Bball606
|
January 2010
editWelcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Mama's Pride has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.myspace.com/mamaspridestl (matching the regex rule \bmyspace\.com).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 05:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added such as to the page Mama's Pride do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://mamaspride.tripod.com/indexframe.html (matching the regex rule (?<!jeff560\.)tripod\.com).
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 19:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Articles for deletion nomination of One Lone Car
edit
I have nominated One Lone Car, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/One Lone Car. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. RadioFan (talk) 23:52, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with One Lone Car. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. RadioFan (talk) 00:20, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Material issue.jpg
edit
Thanks for uploading File:Material issue.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.
As well as adding the source, we also need to know the terms of the license that the copyright holder has published the file under, usually done by adding a licensing tag. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged files may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the file will be deleted 48 hours after 19:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ww2censor (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
File copyright problem with File:Autovein 2010.jpg
edit Thank you for uploading File:Autovein 2010.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Eeekster (talk) 01:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC) == Nomination of [[:
- repeat repeat]] for deletion ==
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article [[:
- repeat repeat]] 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 [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/
- repeat repeat]] 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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:24, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Associated acts
editYou wrote: Please stop removing the "associated acts" on *repeat repeat. Those are clearly associated with the band with references and the drummer is in one of those bands. Please stop deleting them or you will be reported for vandalism.
Have you read the guidelines for inclusion? They're at {{Infobox musical artist}}. I'll include them here:
- This field is for professional relationships with other musicians or bands that are significant and notable to this artist's career.
- This field can include, for example, any of the following:
- For individuals: groups of which he or she has been a member
- Other acts with which this act has collaborated on multiple occasions, or on an album, or toured with as a single collaboration act playing together
- Groups which have spun off from this group
- A group from which this group has spun off
- Separate multiple entries by using commas or {{flatlist}}.
- The following uses of this field should be avoided:
- Association of groups with members' solo careers
- Groups with only one member in common
- Association of producers, managers, etc. (who are themselves acts) with other acts (unless the act essentially belongs to the producer, as in the case of a studio orchestra formed by and working exclusively with a producer)
- One-time collaboration for a single, or on a single song
- Groups that have played or toured together as separate acts
- Groups that are merely similar
So a few points, you're adding them with breaks. Also, how do Gin Blossoms, One Lone Car and Thin Lizard Dawn meet the guidelines? Gin Blossoms only share one musician. They have a friend in Thin Lizard Dawn and One Lone Car isn't even mentioned. Feel free to explain, by providing appropriate references in the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
- I understand what associated acts mean. 2 members of repeat repeat were in One Lone Car. Gregory Lattimer, singer of Thin Lizard Dawn co-writes all the bands music and produces them, and 2 of the Gin Blossoms play in the band occasionally and write songs on the albums as well. They are all clearly associated so I'm going to ask you to please stop removing correct information from the page. I'm starting to suspect a proxy that you have a personal issue with this band.
- The articles for the two bands only state that state. We have three members in *repeat repeat: Jared Corder, Kristyn Corder and Andy Herrin. Only Herrin is listed as being in both Cavo and One Lone Car. Neither of the Corders were in either band. I have removed the bands as they do not meet the guidelines for associated acts, however, if you have a reliable source that places either of the Corders in one of those bands, you are free to add that source to the body of the article then add the band back to the infobox. That Lattimer writes music for the band does not make an association, as stated in the guideline. The associations are not appropriate and I am going to plainly tell you that if you continue to disruptively edit Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing for a short period of time. I have no issues with the band. I do have issues with editors who don't understand editing guidelines.
- You also don't understand that you should use commas or {{flatlist}} as you used
- You don't know MOS:NUM. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Your recent edits
edit Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or 
) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:56, 21 February 2016 (UTC) YOU are the only one who is about to be blocked from editing. How are Cavo and One Lone Car not associated if the drummer is in both those bands? I'm going to ask nicely one last time to stop vandalizing the page. You absolutely have an issue with the band because those associated acts are clearly associated by sharing the same drummer, and you know this. So again, stop removing associated acts that are clearly associated. Thanks.
February 2016
edit Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Karst (talk) 21:40, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
The article *repeat repeat has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Recreation of a subject that was deleted by AfD. New refs do not help subject meet WP:GNG and the subject does not meet WP:MUSICBIO.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
It's a completely different, re-worded, and well sourced article. The group was recently featured in Time Magazine, Nylon, Dujour, and Alternative Press. They are also on a very popular indie label.
Do not delete
Do not delete. national coverage in Time, nylon, and alternatice press. the label is also a known record label. it fits the criteria.
The article *repeat repeat has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Recreation of a subject that was deleted by AfD. New refs do not help subject meet WP:GNG and the subject does not meet WP:MUSICBIO.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello,
It's a completely different, re-worded, and well sourced article. The group was recently featured in Time Magazine, Nylon, Dujour, and Alternative Press. They are also on a very popular indie label.
Do not delete
== Nomination of [[:
- repeat repeat]] for deletion ==
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article [[:
- repeat repeat]] 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 [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/
- repeat repeat (2nd nomination)]] 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. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:29, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- The article was deleted again. May I suggest that you go through the Wikipedia:Articles for creation rather than creating this article again? One editor suggested salting the article so it could not be created again. I argued against that. If the article is created again and we have to vote it down again, I will likely not ague against salting. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:33, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
There were 2 votes to keep it up, and one vote to delete it. I'm confused as to how that calls for deletion. I've contacted Wikipedia about this issue and I ask you follow the procedure ethically and honestly. 2-1 the page should have stayed up.
The file File:*repeat repeat in 2017.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
orphaned file, no foreseeable use
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.
Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:50, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Building Rome
edit
A tag has been placed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Building Rome requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:
Malformed 2011 AfD, doesn't list in AfD so can't be closed conventionally AFAICS.
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 04:12, 26 May 2021 (UTC)