User talk:Ericorbit/Archive28

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ericorbit. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I'm gonna need you to put a semi-protection on both Trina discography and Mary J. Blige discography. Too many vandalism going on on those pages lately, those IP Vandals are up to no good Hometown Kid (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done and  Done - eo (talk) 11:54, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

We got another problem, this user Kiddi92 is on a rampage. He's been vandalizing every article that has to do with Trina. Her discography, her own article, and all her album articles, by adding in unsourced content. I feel like this guy could be the same culprit that had been blocked before for the same reason. It's the exact same disruptive edits he makes. This guy doesn't deserve another warning or another chance, because I know he's made numerous accounts to evade blocking. Please block him now. And if you see on his talk page, he's been warned about this a few times and still continues. Hometown Kid (talk) 12:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

S/he got a final warning and stopped editing two days ago. I'll keep an eye on it, if more vandalism happens let me know. - eo (talk) 12:01, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you also put a semi-protection on Kanye West discography, some doofis keeps altering the sales and certifications, you can see the disuptive edits in the history, already reverted them. Hometown Kid (talk) 13:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

 Done - eo (talk) 18:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Need a semi-protection on Hell: The Sequel, some IP Vandals keep restoring unprofessional reviews in the critical reception section. Hometown Kid (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2011

 Done - eo (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Need a semi-protection on Yung Joc discography, same case as the others, altered certifications and positions by IP vandals. Hometown Kid (talk) 13:20, 22 June 2011

 Done got it - eo (talk) 17:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Also need a semi protecetion on Ace Hood discography, IP Vandals keep putting in non-existent chart positions and restoring what I removed. - Hometown Kid (talk) 13:33, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done - eo (talk) 17:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Need a semi-protection on both Tupac Shakur discography & Ja Rule discography, same old bullshit keeps on happening, all these IP vandals are on a rampage an nobody else reverts the vandalism. Hometown Kid (talk) 15:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

 Done and  Done - eo (talk) 19:56, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Need a semi-protection on Wiz Khalifa discography, stupid IP Vandals keep reverting my edits for no reason. - Hometown Kid (talk) 18:40, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Eric, as expected, this needs protection for atleast 3 weeks untill the whole Grammy hoopla is over. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 17:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done - eo (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Take a look at Worth It (Wanessa Song). I'm inclined to semi-protect it, but people would probably scream WP:INVOLVED at me. So far as I can tell, none of the claimed charts are valid, and it would be good to have that double-checked at the very least.—Kww(talk) 20:09, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Well it's now been redirected to Wanessa. I watchlisted it to keep an eye on it. - eo (talk) 12:03, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow! My bad, I did that on the Rock Songs article too, plus I accidentally put the same date on there 3 times by mistake, fixed it now! And thanks for catching that! The Man Who Needs No Introduction! (talk) 04:23, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I noticed that you deleted the chart comparison sections. The reason those were there is to enhance the article from just being a boring chronological list. In addition, they were to give a clear idea of which particular songs also charted at #1 on other Billboard related charts per se the crossover detail. I feel it is neccessary that they are there. The Billboard chart books (i.e. Book of Top 40 R&B and Hip-Hop Hits) make indications of this as well; example, at the end of the book on the R&b chart calendar there is a star showing which ones crossed over to #1 on the Hot 100 chart. Think about it now. GETONERD84 (talk) 15:31, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't find them particularly useful, although if there is a consensus to keep them, then go ahead. I think the more important task for these lists is to bring them up to the featured-list formatting — quoting the song titles, placing them into tables, researching sources and writing up the year-end analysis with images. - eo (talk) 15:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi eo, I very much want you to join this project, if you would, and also we need you as you'd be the only admin we have in it, and as you very much know this material and are understanding in this subject matter. You've even corrected me on occasion of mistakes (like on "High Energy"). You'd be a great asset as we'd also have a person (you) who not only knows about all of this, but is an admin (no other admins but you edit this regularly) who can help us protect these articles! PLEASE join this project Eric, we really need you!!! Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 13:33, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you please put a semi-protection on that also. The pesky annoying IP Users keep reverting my edits on the US certification for "Black and Yellow", replacing gold with "2x Platinum" and are not obeying the source I provided. It's been certified Gold so far and already has over a two million digital downloads. It should be certified double platinum by now but it's not yet and that's what these IP Vandals aren't getting, and I've been checking the source daily, it's not yet certified double platinum. Hometown Kid (talk) 6:33, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done - eo (talk) 21:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

I do not know how to communicate through Wikipedia and somehow I was linked to your page so that's the reason for the so-called, "vandalism." I have no intention of doing such just trying to resolve this semi-protected lock on the Wiz Khalifa discography page when I have in fact contributed a lot as compared to others.

My next 2 edits would be:

|"Young, Wild & Free" |Snoop Dogg featuring Wiz Khalifa |High School

& *2011: The Green Carpet Tour

P.S. I only edited the "Gold" certification for the single due to reading a direct tweet from the artist's personal Twitter account; http://www.hiphopweekly.com/100303-newsite/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Fullscreen-capture-242011-21728-PM.bmp.jpg

Thank you,

EBonanni90 (talk) 20:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

LOL this guy just doesn't learn he's still vandalizing the page with the same old crap. Can you block this guy for good (Kiddi92) and watch the page for any further vandalism because this guy keeps making new accounts after he gets blocked it's the same culprit responsible for all those disruptive edits. Hometown Kid (talk) March 6, 2011.

 Done. Further response on your talk page. - eo (talk) 19:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Please explain this revert. Is there a valid reason why this image was removed? feydey (talk) 20:12, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Fair use criteria - album covers should be used in infoboxes within the article for the album itself. - eo (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

This user will not stop changing the singles section of Jennifer Lopez discography, in a series of unexplained edits, that are removing content. Now, this user leaves an absurd message on my talkpage, that honestly doesn't make any sense to me at all. Can you do something about this user? And can you please reply to this on my talk page please. Thank you! ℥^nding·start 10:46, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I don't know what this user's problem is. I don't know if you saw this, but the user just posted the message you left them on talk page, signing it from them. This user has not replied to anything. If this user does it once more, I suggest a ban. ℥^nding·start 15:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for removing that... I left a final warning. I don't know what the problem is either - it seems to take more effort to keep coming back to revert multiple times and copy messages from one talk page to another than it would to just leave an edit summary. But whatever. - eo (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean. I don't understand this AT ALL. I see you blocked the user. I hope s/he learns their lesson from this. ℥^nding·start 23:35, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, just got my own access to billboard.biz, so re-checking all the information as for CCP. Found also that "Shame Shame Shame" chart position we have been discussing months ago. The title charted on the Billboard's Global Dance Tracks... (http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz/charts/chart-search-results/singles/3087251), so shame on you! ,-) Just kidding here, never mind, and hope you're alrite Uzerakount (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2011 (UTC) PS: am kinda disapointed about that billboard.biz. Expected more.

Hi, I merged this song because it clearly said it's a "remake" - been in an edit war of sorts since, even though I made clear my reasons for merging - same song different version. I did post my reasoning on an edit and the editor's talkpage. Rather than reverting again, can you cast you eye over the the two articles? One of the relevant edits is which substantiates my claim that the article said "remake" is here. The editor has since written that the original song is sampled (an edit he made while "undoing" my merges. Don't mind if you don't agree with me, just like to see an end of the conflicting edits. Thanks for your time. --Richhoncho (talk) 22:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I called it a remake because I wasn't exactly sure what else to call it. It share's the same title and samples the original, but like "Just a Friend 2002" and "Just the Two of Us", it has completely different lyrics. And what is the deal with remakes anyway? How come, for example, two notable movies Psycho (1960) and Psycho (1998) don't have to share the same page, but two notable songs do? Live and Die 4 Hip Hop (talk) 22:20, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I would keep them separate and change the wording perhaps. While I strongly agree with merging cover versions, sometimes I think there is a grey area. This may be one of them, since Warren G basically replaced all of the lyrics and the only thing used from the original was the chorus. I definitely believe in a strong difference between a direct cover and a case of sampling. I'd remove the word "remake" and replace with "interpolation" - the two examples LaD4HH gave are good, I think another example would be "Right Round" by Flo Rida... the chorus and melody are obviously from "You Spin Me Round" by Dead or Alive but it certainly is not a cover version. I'd also remove the Warren G succession box from the original article (it's still there on the bottom). LaD4HH, songs are not the same as films. It's been repeatedly decided by consensus that articles should be about songs, not versions or singles. No matter who performs it, a song is still a song is still a song, and different recorded versions of it are part of its history. The concept isn't really the same for films — scripts are rewritten and changed, titles are changed, etc. I think that if the film scenario was similar enough to songs then consensus would have been reached by now to merge them in the same way. - eo (talk) 11:18, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Eric, I accept your findings! I have removed the Warren G cat from the original and added the writer cats to the Warren G, other than that I have nothing else to add on either article. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Why have you blocked me? I had no bad intention. Jennifer Lopez singles chart of the list would look better. Please help me and we work together. Let's stop the conflict. Thank you.

Jennifer Lopez Singles Chart: http://www.musicvf.com/Jennifer+Lopez.art

“Let’s Get Loud” UK’s chart: http://www.musicvf.com/song.php?id=21251

“Alive” US Hot 100’s chart: http://www.musicvf.com/song.php?id=21259

"Walking On sunshine” US Dance’s chart: http://www.musicvf.com/song.php?id=86410

“Cherry Pie” UK’s chart: http://www.musicvf.com/song.php?id=21266

“Control Myself” US Dance’s chart: http://www.billboard.com/charts/hot-100#/song/ll-cool-j-featuring-jennifer-lopez/control-myself/7946212

“Que Hiciste” UK’s chart: http://www.musicvf.com/song.php?id=71059

“Mile In These Shoes” Finland’s chart: http://finnishcharts.com/search.asp?search=jennifer+lopez&cat=s

“Louboutins” US Dance’s chart: http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/dance-club-play-songs?chartDate=2010-04-03 —alptns90 (talk) 17:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Please explain this [1]. Is there a valid reason why this single chart was changed?

On The Floor France's chart:http://www.chartsinfrance.net/charts/singles.php

On The Floor Ireland's chart:http://irma.ie/aucharts.asp

Louboutins US Dance Chart:http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/dance-club-play-songs?chartDate=2010-04-03 —alptns90 (talk) 23:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi. An IP user has been persistently (and inaccurately) removing the pop genre in a few Jennifer Lopez pages (namely If You Had My Love, Feelin' So Good, Ain't It Funny, Jenny from the Block, All I Have (song), Baby I Love U!, Get Right, This Is Me... Then and Rebirth (Jennifer Lopez album)). The problem is, the IP address changed each time they would edit the pages (some of those being 93.149.195.35 (talk · contribs), 93.149.195.38 (talk · contribs), 93.149.194.222 (talk · contribs), 93.149.194.139 (talk · contribs) and most recently, 93.150.229.252 (talk · contribs)). I've warned them all, but since they show no sign of stopping, I believe it'd be a pain in the ass to block them everytime a new IP address shows up. Do you think you could have the aforementioned articles protected for a while? Any other ideas will be appreciated. SnapSnap 01:23, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

They're probably the same user - you may wan to take this to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations and request an IP range block. If that doesn't work then we can start semi-protecting them. Normally I'd semi-protect first, but since we'd (probably) need to do all the singles and albums articles, let's try the other first. - eo (talk) 15:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I soft-blocked 93.149.194.0/23. Let's see what that does.—Kww(talk) 16:01, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure we need a sockpuppet investigation first? It's pretty obvious that they're the same user, I just don't know how the IP address changes everytime they edit the pages. But if you feel that opening an investigation is necessary, then I'll do it. SnapSnap 17:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

hello! seems like it's been a long time since i've asked for your advice! could you take a look at the Adele discography, something has cropped up a few times regarding what certifications are shown in the tables. there's a discussion on the talkpage, and also at WP:DISCOGSTYLE but it always seems to be just the 2 of us, and it needs more opinions. could you offer your two cents? thanks. Mister sparky (talk) 16:24, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm approaching 3RR on this one. Take a look and see if you think semi-protection is warranted. It'll probably chart somewhere in the next week or so, but it hasn't happened yet.—Kww(talk) 18:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

The user was banned, and they are now back to the same old, same old... This time removing SOURCED promo singles. Then leaving me a message on my talkpage telling me that they aren't and giving me a link to a blog site. This user has clearly not learned anything from the ban. No edit summary was used, yet again, and I think it's probably going to turn into the same thing that happened last time. Please reply back to me on my talk page please. I rarely ever see messages that people leave me on their own. xD ℥^nding·start 18:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Please contribute to the discuss whether or not this article should be deleted at its articles for deletion page. Thank you! ℥^nding·start 14:35, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

A problem has cropped up, and I need some advice on how to go with it. A while ago, WP:Record charts (which incorporates WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS) got moved to Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts). That's causing some trouble, with some editors claiming that since it is now an MOS page, it can't possibly be viewed as a guideline related to article content (and, in an even more bizarre thought process, that it only can apply to the tables of charts, not other text relating to charts). Take a look at this example: like I say in the discussion, I can see the argument that it's a sufficiently special case to override the guideline, but I still find the argument that the guideline doesn't apply at all to be surreal.

In a sense, they have a point: MOS pages don't usually contain anything related to source reliability, notability, or anything like that: they are strictly where to put hyphens, dashes, and the like. WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS don't belong in that kind of guideline: they've got nothing to do with formatting, and everything to do with source reliability and notability.

I can easily split the thing up, probably by making WP:GOODCHARTS, WP:BADCHARTS, and WP:USCHARTS independent guidelines, and focusing Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts) strictly on the table formats. I'm worried that I would be viewed as a biased editor, and wind up with a backlash that made all three lose credibility. Do you think I'm being paranoid? Do WP:GOODCHARTS and WP:BADCHARTS have enough buy-in by enough editors that I can put them someplace else and maintain them as guidelines? Or am I just better off hoping that this kind of fight never shows up again?

I'll take this to the guideline talk page before doing anything, but just wanted to have a slightly quieter discussion here before I do anything at all.—Kww(talk) 00:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Wow, that argument was exhausting to read (and thank goodness for Jam1991 to finally answer the question properly). I don't think you're being paranoid and I certainly don't think that you are exhibiting any kind of bias - you've done more to create and develop these guidelines than anyone else. That said, perhaps a split is necessary — something to apply to content and the other to deal with style and display of tables. The argument that was presented on the "Friday" Talk Page was unusual, but perhaps it will pop up more often if internet memes and the like make continued impact on the iTunes charts. If you do propose a split I will back you up on it, so please keep me in the loop. - eo (talk) 11:47, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Take a look at User:Kww/recordcharts (which would go back at WP:Record charts) and User:Kww/MOS (which would replace Wikipedia:Manual of Style (record charts)).—Kww(talk) 20:36, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Any comment on the split before I propose it?—Kww(talk) 03:54, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

It looked good before, I'll re-read it before you submit it. - eo (talk) 10:59, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I looked them over again, this is a good, clean separation. The only thing I noticed was missing was mentioning the exclusion of music-video countdown shows. I know TRL is no longer around, did anything replace it? 103 & Park is still around and I'm certain there are a lot of those types of shows on European and Latin American channels. - eo (talk) 20:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you think you could semi-protect this page, please? It's been receiving a lot of unsourced sales figures and peaks lately. Thanks in advance. Yves (talk) 19:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done - eo (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Appreciate it. Yves (talk) 23:57, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

You removed an image again saying that it violates WP:FU. Did You actually look at the image? How did You come to the conclusion that this is a Fair use image? Did You ever check the image's licensing? Even after being reverted and given notice You still claimed it as a fair use image. So do You always revert without verifying the factuality of Your action? As an admin I would have expected more diligence. Please explain. feydey (talk) 09:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

It's an album cover and as such its copyrighted. It should only be used in the article pertaining to the album itself, not as part of the artists' discography page. It also should not be here on my Talk Page, so I've removed it. - eo (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Do You know what Wikimedia Commons is? Do You know there is a category called Album covers - so are You saying the images there are all copyright violations? You say, quote: "It's an album cover and as such its copyrighted." - please give me a source for this claim. Your edit summaries were: "pls dont do this, WP:FU, non free images not used this way in discog artiucles)" and "WP:FU" - do You know as an admin the difference between an "fair use image" and a "public domain" one? Do You understand that there are Public Domain album covers? Please answer. feydey (talk) 12:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

←I removed it for the reasons below.

• Wikipedia:Non-free content - acceptable use: "Cover art: Cover art from various items, for identification only in the context of critical commentary of that item (not for identification without critical commentary)."
  • Unacceptable use
    • Images
      • "An album cover as part of a discography, as per the above."

There is just no reason for it to be displayed, especially so large, in a discography list. No other discographies have this, and a huge Yes image does not enhance the discography page. Please also stop putting the image here on my Talk Page. - eo (talk) 12:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Do You understand that this isn't a non-free image and doesn't fall under Wikipedia:Non-free content? feydey (talk) 07:17, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I've given my reasons for removing the image. - eo (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for that. ℥^nding·start 11:34, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

A protection is needed against IP 80.189.152.215 continuously removing content without explanation. I have reached three reverts, hence won't do it further. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:13, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

In the FAC for the article Wonder World Tour, Legolas left this comment: "I see a real problem with the boxscore references. Only two reference is used to justify them, but they neither have any issue date, nor any publication date. Furthermore, I have access to Billboard and can say that WW tour is present in 10 different issues. So that whole table fails WP:OR." The problem is that I trusted that someone had added them with correct references and I don't have access to Billboard.bz articles or a subscription to the magazine. So, I don't know how to fix any of this. Legolas offered to help, but his condition limits him right now. He said you had access to the charts. So, if you could please help that would be extremely amazing? Thank you so much for your time. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 20:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Could you explain please why you do not feel the fansite links are valid that you keep removing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.250.9 (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Looks like a run-of-the-mill problem editor (probably educable). No smoking guns that I can see that make me believe he is any of our former problem children. Anything that stuck out to you that I should look at?—Kww(talk) 21:23, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, 2 Hearts has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments good article reassessment page . If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 03:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The article DJ Disciple has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Long-standing unsourced BLP.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mephistophelian (talk) 01:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Eric, you had previously blocked User User:Within a dream (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for persistent addition of unsourced content on Born This Way. The user is back again doing the same thing. Can you please take administrative actions? — Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:20, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

And also per this, User:PinkFunhouse13 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) was previously indeffd for image related copy violations. The user is still going on uploading WP:NFCC#8 failing images, which shouldnot continue. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 14:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

I do not know why you decided that this page should have been fully protected, but considering the song's recent coverage, I believe you can unprotect the article as the song may very well pass WP:NSONGS now.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:37, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Thanks for making the request, Ryu. --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:57, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done sorry for the delay, as you can see from the history it was created in January - a *bit* pre-mature. It's good now. - eo (talk) 20:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:31, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

hey, could you have a look at the above article please? You have reverted the addition of an album cover art to the article and also commented on the situation here. There has also been a discussion on the talkpage of the article. The user (Feydey) keeps persistently adding the image, and has now fully protected the article citing persistant vandalism of people removing the image! surely this can't be right? Thanks. Mister sparky (talk) 21:59, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I unprotected and commented on the talk page. Quite frankly, I'm surprised he'd do something like that. - eo (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually I unprotected, You just removed the "move=autoconfirmed" protection. My talk page is always there for discussion, or the article's talk page. feydey (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I have a problem. I need to find box office score data from Billboard.biz, but cannot because I am not a subscriber to the magazine. As I stated before, Legolas recommended you and I really don't want to abuse of him because of his condition. Please reply letting me know if you can or not. Thank you so much for your time. -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 20:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, sorry for missing your last request. I looked within the .biz site, and while I can view the current Boxscore list, I am unable to search any archives on past weeks (or I cannot find where to do so while I clicked around). I can search song, album, video and artist chart archives but not these, it seems. Where did the sources come from previously? If this info is only available via a paid subscription, I don't see how it could be properly sourced in the first place. - eo (talk) 15:39, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Thank you very much for answering and maybe asking Legolas to guide you through searching the archives would help. The sources came from the same place, but Legolas said they were not sourced properly. I still think it is reliable because Billboard is a highly reliable source and I guess maybe it's present on magazines too. I have no idea. Anyways, thank you very much for taking the time to answer and please ask Legolas how to search the archives. Thank you :) -- ipodnano05 * ^{leave@message} 00:17, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that my edits were vandal. Firstly, I've made them for good faith. Secondly (main), no one from users, who had undone my edits, wrote about their reasons. You're the first who talk about references. I've took this numbers from singles' articles so I can simply find sources.--demis^talk 12:58, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Can you please put on semi-protection on that page as well on the The Show Goes On (song), IP users keep changing the RIAA status of "The Show Goes On" to platinum when it's not certified platinum yet, please and thank you. Hometown Kid (talk) 14:15, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done and  Done - eo (talk) 19:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Please please please participate here. Jivesh • Talk2Me 18:38, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

britney HAS sold 530,000 in the US for her latest album. Those sales numbers are correct. I removed the BreatheHeavy cite and total because that was wrong and replaced it with the correct total. I don't see a problem.ColdAsFire Baby (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:35, 2 June 2011 (UTC).

Hi there. So Vinokurov was warned less than 3 weeks ago by you that if he continued to vandalize Britney's discography that he would be blocked. Well, he just removed a large amount of sourced material, truly damaging the article. What do you think? I don't think he is going to get the message any other way.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 00:33, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

ARGH, don't you see that "Other charted songs" is repeated twice? --demis^talk 11:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Окей, я учту это при будущих правках. --demis^talk 11:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I mean "Ok, I will take into account this for future edits".--demis^talk 11:20, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Haha, I already put your text through a language translator. Thanks. - eo (talk) 11:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Checkusered, confirmed, tagged, blocked, reverted.—Kww(talk) 13:33, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

You are my hero. - eo (talk) 17:07, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Communist closed-minded atheist macqueer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.226.229 (talk) 19:20, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Have fun on your block. - eo (talk) 19:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry. The message was for User talk:Angelic-alyssa. I got banned from UKMix. Sorry once again. I will be more careful next time. Jivesh • Talk2Me 14:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

No worries! - eo (talk) 14:21, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

I read through your star award things on you Wikipedia profile, and given your experience, could you find Fall Out Boy sales totals (US and worldwide) for their discography page and album pages? (Especially the Infinity on High page which is up for Good Article nomination. Also, do you know anything about findng worldwide certifications? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noreplyhaha (talk • contribs) 01:48, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi! Look Template:Britney Spears singles - history and Special:Contributions/77.249.94.53. User '77.249.94.53' is always makes changes in the template, even when Xwomanizerx, Materialscientist, PlatinumFire and others undid his edits. I think it's time to block the user or to block the template to prevent any anonymous edits. --demis^talk 19:10, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

I semi-protected the template for six months - eo (talk) 19:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Could you obtain the Hot Dance/Club Play positions of the above single and not only produce a citation, but archive it? If you could go above and beyond and go ahead and do the citations in the "Chart performance" section, I would be grateful. Let me know... I Help, When I Can. ^[12] 20:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmmmm, obviously the current chart shows its peak (http://www.billboard.com/#/charts/dance-club-play-songs), but it looks as if Billboard has not yet added this song to Kylie's "chart history" section (http://www.billboard.com/#/artist/kylie-minogue/chart-history/5213?f=359&g=Singles). They lag on this sometimes.... I think the source that is there now is ok, at least as long as the song is on the chart. Once it has peaked and dropped off, Billboard should have it properly archived. I hope. - eo (talk) 13:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

eric, can I request your input at this discussion about UKchartsplus.co.uk. Thanks. 88.104.25.59 (talk) 14:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Hope you don't mind me grabbing your attention - I've recently started to make contributions about the band Erasure, and noticed your name pop up often in the history of pages. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia as a contributor and have recently just added my first article User:Opwerty/Live At The Seaside. It's currently set up as a user work in progress page and I've submitted it for feedback (no response so far), but wondered if you wouldn't mind having a look at it for me? Talk page here User talk:Opwerty/Live At The Seaside. Cheers. Opwerty (talk) 19:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for checking it out. Kept planning to respond back to your comments, but kept putting it off until I had more time to say/ask what I wanted. That time never arrived. Sorry! I've made the WP:CAPS as suggested, but you hinted there may be other things? If there's more, tell me or feel free to change and maybe I can learn from your alterations. Re: citation tags - they're empty 'cos there is no documentation of 'missing' tracks to reference - only bootleg copies and Youtube uploads! I know they exist (I've watched them!), but suspect that means I might have to take the whole section out! Re: Track Listing template - One step at a time for me I think! I may do this at some point, but for now I want to focus on adding basic info and 'fixing' existing articles. Easier to keep any new ones consistent with all the others for now! Thanks again. Opwerty (talk) 00:32, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Also meant to ask - I've included the majority of the info from the closing credits of the video. Is this overkill? I don't see it being done for other videos. Opwerty (talk) 10:42, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

hey, could i trouble you for an opinion please? could you add your wise words here please? Mister sparky (talk) 13:32, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

could you also have a look at Dannii Minogue discography please? oh and thanks for protecting alexandra burke :) Mister sparky (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Eric, with regards to this discussion, would you agree that there is a consensus to add this site to the list of sites to avoid? And can any user add it to the list or does it have to be an administrator? 88.104.28.199 (talk) 10:38, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Looks as if it was already added by Kww. - eo (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting Pete Burns. The vandalism lately has really gotten out of hand. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 13:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

No prob. I love Pete... just because he looks exactly like Cher with two plates in her lips is no reason to vandalise his article! - eo (talk) 13:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Haha, that's hilarious! I love him, too. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 14:02, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

not all BPI information is updated, the source of "music week" shows that the album sold 1,141,000 million, so being certified 3x Platinum. Silencio faz bem • Talk2Me 10:15, September 2, 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silencio faz bem (talk • contribs)

Okay. Silencio faz bem (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 13:01, 2 September 2011 (UTC).

You locked the Rihanna Discography page. Pls add a ^{[citation needed]} tag for Rihanna's current cd "Loud" having sold 5mill WW. The source presently is " http://toyazworld.com/2011/07/24/rihanna-confirms-cheers-as-the-next-single-cheers/" which is a fan blog. We need a source like soundscan or BB. Thanks. 173.79.75.65 (talk) 16:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)