User talk:Adi39

Welcome!

Hello, Adi39, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 10:12, 25 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Footprints in the Sand

Hi, I just wondered how you knew "Footprints in the Sand" was the song played on X Factor tonight - I could swear I heard the line "Whatever It Takes" in the song... but then the description of that song didn't match the song being played. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 20:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I heard the lyrics of it. :) You can listen again here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JAYelkUmyE Adi39 21:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I was too busy watching the show to realise I was hearing Leona Lewis, until it was too late :( Thanks for the link! — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 21:55, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me about it. It was just so unexpected but I thought I recognised the voice straight away lol. Adi39 21:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recognised her voice straight away but it still didn't register that it was a new song! — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 17:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Leonaspiritcove.jpg

Two things: how did you get rid of the dots and why can't I see the dotless version in the article? I've tried bypassing my cache, completely emptying my cache, and using a totally different computer, but the dotty version is still in the article!!! ARGH! — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 10:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just edited them out on Photoshop as I looked on HMV and they have the cover up without the dots so they're clearly not meant to be there. But yeah you're right, on the article it still has the dots version. Confusing! Adi39 10:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to see what happens when I delete the old version. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 10:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still see the dots version on the article grr. Maybe it needs re-uploading altogether. Adi39 10:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that and bypassed my cache and it worked! Yay! — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 10:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay working for me too now. I didn't have to bypass the cache, guess it just started working lol. Adi39 13:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leona Lewis

Regarding this edit summary, you pretty much said why it's inappropriate to bold the wins, for you said "Nothing wrong with the wins being highlighted, they should be as they're achievements". By highlighting the wins over the non-wins, the neutral point of view policy is being violated in the sense that one part of the article is being highlighted over another part (i.e. the wins over the non-wins). It's the same reason why we don't bold number-ones in a singles chart: bolding the number-ones highlights them over the non-number ones. In addition, in that edit, you reverted my changing of "Lewis" back to "Leona", which had nothing to do with the wins, so even if you don't self-revert your boldings, I would appreciate you changing the "Leona"'s I changed back to "Lewis'", as manual of style says that we should refer to someone by their last name, not their first. Thank you. Acalamari 23:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, didn't mean to revert the "Lewis" to "Leona". It is really frustrating how Leona's Wikipedia page seems to have different rules to other pages simply because it's popular. Some get away with so much stuff because hardly anyone visits them. Take Shayne Ward for example. Nearly all those images violate the terms. But you're right, we'll keep it neutral so I'll self-revert. Adi39 (talk) 23:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the understanding. Regarding those other pages, they really do need to be fixed as well, but since they're not viewed as much, then they're not edited as much either. In addition, I apologize if I came across as aggressive at all in the above post: I made a couple of mistakes today, and I'm getting over those, so if I was uncivil in any way, then I'm sorry. I've seen you around the Leona Lewis article several times, and I think you do a good job on that page and her related articles. Thanks for your work. Acalamari 23:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh it's fine, I didn't think you were aggressive or uncivil. I realised after I made the edit it was probably wrong but then you can't delete it straight away lol. And thanks, you too. :) Adi39 (talk) 00:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for your understanding. :) We need more people like that. :) Acalamari 17:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks a lot for reducing the number of charts on the discography page. I wsa going to do it this evening but you've done it now. I think that it looks great now and it's nice to see people take other people's feedback, so thank you. So now I'm going to ask you on your opinion. Do you think that we could remove 'US pop?' I don't mind, I'm just wondering if it needs to be there. If there is a reason then that's fine. What's your opinion? Juicybrisket (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should stay personally as Pop is Leona's main genre in the States. If you go on Carrie Underwood discography she has US Hot and US Country plus some others but country is her main genre. Same with Alicia Keys discography which has US Hot and then US RnB. :) Adi39 (talk) 18:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For helping to keep the Leona Lewis article and pages related to her free of vandalism, POV, and unsourced information. Acalamari 17:56, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Better In Time US cover.jpg

⚠

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

PLEASE NOTE:

I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 12:20, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Leonasun.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Leonasun.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:47, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]