw. Haha, school - it's exhausting. Anyways, I changed it to say "also known as The Time (The Dirty Bit)" as it was released without the "the." ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 20:54, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh god, can't wait for that... :P But yeah. It seems to me they removed the "the" from it last minute (which is understandable, it actually annoyed the hell outta me.) I say we should wait and see in the next few days if it changes on the charts and stuff. I didn't realize that before I changed it. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 21:01, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I'd say it'd just be best to keep it without the second the, as it was released as such. Billboard seems to be the only one saying otherwise as of right now. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (Talk) 00:37, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Avril Lavigne Template (heck, all templates)

Ah sweet, thanks for explaining. I should have avoided bothering you with the reversion by just asking you in the first place. Cheers – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 08:08, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem! You're very welcome! Yves (talk) 21:15, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Aaronchall IP

It's clearly his IP, but it's more likely he has somehow been logged out and not noticed. It's not a problem as he is not trying to evade or fool anyone into thinking it is another person. The³5₉ (Talk) 07:04, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Report filed. The³5₉ (Talk) 07:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Glee: The Music, Volume 4

Orlady (talk) 12:03, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Ugh

Restore this version please and thanks. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=We_R_Who_We_R&oldid=396795707 - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 00:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Done. :) Yves (talk) 00:09, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, IPs's.....ugh. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 00:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem. And I feel ya. So annoying. Yves (talk) 00:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi again

What's exactly wrong with this? Here it says that promo cd single was released on 08/11/2010.--ArmedRadar2307 (talk) 15:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

OK then :) The other link was working, but they changed it. This link is also no longer working.--ArmedRadar2307 (talk) 16:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Ever Ever After

I'll try to find the sources. Silvergoat (talk∙contrib) 06:58, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, but I don't know if sources will have much impact. Besides the significant coverage part, of course, it still fails the three criteria in WP:NSONGS, where it did not win or get nominated for any awards (unlike "Happy Working Song", "That's How You Know" ft. Marlon Saunders, and "So Close"), did not get notably covered by notable artists, and did not chart (as far as I'm aware). Yves (talk) 07:09, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Seemed like the song did not chart in Billboard's charts. Are charts from other places, like in Asia counted? Silvergoat (talk∙contrib) 08:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, as long as it's one of the WP:GOODCHARTS. :) Yves (talk) 08:54, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

quicki?

I cant believe its taking so long to get Roman's Revenge protected. I've requested that the vandal(s) be blocked at WP:AIV too -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 02:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Haha the orange bar came up the same time as I clicked on the IP's talk page to see the block. Thanks! P.S. I've listed the site for blacklist addition because it has been used on many, many articles. Feel free to add. I don't even know what's going on here. Yves (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

BS

		The Original Barnstar
		Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:27, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh wow, thank you so much, Ctjf: I'm humbled! At first, I didn't know what the edit summary was referring to and I was like, "Uh oh, did I do something wrong?" but this turned out to be a pleasant surprise! :D Yves (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

LOL, you're the 2nd person to question that...I'm too lazy, guess it's a few letters shorter...in the future I should spell it out! :) CTJF83 chat 04:18, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Billboard

Hey Yes, I came to know from JohnFromPinckney's page that you require some help with a certain song's peak, which BB and Allmusic is not archiving. Well you can ask me, since I subscribe to the magazines and can easily cite the phsyical magazine reference for you. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 07:21, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I have access to Billboard.biz also, so can provide you with direct links from there too. :) — Legolas ^(talk2me) 16:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Furt

Gatoclass (talk) 12:07, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Your revert of my Bruno Mars edit

I see that you reverted my edit on Bruno Mars, citing that the "swedish charts are more relevant" than the Norwegian ones. I can't really see how the Swedish charts have more pertinence than the Norwegian charts. May I please have an explanation? MikeNicho231 (talk) 21:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry; my edit summary was cut off when I hit the "Enter" button by accident and I had to write a dummy summary. Basically, the Swedish peak is higher than the Norwegian and WP:DISCOGSTYLE says to "go by the relative success of the artist on that chart." Yves (talk) 21:20, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Editor help

Seeing as you've dealt with this user before, would you help me with Yokota126?, who has been making the same change to sourced content on Graduation (album), the album's sales figure, and has not taken heed to any of my edit summaries in reverting such edits nor talk page posts. Dan56 (talk) 21:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Animal

Please tell me you're watching Animal (Kesha album) because im getting a headache from all the IP's and poo edits. -.- - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 03:40, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I am. So frustrating, I know. Yves (talk) 01:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Loud

The top 5 ARIA charts for singles in Albums and Singles was released in the Herald Sun Newspaper in Melbourne, Australia. It stated on the Albums chart that Loud charted at #3 for this week .I Apologize for my error in referencing, but there is no need for you to be rude :) Don't believe me, check in the charts soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amyfairygreen2 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

brass session on kanye west album

Why am I not getting a response from any editor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dflam (talk • contribs) 19:58, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I asked to include the brass session in the recording section of the article. "Edit request for the production section regarding the brass"

I included the information that is relevant.

--Dflam (talk) 19:39, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

MBDTF change

Hey sorry about the whole not released yet thing. I live on the West Coast so I wouldn't know what the time is in other countries where its being released. STATic message me! 00:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Haha it's okay. Well that's a drag for you, I guess; you're the last one to get things released. :/ Yves (talk) 00:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Release dates in album articles

Hey! Quick query - is there a relevant guideline governing release date sections? I was about to add a few more to Volume 1, but then realised I wasn't sure whether it should just be for countries where the album charted, so it doesn't turn into a long indiscriminate list? I can't find anything official either way, but I'm probably looking in the wrong places. Frickative 05:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey! There actually aren't any concrete rules that I can find, and WP:ALBUM#Release history doesn't address that. It makes sense to have the dates of the countries that charted, and maybe some other major areas where it didn't. I've just seen many articles with release dates of many countries. I see you've done a lot of work with converting tables to satisfy WP:ACCESS. I have to ask, though: have those changes been fully approved? Also, I'd like to know where you think the article is lacking in terms of GA standards. Looking at a GA like Sounds of the Season: The Taylor Swift Holiday Collection, I think we have a great article so far, but would like to know what can be done to improve it. :) Yves (talk) 06:23, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I had tabs open for a few different European countries, but I think instead I'll just go through the ones where it charted to check whether the release was physical or digital or both. It looks like there's still some bickering going on over the finer points, but given that the data table recommendations moved from essay to guideline form a couple of months ago without opposition, I'd assume tacit approval. The only element I changed which isn't part of that was moving the references to a column at the end, which is entirely my own preference just because I think it looks a bit neater, haha. I've seen featured lists present the refs either way so I assume it's not a problem, but I don't mind if you'd rather have them integrated back in with the data. (Oh, the captions are pretty terrible though, I'm no good at those =/).

In terms of further improvements, I think vast swathes of the critical response section could stand to be paraphrased, because it looks like I just threw a lot of quotes down and left it at that. Development isn't as bad, but there's still some meaningless promo-speak like "Glee is a smart and challenging yet totally mainstream platform for the most innovative use of classic and contemporary pop seen on television." Blah. Bad writing is entirely my fault though, so I'll try and give it a good copy-edit this weekend. That aside, for broadness of coverage there should probably be a brief mention of the tour in there somewhere - perhaps just at the end of "Development", because I don't think there's enough material to support a separate "Promotion" section as in the TSwift article. Oh, and something about the inclusion of the karaoke bonus tracks, again probably just a sentence under Development. That should take care of GA critera 1 and 3. 4-6 are already met, then a check through of the references for formatting and redirecting URLS, a quick fix of the dablinks and then hopefully, that should be that! Frickative 07:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Nope, I'm perfectly good with the refs being placed at the last column! It does make it look neater. And I'm not sure what you mean by "captions"? Haha no, don't think of it as "bad writing"! Just think of it as a continuous improvement. Indeed, I've noticed your writing skills have only become stronger, especially in paraphrasing reviewers' comments. I've kind of been doing some of the 'Mr. X from Newspaper Y thought that "Lorem ipsum quote"' kinda thing, but I see it's really toned down. Looking at your most recent: the music section for "Never Been Kissed" is a prime example of great work, and I've been trying to emulate that. :P

About promotion, I agree that a separate promotion section is unnecessary: the tour could be mentioned in a couple of sentences ("A tour ... accompanied the album ... visited cities in North America. "..." were included on the setlist." or something). In some album articles, I've seen singles merged with promotion (example: FA Janet Jackson's Control), because singles are many times considered promotion for the album, but I guess not with the case of Glee; singles kind of stood on their own and the album acted as a compilation of the tracks digitally, in a way, and for those who wanted a physical copy. I'll tackle the quick karaoke tracks sentence, and I'll update somes singles sales figures from a Yahoo! Music article that uses data from Nielsen SoundScan. Also, I'm going to try to find an updated sales figure for the album, if it exists. :) Yves (talk) 08:47, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you forgot to replace the URL for Mexico? Haha. Yves (talk) 01:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

By captions I mean the pre-header bits, like "List of sales certifications by country and provider" - I'm not sure if they're actually meant to be that descriptive, like alt-text, or if shorter/simpler would be better. Thank you, considering it as a continuous process is certainly a much kinder way of looking at it, and thank you very much for your comments on "Never Been Kissed"! I agree that with Glee, the singles aren't really promoting the album - more the show itself if anything. Great find on the updated sales figures (very surprising to see a season two track make it in there within a month of release!) And perhaps I'm looking at the diff wrong (and I wouldn't be at all surprised to have messed it up), but to me it looks as though I replaced mexicancharts.com with the Mexican iTunes Store? Frickative 08:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

From what I've seen, it looks like it's similar to alt text, though I'm not certain. The one you mentioned seems to be alright, in any case. You're quite welcome! And I was surprised, too! Though I didn't think it was that great, I think the reason for the huge sales is because it was the first single of the season after months of Glee withdrawal that I know I went through haha. And with the diff, you used the URL for The Christmas Album, instead. :P Yves (talk) 09:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

LOL oh dear, I even double-triple checked the diff and somehow still missed that. Oops. Cheers for fixing it! Frickative 09:25, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

  I wrote the correct date change on Pink Friday and it was changed b this Yves person. User:100sbo10  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.233.9.101 (talk) 13:56, 25 November 2010 (UTC) 

DYK for Grenade (song)

Materialscientist (talk) 12:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Do It Like a Dude

Hi there! Do It Like a Dude is the debut single of Jessie J and it is being promoted now. It is big enough to have it own page. I appreciate you can undo your action and help me improving it. :) I'm searching for more information in reliable sources, such producers, studio used... Thank you for your time and I hope you can reply to discuss this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkfreakxx7 (talk • contribs) 04:59, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks for the quick answer. Still I don't understand what is missing in that article. I've read the guidelines you posted. The page has covers, tracklists, release dates, music video information (I will write down a small text about its storyline soon), writers information and extra information about peaking iTunes charts. What else should be in? Maybe a small screen capture from the video? I looked around and there are similar pages so that's why I don't get this one is deleted. I spent a few hours editing it. lol Thanks anyway :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkfreakxx7 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Glee: The Music, Volume 4

May I ask why Original artist is not appropriate for this article? ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 07:07, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Because it's an incorrect heading. "I Want to Hold Your Hand" was originally performed by The Beatles and "Sway" by Pablo Beltrán Ruiz. Yves (talk) 07:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Black Eyed Peas Template

What the hell has happened to the BEP template? ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 20:10, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, alright. I was unsure and I got so lost in the redirects and stuff trying to find out what went on. Haha yeah, I understand why it's different. ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 21:43, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Yay, haha. Yeah, I've been going over a few here and there. Don't really have anything else on my plate. ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 23:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Haha, yes I do. I don't have an email thing set up, but I can do that. ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 00:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Well I did it anyway. I've been meaning to regardless. xD ΣПD!ПG–STΛЯT | TΛLK | 00:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Why yes I am. Just messing around with my signature atm. xD ΣПDIПG–STΛЯT (talk | contribs) 02:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, right. I haven't got used to the new msn yet. Accepting you now. :L ΣПDIПG–STΛЯT (talk contribs) 02:33, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Download Charts

I should ask you if it's allowed to use official download chart positions on an album page (Loud by Rihanna). The German download charts are published by the official representer of the German charts, Media Control. So, it's usable and should be included? Also, the American pendant is used in lots of album pages, am I right? Please also write your opinion on the Loud's discussion page! Thanks... --79.216.157.159 (talk) 14:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Yves, my bad... I'm the one who directed this guy to you on this question in the Loud discussion. I was like, "I have no idea, ask Yves." (mikomango (talk) 07:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC))

General Awesomeness - Pack Of Wolves Award

		The Pack of Wolves Award
		Yves, I think you deserve extra props for your non-stop vigilance and quick actions in reverting Ameri-centric edits for non-American artists. You promote of the absolute highest of Wikipedia standards. I especially love your devotion to Rihanna-related articles. Yves, may this pack of wolves comfort and aid you in your efforts! Much love Yves, you rock!!! mikomango (talk) 07:43, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey Yves!!! I totally agree with you. I have no idea if you are a boy or a girl (I am a Caribbean female who used to live in Toronto, no less), but it seems like Wikipedia is a better place because of darlings like you who realize that Americans were not the first speakers of English in the world. LOL! You deserve this award and every other one you've got. You're my hero, Yves!!! Keep on making this place better, hun! (mikomango (talk) 07:58, 29 November 2010 (UTC))

Quick question II

Click on the link and then look at the page source, and it will be pretty obvious. Where was this? Who was stupid enough to give away their API key?—Kww(talk) 14:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Yvesnimmo. You have new messages at Rambo's Revenge's talk page.
Message added by Rambo's Revenge (talk) at 14:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

November 2010

1. Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Furt, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Yves (talk) 02:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

   Singles are important, as they represent a commercial aspect of Glee that meets success on charts like the Billboard Hot 100. Please do not remove that. Thank you. Yves (talk) 02:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree, single are important. Advertising for Amazon isn't. Why choose amazon over iTunes or bittorrent? CoombaDelray (talk) 02:22, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It's not advertising for Amazon; nowhere is that mentioned. Amazon is simply a longevous reference; singles from the first season disappeared from the iTunes Store. Also, Amazon has preorder for singles before the iTunes Store does. BitTorrent is not a legal means of purchasing music. Yves (talk) 02:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to mix it up a little you can use 7digita.com (just make sure you change the store to US first). -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me

Thanks! I didn't know about that! It's not updated to today (yet), though. Yves (talk) 02:39, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Would you mind if we used the iTunes store for season 2 instead? I own shares in apple. CoombaDelray (talk) 02:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

As Yves says, we originally used iTunes for season one references, however the individual singles were later removed from the store. I then had the tedious task of changing all the references to point to a different source - something I'd rather not repeat when the same thing inevitably happens with the season two singles in a few months time. Frickative 02:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

WP:COI much? The reason I use Amazon is because the singles released today (Tuesday, November 29, 2010) were made available for preorder all the way from November 15. The iTunes Store doesn't have preorder for singles, but chooses to release them the day of airing (i.e. in less than two-and-a-half hours). Knowing what the songs are up a fortnight in advance can allow them to be added to episode pages or song lists. With season two singles, they will probably disappear by the time season three commences, so the references will all have to be replaced. Yves (talk) 02:39, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

So, we're agreed to keep both links? Or does Amazon give you a cut for all redirects? CoombaDelray (talk) 02:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

No, I do not want to keep both links. Having one is enough for referencing, and as explained before, the iTunes ones have disappeared in the past while the Amazon ones haven't. Plus, your disruption of Wikipedia to make a point makes me not want to have the iTunes reference. The Amazon reference is for verifiability, i.e. to show that singles actually were released in a digital format, and not some ludicrous advertising scheme. Yves (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Peeps... let's seek consensus here ASAP! An edit war is harming the article. CoombaDelray, consensus will be affected by your admission of "owning stock in Apple." Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't think whatever consensus CoombaDelray wants will be reached. (S)he seems to think the article is about advertisement when (s)he not only mentioned it in his(her) edit summary here, but also disrupted Wikipedia to make a point by calling Amazon.com songs "more expensive" in the same edit. (S)he has also violated the three-revert rule and has opted for a method of "leave a message here, then continue to add the same edit I want a minute later". Yves (talk) 03:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Who are you talking to? Anyway, my vagina and I agree that we can compromise on having both links. CoombaDelray (talk) 03:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't see the purpose of having both Amazon.com and the iTunes Store listed when iTunes Store URLs will eventually link rot and become inaccessible. Also, I don't think you've understood that the Amazon.com link is not there for the sake of linking to a retailer, but for verification. Yves (talk) 03:34, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Good point. CoombaDelray (talk) 03:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Glee

		Glee Barnstar
		Here's a barnstar to award all your hard work on the Glee articles. Their purity is unrivalled. CoombaDelray (talk) 03:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Forth Quarter 2010

I didn't revert anything. I've been trying to compromise this whole time. You're the one being difficult. If you would provide feedback to your fellow editors rather than just reverting their important changes, it would be greatly appreciated! CoombaDelray (talk) 03:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

BTW

In books, the displaying title needs to happen after the pipe. That is something like

:"[[Title]]"

will not be recognized by the renderer. You need to write

:[[Title|"Title"]]

for things to render as intended. See Help:Books/for experts#Saving books for more details. Thanks. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 07:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

BEP

I just have some homework to do tonight, and I'll be able to work on some BEP articles. :) School = the worst thing in the whole entire world. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 21:08, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Wow. What a fail. I decided to take a little nap and ended up sleeping for 2/3 hours. Good thing the homework I had to do wasn't too important. :L ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 01:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Haha, it's okay. At least you did what matters. I'm watching Sectionals right now. :) Yves (talk) 01:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the barnstar! Not bad eh? One GA after three years on WP lol... Adabow (talk · contribs) 00:44, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Haha, should be fine, good luck! We might be able to keep Rihanna discography at FL - thanks to all your hard work! Adabow (talk · contribs) 00:51, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I did up to Germany, and I'll check the others now, now that you mention it... Adabow (talk · contribs) 00:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, Ireland, NZ and UK are done now, but Chart Stats only lists solo singles. Do you know where we can source featured/charity singles? And the Billboard site is playing up for me, so I'll leave the U.S. for now. Adabow (talk · contribs) 01:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Why Don't You Love Me

Please participate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Why_Don't_You_Love_Me_(Beyonc%C3%A9_Knowles_song)#Single.3F Jivesh boodhun (talk) 05:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

It's edit warring even if you happen to be in the right.

Hi, on Ply you managed to get Cocomonkilla blocked. I think you should have informed him that plies redirects to ply when you made your first revert. And that until that clarification was made you should have assumed good fiath in that it's plausible that Coko felt that no one looking for Algernod, AKA Plies, would type in ply in the search box. Taemyr (talk) 08:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Unlike, but possible. You're right. Thanks. Yves (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Including RE:

Yes, and thank you for explaining. Dan56 (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Taylor Swift's 'Speak Now' Certified Platinum

Google it and you'll see, sold over one million albums in the U.S. in its first week alone, which is the equivalent of 1x Platinum. Here's even a link to MTV: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1651391/20101103/swift__taylor.jhtml

You wrongfully got rid of the Platinum certification in her discography. [USER] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.106.10.155 (talk) 23:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Cheyenne?

You mean that girl from the first episode who transferred to Vocal Adrenaline?

That's exactly it. Vocal Adrenaline wasn't in Sectionals. =) CycloneGU (talk) 02:40, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

No, I mean Cheyenne Jackson (Dustin): he's one of my favourite Broadway actors, along with Cheno. Yeah, I was confused: promo pics from the episode showed he was in it and still do! Charice, on the other hand, whom I think you are referring to, will reappear in January. I wasn't expecting Vocal Adrenaline to appear since they are not New Directions' competitors at Sectionals, but Regionals, and they only appeared once in the first half of the first season, I think ("Rehab"). Yves (talk) 02:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Ah, must be Charice I thought you meant. CycloneGU (talk) 02:45, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Now that I've read his page, I get the idea now. Maybe he was in the audience purposely for Sectionals to scope the competition, but producers decided to cut his on-camera time for some reason to not start something with it before the holiday episode? Maybe he'll show up in that one, I dunno...CycloneGU (talk) 02:46, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, but I doubt it. I heard rumors of him being the Warblers' vocal coach in addition to Vocal Adrenaline's, but that not true because they have their Council, so they could have changed that. Maybe he was secretly in the audience, like Shelby claimed to be last season. Yves (talk) 02:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, you see that picture. He's talking to Will at the event. I'm sure he was present. CycloneGU (talk) 02:53, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Promotional pictures are taken exclusively for promotion, though; they don't necessarily reflect screenshots of the episodes. Another example is the picture with Schue and Gwyneth under the yellow umbrella with both of them looking down, which didn't happen. Yves (talk) 02:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Same with the second picture with the banner in the background, as well as the picture of the mini-glee club members with mini-Chord about to sit down. Yves (talk) 03:04, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Stamos was in the episode. After the scene where you see the "Ms. Emma Pillsbury-Howell" nameplate, you see them kissing in her office. Yves (talk) 04:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Really? I missed that apparently. CycloneGU (talk) 19:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Someone's Watching Over Me

Please help discuss this move. Thanks! ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 22:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Gleek Barnstar

		The Gleek Barnstar
		You deserve this for a million and one different things (all the great work you do keeping the discography and song list up to date, vandalism patrolling, keeping articles free of unsourced fluff amongst a multitude of other valued contributions) but in particular, this is for the work you've been doing lately at Glee: The Music, Journey to Regionals. I could hardly believe how much it had expanded - there was a time when I thought the EP articles would never amount to much of anything and even wondered if they should be merged into the episode articles, but you've really shown how much potential they have and done a fantastic job of it. Keep up the great work! Frickative 02:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Rihanna+Kanye

So should I do the thing with the two sentences about All Of The Lights? mikomango (talk) 03:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Done!!! (Sorry it took me a while, got in a car crash since we last Rih-strategized...) Thanks for your support hun! :-) xoxoxo!!! mikomango (talk) 06:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Edited!! :-) Let me know if that's sufficient. I felt like using "including but not limited to" seemed kind of bulky but I'm not sure what would be most appropriate. Re: my car crash. Okay. So I'm driving along doing 35 in a 35 or whatever, and this 17 year old kid decides NOT to stop at his stop sign, and ploughs into the front of my car. Airbags popped out, the whole works. At least he admitted in front of the police that it was his fault. My car is totaled, the airbags bruised the hell out of my breasts (who knew they did that?!?!?! my poor tits certainly didn't), I got a small scrape on my leg because I was wearing leggings, otherwise, I'm perfectly fine. Just annoyed more than anything, because I hate car shopping. The only time in life I wish I had a husband is when I have to buy a car. :-/ mikomango (talk) 17:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Super Bowl episode of Glee

No problem! I look forward to your contributions to the article. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and updated the template (which looks much better, by the way). Thanks for the suggestion. --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Take your time! There should be plenty of coverage for this episode, perhaps even enough to reach FA status in the future. You'll have to rally up fellow Glee task force members to make sure this one gets the attention it deserves! :p --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:18, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Kesha's "Sleazy"

Appears to be a valid single to me.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:30, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's a promotional release as a preamble to the EP. 18:33, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

And "We R Who We R" isn't?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

No; "We R Who We R" was released to radio and as a CD single. Yves (talk) 18:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

And "Sleazy" is a digital single. How does that make it invalid for coverage?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:39, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's not "invalid for coverage"; it simply isn't a legit single. "E.T.", "Circle the Drain", and "Not Like the Movies" were digital-only singles from Teenage Dream, as were "Speak Now", "Back to December", and "Mean" from Speak Now. It does not belong in the infobox. Yves (talk) 18:44, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

That's why we have {{digital singles}}.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:47, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Why did you not use it? Yves (talk) 18:49, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

There is no problem with the alternate cover of ke$ha's slezy and it is only a bit bigger, so what and it has fair usage cause it is offical and it has a right to be there.Ladgy (talk) 05:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I can get a small 300 pixel one and it is still confirmed and offical cover plus it can be lower quality if u wish.Ladgy (talk) 05:49, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

ok ok but enlighten me how can i make it fair usage ?Ladgy (talk) 05:54, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Alright then i give up i'll get rid of it but honesty with looks better???? nd no this doesnt mean i'll put it back up i just wanna know??? i like the coloured one better ?????Ladgy (talk) 05:59, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

ps. how do i get rid of it?????????????Ladgy (talk) 06:00, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

my god its just a friendly question so dramistic!!!!!!! i just said that the other one looked a bit better than the plain black sheesh, and seriously i dont know how to get rid of it im trying hardLadgy (talk) 06:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice i understand and appreciate your opinion greatly and will be viewed upon next time i upload something, but there is always more than one opinion. Thanks for the tip 2:) byeLadgy (talk) 06:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)