User talk:Ray1983a

• Binksternet Can I get a second opinion on the Deep Purple related edits by this user? My sense is they are okay because they are factually correct and sourced to stuff that isn't obviously deprecated in WP:RSP. However, given previous discussions here, I'm concerned a WP:ICANTHEARYOU issue might be present. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:13, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ray1983a has been using chart stats websites for song release dates. Is that what you mean? I don't have a big problem with it. Binksternet (talk) 20:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

The Dutch charts is the offical website by MegaCharts and is part of an 'umbrella' site, covering French, Belgian, Spanish etc, charts. I've been careful not to use the Chart entry-dates, but the site gives the release dates which can also be checked by the mention of Label and catalogue number for the countries in which it was released/date is known.

for example; Toto- Africa 7" Single A|B CBS CBS A2510 [uk] 25/06/1982 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ray1983a (talk • contribs) 20:37, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Okay, that's fine. As you can see above this page, there have been multiple instances of editors trying to contact you, and escalating to a short block. That's why it's a good idea to discuss things if a disagreement or confusion arises. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:41, 28 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I realise that now. I hadn't realised earlier sources were unreliable. I've been more careful to doublecheck info

The accuracy of release dates from the Dutch Charts website is questionable. For example, it shows the release date for Van Halen's single "You Really Got Me" as 31/1/1978[1], but it had already entered the Billboard Hot 100 on 1/28 [2] (p. 108, No. 91) so it was released sometime prior (with the reporting lag, maybe a week or two earlier). Chart sites may be reliable for chart statistics, but better sources should be used for discographical info. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, that's because in this case, the Dutch release is shown as 31/01. This can be checked by the catalogue number, WB 17107. The Cat no. for the US is WBS 8515. Therefor I did not edit "You Really Got Me".

In most cases there's an additional (us), (uk), (aus) -for Australia) or (Ger)-for Germany) present, right after the Label and Catalogue number.

Moreover, I always double-check Billboard and the UK official charts for entry dates to be sure. If they do not work out, but the label and cat No. do, the release date logically does not apply to US or UK singles, but perhaps from EU, and I will not edit. Dutchcharts is the page I'm using, but the info is also available on the Swiss hitparade.ch and austriancharts.at for example. It's the same database, so it's not strictly Dutch info. Ray1983a (talk) 20:35, 29 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Several edits (other user names & IPs) are not so careful about double checking to ensure that the dates are applicable to U.S. releases. Where does the "same database" get its U.S. release date info? It seems easier (and less likely for misinterpretation) to source the info directly rather than from a third party. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:36, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Well, I'm not aware of any US music websites with a database like this one, for example, Billboard does not provide release dates, just the date when songs entered the charts, as does Official UK charts (and MusicVF - which is relying on those two).

dutchcharts (or austriancharts, or hitparade.ch) is the official recognized charts website for those countries, so my feeling is either they source directly from record companies, or authorized discography books.

I'm not doubting the info on their site, though I can understand that because it's a European site, it might be seen as (partially) unreliable. As you are the second editor who raised questions about it, I have contacted the website and asked where the US and UK info is sourced from Ray1983a (talk) 15:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I doubt a business like hung medien, who seems to be behind many of these websites, would invest the extra time and expense to research info that has no apparent bearing on its charts. A lot of hung's info appears to be user-generated from its forum posts. An IP asked whether one of its sites is reliable for release dates at the reliable sources noticeboard. There is a lot of effort to add non-chart info and links from these sites to WP articles. —Ojorojo (talk) 15:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

In that case, I will track down some discography/biography books from the Rotterdam library, see what they can tell me, and make corrections to my edits where needed. If the info was user-generated, with any luck, the release-dates added on the Hung Medien sites were all made in good faith and correct for the respective countries to which they apply. For now, I will stop from editting further using this source. Thanks for the info! Ray1983a (talk) 16:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Many user-generated sites may be correct, but we have no way of knowing. If indeed there are discography/biography books with release details, then they should be used and cited. Otherwise, leave the chart sites for chart positions. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please stop putting the HTML tag for small fonts into the infobox. At MOS:SMALLFONT, the guideline says no small font in the infobox. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Understood

Please, don't transform dates from mdy to dym solely because you are not living in the United States. Many of the pages you have modified are about American topics and WP:NATIONALTIES applies. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 03:32, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

my apologies, I thought Wikipedia had moved to date-month-year as a standard.Ray1983a (talk) 03:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray1983a. When using a book as a source, like you did here, please provide the page number using the |paga= parameter. Please also follow MOS:CITEPUNCT: All ref tags should immediately follow the text to which the footnote applies, with no intervening space. Have fun editing! --Muhandes (talk) 09:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

While I'm at it, if you are linking to the book from the Internet Archive, I'm sure you noted that you can link directly to the page. In this case, I supposed the page was 302 so I corrected it, please verify. --Muhandes (talk) 10:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for the help! ~~ Ray1983a (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Screaming for Vengeance while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. I see you have been editing logged-out with the IP range Special:Contributions/191.57.21.22/19 intermittently during the last few months. Binksternet (talk) 19:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I did not make those edits.. could it be my account is hacked some way? It appears it copy-pasted an earlier edit of mine from months ago Ray1983a (talk) 20:07, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't think you're hacked. It is much simpler to copy your work than to hack your account. Binksternet (talk) 23:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

Greetings. Please do not use Metal Archives/Encyclopaedia Metallum as a source for release dates or reviews, as it has long been considered unreliable and user-generated per WP:ALBUM/SOURCE. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:38, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

thank you, understood.Ray1983a (talk) 03:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced or poorly sourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Rock the House Live!. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Not unsourced at all..as a matter of fact I added Martin Strong's work on discographies, and removed wrong dates that showed the entry on the charts, and where possible add the actual date. There is a tendency on wikipedia to add the entry-date on the charts as "release date", which is obviously wrongRay1983a (talk) 15:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Your recent editing history at ...But Seriously shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. - FlightTime (open channel) 15:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please do not add or change content without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. FMSky (talk) 21:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ray1983a! Please check the Master of Reality album article as there is an IP changing the release date from August to July 21, 1971, repeating that old misinformation propagated by Black Sabbath's own Facebook. I even tried to argue using the LP's entry in the UK charts as justification, but the IP may not stop. 2804:14D:5CC4:484C:610F:FCBC:75CC:4831 (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Now the Martin C. Strong reference has been removed with the argument that "the source says nothing about Black Sabbath" nonsense? Please take a look there. 2804:14D:5CC4:484C:610F:FCBC:75CC:4831 (talk) 14:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think the page should be locked. why are you using an anonymous IP address? More sources say July 1971 than August 1971, Quit calling for back up which is a violation of Wikipedia policy WP:MEAT 2601:3C5:8200:97E0:B88F:BB3E:D308:57FA (talk) 05:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

Source for this change, please. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 22:03, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Aftermath (Rolling Stones album), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Also, Mother's Little Helper Tkbrett (✉) 02:47, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Ray1983a Hi Ray, I removed a unreliable source on In the Zone album because it said the album was released in Argentina 3 weeks before the US release. November 1 also falls on Saturday which make this impossible. Could you revert it back and explain that albums can't come out on weekends? I would appreciate it. Jade505 (talk) 01:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ray1983a Hi thanks man, also on Britney Spears: In the Zone E.P and Greatest Hits: My Prerogative it is using that Argentina source with April 1, 2004 and November 1, 2004. Could you fix that aswell Jade505 (talk) 12:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ray1983a Hi do you think it would a good idea if we remove those sources of those pages, It's just that editors could click on them and set it back to that --Jade505 (talk) 18:47, 4 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Better to keep the sources, even though in these cases better sources are now provided. I think it's argued enough that "1 Nov" and "1 April" etc are nonsense-dates and better sources like RIAA are in place to give the US or international release date. BPI, the British equivallent of the American RIAA, also often use 01-(month) as release date, while it is obvious this is just a placeholder. So to just cite the month of release should do it Ray1983a (talk) 20:03, 4 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Ain't Talkin' 'bout Love, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Van Halen (album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 00:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello Ray1983a, sorry for the inconvenience, but would you please take a look at the Machine Head article as there is an account with 80 edits that continues to insist that the correct release date is March 25, as you may already know it was a Saturday... I added the Martin C. Strong's book (Great Rock Discography) citation that says April 1972, knowing that the album entered the UK charts on April 15 of that year. 2804:14D:5CC4:4BB3:C55D:7D20:7780:F36F (talk) 14:38, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

well, the LP was very likely released on 31 March 1972, except perhaps due to Good Friday, it might've available a day earlier, 30 March. Can't really say what the logistics around Good Fridays were 50 yrs ago in England.

But as of yet, I have no strong source for this, so I just leave it be Ray1983a (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it really could have been released on 31 March 1972 or a day earlier and in this case The Great Rock Discography reports a wrong month of release. But now to add this 30/31 March date we need a good material like a magazine or something. I recommend Record Mirror magazine, you can find some 1972 editions available in PDF on the World Radio History website. Here's the link: https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Record_Mirror.htm 2804:14D:5CC4:4BB3:4DFE:181B:F6CB:C27B (talk) 06:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Record Mirror saves! 2804:14D:5CC4:4BB3:659F:EA63:46CF:3BE0 (talk) 09:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

haha, yes it does Ray1983a (talk) 10:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Tribute (Ozzy Osbourne album), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:59, 29 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, can you point out where in the source you added to Johnny the Fox it says the album was released on the 22nd. Thanks, Bretonbanquet (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Turns out I was mistaken. Elton John's "Blue Moves" was reviewed in Record Mirror on 23 October 1976, and BPI lists this album as released on Friday 22 October.

Therefor "Johnny the Fox", which was reviewed in the 16 Oct issue, was released on the 15th.

Basically all albums on major labels were released on Fridays in this era in the UK and Ireland, it was the default release day of the industry. So Popoff simply made an error Ray1983a (talk) Ray1983a (talk) 22:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

So that's not a source for the release date? You've deduced a release date from a review in RM, which obviously isn't enough. I know, you've often said albums were only released on Fridays, but I've never seen any actual source for that. Specifically, you need an actual source to verify the date Johnny the Fox was released. Maybe Popoff made an error, maybe he didn't – we don't have any evidence for that either. To avoid this slow-burn edit war going on indefinitely, I'll change it to "October 1976", because we at least agree on that. We can't synthesise a date through guesswork and a record review. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough.

That the industry in the UK released albums and singles on Fridays during the 1960s and 1970s is pretty much common knowledge among record-collectors and discographers.

EMI started releasing on Mondays in 1980. Other labels gradually made the change to Mondays between '84 and '87.

Open up any 'Music Week' magazine from the 70s and you'll find the 'New Album"-section announcing albums for release on Friday that week.

Mic Smith's research on Genesis also reveals all their issues were released on Fridays [[3]]

We have the BPI- database (BPI is the industry), by checking the release dates, it's clear they were on Friday.

For single- releases we have many promo-discs with release dates, all pointing to Fridays. For example;

https://www.discogs.com/release/10413594-Mud-Rocket/image/SW1hZ2U6Mjg5MTE5OTU=

(released on 19 July 1974, a Friday)

So I would say we have an abundance of evidence for this claim. Perhaps it should be made a guideline of wiki for music pages.

The US and other markets had a different policy Ray1983a (talk) 19:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'd say trying to make it a guideline of some sort would be a good idea, and all the relevant verifications can be made there. It does seem to be the default day of the week for releases, but I would just say it doesn't allow for any anomalies, like strikes or last-minute hitches resulting in a delay. Just from an encylopedic point of view, each date should have a source, but I know that's not always possible, especially when you're going back a long way. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

That's true, I am careful in making these edits using UK calenders. When there is no direct source, the month of release will suffice.

For example, Good Friday was not a release day early on, but it appears gradually it became one, as shops started to open that day.

There are also (Monday-) Bank Holidays in England, when there is no trade and there is Easter Monday and Christmas, on which records were not released for obvious reasons. But for the most part, BPI and magazines have taken these exeptions into account.

Strikes, delays etc from long ago are almost impossible to check, but there should be an official release date for every record nontheless, which is what the recordlabel communicates through press releases (which end up with the magazines), promo discs for radio, magazine ads and the like. We have no choice but to rely on that Ray1983a (talk) 20:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray, i would revert back to your October 1980 release date for Triumph, those book sources are highly unreliable as they just use release dates written online without any investigation into it. Cena332 (talk) 08:40, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your message. Well, looking at the date when the LP hit the charts (11 Oct for the UK, 18 Oct for the US), the 26 Sept date looks reliable. Albums were released on Fridays in that era in the UK.

There is a possibility that the LP was first released in the UK, as the group had a healthy following there in those years, and perhaps the LP was out in the US around 6/7 October, for it to enter the charts on the 18th Ray1983a (talk) 14:14, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi - you're right, the 12th was my error in copying it down from the NME. But it was definitely Friday the 13th, not Monday... see here on page 4 of that week's Record Mirror: https://www.worldradiohistory.com/UK/Record-Mirror/80s/84/Record-Mirror-1984-01-07-OCR.pdf. Richard3120 (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for flagging! Ray1983a (talk) 16:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray, are you meant too add the single release date or radio release date to the Infobox? I added the radio release date to it [4] but i'm not sure if that is right. Cena332 (talk) 22:32, 3 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Cena, I would argue to put the actual (physical) release date for singles in the infobox for a number of reasons.

Nowadays, there is no physical release for singles to speak off, so a Music Video online or addition to Spotify would count as 'release date' which is probably when radio will pick up the song.

However, in earlier periods, promo-copies were send to radiostation for advance airplay. There are examples when a song was a full month or longer around on radio-airplay-lists, yet there was no actual retail record that the public could buy.

So, I would say, when the retail CD or vinyl actually hit the stores, that should be considered the Release date. With a mention for when the song hit radio in the "Release History" box.

You can often find the difference in dates on pages like https://musicvf.com/ Ray1983a (talk) 00:01, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ok that makes sense; would you be able to update it for me :) Cena332 (talk) 19:42, 4 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray1983a! Once again, a user has changed the Master of Reality release date back to that 21 July date (which we know is incorrect)... I know you have added a material that says the album was released on 6 August and that material wasn't removed from the article. I even argued that the 21/07 date has already been contradicted in a recent discussion on the article's talk page, but they simply reverted me by ignoring my edit summary. 2804:14D:5CC4:4BB3:BDF0:F832:88E0:DA8D (talk) 17:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

thanks for flagging Ray1983a (talk) 17:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Ray1983a, regarding your edit on the Tango in the Night page, I'm not entirely clear what possible copyright infringement you're referring to. What was the warning you received? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 03:51, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello Friend (song): Revision history

I added the release date for "Hello Friend" by Chris Rea with ref to Music Week at the WRH site

1 August 2024‎ Ajsmith141 Improve reference; as excellent a resource World Radio History is, some editors have raised questions over possible copyright issues by directly linking to it Ray1983a (talk) 11:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Ray1983a, that seems pretty nonspecific, and I wouldn't worry about it, if I were you. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

OK thanks, understood Ray1983a (talk) 15:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Something Happened on the Way to Heaven, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Do You Remember?.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:26, 12 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Greetings. Regarding this change in date, RIAA still says it was released on 27 April. Per Template:Infobox album, the earliest release date should be used, so not the later UK one. Hope that helps. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 13:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Doubts have been risen from various editors about the release date info on RIAA.

But OK since we don't have an alternative US date available, I guess we have to stick with this one Ray1983a (talk) 14:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I've noticed your recent activity changing music release dates and want to make sure you are fully aware of and adhering to the Wikipedia policy of no original research and how it applies to what you're doing. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 22:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Red (King Crimson album). Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 00:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

"Red" release date was sourced through DGM for 1 October 1974, which could point to the US release date, as it is well-established that LP's in the UK came out on Fridays (1 Oct was a Tuesday).

6 October might be the result of citogenesis where a erroneous date on wikipedia got picked up and then used again as a source here, the same happened to Master of Reality Ray1983a (talk) 15:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I wondered if you might be able to help at Talk:Christine McVie (album)#Release date? I pinged you but I think I made a hash of it, as usual. If you can't, no worries. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:02, 2 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History Revisited: The Remixes, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages It's My Life and Life's What You Make It.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2025 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Keep Talking (Pink Floyd song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page High Hopes.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray, for the Britney album would you be able to see if the Japanese release date Oct 31 is legitimate. I really find it hard to believe the album was released one week before in Japan before it hit the States. --Cena332 (talk) 09:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I have doubts if we should use Amazon for such things as release dates in general, although it's hard to say how reliable these dates are from the early 00s on there.

It is known however, that certain labels had a policy of a pre-sale in Japan for artists that were succesful there, before the official US/UK date. So in this case, I would let it be. My personal opinion is that articles should have the official dates from the country they are from in the infobox, and additional dates mentioned in a Release history (see the first Spice Girls album), but that opinion is not shared by all editors Ray1983a (talk) 12:44, 8 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Can You Feel the Love Tonight, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources to see how to add references to an article. You need to check the release sources before adding information. As you can see by the quote, "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" was shipped to radio on May 2, as the quote says. Nowhere does it says physical formats were issued on that date. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 17:41, 25 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

You're right. I simply wanted to add the physical format to the section, but didn't consider the possibility of a difference in dates Ray1983a (talk) 18:37, 25 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray, on Christina Aguilera stripped album wiki, they have Oct 22 2002 listed as the release date for all Scandinavian countries, when the UK release date was on Oct 28,[5] (pg 31) and the US release date was on Oct 29.[6]. I believe the Scandinavian dates should be removed as i find it highly inaccurate. Cena332 (talk) 23:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

appears the album entered the Dutch Charts already on 2 November 2002, which would correspond with a 21/22 October release date (not sure on which days albums are released in Scandinavia), so that would actually work out. Seems the label decided on a slightly early release for certain European countries ahead of UK and US Ray1983a (talk) 23:46, 10 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Ok it's just I know Japan had a pre-sale for artists, definitely thought Scandinavia was inaccurate. Cena332 (talk) 23:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Your recent editing history at Whitney (album) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. An edit war occurs when two or more users begin repeatedly reverting content on a page in a back-and-forth fashion to restore it back to how they think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree with their changes. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or undo the edits made by other editors when your changes are reverted. Instead, please use the talk page to work toward creating a version of the page that represents consensus among the editors involved. The best practice at this time is to stop editing the page and to discuss the disagreements, issues, and concerns at-hand with the other editors involved in the dispute. Wikipedia provides a page that helps to detail how this is accomplished. If discussions reach an impasse, you can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard, or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection while a discussion to resolve the dispute is ongoing.

Continuing to engage in further edit warring behavior can result in being blocked from editing Wikipedia—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, or whether it involves the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also, please keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your demeanor, behavior, or conduct indicate that you intend to continue repeatedly making reverts to the page. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 19:30, 15 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Emerson, Lake & Palmer in Concert, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wheeling.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 16 November 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hey @Ray1983a. Your wiki edit anniversary is today, marking 5 years of dedicated contributions to English Wikipedia. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you many more wonderful years ahead in the Wiki journey. :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 19:11, 18 December 2025 (UTC)Reply

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate with others, avoid editing disruptively, and try to reach a consensus – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive behavior – regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.

You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked from editing. Cambial — foliar❧ 15:00, 12 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray would you be able to double check Beyoncé's B'Day album release date? She's gave interviews when she states she had put the album out on her birthday. [7] Cena332 (talk) 14:08, 11 March 2026 (UTC)Reply

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in Michael Jackson. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 04:34, 8 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

You should beware since there are sanctions imposed in this topic, and as the template establishes: "editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies". WP:No original research is a Wikipedia policy. If you have a disagreement, take it to the respective talk page. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 04:36, 8 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Thriller (song), you may be blocked from editing. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 03:58, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you continue acting on your own without discussing this, the next venue will be WP:ARBCOM. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 03:59, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

You don’t seem to appreciate what the problem is with your release dates. They can’t work. You’re not even prepared to accept first-hand sources Ray1983a (talk) 04:06, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

It is not "what I'm prepared to". It is what the sources say, i.e. WP:STICKTOTHESOURCE. If you have a problem with the source, contact the source and request a correction instead. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 04:08, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

The sources I provide are solid. Jospeph Vogels research and a Music Week magazine from the era. Now you placed the Grammy website on “Thriller” which cannot! Work, because this was a Wednesday. Who knows where they pulled this date from? Also, the “Billie Jean” single shows a release on Sunday. Evidence is in abundance that this is not how the record industry works. Don’t edit these things if you lack the proper knowlegde, please Ray1983a (talk) 04:12, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

So, once again, original research from your part. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 04:20, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia doesn't base itself on "The Truth", and Wikipedia is not a newspaper to make investigations on what "is real". Wikipedia is based on secondary sources, and you cannot arbitrarily decide what is "the truth" simply because something has more sense for you. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 04:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

I cited a book and a magazine. How is this original research? As it stands, you now have removed cited material. Sources can be “sources”. Sources can be based on Citogenesis etc Ray1983a (talk) 04:33, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

And there are other sources that include a previous release date. As I alreadyy said

you cannot arbitrarily decide what is "the truth" simply because something has more sense for you.

Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 04:37, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

No, my senses don’t come into play. We need to appreciate the weight of a source. Whoever thought at Grammy.com that November 2 seemed like a fun date, simply does not know what he/she is talking about, as we already have a solid source that is recognized throughout wikipedia as very reliable. The problem is people copying stuff from all sorts of pages and present it like a reliable source, where it often is not Ray1983a (talk) 04:42, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps the discussion amongst various editors on the Talk:Blizzard of Ozz page can clear up things. Despite various sources, we had to conclude there was only one option Ray1983a (talk) 05:09, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Blizzard of Ozz is Blizzard of Ozz. Here the discussion is not Blizzard of Ozz. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 05:10, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

But it follows the same logic of unreliable vs reliable sources. Trying to seek concensus, that’s all Ray1983a (talk) 05:14, 17 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello. You changed back the US radio release dates I added for "Killing in the Name" and "Bombtrack" for the following reasons: "radio debut in Oct 92, but no retail release for the US, only released as a single in EU, UK and Aus" and "'Radio' is not a release date" respectively. As far as I know, a song's release (official add date, impact date) to "radio", or more specifically a certain radio format, such as Contemporary hit radio, adult contemporary, Rhythmic contemporary, etc, is acceptable towards a song's single release date, even if the song never received a commercial release in that territory. One example I know is Fugees' version of "Killing Me Softly with His Song", which lists its US radio release to contemporary hit radio as the earliest date of the song being released as a single, despite never receiving a commercial release there and the song having a commercial release in the UK at a later date. There's hundreds of other song article's that do this, whether it received a commercial release or not in the US. And to explain why I use "Radio" as a format instead of the previous radio formats I mentioned, it's because the sources used don't give a specific one and just give an official add date or impact date. But not having the specific format doesn't invalidate it's release to "radio", or at least I don't think so. All of what I said could probably be explained better and more logically by someone more experienced, but per my long explanation, I will revert your edits back to having the US radio release dates listed in the infobox of the song articles and album article. Spinmeisters (talk) 06:48, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I can see your point, but there is no solid rule of thumb for this, since we have to deal with both technological changes and cultural differences. There are many song-pages that strictly use the physical (CD-single) release as the release date, even for American bands. The problem is that from the late 80s onwards, CD-singles were popular and manufactured in Europe and Japan, but far less so in North America.

But before the CD-era, singles were issued as a physical medium, as vinyl or cassette. Other songs from those times are deemed ‘promo-singles’ or just songs for AirPlay. So, that makes it kind of arbitrary to go from vinyl (a physical medium) to just the date when a song recieved AirPlay for the first time, as an equal ‘release date’, because where do you draw the line? Especially when you compare it to releases in Europe, where usually a CD-single was released, and song-pages from British artists now always show the date where the physical release is presented as release date, and not Some random day when the song first hit the radio, while we do exectly that for American artists. So it creates a sort of weird situation. Ofcourse, beyond 2006 or so, the physical release for singles is pretty much gone, so the contradictions really only excist in that 1988-ish to 2006-ish period Ray1983a (talk) 08:05, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps you should bring your questions to the talk page for Wikipedia:Singles criteria, as I can't really add much, other than that I do agree there are some contradictions.

Based on articles for songs from the 90s and early 00s, it's fine for an official add date to a radio format reported by Radio & Records or Billboard to be cited as a single release in the US. I'm taking that in mind and finding official add dates for 90s rock songs, which are harder to find because they aren't typically reported by those major publications. I do this because they often appear on Billboard airplay charts (Mainstream Rock, Alternative Airplay) months before they get released commercially in another country, which seems odd if you list that later date (One example is the Alice in Chains song "Would?", where Columbia Records released it to US radio on June 8, 1992, and began to chart on the Mainstream Rock chart on August 8, 1992, and wasn't until next year on January 11, 1993, that it was released commercially in the UK). I've used The Hard Report archives mostly to find these official add dates, where representatives of the record label themselves can report when they are going for adds on a song. I may be getting a bit off topic.

Also, I don't know if you're confusing the day a song starts getting played by radio with an official add date, but they are not the same, and it's even possible for songs to be played and chart, through being played via the parent album, before labels officially go for adds on the song itself. I think I've written too much with no purpose, but for example, The Hard Report noted that Soundgarden's "Black Hole Sun" was going for adds on May 23, 1994. Despite this, it managed to chart beforehand on the Mainstream Rock chart on May 14. Spinmeisters (talk) 11:48, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

After reading through the Singles Criteria pages, I agree that it can create a strange situation when holding on strictly to CD singles for American artists. As you said, a song could be a hit for a year in the US, before the label decides to press the song as a CD single in Europe for example. But we do need a clear criterium for this. Back then, promo-singles were often send to radio, for songs that became hits but we consider promo-singles not as full releases. So the question then becomes; is it considered a 'true single' only if the song had a counterpart release outside the US so it would count as a single?

So my take on it, we should distinguish between Europe/Japan and North America. For example; Music Week magazine in the UK reports the Release dates for singles, with the physical formats listed. That should be the criteria for that country, bc there it's not relevant when a song hits radio.

But as the US never embraced the CD single format, Id say the add on to radio would be the proper date.

However, there are cases where a single from an American artists is released earlier in the UK, as they may be more popular than in their own country. But that can be shown in those respective articles Ray1983a (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Ordinary World (song). Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 22:09, 12 August 2026 (UTC)Reply