User talk:Ieatsomeforbreakfast

Imma Be

As the details your trying to add to the article where never there before you should discuss this on the talk page because it is controversial and makes it seem as if Imma Be is a single in canada. Lil-unique1 (talk) 21:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: the source you provided doesn't really explain this and you need more than one source to make the claims your making. If you really want to include it in the article (and if we decide to do so) it certainly shouldn't be in the introduction. Lil-unique1 (talk) 22:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: added some information about the song on Canadian radio. Are you satisified with what i've added? btw we don't use sources where you have to register. Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: No problem. sorry if i sounded harsh before. i was just trying to find a balance of the information so that we got across the facts. Are you new to wikipedia by any chance? also in future can you please sign your comments by using four tilds? ~ ×4. Thanks Lil-unique1 (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

January 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to All I Ever Wanted (album), but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. Twitter is nota reliable source accepted by Wikipedia under guidelines. Clarkson also ahsn't confirmed anything, as it's not up to her. this is why only official sources are acceptable for such information to be added. Alan - talk 22:59, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Imma Be (2)

I understand perfectly how the Canadian Hot 100 works, airplay points are important. But the airplay didn't cause the song to go top ten: it was strictly the downloads. Imma Be had enough digital download points to go top ten with ZERO airplay, which means the airplay points were trivial and not important to its top ten placement. Also, Imma Be has not charted on the National Canadian NielsenBDS Airplay Chart (which is here: http://secure.randr.com/bdsradiocharts/charts.aspx?formatid=43; it hasn't charted there yet), which means that it airplay isn't large enough to be important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chele9211 (talk • contribs) 21:53, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know of the AllAccess page, it seems you don't realise that those are format-specific. The chart I provided is the official Billboard airplay chart which counts spins from all formats. Imma Be isn't in the top 40 of national radio play yet. If you read this week's Billboard Canadian Update you will see that the Canadian editor has written that Imma Be hit the top ten due to downloads, and based off of Billboard point calculations (using the audience in millions and the downloads in thousands) you can calculate for yourself that Imma Be could get into the top ten with no airplay. In this case the airplay has little to do with it being a hit, because it already reached the top ten, making it a hit. It isn't getting "single treatment" because it never got a Canadian radio adds date. When Imma Be debuts on the national airplay chart then perhaps it is more appropriate to mention that as a factor that helped give Imma Be longevity in the top ten following the Grammy performance, or something along those lines.-Chele9211 23:40, 14 February 2010

I don't see any problem with that. Chele9211 04:05, 15 February 2010

ANI notice

{Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic User:Iluvrihann24's edits to Rated R (Rihanna album) and in particular the constant addition of poorly sourced information, WP:BADCHARTS and iTunes etc.. Thank you. Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of number-one songs on American Top 40 of 2010 for deletion

The article List of number-one songs on American Top 40 of 2010 is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of number-one songs on American Top 40 of 2004 until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 00:23, 27 January 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) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]