User talk:Realist2/Archive 15

Semi-protection

Hi, done for you, and I have made move sysop-only to prevent you getting Grawp'd. Let me know if you need any other changes. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu 23:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, lol, "Grawp'd", that should be official wiki terminology now. :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 23:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

R2, months ago R5 added a ubx saying "this user has a girlfriend". He refused to go into detail but did you ever notice this?:D I'm so jealous it'll be years if ever before that appears on my userpage.:(--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 04:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, don't put yourself down, your cool. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 04:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

There's a reason online things and the Internet are called "virtual"(virtual cool,:|). What never watched spy kids 3? The boys beta-testing the game(actually a trap created by a criminal genius) seemed cool in the game but were "geeks" in real life. But I won't put myself down,too much.:)--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 04:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Good. :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 05:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi, is there a way to remove the "move" tab in your preferences or something. I often hit the move tab instead of the history tab and it annoys me. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 01:45, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

But how would you move pages when you need to then? I find clicking the back button in your browser works best. :-) —Giggy 09:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

He he, that is true, however this might shock you. After 19,000 edits I have never moved a page and I never intend to. Thus the button is only a frustration to me. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 10:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hehehe... if you want me to (consider yourself warned, though!) I could try and javascript something up. But consider yourself warned; if you block Jimbo, or (God forbid!) accidentally retire, it's your fault. :-) (seriously, I can try something if you're interested). —Giggy 10:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I definately want to remove it, if it doesn't breach any policy I say go for it. Would it be something you can turn off and on in your preferences or would it be a lot more complicated to reverse it (not that I'm majorly bothered)? — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 10:41, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, try adding User:Giggy/move.js to User:Realist2/monobook.js by adding importScript('User:Giggy/move.js');. No promises that it'll work though. If it doesn't, the best person to ask is Gracenotes if he's around. —Giggy 10:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Nothing happened/changed. :-( — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 11:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you bypass your browser cache? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 13:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

(out) I tried, following all the instructions available, nothing happened though. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 13:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

It worked fine for me. Lets move this conversation to your talk page so we don't annoy Iridescent. I'll copy/paste what we have here, and you can reply on your talk page. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 13:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

What browser are you using? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 13:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea. I'm really not a computer person. I habe internet explorer I believe. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 13:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you already try pressing Ctrl-F5? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 13:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, tried that. You should check my monobook just to make sure ive added the correct thing. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 14:01, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm. Your monobook.js looks fine. Are you using a different skin that the default one? (go to Special:Preferences, click on the tab labeled "Skin" and make sure that Monobook is selected.) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes I'm on the default one, this is so sad, why isn't it working lol. :-( — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 14:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hold on, let me try it in Internet Explorer... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

All right, that code does not work in Internet Explorer. You now have two options:

1. Live with always clicking on "move" when you wanted "history"
2. Get Firefox

Honestly, Firefox is millions of times better than IE anyways, and almost all scripts on Wikipedia are tested in Firefox (and almost all scripts won't work in IE). If you want, I can tell you how to get Firefox. (it's free!!!) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it, well done. Yes I would like firefox please, if you can help me. :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 14:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, just go to this page and follow the instructions. If you have any problems, just lemmeknow and I'll try to help you out. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I will try now. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 14:30, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure you understood what Firefox is. Firefox is a complete web browser, so you should open it up, go to Wikipedia, and log into your account. You don't have to use IE. Firefox does everything IE does (and a good deal more...) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

OMG, I'm on, its working, everything is really futuristic lol. All the mistakes come up in red lines, its funny. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 14:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, that's what I thought when I first saw it :). Does your move button show up now? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 14:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

The move button is gone!! Sorry I went for a jog. Thank you!! — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 15:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, you mean something I coded worked? :O!! —Giggy 06:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

He he, yes! — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 10:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thriller (album) FA review

Next time, please link me to the article or the FAC because I am lazy and like clicking things :p Gary King (talk) 16:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, look what I just put on my user page. I will wikilink in the future, "Realist honor"!! — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 17:00, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I put more comments on the FAC page. I hope it makes it, I know you've been working A LONG TIME on it. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 17:23, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, be patient man. Just do what you think is right for the article, specially addressing comments by reviewers. Sooner or later, you will be overwhelmed by their supports. I see one comment in the FAC that its well-written, so why worry? Prose is the very problemized issue of many FA writers. If the article is well-written, then its up for FAC; sources are good too. Maybe just some minute tweakings. Regards, --Efe (talk) 12:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

What is this? --Efe (talk) 12:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, he supported like two minutes after I sent you a message, lol that is spooky. :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 12:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

It was. =) --Efe (talk) 12:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yay! Hope you get more than 2 supports! :-) Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 22:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll give it a go. I really do want to see this pass, I know it's been a primary focus for you; I'm amazed about how much work you put into this. I'll do all I can. It's only 10:23 in the States, and already I feel tired. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 02:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Dang, I didn't know that the review is closed. Why is it closed so early, did YOU end it? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 02:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes I closed it, it had 2 supports and 2 opposes, it was unlikely to get the consensus needed. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 02:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Okay, well it's back to the drawing board Peer Review. BTW, tomorrow (July 4) is Independence Day in the States, as such, my editing time may be limited. However, I won't let trivial matters like the birth of my country get in the way of Wikipedia. :))) Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)}

Hehe, I was wondering since your into old music, if you had any old magazines at home that might have a review in there? Im not sure how easy it will be to find online. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 02:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

"Old music". That made me laugh. But sorry, I don't have any music magazines at my house. It would make sense to get some, wouldn't it? You could try Rolling Stone if you haven't already, or maybe Q Magazine. I'm not the magazine type of guy, though I had a subscription to Rolling Stone (which I threw out a long time ago, of course). :( Oh well. And if you could, please don't reply on my talk page. I put a message box on the top, and I haven't been enforcing it really well even though I should. If I leave you a comment first on your page, respond on your page without contacting me (I have your page on watchlist). But if you leave ME a comment, make sure to check my page for a response. Thanks, I really want to get this organized (I'm a nitpicker, I need things ORGANIZED!!!) :) Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 03:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure ok I will remember. Well I have an old review from rolling stone, thats ok. Apparently Q wasn't created until after Thriller came out so thats not a help. :-/ — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 03:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Our FACs failed. But mine is more hurting than yours. It's been there for over two weeks and just fizzled out. --Efe (talk) 08:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

What I after is that if they pass white-related music FAs, it must be of equal stardard to that of other black-music FAs or up to the standards of an FA article. Sigh. I targeted this one before I reach my first anniversary here in Wiki. I had my WikiBirthday last July 2. =) --Efe (talk) 09:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The lead to Thriller should include more. Ruhrfisch, the user who hovers the Peer Review page :-), always says that every heading in the article should be accounted for somewhere in the lead. Also, the semi-automated PR for Thriller even says the lead should be expanded. Specifically, the "Recording" section and the "Themes and Genres" section were two that I did not find accounting for in the lead. Just a thought. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 18:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Peer Reviews

Its one nomination per hour, per editor and limit to four open peer review requests. I only have one open right now (Rhythm Nation 1814 was closed days ago, but the bot missed removing it somehow). The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 15:43, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure. :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 15:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Guestbook

Thanks for signing. Does the new title look okay? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I should inform you I just gave shapiros10 ur email address. He's about to send you an invitation....--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 16:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, lol I don't think he likes me because I'm a Jackson fan, hehe. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 16:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I should inform you I have no idea what you are talking about.(jackson?)lol.:P--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 16:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson, Xp, I'm like the biggest MJ person on wikipedia, everyone knows that. :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 17:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Review

Maybe you should review this: # Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as it's up for a GA review. --andreasegde (talk) 21:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I've already done a little work on it and as I created the Janet Jackson wikiproject WP:JANET, it might look just a little bit bad. What you think lol? :-) — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 21:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

LMP

In case you missed it in the recent flurry of posts to my talkpage, have replied there. I think Lara's online at the moment if you want to try nabbing her. – iridescent

MJ

I hope you plan to source that stuff you just added with a reliable source (not youtube) otherwise I will remove it. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 02:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

yes the video was on youtube. so what is the problem every time i add something you try and delete it who are you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tymike07 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, on wikipedia we have to provide proof of our claims (something you never do). If you don't source it I will remove it, also don't provide a link to youtube as your source. Youtube is against wikipolicy. Happy editing. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 02:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Well i am going to stop coming to Wikipedia because everything you have on the website on Michael Jackson is just about untrue. No one no's about Michael finances those are all rumors. SO i would like all the Michael Jackson finance stuff taken off the Michael Jackson page until we can get it verified from the Michael Jackson company. Cause the source you have are not true so maybe we should undo you edits. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tymike07 (talk • contribs) 02:42, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I really don't think you understand how wikipedia works. Its all about reliable sources, find a reliable source and I can make alterations for you. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 02:47, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Commons

replied there. —Giggy 07:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Wiki

On the Bionictest wiki (How you came up with that name, I have no idea), where is this new website going to be? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 22:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol, I never came up with that name, I don't know yet, I will keep you posted. I closed the Thriller FA review by the way. Apparently we don't have enough old reviews of the album. I'm finding it really hard to get hold of any online. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Later tonight. I'm at school at the moment. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 00:54, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

He he, Im sorry . — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 00:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Um...did Bluegoblin change the wiki name like he said, because I can't get on the bionictest site. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 16:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

You Have Mail Regarding BionicTest... in short, click here!--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 17:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

(out) Is it just me, or do you like the old wiki better? Now we have to start over again. Did you even join yet? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 17:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I hate the web link, it doesn't look very wiki like. Yes I just joined. I have a headache. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 17:46, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Same here. Also, I'd like to be a staff member. If you think I'm crazy, see the talk page. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 22:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

R2 please +staff me at the wiki I accidentally -staff myself hours ago.:(--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 05:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

The wiki isn't working, do you know what's going on? Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 14:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, if you don't know, see Shapiros10's talk page. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 14:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I emailed Xp about it a number of hours ago. No reponse ;-/. Anyway, what are you up to today? I forgot to say happy independance day. I'm not American but I know how patriotic you guys are. :-) — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 14:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

It's all right. I'm not that patriotic; if McCain wins, it's straight to Canada (or the UK maybe). :-) I was wondering why you say that you're for Barack Obama for the 2008 election when you're not even American. Oh well, America runs the world (or so many Americans believe). Anyway, I'm not really up to anything. It's been slow these past few days. I'm listening to this Avenue Q CD, so now the only thing I'm thinking about is "The Internet is for Porn". LOL, the play is hilarious, though. Cheers, Kodster ^{(heLLo) (Me did that)} 15:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thriller reviews

These are going to be hard to track down (especially if you're nowhere near a major library) but they are absolutely essential. NME reviewed Bad (I found it an hour ago), and they extensively covered "black music" in the 80s, so it's 99% certain they reviewed Thriller. Yes, Melody Maker is out of business, but NME owns the brand now. NME put out a series of reprints called NME Originals that reprinted old NME, Melody Maker, and Sounds articles, grouped together by theme (I own the Britpop and goth issues). Unfortunately none of the issues were focused on Michael Jackson, although I remember reading mention of him in the 80's-themed issue. If you can find that issue on eBay it's possible it might have a Thriller review. Aside from that, your best bet is to ask around Wikipedia and see if anyone might have those reviews in old issues. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

From experience, something that also works quite well when writing music articles is to approach fan club mailing lists. Given the nature of music fans (especially someone like Jackson who attracts obsessives), there's a very good chance that someone, somewhere will have a shoebox full of newspaper cuttings they'd be willing to scan and email you (just make sure they include the date and page number!) The "black/white music" division never existed in the UK, so I'd say it's 100% certain that all the mainstream press (including NME/Melody Maker/Sounds) would have covered every release by an artist at Jackson's level in depth. I suspect all three would have been quite hostile, as in this period there was a very indie=good, pop/rock=bad bias in the UK press; at the time Thriller was released, The Smiths were arguably the highest profile band in the UK and it was less than two years before C86 itself was released. – ırıdescent 10:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanx for the advise Iris I will look into it. I know someone online that runs a MJ fan club so it might work. I bought an online magazine by NME at a cost of $10 (talk about my dedication to wikipedia), it provided a review by Music Maker which I have added to the article. They panned the album, so im reluctant to add any more rock orientated reviews. Besides the magazine I bought didn't have reviews by NME for Thriller. The article now has 4 old school reviews and 4 recent reviews. Thats enough. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 13:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

A UK source which may be worth digging out is the appropriate back issue of Smash Hits, which despite being aimed at kids was very influential around this period. Again, any fan club should have at least one member who's kept assorted cuttings. – ırıdescent 14:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thats a good idea, lol I might need to save some money if I were to buy a back issue, I've already forked out $10 for 1 flipping review!! Luckly it has some for other MJ albums and tones of 80's music, it should be helpful again in the future. If anyone needs info from it I'm happy to share. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

"NME, Melody Maker, CREEM, Q, Sounds" -- I really just named the first five magazines that came to mind, so yeah i guess a few might not be applicable. But its great that many are willing to help. Also, I saw that Jackson was featured on the cover of Time a few months after the album's release, so it might be useful to check out that issue on the website. indopug (talk) 05:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe not as a review as such,but the fact the album helped him ge on the cover of Time is very notable. "For a record industry stuck on the border between the ruins of punk and the chic regions of synthesizer pop, Thriller was a thorough restoration of confidence, a rejuvenation. " -- this sentence seems particularly nice esp. while discussing its legacy/influence. If there's anything in that article about the recording process, music of Thriller etc, add it too.

Another thing, since the record has been so widely covered in manistream publications, I think we can ignore lesser publications like Blender and Slant entirely. indopug (talk) 07:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the peer review's a good idea, I definitely want to help. One major issue still lingering though; I think it would greatly benefit the narrative if you made the article completely chronological (compare with Loveless (album) and be Here Now (album)--two model albums you should try to follow the style of). For example "Thriller was recorded between April and November in 1982, at a production budget of US $750,000."--firstly, avoid summarising sentences (the period it was recorded is already in the infobox); second, since the cost of production can only be determined after the recording is complete, it should be mentioned at the end of that section. I think the different events in the "highly publicised" section should be shifted around too for maintaining chronological order. A Background section is also needed to cover what happened after the released of Off the Wall to the recording of Thriller, especially if there was anything that happened then that inspired Thriller. I'll give a detailed review later today.

You know when I think of Michael Jackson now, "black" music is not really the first thing that comes to mind. :D indopug (talk) 07:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

(Not entirely related) I think this entire section can go. It occupies around half the article, and is more suitable for the individual songs' articles anyway. indopug (talk) 08:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

About the new song, I'm not going to debate you about this because there shouldn't been any doubt in a few days. But I think you're being far, far too strict in your inclusion of information here. We don't have an exact confirmation by Michael Jackson that he sang the song. That's because, as far as I know, there wasn't much doubt. A singer is not going to release a statement "Hey I sang this song" everytime a song that is suspected to be his is leaked. I doubt any singer will do that, much less Michael Jackson. And if Billboard Magazine and MTV news could confidently claim that it is sang by Michael Jackson, there is no doubt whatsoever. This similar reasoning should be applied to other things as well. Wikipedia relies on sources only when common sense does not suffice. We don't need exact statements on everything to merit their inclusion or notability. I know you're trying hard to make a FA out of that article, but you can't have a FA where a chunk of the person's life is missing simply because you don't like the sources enough. Naurmacil (talk) 14:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I kept the new album details, just removed all the unnessary waffle you tagged in, the sources were crap so I removed them. Don't worry its staying, I will find a good source for it at some point. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 14:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: MJ

Hey, great news about the photo! That's awesome.

Yeah, it's still on my watchlist, but I haven't been doing as much vandalism patrolling lately (been trying my hand at dispute resolution, oh my!) so that's probably why I haven't reverted anything there in a while :) I saw you got Conservapedia to GA! Congrats on that! I think that's probably my next thing to tackle at Wikipedia, is working on getting articles up to GA status. --Jaysweet (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Stop stalking me

Quit stalking me by watching my every move, by following every single edit I make, by trying to stir up crap on Jay's talk page or other editors talk pages. Stay off the pages I work on. Your obsession for me is not healthy and I don't like it. It's twisted. Stop it! Caden S (talk) 15:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not stalking you, I received an email asking that I put Heterosexuality on my watchlist so I did. Then I see you adding your anti gay pov everywhere. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you are stalking me on many talk pages and by messing with pages I work on. Pages that have never been an interest of yours before have now become an interest for you since you are so obsessed with me. You also have been talking about me off wiki with others yet again. Cut it out. I'm sick of you stalking me and I'm sick of you accusing me of things that I'm NOT doing. It's you who pushes your anti-conservative POV on Wikipedia so knock it off. Caden S (talk) 15:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Really I'm honestly not, you should AGF, if someone asks that I view a page then I will. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

You have been stalking me since May. You were asked to spy and you love that because its yet another excuse for you to continue to stalk me. You should assume some good faith instead of trying to lynch me again and again on here. Caden S (talk) 15:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Thriller reviews

I have quite a few I think- physical articles. I'll check em out and get back to you :D Marnifrances (talk) 23:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Help her on the List of best-selling albums in the United States please

I've seen you working on the List of best-selling albums in the United States and i'm wondering if you can help me on the list of best-selling albums in the US. . --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 08:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I took that off my watchlist a few weeks ago, the article is such a pile of crap I haven't the energy for it. Additionally it would never pass a featured list review as there is no definitive list of the worlds best selling artists. It should probably just be deleted and start again from scratch monitoring all edits made to it. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 08:59, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Why do people hate you? --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 22:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Because I have dark skin, I swear, I curse, I'm liberal, I like Michael Jackson. Hell I hate me. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 22:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

LOL! That made my day. hehe. hug The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I also have dark skin and i support Obama. So i don't get it. No one hates me? --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 13:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Aint you lucky. :-) — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 13:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

And both of us lives in Scandinavia. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 13:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't live in Scandinavia. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 13:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Lisa Marie Presley

I removed the bit about the Video because it did not pertain to her music. I think it has less to do with her marriage and divorce. It seems very out of place. A random reference from "out of the blue" at least where they are placed now.72.225.239.152 (talk) 15:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with "where they are placed now". Wikipedia doesn't build articles using hindsight. If it happened it happened, it was a big thing. The fact that they both probably regret it is irrelevant. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok help me understand,how this occurring in their marriage pertains to this section? I read the previous section on LMP information that pertains to marriage and divorce seem very similar. Can we ask her what she thinks and go with that72.225.239.152 (talk) 15:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

You removed it from two sections of the article, clearly you don't like it being mentioned. Sorry, it will be. Everything that happened in their arriage (eg showing their love for one another in a highky documented video, one of the rare examples of when they were seen in public view together) is noteworthy. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 15:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I t is not in context to their marriage and divorce you might as well mention any thing which could have occurred.Can you ask the editor laralove to take a look i will go with what she says.72.225.239.152 (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

No, Lara, is a busy admin who doesn't need to get involved with every minor issue of dispute resolution in that article. It is best that me and you go to the articles talk page to discuss where it is most appropriate to make the inclusion. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 16:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I will talk to LaraLove she seem to be fair minded I'll see you there.72.225.239.152 (talk) 16:07, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I expanded and sourced the section to indicate how it is relevant to their public marriage.— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 16:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Realist, make sure when you revert the edits of another, as you did for DJ-x3, that you don't revert the edits of others in the process. I'm still looking into the matter, but I wanted to drop this note. I've warned DJ-x3 about image uploads and content removal. I'll look over the article now and the talk page, as other concerns have been raised by 72.255. LaraLove|Talk 13:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I know we have had some differences. I am new to this and would like help to expand LMP article. I read one of you comments to laralove that the problem is not that there is not to much MJ but the rest of the sections have to be expanded- I see some truth in that- can you help make this a well rounded Wiki article: not just how it relates to Jackson. I see your work you're very good.72.225.239.152 (talk) 18:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Great ! I wil start looking up information. I will be going away on vacation. Don't thing I'll have a lot of time the next two weeks. But this sounds good.69.22.232.176 (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Message and Smile

Hey! I've seen you around wikipedia a fair amount, and I decided to check out your userpage. Keep up the good work! Its nice to see good article writers, like yourself:-) I hope to see you around more, and I hope you get more GAs:-D Cheers!--SJP _Chat 18:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

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

Wow, thankyou, it's nice to hear that once in a while, most people just think I'm an Attention whore. Hehe you made me blush, better get back to article building. --— Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 18:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem;-) Wikipedia can be a stressful place, and I believe we should work to try to make wikipedia less stressful:-) If we all would do that wikipedia would be a great place to work;-) Feel free to leave a nice note and/or that template on someones talk page:-P Have a nice day!--SJP _Chat 19:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

As far as I know, Nobel Prize nominations are secret; only if a person has won an award is it made public. This topic came up at Bono before. WesleyDodds (talk) 20:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I've been reading it slowly. It's well-written, which is one of the hardest criteria to fulfill. However, there is a lot of unnecessary detail best reserved for other articles. Could you create a user page where I can place material I plan to remove so you can us it again? From the looks of it the article might lose about 20 kb when I'm done with it. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

One example of what I want to trim is the paragraph about the name change of the Jackson 5. You don't need to detail what transpired in this article; all that's important is that you indicate that the name of the group changed. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:20, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I made a few changes last night, I'll do more as time goes by. Thanks for the second Janet award. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 22:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Thriller peer review

I'm not sure the lead needs expanding as such, just reworking. ("It quickly became the best-selling album" - very ambiguous; how quickly? A day, week, month?) I'd say start with a paragraph of recording and music info; then one about the contemporary (1983) reception, sales and impact; and finally one about the legacy.

As for the chronological rearrangement; I think I'll give it a go myself in the coming days. I'm particularly eager to group the 1983 critical reaction (which I think is a little too detailed; you describe what each reviewer had to say a little much; try cutting down on individual songs and summarising more--if the reader wants detailed reviews he'll check the original sources), the sales/charting info and the awards paragraph into one Release and reception section. I think the list of artists who have covered/sampled it is kinda trivial, and it wouldn't hurt the article if it goes. I also strongly suggest removing the additional tracklists--Thriller 25 has its own article and the special edition is just a bunch of interviews (I mean, who cares?); it'll also serve to highlight the main track-listing, the most vital of the bunch. indopug (talk) 17:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

You need a background/Context section and also a Tour one. (surely he performed a high-profile world tour) indopug (talk) 17:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, it was put into the guinnes books on 7 Feb 1984, so within 14 months it had become the worlds best selling album. I have a source for it. He didn't do a solo world tour until the bad album. He toured with his brothers in 1984 which is mentioned in the article in a mini paragraph as a reason for increased sales. I will remove the trivial list, I will but the recent reviews by All music and blender there in its place (which will also help split the old reviews from the new reviews). I also removed the extra tracklisting. As for a background section I really don't think there is anything noteworthy worth adding. Look at the MJ article nothing noteworthy happened in his life between Off The Wall and Thriller. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 18:03, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you get a big "AVRIL LAVIGNE ROKZ MY SOCKZ!" banner when you open Tom Cruise? indopug (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Its a vandal messing with a template, an admin deals with them in a few minutes usually. — Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 20:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

re: DYK

Sorry I'm just now getting back to you. I was in the hospital for 7 days, so needless to say WP wasn't my top priority last week. ;-) APK ^{like a lollipop} 04:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Heyoka

Hi. Can you please take a look at this, is this a Joke? should it be Afd'd..? --Procrastinating@^talk2me 14:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Honorific titles in popular music

Check out the page-links and give me another opinion about the diffrent approach. Or should it be reverted to the first day of it being upload so you can help fix the references like you said.Kelvin Martinez (talk) 05:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Honorific titles in popular music