User talk:Tomica/Archive 28
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tomica. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | → | Archive 35 |
Disambiguation link notification for January 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Usher videography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chris Brown (entertainer) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
You see
http://www.norwegiancharts.com/showitem.asp?interpret=Rihanna&titel=Diamonds&cat=s
look there Tomica. It says 11 ;) did you even check this??? Its the reference that is now there so you know you are in the wrong. I'm still waiting for you to revert your edit you made of mine. Iluvrihanna24 (talk) 21:00, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
- If Tomica feels that it being number 1 for 11 weeks in Norway isn't worth mentioning, that's his right. He doesn't have to reinsert it. If he actually reverted it solely for being unsourced, that's not right, but WP:CHARTTRAJ would be another perfectly good reason to exclude it. Iluvrihanna24, no one is obligated to keep the material you add to articles, just as no one is obligated to keep Tomica's.—Kww(talk) 21:08, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Suit & Tie
 | On 21 January 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Suit & Tie, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the release of "Suit & Tie", Justin Timberlake's first solo single in six years, was used to tie in with the re-launch of Myspace? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Suit & Tie. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:33, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Come online
now!!! AARON• TALK 17:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- I was not home, just came. — Tomíca(T2ME) 18:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedian life is about to become difficult again. AARON• TALK 11:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Auuuuu don't say it. Everything is for the sake of it! — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:10, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Come online — AARON • TALK 18:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Auuuuu don't say it. Everything is for the sake of it! — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:10, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Wikipedian life is about to become difficult again. AARON• TALK 11:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
|
The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal | |
| Many congratulations on reaching the milestone of twenty-five of your articles featured in the Did you know... column of the Main Page. Your efforts are on the record and are greatly appreciated. Moonraker (talk) 23:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC) |
- Thanks once again. — Tomíca(T2ME) 23:34, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Oh
You're here. — Statυs (talk, contribs) 23:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- I was not actually, probably I just off when you wrote this. :/ — Tomíca(T2ME) 09:34, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
"Don't Let Me Down"
Can you add reviews today? — AARON • TALK 14:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- I will, later tonight. :) — Tomíca(T2ME) 16:38, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. I posted all the reviews I could find on the talk page. She spoke a lot about it in the videos I posted too in interviews. — AARON • TALK 16:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Come online. — AARON • TALK 21:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. I posted all the reviews I could find on the talk page. She spoke a lot about it in the videos I posted too in interviews. — AARON • TALK 16:46, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 16:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
There are remaining issues. — Statυs (talk, contribs) 16:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
"Pour It Up"
We didn't get to nominate for DYK lol. Doubt it is 5x expandable now. — AARON • TALK 22:55, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, definitely is not 5x expandable now. Drowned DYK :) !— Tomíca(T2ME) 22:57, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- Lol. As it is a single now more info might come about. — AARON • TALK 22:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- I doubt we will manage to do a 5x expansion though. We should be careful the next time. :) — Tomíca(T2ME) 23:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- Lol. As it is a single now more info might come about. — AARON • TALK 22:59, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Carefullll
Of how many times you're pressing revert. — AARON • TALK 23:31, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- I know, I am not pressing it anymore. Lol :) — Tomíca(T2ME) 23:36, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
DYK for Lucky Strike (song)
| On 27 January 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lucky Strike (song), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Adam Markovitz for Entertainment Weekly thought that the Maroon 5 song "Lucky Strike" was one of the best on their album Overexposed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lucky Strike (song). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
RE: C/E
Finished copy-editing Cry Me a River (Justin Timberlake song). Hope my changes helped. Dan56 (talk) 10:20, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Billboard just made a ridiculous update to their website, essentially shitting on 90% of the urls cited in these articles, b/c their previous site design wouldnt allow for WebCite to archive it... dicks. So, I'd check all those citations beforehand, as I am now doing for the articles I've written. Dan56 (talk) 11:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hi. Can you comment quickly at Talk:The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album)#Genres? An editor is trying to use consensus as a loophole through sticking to what the source(s) say on genres. He's going after my character now, so the discussion could use some objectivity right about now. Dan56 (talk) 00:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hey buddy, I am seeing this now :S ! Do you still need help from me or are the issues resolved? — Tomíca(T2ME) 13:46, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hi. Can you comment quickly at Talk:The Fragile (Nine Inch Nails album)#Genres? An editor is trying to use consensus as a loophole through sticking to what the source(s) say on genres. He's going after my character now, so the discussion could use some objectivity right about now. Dan56 (talk) 00:37, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's all good and settled. Dan56 (talk) 14:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Still pissed at Billboard. Went to their website and sent a message from their contact page, asking them what the hell these stupid circles are supposed to tell me and why it doesnt verify most of this anymore. Dan56 (talk) 15:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Billboard Brasil
Billboard Brasil actually is listed at Billboard now, and I've even added it to {{singlechart}}. The latest Billboard revamp is still taking me some time to recover from (singlechart doesn't work yet for most artists), but that was one actual good thing about the change.—Kww(talk) 20:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Alright then, adding that Monthly charts seemed suspicious to me. But okay. Btw, does Billboard have archives of the charts? Because, if that happens, that will suck... — Tomíca(T2ME) 20:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Don't know why having an archive would suck. Yes, they seem to have one going back quite a ways. I see above that Dan56 is pretty torqued about the change. I can see that. I just wish they had done this one first, and skipped the nightmare we've had for the last couple of years. I'm actually able to see positions from scripts now, will helps me to all kinds of position validation.—Kww(talk) 20:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- I mean if it doesn't have archives it will suck, because in the articles I work on, I used their archives in context in which week the song debuted at what position and stuff. Now I just can't find the archives, is it me not handling good the new desing or am I right, they excluded the archives? — Tomíca(T2ME) 20:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Only the top 20, as in http://www.billboard.com/charts/2009-01-03/billboard-200. Look a the bottom of each chart page for the links, or you can just type the URL like I usually do.—Kww(talk) 21:43, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- I mean if it doesn't have archives it will suck, because in the articles I work on, I used their archives in context in which week the song debuted at what position and stuff. Now I just can't find the archives, is it me not handling good the new desing or am I right, they excluded the archives? — Tomíca(T2ME) 20:59, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Don't know why having an archive would suck. Yes, they seem to have one going back quite a ways. I see above that Dan56 is pretty torqued about the change. I can see that. I just wish they had done this one first, and skipped the nightmare we've had for the last couple of years. I'm actually able to see positions from scripts now, will helps me to all kinds of position validation.—Kww(talk) 20:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
WTF?!
Has happened to the Billboard website?!?! It's all in symbols. — AARON • TALK 14:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Don't sat it, it's a mess. The archives are gone and I don't know how now we gonna source most of the chart performance things on Wiki. Sucks! — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:00, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's not even in English, it's impossible to put anything in articles now. — AARON • TALK 15:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Lol. Exactly. This is the beta version, I hope they re-arrange it a bit, or return it to the previous design which frankly I think it's impossible. — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Every article is going to have to have the US paragraphs removed and from the tables as well, they lead to nowhere now. — AARON • TALK 15:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I think there will be some consensus for the tables and stuff (maybe a legend with the circles, cause there is one on the site), but I am afraid what will happen with the chart performance. Btw, and here we go again. An edit for the sake of it... — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's really pissed me off, why bother changing it. I always thought it was such a great website. Now the only decent ones are the UK and Ireland ones as they have archives. And lol. — AARON • TALK 15:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed. I agree mostly that the OCC site is the best one, of course the Hung Medien ones are good too, they are simple and understandable. I hate that Ireland one doesn't have an archive, although the design is good. I hope Billboard repairs its web. — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah they are good, but they are for a lot of countries. OCC has so many archives for just the UK. Ireland does have an archive, I just used it on "I See You (song)". Just annoyed about Billboard because it's just going to make it so hard to source US charting for every article that we have done and for the future. I just tweeted them an unpleased tweet lol — AARON • TALK 15:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Lol. They will not bother much reading it I guess. xD I just wish they get back their archives. I hope so they do. — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I just don't understand why its all in Japanese. Ergh I can't even talk about it anymore I'm getting really angry! — AARON • TALK 15:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- What's in Japanese? — Statυs (talk, contribs) 17:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- The new Billboard just looks like a load of Japanese symbols lol. There's like no English, its undecipherable. — AARON • TALK 19:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Not for me. :S — Statυs (talk, contribs) 19:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- What does yours look like? How it's always been? — AARON • TALK 19:47, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Not for me. :S — Statυs (talk, contribs) 19:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- The new Billboard just looks like a load of Japanese symbols lol. There's like no English, its undecipherable. — AARON • TALK 19:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- What's in Japanese? — Statυs (talk, contribs) 17:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I just don't understand why its all in Japanese. Ergh I can't even talk about it anymore I'm getting really angry! — AARON • TALK 15:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Lol. They will not bother much reading it I guess. xD I just wish they get back their archives. I hope so they do. — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:18, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah they are good, but they are for a lot of countries. OCC has so many archives for just the UK. Ireland does have an archive, I just used it on "I See You (song)". Just annoyed about Billboard because it's just going to make it so hard to source US charting for every article that we have done and for the future. I just tweeted them an unpleased tweet lol — AARON • TALK 15:15, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed. I agree mostly that the OCC site is the best one, of course the Hung Medien ones are good too, they are simple and understandable. I hate that Ireland one doesn't have an archive, although the design is good. I hope Billboard repairs its web. — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's really pissed me off, why bother changing it. I always thought it was such a great website. Now the only decent ones are the UK and Ireland ones as they have archives. And lol. — AARON • TALK 15:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I think there will be some consensus for the tables and stuff (maybe a legend with the circles, cause there is one on the site), but I am afraid what will happen with the chart performance. Btw, and here we go again. An edit for the sake of it... — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Every article is going to have to have the US paragraphs removed and from the tables as well, they lead to nowhere now. — AARON • TALK 15:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Lol. Exactly. This is the beta version, I hope they re-arrange it a bit, or return it to the previous design which frankly I think it's impossible. — Tomíca(T2ME) 15:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- It's not even in English, it's impossible to put anything in articles now. — AARON • TALK 15:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Go to a chart history of some artist, you will see a bunch of stupid symbols with some meaning behind them. Awkward design. — Tomíca(T2ME) 22:40, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Ours look nothing like that. — AARON • TALK 22:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, the main page indeed looks like this, but the archives still lack. — Tomíca(T2ME) 22:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Visually it looks like it, but it is just symbols. — AARON • TALK 22:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, the main page indeed looks like this, but the archives still lack. — Tomíca(T2ME) 22:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low 
to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
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!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:34, 30 January 2013 (UTC)