Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Bodast.jpg[edit]
Thank you for uploading Image:Bodast.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by an adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Aspects (talk) 01:30, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Come on Feel the Illinoise/Hallelujah (Leonard Cohen song) changes[edit]
Just to ask, did you have any consensus on that before the changes? Not that they're bad changes but previously i had "Come on Feel the Illinoise" reverted to "Illinoise" on the Sufjan article.
Normally, as in the case of "Hallelujah", the most famous song of that name would occupy the "Example (song)" spot but there's so many I agree with the disambiguation. Thanks Sillyfolkboy (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I left a message on the Beat music page suggesting that most of it should be in a separate article called "Merseybeat". Now, I've realised that there once was a separate article, but you merged them some time ago - I can't track down any discussion at the time if there was any. I'm curious to know why you did that? It seems to me that there is scope for a good article specifically on Merseybeat - much of which is already in the article, but also focusing on its relationship to the specific cultural background of Liverpool, and also on how it was largely taken over and diluted by the London music business. There would then also be a need for a separate article on Beat music, which is a much wider term and could could put Merseybeat in its context, together with references to the music scenes of Birmingham, Newcastle, London, Belfast, etc etc. and the European (Hamburg etc.) links. The term "Merseybeat" (the style of music, not the magazine) is generally known, so why not a separate article? Do you have strong views on this? Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Reg-king-album.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 01:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Samuelprody.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Aspects (talk) 01:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
CfD nomination of Category:People from Greater Wellington[edit]
I've reverted your arbitrary move of this page - since there is no other use on Wikipedia of the term "Second Chapter", no disambiguation was necessary. The similarities between "Second Chapter" and "Chapter Two" are too tenuous to require a link to a disambiguation page. Only the meaning is the same, the terms themselves are clearly different enough already. Thanks. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This note is to inform you that The Monkees do not qualify for inclusion in this article as they did not achieve #1 status simultaneous in the US and UK in the charts listed in the article in question so your passage about The Monkees will be deleted. Steelbeard1 (talk) 11:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies as I found evidence that the song "I'm A Believer" does qualify. Steelbeard1 (talk) 12:41, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's better. The links back up the information and is much better than your original unsourced posting. Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Useless redirect of Music single pages to other artists[edit]
I feel that your intervention on the single Substitute by the Clout disturb the way that it should be.
This page is about the single BY the Clout, so the note that Substitute was released by The righteous Borther is informative but the page must be labeled as the Substitute by the Clout, and another page for the Righteous Brothers release should be created... It so obvious for me, and I don't understand why you maintain the image of the Clout single on a page labeled for another artist...
So be for a long time a wiki contributor. Kumeon (talk) 17:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free media (Image:Logo-cherry-red.gif)[edit]
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo-cherry-red.gif. 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 'image' 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 "Image" 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) 07:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of The Clique (1960s UK band)[edit]
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Clique (1960s UK band), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. 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. Sassf (talk) 11:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Shawnpoo (talk) 20:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AfD nomination of Love Story (Jethro Tull song)[edit]
I have nominated Love Story (Jethro Tull song), 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/Love Story (Jethro Tull song). 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. Juvenile Deletionist 19:28, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated La-La-La-Lies, 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/La-La-La-Lies. 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. Juvenile Deletionist 19:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Jim McCarthy, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
No claim of notability, no reliable sources.
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. Jfire (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of This Woman's Work (disambiguation)[edit]
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. Sceptre(talk) 16:04, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Despite the first album's cover, the band was The Masters Apprentices. Other album/single covers show some with and some without the apostrophe. The article states that they deliberately omitted the apostrophe, and that they were named by founder Mick Bower as being apprentices to the masters of the blues with a selection of masters named (see Adelaide years section). Hence grammatically that should be The Masters' Apprentices not The Master's Apprentices. Both Ed Nimmervoll at Howlspace (see here) and Duncan Kimball at Milesago (see ref #2) use no apostrophe. Ian McFarlane in his Encyclopedia of Australian Rock & Pop (see ref #1) however does use the apostrophe. Nevertheless Jim Keays, another founding member, does not use the apostrophe either for his 1999 book title nor for his official website. APRA lists song performers as Masters Apprentices (e.g. "Undecided"). Finally when ARIA inducted the band into its Hall of Fame in 1998 they inducted The Masters Apprentices not The Master's Apprentices. The preponderance of other references in the article use no apostrophe, hence with no consensus for your changes could you please revert them to The Masters Apprentices. Further discussion should be held at Talk:The Masters Apprentices where I have placed a similar note.shaidar cuebiyar ( talk | contribs ) 06:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hello E-Kartoffel! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 5 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 942 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Hi my friend, I think you do great edits with The Shadows, and would like to collaborate with you on both Cliff Richard and the Shadows as I think we both together can turn these articles into FA status. If I add anyrthing new, out of respect, I will let you know. Please do the same for me, if you will. Thanks! Let us (you and me) turn these articles into "featured status" artcles! Thanks, my friend! Best, --Discographer (talk) 00:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I want to thank you for cleaning up the above move so well; you relinked all the relevant pages with Williams link on them.
Thanks again, Adabow (talk) 03:58, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Jackie wilson higher single.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Jackie wilson higher single.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
You have made changes to Jimmy Nicol without first airing your concerns or suggestions on the discussion page, and that feels a bit like a slap in the face. Choosing “Jimmy” over “Jimmie” was a conscious decision (and not a mistake) and perhaps you ought to have enquired as to why this was so - whilst at the same time putting forward your case for change. I could then have explained that while Nicol obviously spelt his name “Jimmie” (I was aware of the photos), record companies and journalists seemed to prefer “Jimmy”; and that spelling became the more popular of the two. That was the reasoning behind it, and I might want to change it back. But if I do, I will first seek consensus, unlike you. --Patthedog (talk) 11:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If a drummer has two different drumsets made with the same specific spelling of his name, it is a more than obvious message to me, and I respect this. What do badly informed journalists count? they don't - or what are you referring to in that direction? I know this was a rather massive move, and I'm sorry if it was surprising, but now you know I have my reasons (E-Kartoffel (talk) 16:53, 31 May 2010 (UTC))
Ok, let me explain. The reason it was “Jimmy” over “Jimmie” is because the former became the common spelling of his name, the other variations of it being acknowledged in the articles’ lead section. It was a toss-up as to which one was chosen, but as most books and articles referred to him as “Jimmy”, and we were quoting extensively from these, then it made sense to go with that. Listen, it’s not a major issue with me, but what did bother me (and still does) is your arrogance. Why didn’t you consult before going ahead? --Patthedog (talk) 17:42, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Now that the template has been renamed, half of the names are missing: the lyricists. Who will take care of that? --FordPrefect42 (talk) 16:50, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Codf1977 (talk) 14:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Lennon/McCartney songs not originally released by The Beatles[edit]
An article that you have been involved in editing, Matrix (name), has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Muhandes (talk) 09:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, this is your own proposal, except you didn't state a rational, start discussion, marked the target page or invited contributors (I use Help:Merging to remind me all the required steps). Since I support the idea I followed through. --Muhandes (talk) 09:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have deleted the - Category:British Invasion artists from the Bachelors with the comment "this band is unrelated to the british invasion (no hits))" I don't know what you count as "hits" but as far as I know, "Charmaine" reached #2 and "Diane" #10 in the US.
I say "as far as I know" because there is a lot of disinformation about the Bachelors, who had "a messy split" There has been a long standing edit war between the supporters of the Cluskey Brothers and the supporters of John Stokes which I quietened down by removing both sides versions of the split from the WP article, listing both sides sites and letting the reader decide. I don't want to start the factions off again, so propose reinstating the Category:British Invasion, unless you are sure I am wrong. Arjayay (talk) 12:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect J.R. Cobb. Since you had some involvement with the J.R. Cobb redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 11:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Wheels, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. 117Avenue (talk) 02:19, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This comment is posted at Talk:Tupelo Chain Sex - please respond there: I'm questioning the logic of removing the categorization of this band from Category:psychobilly groups and Category:American psychobilly groups under the rationale this band is not restricted enough to call them psychobilly. I wasn't aware that a musical group must be restricted to a single style in order to be considered part of a category. Given that the psychobilly classification of this group is derived from an article cited from The Miami News in a direct quote classifying the group as "psychobilly" (as well as other genres), I posit that "third party reputable source" trumps "personal opinion." Will wait for response before reverting. --Quartermaster (talk) 17:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Hi. I wanted to let you know that I moved the article back per WP:PRECISION, since it is the only article we have under the title and the term was left as a redirect. I did, though, put a hatnote on the article in case people are looking for "crying". --Moonriddengirl(talk) 17:00, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Looking at your other edits, it seems like maybe it really needs to be hatted to "crying (disambiguation)" and not to crying? Can you clarify what you're concerned will be confusing to people who wind up at that page? --Moonriddengirl(talk) 17:07, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Template:Sandy Denny. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Oneiros (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Desdemona (disambiguation). It took a fair amount of investigation to conclude your edits were to comply with MOS:DAB by removing unnavigable entries. Thanks, —EncMstr (talk) 01:29, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the big improvement in use of edit summaries. It is now much easier to figure out what you did in your edits. Keep up the good work! —EncMstr (talk) 23:42, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, E-K, for catching, and fixing, the big mistake we'd left in Template:Pop Chronicles. There is now a documentation page, so I'll move those links into the /doc section. DougHill (talk) 23:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. :) I disagree with your move there and have moved it back pending consensus for such a change. If you'd like to discuss, I've set out my reasoning at the article's talk page. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl(talk) 00:31, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you could do the same thing over at The Carpenters? (Maybe "Carpenters (band)" if somebody objects that the plural of a word should always redirect to its parent... hey, it happened over at Mentors (band).) Anyhow, somebody moved it ages ago citing some non-existent Wikipedia naming policy. (Almost beside the point - because, as you'll see, there is virtually no evidence supporting "The" Carpenters - here is a later discussion where people agree the name must be changed back.) Wikkitywack (talk) 07:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for giving me a note, currently "Carpenters" is the one eponymous album, impossible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Carpenters but the duo is definitely not a "band", a band is a singer, guitar, bass, drums line-up, difficult, maybe Carpenters (duo), (music duo), (vocal duo) any idea ? (E-Kartoffel (talk) 06:51, 1 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]
I notice that you made a recent edit for David Spero so thought I'd ask if you could take a look here on the Discussion page and consider making a quick addition to the article. I'm related to a member of one of the bands that Spero manages, so I have a conflict and don't want to edit the article directly.
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.
I see you have taken it upon yourself to move Wolf pack to Wolfpack (naval tactic), without any explanation or discussion that I can see:
Just what exactly do you think gives you the right to be moving pages around in this high-handed manner?
If you think a page needs moving you should discuss the matter beforehand; either take it to WP:RM or at the least open a discussion on the talk page. Even if it is an uncontroversial suggestion (this isn’t!), that at least would be a courtesy.
Sheesh! Xyl 54 (talk) 00:50, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, unfortunately the pre-existing article has been, ahem, "taken over" for the subject you've been writing about. I seen no evidence of the newer, 2010 band meeting notability requirements. I restored the per-existing artilce. I'm taking this one step at a time, but needed you to know. Dlohcierekim 15:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just commenting that I think your change there, and edit summary, is highly debatable. Multiple sources (not to mention articles here) identify him as "rock & roll". Is it really necessary to try and split hairs in that way? Genres inevitably overlap. I'd include him as both "rock & roll" and "Chicago blues". Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that he is a electric or Chicago blues musician that 'inspired' R 'n' R, (but as he even recorded a 'Surf' album...), the Blues and R 'n' R scene were extremely divided in the 1950s and 1960s for reasons known. Now, in retrospect, now that he is well-known and somehow respected, people like to take him over to Rock 'n' Roll, a "white" version of blues.(E-Kartoffel (talk) 11:29, 15 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]
I'm pleased that you've re-added the genre to the infobox. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:25, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed your speedy delete request from this page as we have an article on the artist. The A9 criteria state that it applies "where the artist's article does not exist." Dpmuk (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
While it may be true that ""Joerg" is an internationalized version, very unusual in germany)" his own personal website seems to make it pretty clear he goes by "Joerg" . On his own German language web site at www.joergdeisinger.de he refers to himself as "Joerg Deisinger". While you may feel that Jörg is more culturally correct, and while others may have credited him as Jörg, I think it makes more sense to spell the person's name the way they chose to spell it. So unless you can find a reputable reference that contradicts that subjects own website I'd request that you undo your changes. Userfriendly (talk) 04:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
there are no Umlauts possible in URLs, that is the only reason why the url is joergdeisinger.de - see "Impressum" (imprint) section of www.joergdeisinger.de (E-Kartoffel (talk) 23:10, 17 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:German characters in written fiction[edit]
Hi: you moved the Graham Bond Organisation page to The Graham Bond Organization seemingly arbitrarily, and without discussion. While that may be construed as 'being bold', in this case it is probably contentious - at least there have now been 2 comments (including mine). And from previous comments above, it appears that this wouldn't be the first time a page name has been arbitrarily changed without probably necessary discussion. You might want to drift by the talk page and comment - I'm suggesting at least a) a return to the original page name, and more practically and correctly b) complete removal of the page. The rationale is there, and doesn't just rely on what the (minimal) recording output says on the cover. When the historically accepted spelling, and the experts view, is tilted to 'Organisation', I'd suggest that's where people look to find it. Whatever, I've requested discussion on the talk page to see what the consensus is. Brieflysentient (talk) 23:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello E-Kartoffel! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Women in the Third Reich, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Hitler called the regime of that period the Third Reich. If you want to suggest an alternative title to the article, suggest it on the article's Discussion Page. Adding "so-called Third Reich" to the article opening phrase is odd, and the edit comment does nothing to shed light on whatever reasoning you were using when you made the change. OttawaAC (talk) 01:39, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, this message is to let you know about disambiguation links you've recently created. A link to a disambiguation page is almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:48, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Folk songs adapted by The Animals[edit]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:19, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 17[edit]
Hi. When you recently edited The Story (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Story (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there, I see you have just created the above category along with Bernie Taupin and Gary Osborne. Having checked a couple of the members of the category I see the articles specifically do not support the creation of these categories.In other words i.e. Elton John did not write the words. WP:SONGS reads, The songwriters should be placed in either Category:Songs by songwriter (“Category:Songs written by <songwriter>”), Category:Songs by lyricist("Category:Songs with lyrics by <lyricist>") or Category:Songs by composer ("Category:Songs with music by <composer>"). Only one category should be created for each songwriter, so if a songwriter contributes words and/or music then the category should be in songs by songwriter only (my capitals).
So with this in mind, I am in a quandary whether to list the categories for merging into 'Song by songwriter, or, as the categories are not supported by the text for list for CfD. Perhaps you might like to discuss this?
I shall watch your talkpage for the time being to keep the conversation in one place. --Richhoncho (talk) 06:30, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In my experience there are hardly any songwriters that are lyricists only. It would be unusual, as most lyricists are musicians. There are only people who are ~~known as~~ lyricists. It seems a new rule has to found for these lyricist/composer categories. difficult (E-Kartoffel (talk) 12:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Are you suggesting that we merge, say Category:Songs with lyrics by Bernie Taupin and Category:Songs with music by Bernie Taupin into a new category Category:Songs written by Bernie Taupin? That would be one solution, but I suspect others might object. As far as I know Taupin does not play an instrument and is purely a lyricist. Ditto for Osborne. I think the categories you created are redundant, especially as the text for the articles do not support their inclusion in these categories. You could list from delete under db-author if you choose, or, I could take it to CfD for a community decision. I am pretty easy on your final decision as long as each person has one category in the songwriting scheme - which is pretty much standard WP practice across all fields. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The official information given for example to GEMA about "Rocket Man" is that composers of music (Komponist) are John and Taupin and lyricists (Textdichter) are John and Taupin. That is quite a reliable source. And also: Not allowing Elton John the category 'lyrics by' suggests that he never wrote lyrics... (unjust and quite unlikely) (E-Kartoffel (talk) 13:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
The GEMA source will be accurate to a point. Publishing contracts still generally define separately lyricist and composer, this is more historical than what generally happens. So it is possible (and there are financial reasons, too convoluted to explain here) why John & Taupin, or more likely DJM Music, listed them both as lyricist and composer. However, if you think that GEMA is correct then we need to create Category:Songs written by Bernie Taupin, Category:Songs written by Gary Osborne and Category:Songs written by Elton John and delete all the existing categories. This would, according to your opinion (and not one I share), be the correct course of action. BTW We have still not addressed the issue of the text of the article and categories not agreeing - which is reason enough to empty the categories. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS You might find this book illuminating! Says it all really. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:25, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 11[edit]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Sorry, but I've had to revert your edits to the New Seekers albums. I know the situation between US and UK albums was confusing, but your edits made it even more so, plus some of the info you added was wrong. Everything in the articles is backed up by the refs, please see these for more information.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is confusing, I'll be more careful in the future. (E-Kartoffel (talk) 08:21, 14 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Thanks. Good work on some of the links btw.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 17:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 18[edit]
Hi. When you recently edited Mamy Blue, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anda (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for September 14[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leontine Sagan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Play (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for October 14[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dan Turner (director), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frightfest (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Hello, and thanks for creating this article. It's been tagged for notability. Could you please look it over and see WP:NALBUMS, and see if you can improve it? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 21:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 31[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 10[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
List of Columbia Graphophone Company artists[edit]
Columbia was initially US-American, okay, but was (and still is) absolutely unrelated to CBS (which did not exist then). I don't see why all American productions should be listed under the CBS "Columbia" logo. Columbia Graphophone is more closely related to older Columbia releases than the CBS label. Then another list needs to be created, for the initial Columbia history, would be useful, in my opinion (E-Kartoffel (talk) 13:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC))[reply]
Remember that the American Columbia Records, now owned by Sony Music, goes back 125 years, going through a few ownership changes over the years. The British and American Columbia Records parted ways in 1922, only to see the British company buy the American company. After English Columbia merged with HMV to form EMI, American anti-trust laws forced the sale of American Columbia which wound up in the hands of American Record Corporation which was bought by CBS. Steelbeard1 (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and as EMI Columbia and CBS Columbia strictly never collaborated (one would expect that UK Columbia recordings would be released by US Columbia, but that did not happen), artists of this and that label should be listed on two different pages. The Byrds and Simon & Garfunkel are not label mates of Pink Floyd, these are productions by two different companies. Sony only bought the trademark, the recordings for that label are still owned by EMI. Sony has not used the Columbia Graphophone logo for a proper label, only as a revivalist reference, and it is unlikely that they will do in the future (also because they do not own the recordings associated with that label). The CBS Columbia logo does not look different by accident.(E-Kartoffel (talk) 22:38, 11 April 2013 (UTC))[reply]
Your latest edits for the Columbia Graphophone Company article were reverted for three reasons. The parent company, Electric & Musical Industries Ltd, was known as EMI from day one, the EMI's Columbia label WAS replaced by the EMI Records label in 1973 (periodic revivals of the Columbia imprint notwithstanding), and Sony DID NOT own CBS Records at that time in the mid-1960s. Steelbeard1 (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, The Columbia Records label IS active worldwide, except in Japan, because Sony bought the Columbia Records trademarks from EMI. Steelbeard1 (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sony does not use the EMI/Columbia Graphophone trademark, it uses the CBS Columbia trademark, only since Sony bought both trademarks (1990), the CBS Columbia trademark is used worldwide. Before that, for decades, those were strictly split, CBS "Columbia" was restricted to USA, Canada (E-Kartoffel (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2013 (UTC))[reply]
You are mistaken. Like what EMI did in the 1980s with the "magic notes" logo for a 'retro look', if you bother to read the section about the trade mark transfer from EMI to Sony, it has this passage: "Today, Sony Music prefers using the "walking eye" logo (previously used by the old CBS Records and based on the Columbia Records logo introduced in the US and Canada in 1955) for the Columbia Records trade mark in the UK[11] and elsewhere. However, the "magic notes" logo is occasionally used, usually to give a 'retro' feel (such as the 2008 MGMT singles that use the "magic notes" on the vinyl labels but the "walking eye" on the covers)." You can see this for yourself at [1]Steelbeard1 (talk) 20:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop removing useful redirects on disambiguation pages, as you did on the page Hope (disambiguation), with these edits that removed the links Hope (comics) and Hope (girl band). Per WP:DABREDIR, "A redirect should be used to link to a specific section of an article if the title of that section is more or less synonymous with the disambiguated topic." That is precisely the case in these two instances. If you are going to continue to edit dab pages, I encourage you to become more familiar with the Manual of Style for disambiguation pages. Regards,--ShelfSkewedTalk 14:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for April 17[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Love Ballad (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Back to Front (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:17, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Yes Album, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Bass and Organ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:48, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wildfire Studios may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
* ''[[Balls of Steel (game)|Balls of Steel]]'', published by ''Pinball Wizards'' (see [[3D Realms]]}
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Terry Wilson (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Back Street Crawler (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for July 10[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
E-Kartoffel, I may be missing something, but I don't understand why you removed the hatnote at John Davis (English explorer). I've reverted (which is unusual for me - normally I'd just ask you about it), and I'd be grateful for an education if you know something I don't. But isn't this Wikipedia:Hatnote#Examples_of_proper_use? Shem (talk) 18:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He is the only English Explorer John Davis, therefore the note is redundant, only if there were several "English Explorers named John Davis", this note would be applicable. This note is for articles that are in high danger of a wrong link, but here, noone will link to this article in error (E-Kartoffel (talk) 08:49, 23 July 2013 (UTC))[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Andrew Levitas may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
As one of the previous contributors to {{Infobox film}} or as one of the commenters on it's talk page, I would like to inform you that there has been a RfC started on the talk page as to implementation of previously deprecated parameters. Your comments and thoughts on the matter would be welcomed. Happy editing!
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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paddy Chambers 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. Egghead06 (talk) 21:07, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed deletion of The Scorpions (London band)[edit]
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.
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brett Sheridan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Disambiguation link notification for November 25[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rory Bourke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Music publisher. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitchhiking (disambiguation) 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. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings from Amsterdam. In the past you have had some involvement in the article about Pete Dello. In his discography is mentioned a single by Lace, called People People. However it seems that that Lace is another band then the band of Peter Dello. It was released on another label (Columbia), with Norman A. Smith as producer. See this Japanese site aswell. If you agree with me, please remove the item, if not let me know.Ceescamel (talk) 10:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Honeycombs-lp-65.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:27, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
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.
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.
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Happy Birthday (song). Since you had some involvement with the Happy Birthday (song) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BDD (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I wanted to inform you that I put a move request for the Zickzack lable article to ZickZack. You moved it in 2011(see here), but the name is actually ZickZack, see the label's web site I put on the Talk:Zickzack. --Cyfal (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, E-Kartoffel. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natural Gas (band) 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. Andise1 (talk) 03:36, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parents' Choice Award 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. Toddst1 (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I noticed that you recently made a contribution to the Forever Gold article that seemed to be a test. Your test worked! However, test edits on live articles disrupt Wikipedia and may confuse readers. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! snood1205(Say Hi! (talk)) 19:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
According to IMDb, Matt Hill is credited, but your edit removed him. Is IMDb wrong? It wouldn't be the first time.. Mac Dreamstate (talk) 18:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, E-Kartoffel. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
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.
Thanks for uploading File:Pipelineinstrumentalreview73.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, E-Kartoffel. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Same (album). Since you had some involvement with the Same (album) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalenciaᐐT₳LKᐬ 15:37, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for February 11[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An article you recently created, Sonny West, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 06:12, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for creating V.I.P. (1991 film)! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)
I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-
Please add your references.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.
Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
In January 1st, 2022 works made by authors who died in 1951 will be enter in public domain in the countries which the copyright lenght is Life + 70 years after the death of the author and have important works.
Thanks for uploading File:Collings guitars logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V.I.P. (1991 film) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Hydromania (talk) 04:47, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A New Day Records until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. 78.26(spin me / revolutions) 20:32, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for January 1[edit]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Rascals, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rascal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned non-free image File:Nicole ray make it hot.jpg[edit]
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Nicole ray make it hot.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:30, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Heinzlp.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. LizRead!Talk! 16:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for December 22[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Outcast (comic book), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Outcast.
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. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkltalk 17:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for January 27[edit]
Hi, do you think it's an idea to recreate this page as there is now a page for the late 1960s / early 1970s Canadian jazz rock band Natural Gas? Cheers Karl Twist (talk) 12:02, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't replace useful redirects, as you did with this edit on the dab page Survivor. See the guidance at MOS:DABREDIR. Redirects that link directly to named sections or list entries that match the disambiguated term are both acceptable and useful. —ShelfSkewedTalk 18:18, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for March 3[edit]
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Evil One, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CBS Records.
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading File:Over-under-sideways-frg.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Hello, I'm PamD. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Andy Edwards (sculptor), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. PamD 10:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rather than undo your edit, I found and added a source - but please remember to source all content, especially information about living people. Thanks. PamD 10:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for uploading Image:Logo-cherry-red.gif. 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).
Hello E-Kartoffel! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 5 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 942 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Template:Sandy Denny. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Oneiros (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Template:Sam Brown has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Template:Coconut Records has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:31, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 June 18 § Category:Association football people by prefecture in Japan. Qwerfjkltalk 16:39, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
