User talk:Bookkeeperoftheoccult/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Hey You

...is nominated and ready for GA. I want to add, your name also to the nomination. Please respond. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

If you really feel the need, you can add my name, but all I did was present you the information. I happen to have access to ProQuest and other databases, but the search literally took all of five minutes, either way, its up to you. I appreciate the thought. :) The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Taking the onus to find time to go through articles and get info, is enough reason for me to warranty a co-nomination for you :) --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Single Ladies

Thanks for looking. I think I gave up too, or don't have time to do it right now. But thanks. Orane (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hahha, although I'm more of a dog person, thank you for the kitty. I'll pass it on :). Orane (talk) 03:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

--Legolas ^(talk2me) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Its a cuteeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Lady Gaga discgraphy

Can you come to Talk:Lady Gaga discography#US Sales? A discussion is initiated, where a user is claiming to add data from a forum though unreliable. I'm guessing the data for the user may be correct but fails WP:RS badly. If the sales are not available for a single or an album then can we add the certification number there? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

re: Kitty!

Gosh, thanks for the kitty! Does it help to know that nearly all of my Wiki-editing is done with a kitty on my lap, my leg or curled up next to my feet? They appreciate it too!! Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh I put up with lots, too, to live with them. I live alone in the country and I joke that I worry that I'll pop off in my sleep and they won't be able to feed themselves until someone comes along. I discovered this week that one of them can open the cabinet door and feed herself when she wants fresh food. I have mixed feelings about this... :) Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:30, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Awww, a kitty that I'm not allergic to. Very cute! Thank you :-)

Becks loves your kitty (and all cats). Do you mind if he steals borrows shows his appreciation of the banner by spreading it around Wiki? Thanks for this. BTW, my cat used to try to curl up on the keyboard. Damn hard to type that way. Another one slept right next to the keyboard, opposite of the mouse. — Becks Talk to me 20:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Becksguy (of the Beer) has given you a cat! Cats promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Cats must be fed three times a day, scratched behind the ears, petted, and paid much attention to as befits Royalty, and might just be your faithful companion forever, if they feel like it (and you keep the can opener handy)! Remember that dogs have families, cats have staff! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cat, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

How do you like this one? Just having a bit of fun. Thanks for the Kitty. — Becks Talk to me 00:48, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Madonna's personal life

Hi, I meant to mention this yesterday, and then I got sidetracked, but I wanted to tell you that I was very impressed by your elegantly expressed comment about personal life sections in articles. I admire your integrity. Rossrs (talk) 23:43, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I've also given up on it. And yes, it's one of many that should and could be FA if it wasn't for the actions of a few. Rossrs (talk) 03:46, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Infact even I was also extremely impressed by your comments that I couldnot stop myself and cleaned up the article. Please take a look. I referenced your Janet Jackson article and included the marriage and relationships in the main biography prose. I think we should try to promote it again to FA and give the article its due credit. I believe only minor formatting of the books and the inclusion of the <ref name=" "/> tag is indeed needed. What say we give it a shot at FA? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

The article looks better than it has ever looked, and Legolas's edits have made a great improvement. Maybe it's worth reconsidering? Rossrs (talk) 14:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Awesome job. I'd love to work on it again. Her adoptions and religious/political views should still be merged into the main biography. The only thing that should be left separate are the musical style and Legacy sections. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey Book. How have you been? I have further cleaned up the lady with the awesome biceps article to merge everything together except the influence and legacy. What do you think of it now? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

It's looking a lot better. I have a term paper this week and finals next week, but I'll probably dive in right after. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Paparazzi

Could you tell me if this qualifies as a reliable source? Please reply to my talk page. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. PS The Paparazzi video is indeed amazing don't you think so? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:49, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Indeed! The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 09:00, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey You (Madonna song)

I have placed the article on hold. Please view the talkpage for details. Thanks, and good luck! CarpetCrawler^{message me} 19:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Give It 2 Me GAR

Hi Book. Can you come to the Give It 2 Me article? I have nominated it for GA and it has been reviewed also. However there is one concern about the GA which I fail to understand regarding the critical reception. Could you please help me out a bit? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:57, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Jackson projects

Please comment here, a debate on the future of WP:MJJ and WP:JANET. — R² 14:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

True Blue (album)

Hi Book. how are you? I have been developing the above article for quite sometime, and expanded it. Would you mind take a look at it to see what it needs to be worked upon to make it GA? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks book. I nominated it. *fingers crossed* --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Paris Hilton

Fancy working on this BLP nightmare? I'm definately going to trim the driving violation details. — R² 13:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi there, I have nominated Scream/Childhood for peer review. I would like to send it to FAC over the summer. Any assistance is appreciated. — R² 11:38, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Im out

hi dear. Im hospitalised for the last few days due to an accident. I just logged in through my brother's laptop to ask a favour. Please can you watchlist the Gaga articles untill Wednesday? I'll be discharged by then. I guess you know the amount of crappy additions that goes in these articles (bio + songs + album + tour). Just for these few days only. Please. :( --Legolas ^(talk2me) 00:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

thanks book. I just peeked into the LEAD b4 logging. It looks good, but tends a little PEACOCKY... i mean too much of numbery.. like third, seventh, eleventh... if i come back sigh :( i'll work ferociously on the Madonna FA. Untill then please donot hesitate to revert any crap from the Gaga articles. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 01:13, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm back. Though not fully recovered (still battered), I will be able to edit articles for Gaga and others (yeahh!!). That should calm be down. Thanks for your help in watchlisting these articles. Really appreciated. Also, kudos to the Madonna LEAD. Awesome dude!! --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:09, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Madonna

Thanks for letting me know about the lead. I like it very much and I think it's the best lead this article has ever had. I've commented on the talk page. To summarize, I think her build up during 1985 & 1986 is just about unprecedented, and the lead sells it a little short because it skips straight from Madonna to True Blue. I've made a lengthy statement about making a fairly minor adjustment, but oh well, maybe I was a bit enthusiastic. I hadn't thought about it being numbery. Legolas has a point there. I think years are important but numbering probably not. Rossrs (talk) 14:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I've had a look at the legacy, and there's nothing that jumps out at me. I keep going back to Janet Jackson as a kind of ideal and it's not as strong. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seems to move quickly from idea to idea and doesn't flow as well as Janet's. It's on the right track. I noticed that there is no Madonna identified as a primary article for that name and I wonder if maybe the Queen of Pop should be "Madonna" and the rest of them disambiguated the way they are. It seems unlikely to me that the unsuspecting visitor would intuitively type in "Madonna (entertainer)". What do you think? Would such a suggestion stir up a hornet's nest? Rossrs (talk) 12:32, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I thought the statue would probably win, and now I've read through the talk archive, I will definitely let this one rest. Rossrs (talk) 13:04, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Debate

Hey, could you please comment here and watchlist the article for a few weeks. Cheers. — R² 16:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Just an FYI

I am preparing a sock puppet case regarding this person. I came across corroborating evidence tonight. If you know of other suspect accounts, please either let me know or take a look at the page when I get it posted. I'm hoping to find enough to cover more than just the two accounts and an IP. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I've posted the case. You can find it here. Thanks!! Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow, I'm stunned. Look at the case when you get a moment. It was far worse than I knew, although I was quite sure there were more than I had found. They were all over the place and they are all indeffed now and the IP is blocked for 6 months. Wow. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Aaliyah

Hey there Bookkeeper, it's been a while. I was wondering if you could take a look at Aaliyah; I'm almost about ready to take it to WP:GAN, and I could use someone to look it over and maybe expand the 'Legacy' section a bit. Regards. — Σxplicit 08:34, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Warning

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. UweBayern (talk) 08:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

For an accurate picture of the problem taking place, see Talk:Chris_Brown_(entertainer)#Move. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 08:38, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. — Σxplicit 22:08, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Keep in mind I'm well aware of what I am doing. I take warnings over edit-waring with a grain of salt when it comes to BLPs. I find maintaining the WP:BASICHUMANDIGNITY of living person's biography more important than being blocked for a period of time. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that, and as much as keeping an article to comply with WP:BLP is something we aim for, edit warring is also just as harmful to Wikipedia, regardless of where it takes place. Just be a bit more careful, I find your contributions to be very dedicated respectable and it would be a shame for you to be blocked for any amount of time. — Σxplicit 03:43, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate that. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:48, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)

• Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:14, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Hung Up

Do you think its GA worthy? Any changes you recommend? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Gaga

It would also be best to put musician and change headings to their orginal e.g. 1986-2006 Carer beginings. --Officially I am not Cloverfield Monsta I need help with this 09:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cloverfield Monsta (talk • contribs)

You better keep an eye on this user. Has a looooooooooooong history of edit warring. Just a heads up. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 15:14, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Dangling modifiers

Hi! Thanks for your friendly input on Michael Jackson. Please see dangling modifier. The sentence as you restored it says that "Thriller" was the King of Pop, when that title belongs to Jackson, not the album. Consider: "Climbing the hill, the house became visible." Houses don't climb hills!

all the best, Qworty (talk) 05:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I changed the sentence structure a bit. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, just saw your adjustment--quite sensible--thanks! Qworty (talk) 05:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Everybody

Hi Book. a Small help. Since you have access to all news archives, can you find me some reviews for the Madonna song "Everybody"? Thanks. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 11:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

New message alert

Hello, Bookkeeperoftheoccult. You have new messages at Cosmic Latte's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cosmic Latte (talk) 01:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Madonna wikiproject

I invite you to join the Madonna wikiproject --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Do you think this article Chillin has any notability? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:35, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess it does, primarily because of Gaga. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 04:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Classifying sexual orientation of actors without confirmation by them

Hey, I know that you are an expert on WP:BLP. Sure, these two individuals are no longer living, but it is because of your expertise regarding WP:BLP that I would very much appreciate your thoughts on this and this. Flyer22 (talk) 01:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I gave my two cents on the talk pages. If I can do some independent research, I'll add what I can find to the article. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 04:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Flyer22 (talk) 11:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

The Lottery

Hi! I stumbled across your userpage while editing Michael Jackson, the article. What struck me was your interpretation of The Lottery. I remember reading it some time ago, and watching an adaption to film. I never understood exactly what the theme was, however thanks to your explanation, I now do! Thanks for putting my mind at ease. I guess you have to examine the context of literature to really understand. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I studied it in one of my college English courses. Across cultures, religions, and ethnic backgrounds, human beings have a tendency to uphold outdated ways of thinking - quite often in the name of morality, God, or any other justification they can come up with - regardless of how illogical their reasoning might be. Even in the realm of science, people thought Columbus was insane for denying the flat earth theory. Hitler somehow convinced an entire nation the only way to save themselves was by killing all Jews. The Lottery epitomizes just how ridiculous - and quite often dangerous - "morality" can be: As if stoning randomly stoning a villager to death, via a equal opportunity lottery, will somehow ensure a good harvest. I'm glad I was able to give you some insight. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 10:10, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

But then, who are we to judge their society? We come with our own set of biases and preconceptions about what's "normal". For them, the lottery is perfectly normal, a way of life. ThaMoonwalker (talk) 12:34, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

By reason of political theory, any law which violates human rights is inherently unlawful and must be abolished. While we can respect and gradually change cultural "norms", death is something a human being cannot recover from and the basic human right to live trumps any perceived "right" to tradition. Owning African slaves was once a perfectly normal way of life, jut as killing Jews was. The moral of the story is to always question society, as complacency often leads to ignorance. I am more than willing to offend someone's beliefs, if it means preserving life and liberty.

FYI

Hey, Thriller album is appearing on the main page on Tuesday, the day of the funeral I believe. Please watchlist it. How are you anyway? — Please comment R² 23:46, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

MJ businessman

Hey Book, I can't find the RfC for MJ being a Businessman. It doesn't seem to be in the archive. Can you locate it? Thanks. — Please comment R² 19:11, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Linked on talk page. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 01:50, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) — Please comment R² 20:51, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Michaeljanetscream.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Michaeljanetscream.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip [i.e. a Word document or PDF file] that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Jupiter.solarsyst.comm.arm.milk.universe 00:20, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Gay icon

Hi book how are you? I have a proposition. Would you like to collaborate on the article Madonna as gay icon with me? It would be interesting I think. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

When I have some time sure. Though that may take a few weeks. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 06:50, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

MJ lead

Hello, I noticed some disagreements regarding the content of the MJ introduction. I actually think both versions are more or less ok, although Slim's version is the one that most closely came to something resembling consensus. I just wanted to mention a very important point. In one of your edits, you made what you considered "tweaks" to the introduction and erased "King of Pop" from the lead. If you are not aware, there were wars waged over this label in the past. Prior consensus, which I helped to establish, indicates that the label should be included in the article. So whichever version you and Slim settle on, the label "King of Pop" must be mentioned very early on in the lead. Quite simply, a version of the lead that does not include that title is categorically unacceptable, per prior consensus.UberCryxic (talk) 04:59, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Kylie Minogue FAR

Hi, I know that Kylie Minogue is not an article that you edit, but it is currently nominated for FAR. I see a lot of problems in the article, and many of them relate to the structure. I've made a few comments at Wikipedia:Featured article review/Kylie Minogue/archive1, using Janet Jackson as an example of an article that successfully integrates the personal life of the subject into the main article, rather than having a seperate section. I notice Michael Jackson also has no "personal life" section. If you get a chance, could you please see if I'm on the right track. Thanks. Rossrs (talk) 13:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.  :-) Rossrs (talk) 07:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Say, Say, Said

I thought of you soon after hearing he had passed, and wanted to post something here, but didn't know what to say. Just wanted to let you know you were among those affectionately in my thoughts. Hearing his stuff again after all these years really brings back what a ubiquitous part of the '80s he was, and how, whether you sought him out or not, he was a part of your life.

For me, Farrah was it. Absolutely "it". First star I really "got" not only as awe-struck over her attributes and personality and work, but really comprehending her phenomenal, wider-world stardom. There was time and the documentary to come to terms with the fact that this was becoming no longer the best place for her, so I wasn't as shocked or devastated as I'd have expected to be. But it's still a part of my childhood that has had its long, billowing, beautiful ribbons tied up in a bow and placed high on a shelf. Mostly I pray that the circumstances under which her son, Redmond, experienced—or didn't experience—her final months and her passing do not prevent him from living a full and happy life free of want or regret and full of purpose, good people, sunshine, health and love.

Of course that is what I wish for us all. Sometimes it feels silly or unwarranted or effusive to say, but it almost always seems better to have said than to have not. So, saying, best, Abrazame (talk) 09:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

Thanks for your note, Bookkeeper, that's really nice of you. I also apologize for coming on too strong. It's a frustrating article to edit, partly because there's so much information available now, and people have strong feelings about what should go where; plus, it's long and can be difficult to load, so editing is slow. But everyone's acting in good faith, so we'll get it sorted eventually. :) SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 01:09, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:MADGE

Hey. Please comment here. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Lady GaGa's hermaphroditism rumours

Hi. I noticed you reverted twice my edits about Lady Gaga hermaphroditism's rumours. I have no intention of going into a revert war; I would like instead to happily and politely discuss with you about the paragraph. I re-read WP:HARM and I didn't find anything relevant for the information in case. Would you mind discussing it on the Lady Gaga's talk page? I opened an appropriate discussion on it. Thanks! --Cyclopia (talk) 17:51, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Mark Lester

Hey, the developments at Mark Lester might interest you. By the way, I'm returning to Wiki soon. — Please comment R² 14:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9