User talk:Pyrrhus16: Difference between revisions

Archives

1 • 2 • 3

Please comment here, a debate on the future of WP:MJJ and WP:JANET. — R² 14:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, how are things? What articles are you working on at the moment? — R² 18:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on "We Are the World" in my sandbox. I'm hoping to get it to FA by the end of this year, so it can become TFA for it's 25th anniversary on March 7, 2010. According to the request page, you have to have it pending 60 days in advance. I have to wait for a book to arrive before I can get started on it properly. Until then, I'll be creating a page for the Thrill the World dance event. Oh, and I've got a peer review open for "The Girl Is Mine". I think it's fairly comprehensive and could be an FA. Pyrrhus16 19:23, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Well I've just started this Wikiproject debate (hopefully it will take us somewhere) and I want to put this in the mainspace within the next day or two. Then I'll begin working on HIStory. I still have a spare ticket to see MJ, know anyone who needs it? — R² 20:04, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't really know anybody that needs one. You should stick it on eBay; you'd definitely make a profit. Pyrrhus16 20:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Might have to, although I would rather avoid that. — R² 20:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the best way to get rid of it, is to offer it up on one of the MJ forums. I think MJJCommunity is the most high-traffic MJ forum. Pyrrhus16 20:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I might just give that a go, cheers. — R² 20:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is interesting, a list of Jackson's best selling US singles, we could add this to all the articles? — R² 21:41, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah we should. Is it actually his best-selling U.S. singles or their opinion/ranking of the singles?

It looks pretty accurate that it's based on sales of his number one singles. That said, it could be possible that his singles that did not peak at number one still outsold some of these. It's not a definitive top ten list because it only takes into account this 13 #1's, all his other singles weren't considered. So I suppose it's not of much use really. — R² 11:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well they can still be used in the commentary sections. By the way, have you seen the new pics? I think it's time for Prince to get a new mask. He's getting a bit too big to wear pink feathery ones. Pyrrhus16 11:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree about the mask lol, great to see the curly hair is back, hopefully he will stick with it. Yes, we could still use the commentary. — R² 11:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it is nice to see the curls back. There is a 100+ page thread on them in one of the MJ forums lol. The media have started to say that his brothers will be joining him at the O2, cause of this video. Although, I think he said it to shut the reporter guy up. No doubt they'll call him a liar if the brothers don't show up. Pyrrhus16 12:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't give a rats ass what TMZ say about anything, nobody takes them seriously, a bunch of idiots. — R² 13:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they're jerks. I don't know how some people can believe the stuff they say sometimes. Pyrrhus16 14:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just set up Dangerous (Michael Jackson song) and sent it to DYK, crediting both of us. — R² 17:01, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. :) Pyrrhus16 17:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have been thinking about this for a while, we could probably set up an article for "Allegations of media bias against Michael Jackson". What you think? — R² 18:11, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I started work on this. Then I realised that it was turning into the media's perception of him, and was going to instead name it "Media perception and coverage of Michael Jackson", making it something similar to Public image of Barack Obama. I think an article like that could work, with their perception of him, some of the stories they've reported on him (like the voodoo one, lol) and allegations of them being biased. Do you think that would work? Pyrrhus16 18:21, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Media perception and coverage of Michael Jackson" could potentially work, my concern would be that we don't mock Jackson any further and it could end up too gossipy/tabloidy. We would have to ensure that it stays within the boundaries of WP:BLP and respects the subjects dignity. An article specifically dedicated to allegations of media bias is less likely to have BLP problems, but your suggestion could still work. — R² 18:28, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think your idea is pretty good. It would give a more rounded take on events, as opposed to just the media's viewpoint of him. Pyrrhus16 18:33, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's something we can start in the future. Before that I really have to get HIStory out the way. :) — R² 18:37, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, those album articles always looks like big projects. Oh, and I forgot to ask: are you going to be requesting any of your FAs (MJ or Thriller) for the main page? Pyrrhus16 18:50, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, can't be bothered to deal with the vandalism. — R² 18:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I can imagine. They'd be all over it. Pyrrhus16 18:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don't think I thanked you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage a few days ago, so thanks! Jozal ^(talk) 15:23, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) Pyrrhus16 16:43, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On June 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dangerous (Michael Jackson song), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

For some reason they didn't send this notice to you too. — R² 13:27, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's because I'm not in the revision history of the live article. Cheers. Pyrrhus16 15:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, only the heavy contributors of the mainspace article get the DYK credit. I believe a bot takes a look. Either way, congratulations to both of you! :) CarpetCrawler^{message me} 16:46, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]