Jump to content

User talk:Status/2013/07

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiCup 2013 June newsletter

[edit]

We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.

Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Idaho Figureskatingfan (submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Poland Piotrus (submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, New South Wales Casliber (submissions) and Canada Sasata (submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.

A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 09:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bonus tracks

[edit]

I notice that you've been "cleaning up" album tracklistings by removing some bonus tracks, e.g. [1], [2], [3]. Why that? What are your criteria for inclusion? YLSS (talk) 14:35, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Parker: Adding the budget.

[edit]

It's July 1st, and per our agreement of over three months ago, time to add the budget. I was assuming you or Arre would add it, but if you'd prefer, I can certainly do the job myself.Xfpisher (talk) 18:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeezus: July 2, 2013

[edit]

I have made the change to Yeezus stating that the album was released by the label. Please show references that you have proof that the album has not been released by Roc-A-Fella Records  11Block |talk 03:57, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox album

[edit]

Could you show mere flatlists are acceptable at template:Infobox album? Genre, Label, Producer, and other all indicate that they should be separated by commas. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ACCESS (a guideline) triumphs what documentation of a template says, and besides the point, Template:Infobox single was recently updated, including the guideline; nobody has gotten around to the album one yet.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:30, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Access is not the issue. Following the template guidelines is.
Per WP:BRD, you were bold in restoring what you thought was the correct format, I reverted, discussion is next. Do not restore the incorrect format again until after consensus has been reached at the template's talk page. Are there other articles that I will need to visit to fix this? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such thing as a "template guideline". Please take this nonsense elsewhere.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:37, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The NeverEnding Story (film)

[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The NeverEnding Story (film). Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 20:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Non-free}}

[edit]

Removing a cleanup template when the problems evidently still remain (the lines in the sand are 300 by 300 for album covers and 64kbps for samples) is not at all productive, and that edit summary is downright deceptive. I'm adding the template back- please do not remove it until the issues are resolved. The article has no business being a GA until those problems are dealt with. J Milburn (talk) 23:34, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only problem I saw that was being mentioned was the length of the sample, which I saw was reduced. You readded the non-free template for that reason alone. It wasn't made clear of what the actual problem was. Please learn to WP:GOODFAITH and not call an editor's edit non-productive and "deceptive".  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 23:39, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Removing a cleanup tag relating to non-free use with an edit summary of "c/e" is deceptive, whether I'm assuming good faith or not, and an edit summary can be deceptive without you meaning it to be. I most certainly did not readd the template because of the length of the sample alone- when I said "reduce", I was also referring to reducing the size of the album cover and reducing the bitrate of the music, not just the length of sample. I had made these problems clear in my earlier edit summaries on the file pages, though I admit that I could have probably been a little clearer with it. I'll bear that in mind in future. J Milburn (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Amusement Park Quarter 3, 2013 Newsletter

[edit]
WikiProject Amusement Parks Newsletter

Quarter 3, 2013

463 124 5.13 50 30% »
Full edition
Unassessed Articles Coordinates Needed WikiWork Load Project Members B&M articles are GA or FA

23:09, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Elephunk

[edit]

Hi Status, can you provide some commentary as to why you're reverting edits on the Elephunk page please? The six changes that you reverted seem to be genuine contributions, not vandalism. Not disagreeing with your reverts, just interested in why you rejected the edits. Might help if you wrote something in the edit summary? :) Thanks. ak47wong (talk) 01:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message. First of all, they added unsourced content (about the re-release) and removed formatting from the track listing.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Taylor Swift discography

[edit]

Can you please explain why did you remove Sweden from the list of the 10 charts in the discography? Are you replacing it with a bigger market? —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 07:42, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am indeed. She's had like, 3 or 4 songs even chart there, and not high. Norway also gotta go.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 07:43, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Which markets do you think would be better suited? She's not that successful on the other side of the Atlantic IMO. :) —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 07:46, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
She's been doing pretty good in Switzerland, and has several certifications there. Same with Denmark. I think those could replace Sweden and Norway.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 07:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Went and added them all... and I was not correct.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 07:59, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter, Q2 2013

[edit]

The WikiProject Video Games Newsletter
Volume 6, No. 2 — 2nd Quarter, 2013
Previous issue | Index | Next issue

Project At a Glance
As of Q2 2013, the project has:

Content

Project Navigation
To receive future editions of this newsletter, click here to sign up on the distribution list.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:03, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

[edit]

Flat lists

[edit]

I'm sorry. The template documention does not state either commas OR flatlist can be used. Template:Infobox album does not state flatlists can be used. In fact, we're discussing that issue presently. Please follow the template's documentation and enter the discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:19, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, genres cannot use flatlists but producers may. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If the template says so, then why did you revert it? (You clearly didn't even read documention) And I could have sworn I gave you the impression you were not welcome on my talk page?  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:30, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

[edit]

My first suggestion is to look at your own faults before you began to "talk down" to others. There are hundreds of articles where you have (1) removed sourced information, (2) with a reliable reference with a non-reliable reference, (3) moved pages without discussion or explanation and (4) blindly reverted edits. I am not sure what your deal is but the fact you feel you can scold me, while hilarious, has zero effect on me. For months, you have chosen to ignore other edits and give childish explanation as your reasoning. You cannot decide to follow rules when it becomes a convenience for you. Either follow 100% of the time or none at all. I will not start a ridiculous edit war with you while you moan over your edits not being accepted. I will simply follow protocol. If this behavior continues, I will follow the proper process and inform administrators. Itsbydesign (talk) 05:24, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am quite unsure about what your deal is. Really. You come on (usually) once a month to make major changes to an article that fit your view on how it should look. Without giving a legitimate reason I might add (such as saying "updating boxscore", when it was already up to date). When you decide to change almost the entire format of an article with no explanation as to why, and are reverted, per WP:BOLD, you should discuss these changes and why they should be made. Instead, you continue doing the same thing time and time again. That is quite the opposite of "following protocol". Edit warring with no edit summary? Yikes! If you wish to do this "protocol", please, start a discussion on a talk page of an article and let's discuss. I'd be quite interested in the reasons why you think that tour dates should be listed twice in an article (once on their own and again including its gross and attendance) and why we should include every single tiny change to a set list on an encyclopedia (when there is even a note explaining this and its reasoning). I'm also curious as to why replacing reliable, third-party news reports in favour of primary sources (an artist's official website) is acceptable in your eyes. And I'm sure there's a few additional things that I'm missing. Next time you want to talk to someone about how they have the nerve to "talk down" and "scold" you, you really shouldn't do it back. Especially when you are also calling that person a hypocrite at the same time - awkward. Less threats and more discussing the issues at hand, OK?  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 15:12, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

[edit]

You seemed quite anxious to engage me is a discussion regarding some recent reverts. I have responded to you here. Have a nice day. - thewolfchild 22:07, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV dispute

[edit]

Hi. If it's no bother, could you comment quickly at this neutrality dispute? It's pretty straightforward. Dan56 (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

Is there a response forthcoming? - thewolfchild 18:11, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Pixar Short Films Collection, Volume 1

[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Editing

[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm JustBerry. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! JustBerry (talk) 00:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you seem like a fairly valid editor, let me know your reason for making that edit, or if it was a mistake in general. --JustBerry (talk) 00:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I know it may seem odd, but the song is actually called "Let's Get Retarded". It was edited for radio for "Let's Get It Started". See here.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 00:39, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I know that song, but I have never heard that name before. I will revert the revert if you have not already done so. --JustBerry (talk) 00:41, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I know... it's crazy, haha. No worries; I can see how the edit would look fishy.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 00:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. I have reverted my revert, but you may want to consider putting what you told me onto the talk page of the article. Other editors may feel your edit is "vandalous," hence attempt to revert your edit as well. Also, putting a reason with your edit would decrease/stop reverts to your edit as well (preferably with a direct link). A third thing you may want to do is directly link the "alternative name" to a source. Let me know if you have any questions. --JustBerry (talk) 00:48, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I just added a note. I hope that will avoid any future confusion. Best,  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 00:50, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Great, just remember that for future edits. Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you need to talk to me. --JustBerry (talk) 00:52, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
JustBerry, I'm curious as to whether you actually looked at the talk page of the article? It's been discussed there on and off for the past 7 years :) ak47wong (talk) 06:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Beware (Big Sean song)

[edit]

"Beware (song)" is a terrible article. It should be deleted. That is why I turned it into a redirect. Please replace the article with the redirect.  11Block |talk 03:37, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AFD is where things get deleted.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 03:54, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you!

[edit]
This is for my always-there wikifriend <3 — ΛΧΣ21 04:18, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, stranger!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:20, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Emily VanCamp

[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Emily VanCamp. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 09:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Live It Up

[edit]

Why do you insist on using {{track list}} for the track listing section in single articles? When there are only two release formats and one song in each digital download it seems pointless and looks silly! lol — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 11:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why this revision? As per the styleguide here, (I know this is for albums but the principles apply) it says "A track listing should generally be formatted as a numbered list. In more complicated situations, a table or the {{Track listing}} template may be a better choice." Seen as this isn't a complicated situation its not a great editorial choice to use a track listing template, the only reason of which I can see being that you've added them to some of the JLO and other songs you've worked on. Confused face. :S — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 15:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

[edit]

RE:Email

[edit]

I just saw your note about emailing you. Can't see your addy anywhere. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 15:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GAN in Wikipedia:Wikicup/Reviews

[edit]

Hey, Status, can you give me a poke if no-one reviews that GAN you have by next week? I'd do it now, but...

I, personally, am not that interested in most modern pop music, and so would rather someone who'll enjoy them more does them. But, at the same time, I don't want you to lose out in the Wikicup because I'm off reviewing history and classical music and medicine GANs. And, you know, after some practice in earlier rounds, I certainly can review pop song articles; I just know I enjoy the other ones more.

My offer to review all GANs brought to my attention in the last two weeks of August's round stands, though. Someone needs to do that. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:55, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Adam; I certainly can. I'm not too particularly worried about the article being reviewed just yet, regardless, as it's still pretty early in the cup. Yes, I understand what you mean. I've done a few reviews outside of modern popular music, but of course, the more familiar you are with it, the more comfortable you are in reviewing such types. Thanks for the offer.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 10:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And then I felt so bad that I started reviewing it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha; that's quite alright. I'm the midst of a Buffy marathon and will check back in later. Best,  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 10:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's below. I've asked another person to review my review, though, as the sort of section it is justifies a fair amount of quotation, but it often gets really close even outside the quotation marks, and the structure makes it sound like the source of each sentence's information is only responsible for the second half of the sentence.

It's fixable, but awkward.

Comments

[edit]

I was wondering if you review my featured list article (Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series/archive1)? Please, it will be greatly appreciated! SoapFan12 21:53, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jonas Brothers pages

[edit]

You need to check out all of their pages; they're completely filled with non-filled references and fansite sourcing. And whenever someone tries to fix these pages, one consistent IP address keeps undoing those edits and re-adding fansite references. A lot of their pages should not even be allowed on Wikipedia since they're all fansite sourced!! 71.233.227.127 (talk) 22:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:The Last of Us

[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:The Last of Us. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

[edit]

Suggestions

[edit]

I have got another started New Publications.HotHat (talk) 04:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lana Del Rey discography

[edit]

Just tell me why Off to the Races is a single? It's a promo single just like Carmen! Aaa16 (talk) 11:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Policy development

[edit]

You are more than welcome to comment on Ground rules.HotHat (talk) 07:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Young and Beautiful (Lana Del Rey song)

[edit]

You have undid my edit (I added in the certification table). It was true, it's such a pity. Her single did get awarded with a Gold. BTW, just to let you know that Burning Desire, Carmen, Off to the Races and Blue velvet are all promo singles. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.117.153.229 (talk) 12:08, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

I was wondering if you are interested on giving comments on my featured list Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actress in a Drama Series, it is currently a FLC. This would mean the world to me, if you will be willing! This time I would like to be responded other than be ignore. SoapFan12 20:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE July 2013 news report

[edit]
Guild of Copy Editors July 2013 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter
  • Participation: Out of 30 people who have signed up for this drive so far, 18 have participated. If you have signed up for the drive but have not yet participated, it isn't too late. If you haven't signed up for the drive, sign up now!
  • Progress report: Thus far we have reduced the number of May/June 2012 articles to just 124 articles, so we're on the right track. Unfortunately, for the first time in GOCE history, the number of articles in the backlog has actually gone up during this drive. While all participants are currently doing a fine job, we just don't have as many of them as we have had in the past. We have over 500 editors on our mailing list, but only 18 editors who have done a copy edit for the drive. If you're receiving this newsletter, it's because you have an interest in copy editing. Join the drive! Even if you only copy edit one article, it helps. Imagine how much progress we could make if everyone chipped in just one article.

– Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95, and The Utahraptor.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 21:57, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FAC/FLC

[edit]

I've got a couple articles up for review if you wouldn't care to review one or both - God of War II and Characters of God of War. --JDC808 ♫ 09:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jlo

[edit]

First you wanted it as only "Marc Anthony", arguing it's "his legal name". You then revert an edit to keep it as just that. THEN, you want to change it completely to "Marco Muniz"? Who nobody has ever heard of? Please tell me, what is wrong with "Marc Anthony (Muniz)"? Its keeps his well known professional name while adding his real last name in brackets, so readers realize 1) who he is, and 2) why this is Jenn's current last name. I left a comment on her talk page which you haven't responded to (like you demanded last time). Could you please explain yourself (here or there) before going for your 3rd revert (in 24 hrs)? It would be appreciated. Thanks. - thewolfchild 20:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There you go again, saying I said things that I never said. You complained about nobody understanding Muniz, so I changed it to put his legal name instead. "Marc Anthony (Muniz)" makes absolutely zero sense what-so-ever. It's either Marco Muniz or Marc Anthony. There's nothing in between. At all.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 20:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"At all." - thewolfchild 20:35, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Once you finally learn how to talk to people (which clearly you cannot), I will respond to you. Until then, don't expect a response from me. Or post on my talk page for that matter.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 20:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Riiight... perhaps I should go by your examples on how to communicate. I really don't give a crap care whether you have something to say or not. I just want to improve the article. It's for everyone, not just fanboys. - thewolfchild 20:50, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
edit: poor language choice - Wolf

DYK

[edit]

I think that you might like to know that you were added as a co-creator at Template:Did you know nominations/The 20/20 Experience: 2 of 2. SL93 (talk) 01:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know!  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 02:34, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Thanks for your barnstar! It really cheers me up! — HĐ (talk) 07:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bionic (Christina Aguilera album)

[edit]

Hi Status, I've noticed your recent changes on Bionic (Christina Aguilera album), as you changed "I Hate Boys" as the third single, and "You Lost Me" as the fourth. I'm a little bit confused about this, because "I Hate Boys" was released exclusively in Oceania, while "You Lost Me" was released worldwide on the same day. — HĐ (talk)

Hey HD. Well, since they both came out on the same day, it should go by alphabetical order then.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 15:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confused

[edit]

I'm confused as to what you're talking about? All the genres are sourced?

"Genre: Electronic" from Allmusic

"Musically, the album is rooted in electronic, garage house and dubstep " from Voxxi

"Review: Selena Gomez's 'Stars Dance' a sassy pop-EDM mix" from The Los Angeles Times

So I'm confused why you're vandalizing the article by removed sourced genres, not "influences"? --(CA)Giacobbe (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, do you know what vandalism actually is? The article itself only states the album's genre is electronic, and then goes on the different "roots" (which is not the same thing as a genre; it's an influence).  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 19:51, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Vandalism is the removal of sourced content for one user own preference, no? And you're basing this off a SINGLE Allmusic article, you're refusing to look at the other sources. --(CA)Giacobbe (talk) 19:53, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, no... On Wikipedia, vandalism is the act of editing the project in a malicious manner that is intentionally disruptive. Vandalism includes the addition, removal, or other modification of the text or other material that is either humorous, nonsensical, a hoax, or that is of an offensive, humiliating, or otherwise degrading nature. The article itself states "Musically, Stars Dance is an electronic album,[49] rooted stylistically in garage house,[50] EDM pop,[50][51] and dubstep,[49] while also containing strong elements of techno, disco and teen pop genres"; the only given genre there is Electronic. The others are noted as having an influence on the album.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 19:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wait did you actually even look at the sources? I'm the one that wrote that... It made sense since all the genres are somehow connected under the electronic music umbrella. No source actually specifically it's an electronic album by itself, aside from Allmusic.--(CA)Giacobbe (talk) 20:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Aguilera discography

[edit]

I don't think the two songs that you added were Singles. They were just released on iTunes Store only, which means it doesn't make sense for the two songs to be singles. — HĐ (talk) 03:04, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't add them, you removed them. A single is a song released for purchase apart from an album (or a song sent to station stations). "Hoy Tengo Ganas de Ti", "Slow Down Baby" and "Oh Mother" weren't sent to radio, for example, does that mean they aren't singles? No. We live in a digital world. A digital single is a single in 2013.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 04:05, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer Lopez

[edit]

I have restored the hatnote to the meteorologist that was removed by your edit[4] with no explanation. Tassedethe (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join a discussion

[edit]

Through this way, I inform there is a discussion about partially disambiguated titles, known as "PDABs". This subguide of WP:D was approved at VPP. I notify you about this because you has participated in at least one RM discussion in which PDAB is cited (in any form). You are welcome to give ideas about the future of this guideline at WT:D or to ignore this message. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reissue type on Infobox Album

[edit]

Could you please join the discussion on the Infobox album template talk page? I just noticed you reverted my edits for reissue albums. I'm open to other options. Bonnie (talk) 23:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 02:49, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on Talk:Direct-to-video

[edit]

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Direct-to-video. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

[edit]

Canvassing

[edit]

It's not canvassing if you keep the request perfectly neutral. I believe I kept it neutral. Furthermore, why? I would of love if you send me on my e-mail. Are you deliberately trying to embarass me? I could lose a lot of user friends because of this. I really do not appreciate this, please respect me. Also, I asked them if they are willing and if they said ″no″. I would respect that decision. I don't see asking people for reviews, a problem. I was not asking for a support. But thank you for warning me, I will stop asking. I never thought I was doing something wrong. SoapFan12 Talk smile 21:25, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. Thanks again for warning me and sharing you're opinion! You know what, I happen to agree with you ( only request comments from other users unless the FLC is dead and is in a desperate need for them). It's sometimes, you feel that you want you're list to pass for featured status ASAP. Like Caringtype1 said, I was not trying to do anything shady or insinuate something like, "I'll support yours, if you support mine". Thanks again!

Gaga discog

[edit]

Status, did you gain a consensus on the talk page for the major revamp of the page? I did not find any and have reverted your edit for now. I believe the page was fine as it is in the old version with the singles of different type splitted. I did not find any constructive edit summary also. Request you to raise a discussion in the talk page of the concerned wikiproject please or the article. PS: Pardon any sp mistakes, i'm on a new keboard and it sucks :( —Indian:BIO · [ ChitChat ] 04:43, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for The 20/20 Experience: 2 of 2

[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 06:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

A little favor...

[edit]

Hey there Status! I have a little favor to ask of you. I brought Fijación Oral, Vol. 1 up to GA a short while ago, and I would love to bring it to FA in the near future. Since I've never nominated a page for FA before, I put the page up for a peer review a little while ago. I was wondering if you'd be interested in reviewing it based on that criteria. No worries if you're not interested! WikiRedactor (talk) 15:25, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually just saw that on my watchlist not too long ago. I'll try leaving some comments soon.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 15:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fantastic! Thank you very much(: WikiRedactor (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning

[edit]

Are you serious?

Also this is only revert #2 and I'm effectively restoring a status quo on a poorly decided article that is only 2 days old.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:35, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AGain are you really serious with this? You think that article is valid? I've started a thread at WP:ALBUM seeking input but I guess I'll go with an AFD as you suggested.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:36, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I never claimed the article was valid or invalid. I only stated that since the merge was contested, it should be discussed or taken to AFD, rather than the constant undoing of each other.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 18:37, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All I'm technically doing is reverting this bold edit here.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:42, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it is not as if it's you and WikiRedactor (talk · contribs) in dispute about the article's creation. It's several different users/IPs. The best way to keep it going back and fourth (which obviously would and is happening) is AFD. I personally agree that the article shouldn't be created just yet, as the creator of Good Girl Gone Bad: Reloaded (which began this reissue article trend), but clearly there's a dispute that has to be resolved. And the undo button isn't a resolution.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 18:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA RfC

[edit]

Hi, would you like to elaborate your rationale in the General Discussion section?--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 09:41, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In which one?  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 14:12, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In any in which you made a !vote.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 17:21, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

[edit]

Information icon Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — ΛΧΣ21 00:29, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

Revert

[edit]

Hello,

I do feel that reverting my edit to Teenage Dream album was a mistake. I fixed consistency errors (such as release dates) and removed outdated stats there. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 01:54, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: The only thing I reverted was your removal of albums and a single.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 01:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some stroopwafels for you!

[edit]
Stroopwafel tuesday! — ΛΧΣ21 19:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Hahc21: Aww, thank you very much! *nom nom* — Status (talk · contribs) 19:11, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter

[edit]

We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Canada Sasata (submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Colorado Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, London Miyagawa (submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Wales Cwmhiraeth (submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Wyoming Ealdgyth (submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Poland Piotrus (submissions), Australia Hawkeye7 (submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Status/2013/07&oldid=1089129576"