User talk:IndianBio/Archive 42

Archive 35

←

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

Sex (book)

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Sex (book) has been completed.

The only issue I have been unable to resolve is this sentence in the Mathew Gilbert quote in the Legacy section: "Her politics are largely Electral." I'm not even sure "electral" is a word. When I tried to bring up the article in question I get an error message that the link cannot be found. The whole thing may have to be removed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 16:32, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you TT, yes even I cannot find it anymore, will remove it now. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:55, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Can someone please change Gaga's picture on her Wikipedia page?

Help, someone please change gaga's picture on her Wikipedia page I can 100% confirmed there are better pictures of her on the internet. Thanks Fiqdans (talk) 15:59, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

The current picture has been decided through consensus among the editors and added. If you have any suggestion please feel free to raise a discussion in the talk page. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 16:07, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your Article Work!

Thanks for your recent content work that falls in the scope of the Children's Lit WikiProject. I wanted to let you know that you were recognized in our last newsletter. Happy editing and Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Barkeep :) —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 19:06, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

December 19th

According to SNEP, A Star is Born Soundtrack obviously got a Platinum certification, here's the link: http://www.snepmusique.com/les-disques-dor/?awards_cat=65. I'm pretty sure "Platine" is the french word for "Platinum". They updated the certification on 07/12/2018. I don't know what you're talking about. You clearly didn't find the right source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jijie101 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

No dude. The source had updated now when SNEP usually does update their website. So before they actually update it to include the platinum certification, you were continuously changing the Gold certification to Platinum, thereby contradicting the source. And hence you were warned fair and square. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 09:31, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Margaret

Hey. So I found this Google report from 2013 and she was included in 2 categories and I thought it was worth adding to the article.

"The singer was the eighth most googled Polish celebrity, whilst "Margaret" was the fourth most googled word in the Polish music category in Google's 2013 Zeitgeist report."

What do you think? Also, feel free to reword it cause something doesn't sound right to me just not sure what (haha). ArturSik (talk) 20:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

I think what you added sounds right ArturSik :) —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:44, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Would you mind taking a look at my recent changes in the article. I've expanded 'Artistry' a bit as I managed to find some reviews where they comment on her voice, and also added a paragraph about her songwriting. I don't want to clutter the article with too many redundant information tho so if you think that something should go please get rid of it. ArturSik (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Gaga

Hey, do you think this one would be okay for infobox ? i found it somehow and I think it's a really nice and neutral shot of her. ArturSik (talk) 20:43, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

OMG @ArturSik: this picture is amazing! Please change it right now. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Done:) ArturSik (talk) 21:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

I just saw you used a picture from VSFS in 'Million Reasons' article. I didn't mention it because I'm waiting for it to be reviewed and approved but when that's done what do you think about using it in Gaga's infobox? it's really really nice and whilst the current one is more clearer both are of good quality only the one from VSFS is more gaga and represents her image better imo. ArturSik (talk) 15:52, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

@ArturSik: I think the performance image is really pretty, but the current infobox image is better. Its quite professional looking, a face of Gaga smiling and of high-resolution. PS, I'm pretty sure we will get another barge of Little Monsters logging in Wikipedia to complain about the image change. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 15:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

that's very true. although, if they did they'd have to be wrong in their heads. but tbf i stopped trying to understand them long time ago. best to ignore. ArturSik (talk) 16:03, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Mirror on the Ceilin'

...I mean "A-Yo". I created "Mirror on the Ceilin'" as a redirect to this because I initially thought it was the song's official name, not just a recurring line, and therefore many may search for "Mirror on the Ceilin'" here. This looks like a Dancing in the Dark Perfect and Teenage Wasteland Baba O'Riley situation. For a redirect on a song's incorrect name to be saved from deletion, the term has to appear somewhere in the article, right? How do we solve that here? --Kailash29792 (talk) 11:19, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Kailash29792:, I think if we can include a part of the lyrics in the article, that should save the redirect. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 11:30, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

But let's not force lyrics into the article for the sake of saving a redirect. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:31, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

I agree. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 20:56, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

Always Remember Us This Way

Hello,

Just curious if you have any proof that my change regarding the song's release data as a single was incorrect? I understand it has been playlisted in the UK already, but this was not part of a formal release, the radio station in question simply began spinning it of their own accord. Hence that would make January 4 2019 the correct release date, as that is part of a formal push from the label.

- Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:7089:D300:5891:C943:7586:35D3 (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

The source in question from BBC Radio 2 clearly lists the songs playlisted, which means the track was added to radio playlist on Nov 24. Now whether they are curiosity spins or not is immaterial. Radio add dates can be far ahead or far future before radio increases spins of a song. "Shallow" is still being heavily played in UK. So they might now touch "Always Remember Us This Way", however the label has pushed it in their playlist. Now Universal can add it to Italian radio in Jan 2019, that does not negate that the track is already released to radio in UK in Nov 2018, hence that date is considered its release date. Formal release or not is your own assumption which has no place in Wikipedia. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Forgive me, but as someone who works in the UK music industry, I can guarantee it is you who is making your own assumption and pushing it incorrectly to articles infactual. As clearly explained in my above message, a song does not need to be released in order to be played on this radio. Hence to say November 24 was its first release date is a lie. Please do not continue to defy the truth regarding this, especially a this is not your area of expertise.

No one cares that you work in the music industry so in the politest way don't try to push that agenda here in Wikipedia. All we know is that UK radios playlisted the song from 24th November and cannot do so without a recording company's seal. And on the contrary you need to provide source that it was not released as a single on that date. We know it was added to Italy in Radio one link already. Your own assumptions are not welcome here, Wikipedia works on the concept of verifiability and thats the clear case here, a song added on a particular date to radios. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 14:55, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

acadamy award

I think it should be listed in Gaga's main section — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukeaanthony (talk • contribs) 00:21, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Walking on Air (Katy Perry song)

Billboard called the song "disco" shortened for "Discotheque" which redirected to "Nightclub", a place where dancing, rather than a disco genre. 2402:1980:24D:56EB:5BE3:C24B:5742:51FC (talk) 05:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Can you please vote or comment at Talk:Walking on Air (Katy Perry song)#RfC: genre infobox dispute involving the genre infobox dispute on the page? 2402:1980:8245:A56A:508B:72F0:AF1E:857A (talk) 18:47, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

La vie en rose

This song is mentioned in How Your Mother Met Me article also. You can check the film also. Is so easy and verificable. - Csurla (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

@Csurla: my edit summary is pretty much self-explanatory. You can find a reliable source for this addition and its good to be in place, not crappy websites like IMDB. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 00:07, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Oh! What is your offer in this film? Please explain how can possible that any other film in the list without any references??? - Csurla (talk) 03:41, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

QX Gaygalan Awards

Why do you say these awards are not notable? If they aren't then 1/3 of the awards on Lady Gaga's Wikipedia page aren't either. According to the general notability guideline, a topic must have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (and these sources do not have to be written in English), and that's exactly what the Gaygalan Awards have. Not to mention these awards are featured on literally every "List of awards and nominations received by (...)" page here, including the Rihanna, Coldplay, Sia, Ed Sheeran and Sam Smith ones. So why they can't be on Gaga's?

The QX Gaygalan Awards are covered by literally the biggest newspapers in Sweden, such as Göteborgs-Posten, Aftonbladet and Expressen and I provided all the adequate sources showing that in my edits. These awards are also held since 1999 by QX (magazine) at an actual ceremony broadcast on TV where physical awards are handed out.

This year alone the awards were covered by: Expressen: https://www.expressen.se/noje/caroline-farberger-blev-arets-hbtq-pa-qx-galan-valdigt-hedrad/; Sydsvenskan: https://www.sydsvenskan.se/2019-02-05/caroline-farberg-prisad-pa-qx-gaygala; Helsingborgs Dagblad: https://www.hd.se/2019-02-05/caroline-farberg-prisad-pa-qx-gaygala; Norrländska Socialdemokraten: https://www.nsd.se/kultur-noje/caroline-farberger-prisad-pa-qx-galan-nm5023175.aspx; Norrköpings Tidningar: https://www.nt.se/kultur-noje/caroline-farberger-prisad-pa-qx-galan-om5743371.aspx.

In all of these articles they mention the complete list of winners and post pictures from the ceremony. Also the QX (magazine) page is now updated with different sources showing its notability.

IP user, assuming you are the same IP who is going on adding the award, Wikipedia_talk:Featured_list_candidates#Awards_notability discussion and moderators are clearly against awards that do not have their own page, thereby non-notable. Just because the magazine has an article does not mean that its given award should be notable also. Prove the award's notability and go create an article. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:37, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Well, I think you're just being stubborn and don't want to admit you're wrong (just like you undid the accurate BAFTA updates on the A Star Is Born article despite the fact the ceremony just happened and the entire world knows the film really won Best Film Music). Not all of the awards featured on Gaga's page have their own articles, sometimes just the institution that gives the awards. The QX magazine article has a section talking about the awards and that should be enough. But yeah, I'll make a separate article when I have time and the awards will be added again.

IP user, instead of harping here in my talk page, go and do it first. The reason the awards are all reverted is because fanboys do not have the decency to provide or update source. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:55, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

American Pie - Don Mclean

Noticed you reverted the year end chart information I edited.

Although the 1972 Year End chart does not currently exist on line, I currently have the issue in question on hand and I believe I cited it correctly in my edit on this page. RPM's year end chart for 1972 appeared in volume 18, Issue No. 21&22 (double issue) and has a release date of January 13, 1973. The Year End chart appears on page 20, with Don Mclean - "American Pie" as #1 & Gilbert O'Sullivan "Alone Again (Naturally) at #2. If you'd like a copy of this .pdf I can send your way. I have a good portion of missing charts I've requested from LAC, actually I was one of the original people who requested them posted I the first place well over 10 years ago. I have all their errors tracked, and often share with LAC in efforts to get them corrected, the most recent of which is this correspondence;

Dear Mr. Falk,

Thank you for your interest in Library and Archives Canada (LAC) concerning RPM magazine for the year-end chart of 1972.

After looking at the details you provided and searching the RPM database we noticed that the issue of January 13,1973, Vol. 18, no. 21 & 22 was not in the database. We have checked the original issue and have located the “RPM’s Top 100 singles of ‘72” on page 20.

For your convenience we have attached a scanned version of the article.

We will report this missing issue in the RMP database to the appropriate section and ask to have that issue added. Thank you for reporting this issue to LAC.

We hope this information is helpful. If we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us again.

Regards, Lise Vézeau — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djjamesfalk (talk • contribs) 19:07, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Djjamesfalk: in your edit here it is completely unsourced and does not contain any {{cite web}} citation. So it was reverted. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Correct because there are none, as I referenced. The LAC is currently processing this, and thousands of other corrections I've sent their way. What currently resides online at LAC exists due to my requests for it a decade ago. Further few of Canada's RPM listings are not cited, a good portion of which I've done myself anonymously. I advertise owning the largest music library in Canada and have all of this information embedded within the meta tags of my audio files. I've spent much of the last 15 as the music director for central Canada's largest background music provider. I was also a contributor to the Whitburn project which serves as the backbone for every US chart entry appearing on Wikipedia.

Again, it you'd like the .pdf file of the chart in question I can send your way, but I'm much too busy to begin creating web pages of .pdf files when the LAC will eventually get around to it. Another website https://3345.ca is in the process of a doing the job much better anyways. There's will be done by the end of this calendar year. The literal issues of RPM magazine are on the 3345 for much of the magazines run from 1962-2000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djjamesfalk (talk • contribs) 21:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Djjamesfalk: you do not need actual URL links, you can use {{cite journal}} for printed magazines and giving proper volume, issue and page number you can add the reference yourself per WP:ONUS. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 21:54, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

I believe I did exactly that. I've also repeated the exact issue several time throughout this dialogue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djjamesfalk (talk • contribs) 21:58, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

@Djjamesfalk: no you did not as I have clearly shown in this edit history. You only added the explanation here in this talk page thread. So I am very much correct in reverting your edit as it is unsourced. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 22:00, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Would you care to do it using the method you mentioned? Here's a link to the cover page of the issue:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10161872051535500&set=pcb.10161872052300500&type=3&theater

and here's page 20 which contains the chart in question, likely the first time it has ever appeared on line:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10161872051845500&set=pcb.10161872052300500&type=3&theater — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djjamesfalk (talk • contribs) 22:07, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Using that as a template I will make the same changes for the rest of Canada's Year End Top 100 for 1972

@Djjamesfalk: see this edit that I made and follow it accordingly. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 22:24, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Djjamesfalk: I gave you an example template to follow to cite the 1972 year-end charts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Charts, for exactly this purpose, when there is no online version available yet. Richard3120 (talk) 22:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

The English Roses

Hello again, and apologies in advance for this super random message. I remember that you said in a copy-edit request for the above article at the WikiProject Guild of Copyeditors that you were interested in doing an FAC for it. I fully admit to be nosy about this, but I was just curious if that is still something you are interested in doing for the future. I greatly admire your work on the article. I really should pursue a project on a book article in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 02:22, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Hey @Aoba47: just realized that I forgot to respond to this message. Yes I do plan to take this to FAC in the near future, but my busy schedule has halted my work on it. You are welcome to provide any suggestion for improvement if you see. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 10:39, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

• Thank you for the response and no worries. I was just curious about it. Good luck with everything! Aoba47 (talk) 18:43, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of MDNA (album)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article MDNA (album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HĐ -- HĐ (talk) 13:01, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

GAN of MDNA

Hi, I've made some input. Hopefully you can address my concern within a week's time :) HĐ (talk) 11:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)