User talk:Percxyz

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Be Yo Lady has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. NuclearWarfare (talk) 02:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

looks like you're out to get me :) but you can delete those article if you want to I agree that they are only stubs.

The Nice Hollaback Girl (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for the smile

hey no worries, say hello to your trigger happy sis from me.♣[[user: The_Nice_Hollaback_Gir|Hollaback]][[user talk: The_Nice_Hollaback_Gir|Girl!]]<font color="purple" size="2" (talk) 06:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Circus Tour

I'm confused, I thought we removed the Paris dates because of no real source confirming them? I checked the Ireland, Belgium, and Russia dates and they are listed on either Ticketmaster or the venue websites, but is that a real source for the Paris dates? ---Shadow (talk) 03:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Amy

I'll take a look. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hello!

Hi Percxyz!
Per your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
Rollback can only be used to revert obvious vandalism, not good faith edits.
Rollback may be removed at any time.

If you no longer want rollback, then contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some information on how to use rollback, you can view this page. I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, just leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Cheers, and happy editing! J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

sorry, are you able to go on billboard site and check out as i wrote in the edit message?? i think no, in my opinion as i can see someone just rollbacks because to search is too difficult. it wasn't a vandalism, i don't need the message. --Mojska (m) 05:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and you saw the charts not the chronology -.-' --Mojska (m) 05:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, Mojska. First and foremost, I must say I did not use Rollback to revert your edit, I simply did an "undo" for it and left an edit summary. You can't leave edit summaries using Rollback, and I never abuse Rollback rights (I hardly ever use Rollback to begin with, only for obvious vandalism), so I must clear that up immediately.

Now regarding your edit to Britney's discography, I think as an experienced user you already know that if you're going to provide information to an article that requires a source, it's the burden of the editor to provide the source his/herself. Other editors shouldn't have to go searching for it, it should already be readily available within the article. Now with that said, I did end up looking for these songs on the charts myself. Now I'm not sure what I saw (charts, chronology or whatever) but I did see this: http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/retrieve_chart_history.do?model.vnuArtistId=290150&model.vnuAlbumId=1196626, which leads to every song of her's that has made it onto the Billboard charts. The songs you provided aren't on there, so I can only assume the edit you provided was incorrect.

Now with that said, you do have a point - I didn't necessarily need to give you that warning, as my edit summary pretty much spoke for itself. I was just in a really bitchy mood at the time, which is why I gave it. Don't take it personally. ;-) However, you still need to provide a source for the songs you provided to the Britney Spears discography article in question. Percxyz (Call me Percy, it's easier) 07:45, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/esearch/searchResult.jsp?configType=BBCOM_SIMPLEDEFAULT&pubList=Billboard&an=bbcom&action=Submit&kw=&exposeNavigation=true&keyword=out+from+under+britney+spears&searchType=ARTICLE_SEARCH -.---Mojska (m) 11:29, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Edit

Hello,the recent edit you made to baby one more time has been reverted because it appears to be unconstructive,please refrain from undoing sourced edits--Aldamira (talk) 18:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Regarding your warning and revision of my edit, both have been ignored and reverted. However I probably should have explained with an edit summary as to why I reverted the sales numbers of Baby One More Time back to 25 million in the first place. Popdirt.com is not a reputable source when it comes to album sales figures, as it's more of a blog than an actual sales figures chart website. Anybody can log onto the site, make an account and add their own original research when it comes to their favorite artists and that artist's album sales. Any type of blog, fansite or other website that contains original research from that site or blog's owner or one of its members is not a proper source for Wikipedia. Not only that, the source you provided for the Baby One More Time article was contributed by a member of the site who is clearly a fanboy/fangirl of Spears (which is clearly seen here), and therefore one can assume that their mentioning of BOMT selling 26 million is a biased claim. Furthermore, the source is not an official article on Britney's album sales statistics, but rather, the article speaks of Britney's album sales vs. Christina Aguilera's album sales, and generally doesn't read as a professional article or review.

To further back up the claim that Popdirt.com is not a reliable music source, there's another article on the site that was contributed anonymously that states BOMT sales at only "24" million, as seen here. Not only that, this particular article (posted on the site 12/24/04) states Britney's total album sales at over 100 million. This was clearly inaccurate and not the case back in 2004, nor today in 2009.

Simply put, Popdirt.com doesn't meet the requirements of WP:V or WP:RS, and therefore cannot be used as a source for any type of sales figures from any artist listed on Wikipedia. When it comes to replacing sources, the replacement should not be "dumbed down", so to speak, and one must take into account the fact that the source being replaced must be done so by a source that is not only up-to-date, but moreso, exceeds the reliability and verifiability of the previous. Replacing the foxnews.com source with a source from popdirt.com, in this case, isn't acceptable, and therefore has been reverted. Percxyz (Call me Percy, it's easier) 21:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I Do Have A Source

I do have a source saying that Breathe On Me and (I Got that) Boom Boom were supposed to be singles. Wikipedia itself! Click on the singles section in the contents box and look for those two songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206LR (talk • contribs) 16:50, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Smanu

Just a heads up. The user will try to engage you in edit warring. Its better if you raise ANI before hand. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:21, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No probs. Faced the user many times on the Lady Gaga articles. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Outrageous

Hi, I'm the one you wrote to about the Outrageous article. Just to let you know, nobody's perfect! On the article for the Christina Aguilera song Fighter, it says it's Rock 'n' Roll, when really it's the subgenre electric rock! See, everybody makes mistakes! So leave me alone, seriously! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetie8763 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I 4give u! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sweetie8763 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Chris_Brown_(entertainer)#WP:NPOV_and_criminal_conviction

Hello, neutrality concerns over the criminal conviction of Chris Brown have been raised on the talk page. Since you have been previously involved in the discussion, will you answer the request for comment? Thankyou. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 21:31, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Britney (album)

Why did youn revert my edit????its better said that it has sold more than it had sold--Petergriffin9901 (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Christina Aguilera sales

You can't do it this way! I change the informations and I have references and links to prove what I change! Her sales aren't the numbers you are saying, being confirmed by the links (that are realible sources. If you can change and put your sources... I can do it too!

Piranga(talk) 14:11, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Piranga, you didn't even provide any sources at all when you changed her sales numbers for Back to Basics (which is what my last warning was in regards to), that's why I warned you in the first place. The source here clearly states sales at 3.7 million. With these edits, you changed it to 4.5 million, without providing any sources. And it's not the first time you've done this, either. That's why I gave you the warning. Now I see the numbers have changed back to 4.5 million, with sources (no matter how "less reliable than others" they may be), but honestly I don't care anymore. Xtina is the only artist I know of on here who has numerous amounts of reliable sources claiming different album sales. One says she's sold 25 million, another says 37, another says 42. One says her debut sold 10 million, another says 12 million, another says 16. Another says Back to Basics did 3.7 million, with others saying 4.5 million. It's a mess, period. I don't think anybody will ever TRULY know how many albums she's sold because so many sources say so many different things. So I'm pretty much done trying to keep up with her articles on here because it really is a losing battle. You, and Teneris, and Max Liron, and everybody else who's guarding her articles with their lives, will not be seeing me anymore, lol. Although I will occasionally check on her articles just to see if they're up to par, album sales wise, and I'll be checking sources from time to time to see if they're reliable. But I have more important issues on here to take care of anyway. ;-) Percxyz (Call me Percy, it's easier) 11:18, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If U Seek Amy genre

Hi
Could you come to Talk:If U Seek Amy#Genre and engage in discussion? I will renominate the article for GA and we need sources to establish the genre.
Thanks, Xwomanizerx 15:02, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia.

I noticed that your user subpage at User:Percxyz may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline because it spoofs elements of the MediaWiki interface, more specifically the "new messages" bar. If you believe that your userpage does not violate our guidelines, please leave a note here and we can discuss it. As an alternative, you may add {{Db-userreq}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, or you can simply edit the page so that it meets Wikipedia's userpage guidelines. Thank you. Draftydoor (talk) 11:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Had no idea it wasn't allowed, thanks for letting me know. ;-) Percxyz (Call me Percy, it's easier) 09:05, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Generally speaking...

...if I see a edit summary of D.I.N.O.S.A.U R A DINOSAUR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, I'm not prepared to assume good faith, especially on a school day. Choose your words more carefully. HalfShadow 18:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Category talk:African-American people

You never answer me. what is the difference? --89.249.2.53 (talk) 10:45, 19 April 2013 (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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]