Wiktbdhb
Welcome!
|
Wiktbdhb, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
edit
|
Hi Wiktbdhb!! You're invited: learn how to edit Wikipedia in under an hour. I hope to see you there! Ocaasi |
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!
edit
- Hi Wiktbdhb! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 10:00, Wednesday, April 22, 2015 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
May 2017
editThese are the official sources, there aren't others:
May 2017
edit
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Cornerstonepicker (talk) 10:31, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Janet Jackson Control's sales
editYou keep putting those inflated sales of Janet's album control in her article all that time. But you have to undersand that those sales are way inflated. The album charted moderately around the world and have few certifications. The only place where this album sold a lot of copies was in US. 4 million copies for an album that was not that great in the charts outside US, it's a very good estimation, but 8 million copies is heavily inflated. Billboard is a reliable source only for US sales, since Nielsen Soundscan make the sales counting, but outside there, they include sales from any place, even from Wikipedia, or record companies, thing that it's not allowed. Please don't do that again, 10 million copies it's a lot for a more local album. See the Thriller case as an exemple, a lot of sites begun to publish that the album sold more than 100kk or even 150kk, but with around 45kk certificated sales the most reliable is 65kk, and so that's number that it's included in Thriller article.--88marcus (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Billboard, an official source, reports Janet Jackson's "Control" has sold 14 million copies worldwide: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/hip-hop/6866860/janet-jackson-control-30-year-anniversary
Janet Jackson's official website reports that her "Control" album has sold 14 million copies worldwide: http://www.janetjackson.com/news/news/janet-jacksons-greatest-hits-celebrated-on-number-ones#.Wfp67WhSyM8
These are the official and most up to date sources with correct information about the albums sales. Please do not change them again, Thank you.
- You didn't read what I said to you?! Billboard it's reliable only for US sales, and the old Janet website, claimed tha Control sold 8 million copies worldwide. How this album sound more six millions, when it was out of the charts?!--88marcus (talk) 02:53, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Billboard, an official source, and considered by many to be the music industry bible reports that Janet Jackson's "Control" has sold 14 million copies worldwide: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/hip-hop/6866860/janet-jackson-control-30-year-anniversary
Complex.com, another official source, states that Control has sold 14 million copies worldwide: http://www.complex.com/music/2015/02/the-best-albums-that-lost-album-of-the-year-grammys/janet-jackson-control
MPR.COM, another trusted source, which has won over 875 journalism awards, reports that Control sold 14 million copies worldwide: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/10/24/janet-jackson-hit-number-one-30-years-ago
Ebony Magazine, one of the oldest and most respected magazines in African American culture reports that Janet Jackson's Control sold 14 million copies worldwide http://www.ebony.com/news-views/funky-fresh-and-feminist-a-look-back-at-janet-jacksons-control-042#axzz4xF4KuaDy
Last but certainly not least, Janet Jackson's official website reports that her "Control" album has sold 14 million copies worldwide: http://www.janetjackson.com/news/news/janet-jacksons-greatest-hits-celebrated-on-number-ones#.Wfp67WhSyM8
Please refrain from changing these official stats again.
Thank you
Janet sales.
edit
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Janet (album). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.--88marcus (talk) 16:24, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
The stats provided are sourced from Janet Jackson's label at the time Virgin Records. Which state in no uncertain terms that the janet. album sold 20 million copies worldwide. https://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/signing-janet-jackson These sales are confirmed by Janet Jackson's official website http://www.janetjackson.com/news/news/janet-jacksons-greatest-hits-celebrated-on-number-ones#.Wfu7N2hSyM8
Any other stats are unsubstantiated and not supported by the official numbers released by Jackson's former label and her official site.
Repeated vandalism will result in the loss of your editing privileges.
Thank you in advance.Wiktbdhb (talk) 20:49, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Control (Janet Jackson album), you may be blocked from editing. Official artist's websites and record company websites are not reliable and are forbbiden as sources here in Wikipedia, also, you should know that it's impossible an album the sold so few copies and charted poorly outside the US, sold 9 million copies outside there.--88marcus (talk) 20:01, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
Official artist websites and information from the original record label that released the projects are prohibited by Wikipedia? How are editors/contributors supposed to source the information if even official stats released by the record label/artist is deemed unacceptable? Where else would we pull this information? Wiktbdhb (talk) 20:46, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
- Yes my dear. You should read the rules first
- Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources#Sources to avoid
And you have to understand that not everything that is published online is reliable too. We have to choose the sales that are more according to the certifications. Recently I changed Madonnana' Music album sales from 15 million to 11 millions, because its more accurate. Janet's Control album performed badly outside the US, and has few certifications internationally, how it would sell that amount of 9 million copies outside US?!--88marcus (talk) 22:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
This is arguing semantics, but nonetheless....
Self-published sources are generally unacceptable as references on Wikipedia. An artist's social networking site, such as Facebook or Twitter, in addition to personal blogs and forum posts, should largely be avoided. If the information being added from one of these websites is truly notable enough for inclusion, a publication will likely report about it.
Also:
Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications.
Which is the case in this instance. I have provided links to numerous publications that also report these updated stats, because you personally don't accept them do not exclude the fact that trusted news sources have reported these stats. If you prefer that I cite these third-party publications I can do that.
Lastly, under cited sources for your Control stats were:
(1) A 2006 Ebony Magazine Article: https://books.google.com/books?id=PNMDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=false (I have provided an up to date Ebony article which quotes the 14 million figure. http://www.ebony.com/news-views/funky-fresh-and-feminist-a-look-back-at-janet-jacksons-control-042#axzz4xW5uxA1h
(2) An article from Billboard: http://www.billboard.com/articles/review/6715541/janet-jackson-unbreakable-album-review. This article states Control - janet. each sold more than 10 million copies each, but do not give specific sales for any of the albums. I posted an article from Billboard which list specific sales for the album Control of 14 million copies worldwide.
(3) And a BET.com article: https://www.bet.com/shows/bet-star-cinema/photos/2014/11/15-things-you-didn-t-know-about-janet-jackson.html#!051512-music-evolution-janet-jackson-control. I have a link to BET article which list the worldwide sales for Control as 14 million copies worldwide. https://www.bet.com/music/photos/2012/05/the-evolution-of-janet-jackson.html#!051512-music-evolution-janet-jackson-control
Again, your personal beliefs do not neglect that trusted news sources have reported these stats, or the fact that these are the most up-to-date and officials sources that we have for the sales.
Please refrain from changing these official stats again,
Thank you. Wiktbdhb (talk) 01:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Something wrong
-
- whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Only IFPI is reliable to worldwide sales, so we can't use none of those sites you use as a reference, jo justify a primary source as Janet.com and Virgin website. What we can do is to be the more accurate possible, since the certifications are the only reliable source about her sales, and also the charts, so we can use them. Control performed poorly outside US, and has only 507,000 with certified sales out there, do you think we can conclude that it means almost 7,5 million copies missed, with an album that performed so poorly in Europe?! This Chartmasters article is very interesting about Janet sales (even though we can't use this site as a source, but many important sites do)link1. 10 million copies means 3,6 million outside the US, it's very accurate, and should be used.--88marcus (talk) 02:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
IFPI doesn't have worldwide sales for Control, or any of the other Janet Jackson album. Also, it is cited anywhere on any janet wiki article related to her sales. The only cited sources are third-party sites. Which, as I have pointed out, have also reported that Control has sold 14 million copies worldwide. It makes no sense to attempt to suppress the most up-to-date sales information that we have for these albums, based on your personal beliefs.
Again, your personal beliefs do not neglect that trusted news sources have reported these stats, or the fact that these are the most up-to-date and officials sources that we have for the sales.
As for Chartmasters, let's discuss that.... I'll make my point with Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation album. As I have information handy to discuss it and to show his missteps.
He has that album as having sold 8.1 million in the US, but research will suggest otherwise. The album was certified 6x platinum in 1992. According to Billboard, by 2009 RN1814 had sold 1.377 million through Soundscan here: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/267479/ask-billboard-life-after-discussing-divas.
Rhythm Nation had already crossed 6 million in sales two months before the inception of Soundscan in May of 1991. Archived New York Times article from March 1991 Here: http://www.nytimes.com/1991/03/12/arts/janet-jackson-signs-lucrative-contract.html
So when the album was certified 6x platinum, it had already crossed 6 million in sales. So everything sold through Soundscan can be added separately from the certification. 6 million (RIAA) + 1.377 million (Soundscan) + 1.10 million (Sony BMG Music Club) Here: http://www.mi2n.com/press.php3?press_nb=47877
BTW, as I'm sure you know there were two popular music clubs at that time. BMG and Columbia House. "Control", "Rhythm Nation", and "Design of A Decade" were all available through CH. We have sales for the BMG music club. Columbia House never released their figures. Janet's albums were very popular in the music clubs.
6 million RIAA 1.377 million Soundscan 1.10 million BMG music club Columbia House Music Club (Unknown), but judging by the how much is sold in via BMG, we can guestimate that sales for the CH music club were very high.
= 8,477,000. This is already 300k+ more than his estimate. Without the addition of CH music club. She could very well have a uncertified diamond album with Rhythm Nation... and if the proper (unbiased) work was done. The same probably holds true for the "Control" and "janet." albums.
In short, he made a valiant effort, but his calculations are off.
The most up to date verifiable sources (third-party sites) have suggested that album (and control) have sold 14 million copies worldwide.
I strongly feel there is an attempt to suppress actual sales. Wiktbdhb (talk) 21:10, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
November 2017
edit
Your recent editing history at Control (Janet Jackson album) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —IB [ Poke ] 04:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Sockpuppet investigation
edit
Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BojanJJ, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.
November 2017
edit Your recent edits to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BojanJJ could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. diff theinstantmatrix (talk) 20:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
ANI notice
edit There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:35, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
November 2017
edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 20:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Wiktbdhb (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I was accused of having multiple accounts. I do not. I have been threatened to be reported for vandalism. I have not. I did not threaten any one. I simply stated I would explore legal options if necessary, because I feel as if I'm being harassed, and allegations are being leveled at me left and right, but nothing is being done about that. Wiktbdhb (talk) 21:16, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You're blocked for legal threats, not for vandalism or multiple accounts. If you want to pursue legal action, your account will remain blocked for the duration of the legal action. If you are no longer contemplating legal action, then let us know and you can be unblocked. PhilKnight (talk) 21:28, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
I am not contemplating legal action. I'm simply trying to defend myself from the numerous allegations being leveled at me for attempting to do the right thing, with verified sources backing up my attempts to do an edit.
I'm new to all of this, so I apologize. I don't know the proper protocol to deal with all of this, and trying to maneuver Wikipedia is confusing at times. Especially as it relates to a dispute.
I'm not sure if this is the proper place to do this, so please bear with me. I'm fully aware that you probably view this as meaningless and silly, but please take a moment to look over what I'm sending you. I'm not sure how to contact an admin any other way. I hope you take the time to read this, or, if need be, pass this on to the necessary party. Perhaps the admin team can make a note of this for future, because although I'm done with this (even if my account is unblocked, I'm done with this) There will be other instances with other people simply trying to do the right thing.
First I was accused of vandalism. The user (88Marcus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:88marcus) disputed an edit and I backed up my claims. I never vandalized any pages, though explicitly following the rules, I suppose an argument could be made for that. However, if that's the case, the same argument could be made for the user I had the dispute with, because as I would soon come to find out, this is not his first time doing this.
Next, I was accused of Sock Puppetry. I didn't even know what that was, but after I understood the claim being leveled at me, I responded here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BojanJJ#Suspected_sockpuppets). Soon after I was blocked for making a legal threat. I've now since read that rules and understand why what I said was associated with a legal threat.
After being informed that I was blocked, I went to user 88Marcus' talk page and saw this discussion (Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:88marcus Scroll down to "You Are..." topic). I don't know how it's done. If IP addresses are checked, etc, but I've never had another wiki account. I was and continue to be frustrated by the numerous claims being leveled at me, and nothing being done to rectify the situation.
If you want to investigate the matter, please read through my talk page. It was an editing dispute that turned into something it didn't need to, because one person insists upon keeping edits one way, even though I have numerous sources backing up and justifying the change. Now that I understand that this isn't his first time doing this via a similar dispute, I think the real issue is user 88Marcus.
Again, I apologize for this. I know everything isn't formatted properly and I'm aware that isn't the proper place for this, but I do not know how to contact a wiki admin any other way. I am going to post this on your talk page as well, perhaps this is better suited there.
Thank you Wiktbdhb (talk) 22:25, 5 November 2017 (UTC)