About this, we are mean't to discuss first before changes are made. I've been told to do this on condition of my unblock. So I reverted to how it was, and you revert me to the single version with reaching a consensus. Can you see what I'm saying????? It's never been confirmed as a single. Rap-Up, MTV etc say it's promotional. Rihanna has never said it's a single. Why is this suddenly an issue. People are just going to take advantage of the fact that I can only perform one revert on an article in 24 hours, while others can do three. Aaron • You Da One21:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey hey i'm not against you! I know you can't revert twice. I created a discussion on the talk page to fix this issue. I don't really care if the song is a single or promo. Let's just discuss and remove in that order. I think it's better if we have the sources already on the article as it will be much easier to discuss. Sorry if i went out-of-the-blue, i apologize. Let's discuss and I will remove the info. This way is ok for you? —Hahc2121:12, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My point is, you are siding with single over promo, because you aren't letting the change be discussed. It should stay as promo, then we can decide if there is valid reason to then change it single, otherwise, what's the point? Aaron • You Da One21:16, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have no side. For me, it is the same if its a single or promo. I'm just willing to help end this battle. My point is that i think is better of the claims about the fact that it is a single, I mean, the references and sources, until a consensus is reached. So all users who want to take part in can check all sources and make a decision over it. That's what i mean. BTW, i added a live performance i erased by mistake XD. —Hahc2121:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) WHAT SOURCES!?!?! They say promotional!!!! Well did, someone got rid of them in favour of it being a "single". Why is this being bought up now? Has never been an issue before. So not in a good mood now. Aaron • You Da One21:21, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha i don't even know why it's an issue and why users are discussing over it. That "Rihanna said X" but "iTunes said Y" is kind of boring for me. I think a couple of comments on the TP will do the trick and then it will all come back to normal. I will read the article to be properly informed. And don't be upset, i hope we'll reach a solution for this. Cheers! —Hahc2121:24, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's removal of content. It was explained, as a promo single, that "Hard" was chosen in favour of "Wait Your Turn", and that it was released as a promotional single (by the news publications cited in the article). You reverting it to a single really isn't helping. Aaron • You Da One21:26, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just one question. It has nothing to do with WUT but in general. If iTunes says a song is a single, what does make that song become a promotional single (wich is free, as of what i know)? —Hahc2121:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. I thought you had to pay for promotional singles. Lady Gaga's "Hair" was promo, and it charted at 12 on the Hot 100. They can't be free, you have to download them from the album. Aaron • You Da One21:46, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it is a great issue. On Promotional single says this: "A promotional recording, or promo, is an audio or video recording distributed for free, usually in order to promote a recording that is or soon will be commercially available." I don't know what to think, actually. My personal opinion is that all songs distributed apart from the album are singles, but it's irrelevant and i don't want to get involved in the fight haha XD. —Hahc2121:49, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The only exception for promo singles being made to buy is if they were released as part of an iTunes Countdown, which "Hair", for example, was. Statυs (talk) 21:55, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm. I will call for extra help on this, as I cannot determine if it's or not a single by myself. Both partys show some good evidence, but i'm not convinded haha xD. —Hahc2122:03, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Hahc21. The short answer is yes. Well done on getting a licence change. The image you linked to an a couple others I looked at (I lack the patience to check them all) are now freely licensed and can be uploaded using the {{cc-by-2.0}} licence. Have you considered putting them on commons and using the flickr upload bot ? Peripitus(Talk) 12:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC). as an example I just uploaded using the bot - Peripitus(Talk)12:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I got my 5th barnstar today from Automatic Strikeout for creating all of the missing articles at the Wikiproject Baseball's Umpiring Task Force. Now, I'm going to make with your assistance some larger articles about Police/Sheriff's Departments and some more fish stubs (hence, my username). See you around! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 20:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for the barnstar! I really appreciate it. I hear that you enjoy working with charts and certifications, would you mind helping a bit with Nimrod (Green Day album)? Anything you can do would be great. Thanks! Basilisk4u (talk) 20:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha i'll check again. Some time ago, I updated the charts for that album but not the certifications. I will check the latter. Cheers! —Hahc2106:44, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for changing the status of my article Takis K Evangelides... You certainly look like you've been very ..
For some reason, on my talk page it says you left me a message, then I click on the link to go to your talk page, but I can't find any message... Am I doing something wrong? I hope I'm not being stupid..
Basically, I have all listed all the citations/sources I can find at the moment... is there something specific that I need to do to make sure it stays there? As I mentioned in the previous note, Cyprus publishing is not exactly established on-line!!..yet...! to provide more book references/links
Thanks for reviewing and passing it - I'd be happy to fix the issue with the Background section if you could tell me what it is. BTW, sorry about the failed admin bid - I was considering voting in favor but I wasn't able to before you withdrew it. Hopefully the minds of the community will be a bit more open whenever you are ready to try again. :) ToaNidhiki0521:04, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh thanks! They all told me to wait some months and then reapply, so it was a learning process for me. Well, background is OK. What i spotted could be better ois the lead and you can expand the composition. Actually, the second paragraph on Background is more suitable on composition, sinc eit talks about who wrote the song and such. Additionally, Critical reception and Chart performance could be changed to subsections of a new section named "Reception", since they are too short to be level 2. —Hahc2121:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I have done those changes - not much I can do about expanding the composition section besides that. Its pretty beefy now, though, so thanks for the input. :) ToaNidhiki0500:50, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there!:) I see you are good at uploading pics and stuff. I was just wondering, is this picture here: [1] free to use on wikipedia? :) please get back to me. THanks —SoapJar12:07, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Sad to say, it's actually not - it was licensed as CC BY-NC-ND 2.0, and this specifically does not allow for derivate works (which is what Wikipedia is). However, if you get permission from the copyright owner, this could be waived and the image could be used. Cheers! Theopolisme TALK12:28, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, Hahc21. I'm participating in the current backlog elimination drive and was wondering if it counts for our score if we create the review page before the deadline and then review it after the deadline. Thanks for your time. Rp0211(talk2me)20:30, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey. Well, it's not recommended to do that, since I will archive the Totals subpage when the deadline arrives, so no more reviews can be added and all blank reviews at that time will be removed from the page. I enjoy to see your competitive effort on the drive and it's admirable, since it makes possible to reach our goal. What i can recommend you to do is chose the articles you want to review, do the review and then they can be counted. —Hahc2120:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh. Seems they don0t have better things to do. I saw that info some time ago, and i consider it to be compleyely pointless. —Hahc2102:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! When i check an article and I want Wizardmand to re-check them for one reason or another, i put an asterisk so he can know which they are and give them a look. After i re-check them or Wiz re-checks them, then we remove the asterisk and sign as checked. Usually, when i put an asterisk is because i fiund something matter of attention on the review or the article. Regards. —Hahc2114:47, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Saw your comments for the Lead section. There was one I was just a tad confused with. I left a question on there if you could clear it up for me. JDC808 (talk) 19:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I don't know if you've looked back at the GA review yet, but in regards to the Audio section, Teancum suggested making it a sub-section of Development and to not make "Voice-over" or "Soundtrack" a sub-sub-section of it. I've went ahead and implemented his suggestion. JDC808 (talk) 03:06, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! Great job. I like to review VG articles, so if you have in mind to nominate another, just ask me and i will review it. Cheers! —Hahc2103:46, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I actually have another VG article nominated that no one has taken up yet. It's for the God of War (series). I had a Peer Review done for it, and the reviewer said that once I fixed the problems (which there weren't that many that he found to my surprise), he believed it would be ready for GAN. JDC808 (talk) 03:53, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, i saw it. I will take it. It will be a long review haha but i'll do it. It'll be interesting to know more about the GoW series (i have played the main numbered games). Regards. —Hahc2103:56, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks. I can understand it'll be long as it is a much larger article lol. It's a really cool series, one of my favorites, if not my favorite. The only one I haven't gotten to play is the one that they released for phones. I downloaded a version that I can play on my computer about a month or so ago, just haven't gotten around to play it yet. JDC808 (talk) 04:01, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha took it. My favorite series are Tomb Raider, but i have yet to get the inspiration to work on them for GA or FA. i'm now devoted to reviewing and the Ricardo Arjona articles and such. I will start the review this coming week, but now i saw that the lead is kind of strange, mostly the first paragraph: I think it's too long. Regards. —Hahc2104:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I copy-pasted everything from where you said "I will start the review this coming week,..." until where I said "..instead of two" and pasted it to the review page under "Lead". JDC808 (talk) 05:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! I was kind of busy in real world (and still will be). I will check the article today and give some comments for you to work on. Sorry for the delay. Regards. —Hahc2116:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, no problem. I was gone for the past few days as well on a mini-vacation. P.S. I've addressed the issues you brought up for "Gameplay" section. JDC808 (talk) 17:37, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry it took a little while to get back to you. I had to go to work after I had done the references earlier (also fixed the Metacritic issue just a minute ago). Thanks again for a great review process P.S. You had earlier said that if I have any other VG articles to nominate, to ask and you'd review them. My current goal is to get all of the God of War articles (at least the games) to GA status, with the ultimate goal being FA. If you want to, you can review all of them for GA (not all at once of course). Just let me know. JDC808 (talk) 01:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! Thanks . Of course i can review all of them one by one. Just let me know which one is up to review, but don't nominate them all at the same time or another user may take another one (joking). Regards. —Hahc2102:02, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Razr Nation. You have new messages at JDC808's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Great news! The AMPROFON site is now working again! The site has been updated to include recent certifications! EDIT: Correction, only certifications is working right now. =\Erick (talk) 01:42, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OMG Im Gonna Die! Great! I will check it immediately. Cheers! EDIT: And what is the other things that aren't working? —Hahc2101:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
It lets you to notice all users and not only the nominator of the article if you are interested in more involvement at the review. Also, it uses a table containing the information so that the user can easily find what is said to him. Also, i think it's more distinctive and with a better design. —Hahc2104:41, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just think it would be better to improve the current ones rather than to add new ones. It will keep it simplier for new reviewers. I am not terribly fond of the current ones and think they could be made much better. AIRcorn(talk)05:50, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, Hahc21, I'm beginning the copy-edit for the above article you requested at the GOCE Request page. Feel free to contact me about the copy-edit, or to correct or revert me if I'm doing something I shouldn't. :-) Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A quick question; in the second paragraph I found "According to Arjona, Animal Nocturno and Animal Nocturno are the best-selling albums of his career." Should one of those albums be Historias? Thanks, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:31, 22 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and also for correcting the article; so it's copy-edit Done; feel free to contact me if there are any ongoing issues. It's a fine list article, good luck with your future FL nomination. Cheers, :-) Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:05, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The text for your link is cc-by-2.0. The link actually goes to CC BY-NC 2.0. I believe both of these allow derivative works. Are either (or both) of these a typo? Neither of these has ND (no derivatives) in it like CC BY-ND 3.0.--Rockfang (talk) 07:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at your question, it seems poorly phrased. The correct license for that link is CC-BY-NC-2.0, which doesn't allow commercial use. Perhaps a rephrase is in order? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:16, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Guy, the song seems to been scrapped. Alicia gave her vocals to new 50 Cent's single New Day. Can you redirect the page for the 50's single, and if you can, write something about Alicia's version. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SrGangsta (talk • contribs) 17:40, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No it wasn't scrapped. Alicia's version remains as the original and 50 Cent's version is just a sample of it. Also, her version charted in the US and received plenty of coverage enough to have its own separate article. Regards. —Hahc2117:49, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DYK nomination of 513th Military Intelligence Brigade
Hi! I've created my 12th article today and my 4th BLP. Also, many people are opposing M&E because of his answer to your question. Would you mind teaching me a thing or two about image copyrights? Thanks, ElectricCatfish19:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Addressed all issues. Sorry I didn't get to it sooner. I had to go to work and didn't get home until about 2 hours ago, which I've spent the majority of that time going through the review. JDC808 (talk) 04:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw that you passed it. Thanks again. I know you said you're leaving for a trip, but so you know when you get back, God of War: Ghost of Sparta is next chronologically. I may go ahead and list it to see if anyone else wants to take it up, in the meantime, I'll be working on fixing references for all the pages and the FAC for Chains of Olympus. JDC808 (talk) 17:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I'll just wait till you get back so you can do Ghost of Sparta. I have those other things mentioned to do so that'll work. JDC808 (talk) 17:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okay :) Maybe i get back sonner than expected. Cheers!
Hello, Razr Nation. You have new messages at JDC808's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Razr Nation. You have new messages at JDC808's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Razr Nation. You have new messages at JDC808's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
That sounds fine, the finished ones can be done. As for future stuff, actually I plan to cut out a good amount of the extra stuff, since a lot of it seemed to contribute to the poor reviews. WizardmanOperation Big Bear02:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your participation in my RfA. I enjoyed answering your questions and appreciate the thought you put into my candidacy.
By the way... am I the only one that finds it bitterly ironic how your rationale for going neutral on my RfA is essentially the very same reason I regretfully opposed yours just two months ago? =|
Haha yup i remember. I thought your RFA went way better than mine, and i'm happy to see you had a (relative) good time in there. Sorry that it did not succeded but maybe in some months you will finally become an admin. I'm not following that path again, as I consider i'm happy right now will (all) my rights package and content creation. Cheers! —Hahc2123:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with most of that. No more #1 ranking, and I'd limit barnstars to just a few (ones for 5, 10, 25 perhaps). For a daily review limit I'd prefer five; ten is far too many, and even five is a bit of a stretch. WizardmanOperation Big Bear01:15, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to let you know that I am going to wait a little while to answer your questions. The RFA is unlikley to pass and there are likely to be more questions later so I am going to wait and see what else comes up first. I just didn't want you to think I am ignoring you. Kumioko (talk) 12:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two ways: 1) try to find if the user keeps a record of their reviews somewhere on their userspace; or 2) Go to the user's contributions, on namespace, select "Talk" and look for all contribs with "GA" on it. I know it may be laborious, but it's the only way. Regards. —Hahc2102:59, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh also you can use this tool to check all pages the user had created and it may appear there how many Talk:(Article)/GA pages the user has created. —Hahc2103:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just activate the search tool on your browser and type "GA", then your browser will scan the page to identify all entries of GA and it will make a lot easier the job. Regards. —Hahc2103:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am so sorry for my stupidity with that review. It would be great if you could take a look at my Samsung Galaxy S III review and give me any pointers, and tell me what I am doing wrong. Thanks for telling me before I got myself in too much trouble. ObtundTalk03:49, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry. We all make mistakes sometimes. I read your review and i noted some strange things on it. First i saw was a sentence stating that references should be boiled down to 90 (or something like that). Why did you asked that? I mean, it is odd, but it's just a comment. Personnally, i think you are doing very well on that review. I'm on vacations right now so i can't help you 100% (i'm connected from a PC that is not mine), but i will keep an eye on you to help you as much as I can. Regards. —ΛΧΣ21™03:56, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was 110 I told them to get down to. There was some WP:OWN going on and they weren't getting that 217 references was way to many references. So it is like kids you have to give them a level to get to so they understand. ObtundTalk04:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. I kept an eye on that article since it was created (I love that phone and will get one this month). It has been greatly improved and i think it's close to GA (haven't read it although). I still dunno what happened on the other review, as this is going very well. A Note: I have the fear that, as the device is still new enough, it may not meet the 3(a) and 3(b) criterion, but not totally sure. —ΛΧΣ21™04:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks I just don't want to get barred. Now on the 3a 3b issue I believe it does because it is somewhat new, but everything there is to know about it is pretty much out if you know what I mean. ObtundTalk04:28, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. That's the reason why i doubted. Also, you won't get barred. You jus6 made one mistake and you saw it at time and fixed it. It would take a bigger issue or mistake with an unresponsive feedback from you to get you banned, but as of what i've seen, that won't likely happen. Regards. —ΛΧΣ21™04:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I just took the three most impressive greek symbols (for me) with some significative environment. The first, "Λ", is lambda. I'm studying computer engineering and, in the C# programming language, a lambda expression is an anonymous function that can contain expressions and statements. The second is "Χ", which is Chi, and is often used to abbreviate the name Christ, as in the holiday Christmas (Xmas). When fused within a single typespace with the Greek letter Rho, it is called the labarum and used to represent the person of Jesus Christ. I'm not a catholic, but i like to study ancient history of religion, mostly Jesus Christ's life and stories. The third is "Σ", which in mathematics represents the summation operator, also called (in my country), Riemann's sum. I like mathematics and its most abstract calcules, and it represents that part of me. — ΛΧΣ21™03:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tito, are you from India? I wonder cuz i have the idea that if Dutta is your last name, you might probably be from India. LOL. — ΛΧΣ21™03:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes! Kolkata exact location. My IP address will tell you I am staying in Bangalore, that is incorrect! You have a great knowledge on Indian surnames. Few days ago I was talking to a friend named Chuck who was surprised to learn there are 22 official languages in India. For surnames there are millions of surnames. It is really great to see your knowledge on Indian surnames. --Tito Dutta✉03:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Kolkata! Great city. I love India, and i'm a fanatic of Geography. I know very much about most countries. Although, i did not knew there were 22 official languages, even when i like Bollywood films hehe. Regards. — ΛΧΣ21™03:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is a nice sig. P.S. I've been wondering this for awhile, but how do you change the style of your sig? Special coding? --JDC808 (talk) 05:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
lol I think I just figured it out. Is it under My Preferences and you put what you want to show as your name in that one box? I had never clicked on My Preferences until today. --JDC808 (talk) 05:58, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes! Just off topic.. I have noticed you have not applied for Wikipedia:Questia. I have checked their sites if they have so many full view books, it'll be very useful (right after JSTOR which is unavailable at this moment). --Tito Dutta✉15:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
wow, thanks for being my instructor! I hope I can live up to the academy's requirements! I'll do my best, but please be patient as wiki is a steep learning curve. I can start any time! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:52, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading the article but it's tough going. I've done vandal work with Twinkle but that's the extent of my knowledge. I used to know the speedy deletions but I think the rules have been changed. So it will take me a while to absorb that page. Can't figure out the "access keys" and templates stuff. I'm trying! MathewTownsend (talk) 16:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would take me a two/three weeks to get those reviews going, as I'm kind of busy with my personal GA reviews right now (have like 10 people who are waiting for me to review there articles already). I'll try, but as said, I'm at the moment. I'll be happy to after all my GA reviews are done, unless some else got the review by then. TBrandley02:12, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for trust! Yes, in Barack Obama article, I added few extra points because I was worried about the future of that article... really ... at that time there was a peculiar situation, I started reviewing one Twitter article and another Twitter article was nominated for deletion. I fully agree with you that requesting an infobox or adding section, adding graph, adding more information etc– these are not part of GA review. But, I deliberately added few extra points to greatly improve the article so that it becomes hard to delete it later for its content! No one understood my own reasons for adding these points at that time, but that's the only surviving Twitter article now (though renamed). --Tito Dutta✉04:14, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Not disputing the decision, but you should not have closed it as Speedy Keep. It does not meet any of the criteria at Wikipedia:Speedy keep. I don't even think it meets the Snow close criteria, but that would have been better. Just a heads up in case you are planning to close more. AIRcorn(talk)01:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was undecided in closing it as keep or Speedy keep, but i decided on the later based on the general notability criteria and the main consensus on the article. Almost all song articles sent to AFD result on such decisions. Although, now that i read that page again it doesn't cover the closing decision as you stated, and i really appreciate your comments. Thanks. — ΛΧΣ21™02:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
