User talk:Dizzyneo

Welcome!

Hello, Dizzyneo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Emma chadwick, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Teapotgeorge^Talk 11:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Emma chadwick

A tag has been placed on Emma chadwick requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Teapotgeorge^Talk 11:57, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Grannylyn

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policywill be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Teapotgeorge^Talk 12:03, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Luke Chadwick, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cassandra 73 (talk) 12:06, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

December 2010

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Katy Perry discography worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Yves (talk) 23:05, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, such as those you made to Katy Perry discography, even if you intend to fix them later. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.
Please stop removing information and making text unnecessarily small. Use the sandbox, please, if you want to test out Wikipedia. Yves (talk) 23:21, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to Owl City discography. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.
Please stop inflating certifications, like you did in this edit. Thank you. Yves (talk) 11:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Certifications

The reference you added in this edit mentions nothing about "Fireflies" being certified platinum in the UK. I'm going to ask you to please stop adding false certifications to discographies on Wikipedia, or I may have to refer to an administrator. Additionally, the only sources for certifications we use are official ones, like the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand, the Recording Industry Association of America, the Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas, or, in this case, the British Phonographic Industry. Thank you. Yves (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A single selling over 600,000 copies in the UK does not equate to a platinum-certified single. Certifications have to be given by official companies, in this case the BPI. For some companies, the record label actually has to apply to earn certifications for a specific release. What you are doing (adding two and two together) is a perfect example of disallowed synthesis of published material that advances a position. As for Ms. Perry's discography, all certifications listed are of the countries listed. If you feel the Austrian peak of One of the Boys is unnecessary, I don't know why you wouldn't remove its peak, as well. Certifications are a measure of shipments or sales and provides information about a certain level reached that other published sources would not otherwise contain. Calling those four markets "main music countries" is Anglocentric: I believe countries like Germany and France have larger markets than that of Canada. The small text makes it difficult to read, and I don't know why you want to do that. Take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style! It's the goal for all discography articles to eventually follow the format layed out on this page. Alternatively, take a look at some of Wikipedia's best discographies like Lady Gaga discography or Eminem discography: plenty of certifications there with no unnecessary small text. Does that clear up some of your concerns? Yves (talk) 23:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You "knowing you are right" violates Wikipedia's core policy of verifiability. Things go on Wikipedia because they are verifiable, not because they are true. I didn't address your point of comparison with other singles because, again, that is synthesis of material, which is not allowed. Certifications always have to be given out by the BPI. Yves (talk) 22:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]