User talk:Efe/Archive 18

WikiProject Record Charts

Hi, thanks for the invitation and for your suggestions in the peer review, I would make the changes and join the project tomorrow,(actually later today.....2:00 A.M. here) I am a bit tired. I look forward for you to change also the single pages from the 90s and 80s, although I know is very hard to find references from that years. Ohhhh.... I almost forgot I see that the List of Number-one singles from the 90s in the UK is nominated for featured list, but the format is completly different. So every country will have a different one? Australia, Ireland, US, UK......etc, etc. Let's hope we can reach a consensus.

Frcm1988 (talk) 07:00, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcome. Don't have consensus yet generated by the project. Ei, I'll be working, for now, on pages 2000-present. Not very sure with 80s. I'll try with 90s. --Efe (talk) 07:03, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Charles Justice

Can you restore this article you speedily deleted to my userspace? There's clearly a huge mistake as the subject of the article is in the College Football Hall of Fame IIRC, so to say he is notable would be an understatement... Hippo (talk) 05:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Ignore this. It looks like someone changed a redirect I created into a different article... Hippo (talk) 05:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I rechecked the article. An IP added a content to the original redirect page, and the content was:

On November 11 1911, Charles Justice was electrocuted by the State of Ohio.

It was an ironic end, since when serving an earlier stint in the state penitentiary shortly after the electric chair was introduced, Justice had hit upon the idea of metal clamps in place of leather straps to more securely hold down the chair’s clientele and avoid burnt flesh.

The improvement, duly implemented, was there awaiting its creator.

This is the reason another user tagged it for speedy deletion. --Efe (talk) 11:36, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

GA

Hey, fancy taking "Just Dance" and Poker Face" to the GA with me? -- "Legolas" (talk) 10:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I would love too. But, like I have said to Realist, its too early. Maybe until the singles start to decline in charts and when there are no edit wars. --Efe (talk) 12:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I know, *rolls eyes*. Too much edit war is going on. Did you see the continuous IP war for the thrid single page? Some IP is continuously deleting info. Since you are an administrater can you protect it? "Legolas" (talk) 12:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to review the history. I haven't seen it. Been busy yesterday and today. Exams. --Efe (talk) 12:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, he he. Hope you did well in your exams. Well i'm off for the weekend. Happy editing and reverting all the vandals and huns :-) Hope the pages will be ok when I come back on Monday, and not get a major heart attack - "Legolas" (talk) 12:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Im back. I have reviewed at least the recent edits of the page. It would be pointless to semi-protect the page because it involves registered users and I think one IP. The IP who has been removing the genre/source of the genre is 60.234.151.56, but the IP has a number of good contribs to the page. Seems like folks there are engaged in a minor war. Charmed has helped you revert them, but I would like to note that she has previous edit wars regarding genres (see Rihanna's single talk pages). The best way to resolved it is to call the attention of those who don't agree with the genre and have a discussion on the talk page. --Efe (talk) 12:58, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh is it? i didnot know that. Actually the issue on which the edit war is going on seems very very trivial. Anywys thanks for your help always. Cheers!! "Legolas" (talk) 06:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:GA

Your very welcome! You and the other users who have improved the article should be very proud so congratulations to you all, and happy editing :) JayJ47 (talk) 22:09, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		I gladly give this Barnstar to Efe, for getting Usher (entertainer) to GA and for being generally quite awesome. ;D — Realist2 05:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, that's very generous of you, Realist. Thank you very much. --Efe (talk) 06:32, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Canadian Hot 100 number-one hits of 2008

I have recently saw what you have been doing, and was wondering if I can accomplish the same thing as you. I am here because I need to know how you find your references. For example, Apologize was number one on January 5, 2008. How do I get the reference for that? -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 _anyone? 09:41, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I found a way now. Laugh out loud. Sorry for giving you more bytes. :( -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 _anyone? 09:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Its fine. Its in Billboard.com. It would be perfect if Billboard pubishes news on the Canadian Hot 100, but they do not. Here. But non-news links are actually much helpful. They provide issue date like this:

CHARTS: Canadian Hot 100
Artist: Timbaland Featuring OneRepublic
Title: Apologize
Issue Date: 09/08/2007
Promotion Label: Mosley/Blackground/Interscope
Distribution Label: Universal

--Efe (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Parviz Haghendish

Could you please review your speedy deletion of this article? As I said in my edit summary when I contested speedy deletion the article said that this person was a fencer on the Iranian national team, which is a clear indication of importance/significance. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

You deleted this article (as it should have been) earlier today. Someone recreated verbatim, and I've requested another speedy delete. It's really a non-notable person. Can you help out. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 22:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I deleted the page because it failed to meet both WP:NOTE and Wikipedia:Notability (people). --Efe (talk) 11:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

But neither of those is a criterion for speedy deletion. Anyway, it doesn't matter now because this is now going through the correct deletion procedure at AfD. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:44, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs

Hi, I know you have a lot more experience in this topic than me. I was looking at the songs that are good articles, and then I see that 2 songs from Madonna: 4 Minutes and Give It 2 Me are consider A-Class song articles, which is for articles that are well organized and essentially complete. I don't think they meet the criteria. Thanks in advance for your answer.

Frcm1988 (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. They obviously failed to meet the criteria for A-class articles. Both lack the writing history of the song, analysis of the music and/or lyrics, etc. --Efe (talk) 11:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 4	24 January 2009	About the Signpost

Jimbo requests that developers turn on Flagged Revisions	Report on accessing Wikipedia via mobile devices
News and notes: New chapters, new jobs, new knight and more	Wikipedia in the news: Britannica, Kennedy, Byrd not dead yet
Dispatches: Reviewing featured picture candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

RE: WP:RECORD

Thanks for the invitation, but I'll take a pass. I only participate in WikiProjects I'm familiar and contribute with. -- SRE.K.Annoyomous.L.24 _anyone? 04:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Poker Face

Hey, i think the word "apparently" if added in the article will be better, as the appearance of Chace Crawford in the video is still a bit shaky. Something more authenticable source is needed to establish it, so i added the word apparently. Anyways, cheers !! "Legolas" (talk) 10:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

IMO, the word really has no use. "as the appearance of Chace Crawford in the video is still a bit shaky" is your opinion. Its up to you if you add it back. Cheers. --Efe (talk) 10:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

No probs. I only thought of adding that word because the appearance of Chace Crawford is being said in many articles on the net, but i am yet to find it in Chace Crawford's site. Thats why i thought it may be an apparent thing. Anyways cheers and thanks for your help as always :) "Legolas" (talk) 10:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

W******. Regarding this, to benefit everybody, maybe you post in the project's talk page so that your edits will not be reverted. --Efe (talk) 10:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Ya i know. Thats why i kept the table but removed the commentary. I understood that it is too early to say anything. But the tables are fine and would actually reduce a lot of burden when the final enhancing of the page comes at January 2010. "Legolas" (talk) 11:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Ne-Yo

If it takes you more than a day or so to find citations, drop me a note on my talk page so I don't miss your update. Thanks.--Crossmr (talk) 07:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for dropping by. The citation is actually in one of the refs used, but it only mentioned briefly that Ne-Yo has a baby, no further info. Seems like its a secret baby of sort, as claimed by some not-so-reliable sources. If I can't find an in-depth article about his personal life, I'll mention the baby briefly. I'll try to improve/beef up the article's content, if I have enough time. I'll keep you posted. --Efe (talk) 08:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I have added the info about his son. But I still have to add more. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 10:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I just want to make sure we double check this before we pass it and find out there was some big pile of information we could have added. I'll take your word for it that all that is currently available is in the article.--Crossmr (talk) 07:23, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for passing it. I have added back the template per instruction at GAN. --Efe (talk) 07:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Oops, actually I just took out the nominee template. I forgot to add the GA one, good catch.--Crossmr (talk) 07:44, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. --Efe (talk) 07:46, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Me, Myself & I

Hey i saw that most of the Beyonce single pages are without any music video image. So i uploaded one at Me, Myself & I. But I don't know why the image has been listed for deletion. The image is a split screen showing four different moods from the video and it clarly increses the readers understanding and doesnot fail NFCC#8. Can you please take a look in it? "Legolas" (talk) 09:45, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Its getting stricter everyday. That's why I failed to include an image for "Baby Boy"; it was removed during its FAC. --Efe (talk) 10:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Well i have included a pic in Baby Boy, you must have seen. But the image in Me, Myself clearly doesnot fail NFCC#8. Can you please support me in the deletion discussion? I have seen before also that images are being tagged which doesnot fail NFCC#8 but many images pass which are probably, just an eyeshot of a music video. Really don't get it "Legolas" (talk) 10:51, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Im tired about discussions regarding NFCC. Its a recurring problem. As for "Baby Boy", I suggest you remove it or try to capture a scene that is discussed in the music video section. It really failed to comply WP:NFCC. As for the deletion discussion, I'll try to comment there if I figured what I have to say. --Efe (talk) 11:02, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I have removed it myself. Please read the summary. BTW, you can actually use non-video images for that section when, for example, a routine is being performed similar the one performed in the video. --Efe (talk) 11:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey can we combine the two images, so that the routine's similarity will be more discernible? "Legolas" (talk) 11:16, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid. Maybe you ask someone who is very into this kind of problems. I suggest the one who tagged the image to "Me, Myself". --Efe (talk) 11:19, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Ohh, anyways thanks sweety :-) "Legolas" (talk) 12:15, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Hot 100 number-one hits

Hey, Efe. I saw it was you who started to format these lists like t-h-i-s, and I also did it. I just wanted to know if you were upset by it. I don't know, you started and I did not ask permission to "copy it." Well, that's all. Thanks. Sparks Fly 14:49, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

If I own those pages, I'll kill you. Hehe. Just kidding. Its fine. Looking forward to working with you on the other lists. I'm inviting you to join the project. --Efe (talk) 06:27, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Good! I can sleep better now. I would love work with you, I saw that you began working here and here but not finished. What happened? Sparks Fly 21:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

2002 page is actually one of my projects. My initial plan was only to include 2003 up to present. But one of the members of the project wished of me working on the list of number-one singles up to the 90s. 01, 02, 03 are unfinished because I've been busy these previous days. --Efe (talk) 10:59, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand, wikipedia does not pay our bills. And on the invitation, I would love to participate, but I have a problem: I still am not so good with English, and when I see those discussions in the project's talk page; those words, words and more words, I get a headache and I want to give a shot in my head. I am glad you ask, but I have to pass. Sparks Fly 14:35, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, don't be intimidated. My English isn't good, too. --Efe (talk) 10:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Really? In which country do you live? Sparks Fly 14:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Philippines. We are actually good in English; its our second language. But in my case, I'm still struggling to level the standards here in WikiPedia. --Efe (talk) 05:03, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Defeated Sanity/GA1

Have you seen this? I think the article deserves a proper review. — Realist² 05:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Was it a withdrew? If its the case, then we should proceed to Talk:Defeated Sanity/GA2. --Efe (talk) 06:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Ping, I'm not sure if you want to do the same template thing with this one. — Realist² 06:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Efe (talk) 06:45, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Lucky me sought this mess out, Defeated Sanity is now a GA. — R² 05:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

My Solange. Still have bits to work on. Grats. --Efe (talk) 06:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

RE User_talk:212.219.229.15

Since you were the last person to warn this account...I'm passing onto you the fact that this address is shared by several hundred pupils in a school(s?). I'd recommend blocking, because as I said, the average intelligence is akin to a caterpillar. A dead one. --212.219.229.15 (talk) 13:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

We don't normally block an IP or ranges of IP mainly because we presume we only get vandals from such IP. If the IP continues to vandal despite multiple warnings, that's the time we block them. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 05:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Congrats!

On this!!! - eo (talk) 18:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wow. Its kind of a birthday gift. --Efe (talk) 05:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

LoveGame

Do you think we can recreate the page on Lady GaGa's single LoveGame? I'm not sure that its release status is confirmed. "Legolas" (talk) 14:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Until its single status is confirmed, then we can be sure that it will neither be redirected nor deleted. --Efe (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 5	31 January 2009	About the Signpost

Large portion of articles are orphans	News and notes: Ogg support, Wikipedia Loves Art, Jimbo honored
Wikipedia in the news: Flagged Revisions, Internet Explorer add-on	Dispatches: In the news
WikiProject Report: Motto of the Day	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Updates

I promised to keep you updated and here's all the latest: Christina Milian (album) is on hold, and So Amazin' is up for peer review. Please leave some comments that you think will come up during FAC, or any other issues there may be. Also, nice job on Ne-Yo and Solange Knowles (I cannot get "I Decided out of my head!). Corn.u.co.pia • Disc.us.sion 06:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank for the update. I'll visit there. --Efe (talk) 06:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments so far. I'm going to bed now (first day back at school and I'm exhausted), but will be sure to catch up in a few days, if not tomorrow. Corn.u.co.pia • Disc.us.sion 11:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Always welcome. Have a good sleep Corn. --Efe (talk) 11:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit Summary

User:Dance-pop is continuously reverting changes in the Lady GaGa articles withoout providing any edit summary. That user is becoming quite a nuisance since he/she doesnot take to edits by any other user and is hell-bent on proving his/her theory as right. You can check the user's comments in all the Lady GaGa related talk pages. I left a warning at his/her talk page, which i'm pretty sure will result in the user starting to abuse me. Can you take a look, sweets? "Legolas" (talk) 04:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

zOMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't you know how much I hate controversy sections? They are evil, evil I tell you. Not even the Michael Jackson article has a controversy section, they can be avoided. — R² 06:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

What's the problem? hehe. It's the same thing. Revert it if you prefer longer header title. =) --Efe (talk) 06:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Have you finished the grammar clean up on TDCAU? I know you mentioned stuff on the GA1 page, I'm not great with grammar though. — R² 06:26, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Correction my dear. I'm not good in grammar. Otherwise, I should have managed Nights in Rodanthe to GA status. Its my first "WikiSetback" ever. Hehe. Anyway, going back to the review, I have fixed my own concern. It should not prevent the smooth flow of the process. Good luck. --Efe (talk) 07:02, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for bug=dging in, but can i help in some way? I'm fine with grammar and can edit out errors wherever applicable. "Legolas" (talk) 07:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Cool. "They Don't Care About Us" is a GA nom (on hold). No major concerns actually but you maybe interested in reviewing it. --Efe (talk) 07:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Just a heads up

Be on the lookout for any of these guys. This guy already "protested" the changes of number-ones lists (to the tables with images) and left some rants on the Project Talk Pages: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Charts#Format changes from lists to tables. Basically what he is doing is reverting the articles, then copying all the text (in its old format) and creating new articles with a variation on the name, like "List of 2003". If you place warnings on his page, he'll then copy all the contents onto your talk page and on his talk page and on his user page, wherever he can put it. I've had to block and also give full protection to his pages and delete a number of articles he created; it's ridiculous. Soooo... just be on the lookout, check User Contributions, report to AIV, whatever. Later! - eo (talk) 23:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I've seen one of Billhit's edits reverted before. So he's one of those guys... Thanks for the information and the link. --Efe (talk) 00:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I've blocked the socks and semi-protected some lists. Just keep blocking/protecting as needed, I guess! Some people really have nothing better to do with their time, unfortunately. - eo (talk) 01:03, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

BTW way Efe, see this; we might need to move some lists again. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. --Efe (talk) 02:27, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Lady GaGa

Efe, this: go to Lady GaGa section is getting out of hand. Repeated warnings, have not resulted in a good faith or anything for User:Dance-pop. Check the talkpages. How long will i control it alone? I expect you to take necessary actions. "Legolas" (talk) 04:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Legolas, dance-pop needs constant guidance. He's a newbie. He's not a disrupt at all. Now, I'll repeat to him to add edit summaries. If he don't heed any of us, then we should take proper actions. And please leave refs unformatted. Some users don't want to do that because its a waste of time. As long as its reliable, its fine. --Efe (talk) 07:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not talking about formatting reference. I'm talking about repeating the same reference multiple times within the same article. I told him that is not how we do it, but as you can see from the talk pages he is not bothered about learning, but instead hell-bent on adding the same thing again and again. That makes him a disrupt. Yes, I will revert those kind of changes i tell you. Also its not about edit summaries. He needs to learn to have good faith and be polite. Whenever he is warned, he becomes aggressive and is insolent to learn what is right from wrong. I have seen the same behaviour from the talk pages also. As an administrater I thik you can put a warning (not a notice) and explaining the incidents. i don't think the user will listen to me as i am not an administrater. Regards "Legolas" (talk) 07:41, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

No, that's a wrong presumption. Just because you are not an administrator means you are not bound to be listened to. Its just that both of you are hot recently, and until now. I see what can I do when he replies back. --Efe (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

It's nothing like i'm hot or anything. I did explain situations to the user and asked him not to do it, but the user starts abusing and shouting, saying nonsense. I tell the user repeatedly to stop it lest he gets a warning and to keep good faith, but again i'm struck back saying I'm the one who is insolent and disruptive. Do you think any user would have tolerated after such behaviour? Atleast i didnot take this incident to ANI. I'm saying that since my warnings are not heeded you give a proper warning to the user. Me alone how much can I do and how many pages will I revert? You tell me. I asked Relist2's help also. I don't ask eo since he doesnot respond. The only option and possibly a good friend is you. That's why i come here for help. I know you will listen to it fairly. "Legolas" (talk) 07:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I don't want a heated "debate" on my talk page. Now he's learning to add edit summaries. As of now, he's offline, I think. No edits so far. Until he replies back... or when "bizarre" behaviors pop out of my screen... --Efe (talk) 08:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to say

Just to say, that's one really cool user page you have designed for yourself my friend. Real classical style, I enjoyed running through it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Politis (talk • contribs) 16:34, 5 February 2009

That was actually sort of inspired by User:Giggy's user page, before, and I added it a bit of style. Thanks for the appreciation, Politis, and good morning from the Philippines. --Efe (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Email

I have just sent you an email. — R² 12:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Responded to. --Efe (talk) 05:59, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hi, Im currently working on some songs from the 80s (the sources are very hard to obtain), now I know that a band's own website cannot be considered reliable here in wikipedia as it is self-published, specially regarding sales. Now what I want to know is if this self-pubhished rule is aplying to the Writing and Recording section, for example if the band put some of the information on their webpage about where it was recorded or what instruments they used? Thanks in advance for your answer.

Frcm1988 (talk) 06:16, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I think its fine. I only suggest don't rely on it too much. But for the figures, it had to published by some third-party sources especially when it involves big figures that are readily questionable. --Efe (talk) 06:20, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, again thank you. Frcm1988 (talk) 06:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Welcome. --Efe (talk) 06:36, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Shannon Lark

It specifically says "some entity", which would appear to include people unless I'm missing something. TallNapoleon (talk) 09:08, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, the criterion says: "Pages that exclusively promote some entity and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion." So it usually falls under such subjects, although it can also used for, say, a person. But reading the article isn't a blatant advertising. Perhaps a little tweak. --Efe (talk) 09:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review lists

You currently have four discography listings at peer review. The number of people prepared to give in-depth reviews ar PR is limited. It would greatly help if you, as a regular nominator, were to assist in the reviewing process. This would enable articles, including your own, to move more quickly through the process. Please consult the backlog listing for a suitable article. Many thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 09:47, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I am aware of the maximum requests per editor. I'll try to review some if I have enough time. --Efe (talk) 09:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Please Read the Letter

Dude, just where did the song come from first? It came from Walking Into Clarksdale. A song infobox is totally legitimate for this article. You've written the article as if Plant and Krauss had written it. I should also point out that Jimmy Page is a co-writer on that song, not Krauss, therefor his inclusion is also legitimate. MegX (talk) 05:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Its not an article about the original song, its the single. Mentioning Page in the article is enough. --Efe (talk) 05:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Dude, that's rubbish. It started out as a song on the original album Walking into Clarskdale. Under wikipedia guidlines it's perfectly legitimate to inlcude a song infobox if it came from the original album first. There are many song articles that include both infoboxes. MegX (talk) 05:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Can you give me link or discussions regarding this matter? I would be happy to revert my edit. --Efe (talk) 05:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

After doing a search came up with this example article, Gold Dust Woman, this time between two unrelated artists. One a song, the other a single. MegX (talk) 06:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not convinced. Its one of those music-related pages that gets no or little attention. You may revert my edit, but I am setting up a discussion at the project's page. I don't want both of us to handle this alone. Not actually a big deal for me but let others chime in. Agree? --Efe (talk) 06:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually I was going to get a Wikipedia:Third opinion, but I thought first we should have followed procedure by discussing this on the article's Talk page. I guess it doesn't matter now. Anyway if you wish to bring this up on the project Talk page (I'm assuming here the Song Wikiproject?) I have no objections. MegX (talk) 06:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Its WP:SONGS. I'll notify you if I have set up the discussion. --Efe (talk) 06:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

It's been nice meeting you anyway regardless. I didn't know there was a charts wikiproject until I saw your user page. I've been adding many charts over past two months to articles so its been a happy coincidence. MegX (talk) 07:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Nice meeting you, too. --Efe (talk) 07:53, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

There's been no responses so far. Would there be any major objections then from you to add the infobox information? MegX (talk) 02:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea. Perhaps you can add it, but I am worried. Its a Record of the Year and might attract eyes, IMO. As of now, I can't engage in major discussions, kind of busy in the real world. --Efe (talk) 03:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks. MegX (talk) 03:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

(Outdent) Welcome. We will get into that when there's a response at the project's talk page. --Efe (talk) 03:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Stargate (production team)

I am reviewing your article, Stargate (production team), for GA and have left some comments/suggestions here: Talk:Stargate (production team)/GA1. Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 23:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mattisse, how are you. I have left comments on the review page. I am just curious about this line: "Sorry, I accidently reviewed this article!". --Efe (talk) 05:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Efe, my comment does look a little strange. I reviewed the article for GA, thinking that I had already signed up to do it. Only when I went back to place it on hold did I see another editor's name there. Since I had already opened the review page, I thought I needed to offer an explanation! The other editor said that I should just continue with the review. Hope all that is OK with you. (It was inadvertent; I have never done that before.) Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 18:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I did not notice there was another editor interested in reviewing it. Its fine with me. --Efe (talk) 23:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Grammy-awards

Ha! I'm dealing with same thing at the moment too, until my dinnertime. :) Happens every year when "Grammy-award winning" gets added to the winners. Good luck. Acalamari 03:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I was about to greet you about the same thing. Anyway, good luck. I'm about to have my lunch... but I'm still waiting who will win the most coveted award. =) --Efe (talk) 03:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Rihanna's cancelled Grammy performance

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Talk:Rihanna#2009 Grammy's. Thank you. Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 05:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me. Commented there. --Efe (talk) 06:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Alicia Keys musical style

Hey there Efe, another editor feels that the musical style section in Alicia Keys doesn't comply with WP:NPOV. Think you could help me with it? DiverseMentality 06:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh my. It should not be. It was just recently passed to GA status. First thing, I suggest to invite User:Journalist who tagged it to explain in detail the reasons why, and points lines where arguable. I believe its because of the quotes, but its quotes. Second, contact User:Mattisse since he/she is the one who reviewed it. If that part is indeed POVish in nature, Mattisse should have noticed it. I see what I can help when they're comments become live. --Efe (talk) 06:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Uber GaGa fan

Hey Efe, good afternoon (India time). What can possibly be done regarding this and this. Need your suggestion. "Legolas" (talk) 07:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I left him another note. --Efe (talk) 09:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks again. - "Legolas" (talk) 09:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I have left a comment on your talk page regarding your edit. --Efe (talk) 09:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ya i understand. Thanks for pinting it out. I'll keep that in mind from now on. :-) "Legolas" (talk) 09:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI, I have left a hidden comment on GaGa's page. It seems this what keeps the edit war going on. I hope we can settle this. --Efe (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Saw it. Hope it works. Already a discussion is going on in the talk page and consensus has not been reached yet. The over eager users are adding sources which are not verifiable and frankly they don't give the information in question at all. We can't use some vague comment right? "Legolas" (talk) 09:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course. The only problem I see with Dance is that he always add contents when he knows its disputed and a consensus has yet to be reached. If someone tries to ignore the note, I'll either use my administrative tools (although I am sort of afraid because I am highly involved in this) or report to wherever appropriate. --Efe (talk) 09:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Efe, at one point an action is needed if repeated warnings and explanations have fallen on deaf ears. Also i see a violation of harassment policies repeatedly and too much of personal attacks. You can't possibly make somebody understand something when he/she is not ready to accept good faith in any way. Protecting the Lady GaGa page from IPs will help but then again, if we have over eager and vengeful editors like Dance, then our rollbacks are again going dowwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn. - P.S. I'll go and have tea. What time is it there? "Legolas" (talk) 09:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand your sentiments. I am just trying to "salvage" him from the abyss of his own "uberness". Anyway, I have started with that "LoveGame" thing and he seemed listening to me. He stop adding them. Second, I have given a link at GaGa's talk page regarding how to determine an associated act. So far, that's what I have accomplished. Its past 5 here. I have class. "See" you later... and enjoy your tea. --Efe (talk) 09:46, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok sweety. And i saw the link for the associated act. That will help themn understand not to put it on again. Lots of thanks for your help. "Legolas" (talk) 09:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

W******. --Efe (talk) 11:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of TurnKey Linux

You nominated the TurnKey Linux article for speedy deletion. I was the main editor for that article and I believe you deleted it in error, as it does not fit the criteria for speedy deletion. Tagging an article about an Open source project with as Wikipedia:Spam and deleting it without warning and without any discussion at your sole discretion is both against established Wikipedia policies and an abuse of your administration privileges. Please restore the article immediately and exercise additional caution in the future. -- LirazSiri (talk) 23:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

If you feel it was an error, sorry ma'am. But in my opinion, it was indeed an advertising. You may request a review here. I will not restore it until the consensus is to restore. FYI, an IP tagged it for deletion under WP:CSD #G11, and please, be respectful to others even if they have committed "mistakes". Thanks and thank you for your contributions to the project. --Efe (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I have little respect for overzealous deletionists who speedy delete legitimate articles without seeking consensus or debate when they obviously don't understand the subject matter. You have demonstrated both incompetence and a warped interpretation of Wikipedia guidelines than borders on the malicious. It's people like you that drive good-faith editors away from the project. I have added the article to the Deletion review and I am confident the system will correct the damage. Unfortunately, not everyone has the patience to work through the Wikipedia bureaucracy, so please exercise additional restraint when editing non-music articles in the future. -- LirazSiri (talk) 02:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

And please be civil. We don't need sarcasm here. Thank you. --Efe (talk) 02:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I see. You are vehement with this discussion because, as your user page states: "Finally created a user account in Wikipedia to facilitate full transparency over my edits. Especially edits in which I was directly or indirectly promoting various projects I am involved with (e.g., I'm one of the developers for TurnKey Linux, a new opensource project)." It seems you are in a conflict of interest. --Efe (talk) 02:43, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'm one of the developers. I made that very clear in my user page. I contribute to TurnKey Linux for the same reasons I contribute to Wikipedia itself, or to DMOZ where I am an editor, because I believe in giving back to the same source of free wealth which has given so much to me. TurnKey Linux is a community effort to help users get up and running with various Linux servers applications and asks for nothing in return. It's not selling anything, so how you could force it to fit in Wikipedia's criteria for spam is beyond me. Again, your lack of reasonable judgement in this matter borders on malice. The Wikipedia article is a relevant and legitimate way to educate users who are interested in software appliances that the project exists. It's about the same "conflict of interest" that Jimmy Wales has with Wikipedia. We both want what's best for our community. - LirazSiri (talk) 03:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, its entirely your opinion. We'll just see how the discussion goes at WP:Deletion review. --Efe (talk) 03:14, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Speed delete first, ask questions later. I see. That's kind of counter-productive position don't you think? As Wikipedia:SPAM guidelines state, you could you added a warning to the page, or proposed deletion rather than speedy deletion. I suspect you a zealot even amongst deletionists and I hope you'll discover the Wikipedia community considers opensource software at least as notable as music trivia. - LirazSiri (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to inform you that I have recreated the TurnKey Linux article from a copy provided to me by a friendly administrator. For now I have removed the external links to the appliances on the project's website, pending further debate on whether is it appropriate to do that according to WP policy. - LirazSiri (talk) 12:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for TurnKey Linux

An editor has asked for a deletion review of TurnKey Linux. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. LirazSiri (talk) 02:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for TurnKey Linux

An editor has asked for a deletion review of TurnKey Linux. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Just proposing to do the AfD on this, without undeleting it, to keep with policy and process etc. --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 09:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible to proceed to AFD with an article already deleted, twice? I mean, how could others (non-admins) comment on it? Besides, this was passed to deletion review (although it was quite an unhealthy discussion). Thanks for dropping by. --Efe (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I do think that the basic problem is that non-admins can't have been involved in the deletion process (if I understand what happened correctly), and IMO the article didn't satisfy any CSD. But I articulated this thoroughly in WP:VPP and no one seems to want to address the fact that this is a serious conflict of interest (the real-world kind, not WP:COI - the judge-jury-and-executioner kind.)

I scoured the deletion policies looking for something where this problem could be addressed, without any luck (though if you have any ideas, propose them please.) So I chose the next best thing, trying to set the precedent that this could be the basis for a deletion review.

(In case it isn't clear from the admittedly lengthy DRV, I really don't care about the article, I just want it to be deleted validly within process; I would have preferred that this occur with the article visible to everybody, but I guess even if it's retroactive that's better than nothing.) --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 09:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I am actually hesitant to take further actions after all the harassment I got from that page's creator. But as an admin, I have the responsibility. And since it was again passed to deletion review, I think it would be unwise to put up an AFD. --Efe (talk) 04:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)