User talk:Petergriffin9901/Archive 30

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Petergriffin9901. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 25

←

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

→

Archive 35

After seeing your reply at the Justin Bieber GA was wondering what you think of the Miley Cyrus...that had the same editors involved - they got it to the GA level...but I see the same problems there. Just look at Talk:Tephrosia apollinea/GA1 that people are talking about here. I think we have a bigger problem ..that is a GA reviewer that lacks knowledge of what a GA article is. He says hes done many!!-- Moxy (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

It may have taken a closer analysis, but when I was helping Lady Lotus get Miley to GA, the primary concern Status and I found was sourcing (both reliability and formatting). Prose, neutrality, and stability were fine, and coverage was too aside from some trivia. Shane recently nominated Miley for FA, though quickly withdrew after strong opposition from numerous editors (I didn't feel confident that it would've been appropriate for me to give input since I had helped Lady Lotus address problems during GAN). The Biebs we may as well have just nuked much if not all of the article. It's not as in poor of condition as when I first came across it, but is currently no higher than a C-class overall. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 23:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey mates. So yeah.. it's unfortunately an issue. Throughout this little skirmish, I actually wished we had GAN delegates lol. So, without taking too much of a look into Miley, her article is definitely worlds ahead of Bieber, but still not something I would have passed. I'd rate Bieber a weak-C, she's a B-Class. At least with her, the article seems the appropriate length and researched. Prose/formatting/unreliable sources and just overall tidying up are still prevalent issues I'm afraid. I think it's important to keep an eye out for popular article nominations, hopefully avoid issues like this in the future.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 00:11, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Interestingly, Miley was all tidied up when it passed, though I personally would've definitely failed it if I was the reviewer back when I first came across it during GAN. Much of its deterioration came after passing GAN (i.e. adding Daily Mirror and "JustJared" references). XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 00:43, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I must say though Snuggums, you overlook the same things in your own GANSs (or worse) ;P--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

If talking about poor sources, that would be interesting as I have quite often made sure to look out for those. If talking about formatting errors/inconsistencies, here's why: When I had nominated the Prism (Katy Perry album) page for GA, I didn't yet know about the difference between "work" and "publisher", only that somethings should be italicized and others shouldn't. IndianBio and Prism later helped explain to me what they were for. This helped me when I was working with (CA)Giacobbe to get "E.T. (song)" up to GA. Since then, I've taken extra time to examine formatting. The biggest concern with Miley's article when it was up for GA was how it had things like Los Angeles Times refs reading "latimes.com", USA Today reading "usatoday.com", International Business Times as "ibtimes.com", and Entertainment Weekly as "EW.com". XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 04:50, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Can I ask you to find me some, uh, meat to add to the Justin Bieber article......? Shane Cyrus (talk) 05:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

No thanks. I don't really have an interest him per se. I'd recommend doing more research and gathering more high quality sources and start writing structured/well-written prose.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 06:24, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Just saw you turned 23 a few days ago. Hope it was a good one! XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 02:28, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks :) Still trying to wrap my head around the new number Lol.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 05:55, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

No problem. I get that feeling myself..... XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 06:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi! I have answered your comments; please take a look. I really need your help with the lede. I agree it is far from perfect, but that's because Cher's career is such a long one and is super difficult for me to summarize it in perfect prose. Because I don't speak English fluently, my work in this page was always assisted by someone else. Together, I believe we can turn this into a featured article! Lordelliott (talk) 19:55, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Thought you might be interested in weighing in on this dicussion. — Status (talk · contribs) 06:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Friends? Shane Cyrus (talk) 14:51, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Hardly. I don't appreciate the immature fashion in which you handle yourself. You correct one thing as "you're assisting the GA", yet you look to derail the process. This is the second article Snuggums has nominated that you've found yourself inappropriately involved in. None of your edits are in good faith.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 14:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll try to improve but please forgive me!!!--Shane Cyrus (talk) 15:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I am currently in the nomination process of getting Nicki Minaj videography up to featured list status. I am working through the improvements from user comments and have come to a slight hiccup. One of the problems is that there is different formatting for the references, and that some references do not contain all the nessessary information such as date, publisher exc. I have seen that you have contributed to getting many articles up to a sophisticated stage and was wondering whether you have any idea on how to format these references? without having to individually change every single one? If you could help in any way it would be appreciated. As a Mariah fan, I do not know your stance on Minaj, but if you could lend a hand I would be very thankful :P

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Nicki Minaj videography/archive1, KaneZolanski (talk) 10:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

I just fixed your editing status levels on your userpage, since you displayed them a while back. You have attained higher levels, and probably did not know that you did so.HotHat (talk) 06:22, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I think you might have listed Pills N Potions as a mistake. No, I certainly do not mind constructive criticism, one thing I am not is a seasoned editor. Well, any help you could give me would be appreciated. I've put the article through peer review, copy edit and now this. I understand that there are some basic errors and a ledge that isn't comprehensive in informative information regarding Minaj's total videography, but I'm willing to fix all problems in order to get this article up to standard. Thanks again KaneZolanski (talk) 13:13, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I see, now i wish I made reference to the elusive chanteuse ;) Thanks, your help is appreciated. KaneZolanski (talk) 18:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 23:17, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• The refs should be all good now for this California Gurl. I've added missing page numbers, too. Can the review now please proceed, Mr. Griffin? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 01:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

• The One of the Boys section has had a thorough TNT now. Ready to proceed to the next section? XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 20:22, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

• Sorry to keep asking, Peter, but I really, really would like to proceed with the GAN. I'm willing to let the other co-nominators address any issues raised (in regard to "fresh eyes"), but I don't wanna have to keep waiting for this to finish. If you feel unable to complete the review, perhaps Вик Ретлхед could (at least temporarily) take over. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Because i like it to be honest. It means that you're paying attention on me. hehehe Politsi (talk) 05:33, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes. I have you watch-listed so I can monitor your stupidity.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 05:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Nathan, I have warned Politsi not to troll and cause WP:BLP violations. If he/she does it again let me know, this is straight going to ANI for topic banning. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 05:01, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

To indianBio... please look at this statement from Nathan I have you watch-listed so I can monitor your stupidity

IndianBio... Did you understand and realize? who the real person who make a personal attack and violation?. please behave yourself before you warned someone. thanks Politsi (talk) 16:08, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Have a seat dude. You've been creating fan wars for over a week already. Get it together before admins do it for you.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 23:12, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

HAHAHA....worthless? and nothing to be proud of?.... i dont have to tell you my contribution to the that list, ask yourself Nathan. And please be fair (be a man!), do NOT erase my comment in your page eventhough that's make you so shame. Politsi (talk) 03:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Nathan, You really need to cool your temper, Friend! I won't report you but nor are you allowed to call someone bafoon nor a troll. I am an idiot to not report this but seriously dude, think it over.--Shane Cyrus (talk) 04:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Nor are you allowed to take up 2 GA reviews at same time like you did w. Katy Perry and the Iggy Azalea song.--Shane Cyrus (talk) 05:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Users most certainly can take up multiple reviews at the same time. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 06:19, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

And speaking of reviews, you've got a new Barnstar Mr. Griffin :) XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 07:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Nathan this is customary to notify involved parties. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

My two cents on the links you gave (date not withstanding). XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 05:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for standing by my side at Talk:Christina Aguilera#Dispute. Harsh, we've wasted sooo much time arguing with that guy. But everything seems to be alright now Simon (talk) 11:49, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

@HĐ: Oh Lawd! Lol. Of course, and thank you for coming to my aid. I still cannot believe this dude after 3 hours still doesn't get it :S Alas, cheers again mate and let's be in touch with the article in coming days to see what happens. Cheers buddy :)--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 11:53, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Alright! Cheers, Simon (talk) 13:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you think that this is perhaps a case of WP:SISTER? Admittedly, I didn't think Shane would get himself blocked for socking. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 15:19, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Could you help me expand the article of Carey's upcoming single You Don't Know What To Do ? thanks a lot fidelovkurt 18:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

@Fidelove: If Aaron or another editor don't take charge, then I probably will.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 19:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

The page already exists it was just a mistypo please check it i fixed the border link fidelovkurt 20:15, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

—CoolMarc 06:21, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

—CoolMarc 21:27, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey Peter. I noticed that you've got experience in uploading audios, so I wondered if you can help me with a couple of mine:

• File:Megadeth - Holy Wars... The Punishment Due.ogg from here (0:00—0:30)
• File:Megadeth - Symphony of Destruction.ogg from here (0:12—0:40)

Thanks in advance. Cheers.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 15:00, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

PS And don't forget that the audio quality needs to be around 60 kbps.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 15:02, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Peter, can you leave a response whether you're able or willing to do the request (so I can ask another user)? Appreciate your time.--Retrohead (talk) 11:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I think someone's waiting for your response here. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 03:17, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Mariah-carey-all-i-want-for-christmas-is-you-1994.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Would you like to participate? Simon (talk) 04:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Nathan, I hope everything is good with you. I saw that you reverted an IP on the Music Box article for changing the sales figures from 32 million to 28 million on the article. I was looking at the sources provided in the article, and they don't seem like they are the best, so I decided to look for a better source and found a few things:

• In 2012, BET claims that the album sold 32 million, but in 2010 they claimed she sold 28 million.
• (I am well aware that it is not considered a reliable source but) Live Nation also uses the 28 million figure.
• Billboard does claim that the album sold 32 million copies, but it also claims Thriller sold 110 million copies, which is a figure that was deemed inaccurate.

You're the sales expert, not me, so you can decide what to do, but I don't think that the 32 million figure is accurate. — Status (talk · contribs) 07:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

@Status: Hi buddy. I see where you're coming from, but we have loads of reliable sources stating 30-32 million (let's not forget even as of 93'-94' her sales in Asia were ridiculous and those aren't counted in certifications). Soul Culture lists 32m, BET lists 32m, The Huffington Post lists 32m, The Daily Beast lists 32m, It appears even Billboard does as well, as well as less reliable but worthsome Australian news site Undercover lists 32m as well. So you see, it really is strongly sourced and documented mate. I agree about Thriller 100%, but we're talking about an unaccounted for 4 million copies (not 45-55m+. Considering it sold over 1m in South Korea and 2.2m Japan alone within 6 months, I think it's a safe bet. Cheers. PS. I loved Jenny on WWHL :) Only wish she elaborated on Mottola's theft of some Carey tunes for J.Lo as her main reason for being rudeish ;-)--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 07:26, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Just a correction: The Huffington Post says it sold "more than 30 million". But yeah, the 32 million is backed up by some good sources. I think the Billboard one is all that is needed really, and should probably be used on the article. Never heard of that show before I saw her episode on YouTube the other day. I'm sure if she knew something about it she would mention it, but I really think she has no idea about what went on. Tommy's a pretty shady guy, but I won't lie... he "stole" some good tunes for Jenny. — Status (talk · contribs) 20:46, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I started a discussion here if you'd like to join. –Chase (talk / contribs) 00:54, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

You might be interested in giving input here. Snuggums (talk • contributions) 03:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Since you check out the best-selling music artist page, this one is a Perry stan and might be problematic. Already tried introducing fancruft in lot of her articles. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 16:44, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi If You actually did your research and read the articles i posted you would know that since may of 2014 Jennifer Lopez has sold 80 million record worldwide i feel that it is not right that people keep reverting my changes when i have included up to date articles from 2014 which state that she has sold 80 million records worldwide as well as a film gross of 2 billion dollars what i want to know is why do you and others keep using articles from 2011 and not 2014 you say always cite reliable sources well i can give you 3 articles which state the same thing that Jennifer Lopez has sold 80 million records for example:1.www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-jennifer-lopez-aka-20140615-story.html#page=1 article title:Jennifer Lopez on dating, her split with Marc Anthony and First Love. 2.www.forthone.com/music/news/jennifer-lopez-reveals-album-title-racy-artwork/ article title Jennifer Lopez Reveals Album title & Racy Artwork 3.www.rantlifestyle.com/20-hottest-female-musicians-in-the-world-today/ Article Title: 20 Hottest Female Musicians in The World Today (Tnays20 (talk) 17:46, 28 June 2014 (UTC)).

@Tnays20: None of the sources that you post are regarded as reliable (except for the LA Times). Aside from that, you'll have to read my posts on her biography page and the link to the talk page on List of best-selling music artists as I suggested. Please be aware of policies and guidelines we've put into mass effect in order to avoid inflated sales fed by record labels for promotional purposes (as done for her 55m for her stint on American Idol, then 70m & 80m for her new album). In reality, her certifications barely reach 30m, so read said talk pages to fully understand why we will not be updating her sales.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 19:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Attention Mimi fans and members of her lambily (especially you Nathan)!

I have found a new claim sales for your Diva, this source (http://www.channelcanada.com/canadian-channels/nets/ctv/etalk-gets-personal-with-mega-star-mariah-carey-in-canadian-exclusive-interview-airing-tonight-monday-march-25-at-7-p-m-et-on-ctv)

Has been crowned the world’s best-selling female artist of all time and a multiple Grammy Award-winning global superstar with more than 250 million records sold worldwide!

I'm serious Nathan, I think we should put this fantastic claim sales into her wiki Biography.

Long Live The Queen! Long Live The Queen! Long Live The Queen! Politsi (talk) 05:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)