Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by STATicVapor (talk | contribs) at 19:08, 8 March 2014 (Reverted 1 edit by GabeMc (talk): Yay more vandalism. (TW)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

In order to keep a conversation together rather than spread over multiple talk pages, if you leave me a message here, I will respond here.

Template:Archive box collapsible

RE: Elimination Chamber PPV

Why you revert the things I've updated to the Elimination Chamber PPV. It's not a speculation, because I watched the show and everything is the way I write it. I'm helping, but you're reverting it. WHY WHY WHY - Batbobi - User:Batbobi— Preceding unsigned comment added by Batbobi (talk • contribs)

You must cite reliable sources for content additions, thank you and relax. STATic message me! 00:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello.

This is kind of random, but I just want to apologize, because I was a complete jerk to you the other month. I was just going through my talk page tonight and looked back on some of the things I said to you and to other editors and started thinking, and I just felt really stupid afterwards. I never meant to be disrespectful, I was stressed and just got a little hot-headed, which is really no excuse and I feel ashamed about it. I'm sorry for how I treated you. --Eddster (talk) 03:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

@Eddster: No worries, I appreciate the apologies though, I can understand we all get a little stressed out when someone reverts you. STATic message me! 05:40, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Warrior (Kesha album) - party rap?

Hi, Static, noticed that the genre in the infobox or sentence contains genre says "party rap" which source says "party rap breakdown". I've been refused "party rap" is a type of rap or a genre. Can you figure it out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.179.251 (talk) 10:36, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

• 12george1 (submissions) and TropicalAnalystwx13 (submissions) were the first people to score, for the good article Tropical Storm Bret (1981) and its good article review respectively. 12george1 was also the first person to score in 2012 and 2013.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) scored the first ITN points for 2014 North American polar vortex.
• WonderBoy1998 (submissions) scored points for an early good topic, finishing off Misplaced Pages:Featured topics/She Wolf.
• TheAustinMan (submissions) scored the first bonus points of the competition, for his work on Typhoon Vera.
• Igordebraga (submissions) has scored the highest number of bonus points for a single article, for the high-importance Jurassic Park (film).

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Misplaced Pages's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

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 Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Queens of the Stone Age genre problem

Hi, I was watching interviews with Joshua Homme and Its come up so many times already, He clearly states he doesn't want the specific 'Stoner Rock' genre label, wouldn't you agree that the artist has more say than the fans? In this specific video >"Sound Opinions with Joshua Homme". I honestly don't care if this change is made, I'm just providing evidence as to why I made the edit.

Video Link Here! >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYG2OEJTL4Q , specifically at the time 08:56, so you can hear it straight from Homme's mouth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.130.0.116 (talk) 08:14, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

There was a discussion on the article talk page with consensous to include it, you may leave comments there. Just know that our genre field is just not a replication of what the band wants to be known as. STATic message me! 08:18, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello STATic

Hey, you recently requested speedy deletion for an article that I created because it was similar to another article. I apologize because I had no knowledge of the other article. Is there any way you could help me create the article? Dare2beyou (talk) 23:51, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

@Dare2beyou: It was deleted because there was a deletion discussion at Misplaced Pages: Articles for deletion/Deezy that deemed the subject was not notable. Along with that, the subjects article has been deleted over and over do to promotional accounts creating it and just generally the person not being significant enough for a Misplaced Pages article. We do not generally have topics on subjects that do not meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. Also you please remove the various HTML tags from your signature as it messes up the format of everything after your signature. STATic message me! 00:08, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		A fire broke out in several articles on Misplaced Pages today. It was confirmed to be arson - set by a group of vandals looking for trouble. Luckily, STATicVapor came to the rescue. Armed with Huggle and Twinkle, he began to extinguish the flames and restored the articles to their un-charred state. The valuable information he sent to the administrators enabled them to arrest the appropriate vandals and keep them from causing more harm. I, k6ka, am proud to present you, STATicVapor, this honourable barnstar to adorn on your wall for bravery, courage, and dedication to keeping the encyclopedia safe for everyone! K6ka (talk | contribs) 02:59, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

@K6ka: Thanks a lot for the barnstar! I really appreciate it and for your kindness you have earned a place on my userpage for the near future. STATic message me! 03:40, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Like Toy Soldiers

Static, I see you've been active in EMINEM related article so I came here to ask you whether you'd help me make this article a . I am not familiar with reliable sources in this particular topic and have no familiarity at all, so could you please help? Instead of just jumping right in I wanted to learn the hopes to make the work a bit easier. Thanks. Soham 05:42, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

@Soham: I would really be happy to, the article looks like it needs a lot of work though. If you are looking for what are reliable music sources, see WP:ALBUMS/SOURCES, that is a good listing of reliable sources related to music. STATic message me! 01:29, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks, if I need any help I'll knock on your door. Soham 07:06, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

@Soham: Do not hesitate to my friend. STATic message me! 07:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

MeetMe

It does make more sense in the history section, thank you for putting it there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hrmhrm (talk • contribs) 20:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank You

Just wishing you much thanks. Thank you for making the hip hop section of Misplaced Pages the way it is today. TwinTurbo (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

@TwinTurbo: You're welcome, I appreciate it. STATic message me! 01:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Billy Gunn

ok no problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moel 5.0 (talk • contribs) 06:23, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Motionless In White Correction

Heyy! I took into consideration that you deleted the influence section on article Motionless In White. I took my time out to search for their influences and the respected reference to back it up. Please don't delete this. If there's an error, please notify me. Thank you.

Slippery When Wet by Bon Jovi?

Hey dude, I am sorry for what I done but if you click on the link from the Slippery When Wet album, it brings you to Allmusic and then it says all the genres and then it says that the album is Glam Metal, Heavy Metal and Hard Rock. Am not sure if that is a good link but Slippery When Wet is more than just Hard rock. I am very sorry for what I really done. If you want me to add Glam metal and Hard rock I can do that because the link explains that the album is Glam metal and hard rock and heavy metal. I am sorry for what I done.

Sorry, but if I could add Glam metal and Hard rock I would, only if you want me to do it. The link says it's Glam metal and heavy metal and hard rock so I was kind of confused there. Sorry.

Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.133.242.45 (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Declined speedy

Hey, I've declined the speedy on DJ Cheapshot. The affiliation with the other groups is enough to where he passes speedy criteria, so AfD is probably the next step for this if you want to pursue further deletion. Some of the groups he's affiliated with have articles, so you'll have to show that these specific groups fail notability criteria in order to show that he fails GNG for music people. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Re: Restoring Force revision "Not a professional review site."

You reverted an edit I made under the Professional ratings/reviews scores section of Of Mice & Men's Restoring Force, citing that the score is "Not a professional review site." By what measure are you measuring the professionalism of a site? TheIronCouncil (talk) 14:49, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@TheIronCouncil: See Misplaced Pages:ALBUM/REVSIT, that is the list. STATic message me! 16:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@STATicVapor: The link you cited reads: "This list is also merely a collection of suggestions, and other good sources may exist....Specifically, reviews should be written by professional music journalists or DJs, or found within any online or print publication having a (paid or volunteer) editorial and writing staff (which excludes personal blogs), and must be from a source that is independent of the artist, record company, etc" and The Monolith unequivocally falls under that category. On any given page it lists the members of editorial and writing staff. TheIronCouncil (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@TheIronCouncil: Take it to WT:ALBUMS and propose it to be added to the page then. I do not see much indication that they are a professional review site, or that Tommy Wills is a known music critic that has worked for any major magazine or review website in the past. Also if they were used by Metacritic or AnyDecentMusic? that would work in their favor, but I do not see any indication of that. STATic message me! 19:05, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@STATicVapor: According to the guidelines (which you cited) both of those points are irrelevant, and your definitions of "known" and "professional" seem subjective. There is only one other review on there currently. Is removing it really necessary? It provides readers with an opinion from a published and established source.TheIronCouncil (talk) 21:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

No they are not, you are completely missing every point I am making, as you are just focused on your goal. There is zero proof that the site or the writer are professionals, and that is why it will be not included. My definitions are not subjective, they are facts, I am sorry we cannot include every little blog writers review in the article. Again with the false statements though, there are five reviews, not one. The source is a self-published non-established blog. STATic message me! 21:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

@STATicVapor: Yes, there is a goal. But AGAIN, the guidelines do not say that either the site of the reviewer have to be "professional", whatever the definition (even though the site is over a year old, has an extensive staff, has hundreds of articles, and clearly receives promotional material from labels, PR companies etc, who consider it professional). That is my point, which you are missing. Seems you are over-simplifying the parameters. Won't argue any more, as it's not that important, but maybe try and be a bit less anal about this sort of thing.TheIronCouncil (talk) 23:09, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes it definitely does say that. A whole year? Dang guess they are the next Rolling Stone. So what if they receive PR and promotional content? So does every sort of known blog. STATic message me! 01:12, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

RE: Black Lip Pastor

Got it :)… Well, given that Cilvia Demo has sold more copies than other TDE releases besides Good Kid in their first week – possibly due to TDE's growing popularity – it didn't surprise me that it peaked higher. ??? 15:31, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Possible sock

Upon reviewing the contributions of a user named "Mr. Planck", I'm becoming a bit suspicious it might be another Monterrosa sock. Take a look and tell me what you think based on Monterrosa's past persistence. If this is in fact another sock, I will say it is more subtle than previous ones (namely IP's). XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 03:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: Thanks a lot for bringing this to my attention. I had reverted them after they added the same occupations on Neil Patrick Harris that the sockmaster had, but did not think twice about it. Now that I see the contributions, it is without a doubt Monterrosa and I have opened a SPI on the new account. STATic message me! 04:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Justin Bieber

Just want you to know the last talk (BLPN) we had did get the section removed January 3, 2014. We should keep up the consensus that is only a month old. On a side note disappointing that we have to do this every few months for the same shit.... We should link the 10 or so BLPN that have gotten this tabloid stuff removed ever-time. -- Moxy (talk) 07:51, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

@Moxy: Looks like it, however the section I was in contention with was the last one that you removed. The Miami arrest of DUI, drag racing and driving without a license occurred after that BLPN discussion. Also, the section in total is much better written and completely different from the section in that version of the page. Not all of it is just the tabloid folder like the previus version, the section consists primary of notable events now, per WP:WELLKNOWN. However, some of your comments on the talk page made sense, and the section needs trimming, but removing it completely is uncalled for. STATic message me! 07:57, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Actually we should "err on the side of caution" when it comes to BIOs always. Also the bold edits have been reverted ...so we talk about the concerns raised. We dont jam stuff in after many reverts and many concerns raised...this is the basic of how we do things here. -- Moxy (talk) 08:06, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi STATic, thank you for your contribution to the RfC on Justin Bieber's behaviour and legal issues. Some users have posted that the RfC is currently a mess, and that we need to be very explicit in what we agree to include and what we don't. As such, I have created a second survey, which cuts the content into points. Could you take the time to post your opinion on each point, whether you think it should be included or not, or summarized, or changed. It will be a bit tedious but we need your detailed input to move forward. Thanks again. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 05:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello STATic, sorry to bother you again about Bieber. Unfortunately, only 5 of the 16 editors who posted their opinion in the General survey part of Bieber's RfC posted again in the point-by-point survey. Progress simply isn't made - could you help to post in the responses to above points subsection to move it forward? Thank you very much. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 08:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

hes jewish!

danny mcbride is part jewish his mother is part his grandma is half — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.123.235.28 (talk) 23:02, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Pharrell Williams

Hi STATicVapor. Pharrell rap's nickname is Skateboard P. He's been saying that all over and if you listened to his album you should know that. Please answer soon, ErezCorech. Erezcorech (talk) 16:47, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

@Erezcorech: Did you not read my edit summary? See Template: Infobox musical artist/doc, the section is not for nicknames, only official stage names that the artist performs under or releases music under. STATic message me! 17:01, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Editor DQtheBoss

Hello, STATicVapor. This editor (DQtheBoss) came up on my radar while patrolling for vandalism and other unconstructive edits. Perhaps you would not mind checking to see if this editor is editing appropriately? You are more familiar with music material than I am, and I am not familiar with the topics DQtheBoss is editing, though I am familiar with some of the musical artists. Flyer22 (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

And I see that he just edited an article that you are clearly watching. Flyer22 (talk) 23:59, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

@Flyer22: I noticed their edits immediately upon getting back online today. The account clearly seems to be a vandalism only account as they are going around vandalizing articles and adding deliberate factual errors. I just reported them to WP:AIV. STATic message me! 01:10, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Okay, STATicVapor, thanks. I see that he is now indefinitely blocked. And Koala15 was helping to revert him. Flyer22 (talk) 01:36, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

CM Punk

Your revert to my edits were borderline on bad faith. You didn't work to fix the references "problem" that you saw, you completely undid my edits to the text as well. A three (formerly four) sentence paragraph does not need the same two sources pasted again and again after every full stop. Please do not revert/undo my edit again. Antoshi ☏ ★ 17:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Antoshi: Sorry, if you make incorrect edits and make content unverifiable it will be reverted, no question about it. If you would have bothered to see my next edit, I fixed it in the correct way that you should have. STATic message me! 18:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

My edit was not incorrect—the citations are still there, but not in the overkill method of posting them after every sentence. Yes, I did see your next edit but, again, you completely undid my changes to the text and left it that way. Putting it at the end of the first and last sentence probably isn't too much of a compromise, but it still seems silly to post the same thing multiple times in such a short span. If anything, I'd imagine it could confuse the reader as they may think there's more information beyond the first couple of cites, only to realize it's the same links repeated. Antoshi ☏ ★ 19:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Antoshi: Now they are, in your first attempt they were not clearly citing the content as is required. I agree it did look bad and was overkill, that is why I edited it after I reverted, you are acting like I reverted you and did not touch the content again. The revert was only to help me get the content back, so I could then edit it, there is no reason to get so upset about it. But the way you did edit it (the first time) made the content look unsourced as you should be able to clearly see that. STATic message me! 19:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Look at my diff again. I didn't remove the citations, I removed the excess ones after the first, the ones using the refname. Antoshi ☏ ★ 22:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Antoshi: Yes check the diff again, you left "By Wednesday, WWE.com stopped advertising Punk for future events. The Wrestling Observer reported Punk had legitimately left the event on Monday after telling Vince McMahon he was "going home"" seemingly unsourced.STATic message me! 22:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Because it was already cited... I don't understand why this is such a huge deal. It's right there for the reader to check, just go back a couple sentences. Antoshi ☏ ★ 22:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Antoshi: The citation should come at the the end of the cited material so it is clear that it is cited by the sources and not just unsourced content, which would be subject to immediate removal on a BLP. WP:INTEGRITY is what you should be looking at. STATic message me! 23:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

The Marshall Mathers LP 2

Just here to discuss. :P So far, there has been no "Headlights" single. There has only been a "Headlights" promotional single, released to radio last week in Australia. Adding (radio) to a single listing in an infobox is, to my understanding, is the accepted way to list promotional singles, otherwise not actual singles, in the infobox. RazorEye ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 04:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

@RazorEyeEdits: A release to radio, is a single release. A small limited radio release the week of the album's release is one thing, but a release to Top-40 radio months later in a major English speaking country, still counts as a single release. At least in hip hop, radio is the only possible release besides digital download (which never occurs after the album's release), since CD and vinyl releases for singles are basically unhearded of in 2014. Not even Pop acts receive those sort of releases these days, and format are not specified in their articles either. As you can see by the sources cited in "Headlights" article and , it is the album's fifth overall single. STATic message me! 04:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

This is assuming promotional singles (the definition of which is literally singles released to radio), are singles, which they're not, really. Every Promo CD you find will say either "Promo Only", "Not for Sale", or a variation of the same phrase. Promotional singles co-exist with Promotional EPs and Promotional albums aswell, which is why certain non-single songs can still be played on the radio. Basically, what I'm saying is that a single is a music release that is commercially sold, and can be released on any format. A promotional single is a music release that is released promotionally and is not commercially sold, including singles released for free. A release to radio is not a commercial release, so it cannot be bought or sold, unlike singles, albums and EPs.

Since not a lot of people get this, however, promotional singles are being grouped with singles on Misplaced Pages, considering it's the same type of release (Short, usually 1-track music releases are usually Singles as opposed to Albums and EPs, but that's a debate on it's own!). One of the many ways Promotional singles are included with singles is the addition of promo singles to album infoboxes. Adding (Promo) isn't feasible, since not a lot of people will understand what the word promo, in relation to music, is. This is why (radio) is added instead, since "Radio single" is already a popular term to describe a promotional single. This is the reason why I added (radio) to the infobox in the first place, and quite reasonably, I don't see what the problem is other than yet another misunderstanding of promotional singles. RazorEye ⡭ ₪ ·o' ⍦ ࿂ 07:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

However, an official release to radio as a single occurred. It is not even a country specific release, as it is being released to the second biggest radio format in the US in less than a month. As I said, the sources that are cited refer to the song as the fifth single, not as a promotional single, so it would be WP:OR to called it this, or to just call it a radio single. It is an official single. STATic message me! 05:03, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Street King

I must again apologize for my disruptive editing as I did on Street King Immortal. The article had to be redirected because the album was experiencing numerous delays. I promise it won't happen again. DBrown SPS 13:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBrown SPS (talk • contribs)

Hiding this here. You'll know what I mean. The accessdates are the key to finding "Mr Sawko" if he turns up again. Even the newest accounts did not put the year in the accessdates for the signature moves. - fan of JoMo - 08:57, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Jimmy Henchman page

I noticed that someone keeps wiping out all the work on the Jimmy Henchman page. I know you worked hard on it as did I and many other people. Some editors are wiping out everything including Henchman's new convictions etc. It's already been litigated. Do you have any tips on how to keep this from happening again? Scholarlyarticles (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for your courageous work on the Jimmy Henchman page. Scholarlyarticles (talk) 22:33, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

@Scholarlyarticles: Thanks, I tried to help as much as I can, but with all the disruptive editors on the page now, I see it as usless to argue, as I doubt we will ever win. STATic message me! 05:04, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Maybe but it was litigated a long time ago. I left a note on Dennis Brown's page who helped mediate. It might be worth giving him a yodel.Scholarlyarticles (talk) 05:22, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I thought you might want to know, we're being tag-teamed by 3 people who are coordinating efforts off the talk page. (I've found the relevant diffs). Some of the people have been involved in this for a couple years. One administrator who has involved in this attack was ousted from the board. She left a year and a half ago after she kept trying to get the whole page squashed and then trying to get certain parts removed- it was resolved by Dennis Brown. This came up again because an anonymous IP address, Henchman's agent, lodged a complaint elsewhere on WP on January 23, 2014. The three editors involved coordinated off the Henchman talk page and decided to attack the page again as of January 23, 2014. They didn't let the talk page know of the complaint or their intended attack or of their coordination. They won't hear of logic. This has been going on for near 2 years. I just wanted you to know I recognize your frustration and commend you efforts. Please don't get discouraged. I'm creating an analysis of the diffs to present to the appropriate people and places. Haven't worked so hard since my dissertation. Best wishesScholarlyarticles (talk) 18:41, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

@Scholarlyarticles: Yes, three stubborn editors all in coalition, it is ridiculous. I tried to fight back the first few days, but after blocks were threatened towards me and TheRedPen's violation of 3rr was deemed appropriate, it became much to stressful to me. I would be happy to help more, but my time on Misplaced Pages is clogged up in more pressing and much less stressful issues. Just keep in mind, these users are not listening or abiding by the agents wishes, I believe the editor removed anything he didn't deem in his "almighty wisdom", that was not backed by a reliable source, when definitely some of it was, including the 2Pac issue. I believe their major problem was that most of the content was backed by trial documents which them deemed unreliable, primary sources. STATic message me! 19:19, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

FYI, there was NO "TheRedPen's violation of 3rr" - as WP:3RR clearly states that removal of inappropriate and inappropriately sourced content about living people are exempt actions under 3RR and per WP:BLP and actions that MUST be taken. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

So @TheRedPenOfDoom: which one of us are you stalking? Time to get a life my friend. Again you are wrong about that, you crying BLP, BLP, over and over is the only reason anyone listened to you. You are way to much to deal with, that is why I chose not to carry on the issue, so get over it. STATic message me! 20:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, when there are issues of WP:BLP that are being broken, people listen. You should, too.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:04, 21

You have nerves of steel Vapor. And Red, the exact same BLP issues were looked at in 2012 when you were edit warring then with your previous companion. Your new complaints are noted and will be taken under advisement (as will your tactics for examining them). Keep up the good work, Vapor. All the best, Scholarlyarticles (talk) 22:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Navboxes

As a frequent user of WP:TFD, and someone who understands how navboxes work, I wonder if you'd like to weigh in at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Agriculture#Breed navboxes. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

You may also be interested to join WP:WikiProject Navigation templates, where we could centralise these sorts of discussions. --Rob Sinden (talk) 09:06, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

User:71.47.11.191

User:71.47.11.191 is still vandalizing articles even after warning. What is the next step to prevent this?--SportsMaster (talk) 08:26, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Same for User:72.222.195.252, see User_talk:72.222.195.252#February_2014. Anything that can be done about this? Arne Brasseur (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

@Arne Brasseur: For 72.222.195.252, it has been much to long since their final warning for them to receive a block, also their edit sure looked like vandalism, but I just amended the discography to how it should look per WP:WPMAG. The section should only list their major works (usually just studio album), really minor mixtapes and compilations should generally be left to the main discography page. If we included every single project, you could imagine how long page's like Lil Wayne's would get. STATic message me! 16:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

@SportsMaster: I reported 71.47.11.191 to WP:AIV due to them already receiving a final warning this month. In the future, just make a report on WP:AIV if you ever seen a user/IP having already received a final warning within the last two/three weeks or so, instead of warning them again. However, I just checked again and the user has not edited in three days, so the report might be declined for being stale. STATic message me! 16:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Reason

And your reason if wanting me to have a permenant block is because I wrote on his talk page that he was blocked for the period of six months? Ok I'll tell you why I did that because he did it too me and I wasn't able to get rid of it do to me only being able to edit my user talk page only and for those three to four months everyone saw I was blocked, I was humiliated. Imagine that happening to you, would you have done the same thing to show that person who humiliated you and cast you out as a sockpuppet so that nobody trusts you on Misplaced Pages. That is why I did that. - TreCoolGuy

@TreCoolGuy: I understand how you must have felt, but in no way does that give you the right to vandalize his page. STATic message me! 20:32, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Then you understand why I did that. I know it wasn't the right thing to do, hell I should have thought before doing so. I just wanted to show him how it felt. - TreCoolGuy

(talk page stalker) Yeah......there is just so much wrong with your reasoning and actions. You don't stoop as low as someone else, just to retaliate. That not only bad Wiki etiquette, that's just general bad etiquette. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

'One Piece' Page Change Enquiry

Hey Static, Just realised you changed the edit of one piece that i did today. I added the genre 'fantasy' to the page because it is. It contains dragons, talking toys, mermaids, talking fish, giants and other mythical creatures featured in the series. As such all of these features fit in the fantasy genre. From this information could you please undo the edit to the page that you have done or let me change it back to what I did earlier today. Thanks for listening (and hopefully understanding what I'm trying to say)

Pat9110 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pat9110 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

@Pat9110: See WP:OR, we need reliable sources that label it under that genre. Also, if you would have read the hidden note, it said genre changes need to be discussed on Talk: One Piece. STATic message me! 17:07, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Akons new album "Not released"

Hi there. I am kinda new (well I've been here for a while, but I kind of never spend time editing...)

Anyway, I don't understand, are you some kind of moderator or something? You reverted this: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Akon_discography&oldid=595212856&diff=prev With the comment "yes it is not", by reverting it back to "released: 2014". Obviously I am confused, since you're basically agreeing to my edit...

Please excusse potentialy bad grammar, English isn't a tongue-language, and I am typing a litle fast here...

Mahnas 92 (talk) 20:37, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

@Mahnas 92: No worries, and yeah it is yet to be released, which is clear as there is no release date there. But it is due for release this year, that is why it just says 2014. STATic message me! 20:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

I still don't see the logic in that. If it is "due to 2014", and it is stated it will be released as CD/Digital DL, shouldn't there be a reference? There are no (reliable) sources for this! The album release has been delayed ever since 2010 too! Could you please explain this to me.

Mahnas 92 (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

@Mahnas 92: CD/Digital is a given, not as a Vinyl release would be dubious. As for a 2014 release, I could not find a source, so I am going to change it to "TBA". STATic message me! 21:50, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, of course it is, that's not what I meant. I meant that when this info is stated and "released" states "2014" instead of "Not Yet Released", this, by logic, implies the album is released 2014 in the given formats...

As long s there is no explaing from your side, as giving a reference to some kind of "standardization" of how to use different terms, I don't understand what got into your mind to actually revert the simple, and completly correct three-word edit. Mahnas 92 (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

ARTPOP Consensus

"Change it again and suffer the consequences" - Are you serious? Are you a villain from a bad 80s movie? Look, my edits on the ARTPOP page (and others, as you seem to be following me around now) have been an uphill battle against you until I prove, without a shred of doubt, that what I'm saying is fact and you physically can't oppose me anymore. As shown by numerous messages on this talk page, you've run into opposition quite often and don't like having your edits questioned and respond with hostility and threats; in this case, those cannot be allowed to work. I've sourced two different, highly credible sources that prove what I'm trying to state and you continue to revert and threaten anyway based on... your own opinion? Yes, there are more mixed reviews on Metacritic but the consensus is "generally favorable", and as I've pointed out, multiple other wikipedia album pages in that situation still read 'generally positive", but if you want to completely discredit that source, fine. The Huffington Post is not a source you can just discredit as my own "incorrect interpretation": it lists multiple high profile reviews and states that the consensus is positive. That's indisputable. You've called my edits biased because they tend to have a generally positive trend to them, but they are the way they are because the ARTPOP page was one with a negative bias when I started editing it; in this situation, the facts are not on your side. I don't know why you've tried to incite some kind of personal war against me (attempting to revert my edits on pages completely unrelated to the one where our disagreement originated) but I don't wish for it to continue. You can't really argue against this edit (even if other users agree with you, they're operating on their own conjecture and not sourcing anything. That's not reliable or factual in any way and is something that you've tried to use against me in the past), so please just let it be. This is absolutely exhausting. Reece Leonard (talk) 01:47, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: Haha, I am not actually, but hey it sure got you to stop ;-). Keep being paranoid, but on that ONE page, I have had Date Night watchlisted. There has never been a negative bias, just you not editing with a WP:NPOV. Also, vandalism complaining about me reverting them, is not opposition. I have no time to read your wall of text, the consensus among six editors (including you) is against you, end of story. Do not bring it back months later thinking the controversial content will be magically allowed now, because it wont. Reviews were mixed and you just admitted that more reviews were mixed, so why in the world would we change it to just positive. I get it, you are a huge fan, but changing it over and over against consensus wont result in anything, but your eventual block. STATic message me! 01:54, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Where are you getting that I admitted that the consensus was mixed? I've argued against that statement multiple times. You're foregoing the facts and just running with your own opinion that the critical consensus is mixed. It's not true and you continually fail to address the fact that there are no sources backing up what you're saying. We disagree on an edit; you can't just delete my changes on some implication that I'm a fan of Lady Gaga when I'm giving you sources that say the opposite of what you're saying and then refuse to address my points entirely because you don't feel like it. That, my friend, would be vandalism. (Also, I have no intention of stopping because what I'm saying is sourced and factual) Reece Leonard (talk) 02:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard:Again, see our policy WP:CONSENSUS, this is not "you vs. me", it is you vs. five different editors that clearly disagree with your edit. STATic message me! 02:17, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

None of you have sourced anything. (I can bold things too) Reece Leonard (talk) 02:26, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: Metacritic is the source, it clearly shows that more reviews have been mixed, which you have admitted. Either way, WP:CONSENSUS is all that matters. Sometimes I feel like I have to bold things to combat your illiteracy. STATic message me! 02:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Let me first point out the laughably conflicting nature of you pointing out that I have, in fact, agreed that there are more mixed reviews then positive on Metacritic and then spitting accusations of illiteracy in reference to the same piece of information that you simultaneously claim I've ignored and admitted to. I've stated, multiple times now, that a focus on the number of categorical reviews is an overly simplistic approach that Metacritic itself does not adhere to. The source that you claim to be citing undermines your argument; Metacritic presents a mathematically calculated weighted score based on the philosophy that large journals such as Entertainment Weekly, Billboard, etc. have accrued more integrity over their run and, in turn, have more bearing on the ultimate consensus, which is why the consensus reads "generally favorable reviews". According to your logic (again, that Metacritic does not adhere to), small blog-based start-up sites that have a history of false reporting (the Examiner, to give an example) would be given equal weight in deciding the consensus as an established and respected journal like Entertainment Weekly. I've spelled this issue out multiple times, but instead of responding to it with sources or even measured argument, you've resorted to repeating your original argument of "Numbers!!!!! More mixed reviews!!! That's all that matters!!!" and threatening to block me from editing for questioning your own viewpoint of the critical consensus that blatantly ignores the consensus listed on the only source you have. In regards to the other wikipedia users who have agreed with you; you have to admit that their arguments are rarely coherent and ultimately repeat the same argument "there are more mixed reviews listed and that's all that matters" that I've already raised issue with. Rushton2010 spouted off his own personal narrative based on his research in reading the reviews (a practice you've accused me of in the past and pointed out was against the guidelines of wikipedia); the others acted on similar lines (Sven Manguard gave his own personal interpretation of a 60% Metacritic score, again, against the policies of wikipedia in your own words, as did Smarty9108). You keep redirecting me to various guideline pages in the hopes that that will make you out to seem like the educated veteran dealing with a persistent and ignorant nuisance, but the fact is the page on consensus states, and I quote: "The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view." - You've discussed your own personal interpretation of one source (that the source doesn't concur with) and I've given you another valid one from a respectable journal that lists multiple different reviews and draws the conclusion that the consensus was positive and instead of responding to that in any way (other than calling it an "early" list of reviews when you've previously attempted to use smaller, lesser sources that not only didn't refer to other reviews, but that were published on dates on or very close to the date that my new source was published to support your factually inaccurate opinion of the consensus), you just repeated your original argument of "Numbers!!! More mixed reviews!! That's all that matters!!" again. I came back four months later (after being ignored in the talk page for that duration of time; how do you expect me to react if I can't engage in debate to make the truth available for your consumption?) and attempted to assert my factually sourced consensus with a new source and you responded with a threat. I've laid out the facts. The consensus is generally positive. Not unanimously positive, not simply "positive", but generally positive. That's not me saying that, it's the source you claim to be citing and The Huffington Post. End of story. (Sidenote: most of the "mixed" reviews on Metacritic are 60, AKA one point below positive, and have obvious positive leanings, but that's too obvious and lengthy to go into detail about. I won't go into detail on the numerous critics who have taken issue with the biased and unintelligible reviews that critics gave the album as that's not the issue here, but that is also something to take into account.) Reece Leonard (talk) 05:12, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: WP:CONSENSUS is the relevant policy, so now stop bugging, you are wasting your time and energy. None of your long responses are going to change the policy. You're not gonna achieve any consensus here and I can tell you right now my opinion is not going to change. So if someone agrees with you on Talk: Artpop then we can return to that discussion, if not then just let it go. 05:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

If you will so arrogantly refuse to adhere to well-sourced fact out of your own blind ignorance and adherence to a policy that I've already proved doesn't support your claims and logic that I've repeatedly pointed out as faulty because my responses are "long", then fine. A consensus has not been reached as I am and will continue to be a dissenting voice and your repeated linking to WP:CONSENSUS is undermining your argument. I will look elsewhere for support, but be certain that I will refer to your refusal to budge if you oppose me again. Reece Leonard (talk) 05:49, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Road to Paloma

Would you mind joining the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Road to Paloma? --Captain Assassin! 03:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

Antonio Cesaro‎

Regarding your revert, yes there IS a need to be that specific. If you read WP:RELTIME, you'll see that words like currently are not preferred. Entries should be time specific. NJZombie (talk) 03:46, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Getting it right regarding "Happy" (Pharrell Williams song)"

Dear Mr STATicVapor, I couldn't help but notice that you didn't approve of me adding the correct song writing credits for the https://en.wikipedia.org/Happy_(Pharrell_Williams_song) As it is now, the key info of credits for https://en.wikipedia.org/Happy_(Pharrell_Williams_song) is false. Pharrell Williams did NOT write the key in that song = the chorus.

THE ORIGINAL (1977) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJDFZCY14Ug&feature=kp

Best Regards,

Matt Mellow, Stockholm, Sweden. MattMellow (talk) 04:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

@MattMellow: Misplaced Pages is not the place to fight out legal disputes. All content must be backed by reliable sources not YouTube videos. STATic message me! 21:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Actual Person writing Biography

I am Alonzo Holt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.22.251 (talk) 04:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I know for a fact you are not signed to OVO Sound or Cash Money Records, so stop. STATic message me! 05:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Personally, I think thanks to Holt (if we are to believe that that is who he is) has single-handedly expanded the article 5x. All we need to do is get rid of some of the unsourced/poorly sourced content and do some other fixes and we have a DYK hook.--Launchballer 10:47, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

@Launchballer: No need to change my signature, their might be stuff that needs to be removed from it, but I like it how it appears. About Holt, there's no doubt that his song charted on the UK Singles Chart, the content "he" has been adding to the article is clearly false. Looking online I see zero coverage of the artist in reliable sources, so they do not look to pass WP:GNG to me. STATic message me! 17:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Mmm. I should've smelt a rat when he changed the chart positions to those of You're Nobody 'til Somebody Loves You! My problem with your signature is not the stuff in it, but the order of the stuff; I use WP:SYNTAXHIGHLIGHER, and it breaks the entire page for me. Hence my rearrangement of the bits.--Launchballer 17:44, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

@Launchballer: Oh okay, no issue then. I just recently fixed it anyways so you wont have to worry about doing that again. Not sure what to do with this article though, I am thinking AfD, but I think I will only do that if this person returns to adding the hoax content, because if they do not stop it'll just become tedious. STATic message me! 21:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Associated acts on My Chemical Romance

You have a point with Electric Century, probably not noteworthy yet. However The Used do not fit the criteria for association. As stated on the wiki page for Template:Infobox_musical_artist "The following uses of this field should be avoided:. One-time collaboration for a single, or on a single song" Nitromaster (talk) 21:08, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

@Nitromaster: But as I said, the bands did tour together, which is one of the other criteria for listing acts, which is present in the templates documentation. STATic message me! 21:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

You mean the line "toured with as a single collaboration act playing together"? That means them playing on the same stage at the same time. Else it'd be a really long list as every band they ever toured with would be notable.... Nitromaster (talk) 21:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for being so calm and professional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoodGod13 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Great job on the edits - question about e-cigs page

Hey StaticVapor, Great job on keeping it all under control on the pages. Wanted to know your opinion with the latest happenings in the e-cig industry. Can we add the latest Altria acquisition? These acquisitions are changing the e-cig industry. Didn't want to make any additions without your input. Thanks! Itsabouttime Itsabouttime (talk) 13:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@Itsabouttime: I just patrol vandalism on that page. I have no idea about anything going on the industry, and most of all would not know what constitutes a reliable source, since it is not my subject of knowledge. If you want input on anything it would be better to go to Talk: Electronic cigarette. STATic message me! 16:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion. Will do.

Itsabouttime (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Artpop". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot  19:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the edit (& a question)

As a newbie to Misplaced Pages editing: thanks for the quick simplifying edit to the genre label for the People Under The Stairs page I've been working on. I was under the impression that we wanted to be more detailed, so I went overboard. I've made conforming edits to all of the group's album pages as well. I noticed you've been doing this a while, so I have a question for you, though (sorry if this gets long...):

I've been tasked by Thes One (from People Under The Stairs) to spearhead a fan effort to bulk up the group's pages (because I've done other web work previously), add information where it is missing, get some citations in there, etc. (They've been in the "underground" rap game for nearly 20 years now, and they've had modest sales, so I think it's time.) I've still got a long road ahead of me, but in the meantime, I hit a snag that I hope a more experienced editor of Misplaced Pages can help me with:

Some history: I put in a request a few days back to change the page title to capitalize the "The" in "People Under the Stairs", and it was approved. My justification was that the group has stylized it this way on their albums and at shows since their third album in 2002, it's like this on their official page, all their social media contain it this way, and they're known as "PUTS", not "PUtS" or "PUS" (thank god). Just like "KISS" or "CunninLynguists", it's a common and widely-held stylization, not a preference.

Anyway, while making conforming changes to all the PUTS links across Misplaced Pages, a guy un-did the capitalization edit on the CunninLynguists page, and when I gently turned it back (citing the reasons I just gave you above), the guy un-did my undo, and took the further step of reverting my initial edit to the People Under The Stairs page title (back to "the"). He also posted some stuff on my talk page that I'm not sure I fully agree with regarding reliable sources (I could come with just as many to refute his point... Pandora, MySpace, Discogs, etc.), and said that the group's opinion doesn't matter.

I believe you've clashed with this user a couple of times as well, and his move smacks of retaliation (but maybe that's me being paranoid). He doesn't seem to let go very easily when challenged, too, which may mean that I may regret any consensus or dispute efforts that I undertake. I'm all about civility and not looking to get into any gigantic wiki editing conflicts or reversion wars; I just want to do my best to fix the PUTS pages up a bit (in the most wiki-editor-appeasing fashion), and then leave well enough alone.

So now the question: does he have a leg to stand on, and I'm being a little nitpicky here? Being someone who's been on wiki a while, do you think I should push or just leave it alone? I'd appreciate your opinion. Thanks. Respectfully, PatrickTaormina (talk) 16:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@PatrickTaormina: My mistake I completely forgot to respond to this. No problem about the genre edit, keep in mind unless the act is pioneer/flagbearer for a specific subgenre (Kid Cudi and alternative hip hop, Eazy-E and gangsta rap), then the genre should just be kept at Hip hop on a rapper's article. I do notice that both their pages seem to be in good shape, so good job on that. However, per WP:ALLCAPS and WP:TM generally, as long as other reliable sources use PUtS, even if it is the minority, it should be what is used. That is why the KISS article is at Kiss (band). Trust me, I was very annoyed when the same user got RZA moved to Rza and GZA moved to Gza, and Tech N9ne moved to Tech Nine??? too (thank god the last ones back), but when it is the MOS guideline, we kinda have to go by it. Same thing with People Under The Stairs, "the" is one of those words that is not capitalized in titles in encyclopedia's or books, even if it is the norm on official stuff, such as Nothing Was the Same. I can understand how your feeling though, he/she definitly does not like being challenged. So yes to answer a question, he does have one to stand on as it abides by the WP:MOS, so its just one of those things you have to live with. STATic message me! 19:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@STATicVapor: Oh, no problem at all. I figured it might take a sec; thanks for taking the time to respond. And thanks also for the props. I completely get where you're coming from. I actually had just erased my post here before you replied because I spoke to Thes One & he told me not to worry about it. He said (and I'm paraphrasing) that "The" is correct, but you have to play by the rules of the locals ("When in Rome...", and all that), so he didn't think starting anything would be a good idea. Now that you've essentially confirmed that, I'll consider it a done deal and keep moving with the more substantive things that are probably more worth my time. Glad we agree, and thanks again. Peace! PatrickTaormina (talk) 20:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

@PatrickTaormina: Yes, I was just going to tell you that. More worth your time writing and building content, rather then arguing about a minor thing. I am glad both you and Thes have a positive understanding about it. You're welcome, peace out bro. STATic message me! 21:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

do you have time to to look my sandbox and advise

I'm trying to show the disruptive edits and how the specific issues were resolved in 2012. Then I will consider with whom to air them. Because the specific issues the trio are edit warring about have been discussed and vetted once, it may be appropriate for the Arbitration Committee. You're more experienced that I and I was wondering if you can help by taking a look see at the case I'm building and if you have any diffs to add. By the way, I don't think it's the transcripts that are the issue. Scholarlyarticles (talk) 23:14, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

@Scholarlyarticles: I do not think they are going to listen to anything about 2012 or the former AfD, I saw all the drama you went through back then and I felt bad, that's basiclly the only reason I watched the page in the first place. I think it might be best to discuss every single bit of content they removed and state why you think it should be restored, and provide enough reliable sources for the addition where they can't say anything about it. STATic message me! 16:47, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I understand but the trio does not care about the sources if they've read them at all. RedPenofDoom seems to have a personal investment in presenting a slant. The new tag team seems to want to run us out by baiting, and harassing. They don't want to discuss content. RedPenofDoom deleted a number of times over the years without discussion. Back then in 2012, a group other editors sent me notifications to comment in what I now understand to be a request for help, but many didn't want to get openly involved. I guess that's because of who Henchman is. On the other hand, I was getting reverted and stalked, and gossiped about (offline).

For editors with a POV to email offline and speculate about the identity of editors who work on the pages of a violent criminal fretting his WP page is a safety issue here and very bad for WP. Scholarlyarticles (talk) 17:58, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

"For editors with a POV to email offline and speculate about the identity of editors..." Scholarlyarticles, what exactly are you referring to here? --NeilN 20:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

NeilN, I think there's been a misunderstanding. I wasn't referring to you or anyone currently on the board. I can see how some of the things I've said can be seen as cryptic and non-specific. The reason for the veiled references is because there was a situation a year and a half ago. I was told to de-emphasize anyone's mistakes. It was resolved. I'm not mentioning anyone by name. The person is gone. There was a consequent discussion between me (a newbie) and very knowledgable WP sources offline. They told me to downplay any mistakes. I've done it. Wild horses could not drag it out of me. It was not pleasant for anyone involved. I don't think anyone wants to go there again. Lets proceed by the Principle of Least Drama. Let's take the high road. Trevj is looking at a proposal so we can all put this behind us. BestScholarlyarticles (talk) 21:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hall of Fame (Big Sean album)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hall of Fame (Big Sean album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед (talk) 15:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

T.I. Image

What do you mean by free image? It's his instagram picture, no one is charging or copyrighting that picture? I don't understand why a 5 year old picture would be left on his page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 21:47, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: Well it is the best image we have available and it is not like he has gone under some drastic change, he still looks the same. Read WP:Image use policy. If only we were able to just take images from social networking sites, but we can't. They are not public domain. STATic message me! 21:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Go a bit easy on Alexrock98

Yeah, I get the editor doesn't get English Misplaced Pages, but the editor isn't a native English speaker. You just have to look at the grammar (the RIAA for instance). I'm sure the edits are sourced, and the editor's most recent edit actually added a source (for once), and the editor does need to provide the sources. In my opinion, it would be better to nudge the editor along and tag non-controversial material rather than remove it outright or have the editor blocked. This edit was a bit rough. I was checking the facts and found the RIAA certification while you were removing the material. Since I didn't have access to the templates, I made an intermediate edit and then found how to add the certification. Remember, don't bite the newcomers.

On the whole, though, you do a great job. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Thanks on the last point, same to you my friend. Not trying to bite the user at all, that is why I gave them only a level two "reminder" as I like to call them, just to tell them for about the fifth time that sources are required. I could have jumped right to level three or four due to the recenty of the block, but I am AGF with the editor. The fact that they did not respond to any of Serge's messages until after they were blocked, shows a competence problem however.. The only reason I reverted is as I can tell, the article does not mention any charting at all, so I assumed it could have just be straight incorrect. Any dubious unsourced content really should be removed per WP:V, but I am glad you found a source for it. But I guess it is all good as they are not really genre warring anymore and they have started to provide sources for their additions. STATic message me! 03:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Absurd comedy television series

Hi, I noticed you removed my edits. I'm not sure why, unless you've never seen the TV shows themselves. Or maybe you don't consider an animated cartoon to be comparable to live-action comedy. So I would love to hear your explanation. User:Kjell Knudde 6:11, 24 February 2014 (CET)

@Kjell Knudde: I do not see the word "absurd" in any of these articles, so it is WP:OR and not allowed. Categories must be supported by the article body. STATic message me! 05:15, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Production credit on godwilln'

Please do your research and google Buda da future and you will see we are a production duo, check twitter instagram YouTube and all other social media. We also advised the artist himself, he apologized for the mix up on the actual release. What ever else you need I can provide if you want the instrumental of the track or any other details of the actual beat I can provide that also. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandzmuzik (talk • contribs) 00:23, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

@Grandzmuzik: Okay, I found a source and added it back to the article. You should have explained this or provided a source the first time you were reverted, not wait till now. How were we supposed to know that you were not just seem struggle producer trying to get his name on Misplaced Pages? STATic message me! 00:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Input needed

Hi Static, can you please take a look at the Half of a Yellow Sun article. I was going through the article yesterday and changed the section "accolades" to "soundtrack". Jamie Tubers, a user working on the article, reverted my edit and said that my edit wasn't appropriate. Can you please read this section of the article and tell me if you would consider the release of the "Bother You" song an "accolade". (Section: Accolades). I left a note on the user talk page and provided several reliable references, which specifically state that the song is a soundtrack to the film. Here's a link to the thread on the user talk page: User talk:Jamie Tubers#Half of a yellow sun. I don't want to be involved in an edit war so I decided to leave a message on the user talk page. The user responded, completely ignoring the definition of accolade; he/she went as far as trying to justify his/her decision by highlighting few words here and there. Can you please take a look at that section of the article and read the thread I left on the user's talk page and tell me what you think. I would really appreciate that. Thanks! versace1608 (talk) 13:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Static, I'm still waiting for your response. Thanks! You proabably didn't see this section. You get tons of notes on a daily basis so it's easy to loose track of everything on your talk page. versace1608 (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@Versace1608: Sorry about that, I completly missed this. I took care of it though, an artist writing a song about it is nothing of an "accolade," no madder how huge the artist is in Africa. BTW I am not sure if you would know, but has D'banj officially left GOOD Music? I have noticed some rumors about it. STATic message me! 15:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I heard rumours about it too. The info on his official twitter account has been updated but this is still speculation. No reliable source has confirmed it. Once the news is confirmed, I'll let you know and you can update the good music article. And thanks for making the necessary corrections. versace1608 (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes exactly, I did not want to make any official change unless a reliable source had definitely reported it. And fosho sounds good. STATic message me! 20:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Main Chick by Kid Ink

You're right that there is no official radio release source yet but I find it laughable that you think the artist uploading the official artwork to the song on his vevo channel means "nothing". Juicy J did the same thing with Talkin Bout the week before he released that to radio — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 01:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: Hey it might mean something, but it would be WP:OR to assume that means it is the next single. Most of all being released that was does that not make it a single release date, as nothing was released. I monitor the radio release websites so if there is a release of course I catch it. I did create the article for the song, so of course I would hope it is the next single, but we have zero official confirmation for this. Speculation is not allowed. STATic message me! 03:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

My bad man, I remembered uploading the artwork when it became a single so I just got it confused when I was trying to remember the pages I made haha — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs)

@BlaccCrab: No worries aha, that's what it seemed like. Also, when you post on talk pages use ~~~~ to sign your name. STATic message me! 00:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yours Truly (Ariana Grande album)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Yours Truly (Ariana Grande album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zanimum -- Zanimum (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Please revert yourself

re: , read the WP:TPG. It is absolutely appropriate and within reason to collapse discussions that are not focused on improving article content and have wandered off of vague accusations of secrit cabals.

There is no reason for such content to be cluttering the talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Then collapse or better yet use <!-- --> to contain the "inappropriate" part of the discussion. A large majority of the conversation WAS about improving the article, no matter how you want to paint it. There is no such thing as cluttering a talk page, its a talk page, it will all be archived eventually. STATic message me! 17:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

It WAS collapsed. YOU removed the collapsing. And no, "hiding" it within hidden comment arrows is NOT how it is handled.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

and yes, there most certainly is cluttering the talk page with inappropriate content, like suggestions of secrit cabals and other commentary not about article content / sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:21, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@TheRedPenOfDoom: You do not know how to civilly talk to another human being do you? As I said, collapse the content about secret cabals and all that, but NOT the whole damn section. STATic message me! 17:44, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Obviously no one wants to edit-war with you over what should be collapsed. Since you uncollapsed it but now you're saying some of it ought to be collapsed, why don't you collapse what *you* think is inappropriate so that no one treads on your toes? Do you suppose it's "civil" to expect others to read your mind?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

@Alf.laylah.wa.laylah: I have not been following the discussion for many threads now, I honestly have no idea what TrpOD is referring to, all I saw is a bunch of my comments collapsed when I went to the talk page, when I was obviously not talking about "secret" cabals and all this stuff. STATic message me! 18:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Well if you're not following the discussion then why do you care what's collapsed? The talk page has become useless. If you really don't care, it would be easiest if you'd revert your uncollapse. If you do care, figure out what you think is relevant and collapse that. It seems simple.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

I just restored it, I cannot believe I was ever caught in this mess TrpOD made. No wonder I left that uncivil discussion. STATic message me! 18:09, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! And you're right, I also can't believe you ever got caught in incivil discussion! What a strange world we live in.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

The Yeezus Tour

I'm not sure what you mean when you wrote "well I'm sure you can't explain these changes." First off, the boxscore for most of the North American dates weren't even sourced when I first looked at the article. The source used for them was just a source saying how much the tour grossed so far, not the attendance and revenue for each venue. I had to find the source for these shows and cited all of them next to the leg name. With your recent edit, you added Drake, and some other rapper to the opening acts. The source for the opening act does not provide this information. All in all, I want to avoid an edit war with you. Thanks! — TheMadonnaMusicCN (talk, contribs) 07:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

@TheMadonnaMusicCN: You messed up the whole special guest section when you changed the table. I have been following the tour from the beginning and on kanyewest.com next to every show (before it happened), it said who the special guests were. You made them factully incorrect in multiple places, removing Kendrick Lamar from shows for some reason, saying Lamar and A Tribe Called Quest performed at the same shows, when that never happened. There were sources supporting surprise appearances from Drake, E-40 and Busta Rhymes before you changed the table and removed them. All in all, the table is better, the first time you made it you just messed up in quite a few places. STATic message me! 15:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Specification

Please be more specific! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachary10233 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Metallica

Hi, sorry for the revert, but they really are trash metal; see Slayer, Megadeath, Anthrax. Cheers, --IIIraute (talk) 06:50, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

@IIIraute: I understand that they are, I never said they weren't, but genre changes still need to be discussed on the talk page, as there is a current discussion about it. And WP:OSE. STATic message me! 07:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

I see - I wasn't aware of that ongoing discussion - I won't do any further edits/reverts until the matter is solved - though, I am not sure about the status quo ante; i.e. the condition the article was in before the Bold edit was made?! --IIIraute (talk) 07:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hall of Fame (Big Sean album)

The article Hall of Fame (Big Sean album) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Hall of Fame (Big Sean album) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед (talk) 09:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Reece Leonard ANI

Hi. I justed filed an ANI complaint about Reece Leonard here. I thought I should let you know because I raised concerns about something he's been posting on other people's talk pages which mentions both you and myself: , , , , . You may be asked for your opinion. In case you wanna keep an eye on it. Homeostasis07 (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hall of Fame (Big Sean album)

The article Hall of Fame (Big Sean album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hall of Fame (Big Sean album) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед (talk) 20:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Panic At the Disco Genre Dispute

Who says AllMusic's sidebar isn't a valid reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maskeraid (talk • contribs) 23:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

@Maskeraid: WP:ALBUM/SOURCES. STATic message me! 03:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 February newsletter

And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:

1. Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Misplaced Pages. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
2. Adam Cuerden (submissions), a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
3. WikiRedactor (submissions), another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:

• Hahc21 (submissions), who helped take Thirty Flights of Loving through good article candidates and featured article candidates, claiming the first first featured article of the competition.
• Prism (submissions), who claimed the first featured list of the competition with Natalia Kills discography.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions), who takes the title of the contributor awarded the highest bonus point multiplier (resulting in the highest scoring article) of the competition so far. Her high-importance salamander, now a good article, scored 108 points.

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

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 Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

86th Academy Awards

You're welcome. Go with an admin if you want to thank me more, or stop being ironic with me. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 06:15, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: What are you talking about? I expected you to not add WP:OR and the BRD was not on me, but on the IP that had reverted another user without giving a reason. STATic message me! 06:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't care about the content, but the users who are attempting to start a edit-war on a highly-visible page. The IP reverted Wikipedical removal of content, which is by no way justified by personal reasons. Any attempt to remove such content has to be discussed. And if I added original research, once again, report me to admins and don't make jokes with me. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 06:37, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: A single instance of adding WP:OR, is zero reason for me wasting my time reporting you, as I usually have no problem with your edits. There is zero reason for the condescending attitude. STATic message me! 06:41, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Bed Peace

On 2 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bed Peace, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the music video for Bed Peace by American singer Jhené Aiko pays homage to John Lennon and Yoko Ono's Bed-In for Peace protest? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bed Peace. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:48, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Magna Carta Holy Grail

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Magna Carta Holy Grail you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IndianBio -- IndianBio (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Trill Ent

Your information is invalid. The changes I made are true. Trill Ent is based in Baton Rouge, LA as the website you have linked states. Apply false information again and I will report you to the company. You do not own Trill Ent, Torrence Hatch my brother does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DSkywalker83 (talk • contribs) 09:13, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

@DSkywalker83: You removed sourced content about Phat's murder without giving a valid reason, that is the only reason you were reverted. Also do not throw around threats, or you are likely to be blocked from editing. STATic message me! 09:28, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Rick Ross - MasterMind

How did I add "my personal commentary"? The review gave the album an A-. That's a rave review. There's no other review out yet, and certainly not a negative or average review. Ergo, THE ALBUM WAS MET WITH RAVE REVIEWS. RickyRozay (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@RickyRozay: Where are you getting calling the review "rave", where is this sourced to? It is a single positive review, so how can you say the album received "rave reviews". I understand you are a fan, but do not let that get in the way of you editing with a WP:NPOV. STATic message me! 01:52, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Right now the page says "Upon its release, Mastermind was met with generally positive reviews from music critics." review(S) and music critic(S) as in plural. There's one review out. And it's certainly not "generally positive" it is an ACCLAIMED review. Ergo, if we're getting technical, TECHNICALLY, the album has been met with ACCLAIM not "generally positively". 02:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickyRozay (talk • contribs)

@RickyRozay: And now that sentence has been removed, that was easy. In any case a statement of "acclaim" or "rave" reviews, rather then the more neutral "generally...." needs reliable sources to back it. STATic message me! 02:40, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

alright. well thanks for clearing that up RickyRozay (talk) 03:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

84.164.59.120

Who gave you the right ro remove my warn? Yes, you warned him, but by no sense that means you can remove my posts, regardless they are warns or posts. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 04:37, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: I warned them for the edit already clearly. Why would they need two final warnings for the exact same edit, that is what makes zero sense. STATic message me! 04:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

As I noted, "you warned him, but by no sense that means you can remove my posts". You are not authorized to remove my comments, even if they "makes zero sense" to you. © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 04:43, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@Tbhotch: Okay, chill yourself out. There is no reason you should be taking it so personal at all. The IP is now blocked thanks to the final warning I gave them, so what is your problem? What has changed in the world now that the post is not there? Besides it does not make you look ridiculous for warning him/her for an edit they had already been warned for. STATic message me! 04:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

In case you don't know, I also reverted such edit, the difference is you reverted it a few seconds before me. The IP is not "now blocked thanks to the final warning gave them", it is blocked thanks to his own vandal edits. I am here as it is totally incorrect you removed one post I made. And as WP:TPO says "Editing—or even removing—others' comments is sometimes allowed. But you should exercise caution in doing so", you have absolutely no permission to remove my posts anywhere in this website that doesn't include the User talk:STATicVapor or User talk:STATicVapor/ prefixes. So, I suggest you to not doing it again, even if you find it as "zero sense". © Tbhotch (en-2.5). 04:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi STATic

How are you? I hope the actor you bet on wins tonight. I just wanted to drop you a friendly note over he and asked if you'd be willing to comment on my new RfD certified by Red, Al, an NeilN. Would you be willing to do so? Not canvassing, just a friendly reminder. Also since I've never been through this maybe you can me with the process. BestScholarlyarticles (talk) 05:01, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Nope, not canvassing. Why? Because it's "just a friendly reminder"! Gone fishing...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@Scholarlyarticles: I am not sure what you are asking me to comment on. STATic message me! 07:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

We Dem Boyz

How was my page a redirect? I'm the first edit so what was the page called prior to it being called "We Dem Boyz" ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 07:08, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: Your version, which was redirected as it failed WP:NSONGS and saved you a AfD deletion. Then I created it after it charted, not using a single bit of your version and now it is its current form. Why would this count as creating this. STATic message me! 07:27, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

So i made the page, you canceled it for not charting then made it after I did and count it as your own? Just like when you took credit for when I uploaded My Krazy Life's artwork right? lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 07:30, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: I did not "cancel" anything. Read WP:NSONGS that is the notability for songs criteria, your "article" clearly failed it. I wrote nearly the entire current article did I not? Your sentence was not used at all in my article, so you have zero claim to creating anything. You uploaded a album artwork commons and it was going to get deleted like I told you dude. The only person falsly taking credit for anything is you, and I hope you know that can get you blocked or your userpage deleted. So do not play that game. For the third time, please sign your posts using four ~ symbols. STATic message me! 07:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Fact of the matter is that I found out about that song being released before you and you got rid of the page I made for that song.Then I found the artwork for that album before you, but you by technicalities (once again) take it away from me and upload it as your own. So if it makes you feel better to pretend you found out about things first then by all means use wikipedias rules as loop poles to take away credit from me. I'll sign my name when I stop getting ripped off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 07:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: You think because I do not rush to create a stub that will be deleted that I did not know about it? I listened to it the day it came out. There is not credit for uploading a file? It is a damn file, what is the big praise for that? But I will not let you pretend you created the "We Dem Boyz" article. That is what you created. Not "We Dem Boyz", I wrote the article clear as day, not you. STATic message me! 07:53, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Alright bud, whatever you say. Even disregarding that song, I clearly uploaded the artwork for that album before you yet you take credit because I uploaded it to the wrong part of this website. After reading that Artpop argument there's clearly no point in reasoning with you about anything unless there's 100% full proof evidence to dispute it despite what the facts are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 08:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: Where have I taken credit for it? Uploading an image first is not important and I would never care about that. And look at me being nice explaining to you how to upload them properly and you still act like this. STATic message me! 08:05, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate you showing me that but it's frustrating to have someone point out loop holes that discredit me over little things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlaccCrab (talk • contribs) 08:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: I am not trying to discredit you about anything. None was due for "We Dem Boyz" and if I could have made a note on the image page I would, but you cannot leave edit summaries or anything like that. When I first started editing I cared about who uploaded images at first, but I realized its not even important to be the first at that, it does not make you look any more experienced, its just an album cover. If they are over 300x300 they will be tagged to be reduced and you will "lose credit" anyways. And I am pretty sure your upload was. STATic message me! 08:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for We Dem Boyz

On 4 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article We Dem Boyz, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that We Dem Boyz by American rapper Wiz Khalifa was the first song to be premiered by the music identifying app Shazam? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/We Dem Boyz. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks from the Wiki and I Victuallers (talk) 00:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Rick Ross Mugshot

Hello. I went on Rick Ross' page to check out his biography and saw that a mug shot is being used for his photo. I'm sure that this wasn't intentional, but it just doesn't seem appropriate to use for an artist. I found this on Google Images; not sure if you can use it but it seems better, and more respectful.

http://e31gbvb944rzg5u2.zippykid.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/rick-ross-e1357661090287.jpg

Thanks!

Vigelande12 (talk) 01:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vigelande12 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

@Vigelande12: There is a discussion on the talk page a few months ago where it was deemed okay. It is basically the only free image we have of his full face and it is not obviously a mugshot. STATic message me! 05:40, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Alonzo Holt

Why do you keep messing with my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.35.53 (talk) 05:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Stop adding fake content, it is not your page. STATic message me! 05:40, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yeezus

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Yeezus you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Prism -- Prism (talk) 15:01, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Allegations

You will stop with your harassment now. Enough. Reece Leonard (talk) 06:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: Laughing out loud. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black. I have never harassed you, sorry try again. This is the only harassment I see. STATic message me! 07:03, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You brought all of that before an advisement board and they disagreed. Stop sending me baseless messages and warnings. I don't care what you think about me, but seriously grow up and leave me alone. Reece Leonard (talk) 07:12, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: Disagreed? User:Homeostasis07 did you see any "disagreement" at all? The administrators completely agreed with us and practically laughed off your ridiculous remarks. When you edit war, they are not baseless and if you continue with the horrid editing you will be blocked. Sorry brodie, but the only one that needs growing up is you. STATic message me! 07:18, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You have a seriously warped vision of a board that ultimately decided that your claims against me were baseless and declined your request. What the hell is a brodie? Look, enough. Seriously. We're done discussing this and I'm done interacting with you unless I have no alternative. Reece Leonard (talk) 08:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I will reiterate: Do not interact with me unless it is absolutely necessary to do so as I want to avoid these kinds of disagreements in the future. You are not allowed to remove other people's messages from talk pages, but I refuse to engage in your attempts to draw me into another argument so that you can have a second attempt at banning me. Enough. Do not interact with me again. Reece Leonard (talk) 09:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: See WP:NPA which you continue to violate, the removal was clearly justified. STATic message me! 09:25, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm just going to point out this instance where you attempted to chastise me for doing exactly what you just did for the sole purpose of highlighting your hypocrisy before never speaking to you again: X Reece Leonard (talk) 09:32, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: That comment is barley uncivil, it is not a full blown personal attack like every single one of your damn posts. At least that person was commenting on the content not the contributors. Please do not ever do that again. I am so sick of seeing you saying my name in every single discussion. For you to think this is appropriate: is ridiculous. STATic message me! 16:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

You're choosing to interpret my actions as personal attacks. I think you've misinterpreted what I was trying to do with those messages on those user's pages. I wasn't trying to slander you at all; I was trying to combat the argument that they were going to see on those pages that you made about my alleged bias. That was it. I only mention your name when you're involved in the discussion at hand. Let me also point out that you were the one to initiate the "commenting on users instead of content" when you accused me of not having a WP:NPOV for no reason at the start of the conversation over the critical consensus on the Artpop page. Reece Leonard (talk) 16:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: No if you read WP:NPA you would know they are. I am not misinterpreting anything, you were blatantly slandering me across multiple pages. You need to learn to comment on content not contributors. And why do you think I accused you of not having a NPOV? Because you do not and it is blatantly obvious. But do not comment here again, I am done replying to you. STATic message me! 17:47, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Reece, whether your remarks were intended as personal attacks or not, this does seem to be a case of harassment on your part, which includes repeatedly doing things towards others that they find irritating. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 19:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

@Reece Leonard: Reece, just STOP! No admin ever agreed with your opinion. Anyone who wants to read the entire thing can do so here. That thread was simply automatically archived after 36 hours of inactivity. DO NOT USE IT AS AN EXCUSE TO HARASS OTHER USERS! Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@Homeostasis07: Yeah good thing I brought the discussion back. Glad I am not the only one seeing this blatant harassment. How much you wanna bet he will violate either the topic or interaction ban before its over? I guess we will just have to watch for sockpuppets. STATic message me! 01:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@STATicVapor: Agreed. Whatever the outcome of that discussion will be, Artpop and several other Gaga articles will still be on my Watchlist. My Wiki Watchlist is practically my home page: so any suspicious/unusual activity will immediately be reported. Homeostasis07 (talk) 01:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yeezus

The article Yeezus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yeezus for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Prism -- Prism (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

808 Mafia

12 Hunna isnt in 808 Mafia, I been trying to contact you, Im the one thats actually In 808 Mafia. hes been kicked out. Josephdavinci (talk) 06:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@Josephdavinci: Since Misplaced Pages runs on verifiablity, I would need to see reliable third party sources or official posts from one of the founders Southside/Lex Lugar to support your changes. We need to be able to detonate that you are actually officially in the group and not just a fan trying to get your name there to promote yourself. STATic message me! 06:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Tarentino verified it actuallyJosephdavinci (talk) 06:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@Josephdavinci: Link? STATic message me! 06:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Its in my direct messages on twitter how can I link it — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephdavinci (talk • contribs) 07:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Misplaced Pages appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Cash Money Records (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hot Boyz

The Infamous Mobb Deep (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Hot 97

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, 10.4.0.34 (talk) 09:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Promotional single vs Official

Okay so I know you will just tell me that any single that appears on the album and is available to purchase is official BUT...Dark Horse/Walking On Air were available for purchase as a promotional singles because they were simply available to purchase off the albums preorder. Break the Bank was released this way as well/has no radio release date so that can only mean that it's technically a promtional single too, right? BlaccCrab (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: No "Break the Bank" was released for digital download as a single as seen here. This is referenced on the album and song article. STATic message me! 20:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Walking On air has that too, it's just a link to an individual song off amazon . They were both released the same way, a song to download off of itunes pre-preorder BlaccCrab (talk) 20:52, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok so the link you gave me is just a link to the track off the album but I found the link to the single. How does a song being released on amazon qualify it as a single? a 6 minute track that never gets sent to radio can't possibly be considered an official single BlaccCrab (talk) 20:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

@BlaccCrab: Yes it was released on there February 17, 2014 in the link I gave you, prior to the album's release as a retail single in the format of digital download. Promotional singles are only song's released for free or only available with the iTunes pre-order. If they have a separate download page they are a single. As for the weird way pop articles work sometimes see WP:WAX and yes a six minute song that may be sent to radio is a single as I just explained. In no way is a radio release required to be a "official single". STATic message me! 21:46, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Maino age is 35

this is a video on youtube that explains everything I've been telling you. I believe you have awful intentions to hide the truth (which is the man was born August 30, 1978), for reason im unaware; maybe because your jealous. He was one of three underage boys in 1994 to be sent to federal prison. Ten years later, when he got out, leaves him in his twenties. Ten years after that, which is current time, puts him in his thirties! im not sure of your personal reasons but please stop lying on his Misplaced Pages page it is hurtful to his fans. Don't know if this will change your opinion you seem dead set on ageing this man. But if authenticity means anything to you the honest truth will be displayed. 173.71.187.68 (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

That explains nothing. In the source does he say that he was born on August 30, 1978? Then it is WP:OR. There are two sources cited in the article that place him as older. You are coming up with these bad faith accusations and I am not trying to "age him" at all. According to the NY Post he was 37 in 2010 . STATic message me! 18:07, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry

I didn't meant to be annoying on the page 'Yours Truly' I just didn't know... The reason I tried it a second time is that I thought there was something wrong with my internet. Sorry Flumen-fulmen (talk) 18:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

@Flumen-fulmen: No problem at all, you are a beginner, mistakes are completely understandable. STATic message me! 19:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Magna Carta

Are you looking at the review comments Static? —Indian:BIO · 16:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

@IndianBio: Sorry for lag, I shall get to them either early in the day today or tomorrow, so if you would like feel free to detail another section. STATic message me! 17:11, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Stop bullying me

Stop playing the enforcer and stop bullying people as a meatpuppett. GabeMc 18:34, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

@GabeMc: There is no bullying going on at all, you obviously just do not understand guidelines and policies. Referring to a single revert as "bullying" is just beyond ridiculous. Please understand WP:BRD and you obviously have no idea what a meatpuppet even is... This message is just littered with inaccurate libel.STATic message me! 18:48, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

You reverted my at other pages where Dan pinged you; it will not be difficult to show that you meatpuppett for him at numerous pages, so stop being a bully. GabeMc 18:50, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

@GabeMc: Yes this is Misplaced Pages, you will be reverted quite often just as everyone is, try to get used to it. And the hilarity in that thought is becoming. It would take me more than two hands to count how many times me and Dan have reverted eachother in the four years I have been here. I only commented on that page (did not revert anything), since you obviously refused to abide by a WP:NPOV on that article and as many other editors told you, you were wrong. But please I do not want you to harass me all the time like you do Dan, so in the future just abide by WP:BRD and discuss controversial changes. Most certainly do not change any guides, guidelines or policies to fit your opinion. And after you just vandalized my talk page, do not post on it again or I will report you to WP:ANI. STATic message me! 18:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)