Talk:Indiana Gregg/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

OFF topic: The album financing situation

as the article says She and ehr hsuband Ian got the album financed via some "Enterprise". Acording to the article about this enterprise it is some governmental thingy e.g. financed among other thingies with taxes that scottish politicos "The sheriff" demand form scottish people "the villagers": Scottish Enterprise[1] [SE], is Scotland's main economic, enterprise, innovation and investment agency. Well, I'm not an investigative journalist [hello queen and littleredm&m maybe THATS the chance for you to win the pulitzer in uncoveering some corruption between "the guy that is claims to be good in swordfights" and the politicos whose email was mentioned in the CC" Of course I don't know how those financing works, but if some no-name girl from american province can get scottish taxpayers pounds to release an album that seems to be not a number one bestseller, maybe I should put those politicos emails in my addressbook too, I always wanted to sing, and I never spitted on people as a child ;-) SERIOUSLY: I thought the Scotts are known for their attitute in saving stuff, maybe there is really a Story behind it all for some bold reporter! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor2008 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe that you find that SE co-invests with private investors. The way I believe this is structured is that investors (or a group of investors) will receive match fund investment from SE. It is part of a program to help stimulate business growth in Scotland. Therefore, file-sharers are stealing government investment. File-sharing of copyright owned in part by the government is serious. Now, I understand, wikieditor2008, that you have some very personal agenda against this musician. I believe I will ask that you be blocked from these discussions and from the editing of the article due to your lack of neutrality towards the artist in question.

On another note, does anyone have the page stats for this wiki page for July 4th-11th? I believe that is the time period where we may see a potentially significant increase in the page stats? Littleredm&m (talk) 10:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL @ littleredm&m first of all, do I say anywhere that I condone copyrightinfringement? And what has "File-sharing of copyright owned in part by the government is serious" has to do with my conspiracy between Ian Morrow and some politicos? Are you aware that in america for example everything that is done by some governmental official in teh course of its duty is NOT copyrighted but automaticly public domain? Thats why for example wikipedia can savely use gov photos without worrying about copyrightstatus of those photos of soldiers and such stuff Second, you want to count it negative towards me that I had put on my conspiracy-hat"- and was musing that there migh has gone on some "behind the curtain" greasing of politicos that this 3 kids mama from american provice got taxpayers money from scottish taxpayers so she can make an album?
you say such "conspiracy speculation" by me disqualifies me from editing and makes me "having an agenda" or makes it that I have a "lack of neutrality towards the artist in question."? You must be kidding! Have you seen (sure you have I say since you seems to be "one of the persons surounding" her giving your edit history) the latest blogpostings of Indiana? She now psots YT videos about the big conspiracy to make one big america state out of mexico USA and canada with one curency the "Amero". So is she now disqulified as artist now since she seems it is important that she now posts such stuff (maybe in anticipation that those knife owning fucked up poor british filesharers will not hunt her down when she can make them beleive she is as nuts and paranoid as they are? Wikieditor2008 (talk) 18:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we please have a editor ban on littleredm&m

that editor seems to not understand how wikipedia is supposed to work That editor seems to thing brute force reverts are the way to go even though other editors clearly showed that with citations what infos are Ok and why littleredm&ms edits are not! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor2008 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Judging by this comment, you don't either I'm afraid. Please stay civil on disputes and do not post such comments, they will not help with anything. If this editor is doing things that are to be considered vandalism like removing tags without reason, they have to be appropriately warned on their user talk page. This talk-page is not the right place for this. Also, do not forget to sign your posts (see the notice on your own talk page). So#Why 19:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, that one helps me I guess Wikieditor2008 (talk) 19:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikieditor2008, I have not made any reverts, it is, however, you yourself who is making brute reverts and clearly not paying attention to the information here in the discussion that has been provided. Littleredm&m (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You did revert my sourced edit pointing out Lenzie as Indiana's place of living. Please refrain from such actions and discuss it on the talk page. We must stay calm or we'll have another week of full protection and I believe that isn't what you're aiming for. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 19:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Both of you are contributing equally towards my inclination to protect the article, actually. Phil Sandifer (talk) 19:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm just adding references here. I don't mind Littleredm&m reverting my edits I didn't find references for, but I'll revert an edit where she deletes my reference. I'm trying to take the matter to the talk page, but it seems it isn't working. If you think protection is a good idea, go for it. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 19:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

so what now?
From the editing pattern it is clear [Editentry] for me at least [Editentry end] that the wikipedian littleredm&m -that registered right after the user IANMORROW was banned for vandalism last year and that had not done any edits with that last year registered account until another editor (Queen) got the 3RR warning last week and which is now accused of being a suckpuppet of them- is NOT interested in EXPANDING the article in a useful way. I used the warning templates but it looks at least to me that their is absolutely NO good faith interest in having a useful expanding article about Indiana Gregg visible in the edits that littleredm&m is doing. (all over the web is the artist age of 35 in 2007 mentioned yet this wikipedian argues that the age that is widely known has no place in a biography! How rediculous is that?
So I did the warnings, it did not help, where can i request a blocking of that editor for in my opinion clearly bad faith vandalising and not constructive editing? Wikieditor2008 (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

STOP

Wikieditor2008, please stop making edits that have no reference to this musician. There is a discussion about a given name and date of birth amongst the editors. It has been cited in several newspapers that the musician lives in Glasgow. We have absolutely no reference to her age or date of birth. Until there is an accurate resource that can be cited, it is not appropriate to make guesses.Littleredm&m (talk) 19:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

nice try, but "we" don't make guesses, "we" take outr infos from newspapers that report more then what her managements feed those "exclusive" guys. Even her husband Ian himself admitted that they live in Lenzie! That's what the links I posted above shows! And thats also what Admiral Norton's references show! I guess you are just a few of your vandalising revert edits away from getting banned littleredm&m Wikieditor2008 (talk) 19:25, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

littleredm&m, why did you removed the actual and sourced number of festivals? for me that looks like revert vandalism when you remove hard facts that are sourced Wikieditor2008 (talk) 15:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Please! Do not play dumb now! "(no reference to age in the article, it says, Ian, 50, Indiana, 35)" so what do you argue that those numbers are? And what about the articles (reverenced elsewhere) that do not just have the numbers 35,50 but also the words years old or age for example! Wikieditor2008 (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Lenzie vs. Glasgow

Google search with keywords lenzie indiana-gregg returns more than enough references pointing to Lenzie as the current Gregg's residence. I have used one of them to source the claim in favor of Lenzie. As for the references in favor of Glasgow, Lenzie is actually sorta suburb of Glasgow (see Google Maps). Admiral Norton ^(talk) 19:22, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any compelling reason that we need to state she lives in Lenzie. I found a publicly available record that shows that as recently as June she has listed Lenzie as her home, but it includes her full address and phone number which makes it inappropriate to use as a cited reference. Because, as you mention, Lenzie appears to be a suburb of Glasgow and the fact that the most recent articles about her say she is "based in Glasgow" [1], I think we should use the same language. Maybe something like: "American born, now based in Glasgow". I also think we should be careful here in general about all of this specific personal information from primary sources, as even though she calls herself a "pop star", I'm not sure she's notable enough to warrant such a detailed and probing investigation.--Mooksas (talk) 01:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I think we should definitely include both Terre Haute and Lenzie. There is no reason to go backwards and delete well-sourced material. Lenzie is a suburb of Glasgow, not a neighborhood. This is not personal information; we are not uncovering her address, her phone number, her DNA sample of anything similar. BTW Lenzie is more than sourced, just take a peek at Google.

Just wondering, though, how did you find that publicly available record? We could use some information for date of birth and maybe we can find a public record citing it without revealing other personal information. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 10:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Agreeing with that, a suburb is not a part of the city and thus is the correct place to cite. So#Why 11:50, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Since the others are too busy edit warring to add their opinion here, I'll just add Lenzie. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 18:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, wasn't aware you wanted feedback regarding Lenzie. You did not said so, and since I'm now used that discussions about entries seems not to take place (at least not with respect to all editors that "work" on the article), I simply thought you would do without my agreeing statement.. -> of course I agree with your assesment about the mentioning of Lenzie. Wikieditor2008 (talk) 04:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I just wanted to be sure my statement was not going to be reverted in 5 minutes. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 12:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:BLP

Please remember this is a BLP and so, as the policy says (read it if you haven't already), it's important we get it right. This means we have to make sure we don't give undue weight to any issue or particularly any conroversy; and also be careful with the sourcing. Using primary sources, whether birth records, voter records or whatever to cite her DOB, birth name, or whatever is almost always a bad idea (Do not use, for example, public records that include personal details — such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses — or trial transcripts and other court records or public documents, unless a reliable secondary source has already cited them). Unless it's been cited by reliable secondary sources, then we can presume that it private, and doesn't matter enough for this article. Editors are welcome to take any queries to WP:BLP/N#Indiana Gregg for further feedback (I've already left a comment) Nil Einne (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Tours and "Home Concerts"

Now that the edit battle is over, I'm cleaning up the mess Littleredm&m and Wikieditor2008 left. I was trying to use proper {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} formatting with links to the actual article instead of inline citations like this: (see Sunday Herald) or even this: (gazette-news). I was able to find information for and properly format some sources, but there are still sources whose articles I've been unable to find. I commented them out and marked them with uppercase UNSOURCED. I've also found a dead link, which I appropriately marked.

Now, to all who dare to edit this article: Use {{cite web}} template with URL and title at least, to make sourcing a little easier. I'm sure no one wants this article to look like a mess, so get actively involved in editing and sourcing instead of reverting and restoring. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The citation for the ranking on YT

While my french is a bit rusty, It seems this article is only citing Indiana herself as the "proof" for the YT rank. While I don't want to accuse her of deliberately lying to interviewers, it is not that she is known for being the smartest when it comes to the understanding of technology/law. The YT ranking figure is nowhere so far backed up with anything then claims of herself or her label. No graphs,no YT statistic tools, no nothing. It just seems odd to me that such claimed archivements would be possible given how many artist are on YT and comparing for example jsut the total viewing counts of J@W and her own videos that the "viralled out" with a torrent [SCNR] of myspacepages for nearly every country you can imagine. (Well i dod not tried /indianagreggzimbabwe so far, but canada,france germany and the world are there for sure)

So, is there any objective source for the online archivements that are claimed? [Even if not, "I" will not remove the claims simply for that, I'm not a sockpuppet of a more negative "destructive edits only" wikipedian. But having "believeable" source for that statistical claims would be better I guess. That would be also in the interest of the artist, wouldn't it?] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor2008 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Fourth in what? Fourth most viewed in a week, a month, a day? The article doesn't have this information. I don't think we should remove the claim on the basis of this problem only. After all, it's a reliable source and I believe they do check and choose which of her words will they publish. I'd like to find a confirmation, though. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be also interesting to have a link of the movie. I have tried http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=indianagregg&p=v, but the most viewed video there has 98,000 views, far less than 200,000 in first two days she promises in the article. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

And that one Admiral N. is refering too was only added "2 month" ago, so it can not even be the one she mentioned at all.

Interesting though is the second place with Views: 71,419 While I did not c+p the exact figure of that one i do remember that the count for that one was in the ~65thousand and something range when she became famous because of her husband's "highlander stunt" toward Peter Sunde and I stumbled over that video back them because of that. So I guess a viewing figure increase of about ca. 10% of overall total views in more then 12 month in just a few weeks since the incident...Admiral N had this nice link to the deviation from the norm or how it was called, that IS an indicator that the threatening of TPB with swordfights and the subsequent publishing of that thread had INDEED an extremely notable and measureable effect with respect to her career and should be included! SoWhy's version was perfectly NPOV since it jsut told what was objectively derivatable from the mails. Wikieditor2008 (talk) 23:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The Sunday Herald page that is currently reference #4 and mentioned at the end of the last big paragraph in "Tours and Home Concerts", is not actually an article. It's an autobiographical letter written by Indiana herself (notice the whole thing is enclosed in quotes.) Not sure why it has somebody else's byline, though; that's not something I'm used to seeing.--Mooksas (talk) 00:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Career stages

littleredm&m

editors are supposed to discuss removal of content on the discussion page. NOT putting some comments in the article page itself and go ahead with the deletion anyway! It is not that you should "discuss" entries you don't like by other editors with an admin, if you have issues with edits you should talk about them here, and then shoudl be a consensus reached!

THAT kind of singlehanded removal of content is what i was refering too when i said your edits are not good faith bases!

If you don't like something in that section bring it up here, or put a tag for clarifying or weasel words or what ever onto it that editors can work on the stuff, DO NOT simply kill stuff you don't like. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor2008 (talk • contribs) 18:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

That's it I would say!

Ban this asshole (and give me a warning for not being civil)

littleredm&m summerises the edit with: (corrected grammatical errors where the word "where" was used, rather that "were". fixed some minor flaws and made the thing readable for the anglophone public.) Yet what was done is the complete removal of content!

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Indiana_Gregg&diff=prev&oldid=227733873

I want this asshole banned! NOW! Wikieditor2008 (talk) 00:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I see

so expanding the article seems not to be in the interest of some SPA accounts and while they remove expanding content instead of taking their issues with the edits to the discussion page and telling what source references they want gets again protected without that expanding content gets mentioned.

Well I think Im out of it, Congratulations to the Gre8tpop sockpuppets and the other "content-preventers"!

Phil might want to read again the other wikipedian's comments about his decision to remove the earlier version of the TPB incident!

At least you can remove the block now. I consider my working on en.wikipedia.org, that only begun as newb without any 2nd accounts ~2 weeks ago, done now.

Bye guys! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikieditor2008 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's your life. I am with Phil in this case though and think too much information about the TPB-controversy is misplaced as not justified under WP:BLP's notability-criteria. As TPB points out on their webpage, a lot of labels and artists are making equal demands and many go to the public saying so. So there was no real reason to include it to begin with. Once it has cooled down and the protection is lifted, I think I will include a few short sentences (max) devoted to the incident. So#Why 15:16, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

USA Citizenship

The United States considers a person to be a US citizen if that person is born in the USA, it's possessions, ships, planes (and probably other places that I am forgetting). A person remains a citizen, unless after the age of 18 one "officially", which means through some paperwork, renounces citizenship or does something to have it revoked. AJB2010 (talk) 00:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)AJB2010

I think she revoked her citizenship, she would be double taxed if she didn't. See dual citizenship. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 13:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You can be born in the United States and not claim your citizenship. Likewise, you can be a US citizen and reside in another country and not be 'double' taxed. A US citizen only needs to file taxes in the United States, but, as with other countries, if one is not residing in the the United States, he is only tax liable in the country that he spends the majority of the year in. It is not necessary for a person to revoke their citizenship just because they reside in a country other than the the country of citizenship. In some case, for example Germany & US, dual citizenship is allowed. If you spend more than 180 days in any european country, you become tax liable in that country. There isn't any 'double-tax' per say as far as what I've come to understand regarding tax laws. A citizen cannot 'revoke' his own citizenship. he can only 'renounce' his own citizenship. Only a government can 'revoke' a citizen. Did someone claim that Indiana has renounced her citizenship to a country? I think that citizenship has also to do with how you were declared as a child. You can be born in the US but have another citizenship if your parents are not US citizens and they claim another country for the child, for example.Carribeanqueen (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

If she's a citizen of US, she pays taxes for her salary to US. If she lives and works in UK, she pays taxes to UK, meaning that she has either renounced her US citizenship, regularly gives out a much larger percentage of her income for taxes, or she pays only UK taxes and will be arrested for a tax evasion if she returns to US. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

@Carribeanqueen interesting point you bring up there regarding here citizenship. have you seen this one? As a U.S. citizen, you are always a U.S. national and have to report your worldwide income to the IRS. IRS Publication 901 discusses treaty provisions and their applications.

Therefore, as a U.S. citizen, you'll need to file an annual 1040. Your salary can be excluded from gross income under the foreign earned income exclusion (Form 2555) up to the $80,000 limit, provided you otherwise qualify. Your capital gains and dividends are fully includible in your income. http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/tax_adviser/20060103a1.asp Lets hope the IRS does not read TPbs legal section where millionaires are outing themself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.226.29.87 (talk) 15:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

That's actually $85,700 (official IRS webpage). Admiral Norton ^(talk) 16:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks admiral for the update to currently valid figures. while I guess "a millionaire" does not care about the ~6k a year more they can make taxfree, "normal" US-citizens that earn money abroad will appriciate that increasement. (while it might not be So much given that the US dollar is so weak at the moment compared for example to the Euro). Anyway, lets hope Mrs. Morrowdoes not employ CQ as her taxadvisor. It turned out CQ was again wrong like "she" was with her claims made on this talkpage (and the article) about responsiblities and obligations under US copyrightlaw. 62.226.29.87 (talk) 16:52, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I've heard about his with regard to US citizens. If she is a US citizen, she more than likely files a 1040. If she was never a US citizen, then she probably doesn't care about that. If she has $1 million in assets, then, it is unlikely that those assets accumulate an annual of $80k. Is there a question about her citizenship?Carribeanqueen (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh you did heard about this? When was that? Is it longer then 20 hours ago? Because at least yesterday evening you claimed something completely different: "A US citizen only needs to file taxes in the United States, but, as with other countries, if one is not residing in the the United States, he is only tax liable in the country that he spends the majority of the year in."[2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.226.29.87 (talk) 18:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

As we have no reliable confirmation regarding her citizenship, I don't think we should assume whether she has renounced or not. I think the first line should say "American born" if it has to say anything, because that is all we know. That being said, It wouldn't surprise me if someone whose other "businesses" are scammy MLM sites skirts the tax laws of a country they no longer live in.--Mooksas (talk) 00:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

ah you saw them too ;-) I stumbled over her spiderweb one on blogger. But CQ is telling Phil that the page of her label and her mail got hacked, and CQ got viagra from her. So maybe this time indiana is innocent and only someone that want to besmirch her intelligence signed her up for that shit to have her look even more stupid when it comes how internet and all that "web thingy" works. 62.226.45.245 (talk) 00:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Mooksas, I guess Indiana ows you a "thank you".

Your mentioning of the "scammy MLM" marketing business she is doing made her think that strategy over, She has ceased to do that kind of business. Now she only is in the business of singing songs that rott for 2 years before nearly noone (her amazon sales rank that is objective contrary to the made up stats by her label how many people were interested in her album but don't wanted to pay for it, is something in the 70k range) choose to buy the album she got financed by scotish taxpayers!.

But maybe she will stop that business soon too. 62.226.14.191 (talk) 15:38, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Possilbe usage of open proxies/TOR exid notes by article/talk page editors

on the already obove mentioned webpage [3] that has this article about the sockpuppetry of that banned IANMORROW as topic are new comments. There is one comment [4] that repeats exactly the same (wrong!) arguments regarding notification requirements that were claimed by wikipedian CQ last month.

According to a follow up to the technological nonsense posting of that CQ's arguments mirroring commentor, the operator of that webpage states that that one used TOR exit notes for his comments there.

This makes me suspicious that CQ might use TOR too to hide connections to banned sockpuppets/and or to evade IP ban(s). I think I remember that TOR usage is considered at least somewhat "problematic" and that at least open proxies are for admins fair game to ban that IP on sight without further discussing it WP internally.

Where can I request a check for such possible (ab)use by CQ? 62.226.0.171 (talk) 01:34, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I do not accuse Carribeanqueen here in any way, but just FYI, Wikipedia knows about Tor and simple semi-protection would ward off possible abusive Tor accounts, since the autoconfirm period for such accounts is extended to 3 months. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 14:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Automated archiving

This talk page has become very long in the last few weeks. I think we should set up MiszaBot I to archive all threads older than one month. It would make it easier for people on low-bandwith Internet access to read the page. Does anyone agree? Admiral Norton ^(talk) 17:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Since most stuff is not actually relevant for the discussion of article issues they can be laying to rest (until they are needed sometimes maybe) to ease the loadtime for some poor UMTS using guys in GB for example ;-) 62.226.42.180 (talk) 18:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I second, this talk page has become unwieldy.--Mooksas (talk) 21:16, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I forgot to visit this page for a few days. I have set up the archiving to archive threads that weren't touched in the last 15 days. It will take some time, but the page will become much smaller. I'll increase the date parameter when we get rid of all these discussions so that it doesn't eat away threads if no one visits the talk page for 15 days. Admiral Norton

^(talk) 19:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

ADVERTISEMENT FOR SONGWRITING COMPETITION

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHY THERE SEEMS TO BE AN ADVERTISEMENT ON THIS PAGE ABOUT A SONGWRITING COMPETITION AND IT'S COST. THE WORDING SOUNDS CONTENTIOUS ABOUT 'MATH CHALLENGES'. IT IS ALSO NOT DOCUMENTED THAT INDIANA PAID FOR THE ENTRY HERSELF. WHY ARE YOU UNDOING MY EDIT?Marieanne42 (talk) 15:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

First off, all caps is not nice. Your point is no more valid if you WRITE IT LIKE THIS. Then, if you think that those sentences should be removed, discuss it here. I see your point and I think it's unneeded information as well but the way you do it repels me. I am sure Admiral Norton will explain why he thinks it should be kept. SoWhy 15:47, 23 August 2008

(UTC)

It's because my caps lock was bugging. Sorry for that. I didn't think that anybody would object to me removing what I think looks like an advertisement for people to join in a competition on an artist wikipedia biography. It didn't look like it should be there. I didn't know that this kind of edit would need discussions. Sorry for that. It looked like an advert and then the wee bit about math challenges doesn't look like it has to do with the article at all. I'm sorry to offend the person who added it in, but, in doesnt look right. I have added some references to the demo release she did in 2005 before she did the gr8pop deal. It was in this time that I saw her play with wet wet wet, so, I remember the demo album and I found citations. But, I don't know how to make the "ref" part as I am new and only came to the page because of the article in the Kirkintilloch Herald last week. Sorry about the caps.Marieanne42 (talk) 16:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It's okay. My point is mainly that if you see someone reverting your changes, you should take it to the talk page and discuss, because there might be a good reason you just don't know about. As for refs, see WP:REF for an explanation to use them. If you have further questions, please feel free to ask them at my talk page. SoWhy 16:24, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

After reading about the UK songwriting competition, I signed up for their newsletter which states the following: "If you are a finalist you can tell the media that you beat around 6,000 other entries to acheive that position", so, if Indiana Gregg had two songs in the finalist position, it would mean that she beat 6000 songwriter's to get there. I also found that the contest was founded with The Brit Trust (who are also the founders of the Brit Awards).

"The UKSC is now in its seventh year. It was formed in 2002 with The BRIT Trust (of BRIT AWARDS fame) to encourage and promote the art of songwriting. The contest is supported by some of the most highly respected names in music including BBC Radio, Music Aid, the BRIT School, The Guild of International Songwriters and Composers, The British Academy of Composers and Songwriters, The International Song Copyright Agency, Sibelius, Broadjam, Virtual Studio Systems, Backbeat Books and many other leading music industry professionals, organisations and companies."   http://www.songwritingcontest.co.uk/    

So, I would like to suggest that we include the actual number of contestants because this other number of out of  '56' doesn't make sense without adding the total number of songwriters in the contest.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marieanne42 (talk • contribs) 10:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC) 

How old is she?

I can't find anywhere on the net or her website when she was born, does anyone know? 98.217.147.41 (talk) 04:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

We discussed this a few months ago, but couldn't find a reliable source to include in the article. There are a few articles that mention her age (like this one from 2007) that are probably pretty close, but I don't remember seeing any with a date of birth.--Mooksas (talk) 23:12, 22 October 2008 (UTC)