text:
User talk:Trollderella/archive1

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Tobycat 7 July 2005 01:01 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Redirects
Hi! I noticed your edit of the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition article. It was a good idea to put this redirect in. There's a cool way to improve upon the "See Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition. It's called a redirect.  It is possible to have a page automatically transfer the reader to another page instead of the reader having to click themselves.  You'd use the following code to set-up the redirect:
 * 1) REDIRECT Ernest Shackleton

Just make sure it is the only thing in the edit box and then any reader that types in the page title is automatically sent to the destination page.

I've already set up the automatic redirect on the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition article. You can check it out to see how the code works yourself. Just follow the link "redirected from Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition" at the top of the Earnest Shackleton article and then click the edit tab to see how I set it up.

Welcome & Happy editing! Tobycat 7 July 2005 01:01 (UTC)

Endurance
Q: "Thank you for the welcome and tips! I would like to move some of the stuff on the Endurance and the Expedition out of the Shackleton article, since their scope is really quite a bit larger than him - can I do this? Is there any special way? "

A: Absolutely yes! It's pretty easy....just pick a concise and appropriate name for a new article on the expedition and start to build new content there. You get started by putting the new article title in the search box. If it's available you'll get offered a link to start a new article with that name.

I suggest putting some comments on the discussion page of your new article describing what you are trying to accomplish (same thing goes for the Shackleton article). That way, other editors won't misunderstand what's going on. If the new article is going to be under construction for awhile, it's a good idea to put a "stub" notice at the bottom of it so folks know that there is more to come. You add a stub notice by putting this at the bottom of the page:

As the new article takes shape and adds breadth and depth that the parent article lacks, you may find you need to tinker with the parent article to ensure that there is the right amount of detail there...not too much and not too little.

Lastly, you'll want to find out what other articles exist that should link to your new article and add links on them. That requires a bit of searching and digging around but usually isn't a problem and helps integrate your article into the broader encyclopedia.

Good luck with your article! If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask. Tobycat 7 July 2005 23:51 (UTC)

signature
For some reason, your username does not appear in your signature at Votes for deletion/List of Sikhs NoSeptember  05:12, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

usernames
Good afternoon. Let me also welcome you to Wikipedia. I saw your post on the Deletion Reform discussion. A good question and difficult to answer. You might want to spend some time on the "new pages" patrol to see what kinds of articles frequently come in. A number of experienced wikipedians make it their job to scan the newest articles to see what they can help with and to offer what guidance they can to new users. Many people who believe most strongly in the need for a deletion policy came to that conclusion after spending time on the newpages. It's a chronological list of the most recent newly-created articles - usually in their rawest form. I found it to be very educational. (Note that many of the very worst pages are often speedy-deleted so you have to refresh the page frequently.)

On a completely different topic, may I ask you to reconsider your chosen username? In many online communities, "troll" has the connotation of a user who challenges established thought and brings new ideas to the discussion - a person who participates seriously but who often takes the role of the devil's advocate. Here on Wikipedia, the word "troll" has the connotation of a person who deliberately leaves inflammatory messages and commits minor vandalism just to provoke a reaction from others in the community. When we use the term here, it is almost invariably used with very negative connotations. Choosing to have "Troll..." as part of your username is likely to be interpreted by some as a deliberate provocation. Even your well-meaning and most neutral comments are likely to be given extra scrutiny and/or interpreted in the worst possible light just because of the username associated with the edit. You may consider it unfortunate and narrow-minded but it is reality. In my time here, I've seen several people pick similar usernames. Very few stuck with that name.

It is, of course, your choice. I merely wanted to offer a friendly warning of the probable consequences of your choice. If you do want to change your username, you can do so by following the instructions at Changing username.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia. Happy editing. Rossami (talk) 17:52, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Minor SpongeBob Characters
I would like you to note that the characters you are calling minor are more appropriately defined as miniscule. Sea Bear, Atomic Flounder and Alaskan Bull Worm have no personality, and the only way to make them noteworthy would be to give a crufty description of the entire episode. By definition, the Alaskan Bull Worm and the Sea Bear would not even constitute as a character, since they have no personality, backstory. The Alaskan Bull Worm is a one-time appearance and never ever again, and the Sea Bear is no more than an element of one episode. Why not the Sea Rhino article? Do we give an article to every member of Plankton's family? And on Atomic Flounder, he appears ONCE, for less than 30 seconds, and no more. -- A Link to the Past 20:12, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Just to let you know...
I've answered your question at Reference_desk. :-) Jwrosenzweig 11:27, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Troll, oh not you!

Sorry I didn't always win against you!

--Red stucco 08:19, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

a request for assistance
I created a Christian apologetics area. I thought it would be helpful. It has precedence as there is a Mormon apologetics subject area. It needs to be Wikied up and made to look nicer. Also, please add content.

ken 20:29, 22 August 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

Username again
Hi

You were in fact blocked for a few hours because of your username. (Check the block log). I have unbanned your account, since I have not seen major evidence of disruption from you. However, I strongly urge that you consider changing your username, because the word "troll" does have very negative connotions on Wikipedia. You can request such a name change at Changing username. Thanks, Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:39, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Your trolling of Votes for deletion is also problematic. Zoe 07:40, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi, Trollderella. I have to confess that I am a little baffled here: I've gone through your edits, and see no evidence of trolling, in either VFD or anywhere else. Your user name is problematic, but you should not have been blocked, and certainly not without the admin leaving you a message about your user name, either before or after the block. As you can see, having the word "troll" in your user name makes your edits look suspect, even when they clearly are not. I would encourge you to think about changing your user name over at Changing username, to avoid this unfortunate problem in the future. Func( t, c, @,) 17:14, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I must dissent. A fundamental principle and important guideline here on Wikipedia is to always assume good WP:FAITH whenever possible.  Upon reviewing the edits by Trollderella, I see nothing which would imply malicious intent of any sort.  The word "troll" has many different meanings, as per the Troll (disambiguation) page, and to presume negative intent runs directly against one of our key principles.  It is not uncommon for editors here to name themselves after dark and nefarious individuals or creatures, and it is their right to do so.  If you wish to change your username to avoid being stigmatised you may, but it should not be a requirement.  Hall Monitor 18:56, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Every single one of Trollderella's VfD votes has been keep. He has yet to vote to delete a single item.  And even on articles which are clearly delete-worthy (like items which go on Wikitext or Wikisource), he votes keep.  Zoe 20:26, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * This vote is not a keep vote. I also have disagreed with some of Trollderella's votes in the past, but have not seen any evidence of being disruptive or acting in bad faith.  Hall Monitor 21:09, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually it is, 'merge/redir' counts as a keep. But that's arguing semantics. Personally I don't care either way about Trollderella's username (it reminds me of fairy tales, I'm not sure if that was intended). However I would like to suggest to her that it may help if she adds a bit of reasoning whenever she votes on VFD, because despite all appearances VFD is supposed to be a discussion rather than a vote. If you state why you want something kept, you could plausibly convince others. Radiant_ >|< 13:09, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I concur, it is meaningful to provide a reason for your vote for the reason you stated. Perhaps VfD should be renamed DfD, but that is neither here nor there.  Hall Monitor 17:41, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Trollderella's vote on Zambian Boys shows a clear trolling of VfD. Zoe 20:02, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Zoe, I replied on your talk page. Trollderella 20:10, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You voted keep on an article written by a troll with no valid edits, on a subject which has nothing to verify that it exists.  That, my friend, is trolling.  Zoe 20:13, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * So why haven't you voted keep on Big Bad Brucie, Medieval black metal, Jorma Himokas and Konstaapeli Himokas? And apparently you would vote to keep every road in the world.  Zoe 20:26, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Zoe, I do not vote on every article, and have not taken a look at the ones you mention. You are somewhat putting words into my mouth, but in principle, if an article is verifiable and factual, then I see no reason to delete it. Of course, there are exceptions to this in the deletion policy, but as a general rule, that seems to work for me. Trollderella 20:39, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I notice you two are having a vivid discussion about Zambian Boys, which I nominated for deletion. You say you think 'there may be good reason why this band doesn't have many google hits' (actually there are none). You're right - the reason is that it doesn't exist. The user who created the article is Finnish (nearly all of his other edits have been about Finland, and he's commented on talk pages in Finnish) and thus there's a very slight chance that they're an expert in Zambian music. Zambia does have an internet presence - 'music in Zambia' Googles over two million results. With this amount, you'd think at least one of them would mention this 'very famous' band, but not a single one does. And, as I said in the VfD, most of the purported band members' names are Finnish words that have been slightly altered to make them look more 'African':
 * Kuwaawa <= 'kuvaava' (taking pictures)
 * Kawala <= 'kavala' (devious)
 * Oiva Pera <= 'oiva perä' (nice ass)

 * I'm 99.9% sure this is a hoax. If you don't believe me, you can ask anyone else who speaks Finnish what those words mean. - ulayiti (talk)  21:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi there, thanks for your comment, I am more and more convinced that you are right. Actually, Zoe and I were not debating the article per se, but her accusations that my vote to keep it was 'trolling'. I may be wrong (it looks increasingly as though I am) but the initial vote was in good faith, and based on the information that I had at the time. Thanks for pointing this out, Yours, Trollderella 21:08, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I noticed that, yeah, but I just wanted to inform you some more (in hopes of perhaps getting you to change your vote and making sure the hoax gets deleted)... :) Actually, I've been following the conversation about your purported 'trolling' for quite a while now, and I'd just like to note that IMHO you haven't done anything wrong. Well, except maybe choosing a username which people of a certain personality type could find somehow offensive, but that's not your fault. And your Wikipedia career seems to have started well, so just keep up the good work! :) - ulayiti (talk)  21:18, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Username yet again
Hello. Please change your username. If you do not put in a request to change it, I will start a request for comments (WP:RFC) to make you change it. Any name with "troll" in it is inappropriate. If you are not a troll, choose a username to reflect that. Wile E. Heresiarch 06:12, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Trollderella do not let them bully you. Wikipedia has a policy of assuming good faith and if people fail to do so, it is their problem not yours. You are entitled to keep this name if you choose. If they think all users with "Troll" in their names are wikipedia trolls, they should remember that current admin ClockworkSoul was once known as ClockworkTroll. Having said that, clearly changing your name would have some advantages for you, but it should be your choice, not theirs. Kappa 17:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This Username does not: promote hatred, refer to violent or sexual acts, cause confusion, or mock or defame anyone or thing. What rational argument and would you present to the community to achieve consensus that this person must change his handle? I hope that I am not alone in believing that such drastic measures would be an unnecessary and excessive use of force.  Fundamentally, I see nothing wrong with the word "troll" in one's name.  What really is important, to me anyhow, is the way in which all of us interact with each other and contribute to the encyclopedia at hand.  Hall Monitor 17:12, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Trollderella, thanks for your contribution at Swahili (people), an article that I started as a stub hoping someone would fill out. I agree with Kappa and Hall Monitor: I would think that it's your choice to keep your username or not, although, as I'm sure you're now aware, people will make certain assumptions. — Matt Crypto 00:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Noteability and VfD
Decided to move here for ease of communication, etc:
 * CSD vs VfD: separate is less accurate than noting that the CSD are an extreme subset of VfD criteria. Anything that's borderline CSD can (and usually is) tossed into VfD proper.  For example, CSD A7 (no assertion of noteability) is frequently denied by an admin when an article says "so-and-so wrote 2 books."  You have to take that to VfD to say "these books were never actually published, even though they were technically written."  Obviously, writing an unpublished book is meaningless -- I did so when I was 5.  However, AFAIK, the CSD criteria is the only one directly applicable to the process even though CSD itself usually doesn't handle it.
 * VfD criteria: the criteria themselves are not fixed in rigid legalese. You're more than welcome to take a stance on hardlining towards a narrow view of the criteria (though you might want to cast the occasional delete vote on one you agree with simply so that you don't appear to vote keep without any consideration); however, most of the community sees policies as flexible.  Non-noteable is usually a shorthand for WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of info.
 * Not noteable == I don't care -- there's a page (I think VfD Precendents, or some such -- I've just now lost it) that defines noteable as likely to survive VfD. Yeah, pretty circular.  It's not hard and fast, I think, simply because defining an acceptable hard and fast inclusion policy is more difficult than writing an encyclopedia.  However, I find that most editors frequenting VfD are deleting based upon their interpretation of the standards and policies rather than their own likes or dislikes.  The other day I saw a comment to the effect of Keep, but I need a long bath after viewing the filth I saw researching this.  I voted keep recently on a skinhead band.  I found the subject matter abhorrent, but I also found that the band met WP:MUSIC.

Hope that helps clarify a bit. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 21:58:54, 2005-08-25 (UTC)

 * Yes, I don't really have an axe to grind on this, and am not really that interested in debating it, except to the extent that I am being accused of some vague crime in voting according to the criteria. It seems vague, inconsistant and, in places, odd, which is, I guess, why votes are necessary. Thanks for copying that here, Trollderella 22:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Skyscraper
Re the discussion on the Village Pump, and noting that you removed the quote on Skyscraper, I wondered whether you would reconsider. There doesn't seem to be any concensus on whether these are good or bad, and, I for one, and several others, found this one added to the article. I think that, were they to proliferate, or detract from articles, there would be a case for removing them, but an occasional article that breaks the mold, to me, improves the encyclopedia. Please see if you can find it in your heart to reconsider this one, and let an isolated oddity remain. Yours, Trollderella 02:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object if you put the quote back in, although I think it's better without the quote. My usual habit is to initially be bold and edit something straight away if I think I can improve something, and then discuss it later if others don't agree, and I don't mind if my change is undone. — Matt Crypto 02:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Votes for deletion/Elise Harp
Taunting doesn't decrease my opinion of your being a troll. Zoe 06:58, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Quit trolling VfD and I won't have to make comments on your edits. Zoe 07:06, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Don't taunt other users. Zoe 07:10, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

I've reached my limit on troll-feeding. I won't be responding to you on your or my Talk page. You are obviously a troll and are beneath my notice. Zoe 07:14, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * With respect, Zoe, you started this thread, with abusive comments, and are ending it with abusive comments. If you don't wish to have anything to do with me, that's fine - simply don't post abuse on my talk page. Trollderella 07:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Trollderella/archive1


text:
User talk:ClubIvy

I am Skylar Durden from http://www.ClubIvy.org. I am a graduate student at what will remain an undisclosed Ivy League university. In my spare time I enjoy horseback riding, playing tennis, blogging, webcamming and sharing a vintage Port wine with intimate partners. I consider myself an informed citizen. Among my political concerns are freedom of speech, the erosion of our civil liberties and corporate control of the media.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:ClubIvy


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adolf Hitler (South Park)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was MERGE to Hitler in popular culture. -Splash 21:35, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Adolf Hitler (South Park)

 * Delete This should be merged with the South Park page. This does not merit its own article.  WATCH THIS USER -- he is posting a lot of nonsense.    Paul Klenk 07:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment If you thought it should be merged, why are you nominating it for deletion? A merge does not involve a deletion.  Please see Duplicate articles.  Anyone can merge an article, or if you're too nervous to do it yourself, suggest it be merged with a , not a  .  CanadianCaesar 06:52, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * So merge it then, don't nominate it for deletion. This nomination never made it to the main page; adding it now.  JYolkowski // talk 15:10, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, interesting for South Park fans, and a illustration of how Hitler is portrayed in popular culture. Should not be merged with the main South Park page because it's too high a level of detail. Kappa 15:16, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Is this really good faith, Kappa? / Peter Isotalo 20:12, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't oppose merging it somewhere else, but not with South Park. Kappa 10:20, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Hitler in popular culture--Doc (?) 15:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Hitler in popular culture, per Doc. Best course of action here - then redirect to "#the specific section" in that article. -- BD2412 talk 18:41, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per Doc. Sdedeo 23:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per Doc but do not redirect. Nandesuka 02:42, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Gamaliel 03:35, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete outright, no redirect. --Calton | Talk 03:59, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * You mean there was a real Hitler, too? Delete. Grutness...  wha?  04:36, 4 September 2005 (UTC) (has this debate invoked Godwin's Law)?
 * weak delete Does every character's alter-ego deserve its own article title? Roodog2k (talk) 20:44, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Hitler in popular culture. Good idea, Doc. --Jacqui M Schedler 06:13, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Hitler in popular culture as Doc suggested. That is more sensible than cluttering up the main South Park article with minor characters. Sjakkalle (Check!)  12:34, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electrical Equipment in Hazardous Areas

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was: KEEP. 2 deletes (including nom) vs 7 keeps. Adding cleanup per several recommendations by keep voters to do so. Tomer TALK 07:19, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Electrical Equipment in Hazardous Areas
It's a minimally-informative essay on the use of electrical equipment in areas where hazardous vapors may be present. I'm sure we've already got a better-written article or two on this. --Carnildo 07:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - and it smells like a copyvio, but I can't find the source. Bovlb 08:04:39, 2005-08-26 (UTC)
 * Keep seems legitimate, unless people can actually show the better written article, or that it is a copyvio. PatGallacher 10:34, 2005 August 26 (UTC)
 * Keep as per User:PatGallacher. Roodog2k 14:01, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per User:PatGallacher. Dlyons493 15:42, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as above. Trollderella 16:36, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep again, as above. Needs to be rewritten to encyclopedic style but valid topic. --WCFrancis 16:42, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. Needs to be cleaned up, expanded to cover other standards than the UK and references provided. Capitalistroadster 00:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. *drew 00:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Church Avenue station (IND Culver Line)

The Church Avenue station is an express station on the IND Culver Line of the New York City Subway. Located at Church and McDonald Avenues in Kensington, Brooklyn, it is served by the F and G trains at all times (the latter of which terminates here), and by the <F> train during rush hours in the peak direction.

The Church Avenue station was constructed by the Independent Subway System (IND). It opened on October 7, 1933, as the new terminal of the Culver Line, which was known as the Smith Street Line or the South Brooklyn Line at the time. In 1954, this station ceased to be the line's terminal with the completion of the Culver Ramp, which connected the South Brooklyn Line and the Brooklyn–Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT)'s Culver Line and allowing service to run to Coney Island. Though the Church Avenue station contains four tracks and two island platforms, as with many express stations in the New York City Subway, the inner tracks see limited use, being used only by peak-direction <F> trains.

History
The Church Avenue station was the original southern terminus of the IND Culver Line, which was built as part of Mayor John Hylan's Independent Subway System (IND) to Coney Island. The line was planned to be extended to the south via a connection to the Brooklyn–Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT)'s Culver Line. To connect this line to the Eighth Avenue Line – the main trunk of the IND – a subway line was to run from Brooklyn Borough Hall south under Jay Street, Smith Street, Ninth Street, and several other streets to Cortelyou Road (later Church Avenue) and McDonald Avenue, just north of the Ditmas Avenue elevated station. A ramp would then lead onto the elevated BMT Culver Line. As originally designed, service to and from Manhattan would have been exclusively provided by Culver express trains, while all local service would have fed into the IND Crosstown Line. On October 7, 1933, this station opened as the new terminal of the line, as the line was extended from Bergen Street.

Construction on the Culver Ramp, also referred to as the Culver Line Connection, between this station and the Ditmas Avenue station, began in June 1941 and was scheduled to be completed by the end of the year. The ramp was expected to cost $2 million, and along with new signals, and rehabilitation of the Culver elevated and lengthening of its stations to IND standards, the total cost of the project was estimated at over $11 million. Though the ramp was nearly complete, including rails and signal work, construction was halted later that year because of America's entrance into World War II. When the project was restarted in 1946, completion was delayed further due to continued material shortages and a lack of rolling stock to facilitate the new service. On October 30, 1954, the connection between the IND Brooklyn Line at Church Avenue and the BMT Culver Line at Ditmas Avenue opened, allowing IND trains to operate all the way to the Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue terminal.

In 1958, there was a program in which subway riders could get their clothes dry cleaned at the station for a fee.

Service changes
The station was originally served by the A train. In 1936, the A was rerouted to the IND Fulton Street Line and was replaced by E trains from the Queens Boulevard Line. In 1937, the connection to the IND Crosstown Line opened and (later renamed the G) trains were extended to Church Avenue, complementing the E. In December 1940, after the IND Sixth Avenue Line opened, E trains were replaced by the, and the GG was cut back to Smith–Ninth Streets. Following the completion of the Culver Ramp in 1954, Concourse Express trains replaced F service to Coney Island. In November 1967, the Chrystie Street Connection opened and D trains were rerouted via the Manhattan Bridge and the BMT Brighton Line to Coney Island. F trains were extended once again via the Culver Line.

The center tracks at the station were used for F express service starting in June 1968, while G trains were extended from Smith–Ninth Streets to Church Avenue to provide local service. Express service between Bergen and Church ended in 1976 due to budgetary concerns and passenger complaints, and the GG, later renamed the G, was again terminated at the Smith–Ninth Streets station.

In July 2009, the G was again extended from its terminus at Smith–Ninth Streets to a more efficient terminus at Church Avenue to accommodate the rehabilitation of the Culver Viaduct. The G extension was made permanent in July 2012. In July 2019, the MTA revealed plans to restore express service on the Culver Line between Jay Street and Church Avenue. Express service started on September 16, 2019.

Incidents
Jack Lovelock, a 1936 Olympic gold medalist from New Zealand, fell onto the tracks at the Church Avenue station on December 28, 1949, after complaining to his wife about dizziness; he was then killed by an oncoming train. On August 2, 1974, a robbery suspect was killed by a plainclothes police officer in the station. The former was suspected to have robbed a token booth in the station shortly beforehand.

Station layout
This underground station, located in Kensington, has four tracks and two island platforms. Both outer track walls have a maroon trim line with a Tuscan red border and small tile captions below them reading "CHURCH" in white lettering on a black background. This tile band is set in a two-tile-high course, an arrangement normally seen at local stations. The tiles were part of a color-coded tile system used throughout the IND. The tile colors were designed to facilitate navigation for travelers going away from Lower Manhattan. Because Church Avenue was an express station, it uses a different tile color from the next station to the north, Fort Hamilton Parkway. All I-beam columns in the station are colored Hunter green. The station signs are in the standard black name plates with white lettering.

There is a four-track train storage yard known as Church Avenue Yard south of the station beneath the revenue tracks, which is used by terminating G trains. South of the connection to the yard, there are switches between the express and local tracks, south of the yard ramps. These switches replace the same ones that were located immediately north of the Ditmas Avenue station. The switches were relocated underground to protect the switches from weather, increasing their reliability and eliminating a potential failure point. Two additional switches were added in the same location from the southbound local track to the southbound express track and the northbound express track to the northbound express to enable trains to skip Ditmas Avenue station without having to skip all local stations from Smith-Ninth Streets to Kings Highway. The line then ramps up to become a three-track elevated line before entering the Ditmas Avenue station; the two express tracks merge into a single track. Though this station is a part of the IND Division, the Culver elevated portion directly to the south of this station is controlled by BMT radio dispatch and supervision, so train operators change between the IND (B-2) and BMT (B-1) radio frequencies at this point or station.

During off-peak hours, the express tracks can be used for staging subway cars without interfering with normal service.

Exits
This station has a full-length mezzanine above the platforms and tracks with two fare control areas. The full-time one is at the extreme south end. Two staircases and one elevator from each platform go up to the mezzanine, where public restrooms at the center are available and a turnstile bank provides entrance/exit to/from the station. Outside fare control, there is a token booth and staircases going up to all four corners of Church and McDonald Avenues. There is also a ramp leading to an elevator that goes up to the west side of Church Avenue. The three elevators, installed during a 2008 renovation, make the station ADA accessible.

The station's other fare control area at the north end is un-staffed. Three staircases from each platform go up to a mezzanine, where exit-only and High Entry/Exit Turnstiles provide entrance/exit to/from the station. Outside fare control, there are two staircases facing in different directions that go up to either southern corners of Albemarle Road and McDonald Avenues. Crew facilities at the center of the mezzanine separate the two fare control areas.

title: Church Avenue station (IND Culver Line)


text: User talk:18.251.2.2

title: User talk:18.251.2.2


text:
User talk:Adahan

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, you can post to the help desk or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Thatdog 08:04, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Nanase Aikawa
yes.74.195.3.11 20:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If so, you're welcome to add the information back along with the URL where it can be verified. --Adahan

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Wbb2default.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Wbb2default.png. 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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:KOF97 - Yuri.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:KOF97 - Yuri.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

About Seamonkey
I object to your assertion (sic) "rv (Wikipedia is not the place to air your personal grievances about SeaMonkey. Use the newsgroups or Bugzilla to report bugs. See WP:NOR and WP:V))"

FIRST, I hold no grievances at all toward an admirable piece of software that I use daily and depend on for my work. In fact, I started using the original Mozilla browser ever since it appeared, and have not used Microsoft's Internet Explorer for years. As a proof that I'm fully in favor of it, let me remind you that I'm the one who expanded the article's lead to include a text on "What does it do?" after a complaint by "Jeff", thus:

More than half a year later, this article still fails to provide a meaningful description of what its subject is. (see the last paragraph in the discussion )

SECOND, I provided a reference (which you erased) about the PDF problem, taken from the same source you mention: the Mozilla Newsgroup. In other words, it's not only me: several people have encountered problems when trying to open a .pdf file link from within Seamonkey.

THIRD: Why do you so stubbornly deny that bugs do exist? I looks like it's you who is taking any less-than-favorable comment about Seamonkey as a personal grievance. Which it is not.

Regards, --AVM (talk) 21:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Discussion about this belongs in the SeaMonkey talk page. I replied there.  --Adahan (talk)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Maki otsuki.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Maki otsuki.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 01:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Nomination of Maki Otsuki for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maki Otsuki is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Maki Otsuki until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 16:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Adahan


text:
User talk:60.26.30.113

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. -- Naive cynic 08:04, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:60.26.30.113


text:
User talk:Tybron

Please do not create user pages for an account that is not your own. Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 08:04, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a place for you and User:Kankraka to throw personal attacks at each other. If either one of you continue, you will be blocked from editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 08:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tybron


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Asbestos

Asbestos
Final (32/0/0) ending 08:05 2 September 2005 (UTC) - Sam has been a member since May 2004. According to Kate's Tool, he has over 4100 edits and is active on all fronts. Sam happens to be very reliable, always staying on top of things. He keeps a to-do list on his user page. He is also extremely organized and humble. Sam keeps an unofficial RfC on himself open so users may leave constructive criticism. As a member of the Harmonious Editing Club, Sam has pledged to remain civil and to use talk pages to sort out conflicts and discuss reverts. He has also taken an interest in becoming a mediator. Methinks he deserves his own soggy mop. -- Acetic Acid 08:05, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * Honored to accept! — Asbestos | Talk   (RFC)  14:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Support
 * 1) Support as nominator. Acetic Acid 08:05, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Merovingian (t) (c) 17:44, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Ryan Norton T 20:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Journalist  ''' C.| Holla @ me! |undefined
 * 5) Support I commend Asbestos for his openness to full accountability. Fine admin material. Bratsche talk  5 pillars 00:06, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support. Friday (talk) 01:29, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support --Chris S. 01:53, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support per nominator.Imdaking 01:58, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support. Thunderbrand 03:59, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Sure. Andre ( talk ) 07:57, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Rje 13:10, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Support. Checks out and I like his ability to not only take constructive criticism but to welcome it. Admin material, he is. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 15:32, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support. El_C 18:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Supporting. Denelson83 20:43, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * BTW, he's got a "triple A" behind him. One for his username, and two for the username of his nominator. ;) Denelson83 03:57, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Support.— Encephalon |  ζ   21:01:28, 2005-08-27 (UTC)
 * 2) Support. Most definately mopworthy. -- Essjay ·  Talk 06:40, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Support. Everything looks excellent here. Great question-answering, and as per Bratsche's comments on Asbestos's openness to full accountability. Func( t, c, @,) 16:08, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support Derktar 15:32, August 29, 2005 (UTC).
 * 5) Support. I hope the username will serve as a flame retardant. JFW | T@lk  21:08, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support  KHM03 21:37, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Support Briangotts (talk) 21:44, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Support. utcursch | talk 06:45, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support per my standards. --Celestianpower hab 15:57, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Support Welcomed me and has been helpful since. Marskell 10:09, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Excellent candidate. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:12, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) Oh Yeaahh! the wub  "?/!"  16:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support -- Masterjamie 20:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Support --Alan Au 23:01, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Support Shimgray 14:41, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Support, and not (just) to go along with the flow. You have my confidence, and that of everybody else round here, it seems. :) - ulayiti (talk)  17:02, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. Absolutely. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:42, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) Support --Saluyot 01:32, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Comments
 * Edit Count for Asbestos

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:
 * 1. What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with? (Please read the page about administrators and the administrators' reading list.)
 * A. I spend a fair bit of time on RC patrol, though not in the last couple of months because of a dissertation (finally submitted Thursday). I've also been interested in copyright stuff, and have been involved in Image sleuthing, so I'd be happy to work on WP:CP and related pages. Finally, while one doesn't need to be an admin to do this, I've applied to be a mediator, and possibly warring parties are more apt to listed to suggestions made by an admin than someone else. — Asbestos | Talk   (RFC)  22:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * A. Not any one thing in particular. I haven't started any new articles in several months, though that will change now that I finally have a vacation. I've enjoyed working on my technical diagrams and photos, particularly my Please Don't Feed the Trolls sign, which is used fairly widely on the other 'pedias, and represents a philosophy I stand by. — Asbestos | Talk   (RFC)  22:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * A. Not too many, fortunately. Early in my Wikipedia carrier I got into a tiff with another user over Wesleyan and related pages, which unfortunately let to that user having an RFC brought against him by a number of users. I think if I had been more experienced, I could have avoided the trouble by bringing in more voices to the discussion. As it was, he ended up feeling attacked, and so lashed back — a reaction which I think is quite common in new editors, and which often could be avoided. Some time later, though, he got into an argument with another editor and asked me to help sort out the facts of the dispute, which I tried to do, and tried to restore some calm . I haven't really been in a dispute recently, though: I try to keep to harmonious editing — Asbestos |  Talk   (RFC)  22:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Charmbracelet

"international"
although the album did get re-released in a few smaller markets was recently revised as although the album did get re-released in a few international markets

I'm puzzled. I'd have thought there'd only be one "international market". Can somebody explain? -- Hoary 08:05, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Merging Charmbracelet World Tour: An Intimate Evening With Mariah Carey into this article
I don't see why a separate article should exist on an artist's tour, unless there was something extremely noteworthy about it. Besides, there's plenty of room in the main Charmbracelet article. See also Articles for deletion/Ashlee Simpson U.S. tour, 2005. Extraordinary Machine 16:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

This tour was definitely extremely notable being her first ever major international tour (like she actually went around the world, not just the USA, Japan, and Europe). The main CB article is already big and theres too much info to merge. Other artists have articles on their tours too and this page could be used to also describe the critics opinions of the tours along with performance info and setlists. OmegaWikipedia 06:25, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

No, while there may be too much information to merge (though I'd tend to call it trivia rather than information), there is not too much encyclopedic information to merge. I've shortened the tour article slightly, without yet cutting any of this trivia. -- Hoary 06:50, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I think its definitely encyclopedic...which honestly is sort of an abstract weaseal word to get rid of something or support something without a real reason on either side. OmegaWikipedia 07:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd say that for something to be encyclopedic it would have to interest more than a small number of fans. This is indeed possible for costumes. (Janet Jackson's costume somewhere or other -- I forget -- did so because one of her tits fell out, thereby causing mild amusement among many and righteous indignation among the Bible-thumping booboisie.) How many people do you think now want to read about Carey's changes of frock? And can't those people read about this and more (entire articles on Carey's pooch, etc.) on some "careypedia" somewhere? -- Hoary 07:19, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I think every article here has an audience that can be appreciated by everyone if we take a moment to look at it without preconceptions or being judgemental. Like we know you're not a fan of pop music, so obviously something like this will go look very "So what" to you. By that same token, I could look at an article you created and go "so what" because its not my field of intrest. But this is probably not the right way to think and we have to look at these things from a more general perspective and learn to appreciate articles that we would not enjoy naturally. OmegaWikipedia 07:31, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

No, it's not that simple. The articles I've seen on musicians whose work does happen to interest me don't spend time relating such things as how well those musicians did in various "charts" week after week, the musicians' changes of clothes, or the place and date of each of their concerts. And neither, I think, should they do so. That's what fan sites are for. -- Hoary 11:21, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that most of the information in this article is, like Hoary said, unencyclopedic trivia. Fancruft. It will only be of interest to hardcore Carey fans (and could you honestly argue the list of tour dates to be encylopedic information?). Keep in mind that another article about a musician's tour was deleted (not merged, not redirected) with the support of roughly eighty percent of voters. I suggest we summarise the main points of the article into one or two paragraphs (at the very most), and then merge with and redirect to the main Charmbracelet article (and no, it isn't too long, as the recommended maximum article size is 32KB, and this article isn't even half that). I've submitted a request for a Mariah Carey wiki to be created at Wikicities so that all the information about tour dates and costume changes and everything else can be moved there. Extraordinary Machine 11:28, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I think what is of intrest is always debatable. Like I said, we all create articles that are looked at from different points of view from other angles. Like I said, Im sure I could look at some articles youve created and deem them as fancruft that would be of no intrest to anyone. There seemed to be an Ashlee Simpson backlash here before, but what about other artists with articles on tours? For now, I hope we don't take any brash action and just discuss this matter. What about when there is a tour for TEOM? That article is long and tour info would not fit onto that album. You also have to remember that many times artists go on tour not in support of any particular albumOmegaWikipedia 11:39, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

We're supposed to look at these article from the point of view of somebody wanting to read an encyclopedia, not a fansite for a singer. What if there is a tour in support of The Emancipation of Mimi? Simple: don't start a separate article on it. Write a paragraph, or even just a couple of lines, about it on the main article. Trim down the main article, as there's a lot of overexcessive detail that could be removed. For example, Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album) restricts information on that album's tour to one single sentence. Extraordinary Machine 12:03, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

And the article is written from the point of view of an encylopedia, because it this was a fansite, the article would be very different. The article on TEOM is pretty long now, and even if it were cut down, adding tour info would still bloat it. Seeing as there is only one tour article right now, how about this...I would be find with a merge for the time being. But if the CB article gets too big, or if TEOM does have a tour, I think the article should be seperated. As there are currently no announced plans to tour and Charmbracelet wont be reaching that size anytime soon, does that sound fair? OmegaWikipedia 12:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

How about we write reams and reams of information about Mariah Carey's tours, costume and scene changes during her performances, plots of her music videos, week-by-week sales and chart positions of her albums and singles etc. etc. etc. on the forthcoming Mariah Carey Wikicity, and keep that level of detail off Wikipedia entirely? Extraordinary Machine 12:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Also, you should list empty categories (or categories that you want renaming) at WP:CFD instead of just orphaning them entirely. Extraordinary Machine 12:44, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, can you please stop being so snide and sarcastic in your replies? I don't know why you're always like this. Everytime I try to talk politely, you act so hostile. I'm honestly trying to talk about this situation in a polite fashion. But anyway, is that a reasonable position concerning this proposed merger? OmegaWikipedia 12:48, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Ignoring your histrionics: no, I don't think it's a reasonable position. It's still suggesting that these tours are noteworthy enough for their very own articles, when a paragraph or so in the articles for the albums would do. Write about the tours all you want on Wikicities, just not here.

 * My histronics? I'm not the one ranting here lol. Again, I'm not asking to write a huge article on the tours. You suggested that their should only be an article if the tour was noteworthy and Ive explained to you why it was noteworthy. If this were one of her other tours, I would understand, but this was a signicant tour. Again, there are other tour articles on Wikipedia. And again seeing as the CB article isnt big yet, I wouldnt mind a mergr for now, but if the article does get big enough, Im just suggesting the tour section should be split. I'm already compromising here..OmegaWikipedia 19:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and rather than creating empty section headers, you should either refrain from proposing new sections until you have something to write in them, or write a few lines and tag them with Expandsect or sect-stub (instead of writing "To be filled in soon" or whatnot). Extraordinary Machine 13:01, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

You'll talk until you're blue in the face. Nothing against him, but OW and the rest of the Careyites don't understand the ideals behind an encyclopedia, especially as far as what should be covered, shouldn't be covered, and what should be covered in what amount of detail. I'm researching a way to file a multiple-user RfC (or just a general one for the pop music articles in general). Of course, all that messy business could be prevented if they would all just conform with the Wikipedia guidelines, the WIkipedia principles, and good old fashioned common sense. --FuriousFreddy 13:35, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Freddy, why are you regressing? I thought we had our talk and that things got cleared up (but then again that conversation did get cut off). But Im dissapointed in your behavior again to classify things inappropriately. No, thats not the case here, and I wish you'd stop making your stereotypes. You have it completely wrong. OmegaWikipedia 19:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Our conversation didn't mean that there still weren't problems to be resolved, nor did it mean that you can just do whatever you want. In fact, from our conversation, the main thing I realized is that yes, based upon your behavior, you do not appear to understand the ideals behind an encyclopedia, especially as far as what should be covered, shouldn't be covered, and what should be covered in what amount of detail.

 * Then if that's what you realize, then once again Freddy you are terribly wrong. This doesnt seem to be a matter of what's "encyclopedic" (which as I mentioned above is a weaseal word you like to use when you dont like something), but article preference and bias. Ive seen articles you have created that I could deem as fancruft, due to your writing style. I think you're probably confused because you deal with older R&B songs, which dont have much to write about, so you write them in a different fashion, while with modern songs, there are more aspects to discuss. I can see how you would be offended as these articles overshadow and undermine you.

 * That's not a personal attack or a dergatory thing; that's just how you (and others) come across. For the hundredth time, I don't have a problem with you personally, and I hope you understand that. I apoligize for appearing to lump everyone into one big box, but the problem isn't with the people; it's with the articles. You haven't shown enough (some, yes, but not enough) willingness to try and reduce/reverse/end the problems that you and others have started, and the problem is really bigger than one person can handle (there's litterally hundreds of articles that need to be gone back over and cleaned up), so an RfC is the way to get more assistance, more notice, and solid, firmly established guidelines about what should and should not be done. Again, it could be avoided if the initiative were taken to do something about it before going to that step (I'd like to be able to get this resolved without having to resort to that, but it seems like that is the only way). --FuriousFreddy 02:58, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * And again, for the most part this seems to do with personal preference over what constitutes a single article. Obiously the songs you write are older and are filled with info over recordings and studio credits, while the articles we write today constitute of different factors. And again, everytime I talk to you, I think my point has gone over your head and you dotn seem to understand. I would definitely be willing to discuss this if you are OmegaWikipedia 03:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Indeed he does. I notice he returned to Wikipedia once again! *insane laugh* --Winnermario 21:42, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I returned because I've decided that giving up is not the way. And your cyncism is unprofessional and not appreciated. --FuriousFreddy 02:58, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Can I weigh in here? I followed a link hoping to read about the tour, only to find a mass of double redirects (which I fixed, directing them all to the album article) and no article on the tour except in one of the page histories. I really think we should have that information and I'm disappointed to see it's gone. Everyking 11:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I really think that that shouldn't be redirected. That should be on concert tours gatecory and I think it's a good thing to have a their own pages about concert tours, because those concert tours are important and there really isn't a good reason to delete those pages!

-L.a.m.b (6:59 20 October 2005)

No Need To Merge
There is no reason why 'Boy (I Need You)' should be merged with the Charmbracelet album article, as indicated on it's page. The song is a definite full-fledged single and has enough information to validate it's article's existence. In the case of 'The One', it could be debated, but like such songs as 'Last Night a DJ Saved My Life', 'Lead the Way', and 'Underneath the Stars', all of which are promo-only singles, it had been given official singles treatment. Therefore, I am removing the tag from the 'Boy (I Need You)' article, but not from 'The One' article. - Grey Pursuit January 6, 2005 (UTC)

Why Merge???
There's no need at all to merge these articles. One is about an album and one is about a single. End of. Any other Music Album related article follows the same setup, with seperate pages for singles. And may I add how well an established artist Carey is, and what a fanbase she has, easy access to information is necessary, without having everything cluttered. Both articles are clear and informative and are up to Wikipedia's standards - so why need they be merged?

POV

 * 1) I removed "although it should be noted that a CD single was not released in the U.S., seriously impeding it's chances for success" in relation to "Boy (I Need You)". Any sentence that begins with "it should be noted that" does not belong in any article; it is a violation of the NPOV policy because it is the author's opinion that "it should be noted" and not an outside source. Unless you can find a reliable source that says the song failed in the U.S. because a single wasn't released, then that sentence should not be re-inserted. (Note also that often a song's airplay can determine whether it is released as a CD single; if a song receives little airplay then there isn't much point releasing it on CD, especially if the album is already available.) Extraordinary Machine 23:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) I also removed the note about "Fly like a Bird" reaching the top five of the Adult R&B Airplay chart; it isn't even a song from this album so its chart performance is irrelevant here. All the reader needs to know is that it initially received little play when released alongside "My Saving Grace", but was later released to radio again. If they want to know how it performed the second time around then they can visit the song's article. Also, "Fly like a Bird" failed to chart in the U.S. and only received substantial airplay on adult R&B stations, so simply writing it "went on to peak in the top 5" there is misleading.
 * 3) Please consider creating an account here, particularly because your IP changes with every edit and it is almost impossible to track you down and discuss things with you. Extraordinary Machine 23:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Although you have to admit that this article is well-developed, even though it does not contain references. —[Eternal Equinox] | talk 23:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

 * As with Madonna's "Hollywood," "Boy (I Need You)" "could have managed a week or two at the bottom of the Hot 100 had the single release been a little more timely."
 * As I have said before: 'neither song recieved substantial airplay' is a lie unless the small successes of "Fly..." are noted.
 * What is wrong with discussing with me about an article on that article's talk page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.10 (talk • contribs) 19:55, 28 June 2006.

 * If you cite a reliable source stating that the situation was as you described, then feel free to reinsert it.
 * The statement "Neither song received substantial airplay and only the latter was eventually released to other formats" is accurate; the first part ("Neither song...") tells the reader it is the song's original release that is being referred to (and not any subsequent releases), while the second part tells them that it may or may not have gotten more airplay after being released to other formats, and that's when the Fly like a Bird article comes in. Regardless, "Fly like a Bird" didn't reach the R&B/hip hop airplay top twenty in the U.S., so "substantial airplay" is misleading; it's also not a song from this album, as I've said above.
 * I probably wouldn't be asking you this if I didn't have issues with your contributions, but some of your other edits are NPOV violations, such as on the articles Mariah Carey and We Belong Together where you altered critics' quotes to make them less anti-Carey. Also, on Breakdown (song) you reverted an edit of mine without any explanation. So without a username and with a dynamic IP you could (if you wanted to) refuse to discuss anything, and even if you were willing to take part in discussions you wouldn't know that somebody did want to discuss something with you unless it was mentioned in the edit summary or an "invisible note" was placed in the article. Creating an account would be a good way of eliminating this problem, and it also has many other benefits. Extraordinary Machine 22:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Ericorbit has now removed that quote from the "Hollywood (song)" page (thanks!). I simply felt that as the quote ("...could have managed a week or two at the bottom of the Hot 100 had the single release been a little more timely") applied to both songs it should either be in both articles or neither.
 * "Neither song..." suggests neither song EVER got substantial airplay, that is untrue. Would "Fly..." peaking two places higher on the R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay chart have made you think that it had received "substantial" airplay?
 * I have issues with some of you're contributions (as evident in me rv-ing your edits without any explanation, something you also do frequently). I don't refuse to discuss anything, if someone wants to discuss my editing of an article with me then they can do it on the article's talk page, which I check, as I have evidently been doing with this talk page. It is not compulsory to create an account to edit on Wikipedia, and as I have no desire to create an account, I won’t until it IS compulsory. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.10 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 30 June 2006.

 * Well, make sure to double check things like this. That another Wikipedia article says it does not necessarily mean it's okay to mention here without citing a source.
 * In articles I've read, a song that is said to have achieved "substantial" (or any other word with the same meaning) success reached the top ten, or at the very least the top twenty. "Fly like a Bird" didn't.
 * I leave edit summaries for all of my contributions; I know this is particularly important when I'm undoing someone else's. Whatever your intentions may be, you've been making attempts to insert a pro-Carey POV into these articles for a while now. I'm guessing your a fan of her; well I am too, and it's good that there are other people who are interested enough to write about her here. What nobody must do, however, is allow their personal opinions to dictate what these articles say or don't say; Neutral point of view is a non-negotiable key policy for the project. You do realise that creating an account would make communicating with other editors easier? Extraordinary Machine 18:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

 * 1) I am now Such Great Heights
 * 2) Fly Like a Bird this week moves 27-19 on both Billboard's R&B/Hip-Hop Songs and R&B/Hip-Hop Airplay charts -- a substantial hit?! Such Great Heights 11:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Refrence to "Glitter" in relation to "chamrbracelet"
It should be noted that Mariahs 'Nervous/Exhaustion Breakdown' was prior to the release of "Glitter" and not after, as is reported in this article. "Glitters failure" was partly due to her lack of promotion of the project over the summer of 2001 due to the fact that her father had died and she was in a rehabilitation facility recovering from the breakdown. It is widely reported that Mariah suffered the breakdown in response to the failure of her album/film, however she actually suffered the breakdown during the promotion of the albums lead single "loverboy", as is well documented due to her erratic appearance on MTV's "TRL" that July, not in or after September 2001 when the film was released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.173.240 (talk) 22:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Virgin record deal
Didn't they pay her to leave the label. In other words I read that when Virgin wanted to release her from her contract they had a series of meetings where they negotiated a 58 million pay off to her if she AGREED to leave the label. I don't think that qualifies as dropping.PhoenixPrince (talk) 00:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

EXPANDING
I think the article should be expanded like her other albums! It don't even hve background info — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.118.144 (talk) 16:05, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I Know What You Want
So why shouldn't "I Know What You Want" be included as a single? It's on the album, just like a re-release. I believe that it is also part of the singles form this album. MariAna_MiMi (Talk) 10:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "I Know What You Want" was recorded by Busta Rhymes for It Ain't Safe No More and was first released as a single from his album. It Ain't Safe No More was released in November 2002, long before Charmbracelet was re-released. So, I don't think that the song is a single from Charmbracelet. Also, the "I Know What You Want" article states that it's a single from The Remixes! Thank you for starting a discussion because I'm confused at the moment. Opinions of other editors are welcome. Novice7 (talk) 11:09, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Highly doubt the song had anything to do with an actual Carey album. It was more of a featured appearance than anything, so it was included as a "bonus track".-- CallMe Nathan  •  Talk2Me   11:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * But since it's a bonus track doesn't that make it part of the album & singles? I mean, people might have bought the deluxe vers. just because of that song. It's the same case as with "Dilemma (song)", it was first released on Nelly's album, but it also appears on Kelly Rowland's album. MariAna_MiMi (Talk) 14:05, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Not really. I agree that sometimes songs are included on the featured artists' album due to their popularity. It is a single by Carey, but not from Charmbracelet but from It Ain't Safe No More. "Dilemma"'s the same case. Novice7 (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

B class
I see no evidence that either WikiProject Albums or WikiProject Mariah Carey have any system of assessing articles as B-class. I see that User:Zidane tribal and User:Novice7 added B-class without even attempting to assess the article. The prose is extremely poor and and thus the article only merits Start class. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Credits and personnel section
I plan to delete the Credits and personnel section at the end of the copy-edit; per WP:NOT. We don't need to know who made the tea and swept the studio floor - that's what the sleeve notes are for. Thoughts? Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 04:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
 * On second thoughts, i may place this and the track listing into collapsible tables, closed by default. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 03:01, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * According to MoS for album articles, a personnel section is required. I think placing them into a collapsible table is a great idea. 五代  (talk) 05:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks; I'll do that if I can make the template work - I tried yesterday and it only worked in preview mode, so maybe there's a bug in the wikicode. Having read MOS:ALBUMS I understand the section is recommended. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:20, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Text removed wholesale during copy-edit
From 'Background': Critics deemed the album a strong improvement over Glitter, but not something that would re-capture audiences around the world and re-establish her popularity throughout the 1990s. Many took notice of Carey's more airy and light vocals, and criticized her of not being capable of the same degree of vocal prowess she had been known for during the first part of her career. However, three years later with the release of The Emancipation of Mimi, Carey's critical and commercial popularity surged again, with critics calling it her true comeback, as well as her emancipation from her previous two albums.

From 'Development and recording': "'I've always tried to insert positivity into my songs wherever I can, to inspire other people who go through stuff. I mean the stuff they talked about in tabloids and the things that were so overly exaggerated, that's one aspect. I also went through a lot of personal stuff, a lot of family stuff this year. [...] It's brought me to another place. People are going to read into it as, 'This is Mariah and her struggle,'' Carey said of the song."

Which album chart in 'Re-release'?
In the 're-release' section, the final two sentences are: "The re-released version of Charmbracelet charted for three weeks on the album chart where it peaked at number 96. According to Oricon, it has sold 4,936 copies." I understand the website is Japanese, and Oricon compiles the Japanese charts. Can someone confirm the referenced chart is the official Japanese album chart, and provide dates for chart entry, peak and exit? I've checked the reference which was not helpful. Meanwhile I've left 'where' and 'when' templates  in the text. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 22:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The re-release charted on the Oricon albums chart . The link provided is official but I'm afraid the readers have to subscribe to view the contents, just like Billboard. I'll ask someone who has access to Oricon. 五代  (talk) 03:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's the chart trajectory (in the top 300):
 * 2003/07/07   177
 * 2003/07/14    96
 * 2003/07/21   195

This is from the subscription only link too. 五代 (talk) 11:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

 * Thank you for these dates; I've included the peak date in the text. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Non-free media
I have reduced the resolution of two files tagged with Non-free reduce and also removed an excess sample. 五代 (talk) 10:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Charmbracelet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.snepmusique.com/fr/pag-259376-Classements-Annuels.html?year=2003&type=2
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ifpihk.org/www_1/go21e.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 12:44, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Charmbracelet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.oricon.co.jp/prof/artist/163336/ranking/cd_album/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 one external links on Charmbracelet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.music.yahoo.ca/read/news/12026730
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100621054859/http://www.infodisc.fr/Certif_Album.php to http://www.infodisc.fr/Certif_Album.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100113151538/http://swisscharts.com/awards.asp?year=2003 to http://www.swisscharts.com/awards.asp?year=2003
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110511120001/http://www.bpi.co.uk/certifiedawards/search.aspx to http://www.bpi.co.uk/certifiedawards/search.aspx
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.leparisien.fr/loisirs-et-spectacles/tf-1-et-nrj-ont-toutes-les-stars-18-01-2003-2003742780.php
 * Added tag to http://www.vh1.com/news/articles/1471917/mariah-carey-scraps-arena-tour.jhtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:06, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Charmbracelet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629170705/http://www.mtv.com/bands/c/carey_mariah/news_feature_032805/index.jhtml to http://www.mtv.com/bands/c/carey_mariah/news_feature_032805/index.jhtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110710135003/http://www.disqueenfrance.com/fr/pag-259165-CERTIFICATIONS.html?year=2003&type=8 to http://www.disqueenfrance.com/fr/pag-259165-CERTIFICATIONS.html?year=2003&type=8
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100906003856/http://www.abpd.org.br/certificados.asp to http://www.abpd.org.br/certificados.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160110052929/http://www.infodisc.fr/CDCertif_O.php?debut=450 to http://www.infodisc.fr/CDCertif_O.php?debut=450

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Charmbracelet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.vh1.com/news/articles/1456879/new-mariah-album-december.jhtml
 * Added tag to http://www.mtv-ca-jq.mtvi.com/music/video_browse_play.jhtml?vid=22733&aid=976
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160111124357/http://repertoire.bmi.com/title.asp?blnWriter=True&blnPublisher=True&blnArtist=True&page=1&keyid=6288119&ShowNbr=0&ShowSeqNbr=0&querytype=WorkID to http://repertoire.bmi.com/title.asp?blnWriter=True&blnPublisher=True&blnArtist=True&page=1&keyid=6288119&ShowNbr=0&ShowSeqNbr=0&querytype=WorkID

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Charmbracelet


text:
Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of rock and roll albums

List of rock and roll albums
I think this is an interesting and useful list, but would be interested in any comments. I didn't feel a list of just any rock and roll albums would be very useful, so I decided to combine various critics' best-of lists to produce a sort of meta-list. Tuf-Kat 08:05, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose No images, plenty of redlinks. Also, I don't think there can be any definitive or complete list of what is a notable rock and roll album. --Sophitus 18:00, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I added some album covers (every album with at least six references). I think there's pretty clearly a majority of blue links (a "large majority" is certainly debateable, though it's worth noting that virtually every performer has an article, even if all the albums don't).  Your last objection is not actionable; it includes every member of its defined set (the lists given) and does not miss any major component of its set (the lists are varied, and, taken together, include all the major rock albums). Tuf-Kat 23:11, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment By my count there are 307 red links out of a total of 1282 for a blue link percentage of 76.05%, which meets my definition of a "large majority". I'm undecided at this point on the merits of this list otherwise, although I would note that the criteria that objections must be "actionable" is rule for Featured Articles cadidates.  Lists have failed before because they, by their nature, cannot be complete.  Dsmdgold 15:55, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * That seems kind of silly. I thought the whole point of featuring lists was to encourage the improvement of every Wikipedia page instead of just articles. Tuf-Kat 16:04, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose – agree with Sophitus. Have you also included groups in India, Pakistan and the many other countries that do have rock groups (in English that too)?  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  18:23, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * The methods I used to create the list are explained at the top of the page. I'm sorry that there are not more critics who make lists of albums with Indian and Pakistani bands on them.  This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of rock albums; it is a list that combines best-of lists from various sources.  I can't help that those sources don't include any Indian rock bands -- there are at least eleven countries represented on this list, from Iceland and Mexico to Jamaica and Germany. Would moving it to rock albums that have been considered among the greatest ever please anyone? Tuf-Kat 23:19, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Considered might be a POV. How about groups that have won international awards, or by platinum sales? =Nichalp   «Talk»=  06:06, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Inclusion criteria are too arbitrary and fuzzy. Jonathunder 16:56, 2005 September 3 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helicopter use in Brasil

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Woohookitty 08:12, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Helicopter use in Brasil
Dottore So 19:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete This user is also posting articles such as, Cocaine use in Brazil, Anal Sex in Brazil. Paul Klenk 08:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, this one is rather interesting. I have no opinion on the other articles. Should be renamed to 'Helicopter Use in Sao Paulo', and I was about to do so, but will leave the existing title until this VfD is finished.-gadfium 08:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC) Changing my vote to Delete. Paul Klenk can put any relevant information he wants into the Sao Paulo article, but there's no need to keep this.-gadfium 04:20, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, Oh Klenk, why the raw feelings about a lifestyle you obviously dont understand i doubt if anyone would care what you say about me as I have always been friendly and willing to learn while a quick check of your comments about me and your past dealings and blocks for personal attacks speak for themselves.Wiki brah 08:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, good article. Needs sources. Needs more sources Kappa 10:54, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Unsure.  Neither the São Paulo, São Paulo nor the helicopter articles seem to mention this interesting phenomenon at all. We'd be a lot better served if the information were in one of these two places and linked from the other, IMO. The information here is scanty, the article doesn't actually say what the ratio of helicopters to people is, even approximately, it just baldly declares that it's the highest in the world, and offers no figures or references to back this claim, which is therefore unverifiable and arguably therefore unencyclopedic. So the article if accurate may have potential, but as is it would be no great loss if deleted, and it's not obvious to me how to fix it. Andrewa 11:07, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment, reference doesn't seem to back up the claim the helicopter/inhabitant rate is the highest there. Should be merged in city article and mentioned in Sao Paolo article once it is. - Mgm|(talk) 11:50, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep unexpected gem - who would guess Sao Paolo has the highest helicopter per capita? maybe a rename of article as others have suggested as seems specific to Sao Paolo. --K URANDO 13:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to São Paulo. Would be worth mentioning as trivia in the helicopter article as well. Though I would like to see a citation for the "highest per capita" claim.Roodog2k 14:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The claim that makes this a noteworthy subject is unsourced, and apparently original research/commentary. Monicasdude 16:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, but spell Brazil correctly. Trollderella 16:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Entirely dependent upon one source; its essentially a summary of the Wash Post article with a couple of other unreferenced claims. Fernando Rizo T/C 16:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The single source quoted as supporting this article is itself entirely unreferenced and full of anecdotal evidence, in part speculative, and is achingly POV. Just because it's got numbers in it doesn't mean it's true.   Delete. Sliggy 18:49, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Summary of newspaper article. Suggest information appear in Sao Paolo article instead. Sdedeo 19:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete The only relevant content is about Sao Paolo, so that's where this peculiarity should be noted. Agree with Sdedeo, Sliggy, Fernando Rizo.
 * Delete. If the single interesting fact can be verified, it should be noted briefly in São Paulo. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Sao Paulo. Zoe 20:50, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not a useful redirect. The meagre encyclopedic claims this article makes and the source now provided can be copied (the information, not the text) to the São Paulo, São Paulo and/or helicopter articles if someone thinks they are sufficiently impressed to do so. I'm not, it seems a throwaway line in a sensationalised article, and I'd want better sources than that. Andrewa 21:12, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merges are done so the original author is given credit. If copy-pasted the user's name or IP needs to be included in the edit summary to comply with the GFDL. - Mgm|(talk) 07:11, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Exactly. But IMO it's easiest if what is added to the recipient articles is not the text, which is subject to copyright, but just the information, which is not. Merge and redirect is fraught with danger when the redirect is of doubtful value. For example, if the redirect later comes up on RfD, then GFDL impacts will be fully considered, but if it's converted to a stub in good faith and then subsequently renominated on VfD, they may not be. No change of vote. Andrewa 15:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not useful. Groeck 06:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. -- Kjkolb 06:56, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Great band name, bad article. Gamaliel 07:15, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Anal sex in Brasil is a much better band name. Fernando Rizo T/C 07:57, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete- for reasons given above. --Bhadani 15:52, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Sao Paulo as above. ESkog 22:53, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Claim is unverified. -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 23:30, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment So, does having anal sex in a helicopter admit you to the "Pile High club?"
 * Comment: Please sign your posts, Dpbsmith. Very funny. No change of vote. Andrewa 17:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. *drew 00:41, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. -- DS1953 01:05, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to Sao Paolo and Helicopter. This is not unverified, the article has a reference (as of the time of this vote). Martg76 23:47, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Washington Post report now given as a reference does not support the basic claim of the Wikipedia article, that helicopter ownership is the highest in the world. The WP report neither makes this claim, nor provides the number of helicopters, only the number of helipads. So I disagree, the claim is still unverified. No change of vote. Andrewa 20:21, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 *  NOTE:  This has just undergone an extensive rewrite and is no longer an article but a factoid (see its talk page).  I stand by my delete comment above and vote to Merge copy and paste the contents to another page, but only if the facts can be verified.  Paul Klenk 17:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC)  + Do not hang on to the redirect page -- get rid of it.   Paul Klenk 01:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment: A good try, but why? The still unverified claim that São Paulo, São Paulo has the highest per capita helicopter ownership in the world can be merged to the other articles without leaving a redirect, so long as you rephrase it into your own words as you have done. There is no merit in keeping this as a redirect, nor its history (nor IMO this claim, based apparently on an inaccurate reading of a sensationalized newspaper report, but that should be discussed in the talk pages of the articles concerned). No change of vote. Andrewa 20:16, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Just FYI, the article was written before link was added. Kappa 20:18, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Exactly right, and possibly added partly in response to my first post (unsure, above). However note another has subsequently commented This is not unverified, the article has a reference (also above). The point several of us have made is that this reference does not actually support the claim. No change of vote. Andrewa 21:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Comment (on the addition to the NOTE above): Merge by copy and paste without leaving a redirect seems to me to risk GFDL problems, and to actually be a vote to delete. See Deletion policy. No change of vote. Andrewa 07:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unreferenced; claims not supported by ext link. If the 'highest per capita in the world' claim can be verified, it should be a note in the helicopter article, at most. 68.185.16.5 17:35, 1 September 2005 (UTC) {User:Niteowlneils not logged in, editing from an internet cafe in Roseburg, Oregon.}
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
He Who Gets Slapped (film)

He Who Gets Slapped is a 1924 American silent psychological thriller film starring Lon Chaney, Norma Shearer, and John Gilbert, and directed by Victor Sjöström (credited as Victor Seastrom). The film was written by Victor Seastrom and Carey Wilson, based on the Russian play He Who Gets Slapped (Тот, кто получает пощёчины; Tot, kto polučájet poščóčiny) by playwright Leonid Andreyev, which was completed by Andreyev in August 1915, two months before its world premiere at the Moscow Art Theatre on October 27, 1915. A critically successful Broadway production, using an English language translation of the original Russian by Gregory Zilboorg, was staged in 1922, premiering at the Garrick Theatre on January 9, 1922, with Richard Bennett (actor) playing the "HE" role on stage. The Russian original was made into a Russian movie in 1916.

He Who Gets Slapped was the first film produced entirely by the newly formed Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. It was not, however, MGM's first released movie, as the film was held until the Christmas season when higher attendance was expected. The movie was highly profitable and critically hailed. It was also the first film to feature a lion as the mascot for MGM. Created by Howard Dietz, the lion logo was first used for the Goldwyn Pictures Corporation film Polly of the Circus (1917 film) and passed on to MGM when Goldwyn merged with two other companies to form MGM. Coincidentally, a real lion plays a key plot point in the Chaney film's plotline.

The film was important in the careers of Chaney, Shearer, Gilbert, and Seastrom. Victor Seastrom called Chaney "the finest actor in the history of the screen or the stage". George Davis, a popular European clown, coached Chaney in his clown role. The circus sequences took two weeks to film on the studio's largest stage. Stills exist showing details of Chaney's makeup as both Paul Beaumont and "HE".

In 2017, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". The film entered the public domain on January 1, 2020 (along with all American films from 1924) as dictated by U.S. copyright law.

Plot
Paul Beaumont (Lon Chaney) is a scientist who labored for years alone to prove his radical theories on the origin of mankind. Baron Regnard (Marc McDermott) becomes his patron, enabling him to do research while living in his mansion. One day, Beaumont announces to his beloved wife Marie and the Baron that he has proved all his theories and is ready to present them before the Academy of the Sciences. He leaves the arrangements to the Baron. However, after Beaumont goes to sleep, Marie steals his key, opens the safe containing his papers, and gives them to the Baron.

On the appointed day, Beaumont travels to the Academy with the Baron. He is aghast when the Baron, instead of introducing him, takes credit for Beaumont's work himself. After he recovers from the shock, Beaumont confronts him in front of everyone, but the Baron tells them that Beaumont is merely his assistant and slaps him. All of the academicians laugh at his humiliation. Beaumont later seeks comfort from his wife, but Marie brazenly admits that she and the Baron are having an affair and calls him a clown. Beaumont leaves them.

Five years pass by. Beaumont is now a clown calling himself "HE who gets slapped", the star attraction of a small circus near Paris. His act consists of his getting slapped every evening by other clowns, and includes HE pretending to present in front of the Academy of the Sciences.

Another of the performers is Bezano (John Gilbert), a daredevil horseback rider. Consuelo (Norma Shearer), the daughter of the impoverished Count Mancini, applies to join his act. Bezano falls in love with Consuelo, as does HE. Consuelo's father, however, is planning to restore the family's fortunes by marrying her to the wealthy Baron Regnard.

One night, during HE's performance, he spots the Baron in the audience and becomes enraged. The Baron then goes backstage and begins flirting with Consuelo, which she does not like. The next day, the Baron sends Consuelo jewelry, but she rejects it.

When her father leaves for a meeting with the Baron, Bezano takes Consuelo out to the countryside for a romantic meeting, where they declare their love for each other. Meanwhile, Count Mancini convinces the reluctant Baron that the only way he can have Consuelo is by marrying her. The Baron agrees, and discards the heartbroken Marie, leaving her with a check.

Later, HE admits to Consuelo he, too, is in love with her. She thinks he is kidding and laughingly slaps him. They are interrupted by the Baron and the Count, who inform Consuelo she will marry the Baron after the evening performance. When HE tries to interfere, he is locked in an adjoining room, where an angry lion is kept in a cage. He moves the cage so that, when he carefully opens it, only the door to the next room prevents the lion from escaping. HE re-enters the other room through the only other entrance (making sure to lock it behind him) and reveals his identity to the Baron. HE threatens the Baron, but the Count stabs him with a sword.

The Baron and the Count try to leave but, finding the main entrance locked, open the side door, releasing the lion. The animal kills the Count, then the Baron. However, the lion tamer shows up and saves HE from the same fate. HE goes on stage and collapses. Assuring Consuelo that he is happy and that she will be free to lead her own life, HE dies in her arms. (In the original Russian play, by contrast, HE poisons Consuelo and then himself, the Baron commits suicide afterward, and the Count survives.)

Alternate soundtrack
The film was given a newly composed score by Will Gregory from the band Goldfrapp for use at live concert screenings of the film, initially in the Colston Hall in Bristol, UK on December 1, 2007. The score was later broadcast on BBC Radio 3 in February 2008 with linking narration by actor Samuel West to relay to listeners the plot of the film. The Alloy Orchestra has also composed a score for the film.

Alleged Lugosi appearance
For years, it was thought that Bela Lugosi had played an uncredited bit part in this film, but this was never confirmed. The rumor originated from the discovery of a still from the film found in Lugosi's scrapbook posthumously, showing an unidentified clown speaking to Lon Chaney in one scene. People close to Lugosi thought it was evidence that Lugosi had appeared in the film, but film historians all agree that it is very unlikely as Lugosi was either in Chicago or New York City at the time this film was made in Hollywood.

Release
The film took in $881,000, and made a profit of $349,000. He Who Gets Slapped was released on DVD by Warner Home Video on November 30, 1999. Warner has re-released the film several times as a part of its 6-disc Warner Archive Collection, first on November 22, 2011 and later on June 23, 2015.

Critical reception
He Who Gets Slapped received mostly positive reviews from critics upon its release, with many praising the film and Chaney's performance. In his 1924 review of the film for New York Times, Mordaunt Hall praised the film's direction, performances, and story, calling it' "the finest production we have yet seen". Author and film critic Leonard Maltin gave the film three out of a possible four stars, calling it "a Pagliacci–type vehicle for Chaney." Christopher Meeks from Variety gave the film a positive review, commending the film's inventive staging, lighting and sound design, and performances, but felt that the ending was predictable and drawn out. Hans J. Wollstein from Allmovie gave the film a positive review, praising Chaney's and McDermott's performances.

"At the Capitol this week there is a picture which defies one to write about it without indulging in superlatives. It is a shadow drama so beautifully told, so flawlessly directed that we imagine that it will be held up as a model by all producers. Throughout its length there is not an instant of ennui, not a second one wants to lose...Never in his efforts before the camera has Mr. Chaney delivered such a marvelous performance as he does as this character. He is restrained in his acting, never overdoing the sentimental situations, and is guarded in his make-up...For dramatic value and a faultless adaptation of the play, this is the finest production we have yet seen." ---The New York Times

"While this picture may not quite live up to the claim made of "the perfect motion picture," it is nevertheless a mighty fine screen entertainment, capably acted, almost flawlessly directed and photographed...Lon Chaney as "He" stands out as possibly the greatest character actor of the screen. In this role he displays an understanding of character beyond anything that he has done heretofore." ---Variety

"Lon Chaney does the best work of his career. Here his performance has breadth, force and imagination." ---Photoplay

"(Chaney's) makeup is, as usual, perfect and he gives you a magnificent performance, full of pathos that brings a gulp to your throat" ---Movie Weekly

"Never before have I seen Mr. Lon Chaney perform so faityhfully and so knowingly as he does in this part of the tragic clown. Both as the scientist and later as the circus clown, he is shown to be abundantly equipped with those essential gifts which make for compelling characterization before the camera....(With all the film's) fineness, I am inclined to think that Mr. Lon Chaney is the real triumph" ---New York World

title: He Who Gets Slapped (film)


text:
User:Pischdi Hufnagel~enwiki

Pischdi Hufnagel says "Hallo!" from Germany!

 * de:Benutzer:Pischdi Hufnagel

title: User:Pischdi Hufnagel~enwiki