User talk:KaneZolanski

Hello, KaneZolanski, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Drmies (talk) 14:22, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your edit to Pink Friday, as Twitter accounts are not a reliable sourcs; confirmed accounts celebrities perhaps, but otherwise no (WP:Twitter) A past discussion and consensus finding it unreliable is referenced at WP:Reliable sources noticeboard. Dan56 (talk) 15:36, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for letting me know. KaneZolanski 10:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm STATicVapor. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Pink Friday, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. STATic message me! 21:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I see that there has been an issue recently regarding the images on the Nicki Minaj article. I opened a discussion regarding the situation on the talk page of that article and would deeply value your perspective. Please see Talk:Nicki Minaj#Infobox image for the relevant discussion. Thanks. :) --Thevampireashlee (talk) 13:52, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Feuds discussion has been opened, it requires your alongside other users' input. ChocoLantern88 (talk) 22:52, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Nicki Minaj videography, KaneZolanski!

Wikipedia editor Sam Sailor just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Blimey that's well done!

To reply, leave a comment on Sam Sailor's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hello, KaneZolanski. You have new messages at Sam Sailor's talk page.
Message added 15:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

-- Sam 🎤 15:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to be certain you realized that I simply protected the article where it was, and am not endorsing your version. You need to discuss this on the talk page as well. If you edit war after the protection is over, you will be blocked just as certainly as JACUBANHELADO will be.—Kww(talk) 15:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I Just wanted to let you know that a Section has been opened on the Nicki Minaj Discography Talk Page For Us To Discuss On the Music Videos Section of the Page. JACUBANHELADO (talk) 05:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I don't think you'd be going for GA, this would likely be an FL candidate eventually. The list looks to be in a good shape, though I recommend that you use a consistent format when writing the dates (ie. Month Day, Year), and the albums' names need to be italicized. I also saw some bare URLs and some questionable sourcing (I'm not familiar with Hip Hop Press, but I'd try to find another source if possible.) Other than some minor adjustments, I think the list has a good shot at becoming promoted to FL. Cheers! WikiRedactor (talk) 16:25, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KaneZolanski. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Nicki Minaj videography at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Miniapolis 18:16, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message to me about Nicki Minaj, I am not familiar enough with her work to contribute, I'm afraid. However, I have just finished the main copy-editing for this article, and need to go through the footnotes now to check the quotes and facts in the text against the citations (that is the order in which do work on an article). I can let you have a list of the footnotes I cannot sort out myself, if you would like me to. There may be some broken links, which I am not very good at fixing yet, as I am very new to dealing with all the wikicode involved in mending them. Should I send the list to you here, or post it to you or just generally on the Nicki Minaj Talk page? -- P123ct1 (talk) 20:32, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P123ct1, Thanks for taking your time to do this. Yes, on here would be completely fine :) KaneZolanski (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Will do! I notice that I have already done some of the footnotes (had forgotten), but there are others to come. -- P123ct1 (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi KaneZolanski, Thank you for trying to improve the article by trying to get it to a featured article status. I do like the article; It has a lot of content (enough to be a "good article), has a lot of references, and is well organized. It might be able to make the "good article" status. If you try to get it to "good article" status first and then build it up to a "feature article", then it will be more likely to appear as a "featured article" in the future. You could view Wikipedia:Good article criteria for more information. on how to make the article a good article. Robert4565 (talk) 04:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm JD3rulo. The thing is that I'm a huge fan of Jessie J, I have made changes in her page, but other users have removed them, replying that the links I referred to don't belong to reliable sources. So I'm wondering if you could dedicate part of your time in helping me to fill some topics that are abandoned, such as Jessie J's vocal type, range and also writing updated news about her career lately. I hope you can help me, cause it seems Jessie's page has been forgotten. If you need some help to write about any article or making research, you can count on me, so this is the only thing I can give you: my friendship to make wikipedia a better and updated site. Chao, have a nice day!JD3rulo (talk) 05:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lol Hey buddy. I was looking at your FAC... I don't mean to sound rude, but I see so many basic errors. I was under the impression that you were a well seasoned editor, so blog usage/no formatting/weak lead come as a surprise. The article needs a lot of work. I will try to assist and guide you through the process. Cheers.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 10:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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)

Lol. Yeah I know about that. I was just using the song for your enjoyment ;) I'll see how I can help. Cheers mate.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 16:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

A few days back you made this enquiry on Drmies talk page and he pinged me asking for my opinion about the use of Third Opinion. I see you have not attempted that, which is just as well because your request would have been declined. All forms of mediated content dispute resolution at Wikipedia require extensive talk page discussion before asking for help. Your first obligation in moving away from an edit war would be to discuss the issues in question with the other editor, preferably on the article talk page. If the other editor will not engage in discussion, then you might want to consider the recommendations I make here. However, even before that, you may want to give serious consideration to the #1 and #2 steps in my recommendations. At this point your hands are not clean and there are serious policy considerations which are being overlooked, perhaps most notably BURDEN and NOR. The first thing a dispute resolution volunteer is going to want to know about a dispute is the reliable sources for the material in dispute and those sources are going to not only have to be reliable but must also say, pretty much straight up without any interpretation or prohibited synthesis, what it is you want to put in the article. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 18:22, 10 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I've noticed that you continually keep renaming the page for the song "Bang Bang." It appears that you keep citing that "reliable sources including Billboard" have confirmed that "Bang Bang" will be a joint single by Nicki Minaj, Jessie J, and Ariana Grande rather than a single by Jessie J featuring the latter two. However, only one link to Billboard appears on the page and it clearly states that "Bang Bang" will be Jessie J's single with Nicki Minaj and Ariana Grande as guests artists. Taken directly from the article: "Ariana Grande and Nicki Minaj are both guest artists on "Bang Bang," a self-described "powerhouse anthem" (thanks, press release!) due out on July 29 through Republic Records." Here is the article that is on the page for "Bang Bang." The other websites that are supposedly backing up the fact that "Bang Bang" will be a joint single are not very reliable (in one source, they don't even capitalize Grande's last name) and actual reliable sources like MTV and Billboard state that Minaj and Grande are only featured in the song. Many people have tried changing the song back to Bang Bang (Jessie J song) as it should be but every time you change it back to Bang Bang (Nicki Minaj, Jessie J and Ariana Grande song) which frankly is incorrect. If you would please move the page to the correct name, that would be greatly appreciated. Thank you - Divine618 (talk) 17:08, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Divine618, Company Magazine, which is a HEARST based magazine, is one of the most reliable sources available. This source describes the song as a joint single. I have reread the Billboard article, and it seems they reference the press release as their source. The press release, released by REPUBLIC Records, the record company for all three artists, does NOT list Jessie J as the main artist with Ariana and Nicki as featured. Now, with the facts out of the way lets move on to logic. Why would Ariana Grande put an unreleased song she was just featured on, on her album? Second, why would all three artists and the label be promoting it as "Jessie J + Ariana Grande + Nicki Minaj"? Wouldn't it be listed as Jessie J feat. Ariana Grande and Nicki Minaj? Third, only one of the three artists are listed as a song writer, which isn't Jessie J. KaneZolanski (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I would like to talk to you about the constant renaming done by you to the page about Jessie J's newest single. As much as I appreciate and share the passion of bringing excitement and making the page a better one by doing all the fun edits you do, I would like to ask you to stop renaming the page. I do not need a reliable source to prove my point that the song is by Jessie J featuring the other two. If you visit any Wikipedia page about a song that features two or more artist you will find that putting the name of all the artist that are involved in the song is not necessary. I see that other editors agree with me on this one, so I would ask you again to stop renaming and moving the page. Anyway, thank you for the contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo Lazov (talk • contribs) 19:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo Lazov Wikipedia REQUIRES reliable sources, you can't reference other pages you can only follow the rules and make alterations when necessary. Currently, there is no reason to believe this is just a Jessie J song featuring Nicki and Ariana, all logical information points to the fact that this is a joint single. Read this.... Company Magazine, which is a HEARST based magazine, is one of the most reliable sources available. This source describes the song as a joint single. I have reread the Billboard article, and it seems they reference the press release as their source. The press release, released by REPUBLIC Records, the record company for all three artists, does NOT list Jessie J as the main artist with Ariana and Nicki as featured. Now, with the facts out of the way lets move on to logic. Why would Ariana Grande put an unreleased song she was just featured on, on her album? Second, why would all three artists and the label be promoting it as "Jessie J + Ariana Grande + Nicki Minaj"? Wouldn't it be listed as Jessie J feat. Ariana Grande and Nicki Minaj? Third, only one of the three artists are listed as a song writer, which isn't Jessie J. KaneZolanski (talk) 19:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you have bordered breaking the 3-revert rule, and I suggest instead of constantly reverting each other's renaming of the article, that an RFC, or more simply, a move request be done to gain a consensus from the community. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You put a lock on moving this page. The verified artist just confirmed that the spelling is "The Pinkprint" Not "The Pink Print". https://twitter.com/NICKIMINAJ/status/497117375712329728 KaneZolanski (talk) 20:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It will need a better source and a discussion on the talk page. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 20:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've read the rules, and Twitter sources are deemed ok if it's from a verified page. This is Nicki Minaj's album, and this was from her official verified Twitter account. She was directly answering the question as to whether it is spelt "The Pinkprint" or "The Pink Print". I don't understand what there is to discuss, or am I missing something out? As any "better" source is going to be sourcing that tweet. KaneZolanski (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is there are other results for Pink Print. So a Wikipedia:Requested moves would be the way to go. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 21:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC) It has been made. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Pink_Print#Survey KaneZolanski (talk) 22:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll keep an eye on it. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 22:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With 9 Supports and 1 Oppose (Who's concerns about publications not using the name being counteracted by articles such as The Rolling Stone and Spin) when can the page be moved over to the title, "The Pinkprint"? KaneZolanski (talk) 02:36, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That looks conclusive. I've moved the page. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 03:24, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KaneZolanski. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Nicki Minaj at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Miniapolis 15:31, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Pills N Potions.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) 00:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any reason to believe that theboombox.com issues a notable award. It appears to be a fairly minor blog, and I can't find any reliable sources making note of the award. Don't continue to reinsert it unless you can gain a consensus somewhere that it actually is a notable award.—Kww(talk) 04:38, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A move request regarding Deadline.com / Deadline Hollywood, an article whose talk page you have edited, is taking place at Talk:Deadline Hollywood#Requested move 11 March 2018. It is scheduled to end in seven days.--Tenebrae (talk) 19:24, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]