User talk:Koavf/Archive014
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Koavf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
 User talk:Koavf archives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Please do not modify other users' comments or formatting.
){kind=link}
License tagging for File:Kaia Intense.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Kaia Intense.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.
For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 06:07, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Category:Cancer deaths in Korea
Hi Koavf. Just to explain my edit re the above—"Korea" was a unified country until the Korean War. People died of cancer in "Korea" prior to the division of it into North and South. So it's entirely apporpriate for it to be a subcategory of Category:Cancer deaths by country. The same principle explains how we can have Category:Cancer deaths in the Soviet Union as a subcategory of the same. Thanks. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
Indiana regions on Wikitravel
Hi Justin, since you've been active on Wikitravel in the past, I wondered whether you might care to comment on my proposal for a regions hierarchy for Indiana [1]. I'd appreciate any insight you could give! --Peter Talk 05:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
GAC
As you may have noticed from the map, FAC is in the wild seas east of Trollmark in the area marked "Here be manual of style dragons." Em-dashes and en-dashes are vittles to them horrible critters. Come with plenty in the article, in place of hyphens. Hamlet, Prince of Trollmark (talk) 23:18, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Suggest Deletion of Diddy Wah Diddy (Geraint Watkins Song)
A page that you have been involved with. The page ends up being a redirect to a song title on an album of covers by a lesser known artist, who was not the original songwriter. I have eliminated the redirect but don't know what the process is for getting a page deleted.
General Abuse of Wikipedia Redirects by Geraint Watkins
I went through some of the other song titles on his page and he has done the same thing--reference a song with which he has no connection, either as the songwriter or as the original performer, and then tagged (Geraint Watkins Song) with a redirect. Plus, you will see that Geraint Watkins shows up in all sorts of other redirects. Fortunately, it seems that he is a real person, but quite marginal in terms of notability, from what I can see. How to address this apparent abuse of the Wikipedia redirect function? Could you please discuss with fellow editors or refer to same? I don't know who to talk to about this.
AfD nominations of songs
Hi there, this is just a friendly note with a friendly suggestion. You might want to slow down your nominations of songs and spread them out over the course of a few days, as AfD is already pretty busy and adding 50+ discussions all at once is sort of clogging things up in my opinion. I assume you have actually checked that each song is not notable and are nominating them all in good faith, but mass nominations with very short rationale aren't as helpful as if you were to say "This song is not notable because _________there are no Google hits, no significant coverage in Gnews, the song has not charted etc (along with links to prove it)____________". Just a friendly suggestion. :) — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 23:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
- One other thing-- I noticed in your deletion rationale from some of the last ones you nominated, you say "Merge/redirect to album". If your recommendation is to merge or redirect, you should not bring it to AfD (which is reserved for titles you think should be deleted). If you think it would be a non-controversial merge, then you can be bold and just merge it, or if you think there may be opposition, then use the {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates and discuss it on the talk pages first. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 23:37, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Greetings again... and congratulations!
Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. Just wanted to congratulate you on the stuff you've been doing - now that I see it in context it confirms my original feeling that yours was actually the best solution and that and that, despite my initial misgivings (based on, if you remember, the lack of consensus-seeking*), it added greatly to the subject matter. It's been well worth the wait! Looking forward to seeing the results of other articles you decide to take on :) *I realise now that the process of waiting for the desirable consensus can be mind-bogglingly slow and that "being bold" is probably the best way to go... Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 23:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Prodded Songs
For all the songs you prodded, I think it is reasonable to just be bold and redirect them. smooth0707 (talk) 00:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- There are occasions to nom/delete song articles; I would say notability of the band and album/song coverage are deciding factors. In the case of questionable songs by the Dave Matthews Band or Yoko Ono, I would say a redirect is more appropriate. Redirects are even suggested at WP:NSONGS. smooth0707 (talk) 01:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Also, when you nominate something, please make the effort to follow WP:BEFORE and at least do a cursory google search to see if sources can't readily be found (and indicate so in the nomination) - Mgm|(talk) 08:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Another comment: When songs are part of a WikiProject, it is a nice gesture to let the Project know, as there are watchers of the project (but not necessarily all song articles) who may be willing to improve the articles to make them satisfactory. Also, they should be involved in the decision process. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 18:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- If you ever consider nominating more than one similar article again, could also please look into doing a multiple nomination (more articles on a single page) It makes AFD a lot shorter and it also makes it easier to comment for everyone else. - Mgm|(talk) 10:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Would be happy to do a style review. Let me know when you have finished your major edit and I'll jump in. – ukexpat (talk) 14:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Move of Lists of National Treasures
Hi Koavf! You recently moved several Lists of National Treasures, for instance: "List of National Treasures of Japan (Shrines)" to List of National Treasures of Japan shrines.I think the original name is more readable and in line with common usage on wikipedia. This was also noted in the peer review of one of the lists. What was the reason for this move? bamse (talk) 01:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Do you mind if I move everything to names with parantheses but without capitalizaion? bamse (talk) 05:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Speedy rename process
Hey, just wanted to make you aware if you weren't already of our speedy renaming process. A few of your recent CFD nominations can be handled through this process, rather than having to go through a full five-day discussion. Otto4711 (talk) 23:21, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on The World's Greatest College Weekend, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect to a nonexistent page.
If you can fix this redirect to point to an existing Wikipedia page, please do so and remove the speedy deletion tag. However, please do not remove the speedy deletion tag unless you also fix the redirect. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. R'n'B (call me Russ) 01:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for File:Nickcavenovel.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nickcavenovel.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 05:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The Catherine Wheel
For LPs on WP:ALBUM the track listing is split by sides for the track listings. From WP:ALBUM: "Albums originally released primarily on vinyl or cassette should similarly list the tracks of each side separately under sub-headings named "Side one" and "Side two"." Please do not remove Side one and Side two titles. JoeD80 (talk) 23:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's cool; I'm a little slow at keeping an eye on my old changes, so I didn't notice this one until today even though your change was long ago. Sorry about that. JoeD80 (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Warped (Star Trek)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Warped (Star Trek), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- Little more than a plot summary, not recently updated.
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Doniago (talk) 07:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Editing Style
Hello, Please can i ask that in the interest of courtesy and for ease of understanding when making edits like you have done to Fantasy Ride can you provide an WP:edit summary. this helps other editors identify what changes have been made to articles. I know myself that sometimes i forget to do so, but it does make things easier for other users if you can provide a brief summary of the additions/deletions or changes you have made to an article. (Lil-unique1 (talk) 11:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC))
- pardon me, i noticed your edits, but cannot remember which article you had edited. i copied this message because i've been sending it to lots of users who forget to edit summary (Lil-unique1 (talk) 16:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC))
Date formatting
You keep changing the date formatting in album infoboxes to fit the "start date" template, but there's nothing at WP:ALBUMS] that says it's mandatory. Really, it's just so much easier to type it out, and autoformatted dates are discouraged these days anyway. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Deleting redirects
Hi Koavf, after moving articles you have asked for the redirect to be deleted. Please fix all the inbound links to the new redirect. In some cases there is a double redirect, but a robot won't fix it if it's gone. Once the inbound links are gone, then please propose for speedy delete! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
John Nau
I removed the link to John Nau because I didn't think it was likely that he would ever have an article. I couldn't find a single source for a musician by this name at all, so he shouldn't be red linked if he's unlikely to have an article, ever. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 01:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Love (The Beatles album)
Regarding your recent edit to the article, please keep in mind that "(transition)" only refers to the latter song name in each track. Moving the quote marks creates the impression that all of the song names in each track make up a transition, which is misleading. Feel free to contact me if you have any concerns. just64helpin (talk) 00:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
- To clarify:
- "Eleanor Rigby"/"Julia" (transition)
- The above formatting implies that "Eleanor Rigby"/"Julia" is a transition, when in fact only "Julia" is a transition as listed in the artwork of the album. This was previously clarified in the article with <br> breaks, which also reflect the album artwork, but the breaks were removed. just64helpin (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
PerB -> lang|fa
Before changing them, make sure that it works well (currently it doesn't). Alefbe (talk) 06:39, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
See [2] for example. Currently, it doesn't show the link to the Persian language. Alefbe (talk) 06:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Law enforcement
I understand you frustration at the lack of improvement of these, but they are not exactly empty" by the cCSD standard, so to avoid problems I changed them to "proposed deletion". You really should have notified the author, but i took care of that just now. I suppose it is possible to add at least some information to all of them, and if so, it would be reasonable of him to remove the tag. If not, they will probably be deleted unless someone else does. Ideally, it's everyone responsibility, per WP:BEFORE, but I admit that I myselfam not likely to havethe chance to do it. DGG (talk) 04:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I would point out that any editor (other than the creator) is permitted to remove a speedy template, regardless of whether it is likely that an admin would delete the nominated article. This policy frequently leads to the requirement for AfD discussions for articles that are blatant candidates for deletion—but that's life. Bongomatic 04:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- There is considerable disagreement at this time about whether admins are required to delete only if the article fits under the exact wording of WP:CSD. Each admin does things the way they think correct. If another admin does something I think probably a little wrong, and it's an ongoing general disagreement, I'm not going to seek him out and question it every time, but I certainly do not feel at all obliged to follow his precedent. To me, saying what the name of the relevant body or bodies is, may not be much of a start, but it is a start. It might be as easy to add more as to argue about it. I would be very surprised if each of those articles could not be expanded, & I only wish I had time to do so myself. I do not in the least regard these as blatant candidates for deletion, just candidates for looking for sources and expansion. DGG (talk) 04:47, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I finally searched, and found 3 good multi-vol encyclopedias, all widely avail in print, 1 with several pages for each country of pertinent material even visible on Google Book Search. These will provide extensive relevant information for every one of these. I've therefore deprodded them all. They are so easily expandable that I feel silly to have tried to do it the hard way by going thru fragmentary sources of Google News Archive. DGG (talk) 22:46, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
compact disc
Thanks for your feedback, but "compact disc" is not capitalized. Here are five style guides saying so (search for "compact disc").
Also, if you read up on proper nouns you will see that it is clearly a class of things (a common noun) rather than a unique thing (a proper noun). Have a nice day. Careful Cowboy (talk) 14:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Granted There are several style guides which probably contradict Wikipedia, but this is the only one that matters on this site. "Compact Disc" is a trademarked term and it means a particular thing. While it has also become generic term, as long as the Wikipedia article is at "Compact Disc" and not "compact disc", then that is how it is to be formatted. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:23, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- Please stick to the text and the facts. The compact disc article makes no comments about writing style. Wikipedia is not a style guide. In fact, this article, as of today, uses both Compact Disc and compact disc, so it is not useful as a style guide. The article does not even mention that compact disc is a trademarked term. If you want to assert that compact disc is a trademarked term, then you will need a source for that. If you read the talk page for compact disc, you will see a long discussion that comes to no consensus about capitalization or trademark status. Perhaps that is why the article itself has both Compact Disc and compact disc. Anyway, if you want to make a claim, you need an external source. Citing another Wikipedia article is simply circular, especially since that Wikipedia article does not make any claim about writing style or trademark status. Anyway, the usage that you edited was clearly using the term compact disc generically, e.g., it was not a reference to the invention of the Compact Disc. Have a nice day. Careful Cowboy (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Professional reviews in infobox
Professional reviews in infoboxes are supposed to be cited, not linked. Take a look at Template:Infobox Album. Also, as quoted on the WP:Album page, "Do not add reviews without a citation (see Wikipedia:Citing sources). In most cases, this means a properly formatted footnote providing the author, date, and source, along with an external link if available. For example: Allmusic 
[1] Do not use an embedded link with no information (e.g. link) as this promotes link rot and is inconsistent with Wikipedia's policy on embedded links. If you must use an embedded link, be sure to manually provide a full citation in the article's References section per Wikipedia:Citing sources."-5- (talk) 09:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Redsox template
Hey. I'm glad someone's finally combinging the two, it's needed to be done for a long time. Unfortunately, the way you're doing it is creating to Wikiproject Baseball templates on one talk page. Can you fix this please? Wizardman 19:42, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks on WPEQ
Thanks for the massive cleanup on the horse breeds task force template. I have never been able to figure out AWB, your work is appreciated. Montanabw(talk) 04:24, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
HSL–Zuid
I think you have incorrectly changed the name of the article HSL–Zuid. The hyphen does not indicate a trajectory between HSL and Zuid, but a subdivision, the South (Zuid) part, of the High Speed Line (HSL). Rubenescio (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Search-and-replace error
Hi there. Just commenting to point out a mistake you made when using WP:AWB: in this edit, by automatically replacing the string 'perb' with 'lang-fa', you 'corrected' the word 'superblock' to the nonsensical 'sulang-falock'. These are the dangers of automatic search-and-replace! :) I've corrected it back, but just wanted to let you know; in order to avoid making such mistakes in future, always check just exactly what it is you're replacing with what! Robofish (talk) 01:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Georgian People vs. People from Georgia
I see you replace the category "georgian people"with öPeople From georgia". I try to kindly remind you that these two are two different concepts. Georgian people refer to Georgian ethnic groups in all countries. Georgians are native to georgia, Turkey and republic of Azerbaijan and in addition live for centuries in Iran. These can be seen as indigenous Georgians but not from Georgia. Especially georgians from Turkey (Sunni Muslims), and Iran (Shiite Muslim) are very different in identity with those in Georgia (predominantly Orthodox Christians. On the other hand there are peoples of Georgia, which are not ethnic Georgians, there are also Ossetians, Abkhazians, Armenians, Chechens etc... in Georgia. So one category is about the Georgian ethnic group and the other about the citizens of Georgia.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello again. I will archive my talk page after I clean it somehow. Hower in the disambig. page I still cannot see the category of Georgian people as an ethnic group. Georgians from Georgia as well as other ethnic groups from Georgia can be included in that category "people from Georgia (country)" but Georgians from Iran and Turkey cannot be included in that. I propose to make a category named "Georgian people (ethnic group)"--Babakexorramdin (talk) 08:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Hello to all. I second Babakexorramdin's proposal regarding "Georgian people (ethnic group)". The current categories render it is impossible to distinguish ethnic Georgians from other peoples hailing from Georgia and leave no room for ethnic Georgians coming from outside Georgia. --KoberTalk 04:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Vinyl album track numbering
Hey Justin,
I noticed you've been updating a lot of album articles to make the numbering on vinyl versions continuous instead of restarting on each side. What's the motivation behind this change? At any rate, every vinyl record I own, including some whose articles you've changed, has tracks numbers that restart on each side. So I'll change them back and ask that you only make such changes if you know it's an accurate reflection of the original. Thanks! —Zeagler (talk) 10:11, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
NowCommons: File:Yabaniy es-sahara western sahara anthem.mid
File:Yabaniy es-sahara western sahara anthem.mid is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Yabaniy es-sahara western sahara anthem.mid. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Yabaniy es-sahara western sahara anthem.mid]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 13:29, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
AfD
I've just nominated an article you've worked on, Make It to the Sun for deletion.Borock (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
The Limited Series (2005 box set)
Why did you move this to The Limited Series (album)? It's a box set, not an album. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:07, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Didn't you realize that Garth had two box sets with this name, at least? What's wrong with using "Box set" in the qualifier anyway? Other albums do. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- So 1998 album and 2005 album, respectively, would work? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:29, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, can you move 1998 for me please? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:36, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
- One of them needed a G6 to be moved to that title. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:34, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
The Misfits (box set) → The Misfits (album)
You recently moved The Misfits (box set) to The Misfits (album). Why? It's not an album, it's a box set, so the dab is now incorrect. Albums and box sets are 2 entirely different types of releases, just as EPs and singles are (which is why we have different infobox codings for each as well). You wouldn't move an article dab'd as "(EP)" to "(album)"...that'd be incorrect, just as it's incorrect to move a box set to "(album)". In the Misfits case this is especially so, since the box set contains 6 albums within it. It's not an album unto itself. In any case I think that The Misfits (album) ought to redirect to Misfits (Misfits album) (a nearly identically titled release by the same band) or to Misfits (disambiguation) as there are other albums by the title "Misfits" as well. I've tried to reverse the redirect you created in order to fix these issues but the speedy was denied. I'd like to hear your reasoning on the issue, since you did not leave an explanation in your edit summary as to why you felt that the dab "(box set)" was incorrect (your edit summary merely said "dab"). Bottom line: albums and box sets are 2 different items and it is incorrect to dab them identically. --IllaZilla (talk) 08:09, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Coda
I notice you have again edited several Led Zeppelin pages in order to categorise Coda as a compilation album rather than a studio album, but you have not provided any additional evidence or reasoning for these edits on the discussion pages of these articles. Before editing these pages again, please provide a rationale for your edits on the discussion pages:
My rationale for categorising the album as a studio album is clearly explained on each of these discussion pages. Unless you can demonstrate that my rationale is flawed or incorrect, the categorisation of the album as a studio album should remain. Edelmand (talk) 07:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
AfDs
Plip!
. "Not notable" isn't a good deletion nomination rationale. See WP:JNN. Fences and windows (talk) 22:18, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with File:Raoinderjitsingh.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Raoinderjitsingh.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:33, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Response
Yes sir you indeed appear to be correct that was an inappropriate tag on my part. My apologies, you brought the matter up with tact and class for which I thank you as well. A helpful fyi you shouldn't remove the templates yourself. (unless you are reviewing admin, in which case hey you got a job to do) Again though The manner you broached the subject was very commendable! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Apathy Is Worse Than Hatred
Albums by red link artists can be tagged for speedy deletion via A9. Just letting you know, since *cough* I'm the user who created A9 in the first place. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- One step ahead of you. The other two albums and the category are already gone. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:06, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Re: Buddha or buddha
Hi justin - I'd wondered about that, so I checked the WP article on it - Buddhahood - which tends to use "Buddha" rather than "buddha" throughout. Perhaps that article needs some judicious editing? Grutness...wha? 04:05, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- You're probably right about it being lower case -might be taking it to a full CFD to get more expert opinion? As to my health, BTW, it's not too bad at the moment, but I have eased back my wiki-work a long way, and may take an extended break for a while soon - thanks for the concern. Grutness...wha? 01:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Talkback
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
More A9s
I got all of The Endless ones, but not Rolo, as Rolo's article is still around. Why didn't you tag these yourself? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- Congratulations, you're the 100th editor to have mistaken me for an admin. You win... um... a Coke. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Albumzzz
I only follow the guidelines as much as necessary, because they are just guidelines. My main concern when editing an article is how well it adheres to the Featured Article/Good Article criteria and general editing policies. If a guideline doesn't make sense, no one is obligated to follow it. Guidelines aren't inflexible, and that's something you should be more open too. In contrast, it's not like I don't ever change my mind. If you have a sound rationale for reverting a particular edit I'm totally open to it. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:12, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- Also: the album guidelines don't mention either listing a language in the infobox (given we are discussing music albums and not spoken word recordings, the language sung is irrelevant) or succession boxes (which make sense if you're talking about presidents or award-winners, but when talking about chart positions, it's very subjective, because logically there's no reason to not make similar boxes for albums that reached number two or number 27; consider how it's discouraged to put "1" in bold in discographies, which used to be a common occurance). WesleyDodds (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'll note that for the longest time I actually liked chart succession boxes. But a combination of an obscene amount of these boxes for really successful albums plus the fact that there is no solid objective reason to include them (the only reason they are around is because people like to make succession boxes for everything, from sports team positions to comic book characters) have changed my mind recently on their validity. Keep in mind we do have categories like "Number one songs on the US Dance charts", which do the same job in a less obtrusive fashion. As for the langauge thing, I can understand wanting to note what language the lyrics are sung in, but compared to film (which by and large have to tell stories through narration and character interaction) the precise language is unimportance. There are countless artists who are popular outside of their native countries regardless of langauge, because people focus on melody, harmony, and rhythm first. To give an example, "Losing My Religion" was a huge hit in Israel, even though people only understood the first line, to the point where they would request it by asking DJs to play "Oh Life". Also, you have artists ranging from Celine Dion to the Pixies who sing in multiple languages, or others like Sigur Ros and Cocteau Twins who aren't necessarily singing real words at all. Not to mention albums that feature instrumental tracks. Lyrics and their meaning are important to vocal music, but not necessarily language. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
- Actually, rechecking the Spin article I read the anecdote in, it was Portugal. Nonetheless, the language field is not mandatory or even acknowledged, so adding or removing it is simply a matter of preference; it's not a breach of protocol or guidelines if it is removed or not used. There are better things to be insistent about. Hell, infoboxes are not even mandatory for any article. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'll note that for the longest time I actually liked chart succession boxes. But a combination of an obscene amount of these boxes for really successful albums plus the fact that there is no solid objective reason to include them (the only reason they are around is because people like to make succession boxes for everything, from sports team positions to comic book characters) have changed my mind recently on their validity. Keep in mind we do have categories like "Number one songs on the US Dance charts", which do the same job in a less obtrusive fashion. As for the langauge thing, I can understand wanting to note what language the lyrics are sung in, but compared to film (which by and large have to tell stories through narration and character interaction) the precise language is unimportance. There are countless artists who are popular outside of their native countries regardless of langauge, because people focus on melody, harmony, and rhythm first. To give an example, "Losing My Religion" was a huge hit in Israel, even though people only understood the first line, to the point where they would request it by asking DJs to play "Oh Life". Also, you have artists ranging from Celine Dion to the Pixies who sing in multiple languages, or others like Sigur Ros and Cocteau Twins who aren't necessarily singing real words at all. Not to mention albums that feature instrumental tracks. Lyrics and their meaning are important to vocal music, but not necessarily language. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
You were involved with this page at one point. I came across the page in going through Doug Fieger. To me, there are issues of self-promotion and notability, at least in relation to his post-Knack activities. I am wondering if the page is appropriate for Wikipedia in its current form.
Many thanks in advance for your sentiments and actions, if considered necessary.
Dreadarthur (talk) 00:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks for taking the time to edit here. A much more reasonable presentation, in my view.
Bill Nye Jewish
Howdy, I noticed that some months ago you added that Bill Nye is Jewish [8]. Someone recently posted a request for a source for that, and I have to admit I am coming up short (mind you, using only Google). Any chance you remember the source off the top of your head? Many thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 04:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks for the note. Any objections to removing the cat and infobox note? It used to be in the article, but cited only to an episode of South Park. That part has been removed, but no other source has come forward. Thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 04:34, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- Great, done. It caught my attention because it was a YTMND meme a few years ago, but coming from you vandalism seemed unlikely. Thanks again, --TeaDrinker (talk) 04:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Reckoning
There's no sources for the release history. For instance, I'm having people help me look for reliable sources on the Mobile Fidelity Sound Recording release, but that's tough going so far, and I have access to tons of sources on R.E.M. Even then, prose is perferred over tables. Currently all the relevant information is included in the prose of the article. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:29, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
- Just because the Albums wikiproject demonstrates how to organize a release history into a chart does not mean an article needs one. In the case of Reckoning, all verifiable release info is covered in the prose of the "Release and reception" section. Everything else is unreferenced. Even then, this article is being subjected to the Good Article criteria, meaning we can't have a morass of uncited ungainly tables in the page. This is why I've been emphasizing to you that the guidelines are a means to an end; you dont have to follow them to the letter. Scores of GA and FA album articles don't bother with "release history" sections, because in most instances they are unnecessary if the article is well-written enough. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Language field for albums
I've started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Albums#Language to see if we can get some sort of a consensus on this. --JD554 (talk) 08:21, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Baa
Hi there. Please forgive this slightly odd request; I was seeking an active Wikipedian in the Indianapolis area; reason being, the spotlight team are working on the article Marco Polo sheep, and we're struggling for pics. I wondered if there might be someone who could pop down to the zoo with a camera. Even better would be a sound clip of a 'baa'. Let me know if you can help; cheers, Chzz ► 17:39, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template. File:Ico specie.png
Touched with Fire move
- Please put your message in Talk:Touched with Fire#Move?. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:19, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Consensus
Hi Koavf, I've reverted your edits that have added language=English to album infoboxes per this discussion. I'm sure you know about Wikipedia's policy on WP:CONSENSUS. --JD554 (talk) 07:18, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
The Who
Instead of crapping [citation needed] all over every single Who album and Who single chart information on every single Who page, how about if you provide the actual citations? The citations are Billboard and the UK charts. 74.73.110.46 (talk) 03:07, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media (File:Mohamed Abdelaziz and flag.png)
){kind=link}
Thanks for uploading File:Mohamed Abdelaziz and flag.png. 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 'file' 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 "File" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
){kind=link}
Could you please explain further...
You renamed "Dirty thirty (Guantanamo)" to "Dirty thirty (Guantanamo Bay Naval Base)" with the edit summary "per main".
I don't know what "per main" means in this context.
Could you please return to the talk page to discuss choosing the best name for the article? Geo Swan (talk) 19:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Naomi Aho
The article Naomi Aho has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- no evidence whatever of notability; appears to be pure self-promotion
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Deb (talk) 22:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
ndash and United Kingdom
You are correct about my ndash error: I entered as a modifier key+hyphen from my keyboard; I corrected it by entering the actual code.
"London, United Kingdom" is not correct: the correct format for cities and constituent countries of the UK is, eg, "London, England, UK", although in the case of a highly recognisable city like London, adding "United Kingdom" is not necessary. Radiopathy •talk• 17:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
There are no non-breaking spaces in my edit; take a look for yourself.
Templates are tools, not guidelines; one does not need to fill in every space. Sometimes it's just a matter of using common sense. In the UK there are no states; places in England are generally broken down into municipality, county, country, eg, Blackpool, Lancashire, England. By your reasoning, if there were a template for England (town, city, state, et cetera, indicates a US bias), one would fill in the ward or parish, town or city, county, constituent country, sovereign state, eg, Wardley, Gateshead, Tyne and Wear, England, United Kingdom - a bit much, don't you think? And since Greater London (but not the City of London) is in London county, well...
I've reverted your edit at George Orwell. Radiopathy •talk• 02:33, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
3RR
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on George Orwell. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Radiopathy •talk• 02:47, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
George Orwell
Your edits to George Orwell have quickly gone from good faith to disruptive. Please do not make any further changes to the place of death section of the infobox without first gaining consensus on the article's talk page. Thank you. Radiopathy •talk• 19:32, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Please do not move pages without first getting consensus on the article's talk page. Your move included a non-standard symbol (em dash) in the article's title. Radiopathy •talk• 19:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Please stop. If you continue to move pages to bad titles contrary to naming conventions or consensus, as you did to Singled Out (Diesel album), you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. - see Singled Out (Eleanor McEvoy album). Radiopathy •talk• 20:19, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
| | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Koavf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
- ^ Huey, Steve. "Review: Dirt." Allmusic. Retrieved May 16, 2009.