Talk:Roar (song)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page already moved by User:Amatulic; no point this occupying space at WP:RM, despite valid comments from 76.65.128.222, and no precedent set non-admin tidy up - but if anyone wants to re-open go ahead In ictu oculi (talk) 03:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

---

Roar (Katy Perry song) → Roar (song) – The other song "Roar" is unnotable. It's probably annoying that I do this to every article, but all I want is for this website to be successful. Billboard Man (talk) 20:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

• Speedy move. The reason why I did this, was to make room for KP song. Just a technical move so the RM is unneeded. Note: I requested deletion of that page before I noticed this RM. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment a redirect from Roar (Axwell & Sebastian Ingrosso song) and Roar (Monsters University song) would probably be a good idea -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 01:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
• Comment this should have waited for a week, for the stats to come out, instead of Crystalballing it. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 01:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
  • It's not crystalballing, it's common sense. All singles by Perry have charted in the past, even in "trivial" charts, and this one was released today and already has charted in two different charts. Considering it sounds like other songs from One of the Boys it will reach the top 10 in many countries. Before Monsters' song there where no other songs titled "Roar", and this is clearly the only notable song from the two "Roar"s, as Axwell and Sebastian's hasn't charted in more than two months the song was released as single (according to the link). Rarely, Disney-Pixar songs chart. The likeness users typing "Roar (song)" while they search this song (Monsters' stats vs Perry stats) demostrate the move was correct and this RM should be closed as there is no major ambiguity that a hat note can fix (This is not at Roar, right?). Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 02:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Plagiarism accusation

Should we include the whole plagiarism scenario in the Release section? Just a sentence or a short text. I have two sources for that. Pedro João [talk] 11:05, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Of course. — Status (talk · contribs) 11:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I think its a little bit too soon for it to be included. Let's see how this plagiarism thing plagues out (burp). Is this a case like Lady Gaga's BTW and EY? Don't think so. The rabid critic and fanwars haven't began yet. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:43, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

This is probably because Sara Bareilles isn't and never has been at Madonna's status level. Roar is a lot more similar to Brave in terms of chords, melody, instrumentation, structure and theme than what Born This Way was to Express Yourself and many critics have mentioned it so I think it's worth noting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.254.236.207 (talk) 13:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree with IndianBio on this. If things get more serious, then it should be added. Arre 13:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

@IP user. Mentioning the critical analysis and coming to the conclusion that "Roar" shares similarities with "Brave" is fine, since music journalists are pointing that out. However, taking that out to remark that it was a case of plagiarism is arbid and without third party notability (and I mean that word) at this point. Things might change though. Why not wait this out? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 14:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

If the whole situation develops soon, I'll add it to the article. Thanks for the help. Pedro João [talk] 16:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

If we add these accusations into the article, please provide references- someone keeps adding that without any citations about it. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

A user keeps editing the upper text area, claiming that critics called the song a "rip-off". I already edited it again though. I'm going to add a short sentence about it on the Composition section, but nothing like accusations, just a sentence showing that some critics compared it to Sara Bareilles' song. Pedro João [talk] 20:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Good to know. However, I should mention that Huffington Post (a source you added) is not reliable. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 21:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources added along side Sara's picture is pretty reliable and so is The Huffington Post. Cut the crap now. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:17, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

XXSNUGGUMSXX, with all respect, you aren't in a position to deem a source unreliable and The Huffington Post certainly is reliable.Arre 06:58, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

On the contrary, that site has actually often given false information. For example, it reported Katy was feuding with her friend Rihanna when in fact that was never the case at all. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 15:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Reliability doesn't seem to be the problem right now since a lot of music-related sites are reporting the situation aswell. Pedro João [talk] 15:49, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

At least one reference to Sarah Bareilles:[1]. I also deem Huffington Post reliable enough, although HuffPo often references others' material, which should be referenced instead, unless a Huffington Post contributor has added new information and insight. -Mardus (talk) 06:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Outro

The background motif of the song is very similar to "Outro" from M83's album Hurry Up, We're Dreaming. Compare: Roar vs Outro. -Mardus (talk) 03:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

^ This here is the new material proposal, as per WP:TALK. I also strongly object to any removals of my comments — or anyone else's, for that matter — from talk pages. -Mardus (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

 Not done a reliable third-party reference comparing the two songs would be needed, YouTube uploads of music videos are not third-party sources. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 06:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 August 2013

Roar was written by Katy Perry, Lukasz Gottwald, Max Martin, Bonnie McKee and Henry Walter and produced by Dr. Luke, Max Martin and Cirkut. Artispopculture (talk) 14:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. For Cirkut being a producer, the rest are already listed. Jackmcbarn (talk) 16:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 August 2013

Roar was produced by Dr. Luke, Max Martin and Cirkut. Here is the source http://www.billboard.com/articles/review/5645969/katy-perry-roar-track-review Artispopculture (talk) 01:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done — Status (talk · contribs) 02:13, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 August 2013

"before the record belonged to "Heart Attack" by Demi Lovato"

At the moment, "Heart Attack" attempts to link to Heart Attack (song), which ends up redirecting to Heart attack (disambiguation). Please change it to link to Heart Attack (Demi Lovato song) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.222.89 (talk) 10:26, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Roar sales WW

 http://www.mediatraffic.de/ 

Roar' is still the biggest hit worldwide, it holds the top position for a seventh week and shrinks 4% in points to 454.000 points, a total of 4.205.000 points after only eight weeks on the tally.

77.44.232.141 (talk) 16:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 13 October 2013

Change from: "As she's feeding the monkey, the tiger secretly watch them." to "As she's feeding the monkey, the tiger secretly watches them." The verb form "watch" is incorrect, and should be fixed for grammatical accuracy. Talophex (talk) 08:01, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. There were several things like that in the section, so I've just copy edited the whole thing. --Stfg (talk) 09:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 October 2013

On August 12, 2013, a lyric video for "Roar" was released, which was directed/produced by Joe Humpay, Aya Tanimura, Tim Zimmer, and Tuan Le. It depicts Perry doing daily activities such as eating, using the toilet, working out, and taking a bath, while she texts the lyrics on her Nokia Lumia 1020 to various people; Emoji characters are used in place of certain words. Music producer Dillon Francis felt that the "Roar" lyric video copied his "Messages" video, as it also used the concept of instant messaging.

the Phone used in the Video is the [Nokia Lumia 1020] NOT the [iPhone] 137.191.225.242 (talk) 11:10, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the lyric video uses an iPhone; it's the main music video that features the Nokia phone. Acalamari 11:15, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

The change requested is WP:OR anyways. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 12:15, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Just a FYI

The song is also known in Japan as "Roar ~Saikyou Gaaru Sengen!" (ロアー〜最強ガール宣言！), which means "Roar ~Strongest Girl Declaration!". Source: [2]. ごだい (会話) 11:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

How on Earth can we get the POV tag (neutrality disputed) off the article?

Judging by this link (diff, or whatever it's called),

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Roar_(song)&diff=577970919&oldid=577954732

I gather that AARON added a Point of View tag to the article, which remains to this day; I'm sure he had good reasons for adding it back then, but is the neutrality of the article still being disputed today? If so, please, who has a problem with the neutrality of the article, so that we can address the issue? It would be nice to get rid of that tag (obviously I could remove it right now, but that's not the right thing to do, of course). Thanks in advance. Dontreader (talk) 06:29, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

The article could do with a clear up to be honest, there's a lot of information and quotes that aren't really necessary, and it's not neutral in the way that it presents the information. Its a recurring problem with articles like Katy Perry and Lady Gaga etc. They get inundated with "fandom" editor who portray it as the best thing since sliced bread, and thus don't present information with the neutral tone and language we would be expected in an encylopedia. I forget how many times I've removed unencylopedic language and slang; or, in this and other similar articles, how many times I've seen incorrect chart placings put in (saying it charted higher than it did or got to number one in countries it never did).

I've never thought the issue deserving of the tag though. But then to be honest, I rarely use the tags on these sorts of articles; they so quickly get removed by the fandom who can't bare any errors or problems being highlighted -so you're better to just go and fix the problem right off.

So I'd say, go for a good impartial clean up and copy edit and you'd be ok to remove it. For the exact reason Calvin999 added it, you'd have to ask him yourself.

--Rushton2010 (talk) 12:39, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Rushton2010, for your detailed explanation. Some of the reasons you cited are understandable since not every fan of an artist can be expected to edit in a neutral way, but if chart placings and other similar issues are wrong, then that might indicate that people directly or indirectly associated with Katy Perry are involved in the editing for promotional purposes. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the page was moved by someone who systematically moves these types of pages. Furthermore, the page in general is too well-written (the main composition style), different from the composition skills of the people involved in the talk page debates, indicating that perhaps someone linked to Perry was involved. Of course I cannot prove these allegations but anyway, I can't make the article neutral enough all by myself since I would expect to meet heavy resistance, perhaps even from powerful people. I wish several different unbiased editors could fix different problems. Oh, and Calvin999 doesn't seem to be available at the moment, but I hope he does read this eventually. Thanks again for your time and help! Dontreader (talk) 20:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Can we agree on the names of the producers and songwriters?

In the music industry, producers and songwriters go by their artistic names. In the very first paragraph of this article we see this sentence:

Composed by Perry, Dr. Luke, Max Martin, Bonnie McKee, and Cirkut, "Roar" is a midtempo power pop song; its lyrics address standing up for oneself.

That is correct. However, under the picture on the right-hand side, we find:

Writer(s) Katy Perry Lukasz Gottwald Max Martin Bonnie McKee Henry Walter

Producer Dr. Luke Max Martin Cirkut

This is wrong, and I had corrected it. Dr. Luke and Lukasz Gottwald are the same person. Also, Cirkut and Henry Walter are the same person. In its current state, the article causes confusion because a reader might think that these are different people involved in the making of the song. This is a very clear example of lack of consistency. Max Martin is an artistic name, too. That's how he is known in the music world; no one calls him Karl Sandberg, and the article correctly calls him Max Martin.

Lukasz Gottwald must be replaced by Dr. Luke, and Henry Walter must be replaced by Cirkut.

I understand that the birth names show up in at least one article used for this page, but that is a mistake. For example:

http://www.billboard.com/articles/review/5645969/katy-perry-roar-track-review

Reuters has it right:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/22/entertainment-us-katyperry-prism-idUSBRE99L0P920131022

We cannot use two names for the same person. Please correct this, and also, how can we stop this from happening again? Thanks in advance. Dontreader (talk) 05:14, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree with this. Whether it's "consistent" or not Dr. Luke is always credited by his artistic name under production credits and his real name under writing credits. Check the the Roar psychical single and the Prism CD booklet. This is the same for every Katy single he's produced along with anything else he's produced for other artists. You're saying we should disregard how he is credited in official credits issued by the record company because it's inconsistent? I don't see how that's correct at all. And by this logic the pages of the hundreds of other singles he's produced are all incorrect as well (even ones that have been declared good articles by Wikipedia). I feel like that's the point of linking both Lukasz Gottwald and Dr. Luke in the infobox. If someone cares to know whether it's the same person or not, they can easily find out. MusicLover (talk) 07:41, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

How is BMI listing the writers names? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 08:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

MusicLover, well, I am shocked. In all my years buying music I have never seen such a bizarre thing, but since that's the way the names show up on the Roar physical CD single and the Prism CD booklet, those are the best possible sources. Indian:BIO, I'm sorry but I don't know what BMI means; however, it doesn't matter since I was totally wrong. I apologize to both of you for the inconvenience, and thanks for taking the time to explain the situation. I'm not a Katy Perry fan but I have spent time trying to improve this article. Obviously on this occasion I failed but now I can get that issue out of my system. Thanks again. Dontreader (talk) 10:23, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

BMI is Broadcast Music Incorporated, the writers block for songwriters and royalty etc. They generally have the legal names in lieu oftheir stage names in their database and that's what I have seen many articles in WP writing it like that. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 10:50, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Well first off to Dontreader it's all good! I'm just glad we got this problem sorted out now and you understand and agree with where I was coming from. Secondly, Indian:BIO if you're still curious about how BMI listed the writers, they credit Dr. Luke and Cirkut by using their real names just like in the album booklet. Here's the link to the entry: http://repertoire.bmi.com/title.asp?blnWriter=True&blnPublisher=True&blnArtist=True&page=1&keyid=16156049&ShowNbr=0&ShowSeqNbr=0&querytype=WorkID MusicLover (talk) 11:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks MusicLover for the info. Well I guess its all sorted then how Luke and Cirkut should be listed. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:46, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit

Roar peaked @ 3 in Czech Republic and Slovakia ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DressinUp (talk • contribs) 10:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Cover versions

Please add that Glee covered this song at the end of the show A Katy or A Gaga — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.9.43.75 (talk) 00:22, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Alton Towers Scarefest video

Should there be mention of Alton Towers releasing an exclusive video on their YouTube channel which has all the elements of their Scarefest set to this song? Visokor (talk) 10:31, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The article is terrible.

Why is the article so bad? All her other songs have a much better articles and are more in depth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.148.100.210 (talk) 01:32, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Australia: credited 7x Platinum (490,000 copies) Reference: ARIA Charts - http://www.ariacharts.com.au/chart/singles 118.211.225.228 (talk) 15:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Done Edited, thanks. Samjohnzon (talk) 17:44, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

Remove neutrality template?

I've been doing a major reconstruction of the article, and I'm pretty sure that the neutrality tag at the top of the article is unnecessary. As of now, I'm trying to make this a GA-class article, and I'll nominate it as soon as possible. prism △ 18:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it needs it anymore either. I agree that the tag should be removed. Samjohnzon (talk) 19:24, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Good article nomination

The major reorganization is done now, I guess. Anyone that has any improvements to add to the page please do it as soon as possible because I want to GA-nominate this. Thank you in advance. prism △ 21:29, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

5x Plat in Canada and Gold in Germany

http://www.musiccanada.com/GPSearchResult.aspx?st=roar&ica=False&sa=&sl=&smt=0&sat=-1&ssb=Artist 5x Plat for Canada (400,000)

http://www.musikindustrie.de/no_cache/gold_platin_datenbank/#topSearch Gold in Germany (150,000)Arturo52311 (talk) 06:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Roar (song)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 02:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

I'll do the review. Ref 130 has, in red, that "Australia's Official Top 50 Songs" is rejected. There's also four links that just need to be modified ever so slightly (uncheck "Good" in checklinks, let me know if you need help with the tool). -- Zanimum (talk) 02:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done prism △ 12:52, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

If you ask me, something that should definitely be adjusted is how contributors in the infobox (Cirkut and Dr. Luke) are listed by different names (Henry Walter and Lukasz Gottwald, respectively). The flaw with this is that it can potentially mislead readers into thinking they are different people (especially when reading without clickable links). Other than that, this is definitely worthy of being listed as a "good article". XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 03:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Good point, XXSNUGGUMSXX. I'm glad to see it is standardized in the article itself, but I would have never realized they were the same person, in the infobox. Is this how they're credited on the release? -- Zanimum (talk) 14:43, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I've just checked my Prism booklet and they're credited like they're now on the infobox: stage names for production; real names for songwriting. prism △ 15:53, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Passing "Commercial performance", "Track listing", "Charts and certifications", "Release history". (Note that I check references last, this pass is for the prose, for now.) -- Zanimum (talk) 14:43, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Passing "Background", "Promotion", "Music video". There were some changes, including Lisa Frank pointing to the person, as opposed to the company. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Passing the two fair use images, and the fair use audio. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Passing "External links", "Critical reception" (although it does seem short compared to the ones in other pop songs I've reviewed GANs for), and "Composition and plagiarism accusations". Starting "References".

• Dr. Luke's quote... it's good to link to the actual tweet, but you should also cite a news outlet that quoted the tweet.

 Not done, no news outlet reported it... the only solution is to remove the text from the article.

• https://toolserver.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Roar_%28song%29#view:0.1.1.1.1.1 Checklinks finds one "Warn", four "Status", and one "Connection issue". Please fix these.

 Done, I think. Prism △ 21:28, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Reviewing the rest of the references later. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:30, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I've just made a tiny change in the article's structure: I've changed the Background section name to Artwork and moved the part where it says "Roar" was recorded in March 2013 to the Composition section. Prism △ 11:30, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been busy with work for the last little bit, and then suddenly Toronto was hit with a crippling ice storm.

Looking to FA articles about songs for guidance, I'm not sure any have a promotion section so far up. The promotion was before the song's release, but ultimately, the actual music should take precedence over the marketing. Also, isn't the release artwork just an element of promotion? I will note that most FAs have a background/writing/inspiration section, so while I will pass the article as a GA without one, it likely won't qualify for any higher. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Once it's GA passed I can try to find some info on that, although the promotion section is basically a Background section, usually. I'll move artwork to promotion section. Prism △ 19:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I added a Writing and Development section, altered Composition and Critical reception sections to merge them, moved Announcement and promotion section. Although it isn't in much more featured articles, I don't want to remove that information at all. Prism △ 23:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Passing! -- Zanimum (talk) 20:41, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Roar sales WW

http://www.mediatraffic.de/alltime-track-chart.htm

it's number 231 6,953,000 units

77.44.232.141 (talk) 21:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

 Not done, Mediatraffic.de is listed as a site to avoid per WP:BADCHARTS. prism △ 13:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

A tiger or a lion?

In the music video description, it says at first it`s a tiger, then it changes into a lion. Like, really??? Pay attention when writing guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.13.158.65 (talk) 18:36, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Done Fixed it, thanks. It should be a tiger. Samjohnzon (talk) 20:41, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Arrow or Spear

The weapon she made from the heel of her stiletto in the video is definitely a spear and not an arrow. Do people not know the difference between them?--Babar Suhail (talk) 19:37, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

It's no big deal... (pun intended) But to be honest, it isn't. Don't start an edit war because of this. Prism △ 19:58, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I don;t intend on starting an edit war, I corrected that it was a spear, and got the edit reverted back, so I thought I'd discuss it here. --Babar Suhail (talk) 10:07, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

According to this, you're correct. It is a spear.  Done Prism △ 11:07, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Glee

I really don't know why Glee would be mentioned. Their covers of songs don't exactly tend to have much (if any) impact on song history or popularity. TV show covers (including reality competition shows) in general tend to be trivial compared to non-TV show covers since show covers don't generally get airplay or chartings. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 09:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

You are not the sole judge of a song's popularity or its inclusion. The song and its cover version received third party notability per reliable sources, hence its included. And your biasness against Glee and its episodes has gone long enough. Either provide valid reasons for its removal else don't go around disrupting articles. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 09:31, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I never claimed to be the "sole judge", and my removal isn't "disrupting" articles or based on bias. The problem isn't reliability of sources. The problem with including such covers is that they aren't notable compared to those outside of TV shows (i.e. Michael McDonald covering Marvin Gaye) since they generally don't get airplay or chartings. Their covers also do not really affect song popularity ratings or anything, and have absolutely no impact whatsoever on the original artist's career. However much covers might affect the cast's career, it doesn't really boost (or lower) any aspect of the songs themselves. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 09:45, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

A cover version is a cover version, it is not supposed to affect the original singer's career. However, that does not make them any less reliable or notable. Your deduction of covers being notable solely based on airplay or chartings is reductive (to quote the Queen of Pop). The version performed in Glee passes WP:SONGCOVER and point 3 of WP:NSONGS. They have been performed on a major television platform and released for sale. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 10:01, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

@XXSNUGGUMSXX: I suggest you to take a look at Glee discography and see how much successful their covers are! Then you can come here sharing your stubborn opinion around. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 13:21, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Would you mind please not using exclamation points so frequently in comments towards others, Tomica? The way you do so often makes it seem like you are yelling at them..... XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 14:58, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I am actually yelling at you, because of all your bossy attitude. Calm down, we have been on this place a long before you came. Have some respect! — Tomíca^(T2ME) 18:47, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I never actually aim to be bossy or disrespectful, and really don't appreciate being yelled at. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

Japan Year-end

Here is a link http://www.billboard.com/charts/year-end/2013/japan-hot-100?page=2--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:59, 11 July 2014 (UTC)