User talk:Lil-unique1

November 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Fantasy Ride, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 22:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Fantasy Ride. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 22:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Human (Brandy album). Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 00:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i did use reliable sources....!

Revert on Fantasy Ride

Hi Lil-unique1, I've left a response to your question on my user page -- Marek.69 ^talk 00:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia guidelines, it is not, so don't shoot the messenger. Charmed36 (talk) 00:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fantasy Ride track isting is on the page. Look!

Brandy etc.

Sorry, but the way you edit is unacceptable.

Removing comments on talk pages is vandalism! I you don't like it ignore it, but DO NOT remove edits!
Once again: There are guidelines on Wikipedia to create a uniform appearance for all articles - and Human really should be an example! I like the look of the templates but they do NOT fit the guidelines!

Please, accept his! - Noboyo

first of all... i didnt remove comments from the talk page. atleast not deliberately altho i did add a reply.
secondly guidelines are exactly what they say... they are GUIDES!!! to writing a good article not NECESSARILY the exact way of doing it. There is nothing wrong with the table format. I've monitored your handling of the Brandy page for the last month or so and you have been consistantly heavy handed.
you have undone changes by numerous wiki editors. the article does not belong to you, wikipedia is for the public to use and therefore i should be able to make edits like anyone else. if wiki has a problem with the table format for tracklistings then it would not allow them at all. many albums have them, you have even agreed that you like the template. what's the problem then?
you just dont want to accept the edit because it wasnt done by you, you cant accept that another user had a good idea for an article.

2nd post

1. If you did not deliberately edit it's okay, but it actually looked like as you did just remove my comment.

2. WP:Albums says "you should feel free to personalize an article as you see fit, though others may change it to fit our standards." A template for the track listings is no standard on Wikipedia. This has been discussed before on the WP:Albums talk page ... Once again: I want this article to be an example! But even if I like the look of templates (I actually created tracklisting templates too in my earlier days on here), I do accept the fact, that it's not the standard requested on here.

3. I accept any good idea as long as it matches the guidelines of quality (!) and has a reliable source. I'm aware that I do not own this article. That would be laughable.

Fan sites

Please take the time to review and understand WP:RS. Fansites are not reliable, and cannot be used to source information in Wikipedia.—Kww(talk) 16:05, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leona Lewis

I have provided a source here. Dynablaster (talk) 00:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keri Hilson - Quicksand

http://www.amazon.com/In-A-Perfect-World/dp/B001XJV5Z6/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&s=dmusic&qid=1237677710&sr=1-6

There is the source, I have been adding Quicksand, now will you please leave it intact? Danja is obviously the producer, and I also have a source for that too, but cannot find it at the moment.

Thats fine. Please dont use an offensive or menacing tone. i simply meant that the article has had many false tracklistings and i am trying to make sure that only factual information is kept. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Leona Lewis

Hi

I'm going to assume you had the best intentions when you made this edit, but I've reverted you - your edit changed, for example, "Leona Lewis" to "Leona Leona". Additionally, the idea is that we try and maintain a neutral point of view - we shouldn't, for example, refer to thearticle's subject by her firstname, as that implies familiarity and is inappropriate for an encyclopaedia - it makes the article read like a fansite, whereas the idea is to make it sound like it was written by a completely impartial (neutral) editor.

Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 21:45, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually refering to her by her last name is more like a fansite and less like an encylopedia as the previous editor pointed out. and the leona leona thing was one slight error (Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:47, 23 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Which "last editor"? And as has been pointed out below, your view regarding the use of first names is very much a contrarian one. Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 22:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sorry i stand corrected. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

No problem! Though I must admit, I'm trying hard to think of even one fansite where they refer to their subject by surname! Cheers, This flag once was red^propaganda_deeds 22:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use of last names in Bio articles

Please see Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Subsequent_uses_of_names. Mfield (talk) 21:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Soundz

I think you are a little confused. While "The Soundz" might be the name of a production group, "Soundz" is just one man (Kenneth C. Coby). Since he always goes by just "Soundz", I changed the move. Hopefully this clears things up. Tom Danson (talk) 03:38, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pussycat Dolls discography

Hi there. Please refer to the talk page regarding Billbaord references for both "Right Now (NBA version)" and "Top of the world". I have provided Billbaord references to show that both were released as commercial singles, not as promotional only. If you disgree then we need to find a Wikipedia consensus or policy on the defintion of a single. I don't see why such a definition would differ from Billboard as they are a credible reference and trusted source of data. Please discuss an talk page.--Design (talk) 01:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kara Dioguardi

Hi there. Two very good sources of reliable songwriter info are ascap.com & bmi.com here is a link to BMI listing Kara Dioguardi's registration as a co-writer of "I Hate This Part", ensuring that she recieve's songwriter royalties. [1] regards--Design (talk) 05:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Fantasy Ride (deluxe).jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Fantasy Ride (deluxe).jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Fantasy Ride.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Fantasy Ride.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Ciara Discography

I would appreciate it if you would check who submits what on wikipedia before you accuse someone of putting on false information. I never entered anything regarding the chart success of Ciara's two songs (Go Girl and Never Ever). All I did was add in the nz chart success of her other song Love Sex Magic; it was someone else who added in the false information on the 31st March! If you compare edits you will see this. I would never intentionally graffiti any page with wrong information or facts. --Zurak26 (talk) 12:19, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Nicole2008.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nicole2008.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:17, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nicole Scherzinger

Hi Lil-unique1, can you please stop changing the current free image on the Nicole Scherzinger article with a fair-use one? See WP:NONFREE: fair-use images shouldn't be used to depict living people, and as I stated here, there is even less reason to use a fair-use image of a living person when we already have a free image already available. Can you please consider reverting yourself? I'm not interested in revert-warring over this, but image issues are very important. Thanks. Acalamari 16:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Doll Dom Mini.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Doll Dom Mini.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 22:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Fantasy Ride (deluxe).jpg)

⚠

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Σ xplicit 21:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Fantasy Ride.jpg)

⚠

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. — Σ xplicit 21:35, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding In A Perfect World... and "Get Your Money Up"

I understand that I am using my own Youtube channel, but the information on the Youtube page came from an official source, Keri herself. If one would watch the video, they would see that Keri herself confirms the single choice, therefore it should be a reliable source.

Whitney Houston

Will you explain how you feel that article is too long, and what problems you have with its lead (intro)? Perhaps on its talk page? Simply tagging the article with the tags you did without explanation on the talk page will not solve your problems with it. Especially, when an editor tries to fix those problems you have with it and you add the tags back. I mean, think of it from our perspective: Are editors supposed to keep trying to figure out what problems you have with the article until you are satisfied with one of their edits? The article itself has not even yet suggested it be split, and there are other articles on Wikipedia of legendary singers far longer than Whitney Houston's.

If you do not explain what improvements you feel need to be made to the article in a way that you will be satisfied with, I will remove the tags you placed on the article. Flyer22 (talk) 17:55, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on my talk page, of course. Flyer22 (talk) 03:17, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed both tags based on WP:SIZE and the basic manuel of style amoung biographies of living people, since the article as of yet violates neither. According to WP:SIZE: For stylistic purposes, only the main body prose (excluding links, see also, reference and footnote sections, and lists/tables) should be counted, since the point is to limit the size of the main body of prose. What this means is that with an article that is 71 KB in size, propbably only half of that is what is actually read on screen; the extra data is the citations and footnotes.

According to Wikipedia:SIZE#No_need_for_haste: Do not take precipitous action the very instant an article exceeds 32 KB overall. There is no need for haste, and the readable prose size should be considered separately from references and other overhead. Discuss the overall topic structure with other editors. Determine whether the topic should be treated as several shorter articles and, if so, how best to organize them. Sometimes an article simply needs to be big to give the subject adequate coverage. Certainly, size is no reason to remove valid and useful information.

It may interest you to review Featured Articles such as Janet Jackson, Michael Jackson, John Frusciante, and John Mayer as examples for biographies of living people (all of which are well over 32 KB). Most featured articles on wikipedia run about 60KB unless the subject is broad enough to require more, and with a subject like Whitney Houston as with other music legends, I believe once it is properly sourced, it may run over 80KB if it is ever promoted to FA. From what I can see, the only problem with Whitney Houston is a lack of sourcing with the information that is present in the article. It would be more benificial to the article to place ^{[citation needed]} tags next to sentences that are unsourced or dubious. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 00:16, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Fame

First of all, please be civil, there's no need to write in all capitals. I can certainly state that my edits are in accordance with WP:ALBUM. You, however, appear to have missed a few points from WP:Albums#Track listing; it says, "Use a spaced en dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) as a dividing horizontal punctuation mark before the track length", while you're using an em dash (—), and it's not mentioned anywhere in the page that songwriters should be placed between <small></small>. It should be noted that the guidelines from WP:Albums#Track listing apply for all albums, not only for hip hop albums. Funk Junkie (talk) 18:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]