Seeker56

Welcome!

Hello, Seeker56, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --rogerd 02:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Fogerty/Zaentz dispute

I have no disagreement with your changes. I don't know who you are talking about when you say "gossipy celebrity warfare", because all I did [1] was remove the stuff about being an "old fashioned hands-on producer", which is opinion, not fact, and restored the Fogerty/Zaentz dispute, which you added some good edits to. So what do you mean when you say that you "side with Olompali"? --rogerd 02:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Notability of Museum of modern mythology

A tag has been placed on Museum of modern mythology requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Arx Fortis (talk) 06:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Writer attribution for Lennon/McCartney songs

Your edit comments that "Authorship of Beatles's songs is difficult to ascertain precisely, except for the rule that the lead singer is the dominant writer" and "Authorship of Beatles's songs is difficult to ascertain precisely, since all four, plus George Martin and others, were frequently involved in the crafting" are wrong on several counts.

• The official, legal credits are easy to determine: Lennon/McCartney except for some early songs which were originally credited to McCartney/Lennon. Ample sources exist and the WP infoboxes show the official L/M (or M/L) credit.
• Who actually wrote the song is pretty easy to determine for most of the songs where there is no dispute between L and M. Using various interviews and biographies as sources, L and M say what their part was. For a small minority of songs, such as "Eleanor Rigby", L and M disagreed and the article describes the disputed authorship. For cases where there was a 60/40 split, adverbs like "predominantly" or "mainly" make sense, but not in cases where there is no dispute that L or M was the sole author.
• While it is true that the lead singer was often the main writer of an L/M song, it is not always true. "Every Little Thing" is one such exception.
• Other people who contribute to a song—such as a producer or soloist—typically do not get a writing credit for their contribution. That's standard practice in the industry with rare exceptions, and there are good reasons for it. When someone makes a significant contribution, that should be discussed in the prose or in the Personnel section, i.e., "Martin wrote the string arrangement" or whatever.

Your position on the L/M situation is a minority viewpoint. The authorship details you are challenging are typical of hundreds of articles that have similar prose and use similar evidence and the text in those articles have been accepted by many WP editors. That represents a strong consensus for identifying the actual author in the prose. You should seek consensus for your changes and present reliable sources that support your view. — John Cardinal (talk) 17:03, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi John-- This is a late reply but the subject remains on my mind. The matter of Lennon_McCartney authorship is so important, and Wikipedia's position of authority so dominant, I want to carefully and precisely express my concerns. Legal credit is not what I am disputing. What I have tried to call attention to is how inaccurate and misleading it is to say that a given song is either a Paul McCartney or John Lennon composition. They collaborated in ways that were oft-times subtle-- but hugely meaningful in the final account. The best way to put it, I think, is that each writer wrote for the Lennon-McCartney songwriting partnership, and both Lennon and McCartney, and to a lesser extent Harrison and Starr, approved, disapproved or contributed to the development of the works.

Within this frame, any Lennon-McCartney composition can be understood to be representative of the artistic (or at least commercial) sensibilities of both writers, no matter how much or little it was reworked as it passed through approval/development process. The proof is that neither Lennon nor McCartney chose to exit the partnership, even selectively, during the Beatles years-- and they certainly could have [that they might have published music independent of each other is shown by the fact that Paul is sole credited writer of the 1966 score to The Family Way (soundtrack) as well as Come and Get It (song) the 1969 theme to The Magic Christian (film), both released within the working timeline of the Beatles' recording years.]

Could we establish a norm on Wikipedia with regard to Lennon-McCartney that says, for example, "She Said She Said" is a song written by (or primarily by) John Lennon for the Lennon-McCartney songwriting partnership.(?) Because that language more accurately contextualizes how things really were. These writers did not work in a vacuum, with no artistic concern other than there own: John had to meet Paul's standards, Paul had to meet John's, and both had to meet Beatles approval. A descriptive convention like this would answer my concern-- which, put another way, is that few of these songs would display the genius they do if the other writer had been 100% absent. That is the problem I have, that is what is implied when Wikipedia says "You Won't See Me" was written by Paul McCartney. Saying it is "credited" to the Lennon-McCartney partnership doesn't do it justice-- that sounds like it was just mislabeled. My position is that it should say "You Won't See Me" was written by Paul McCartney for the Lennon-McCartney songwriting partnership. Seeker56 (talk) 03:24, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Hemingway's nobel prize speech

Hi, since Hemingway wasn't able to travel to Stockholm to accept the prize himself, I'm not entirely sure that's his voice. Can you add the source, with a page number, to the ogg file page so it can be verified? Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:44, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Ways to improve Nile Southern

Hi, I'm Carriearchdale. Seeker56, thanks for creating Nile Southern!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please add categories and expand the article. Thanks! Carriearchdale (talk) 01:22, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Carriearchdale (talk) 01:22, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kendra McKinley (November 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by JC7V7DC5768 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kendra McKinley and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kendra McKinley, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

JC7V-talk 03:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Seeker56! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! JC7V-talk 03:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)