Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Eternal Equinox (talk | contribs) at 15:35, 18 April 2006 (→Hi EM). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

/Archive01: May 22 2005 – September 30 2005

/Archive02: October 1 2005 – November 16 2005

/Archive03: November 19 2005 – December 31 2005

/Archive04: December 31 2005 – February 8 2006

Looking at Kelly Clarkson

Because of our collaboration on We Belong Together, I have been curious to ask something. Since she is listed under your contributions in your profile, what do you think of the current state of the Kelly Clarkson article? It is tedious and by looking at the history, has been the central point of edit warring for quite some time. I was hoping to get around to clean it up but I have limited faith in the article's future. Are there any suggestions you could offer me to help enhance Kelly Clarkson? —Eternal Equinox | talk 00:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Although I did not request for you to help me promote the article to a standard of any type, you did save me valuable typing-time. Thank you! Speaking of Image:Kelly Clarkson in September 2002.jpg, how is it that an image becomes public domain? I am not going to be removing it from the article because it is specially classified, but under what circumstances and copyright laws does one become public domain? —Eternal Equinox | talk 00:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. —Eternal Equinox | talk 02:06, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I've done some clean-up at my sandbox and was wondering if you could do me a favour. Since I'm new to referencing sources and citations in APA format (or whatever it is called — I've already forgotten!), and because I found your work on KaDee Strickland simply spectacular, I'd appreciate if if you could properly format my references. I'm not too far off of properly structuring them, but I'm still a tad bit confused. Your help would be useful! Thanks! —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thank you for correcting the citations. Do you have any suggestions on how to properly format references? I think I'm beginning to understand some more but am not quite there yet. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

All right, thank you very much! —Eternal Equinox | talk 00:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Why does EVERYTIME I try to edit Mariah Carey's page you delete my additional information and send me a message of "you're wrong blah blah blah"? What's the problem with my editions!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gihad (talk • contribs) 16:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

New Message for EM Please stop sending me messages as I am just going to ignore them. And mentioning an artist's amount of Grammy wins is not a violation of point of view, it is a fact-there is no point of view. Do not email me again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldiggity (talk • contribs) 22:47, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

NO

What do you call /Archive01: May 22, 2005 – September 30, 2005?????!!!!!!!!! Plus, I think you need to stop talking to me! You are just annoying! Tell somebody else to talk to me. I get so mad talking to you!!! UHHHHH! Tcatron565 8:17pm c 2/10/06

Okay, what I'm going to do you will like, but it's going to take a couple of days, so please be patient with me. But it seems like everytime I make a wrong move, you're all up in my face! It's like you're watching my back. Please, when I do something wrong, wait for 4 days, then tell me. Okay. Please! Tcatron565 8:34pm c 2/10/06

World Sales and Certifications for Mariah Carey

Hi Extraordinary Machine! How are you? You have just add the World Sales and Certifications for Mariah Carey to the clean-up list. I've been working so hard in it, searching information in the internet, and i haven't finished it yet! I would like to know why you pretend to delete the article.

ps:I'm a novice wikipedian... so i have a lot to learn!! ;) Sensatez 05:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Singers perfoming live,Whitney,Dion,Streisand,Mariah etc

I agree with "Signed of love" regarding Mariahs lack of quality singing live on stage.She is not what I expected. As a fan of Barbara Straisand and Whotney Houston I have allways enjoyed stunning vocals in concert.With Mariah,who never tours by the way,it´s not the same thing. She lacks what the others have.That is all one needs to say.

Have anyone heard the liveduet during the Oscars 1999 when the song "When you belive" was performed with Whitney Houston?It is a difference of class between Whitneys voice and Mariahs. She is simply outclassed by Whitney.I like both singers but I am disapointed at Mariah.Why is she not able to perform well live! Whitney is a killer live vocally but Carey has since her debut failed to give Whitney a run for her money.Im sure Mariah would have the same status worldwide as Whitney if she could performe as well live as in studio.Signed Fan of love

Surley I must agree with "Fan of love" I as a fan of Streisand listen to a lot of music - brought to the public live.I allways judge performers based on how well they perfom live. - Whitney and Celine send thrills down my spine when rendering classic material live on stage.Mariah is not to be taken seriously.She is a great women.A powerful caracter but - how can she expect to be taken seriously when she has never toured of when she fails - as aboved mentioned singing live? - A live in Northen Europe and both Celine And Whitney toured Sweden a few times,Mariah - has never toured as an artist sounding so nice in studio should! - While Whiney and Celine are famous all over the globe Mariah tends to shine brightly - in the US.Why?

Well I am surprised that the Mariah article dosn´t take into account Mariahs lack of credibility on stage.Miming,never touring,outclassed by others while singing live, are you sure we are talking about the same singer....it´s a piece of cake sounding nice in studio but a piece of hell performing as well live....just ask Milli Vanilli or Mariah.....

This is a joke....are you serious about this article! It can only be some hardcorefans living out thier fantasy here....the women can´t sing live,and when she performes sounds terrible. Have you even deared to compare her voice with other great singers... I suspect not... well try and listen to some other voices in concert and then maybe you should evaluate your article again.Mariah will ever obtain the status of a great singer worldwide... and you know why.

WELL , AS MENTIONED BY OTHER WIKIPEDS YOU HAVE A TENDENCY TO BE A LITTLE SUBJECTIVE WITH SOME ARTISTS,STOP WITH THAT OR YOU WILL FACE THE SAME MEDICINE... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uyt (talk • contribs) 15:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mijaser (talk • contribs) 18:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Image:Nick Lachey Jessica Simpson USO 210405.jpg

Are you certain that this image is public domain? It was originally uploaded as such, and then changed to a fair use, then you changed it back to PD. The version on the commons was deleted, which may have been in error, since the only copyright notice on the source is "This Image has been cleared for release"

On an unrelated note, I'd also like to propose a possible collaboration. I noticed you have Diane Keaton under one of your favorite actors, and I've been planning to rewrite her article to get it to Good or featured status. --Fallout boy 06:44, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I removed the PD tag. Please check the image description for reasons. --Rob 23:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Copied from Image:Nick Lachey Jessica Simpson USO 210405.jpg : This image is no longer in Commons. It was deleted (see log) because it is copyrighted material. ABC holds the copyright. It was a "Courtesy photo". It's important to note that the photo was submitted by " 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing", but "submitted by" is different than "photo by". Its common for the two to be different. "Photo by" is who took the photo (which effects copyright). "Submitted by" is the employee who uploaded the image (e.g. its equivilent to an uploader in Misplaced Pages, who might not be the copyright holder). --Rob 23:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/We Belong Together

Although I'm not one-hundred percent aware of what the criteria is, I don't believe the users who worked on an article together are allowed to vote at the FAC. However, as noted, I'm not entirely sure of this. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm just letting you know that the information that you requestion have been sourced. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 17:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Since you have not edited the article since its last nomination, I believe it is appropriate if you chose to support the nomination once again. —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

E.E, I should let you know that it is rather frwoned upon to pursue support votes, even if E.M voted at the last one. He has seen the page — let him decide for himself. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I was not attempting to persuade him since he supported last time. I did not know about the "frowning" part of the method, however, and will therefore refrain from posting any further concerns about voting at the FAC on your talk page, EM. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey

Unfortunately, I can't find a better source from where I am right now. An internet search just turned up websites that are even less reliable than IMDB. --M@rēino 21:01, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

You've already been warned of this and asked to discuss the issue at Talk:Mariah Carey. Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. Extraordinary Machine 20:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I tried to discuss it with you but you just would not listen-what is the point? I thought I told you to stop sending me messages! You are obviously not going to listen to me so I am not going to listen to you. I am making it my life's work to change that article to include her Grammy mention. Do not contact me again! I will do it once or twice every day and therefore, will not be in violation of whatever that rule says. I will do it from different computers if I have to. This can be hard or this can be easy-your choice. Stop reverting my edits. You're not welcome! I am no longer going to read any messages sent to my discussion page. All messages sent there will be ignored. This time tomorrow, I will revert it.

you are obviously not going to listen to me so I am not going to listen to you either-this is my last post here-you can write whatever the hell you want-you want to start an arbitration proceeding over the mention of "she has won 5 grammy awards"-i have already explained why it notable to mention her grammy wins above-if you had listened to me we would not be having this petty conversation-you are not worth having a discussion with-i am through discussing it-bring it on-waste of time and money-i am going to change it come hell or high water-goodbye forever "When I have something to say, I'll f------' well say it."-Fiona Apple — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.119.238.252 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

as soon as the protection comes off, i am going to change her grammy mentions again-you ara all biased, anyway-there is no such thing as a completely neutral point of view — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.119.171.60 (talk • contribs) 22:09, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Emma Watson image: Fair-use question

I'd like your opinion: At miss-watson.org (which has a huge image gallery, virtually none of which could be used on Misplaced Pages), six scans were made from the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire Movie Poster Book, including this image. There is no question that the poster book was released to promote HPatGoF; however, the poster book was released for sale. Does the image (or, perhaps, a lower-res copy thereof) constitute fair use as a promotional image? Please reply on my talk page. RadioKirk talk to me 17:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, I think that use of the poster can qualify as fair use if it is of lower resolution than the original image, as well as if there are other good reasons for using that image on Emma Watson. Warner Bros. probably might appreciate one of their promotional images receiving extra circulation anyway.

Sounds good, thanks :)

On an unrelated note, I think my standards at the Lindsay Lohan FAC were a little too high, so sorry about that :). Maybe it's because I adored Freaky Friday and Mean Girls?

Not a problem, don't worry about it. The experience was a good one, hard work notwithstanding ;) No doubt you've seen the thanks and credits? :D

Well anyway, if you need any help with anything (or would like to collaborate on an article) then please let me know! Extraordinary Machine 18:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Will do! :D RadioKirk talk to me 18:39, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, the image is uploaded here. Please feel free to comment on my rationale for Fair Use. :) RadioKirk talk to me 19:04, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

"The image features the subject in her best known acting role, yet is simultaneously illustrative of the subject in real life" - sweetness :). Sorry, but I just feel that sentence hit the nail on the head with a hammer factory!

LOL thank you! :) That does constitute, as you put it, the "other good reasons for using that image on Emma Watson." ;)

The rationale looks great to me; however, user:Carnildo is much more knowledgeable about image copyrights and fair use than I am. See also Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Fair use.

I did in fact read Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Fair use, but it still left unanswered questions. I'll check with Carnildo, thanks! RadioKirk talk to me 21:30, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Talk page

Please see the talk page for We Belong Together. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eternal Equinox (talk • contribs) 21:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Dude

Sorry about deleting that picture, no offense to you or anything, but I just HATE looking at that picture, it's so UGLY. Lol. But I'll deal.

Titles

The words that shouldn't be capitalised are articles, prepositions (some manuals of style specify prepositions under five letters; I don't think that Misplaced Pages has decided on that, unless things have changed since I last looked), and conjunctions. The exceptions are first and last words in the title. So:

• The Last Days of Pompei
• "Ode on Intimations of Immortality"
• Journal of a Disappointed Man
• Not Only, but Also
• "Going Up"
• With the Beatles, etc.

Some manuals also make exceptions for prepositions that form part of phrasal verbs. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:21, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

"After" is a preposition there, and would normally be left uncapitalised (again, unless it started the title, as in After Henry). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Katie Holmes

Thank you very much for your help with this article. I've nominated it as a FAC and would appreciate your comments at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Katie Holmes. PedanticallySpeaking 16:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Chronology on Mariah Carey singles articles

Hmm...technically, "promotional singles" are singles nonetheless, and removing them would only revive the argument of whether they're singles or not. But I could understand if you would want to remove them if they just lead to redirecting pages and what not (Fly Like A Bird, maybe?!?). Its just that with singles like "Sweetheart" and "Never Too Far", which were promo-only singles in the U.S., you can't really justify removing them from the chronology simply because they were airplay-only cuts. Likewise, the same doesn't apply to songs like "Whenever You Call", which didn't even have a promotional release, or "Underneath the Stars" and "The One", which are retracted singles. Are their any singles in particular that you want to remove? In the end, I'd just remove or fix links that are problematic. Hope this helps.

On a similar note, I'm finding it difficult to condense the "Boy (I Need You" article, because I know its possible to extract a lot of the fan cruft and unreferenced info. I noticed you did a really great job doing that with the "Butterfly" article, so I would appreciate if you could help me with this one. Also, do you think its possible to merge the information on "The One" (and maybe even "Irresistable" and "You Got Me") to the "Boy (I Need You)" article? Their articles are comprised of mostly redundant information that could found be found elsewhere or simply point out the obvious. Just wondering, sorry for dawdling on... --Grey Pursuit February 21, 2005 (UTC)

Dont do this

here-Ste|vertigo 18:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Is Punk'd "irrelevant"?

I'm in the middle of a dispute with backburner001 over the Punk'd reference at Lindsay Lohan. This user says it's irrelevant. I laid out the case for its relevance—with a rewrite for clarity—and he deleted it again. His response: "I did my part – I removed content I felt was not significant and I made suggestions for improvement when I was asked for them. If you are interested in working together to fix this problem, do your part and improve the Punk’d reference or give me a legitimate reason for keeping the reference that was in there before." (Essentially, "You think it should stay? Prove it to me and me alone," which sounds awfully close to self-appointed WikiGodhood, but I've been called dramatic already. More on point, "working together" to this editor means he deletes it, but someone else has to "fix" it.) This user's page includes as a goal, "emove irrelevant/trivial content", but a quick look at his edit history is telling: on 30 January, he removed from WP:MOS a "reference to naming conventions for Mormonism"; on 19 February, he deleted "2 paragraphs" from Hiram College "to keep concise". Since then, every deletion of material has been a Punk'd reference, from Lindsay Lohan, Avril Lavigne, Jena Malone, Beyoncé Knowles, Mandy Moore, Chris Klein (actor) and Proof (rapper). After we blasted each other's antagonism (real or imagined), I threatened him with a WP:3RR war and mutual blocking, and backburner001 then agreed to stop removing the reference pending the discussion that results from my Request for Comment. No matter the outcome, your input would be very much appreciated. RadioKirk talk to me 21:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Order of info on Chart table

It's been a nuisance on editing and now I'm in a dilemma. How would you order the chart information on a single's Chart table, seeing that you can't be put in order of "importance" (with the exception of the U.S. charts which has the precedent practice of beign put first)? At first, I decided to model off the "We Belong Together" article, which is a featured and well-edited article, with having the chart info listed in order of peak position from highest to lowest. But when I reached the "Don't Forget About Us" article, I realized that by doing so, would mean leaving a unappealing gap on the "No. of chart topper" column. Therefore, do you think I should continue to model off the "We Belong Together" article or put it in alphabetical order, except for the U.S. charts of course? Thanx and sorry for dawdling on a trivial matter! Grey Pursuit 22:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

...

...Is it just me, or is Misplaced Pages steadily getting worse? It seems as though I spend nearly all of my time going behind other users and doing cleanup to articles that have been crufted beyond recognition or are otherwise in bad shape. I think it's almost time for another Wikibreak. --FuriousFreddy 16:57, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

What?

What was wrong with the meaning of the songs on Most Wanted (Hilary Duff album)? Tcatron565

Mirroring of Misplaced Pages

Do you know anything about all the mirror sites that copy wikipedia's content, and where WP stands on that? It's very weird to see everybody's comments from talk pages showing up on other sites like algebra.com and yourart.com. Schizombie 06:30, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. It's the mirroring of talk pages I find particularly odd. Schizombie 21:51, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Diane Keaton

I have the first draft of my major rewrite completed. Feel free to imput! --Fallout boy 07:17, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

They Might Be Giants

I've tried to address your concerns. Are you willing to put it back on the Good Articles list? —User:ACupOfCoffee@ 02:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I already did, and the nomination was removed by somebody else. But the main reason I asked was because because I wanted to get a guided sense of if I'd done it right. —User:ACupOfCoffee@ 21:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there is any need ...

... to repeatedly lecture me on Misplaced Pages policy, especially on such a minor affair. Thanks anyway, and next time just go ahead and remove the links again if it makes you happy. All the best, <KF> 22:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: I'll Be There

I've already taken the time to read both guidelines and don't recognize my error anywhere in the text. However, you have been a Wikipedian for a much longer significant amount of time than I have, so I'll refrain from editing the image for now. I would like it if fair use rationale was applied for all of the articles it appears in though; this would make Misplaced Pages look like it is in order of its priorities. Perhaps when the Mariah Carey article reaches featured article status, we could fix up the rationale for both articles. Until then, I understand your concern. Thanks! Take care! —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Eternal Equinox/Sandbox

Hello again Extraordinary Machine. I was just wondering if you could take a look at my sandbox and comment and/or critique the work I've done for the Kelly Clarkson article. I've been trying my hardest to ensure that the everlasting fan-gush is executed upon notice. I would appreciate it! —Eternal Equinox | talk 15:21, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to fix up a handful of the errors you've noted, and yes, I should have been able to catch these, but it can be a bit irritating once you begin reading the same words day after day. However, I will answer a few questions:

1. I'm not sure about the Indonesian singles market. It's not very important, from what I've heard, but it is being included because of all the number-ones Clarkson garnered from Breakaway. Is that special enough? Perhaps, but perhaps not.
2. Canada is a major music market. The only reason an album needs to ship 100,000 copies to be certified platinum is because of the population: 33 million, which differs greatly from the U.S. population of 275 million. Australia has a population of 20 million and needs to ship a mere 75 000 copies to be certified platinum and is considered a major music market. It's unusual how the system works.
3. "Low" reaching the top forty instead of the top fifty? I disagree with you, however, in the end you are correct. I'll change it.

—Eternal Equinox | talk 14:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

right|150px By the way, although I know that you've changed your sandbox layout, I went ahead and created the CD single cover image for A Thousand Miles. Since no article exists for the single, and because we obviously do not want the image to be deleted, I'm going to leave it here with you for now, unless, of course, you do not want it. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are right about the Mariah Carey article. It is impressive. Anyway, on the topic of Clarkson, most of her singles reached fairly high positions in Canada. Also, from what I've heard, an American musician's releases normally perform strongest in Canada because of how close the nations are. The same situation occurred with Carey, correct? Her singles performed strongest in Canada for the first decade of her career. They were never successful in the UK for a significant amount of time; this also happened to Clarkson. All in all, I'm going to attempt to promote the article to a standard similar to Carey's. However, there are major image issues occurring right now — it may be sometime before consensus is met. However, time will tell, and thanks for your help! Good luck with both articles. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:33, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for replacing the public domain image. It hasn't been an easy task communicating with the IPs and HeyNow10029 who insists that the images he/she do not have copyright issues. It is unusual that they decided to remove the PD image though... thanks, again! —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:RFM-Filed

WikiProject Psychology

Hi! I noticed you categorized yourself as interested in psychology. Maybe you would like to join the Psychology WikiProject? /skagedal 15:51, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

A BEST -> A Best_A_Best-2006-03-07T20:32:00.000Z">

I just wanted to know why you made this move? The Japanese page uses A BEST and A Best is not an English translation of this... thanks. gren グレン 20:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)_A_Best"> _A_Best">

Bruce Johnson

Greetings, Extraordinary!
You were kind enough to support the FAC candidacy of my article on Katie Holmes, for which I am grateful. I've put forward another nomination, Ohio's lieutenant goveror Bruce Johnson, and I would appreciate your comments at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Bruce Johnson. PedanticallySpeaking 21:34, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Merging two articles about the same song

You've had some success with this, if I remember. We seem to have American Pie (song) and American Pie (Madonna song). Jkelly 01:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Jkelly 17:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey... why are some articles in Category:Hilary Duff singles needlessly disambiguated? Like, Fly (Hilary Duff song) and Wake Up (Hilary Duff song)? Jkelly 00:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Bruce Johnson

I've posted this response at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Bruce Johnson to the concern about photos: "The press office of the Ohio Department of Development, of which Johnson is director, informs me by e-mail 'We do not have copyright on the photos.'" PedanticallySpeaking 14:41, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to say thank you for your kind words about the Kylie Minogue article. It's gratifying to know that you like it. Yes, User:Plek and I substantially wrote it, and got it to featured article status after 3 previous unsuccessful nominations. Persistence pays. Anyway, thank you and I'll have at look at Mariah. Rossrs 09:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

ps. I have most of Mariah Carey's albums. Please let me know if you'd like any sound samples, and if so, which songs. Rossrs 09:45, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I think the songs you suggested are appropriate and I like that you are thinking of ways of making them relevant choices rather than just picking a handful of hit singles. I saw "Vanishing" and wondered why you'd choose that, but your reasoning is really good. I like the idea of spanning a range not only of time, but of styles and I can see that's how you are thinking too. I would also suggest something from MTV as the article discusses her aim of proving she wasn't just a studio creation. I don't know how many is too many? Certainly in FA you'll get 10 different people giving you 10 different personal opinions of the correct number ;-) That's something to look forward to, isn't it? I'll keep you informed of my progress as it may take a little while to do but I enjoy doing stuff like this, and I'm glad you took me up on my offer. cheers Rossrs 09:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hello again, I've uploaded the songs you suggested but unfortunately I don't have the David Morales mix of "Fantasy" so I've used "My All" - I hope that is ok. I've put them in this box but you'll need to delete this off your talk page once they're added to the article. The box is a variation of one that's being used which I adapted for the Kylie Minogue article. I kind of like it, because you only have to change the word "left" or "right" to move it if you need to, same as images. Someone suggesting grouping them within the Kylie article - that may work here also. (My captions are really bad, but just so you can see how it would look. Rewrite them..... Please!) Cheers. Rossrs 14:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

no problem :-) Rossrs 10:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey

I think your policing of the Mariah Carey site is wrong. Those comments about Ms. Carey are inappropriate for the lead of the article because their placement in the lead tends to suggest they have greater importance than they really do in the grand scheme of things. Sure her voice is the subject of criticism but there are lot of things that she is more well known for that are not included in that lead. She is far more well known for having massive hits and being one of the biggest selling artists than she is known for having a damaged voice. Most people think of her as having a great voice and though she has been criticized recently, I think those issues are better explored later on in the article. I don't think you are right about the paragraph lengths. What gives you the right to decide how long they should be?

I think you should worry about things other than objectivity. You don't just stick just anything in the lead of an encyclopedia article just for objectivity's sake. I think the discussion of the problems she has had in her career is fair game and provides objectivity because she is well known for suffering a major decline in her career but the voice issues do not belong there.

Mariah Carey does have a sexy image. What is your problem. I did not say she was sexy, but the image she has is a sexy one. That's an appropriate statement and it was another way of saying discussing her image because though she has had criticism of her image there was been praise for how great her body is, why isn't that in the lead of the article? Because it does not belong there. That's why.

Do you need any help with the Mariah Carey article? I see that there's clearly an edit war occurring right now. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

In addition, after editing We Belong Together for so long, I believe The Emancipation of Mimi is Carey's ninth and not tenth studio album? I'm not quite sure which article is accurate, however. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll give the article a quick read-through. I am not going to be taking sides considering I have a limited interest in Carey and am merely here to provide elucidation, but only if it is required. Anyway, you're welcome regarding the screenshot. By the way, Journalist would like to know if you want him to semi-protect the page? —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey E.M, do you want me to semi protect it, or block it until the edit-war is over? Oran e (t) (c) (e) 23:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

re: Mariah Carey copyedit

I'll give it a going through once the protection is lifted. Thanks. —Wayward 07:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Single infoboxes

The templates you've put on Lady Marmalade (2001 song) and Check on It articles are for albums, not for singles, like this.
200.138.194.254 18:54, 18 March 2006

But there are loads and loads of articles about singles whose template is like this. Do you intend to change all of them?

200.138.194.254 19:06, 18 March 2006

Marey Carey

Yes you can delete it. I forget where I got it the Emancipation of Mimi promo from. User: Charmed36

Pussycat Dolls

Can you stop the user from changing the article "Don't Cha" from first single to second, "Stickwitu" as second single to third, "Beep (song) from third single to fourth. Sway the Pussycat Dolls song is not the first single. User: Charmed36

Re: A Thousand Miles

"Without crediting the users who worked on the original material" — unfortunately, this line confuses me. Also, there are several other articles on Misplaced Pages presented with limited information. The principle reason for creating the article was that the image of the CD single wasn't deleted without warning. I haven't read the Music/Song guidelines, so I'm unaware of the notes within. I know that you will be writing and expanding "A Thousand Miles" eventually but I took the initiative of creating the article and, unless I'm wrong or haven't read a specific policy, anyone is allowed to create an article. —Eternal Equinox | talk 00:21, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, I should have asked, and therefore, I apologize. Please do not take this as insulting toward you or I purposely ignored you, it had been that I was merely in a rush to avoid the image being deleted. I will stray from your sandbox unless I am interested in a topic you are writing. Please excuse my rudeness and do not let this effect you personally. Again, my sincere apologies. —Eternal Equinox | talk 22:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Could you do me a favour and help me with the situation currently being handled, or, well, not being handled, but barely dealed with at Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates. I've been banned for reasons that are not supported by any claims and a ridiculous claim of being Hollow Wilerding, a user who I had once been acquainted with (and dealt with). Please do not let this effect our Wikipedian relationship, where we are working on similar articles, even if you feel the need to agree with the situation. Thanks. By the way, We Belong Together failed again based on trivial edits, so Journalist and I are going to be cleaning it up a bit more. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll make sure to credit you properly next time. And just to let you know, the Hollow Wilerding accusation was dropped, thankfully. If you need anything, just leave me a message! :) —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:34, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Reference

Wow, you don't waste any time in catching people out. I was just adding a reference after it having realised Id forgotten to but the article has been reverted back. Anyway I think I'm officially fed up of editing this article, it is just an accumulation of people debating over complete rubbish and everyone refuses to see anyone else's point of view, including me I guess. So I give up, I'd rather just enjoy Carey's music than bother to write an article on her that is largely uninformative and uninteresting and hardly anyone will read. At least it's one less hassle for you to deal with. Nice working with you. Ultimate Star Wars Freak 19:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

A couple new userboxes for you!

Hey, I whipped these up, I think they would enhance your user page for readers.

Did you know?

The article for "A Thousand Miles" is currently visible on the did you know template. Perhaps you should take a look! —Eternal Equinox | talk 13:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Page move

Done as requested.--File Éireann 19:30, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Gone

Just to let you know, I'm taking an extended Wikibreak. I can no longer participate fully. Not Anymore. Take care of "We Belong Together" for me. If you have any issues, you can email me. Also, good luck with Mariah Carey —it really deserves to be featured. Peace. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 02:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mariah Carey and children at Camp Mariah.jpg

In the Mariah Carey article, I was wondering if you could identify what year the image was taken, that is if you can? Thank you. —Eternal Equinox | talk 13:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and thanks for catching this. :) —Eternal Equinox | talk 13:29, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

If that is the case, then do not worry. It was merely my curiosity. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Buckowensjapan.jpg

When you have a moment... am I incorrect in questioning the fair use of this image? The three potential problems I see: 1) Its resolution may be too high; 2) The accompanying text, while mentioning his contract with Capitol, does not mention this album specifically; and, 3) There is no explanation for choosing "Album Cover" as a rationale for its use (the uploader believes simply choosing the option is sufficient). Thanks for your time. RadioKirk talk to me 17:46, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, Rossrs has said pretty much what I was thinking. :) Extraordinary Machine 21:21, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

'preciate it, thanku :) RadioKirk talk to me 22:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Talk:I'm With You

While I was checking the ], I noticed that I'm with You had been replaced with a capital "W" due to specific claims on the talk page. However, I noticed that you returned the title to a small "w". Which is technically correct? Although Avril Lavigne's website clearly states that the spelling should be with a capital "W", should this be ignored and be abided by Misplaced Pages policy and the MOS? —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure. If appears as though thorough references were provided, but as I said, if it is stated by the naming conventions, it will remain in proper English. Thank you. On a different note, and excuse me if I'm acting too fishy, but are you perhaps located in Europe? —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Call it a hunch. —Eternal Equinox | talk 22:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in (I stumbled across this as I was replying above), but I have to agree with Eternal Equinox on this one. While certain conventions are meant to demand adherence, I find song titles exempt, for the most part. We don't correct spelling mistakes, intentional or otherwise, unless the artist or label issues a correction. Personally, I don't end at song titles, either; I am Sam should be in all lower case, nevermind the fact that WikiURLs make that impossible... ;) RadioKirk talk to me 22:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Partial retraction (sort of) in this post. RadioKirk talk to me 23:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Replied to yours :) RadioKirk talk to me 19:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Fly Like a Bird, So Lonely, Say Somethin'

Thanks

Never did thank you for your warm welcome to the project. I must admit it seemed like a greeting-bot to me at first... Anyway, thanks for taking the time to do it. Ksenon 21:40, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Mariah Carey

Could you please point out some of the references that discuss the different number of weeks Mariah Carey spent at the top of the U.S. Billboard 200? Also, I'm hoping for you to nominate the article here very soon. :) —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Curious

I saw your edits at Cool (song) while I was browsing, and have been wondering to know what role the Pop 100 Airplay supplies that does not make it notable on Misplaced Pages? I ask this simply based on curiosity, and not on replacing it in the article, which, to be honest, I really don't care much for. —Eternal Equinox | talk 15:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I will not restore the length "Cool" spent at number one on MuchMusic; I will not restore the album wikilink (although I still believe it should be there); I will have attempted to compromise your edits with mine in the "chart performance" section; and I think that some of the positions it reached should be included, while less important ones be labelled as "top ". Is this better? —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

The return of "The Editor"

I've semi-returned, sort of. My anger is now gone. My mood is lifted because I got accepted to York University and Ryerson University, with offers for scholarships if I maintain my 90% avg (The pressure's on). I'll be semi-active though. See u around. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 03:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

filmogs, discogs, bibliogs oldest first

see Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (lists of works) or Misplaced Pages:Filmographies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzzzz (talk • contribs)

You may want to see this objection. Gflores 03:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

In short, my objection is that Zzzzz changed both linked pages to suit his position and, clearly, is using them as an authoritative source. Neither page shows consensus, but since both pages are inactive and neither are adopted into the MOS indicates a clear lack of support by even the creators of the pages to keep the discussion active. Cburnett 04:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

And, as if that wasn't enough (and, sorry to burden you with this), I've taken User:Niz to WP:AN for starting a revert war and then decrying it, chiding others for their "childishness". In my experience (brief though it may be), it's quite common to revert a page to its appearance prior to the issue raised. Bye bye, WP:EQ and WP:AGF... RadioKirk talk to me 15:28, 6 April 2006 (UTC) It appears the user was trying to do too much, too fast, never mind. :) RadioKirk talk to me 20:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

And now for something completely different

Song titles

Personally I think that writing song titles like Come On Over Baby (All I Want Is You) is better than "Come on over Baby (All I Want is You)". Have you ever seen Christina Aguilera back cover? It is written Come On Over (All I Want Is You), not Come on over (All I Want is You).
200.138.194.254 21:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand. But I really believe that songs titles should be capitalised, although it'd be really painful to capitalise every single article title about a song.

200.138.194.254 18:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey FAC

I'm glad that you finally decided to nominate the article. You can finally get this. There is just one more nomination process to go (you know what I mean). I'm still waiting, so...anytime you're ready. I should warn you about FAC, however (though you already know): it can be brutal. Also, beware "The Savage". If you have a comma out of place, fix it now!! Believe me, if you don't, it will be spotted, then he'll come to the FAC a day before it's to be promoted and write, "object" followed by an incomprehensible 750-word essay. (I know its not nice to say this, but its true) Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Excellent work with the article. It is even better than Kylie Minogue, in my opinion. You deserve a barn star, which I'll hand over to you following the FAC, whether it passes or not. Sorry if you consider this snooping, but since Orane and I were also conducting a conversation at the time, I also believe Tsavage has constructive objections, though sometimes frightening. If he objects, I'll try to help and correct them. —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:58, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, see you EM. I can't believe you're leaving though, if even for a while. I don't know. It seems like many people are simply...outgrowing Misplaced Pages? Yep, I understood what you meant (the circle thing). Don't worry, Mariah Carey will be featured. It's that good, and you should be extremely proud of yourself. Give me a sec while a try to decide which barnstar would be most appropriate to give you. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 22:03, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion the guy is a ... His objections are sometimes "workable", but most of the time, they're just crap (take Bulbasaur FAC for example). And the long and confusing way he expresses them. Its just...I cant even find the words. I know he means well, but sometimes I think that he feels that he's God's gift to the FAC process, and it really bugs me. Long story short, I really don't like him. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 22:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, in a way. However, as long as he is here, we'll have to find a way to remedy his suggestions. —Eternal Equinox | talk 22:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Really, don't worry about the samples. The idea came to me when I saw the dance remix of "My All"—in my opinion one of the most unusual songs ever—in the article. Anyway, I've seen that you may retire from Misplaced Pages (or conduct minimal edits) in the future. Is there a reason you've come to this decision? —Eternal Equinox | talk 18:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Good luck to whatever you choose to do! —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I suppose there really can be miracles, you should see the Mariah Carey article in early February 2005. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is quite interesting. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Good is Good

I am preparing the delete so you can do your merge.--Adam 22:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Nine Million Bicycles

I'd like to thank and congratulate your fantastic work on the Nine Million Bicycles page. It's a real improvement from the page I start two days ago.

I don't know if you're aware, but Template:Katie Melua, that I created to easily navigate through Katie Melua's music, has been put up for deletion. If you believe that it's useful and needed please vote to keep it. Thank you. Hera1187 06:37, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Naming

Please stop replacing Katie Melua's professional name with her real name, it's her professional name which counts. --62.255.232.20 01:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mariah Carey and Whitney Houston in March 1999.jpg

I posted this on Commons, but then thought, I should ask you here, in case you don't check your commons page.

This is a nice picture, but how can you know if the copyright ever belonged to mariahdaily.com? It seems they invite people to send in photos (as opposed to making them). To me, this photo looks like it would be owned by the makers of the show. Did the person who runs the site say he personally took the photo, or how he got it? --Rob 10:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Always Be My Baby

Thanks for adding the credits. Orane and I plan on working on the article eventually, perhaps you'd like to assit us every now and then? —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Again, thanks. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey FAC

Hi, I wanted to draw your attention to some edits that have been made expanding the bio infobox for Mariah Carey. I've commented on this at some length on the FA nomination page and have changed my vote to "object", but I wanted to explain to you why I did it this way. The last thing I want to do is cause any problem with the article being featured because I feel it is very deserving. I know I could easily revert the changes, but I suspect that I would then become embroiled in an edit war, and that would be more disruptive to the process. My intention in formally changing my vote to "object" and making it public on the nomination page is so that it can be dealt with publically and hopefully any other editors who may agree with my comments will support them and the matter can be dealt with quickly. I think the editor who made the changes did so in good faith but without appreciating the wider ramifications of what looks like something very simple. The problem is that I don't trust this editor to be reasonable, judging on what I've seen of his behaviour in the past, which is why I've given such a detailed explanation of my opinion on the nomination page. This probably all looks very cryptic if you haven't read my other comments yet. Rossrs 00:04, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for dealing with this so quickly. After I saw the info box on Mariah, I also noticed it on Kylie Minogue where there were no related artists, but quite a POV list of notable albums and singles, which I removed. I guess we should just remove them when we see them. Thanks again, I'll go and change my vote back. Rossrs 00:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

and now it's featured! :-) as if there was ever any doubt. Congratulations. Nice to see all that hard work was appreciated. Rossrs 09:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Honey (Bobby Goldsboro song), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Cactus.man ✍ 16:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Template

When then they don't know how to edit Misplaced Pages. Because to me, it is very easy to edit those things. It's hrad for me to edit those other ones! Plus this one give more information than the other one did. It has sales and Cirtifications of the album and chart positions, which singles have. I think we need a much better one. Mine may not be the best but at least it's better than the other one. So stop dissin' me okay. Tcatron565

Image

I found this image while scanning an article and found it to be filled with nonsense. The song was never a number-one hit in Canada and the latter portion of the Australian trajectory is false as I've verified at both Jam Canoe and ARIA. I am placing it here for now, since you were the original uploader, but if I were you, I'd consider consulting an administrator and having them delete it immediately. Just letting you know. —Eternal Equinox | talk 16:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey

Its over. Congratulations on your wonderful accomplishment. I can't even express my happiness. Well deserved!!!!!

I see that you have cleared your userpage. Does that mean....? Oran e (t) (c) (e) 21:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully not. :( —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:19, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Janet Jackson discography

Hi

Just letting you know ive removed your clean up tag from the Janet Jackson discography; I did a lot of work on it last night, so its looking a lot better now...

Also just wanted to say "hi" and let you know I appreciate the work you do on Misplaced Pages...Rimmers 23:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi EM

I'm leaving Misplaced Pages. I find this place to take things too personally and am not interested in anything it has to offer anymore. Perhaps we could communicate off of Misplaced Pages? Please respond on my talk page if you're interested. —Eternal Equinox | talk 15:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)