User talk:OnBeyondZebrax/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NPOV[edit]

I disagree with you. Although it can lead to POV, it is important to say how the public recieved a film for example, because this reception is often different to that of the critics. Anyway, "critics" == "prominent experts" in my opinion. What do you think? Maybe there is a way to rephrase this. Yandman 14:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Skinhead article[edit]

In your comments by your edit to the skinhead article, you wrote that the text I reverted "...is filled with weasel words, original research..." What specifically are you referring to? I have no issue with the edit you made to the one sentence, but I'm not sure if you have other examples. I didn't write most of that text, but it looks pretty accurate to me, and it's nothing that I haven't read, heard or seen before. I have been careful about not just instantly reverting huge sections just because of a few errors. I always read through the changes and only delete or revert content that is innacurate, unverifiable, point of view or irrelevant. Of course I sometimes make mistakes, but I usually catch those later and remedy the situation. Spylab 12:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Spylab[reply]

I looked back at the article, and saw a few examples of what you mean. I replaced words like "exploded" and "closely tied" with more academic and verifiable terms. I'll take another look to see any others I have missed. The skinhead article is notorious for editors (often anonymous) trying to promote their point of view (usually US-based) and posting unverified myths that they have read on message boards and other unreliable sources. My goal is to make the article as accurate and relevant as possible. Spylab 13:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Spylab[reply]

B-movie[edit]

You're quite right. I've restored the quote, clarifying the context. Best, Dan—DCGeist 13:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aestheticization of violence[edit]

Hi, Nazamo. I do agree with you that the article still needs a considerable amount of work. I hope you're agreeable to my copying and posting your comment to the article's Talk page, as it raises a couple of important, specific points. I disagree with one and agree with the other (as I state there), but certainly others interested in the article should consider both of them. Best, Dan —DCGeist 18:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes on Jazz fusion[edit]

Your changes are generally a mess, and there was no POV in the article as it existed, and you made no specific references to where you saw a POV. You also butchered the layout, and now I get to spend hours reverting what you've done. Tvccs 23:36, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In looking at your contribution history, you have an obvious interest in the bass and bass guitar - in looking at your changes and deletions - it would be a POV to say Jaco Pastorius was innovative, because it's an unsourced "POV", even though we and thousands of others would agree with it. Such criteria is a POV in and of itself, and if POV is that large a concern, your efforts might well have been better spent researching and linking/bookmarking the content that was there. The deletions you made on Soft Machine, for example, are completely inappropriate - Third is their largest selling record by far, was in print for many, many years, and is seen by most familiar with the Canterbury Scene as one of, if not the, leading recording of that era - Hugh Hopper's interviews, which are linked on his page and the Soft Machine page, support that. and I see little or no other contributions from you to anything else to do with Canterbury. The various references cited in the article - most of which predated my contributions, support the prior article, as do other Wikipedia and other sources referenced. It's also not appropriate to move the radio section down to the 1990's and 2000's section you renamed, it's not related. And the majority of other edits, no matter how well-intentioned, create havoc with the prior article, and reflect your own POV. Tvccs 00:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of POV, you are the only contributor to that article in the last however many months that feels that fusion was "well-represented in the 1980's - nearly everyone else has concurred otherwise. You also removed the section on virtuosity, which is also your POV - you have to be a virtuoso to play most of that music, and very few musicians can at the highest levels, or play and improvise in those meters, etc. Tvccs 00:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry to plunk this down here, I can't find a "add talk here" place (perhaps I missed it). I saw your site, and I appreciated a lot of your points, about learning about a topic before you edit a page. Here are some friendly responses to your message....
Thanks for your comments.
Your changes are generally a mess--Just trying to do good-faith copyediting to improve flow, and downgrade strong claims to a more defensible position (e.g. I proposed changing Jaco from the "most celebrated bassist" (or similar phrase), which may be hard to prove, because many bassists have been "celebrated" in bass magazines to "innovative")
I think it's a reasonable forward to claim that Jaco Pastorius and Stanley Clarke were likely the two most influential bassists with fusion ties to the 70's. That commentary was here before I arrived, and I believe it's generally accepted within the fusion community from all that I've read over the past 20-30 years. I'm a former record buyer with a major chain and know many of these people personally as well...have 10,000 recordings, have written liner notes, have music blogs, etc etc etc. God forbid we have anything "OR"...In regards to the layout issues, you have to look at the images on a page and adjust those as well if you're going to mess with copy, not just edit copy and leave a page looking like hell with edits - I don't touch pages unless I'm prepared to edit not only the copy, but the layout as well, and I've had to learn various tricks to make that easier. I might prefer a shorter lead as well, but the prior lead, with the Miles Bitches Brew cover, looked like hell from a layout standpoint, and I didn't want to move the Miles cover just because of my own preferences as it belonged there according to others. Another editor took my original section on virtuosity and time signatures and moved it up into the lead, which I thought was a good move (see the page discussion). I thought it was a good thing to add the Tony Williams Lifetime cover art, which helped balance the layout, and it means the lead is longer than usual. It's a matter of balancing layout and content, and I thought it was the best option at the time. Leaving huge gaps in displayed pages looks terrible, and as I've reviewed pages cited by Wikipedia as excellent I've found layout is an important issue, as it should be. I should also add that I'm reluctant to delete or edit the work of others much except for very minor grammatical cleanup and obvious fact errors or omissions, this is supposed to be a collaborative effort. I'm not the god's gospel on this, and I know people, like the guys that run Audiophile Imports, that can run circles around me. I'd rather add and build than chop and diminish.
and there was no POV in the article as it existed, I argue that statements like "In addition to Davis, the most important figures in early fusion were.." could have some POV. I argue that the POV exists in the phrase "the most important". If it was softened to "other important", sure, that's defensible. But to say a list of 6 or 7 are "the most important," I believe you'd need an expert source saying this.
Again, there are plenty of "expert sources" that have agreed on this for years to the point of common knowledge - there are not a lot of definitive fusion bibles out there, actually none. There are articles referenced at the bottom of the page that do generally support those contentions, however.
and you made no specific references to where you saw a POV. Sorry, should have been more specific in edit summary
You also butchered the layout,I didn't believe that the radio airplay para was needed in the Lede...but if you call that "butchering", OK.
See above commentary about balancing layout and copy - One of the things I have consistently found since I was a record buyer in the 1970's, and have seen and heard dozens of times since, is people asking why they never hear this music on the radio, in the U.S., whereas Scott Henderson and other people have talked about a much wider acceptance overseas.
better spent researching and linking/bookmarking...I agree with this point...I have started some articles, and there are some editors who just keep cutting and deleting, and I feel like you...If you feel so strongly that X content is unsourced or whatever, why not improve it, and don't just cut it out. For the record, I don't think I actually ERASED content, I just tried to copyedit and downgrade claims.
I'm glad you sense the same, and I try to stay away from deleting "unsourced" material I know is reasonable when there are no traditional sources, which is most of the time in what I write about. And yes, there was siginificant content that was deleted in the form of edits. deletions you made on Soft Machine...references to bands being leaders of scenes are commonly made in music pages...However, I believe these claims, since they are subjective, need to be backed up by a quote from an expert (music critic/music historian). Your point that Soft Machine are the leaders may be fine...but many Wiki editors claim that XXX singer is the leader of YYY scene, or ZZZ band is the leader of the QQQQ scene, without references. Read the Canterbury scene Wiki page, the Soft Machine page, there are books on Canterbury, many other references, it's generally, not universally (there are a few Caravan and National Health junkies for example), accepted that Soft Machine was the lead band from the Canterbury scene, and that has been the case for 30-plus years, and they have the record sales to support it, having outsold anyone else Canterbury-related with the exception of Pink Floyd by a wide margin. I already referenced the Hugh Hopper interview in my prior comments. In this case we aren't talking about today's bands, per se, this is established and discussed ad nauseum history.
It's also not appropriate to move the radio section down to the 1990's and 2000's section you renamed, it's not related. Sorry, probably not a good place, but I didn't believe the lede was a good place.
See above.
And the majority of other edits, no matter how well-intentioned, create havoc with the prior article, and reflect your own POV.Just trying to improve the article.
Again, your improvements need to be balanced against the contributions of dozens of others, especially when you start chopping up copy. I try and respect the time and effort of others, regardless of whether I totally agree with what they've said, or exactly how they said it.
you are the only contributor to that article in the last however many months that feels that fusion was "well-represented in the 1980's - nearly everyone else has concurred otherwise.Maybe it is a problem of definition of fusion, but the facts indicate that there are Grammy Awards for Jazz Fusion throughout the 1980s....Grammy Awards of 1989: Yellowjackets for Politics Grammy Awards of 1988: Pat Metheny Group for Still Life (Talking) Grammy Awards of 1987: Bob James & David Sanborn for Double Vision Grammy Awards of 1986: David Sanborn for Straight To The Heart Grammy Awards of 1985: Pat Metheny Group for First Circle Grammy Awards of 1984: Pat Metheny Group for Travels Grammy Awards of 1983: Pat Metheny for Offramp Grammy Awards of 1980: Weather Report for 8:30...plus other albums from the 1980s, such as Weather Report (self-titled album) summer of 1981, Yellowjackets Yellowjackets 1981. Yellowjackets Mirage A Trois 1983, Yellowjackets Samurai Samba 1985, Yellowjackets Shades 1986, Yellowjackets Four Corners 1987, Yellowjackets Politics 1988. Yellowjackets The Spin 1989, plus Chick Corea Elektric Band...
The above list generally speaks to the exact issue of the submergence of fusion into the smooth jazz genre and the resulting confusion about fusion (ha-ha). I actually added something to the smooth jazz page on this. By this time Weather Report was a Birdland-driven whatever that was a shell of its original improvisational monster, the Metheny albums cited are from his smoothest phase (and from which many commercial themes were taken - I heard one for Publix Supermakets to the point of near insanity), David Sanborn and Bob James are well-known as smoothers, as is Yellowjackets. The music the Grammys awarded has little or none of the experimentation/improvisation fusion was best known for and is far more littered with the safe and catchy hooks, etc. of smooth jazz, which is why the section on confusion, etc. is appropriately included in the article. If you looked at the smooth jazz station playlists of the time such as the pioneering WLOQ-FM in Winter Park, Florida, the albums you cited above would be all over their air, whereas they wouldn't have touched Allan Holdsworth with a ten foot pole.
You also removed the section on virtuosity, which is also your POV - you have to be a virtuoso to play most of that music, and very few musicians can at the highest levels, or play and improvise in those meters, etc. I would argue that all top professional instrumental musicians with solo careers in genres ranging from bebop, classical, or bluegrass are probably virtuosos on their instruments. If you claim that fusion musicians have an exceptional level of virtuosity, beyond say a top bebop player or classical soloist, then please add in an expert source (musicologist/music critic) to support this.Nazamo 14:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Classical musicians have a high level of technical virtuosity, but rarely improvise at anything near the level of the best fusion players, or play in odd meters with rare exceptions, and the improvisation that does exist, no matter how beautiful, is generally limited by the form with some rare exceptions. Be-Bop players and especially some avant-garde players obviously improvise, but again, you rarely hear the complexity of odd meters and changes combined with that improvisation (I'd point to maybe the Art Ensemble of Chicago as the best exception), as opposed to a band like Planet X, for example, that may make dozens of meter changes in a single song, or something like Don Ellis playing in a 19/8 that almost no one can play period. Bluegrass players rarely mess much with meters as well with some exceptions, and I wish like mad bands like Union Station would use their gifts of improvisation more as the virtuosity and ability is obviously there - but again, I don't hear bluegrass recordings where you hear the aspects of fusion where you have extended track lengths and soloing combined with mutiple meter changes, odd meters and virtuosity. If you know of any, please point them my way - I was, for example, disappointed in the recent Union Station live DVD which featured great playing all over, but almost nothing that varied much from what had been recorded and released in the studio, even when the songs seemed to scream out for improvisation live. I should also add/clarify that much of my thoughts on virtuosity is aimed at the rock genre, where people like Bruce Hornsby have made a point of talking about how rare a real concentration on virtuosity is in the latest generation of musicians. I have made an adjustment to the virtuosity section, and will edit it further in order to clarify/improve it. Again, thanks for your comments, and I hope you find mine useful as well. Tvccs 22:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tvccs"

Thank you for your most recent comments - please use the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tvccs, or discussion page, am I am using here, for future comments/discussion with users. Tvccs 17:33, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Once again...let's leave the comments here from both and I will check back - Although your extensive changes on jazz fusion again are well-intended, I'm sure, they are again filled with deletions that didn't need to be made, and in many cases the copy again makes no sense - Genuine fusion carries on is not a POV - it's a direct statement redressing this issue of smooth jazz and confusion as a result, and the copy edits you made once again butcher that very needed perspective. I haven't had time yet to read all that you did - have you ever heard "Lotus" from Santana? Your rewrite of that section does him an injustice, and the section on Lotus not being released in the U.S. for twenty years was very relevant. I will add more later. Tvccs 22:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a limited further review...I see many more problems...much like the first time. I've looked at your user contributions - can you plase point me to something you've largely created rather than edited? I see a lot of editing, and I see others have complained about your hacking up articles as well. Tvccs 22:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read your comments quickly...thought we'd leave them all here...but...as in the first go-round, you again deleted content i.e. Santana, which you discovered on further review the first time. Please link here, if you would be so kind, articles you've generally created. Thank you. Tvccs 04:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Let me also add, for the record, that I write for a NY Times newspaper, including material about music, and have for many years. I've also written and produced dozens of television interviews and musical performances for more than ten years, and served as an editor and Executive Producer for many more. I work directly with the artists themselves on numerous occasions, including Wikipedia. Tvccs 10:55, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Children of Men[edit]

I don't like the edits you have made to the article on Children of Men. Your edits are unnecessary and somewhat random; they have disrupted the flow of the synopsis, you've made a few errors, and have generally chopped out a great deal of information. And you haven't even given an explanation as to why you've done this. If you aren't happy with the way the article appears, it would be polite to say so on the talk page and inform other users of your opinions, before you just start tearing articles apart. Rusty2005 22:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frank and Silver[edit]

Hi, Nazamo. So...there aren't articles on either of them. I have a strong allergy to red links, but I'm resisting it here. If you start the articles, as you said, I'll help out as I can. I know nothing of Frank other than his seminal article (and maybe that's all there is to know); I have in my library most of what Silver has written, so I can certainly contribute there. Best, Dan —DCGeist 22:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I'll see if there's anything on Frank in my library. As for oneiric/oneirism, that's an interesting cite you give for "oneirism." On the other hand, the very same source--i.e., Princeton--give for "oneiric": "of or relating to or suggestive of dreams" (see here). Similarly, MedicineNet.com gives for "oneiric": "Relating to dreams; dream-like." (see here). Not to mention the latest edition of the standard Merrian-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary: "of or relating to dreams : dreamy." The translation, by the way, is direct; Borde and Chaumeton's original French is "onirique." They use the word often, as they do the standard French noun for "dream": rêve. In their discussion of noir, they never use the standard French noun for "daydream": rêverie.—DCGeist 03:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think developing an article on dreams/oneirism in the critical context you describe is an excellent idea. My immediate feeling is that it's too complex a notion to deal with in a footnote, but if you find a good article online on the topic, I think it's fine to link to it until Wikipedia has its own article. A very interesting book directly on this topic came out about a year ago: The Power of Movies: How Screen and Mind Interact, by Colin McGinn, a profesor of philosophy. He investigates "how heightened reality characterizes both film narrative and dreams" and explores the variety of ways in which movies are dreamlike (and dreams are movielike). It's something you might want to take a look at it, or, if you initiate an article from other sources, I can bring some of McGinn's observations in.
Yes, that is interesting about Silver. I had vaguely heard that he was involved in film production, but had no sense to what extent until you raised it and I looked him up at IMDb. A somwhat comparable case is that of James Schamus--the very successful producer of Ang Lee's movies (Brokeback, Crouching Tiger), he's also a professor of highbrow film theory and philosophy at Columbia University (I briefly attended a class of his there). Of course, Silver is the leading presence in the noir critical field; I don't believe Schamus has written nearly as much in terms of film theory/history. Best, Dan—DCGeist 22:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just had a chance to look at the Frank article--terrific job!—DCGeist 05:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oneiric (film theory)[edit]

Just had a look. Excellent work.—DCGeist 21:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good addition to Art film--the disclaimer works well and helps with some of the contradictions of having mainstream films listed with arthouse, something that's bothered me but I had no idea how it could be resolved short of editorializing mainstream vs. arthouse. Freshacconci 15:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Art film I don't like the what is taking place on the Art Film page. I think in Your attempts to edit you went out and copied some list of a web page about Indi films, becasue many of the films I am finding are out of place, not indi films or unnecessary and somewhat random; I do not know for shre if you did this but I hope you are cheaking your facts, this page now needs a lot of work. I would like to know how you feel about this. . .Grosscha 20:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like your Idea about putting the movies at the bottom in the decade time line. I think until we get this page better sorted out keeping it simple would be best, but after that I think adding more info would be a great Idea, and some pic's would do some good. Grosscha 21:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, simple, and inform, this way people do not become confused, and if people do want more information all they need do is click the link. let me know if you have any other ideas for this page , I am ready to help, just point me in the right detection Grosscha 21:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noir for all[edit]

I finally got a chance to look at the Simple English film noir article. The only thing I feel called upon to say is that I think it's absolutely wonderful that you've done this. Best, Dan—DCGeist 06:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resident Evil: Apocalypse[edit]

Oh, well thank you. :] Funny thing is I actually had to do a bit of research to figure out what you were talking about. I remember now about deleting the triva section, but I still think the article has a lot more work that needs to be done. There's a section of Miscellaneous Information thats essentially a trivia section in disguise. I haven't gotten to narrowing it down and adding the important stuff into the article quite yet. Good job with the plot edits anyways. I think now all it really needs is a little more tweaking here and there, and perhaps edited to flow a bit more. I'm not entirely sure. -Lindsey8417 07:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spielberg[edit]

In my view disreputing a popular film magazine for being populist or whatever is quite POV. If a major establishment says something like that then it is notable. Still, thanks for doing some clean-up on the article: it's become so long I've found it impenetrable. Wiki-newbie 17:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, all major published magazines have a valuable voice on Wikipedia. Still, good work you've doing on Munich. Wiki-newbie 18:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

--Mel Etitis (Talk) 08:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Art television, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Oo7565 19:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My delete suggestion wasn't meant to be harsh, but I don't think the term is sufficiently noteworthy to warrant its own topic. Perhaps as a paragraph section on Kristin Thompson's page, or under a broader television article. --Jajasoon 01:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quality television[edit]

The problem is that this isn't a straightforward, objective concept; it's an evaluative notion (as if we were to have one article on Music and one on Good music). I honestly doubt that it would survive an AfD. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 20:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, but scholars and critics also talk about "great art" and "good music", "good food" and "fine wine" — evaluations all. "Quality television" isn't a term of art any more than any of the others; like them there will probably be a great deal of agreement among mature, educated people — but it's still not objective. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 20:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spielberg[edit]

Hi, Finally, an editor with the same "allergy" to "fluff" writing in Wikipedia. Like you, I am tired of "fluff" writing, especially in music and arts articles, when we hear that so-and-so band is "the most influential and important rock band in the history of music" and that so-and-so rock singer "is widely considered to have the greatest voice in all of rock history." Whenever I see this style of writing, I purge it!Nazamo 03:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actually believe that there are "others" of "us" out there :). Seriously, I have been only removing material from the project lately since at least 90% if not more, of the material in here is without sources. The project has exploded in content over the last 18 months. Good and bad imho. Most of the material is probably correct or added in good faith, but without references, who should believe it? I surely would not. Anyways, best of luck and let me know if you need assistance with "fluff removal". Cheers! --Tom 13:22, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bouncer[edit]

Responded on my page. Cheers. MadMaxDog 10:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I am impressed at the stuff you have added to the page. Even if it again meant I had to clean up some refs... MadMaxDog 13:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stones Edits[edit]

Thanks for the edit of the intro. I hope you continue to pay attention to the Stones article. Mr Anoymous

Double bass edits[edit]

Thank you for your great edits to double bass. Your additions on bluegrass slapping are most enlightening. Badagnani 20:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of released Guantanamo prisoners who allegedly returned to battle[edit]

Hi Nazamo. You are off to such a great start on the article List of released Guantanamo prisoners who allegedly returned to battle that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 18:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

The Barnstar of Music
Awarded to Nazamo for exceptional contributions to music-related articles. Great work! Cricket02 18:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have sources off-hand because I put that back in while doing high-speed vandalism reversion, but I do know it's a legitimate usage of the term. Why don't you improve the article by adding some sources; here's a few I got really fast. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Please reply on my talk page if you have any other concerns. Thanks! east.718 19:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you beat my message, great job on the additions! east.718 19:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I admit I went a little over the top with my inclusion of Saxa's history... but what do you say we keep in the line about his peers referring to him as "legendary?" I lost count of the number of times I read that while browsing through sites reading interviews and bios... and many were by fellow musicians rather than critics. That was the purpose of my reference to the site by the former Steel Pulse member... even someone from another band refers to him as such! - Steve3849 talk 04:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for adding to Rockets page, I think you've cleared up many inaccuracies and false and libelous information that Pfistermeister repeteadly insists on posting. Peace, Black-E

I appreciate your copy edits to the acid house article, especially in the introductory sections, but the etymology section and references sections are now rather messy. Are you still working on it?

I think the bulleted list provided better readability because it allowed the reader to skip the variable-length explanations for each item, whereas your prose version rather forces one to trudge through it. The bulleted list also makes it easier to imply that no one item has any more weight than any other.

I'm very wary of using "perhaps" and "may be due to" types of phrases like those you've added. I had tried to avoid that wording in the article because it makes statements be speculative, which is forbidden in Wikipedia articles. Please take this into consideration as you make your edits, even though it may seem superficial. It can make the difference between the article's stability and another editor coming along and deleting everything on the grounds that it has the look of original research. —mjb 18:46, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response to yours on my talk page: It's not that there's too much text in the references (I think it's all quite useful), it's just that the formatting got crazy when you moved things around. There were various markup issues when I looked at it earlier today. I'll wait until you're done before commenting further, though. —mjb 21:20, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You've combined some things such that the Genesis P-Orridge info is now wrong. Please make it clear that 1. He claims to have invented acid house (citation still needed for this, I think); 2. In the Better Living Through Circuitry interview he does not make this claim but rather says that when he asked a Chicago record store clerk for the weirdest records on hand, he was pointed to the "acid house" section (the clerk used the term; it was apparently new to P-Orridge). He listened to them to try to figure out what made them psychedelic, and he came away convinced that the tempo was the key element. Thanks! —mjb 02:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Children of Men edits[edit]

You might want to revisit the article, as the inclusion of citations in the plot subheader is in violation wth the film article template. I like what you propose, but you have to find a place elsewhere to include citations. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Milkshake[edit]

The Milkshake article received heavy editing today by new/unregistered users, which I noticed at WikiRage.com. The article may benefit from a good review. According to Wikipedia Page History Statistics, you are one of the top contributors to that page. If you have the time, would you please read over the article and make any necessary changes. If you think your efforts to improve that article would be aided if new and unregistered users were blocked from editing that article, please let me know and I will protect the article. Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 07:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spam?[edit]

Hiya, thank you for your constructive edits. Do however take note of the guidelines for advertising or things that look like advertising. Your last edit to sound reinforcement systems seemed to be over the edge of what is acceptable, leaning too much towards being an advertisment. Happy editing! Martijn Hoekstra 16:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Priest[edit]

What's with the seemingly random rewrites on the Judas Priest article? Some of the prose is an improvement, but some of the other things you changed are clunkier now. You even added some weasel words, despite an attempt to remove them. Wtf, m8? Howa0082 14:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

heavy metal stuff[edit]

Hi Nazamo

First I have to congratulate for the great job you did in the heavy metal article but this is on one particular edit that I wanted to discuss here. I saw you removed the section on consecutive fifths. While your reason may appear justified, I have to stress the fact you apparently believed something wrong. You indeed seem to have understood that the sources were supposed to support the claim about the use in heavy metal. But of course not! I didn’t put them to support the claim that heavy metal uses parallel fifths!

Actually I put these sources on request of Ceoil

“Can you cite the statement: "The use of consecutive fifths and octaves is a violation of an important rule of harmony and classical aesthetic". Thanks.”

A comment that you can check by yourself on my talk page here and you also can check that the sources were added just a while after the request the HM historic page.

These sources were added to support the existence of this rule in classical music. So of course HM is not mentioned in them...

So no, my intellectual honesty is certainly not questionable concerning that issue, as your comment seems to suggest here:

"This appears to be Original Research. Yes, there are sources from various Classical encyclopaedias, but none mention HM."

Original research, the use of parallel fifths in heavy metal? Come on, this claim is easily verifiable empirically… I didn’t thought it was necessary to prove it as I thought it was obvious. But ok I can provide countless musical examples of HM using them. I will provide some.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 00:10, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nazamo for your reply.
I really appreciate your sense of objectivity and your methodological approach but I’m afraid you misinterpreted my basic point in the article considering the content of your reply. Let me take it point by point.
Concerning your quote thanks for providing it, but I was already aware of everything about it, since I myself wrote a large part of this quote. So I certainly agree with it. This sentence most particularly:
“So it is irrelevant to criticize popular music for using such chords, for it never was concerned by the observance of these rules. Popular music’s compositional approach is freer, more intuitive and is not concerned by the complex classical theories of polyphonic structures”
it was written by ME. Yes I did.This too:
“In this approach, power chords are not considered as composed of independent parts that happen to coincide.”
So I can assure you there is nothing in this quote that contradicts the point I raised about parallel fifths in the HM article.This is where I realize you guys apparently misunderstood the point I raised since you seem to believe anything in this quote can contradict it.This point you removed is not meant to criticize Popular music for using Parallel fifths! Of course not. And of course it is a stylistic issue. That’s my point.
Basically the point was meant to dissipate the beliefs that claim Metal descends from classical. A view which is wrong. Because these music genres are different by essence. Classical is erudite music and Heavy metal is Popular music. But anyway the Parallel fifth comment is just a minor detail among others concerning this claim: The difference includes also the following facts.
1.Classical has a heavy theory of harmony, with lot of obligations and interdictions. While Heavy metal is freer in his compositional approach.
2.Classical is a strict written tradition, a classical work is defined first by its written score whereas Heavy metal song is first defined by its original recording.
3.Common practice classical music never or rarely used modal scales. Only late modern classical music made use of them. Whereas Metal most pre-eminent scales are modal.
4.Classical has a polyphonic comprehension of Harmony whereas Metal like many popular music often uses harmony like global block and doesn’t dissect them in independent parts like classical does..
5.Classical music extensive make use of complex techniques of composition such as strict academic counterpoint (not free counterpoint that pop music including metal may sometime use) and fugue as well as a use of polyphonic structure within the vertical harmony.
As for the guy who claims that chords can actually employ parallel fifths in classical. Sorry, but he's wrong. And I’m so sure of that, that I can challenge him to provide any examples from Mozart, Beethoven and any composer from the common practice period. There’s no doubt that chords progression by these composers don’t use such parallel movements even in instrumental accompaniment. And I can provide countless examples of such music without a single trace of Parallel fifths EVEN in CHORDS. Sure occasional exceptions to this rule can be found in case of chromatic context (where they re indeed licit), bass doubling to the octave most notably.
You also can find some exceptional example of free parallel fifths in Mozart’s divertimento for two horns and strings called “ A Musical Joke" (Ein Musikalischer Spaß, K. 522) ” .
But this was precisely meant to be a parody of popular musicians of his time for their extensive use of parallel fifths.
But yes, historically the parallel fifths rule does come from the polyphonic voice leading. So originally they used to concern only polyphonic chants. But that was in medieval music and Renaissance. But since then this rule has been extended to any ensemble in the common practice classical period. Until it was abolished by modern 20th century classical music. But modern classical is quite different from Common practice classical music. And Heavy metal rarely refers to modern classical music.
So sorry, but my point remains unchanged.
If my original point has been misinterpreted, then I agree it’s important to reword it to make it clear that nothing is meant to criticize or be condescending to Heavy metal. But I stick to it.
Unless the guy can provide extensive examples of parallel fifths even in chords in common practice classical music. Which I’m certain he cannot apart from the licit exceptions I mentioned.
Hope I dissipated certain misunderstandings.
Greetings
PS: at any rate, your French is wonderful! I wish I could speak English as well as that.Frédérick Duhautpas (talk) 09:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Jack Swing[edit]

Yes, but having the songs listed the way they currently are (rather than in a table or bulleted) is difficult to read -- and seeing as it's basically a list it should be displayed that way. And while I agree we need chart positions to show that songs merit being included in the article; I see no reason why why can't just list them like:

  • Keith Sweat - I Want Her (#1 R&B, #5 Hot 100) 1987

etc. rather than having unnecessary text like "The next year, (song) by (artist) reached the number (#) position on the US charts and (#) on the US R&B chart....." or whatever. It doesn't add anything to the article. Nathan86 (talk) 05:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shotgun[edit]

I appreciate that you were using what the article said. However, the article is not accurate. Shotguns are not only common in the US military, they are actually increasing due in part to our involvement more urbanized environments. Only a few years ago, the Dept. of Defense solicited a submissions for a new shotgun, which they've purchased in large number. The author of your article is writing from a very traditional point of view. And simply going by comparing them in strict numbers compared to rifles etc is misleading. For example, shotguns can be found in the arms rooms of many, many military units but mortars would be found in far less. Should we call mortars "uncommon"? Niteshift36 (talk) 23:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Escape from New York[edit]

I wouldn't mind if someone edits what I put under the Plot of Escape from New York, but please keep the main stroy details and plot there, and don't leave anything important out. I read it over and it was missing a few important details. I felt it was good "word count" wise where I had it, yet had enough detail to explain the story. If you want to change it...I guess you can as long as important story elements are kept in. I only added what I felt necissary, and it looked like you made it "too" short that is why I changed your edits. Well Have a nice day - Prede (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jam band[edit]

Hi, I like seeing your edits to the Jam band article giving them more readability. There is a direction I was trying to keep in the opening paragraphs that appears to be getting lost again. When I first started working on the article last year I was un-nerved by some of the false statements about history of the use of the term which was basically muddling up the history of rock music itself. Cream, Jimi Hendrix, Frank Zappa and Pink Floyd were being listed as "first generation jam band" which is flat out rediculous as for starters there were no "jam bands" in the sixties. So I made an effort on two separate fronts. The first: being careful about when the term is used historically and the other: is to identify "jam band" as a largely cultural term, which it most certainly was in it's first use in the 1990's.

The current edit (yours) states "While the seminal late 1960s jam band group, Grateful Dead, were originally categorized as psychedelic rock band[3], by the 1990s and 2000s, jam bands existed within a variety of genres...." This implies that a "jam band" could exist in the 1960s and/or prior to the 1990s. It opens a can of worms in that once again young rock history enthusiasts will again be trying to discern who is and who isn't "jam band" from the sixties. After all, Led Zeppelin for exapmple did indeed jam performing 3 hour crossgenre sets. Was Led Zeppelin a jam band? That may sound like a rediculous question, but over time it will be innocently considered. - Steve3849 talk 01:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She describes her own music as Southern Soul on her myspace page. Is that enough to classify her genre on her Wiki page as Southern Soul? It is hard to classify IMO, it sounds country, soul, gospel and alternative at different listening moments within the same song. Elements of all involved. Alatari (talk) 13:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You had worked on other music articles leading me to believe you would have a serious opinion or sources at the ready. Alatari (talk) 12:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

mtv[edit]

i have no problem with the statement, put mtv on the map, im sure i never altered it a second time. Feel free to alter it to that. I might bring in a source to enforces how he helped end racism on mtv but the map line is correct and accurate. Realist2 (talk) 18:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Wilco[edit]

Your insertion of the material failed to take into account whether or not it was inseted well and was well-written. Inserting "roots rock" into the first sentence and into the musical style was forced and ill-written. Additionally, there's no reason to put it in the first sentence, which is supposed to be as general as possible. If it were to be more specific, there are other genres that would be selected first (alt-rock, alt-country, and so forth.) As Wilco is a Featured Article and is supposed to represent the best of Wikipedia, just shoving in unformated references is not a good idea. I suggest discussing adding such material with the article's primary editor, User:Teemu08. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying that Teemu08 controls the article. I'm saying he's worked on it a lot and is quite the expert on Wilco, so it would be prudent to seek his opinion. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Video Arcades[edit]

Game features of the 2000s you might want to include: Card readers such as the ones in Maximum Tune 2 and the Initial D series; Dance Dance Revolution dance pads; motion/position sensing such as that in Mocap Boxing in 2001; Flat screen LCD monitors. There isn't much in the 2000s we didn't have in the 1990s. Moving cockpit cabinets such as Sega G-LOC were popular in the 1990s, as well as multiple speakers with subwoofers.----Asher196 (talk) 17:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)[edit]

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great writing on Hip Hop--but one issue I would appreciate your help on. Hip Hop is supposed to be a brief portal article, and not a clone of Hip Hop History, Hip Hop Culture, etc. A lot of what you added may be better served on the more in-depth component pages. Rather than fill your talk page with the "why," you would probably get more out of checking the protracted discussions (and votes, etc) on the talk pages of Hip Hop Culture, Hip Hop Music, and Hip Hop. Thanks, and again, great writing. -RoBoTamice 14:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator elections[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! Kirill 18:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist coordinators election has started[edit]

The February 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fifteen candidates. Please vote here by February 28. --ROGER DAVIES talk 21:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re. your message on my talk page: Sounds good to me. I didn't know that the pedal keyboard really had a great deal of usage differently in jazz than it does in classical music... plays the bass line, etc. Technique, I suppose, is different. I kind of regarded it as those sections on the bottom of Toccata and Fugue in D minor and Organ (music), where people simply list random sightings of the T&F and the organ in popular culture, which is pretty much useless. Two articles doesn't sound like a bad idea to me, as long as there's enough information on both subjects. We should propose it on the WikiProject Pipe Organ pages. —Cor anglais 16 17:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nazamo. Thank you for the excellent structural edits you made on this article – much appreciated --Geronimo20 (talk) 22:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Morrissey[edit]

Yes, you are right here. I checked it and no source required here. The edit was reverted by McGeddon per WP:TONE. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uzeb, and other things[edit]

I noted your contribution to the Uzeb article. Uzeb is one of my favourite jazz bands. I added to the discography section of the article a key compilation album that I also happen to own. Do you listen to them much? Do you know other bands that make similar jazz music? I read your editing modus operandi on your user page. I like your approach. I, too, persevere to edit the way you do. Here is an A-class article that I have been working on — Ilaiyaraaja. I've had it nominated twice for FA status. No luck. Could you perhaps in your free time have a glance at it? There could be deficiencies in need of fixing that my perhaps subjective eyes are unwilling to pick up. Thanking you, AppleJuggler (talk) 03:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIV (February 2008)[edit]

The February 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 07:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Review text[edit]

No problem. I just wasn't sure. MixSup? 22:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of radio DJs[edit]

I have nominated List of radio DJs, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of radio DJs. 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. Rtphokie (talk) 12:44, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)[edit]

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Lust, Caution - your removal of anachronisms section on 26 March[edit]

Without being sure that I agree with your premise about the criterion for whether these should be included, do you consider Bryan Appleyard to be a "reputable critic"? If so then I refer you to his blog here: http://www.bryanappleyard.com/blog/2008/01/protocol-problem-and-lust-caution-taxi.php which would seem to meet your criterion. Paul Christensen (talk) 17:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absent any immediate response I have reinserted the Anachronisms section with additional citations as above. Let's discuss further on Discussion page there if you wish. Paul Christensen (talk) 07:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support![edit]

Thanks for the support. I do look forward to seeing the work on the Canadian blues page... that page has such potential - imagine what it would look like if even one or two editors creating articles on anyone who's ever bobsledded in the Olympics took a day off of that and helped you reference or add material. You could have a comprehensive, fully reference Good Article in less than 24 hours! I guess I laid it out on my talk page, but I think we're doing good on the number of articles... it's time to start fixing up and, if necessary, cleaning out, the ones we've already got.

Let me know if you want more detailed suggestions on any Canadian article - I'm still a part of Wikiproject Canada, but the sheer volume of articles made it impossible to leave detailed comments while assessing. Cheers, CP 20:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)[edit]

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your ideas seem good. It's good to have the instrument's nicknames, and I think where they are now is good (though I thought the instrument was sometimes called "doghouse" in addition to "doghouse bass"). The section referring to important repertoire should probably summarize, in prose, the most important composers and works, and a separate article could include more notable works. I started one like this, for example, called List of oboe concertos. Badagnani (talk) 04:51, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of compositions for violin and orchestra is probably a better model. Badagnani (talk) 05:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit counter[edit]

This is easy.[5] Also the user profile in "preferences" gives the number of edits. Ty 04:39, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although I appreciate your attempts at cleaning up the article, I think you are making too many sweeping, unilateral conclusions about what should and should not be in the article. As just one example (which I have restored), the info on Erdos-Bacon number has been discussed on Talk with no consensus to remove it. And bear in mind that your comment "appears to be nonsense??" is your opinion and does not carry enough weight to overturn consensus. You might want to take a look at the talk page before slashing more of the article out. There may be other of your removals that I will restore when I have more time, but for the time being, let me make a polite request that you slow down and consider discussing some of your concerns on the talk page before bulldozing your way through the article any more. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 03:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Be bold" is fine. Just don't forget a more fundamental Wikipedia policy: consensus. Sometimes it's better to discuss your "bold" ideas on talk before making decisions on your own to make major changes that might be controversial. Ward3001 (talk) 04:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Portman's Erdős–Bacon number[edit]

I personally don't see the need to repeat what the reader can find simply by clicking the link to Erdős–Bacon number, and I suspect someone will remove the "gloss" later, but this is not a point that I consider important enough to revert. Ward3001 (talk) 03:56, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"could there be cases where the article is licensed to another location, in such a way that the Wikilinks don't work?": Not quite sure I understand your question. A wikilink will always work if it's properly formatted and a target article exists. Maybe you mean an inline external link, such as this one. Those will always work unless the URL changes. Ward3001 (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"When Wikipedia articles are licensed to other websites (under the GFDL), I was wondering if the licensees always import the wikitext HTML markup, including the Wikilinks. Could it be that in some cases, a Wikipedia article appears just as "text", with inoperative Wikilinks? If this were the case, then it would help to justify adding glosses": Wikipedia's free license allows any website to use it's material. It isn't licensed to any specific websites. And Wikipedia has no responsibilities to other websites that use its materials. So if they copy wikilinks that don't work on their sites, that's their problem, not Wikipedia's. Ward3001 (talk) 23:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keytar Article[edit]

Keytar Article.

Hi, I'm jeffrey abbott and i would like to clarify a few things in regards to your edits. I decided to correspond with you here before attempting to edit the work you did on the article.

First, The information about who owned the first "Moogs" came from, me not only for the Wikipedia article but also for the London Times story which represents the source thats being accepted as fact. It's important i feel to qualify this.

Second The "strap on" keyboard reference you used came from an antiquated story about an instrument that never really came to market. For the record, the Representative for Lag in the U.S. and I had a dialogue about my possible involvement with the instrument and i declined because i thought the design and especially the price point was not realistic.( It WAS an amazing piece of wood!)

I REALLY feel the "strap on reference could and should be removed and replaced with the words " Portable-Keyboard"

Third: This paragraph is VERY important to the article because it helps define the evolution of " Keytar-Keytaring"

"The term “keytar” also refers to the ability to emulate the playing style and sound of an electric or acoustic guitar via a synthesizer, sampler or computer.[1]

I would like it re-introduced to the article.

Fourth: There is musical inaccuracy in this line that i would like to clear up.

A key difference is that toys generally have one- or two-note polyphony,

Fifth: My use of the term "Keytar" and the authenticating of that became an issue back when it was included in the original article. I believe other editors addressed this already and also this fact was again used in the London Times article. I seem to have been the subject of much debate both in this article and the list article for reasons that are beyond my comprehension. As always i can be contacted for clarification questions etc. at keytarjeff@comcast.net

I will make no edits on the Keytar article without your permission/blessing so i can avoid the wrath of editors.. Thanks,jeff —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.100.56 (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jeff, When I came to the article, I saw the section on the first owners of the Moogs, and, noting that there was no source, I toned down the claim, by giving less details. If there are details or strong claims, it needs a source. I will check on the London Times story .

You suggest that "strap on" keyboard reference could be replaced with Portable-Keyboard"..that sounds reasonable.

Hi, the SoundonSound paragraph you have is good. Sorry if I removed it. "The term “keytar” also refers to the ability to emulate the playing style and sound of an electric or acoustic guitar via a synthesizer, sampler or computer.[2]

Sorry for introducing an error regarding toys...generally have one- or two-note polyphony.

The authenticating of the term needs to be from a verifiable source, in print.

Regarding "I will make no edits on the Keytar article without your permission/blessing so i can avoid the wrath of editors..", we are all equals (except for the administrators), so I think disputes should be settled based on whose argument has the most merit (based on Wikipedia rules, standard professional researching and editing norms, and so on)OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC) .................................................................................................................................... Thanks Much for the kind&fair response! I re-introduced on part i thought was important, jeff www.jeffreyabbott.vom —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffrey abbott (talkcontribs) 00:36, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "There have been some famous twin-guitar line-ups in rock history and, even if you can't strum a note, you can now have the virtual equivalent - both of these software instruments will play on time and in tune, and won't want a solo in every song! But are they both equally good?" Music Lab Real Guitar 2L & Steinberg Virtual Guitarist 2 (soundonsound.com)
  2. ^ "There have been some famous twin-guitar line-ups in rock history and, even if you can't strum a note, you can now have the virtual equivalent - both of these software instruments will play on time and in tune, and won't want a solo in every song! But are they both equally good?" Music Lab Real Guitar 2L & Steinberg Virtual Guitarist 2 (soundonsound.com)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)[edit]

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Poppers edits[edit]

Hi OnBeyondZebrax. Thanks for your edits to the poppers article. The reason I'd reverted all of them last night was that I was too tired to go through so many, and the only time the article has seen that many edits at one time has been when vandals have attacked it. In the talk section you'll see that, in the past, when any of us who have spent untold hours trying to build the article into a credible repository of accurate information on poppers have seen such large edits, we've reverted most of them because they almost all were the work of vandals.

Having had time now to go over your many edits, it's refreshing to have such a high quality contributor make needed edits!

Thanks again for your meaningful contribution!

Respectfull, Munatobe7 (talk) 13:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)[edit]

The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Distortion[edit]

Thanks for your edits to Distortion (guitar) - they're great! Steve CarlsonTalk 04:40, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Steve, Thank you. I try to work on the lede section of any article I edit. Ideally, the lede should give the basic information AND interest the reader. I find that some lede sections are too "dry" and bare! I have been going through a lot of guitar and music-related articles to clean them up. Guitar and music-related articles are close to a lot of people's hearts, so there tends to be a lot of POV/ OR/ praise, and the words "legendary", "classic", and "greatest" get thrown around way too much. As well, with guitar topics, there is a lot of "a guy at the guitar store told me that..." type legends/rumours/myths that circulate, to the point that people believe them (e.g., on the Jaco Pastorious page, we have had to remove claims that he put chicken grease on the neck of his bass). One issue I wanted to raise with you is how to deal with the problem of duplication in the guitar/effects topic area. There is a "guitar effects" article, an "effects units" article, a "stompbox" article. I think it might be good to merge them all into one BIG effects article, and have the other titles REDIRECT to the main article.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 13:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, there is really no point in there being separate articles for each, and they duplicate a lot of content. I believe the issue has been raised on the talk page of one or more of those articles, so please chime in. Or be bold and just do it! I'm watching those articles too and will help straighten out the mess if you take the plunge. Steve CarlsonTalk 01:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tense in Led Zep[edit]

Thanks for your comment. I think you're right - they were trying to sound like one of those breathless documentaries you get on Discovery!--Whoosher (talk) 18:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Supercouple article[edit]

The reason I had previously tweaked your revision of the lead is because a supercouple is not simply a popular couple or a couple that fascinates. I mean, plenty of couples are like that. Any couple would be a supercouple if that were the case. For supercouples, it's about to what degree do they fascinate, which is where the "beyond normal expectations" part comes in. In addition, supercouples are not limited to television characters and celebrities. There are comic book characters who are supercouples, for example. On top of that, super rich couples who fascinate their observers but are not celebrities are sometimes called supercouples, very popular pairings in high school as well. Thus, I changed the first sentence from mentioning any particular type of supercouple and instead noted primetime and celebrity, since it already notes soap opera, and the first sentence can apply to any type.

Your expansion of the lead, I don't feel that it's needed, since it's a condensed copy of the celebrity section. Flyer22 (talk) 20:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I do like your new version of the lead. It's just that first sentence that I feel should be changed back, for the reasons I stated above. Or, if not changed exactly back, changed to where it does not mention a specific type of supercouple (after all, the rest of the lead touches on different types of supercouples; the main three types), and to where it specifies something about how the popularity or fascination with them is not the simple popularity or intrigue.
Oh, and forgive my using a subheading for this additional comment, but I'm responding to you this moment through the Playstation 3, which doesn't allow much editing freedom. Flyer22 (talk) 20:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good cleanup. Your copyediting of this article was/is much needed. It's good to have help in editing it. I like how the lead is now; it's a good compromise.
And any valid sources you can find for more supercouples would also be a great addition to this article, of course. Flyer22 (talk) 19:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy metal fan subculture[edit]

I appreciate your work on the creation of a fan subculture section in the Heavy metal music article (It's one thing the article needed but we never got around to). However, there's two problems. One is that that citation style is inconsistent with the rest of the article. This is simple enough to fix; as you cited the Weinstein book (which is cited several times in the article already) it's as simple as copying the footnote style and putting in the proper pages numbers. More problematic is the way you wrote the section. I tried to format the refs properly myself, but found the way the section was written very reminiscent of an academic essay, which made me hestiant to redo the refs since it seemed like some synthesis was going on. I can help you if you need it to rewrite to section. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with the photos is that there are too many and they are messing up the page formatting. WesleyDodds (talk) 20:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

image placement[edit]

Hi,

I've noticed you're moving the images around on electric guitar. The MoS specifically says "start an article with a right-aligned lead image", so I've reverted your recent move of the first image down-article. There's no longer anything in the MoS which recommends not starting sections with images, and it makes it easier to locate them when editing than sifting through text for the image code, so it seems better to place them at the top of sections unless there's a specific reason not to. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:10, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see you reverted another image move back to below the accompanying text. Your summary was "add to discussion" - can you explain? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 15:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Hi there, Just wanted to say a big THANK YOU for all your help editing the article. Looks better! Please pop-back & tighten up once in a while and pass the link on to your friends for them to add to, or correct. While you're there please check out Bongo (antelope) and tell me what you think. Could it go for FA status? Thanks so much again, Black Stripe (talk) 12:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Punk subculture[edit]

Responded on my talk page.Spylab (talk) 14:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scientology: L. Ron Hubbard foremost a 'Science' Fiction writer?[edit]

I oppose to your edit and the conclusion you made in the Scientology article. Talk:Scientology, see #5 L. Ron Hubbard: speculative fiction writer or science fiction writer. I made a response and give a link to information. --Olberon (talk) 19:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I copied it to the talkpage in the article. I also did respond to it (please keep your responses there!). --Olberon (talk) 20:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MDD history section[edit]

Hi there. At Talk:Major_depressive_disorder#Treatment_to_new_article, we've agreed that the history section should be somewhat trimmed and moved--however, note the areas we've discussed keeping in the article, e.g., the emphasis on the origins and fate of "melancholia"--and that, because you and User:EverSince have been the main contributors to that section, you two should have dibs when it comes to revising it. EverSince has agreed to work on it, but is waiting to see if you'd like to give any input on the matter. Thanks! Cosmic Latte (talk) 22:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)[edit]

The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rock music WikiProject[edit]

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 12:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)[edit]

The August 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quotation marks in mod article[edit]

The reason I have deleted several of the quote marks in the Mod (lifestyle) article is that they weren't really necessary, and made the paragraphs too cluttered for an encyclopedia-style article. Most of the text that I deleted the quotation marks from were just basic statements of fact, and not really the type of unique or profound statement that one would present as a quotation. Many of the phrases were only partial quotes anyway, not the full statement of the author or speaker.Spylab (talk) 01:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:59, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI[edit]

The article at Desire (emotion) has been restored. --Reinoutr (talk) 09:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Offstage trumpet[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Offstage trumpet, 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. Skitzo (talk) 19:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

by sources you need to add external verifiable references mate, either links to a website or bibliography esq. sources ... Skitzo (talk) 19:51, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
it is however policy to use your sandbox to work on articles in order to bring them up to standard before posting them in the main space. Skitzo (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
it doesn't matter how long there are there, only if they meet the standard, as i said it is better for an article like this to use your sandbox until you have it at least to stub standard, look here you'd be amazed how many look like yours did and then never get touched, hence why i used prod instead of speedy delete as that gives you 5 days to improve it, others wouldn't be so generous i'm afraid. Skitzo (talk) 20:14, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm bored so decided to go on a cull, feel free to remove the tags mate, thats the good thing about the prod AFD, anyone can remove them after improving the article.Skitzo (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)[edit]

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rock music[edit]

Just wanted to say that I thought your edits were generally excellent, though I've had another go at the opening sentence - see what you think. The article needs a lot more work, but I'm happy to collaborate on editing further if you're interested. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your analysis. I think as a start the best approach would be to identify and cite reliable sources for the information set out - starting with the rock music article, and then moving on to the various genres. But what are the most reliable sources? I don't have many encyclopedias of rock music (I do have an old Rolling Stone "History..."). What do you think? What are the best /most objective online sources that give a fair overview? I'll add it to my "to do" list, but personally I need to prioritise in other areas right now. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In re this, to be honest, when I found those whitepapers, I was stunned at the wealth of information and spammed the links wherever I could think of. The paper gives such a good and accessible explanation, the cable is such an important part of an electric instrument, if I had my druthers, I'd probably put it in all 500 articles. (And I have no clue who the company is, just that they have an excellent article)

I have no problem with you removing the EL - but since that information could be of great interest to someone researching bass guitar (and more particularly, trying to figure out why their guitar sounds like crap) - is there a wiki-link in the article (or a see-also) that will let the player find it? All I care about is that the information can be found. Franamax (talk) 01:48, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)[edit]

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIII (November 2008)[edit]

The November 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:07, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Way to escalate the conflict[edit]

Um... interesting that you immidiatly jump to accusations of ownership and edit waring before even talking to me. Not exactly a friendly or civil way to start a dialogue. I personally prefer bullet points and embedded lists in this instance as opposed to prose, as such lists disseminate the information in a more reader friendly format. I am of course open to any changes if they improve the quality of the article. Just because I may disagree with you and prefer an earlier version does not mean that I am expressing ownership of the article. I suggest that you actually take the time to explain your reasoning behind what you are trying to do and argue for its merits rather than throw a temper tantrum. This is a collaborative encyclopedia after all.Nrswanson (talk) 20:12, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXIV (December 2008)[edit]

The December 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of bodyguards[edit]

I have nominated List of bodyguards, 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/List of bodyguards. 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. Bongomatic 00:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article you created maybe deleted soon: Tools which can help you[edit]

The article you created: List of bodyguards may be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:

The faster you respond on this page, the better chance the article you created can be saved.

Finding sources which mention the topic of your article is the very best way to avoid an article being deleted {{Findsources3}}:

Find sources for List of bodyguards: google news recent, google news old, google books, google scholar, NYT recent, NYT old, a9, msbooks, msacademic ...You can then cite these results in the Article for deletion discussion.

Also, there are several tools and helpful editors on Wikipedia who can help you:

  1. List the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. You can get help listing your page on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
  2. You can request a mentor to help explain all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond to you before responding on the article for deletion page.
  3. When trying to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you.
    Here is a list acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.
  4. You can vote to merge the article into a larger or better established article on the same topic.

If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. Good luck! travb (talk) 03:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of List of session musicians[edit]

I have nominated List of session musicians, 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/List of session musicians. 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. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 23:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)[edit]

The January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just saw this article for the first time and I wanted to congratulate you on a very interesting topic that has great potential for expansion. I hope you'll return to it. Viriditas (talk) 07:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gregory Bruce Campbell[edit]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Gregory Bruce Campbell, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Notability asserted without 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. —EncMstr (talk) 17:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVI (February 2009)[edit]

The February 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 13 March!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. We will be selecting coordinators from a pool of eighteen to serve for the next six months. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on Saturday, 28 March! Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVII (March 2009)[edit]

The March 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Old Account[edit]

Basically, your oldest username has an orphaned talk page, do you mind if I move it to User talk:OnBeyondZebrax/Archive?--Jac16888Talk 15:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks--Jac16888Talk 18:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXVIII (April 2009)[edit]

The April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GUNS Pop Culture Edits[edit]

I'm not really sure it's appropriate to go and arbitrarily change the pop culture referencing rules in the WP:GUNS, especially without discussion and when you're not a prolific or "recognised" editor on the subject. There's a difference between "Being Bold" and "Completely Ignoring Or Deciding You Know Better Than The Project Task Force". I'm not saying I disagree with your changes, but I don't think it's appropriate for you to make them without reference to the people who put a lot of time and effort into the articles and the relevant task force(s). Commander Zulu (talk) 12:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Commander Zulu is right. What you did wasn't being bold, it was a decision to go against consensus that had previously been established. If you think they need to be changed, come to WT:GUNS and discuss it. You would never try to change a Wikipedia policy or guideline, so let's not try it with Wikiproject policies. If the consensus to change exists, we will discuss with the others how it should read, and I will implement the changes myself.--LWF (talk) 16:47, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Firearms[edit]

Welcome to the WikiProject Firearms. I hope you enjoy being a member.--LWF (talk) 05:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a Conflict of Interest distute[edit]

Hi, I noticed you've been editing Bass guitar recently so figured you may have more knowledge than I do on this field. There's an ongoing dispute here: here with both editors saying each other have a conflict of interest over who made the first extended-range bass. I'd be grateful if you could perhaps take a look and add your thoughts. Thanks a lot Smartse (talk) 19:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XXXIX (May 2009)[edit]

The May 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XL (June 2009)[edit]

The June 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated List of 12-string guitar players, 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/List of 12-string guitar players. 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. Pichpich (talk) 21:09, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of outsider musicians. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of outsider musicians (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)[edit]

The July 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)[edit]

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started![edit]

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)[edit]

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bass effects[edit]

Hi there, saw your note in the edit notes of effects unit, which I assume is directed at me. I thought I'd reply. Although I'm most interested in a good encyclopedia, and not as much about people's feelings, I do feel bad when it seems that I've offended someone. I looked through the history and see you contributed a lot to the bass effects article, so I apologize if it seemed I was being rude about the content. Just so you know, I'm a bass player of 10 years and I build effects for a living, so I'm not down on the subject. It's just that, as a matter of course, any effect can be a bass effect, and the vast majority of that page consisted of things like "bass delay - this is a delay pedal", "bass octave - this is an octave pedal for bass", which really doesn't illuminate anything, it really is just the same as all the other effects pages I merged, but with the word bass attached. That's not bad writing, it's just how it would have to be. Many effects are marketed towards bassists, but the majority are not significantly different from general effects to warrant a whole other page. I do this for a living and a passion, but in my opinion Wikipedia's not the place for endlessly splintering topics into tinier subcategories.

So I guess the point is that I wasn't insulting the writing on the bass effects article, it was absolutely as good as it could be. It was the subject that wasn't notable, and you didn't create it, so it wasn't in any way a dig at you.

In case we run into each other again while working on WP, I just want to apologize for my sometimes terse language, which can come off the wrong way, and extend a handshake. Conical Johnson (talk) 08:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, if you want to make a contrast between simple and complex distortion boxes, I used to own a much more knobby box than the Tonebone:
http://www.4mspedals.com/swash/swashfuzzbe.jpg
It's made by 4msPedals, and they took the picture, so you'd have to contact them for permission to upload the picture to WP, but it certainly makes for a more extreme comparison. The guy at 4ms is named Dann Green (2 N's in Dann is correct, not a typo) and he's a cool guy and would probably be fine with it if you contacted him to ask.
I've made a comment on Talk:Effects unit regarding the serious need for references, was hoping you'd take a look since you're the major editor on this article right now. Thanks Conical Johnson (talk) 18:47, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I notice you reverted the bit about portamento on defretter effects. Care to cite a source on this one? Conical Johnson (talk) 18:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a member of the Military history WikiProject or World War I task force, you may be interested in competing in the Henry Allingham International Contest! The contest aims to improve article quality and member participation within the World War I task force. It will also be a step in preparing for Operation Great War Centennial, the project's commemorative effort for the World War I centenary.

If you would like to participate, please sign up by 11 November 2009, 00:00, when the first round is scheduled to begin! You can sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIV (October 2009)[edit]

The October 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:56, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Essays[edit]

Yes, photos and paintings of famous essays would be much more appropriate for the article. Using ones that are in the public domain already avoids copyright issues.--Jorfer (talk) 04:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pro sound articles[edit]

Thanks for kicking some ass in the pro sound articles—they really needed a vigorous cleaning. Nice to see somebody else at Wikipedia knows about Bassmaxx, EAW, Meyer, towel bars, etc. Binksternet (talk) 16:31, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Overkill[edit]

Thanks for expanding that page! Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar[edit]

The Surreal Barnstar
Great additions to Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in edit wars! Keep up the good work! Sebwite (talk) 05:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pics in Notability Guidelines[edit]

Please stop attempting to add illustrations to notability guidelines. They do not benefit from them and it only clutters the page, and could confuse new editors. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:41, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And ditto the civility and NPA pages. I've removed the pictures, they are frankly bizarre. And I am amazed you would think that a Carlos Latuff picture to illustrate an apology is a good idea on a policy page; he's rather controversial. Fences&Windows 02:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)[edit]

The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced BLPs[edit]

Hello OnBeyondZebrax! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to these articles, it would greatly help us with the current 943 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

  1. Jonathan Kaplan - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  2. Peter Mach - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  3. Matt Schofield - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
  4. Alain Silver - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)[edit]

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:02, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)[edit]

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Margaret Bruder has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources to comply with notability requirements. This included web searches for news coverage, books, and journals, which can be seen from the following links:
Margaret Brudernews, books, scholar
Consequently, this article is about a subject that appears to lack sufficient notability.

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. Abductive (reasoning) 08:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some suggestions about your changes to article leads[edit]

OnBeyondZebrax, thank you very much for all the work you do to improve article leads. I looked at a bunch of your lead work from your User Contributions page. I saw that lots of your edits improved articles:

  • making bio leads provide a much broader overview of the subject,
  • and making other leads much more useful, by making them include more information.

Some tips:

  • As George Orwell said, I think near the end of "Politics and the English Language": Whenever you can leave a word out, leave it out. Whenever you can use a shorter word, do. This makes writing easier to read. For example, in an edit you made to Ghostwriter I would have written "other fields" instead of "fields outside non-fiction and fiction publishing".
  • Please put a space after every period or comma, as any grammar textbook will tell you.  :) It looks more professional. You can see an example of a missing space in an edit you made to Ghostwriter.
  • General rule: please don't merge later sections into leads, as you did in an edit you made to Shill. It's easy enough for readers to scroll down and see the next section. Perhaps you can make an exception to this general rule when the lead is way too short, but even then I'm not sure it's worthwhile. "Etymology" sections are especially unimportant to some readers; leaving them as separate sections makes it easier to skip them.
  • Please think twice before you merge many small paragraphs into one. For example, in a series of edits you made to Segregated cycle facilities, you merged the definitions of Cycleway, Cycle track / cycle path, and Cycle lane all into one paragraph. This makes it a little harder to read them.  :)

But these are small niggles. Please keep up the good work on improving Wikipedia's article leads.

P.S. I'm not yet so great at giving feedback. I would appreciate if you'd give feedback on my feedback. Was I too harsh? Too polite? Was my positive-feedback section too short, considering the length of my negative-feedback section? Could I have given one more negative feedback without it being too much? Was my feedback perhaps (unintentionally) slightly hurtful? Did my feedback make you angry? Unhappy? Happy? Did I use the right number of emoticons? Please let me know on my talk page.

Cheers, --unforgettableid | talk 17:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate your suggestion about being more concise. I agree with the example from the Ghostwriting article. The comment about the missing space in the Ghostwriting article I found patronizing. It was a minor typo in a contribution that otherwise--I think--was fairly helpful (adding a longer lede). I suppose it is a matter of personal editing style; you perhaps view it as an "unfinished edit" or carelessness. I don't agree with your statement that you cannot merge sections. Wikipedia has a tendency to have too many headings. Look at an Encyclopedia Brittannica article for a topic, and then look at the Wikipedia equivalent. In some cases where Brittanica will have two headings for an entire article, a Wikipedia has a new heading for every paragraph. Your statement that a person should not merge sections makes it sound as if by putting something in a heading, it is then "protected" against being merged. I don't agree that one or two sentences should have a separate section heading. Starting with positive statements was a good idea...too often people focus on the negative elements. The emoticons are friendly. ThanksOnBeyondZebrax (talk) 05:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the contribution to Ghostwriting was very helpful. It just would have been even better if you added that extra space after the period. On a related note, I forgot to mention: it also would have been even better if you added some footnotes to support your words. Your words seem true to me, but Wikipedia likes footnotes. :)
I don't know why Britannica uses fewer headings than Wikipedia. Paper costs money. But IMO in an encyclopedia made mainly for online reading, pixels are free, and so it's good to have lots of headings. They let people look at the table of contents then click straight through to what they want. Also, I still maintain that, when reading the article, people might want to skip reading the part about etymology. Headings make that easier. Just because Britannica does something doesn't make it right.
Thanks again for the work on Wikipedia that you do. Also, thank you for listening and for your feedback on my feedback. :)
Best regards, --unforgettableid | talk 02:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos for your excellent edit summaries when editing Spam (electronic)[edit]

On a related note: KUDOS for your excellent edit summaries when editing Spam (electronic). The diff was unreadable, but your accurate edit summaries made reviewing edits that would otherwise be difficult, easy. --Elvey (talk) 15:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of rock and metal bands that cofeature two guitarists has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced original research tagged since July 2008

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. SilkTork *YES! 00:50, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pop music again[edit]

hello OnBeyondZebrax - this is just to let you know i've again moved your message on my talk page to Talk:Pop_music#Paragraph_on_notable_pop_music_performers_and_groups and replied to it there. let's keep the discussion on that page, all right? thanks. Sssoul (talk) 11:34, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, OnBeyondZebrax. You have new messages at Sabrebd's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nominations for the March 2010 Military history Project Coordinator elections now open![edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 8 March 2010! More information on coordinatorship may be found on the coordinator academy course and in the responsibilities section on the coordinator page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)[edit]

The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Recent addition to Heavy metal music[edit]

I assume the citation you added recently to heavy metal music was from a website. Can you add the URL, publication date, and access date? WesleyDodds (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to indicate in the citation where you get the information, and if it was online, you need to include the retrieval date. It does not matter if there's a payment fee. Otherwise the citation is imcomplete and should be removed. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment. Complete deletion? I don't think so! I did, after extendng the first part of the article, remove a lot of unencylopaedic waffle. You have replaced that with solid work and have greatly improved the article - for which thanks again - in areas which I am not competent to handle. But there is no need, because you don't agree with my edits, to attack me. If you bother~ to look at my record, you will see that I completely share your aim of expanding information on WP - perhaps where we differ is as to the roemoval of non-information - Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 05:30, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

let me by the way quote to you something I have found on an editor's home page (yours, in fact), with which I completely agree:

If you are concerned about an edit that I did, I want to let you know that I follow Wikipedia's "Be Bold" editing guideline. If I come to an article, and find statements that I believe contain Original Research, misleading or biased points of view, incorrect information, or dubious and unsourced claims, I do not put a "needs source" tag or start a discussion on the talk page. Instead, I remove, reword, or rephrase the content.

Best regards, --Smerus (talk) 06:56, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator elections have opened![edit]

Voting for the Military history WikiProject coordinator elections has opened; all users are encouraged to participate in the elections. Voting will conclude 23:59 (UTC) on 28 March 2010.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Big hair[edit]

An article that you have been involved in editing, Big hair, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big hair. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō Contribs. 08:40, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)[edit]

The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Sentry gun[edit]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Sentry gun. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sentry gun (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)[edit]

The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of contemporary classical double bass players. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of contemporary classical double bass players. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)[edit]

The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)[edit]



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LII (June 2010)
Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

Catch up with our project's activities over the last month, including the new Recruitment working group and Strategy think tank

Articles

Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content

Members

June's contest results plus the latest awards to our members

Editorial

LeonidasSpartan shares his thoughts on how, as individual editors, we can deal with frustration and disappointment in our group endeavour

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:25, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

kurt Russell[edit]

Please see... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kurt_Russell#Political_party

and careful on your wordy Filmography notes Lead is fine--intelati 23:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you some how broke the "soldiers" row?--intelati 00:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's acctually still broken somehow--intelati 00:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Got it you forgot (deleted) the "|-|rowspan=2" tag. nice working with you. :) --intelati 00:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the "rowspan" makes the movies for the year line up.--intelati 00:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. Now get back to work :). --intelati 00:18, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
thanks that's perfect. --intelati 00:02, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)[edit]



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIII (July 2010)
Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

New parameter for military conflict infobox introduced;
Preliminary information on the September coordinator elections

Articles

Milhist's newest featured and A-Class content

Members

July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy

Editorial

Opportunities for new military history articles

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I have nominated List of stage names, 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/List of stage names. 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. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:44, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I have nominated List of international public administration societies, 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/List of international public administration societies. 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. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 22:52, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)[edit]



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LIV (August 2010)
Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

The return of reviewer awards, task force discussions, and more information on the upcoming coordinator election

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants

Editorial

In the first of a two-part series, Moonriddengirl discusses the problems caused by copyright violations

To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Milhist election has started![edit]

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies talk 19:26, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)[edit]



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010)
Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)

Editorial

In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 20:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tech1 Noir listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tech1 Noir. Since you had some involvement with the Tech1 Noir redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010[edit]

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:33, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010[edit]

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010[edit]





To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 21:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011[edit]

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 16:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011[edit]

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:24, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011[edit]

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 04:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011[edit]

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011[edit]

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 23:38, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. BrownBot (talk) 22:45, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of politicians with economics training has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a clear violation of our rules on intersecting lists--there is nothing inherently notable in the idea of a politician having had down some sort of academic work in economics. Unless the subject of the intersection has itself been discussed in multiple, reliable, independent sources, this list should be deleted.

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of politicians with economics training is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of politicians with economics training 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:26, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of New jack swing artists for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of New jack swing artists is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of New jack swing artists 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Ei1sos (talk) 22:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011[edit]

To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In Insignificance, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Surprise (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) 10:51, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011[edit]

Your addition to Scooter (motorcycle) has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
Edit included paragraph copy-paste of press release from http://www.pikeresearch.com/newsroom/electric-bicycles-motorcycles-and-scooters-to-gain-increasing-acceptance-worldwide

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:55, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Military Historian of the Year[edit]

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:27, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AfD and PROD notifications[edit]

Hi OnBeyondZebrax,

Back in November, you got either an AfD or PROD notification, which was part of the template testing project's experiments. If you could go here and leave us some feedback about what you think about the new versions of the templates we tested (there are links to the templates), that would be very useful. (You can also email me at mpinchuk@wikimedia.org if you want.) Thanks! Maryana (WMF) (talk) 18:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:14, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of slap bass players (electric bass) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of slap bass players (electric bass) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 05:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

March 2012[edit]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Insignificance a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. I've listed this one at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen so that an admin can sort out the history. John of Reading (talk) 17:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peter Mach for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter Mach is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Mach 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 template from the top of the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:28, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:28, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great boredom image![edit]

Well done for adding the photograph to illustrate boredom. I think it is perfect. Edward (talk) 17:25, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Military history coordinator election[edit]

The Military history WikiProject has started its 2012 project coordinator election process, where we will select a team of coordinators to organize the project over the coming year. If you would like to be considered as a candidate, please submit your nomination by 14 September. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact one of the current coordinators on their talk page. This message was delivered here because you are a member of the Military history WikiProject. – Military history coordinators (about the projectwhat coordinators do) 09:38, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

French classical music edit-a-thon[edit]

Hi OnBeyondZebrax, I saw that you were a significant contributor to French classical music, so you might be interested in a classical music edit-a-thon organised for 8-14 October, to coincide with the Australian ABC Classic FM radio countdown themed Music of France.. There will also be a meetup in Sydney, so we are using Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/October 2012 as our main collaboration page. I hope you'll be able to join us, either in person or online. John Vandenberg (chat) 05:32, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Machine pistols in fiction for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Machine pistols in fiction is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Machine pistols in fiction 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 template from the top of the article. Spartaz Humbug! 04:50, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of genres edits[edit]

Hello, OnBeyondZebrax, there are some issues about your recent major edits of List of genres (as you might imagine). Beginning with the lead, this is a list article, not an article to define what a genre is. There is an article for that, which is linked to -- and apparently what you have copied and pasted from. Basically the same goes for the rest of the article. I suggest you read WP:SAL. Also, look at other list articles. Many, and maybe most, list articles are simply that - a list of title links to other articles. If there is a description after the name, it's a short summary (usually 1 or 2 - and no more than 3 - sentences). A perfect example is List of styles of music: A–F, etc. Not to mention, none of your additions contain a reference. Now, one edit you made was very good - removing the list of "adult" channels. I don't know when that was added. But yeah, if anything, there should be more removed from the article than added. I will wait awhile for either your response or for you to make changes before I make my edits. Thanks. --Musdan77 (talk) 18:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[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.

Aestheticization of violence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Man on Fire
Cro-Mags (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Hardcore
Discharge (band) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to S.O.B.
Film criticism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Michael Phillips
Glossary of jazz and popular music (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bouncer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:02, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of David Rotundo, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://torontoblues.com/id65.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 15:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Rose Bolton, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.myspace.com/rosebolton.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nicolas Gilbert[edit]

Hi. If you want to avoid your new pages being deleted when you haven't finished working on them, the best thing to do is to post the appropriate template, such as "under construction". If you don't do this, it is difficult for page patrollers to tell the difference between your contributions and those of contributors who simply haven't read the guidelines or are self-promoting. Let me know when you have the references and I'll restore the article for you to work on.Deb (talk) 17:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Delphine Zentout has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Ducknish (talk) 22:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Larry Hurst has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only reference is not independent.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:46, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Anastassija Makarenko[edit]

Hello OnBeyondZebrax,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Anastassija Makarenko for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Sosthenes12 (talk) 18:32, 15 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 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.

Bass instrument amplification (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bluegrass
Bauhaus (band) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Peter Murphy
Great Uncles of the Revolution (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bluegrass
Hipster (contemporary subculture) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Authenticity
Insurgency weapons and tactics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Błyskawica
List of styles of music: A–F (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to New wave
M18 Claymore mine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Norman MacLeod
Rockabilly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Bluegrass
Roddy Ellias (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Kirk MacDonald
Seweryn Wielanier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Błyskawica
Strut Records (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Calypso
Suicide (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Depression
Suppressive fire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Heat (film)
Wacław Zawrotny (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Błyskawica

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Wacław Zawrotny requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. CaptainScreebo Parley! 00:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I cut and pasted from a Wikipedia article Błyskawica submachine gun, so the Wikipedia article itself must be infringing on copyright.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 17:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orgasm and Penis articles[edit]

Hello, OnBeyondZebrax. I'm stopping by your talk page to let you know that you have replies at the Orgasm talk page. And to also let you know that, regarding the section you added about humans to the Penis article, you should read this discussion for why a section on/picture of the human penis has been kept out of that article lately. It might be best that you start a section on that article's talk page about why you created the section about humans, and see if WP:Consensus will now be for including such a section/image. I agree with you that more about the human penis besides a link to the Human penis article should have been in that article. And regarding the lead you created for Human penis article, you should cut down on that a bit; all the detail about what parts make up the penis is not needed for the lead, is already covered lower in that article, and, per WP:LEAD, the lead should usually not exceed four paragraphs. Flyer22 (talk) 23:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Richard Carr (blues musician), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 05:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Iguane Records, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

  • It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
  • It appears to be a clear copyright infringement. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

    If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

  • It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 05:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 25[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.

Musical ensemble (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Continuo
Psychobilly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Punk

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:48, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See picture, below[edit]

I've reversed your reversal, but I'll grant you the last word if you insist on putting "see picture, below" back in.

I only removed the text. You'll note that all pictures remain intact.

I did this because phrases like "see picture, below" are rarely corrected when, inevitably, either the body of text moves, or the picture moves or is deleted. It's simply not a wise phrase to have in the text.

My action had nothing to do with the number of pictures agreed upon or their nature.

Cheers

P.S. I guess I should mention it's the Bass guitar article I'm talking about.

Also, I apologize if my choice of subject header sent you on a wild goose chase.

Willondon (talk) 12:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 2[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.

Fuzz bass (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Vader and Music Machine
Alan Sparhawk (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Low

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:American double bassists, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

empty and unwanted duplicate of Category:American double-bassists

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Pichpich (talk) 18:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Category:Canadian double bassists, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

empty and unwanted duplicate of Category:Canadian double-bassists

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Pichpich (talk) 18:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Scotty Anderson (guitarist)[edit]

Hello OnBeyondZebrax,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Scotty Anderson (guitarist) for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks,

TKK bark ! 10:25, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Signal flare[edit]

Hello. Judging by your recent edit in flare article, you might be interested in participating in an RFC in Talk:Flare (pyrotechnic) § RfC: Is this article the primary topic of "flare"? Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 07:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This [6] edit was a little bit disingenuous, if you look at all the other characters their races are mentioned in the sentence (emphasis mine);

notably the hobbits Frodo Baggins, Samwise "Sam" Gamgee, Meriadoc "Merry" Brandybuck and Peregrin "Pippin" Took, but also the hobbits' chief allies and travelling companions: Aragorn, a Human Ranger; Boromir, a man from Gondor; Gimli, a Dwarf warrior; Legolas, an Elven prince; and Gandalf, a Wizard.

To just refer to Boromir as a 'captain of Gondor' removes any reference to his race. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 06:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Couch 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Psychedelic music 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Deena Weinstein[edit]

Hello OnBeyondZebrax,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Deena Weinstein for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. FoxyOrange (talk) 19:39, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 23[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.

Hipster (contemporary subculture) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Indie
Keyboard amplifier (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Monitor speaker

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Borate glass requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.ptc.tugraz.at/specmag/struct/sb.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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 "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kolbasz (talk) 13:13, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ping[edit]

Hello, OnBeyondZebrax. You have new messages at Montanabw's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A page you started has been reviewed![edit]

Thanks for creating Stanley Horn, OnBeyondZebrax!

Wikipedia editor I dream of horses just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

It would be helpful if you added secondary sources instead of tertiary sources.

To reply, leave a comment on I dream of horses's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Speedy deletion nomination of Charles Marcus Edwards[edit]

Hello OnBeyondZebrax,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Charles Marcus Edwards for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 23:31, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, OnBeyondZebrax. You have new messages at I dream of horses's talk page.
Message added 00:03, 30 May 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 30[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.

Psychobilly (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to The Shining and The Thing
Caspar Lehmann (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Intaglio
Football hooliganism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ban

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:56, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Tip page[edit]

Hello, please continue the discussion o the article's talk page rather than my page. You cited "Paris is the capital of France" as an example of something not requiring citation. Another such example is "the sky is blue". These are not contentious and not something subject to disagreement. Much of what you added in tipping is derived from opinion pieces and the contents of them, I find to be controversial matter. Student news paper especially on which discusses author opinions is not a reliable source. The tone/style like "problems faced by servers is..." makes it seem like you're writing from servers' position which is in conflict with our wish to remain impartial. If you're a tipped server, this would be something of consideration for influencing your neutrality, whether willing or not. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 08:52, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you happen to be a tipped employee and sympathize with tip recipients?[edit]

Do you represent the viewpoints of tipped employees as a tipped employee, or are you a business owner, or neither? I am neither. As you can see, either of these two groups would likely have trouble editing with total impartiality.

Please have a look at WP:IMPARTIAL again. The quotation you used are highly contentious. "The tone of Wikipedia articles should be impartial, neither endorsing nor rejecting a particular point of view. Try not to quote directly from participants engaged in a heated dispute; instead, summarize and present the arguments in an impartial tone." Changing the section title to "issues" and blasting off with concerns from viewpoints of servers is also highly contentious and the excess and prominent coverage presents undue showcasing of one side of view. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 08:11, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For all your hard work JayJayWhat did I do? 23:28, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Quality" Sources[edit]

The source is not quality, she clearly doesn't understand Tolkien (note the spelling, it's Tolkien, not Tolkein). For one she insinuates that Sam and Frodo maybe lovers, this alone tells you she is not a reliable source when it comes to understanding of Tolkien's work. It seems that you're pushing for it's inclusion because it's new, not for any specific reason. GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 18:23, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the misspelling. I have some type of dyslexia regarding "ie" and "ei". I am pushing for inclusion because in my country The Walrus is viewed as a Canadian equivalent to Harpers. It is a notable, reliable source, and I am not including any of Ms. Landau's controversial views, merely her general comments on Tolkien and LOTR. I challenge you to cite a Wikipedia policy which makes Ms. Landau's review unacceptable.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 22:32, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please keep the discussion at Talk:The Lord of the Rings GimliDotNet (Speak to me,Stuff I've done) 05:40, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Poseur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Garage (music) (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) 11:16, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You used a non-existent ref name for the "Selling out" article[edit]

With this edit, you (or a bot/script?) added "<ref name=autogenerated1 />" to the Selling out article. However, in the version you edited, no such reference existed. This means Selling_out#References now displays an error. Maybe you could look into it. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 21:20, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Military history coordinator election[edit]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:07, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 12[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.

Jazz guitarist (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to John McLaughlin
List of jazz violinists (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Notable
List of rhythm guitarists (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Chords

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ani DiFranco, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Punk (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) 11:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 26[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.

Korean War (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Patton tank
List of double bassists in popular music (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to James Kirkland

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Didi Beck[edit]

Hi, I'm Sulfurboy. OnBeyondZebrax, thanks for creating Didi Beck!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. 5

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. Sulfurboy (talk) 06:05, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and reliable sources[edit]

I see that you have created more than one article recently that does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements (eg Harm OCD and Didi Beck at least), and that you continue to add non-reliable sources even after you have been notified of that problem, both at Harm OCD and previously here on your talk page. In addition to Wikipedia's general guidelines on reliable sources, medical content should be cited to sources that meet our guidelines for medical topics. Please take some time to understand Notability and reliable sources, and refrain from doing more of same. You can click on the templates at the top of Harm OCD to see that there are no reliable sources that discuss this topic, and when you create articles that aren't notable, it takes other editor time to clean them up, and if you continue to do this, it could be considered disruptive. On Didi Beck, youtube is not a reliable source. Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message on my user talk page, but if I start a discussion here, I'll follow it here, so you can respond here to keep it all in one place. Also, you can sign your entries by entering four tildes ( ~~~~ ) after them. Thanks again for understanding that when non-notable articles are created, it takes other editors a lot of time to clean them up. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches may help you better understand the kinds of sources we need for medical content. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:25, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
After reading the dispatches, I see how unacceptable my harm OCD article is. I began it in good faith, hoping to find some reliable sources, but I see now I should have looked for reliable sources before creating the article. OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 23:34, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad you understand! Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:37, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 2[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hardcore punk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Still Life (band) (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) 09:27, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

Hi-Ya ! You're source of "metal" on the Hardcore Punk page is PERFECT. Totally Reads True. Thats how a person knows its great. It Rings True. Nice Job !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.201.63 (talk) 02:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK about.com is not a real strong source but the wording was pretty much right on. Hope there can be a reference to that. Didn't know it was removed. 76.117.201.63 (talk) 02:35, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


ps "great" job adding a commercial attribute to a genre that originated in the underground. WAY TO GO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.117.201.63 (talk) 02:48, 8 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hardcore punk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page D.R.I. (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) 09:38, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of No wiki[edit]

Hello OnBeyondZebrax,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged No wiki for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Tritario (talk) 18:15, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've parked this in User:OnBeyondZebrax/No wiki as it looks like you meant to write an essay or some other project page rather than an article. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:39, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anti-aircraft warfare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RPG (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) 09:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you copy information from one Wikipedia article to another as you did here (From the article Bayonet to the article Danny Boy) then to comply with copyright and plagiarism requirements as a minimum you must added to edit history the article to into which the material is copied, a link to the article title from whence the material came (see Copying within Wikipedia ). -- PBS (talk) 15:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 7[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.

Poseur (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Objectivism
Rocket-propelled grenade (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Battle of Mogadishu

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Provisional Irish Republican Army, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages UVF and UDA (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) 09:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 27[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.

Film director (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to The Dam Busters, Fargo, Wild Strawberries, Modern Times, Lost in Translation, Red Road and Heaven's Gate

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

March 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Film director 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Errors on 29 April[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked editor[edit]

When you made this edit, you evidently had not looked at the editor's contribution history, or you would have seen that he/she has been indefinitely blocked since January 2012. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Funk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Groove (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) 08:54, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Cueing (playback) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Cueing (playback) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cueing (playback) 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. Jim Carter (talk) 12:38, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Elvira Woodruff for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Elvira Woodruff is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elvira Woodruff 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. KDS4444Talk 07:01, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of George Washington's Socks for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George Washington's Socks is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Washington's Socks 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. Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:32, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited U-571 (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Home theater. 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) 08:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hardcore punk 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Hardcore Punk'']</ref> Guitar melody lines usually use the same minor scales used by vocalists (although some solos use [[pentatonic]] scales.<ref>http://www.academia.edu/3080250/The_Rage_and_the_
  • //www.popmatters.com/pm/review/rise-against-appeal-to-reason |title=Rise Against: Appeal to Reason < PopMatters |publisher=Popmatters.com |date= |accessdate=2011-12-04}}</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Anti-fascism 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • , [[Italian language|Italian]] for "[[Organization for Vigilance and Repression of Anti-Fascism]]"). In Spain. large-scale anti-fascist movements were first seen in the 1930s, during the [[Spanish
  • , [[Italian language|Italian]] for "[[Organization for Vigilance and Repression of Anti-Fascism]]").

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:56, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Goth Subculture[edit]

There is no need to put the same content on many articles: wiki links show where extra information on a subject is available.
The edit about Nancy Kilpatrick is suitable for the article about goth fashion: mentionning the name of a low profile writer who is not a journalist/historian is not encyclopedic. Woovee (talk) 18:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

source[edit]

The templates of citations are explained at this url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Citation#Journals.2C_newspapers.2C_magazines.2C_or_other_periodicals You have to read them carefully and respect this wiki guideline.
because contributions like this one, don't follow our policy:

You should have put instead:

Woovee (talk) 17:45, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 13[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.

Glossary of jazz and popular music
added a link pointing to Fakebook
Intoxicative inhalant
added a link pointing to Intoxication

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 20[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Goth subculture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page American Beauty. 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) 08:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 27[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.

Canadian hardcore punk
added links pointing to Counterparts and The Skulls
Goth subculture
added a link pointing to Convergence

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Intoxicative inhalant and Parkinsons[edit]

Given how widespread Intoxicative inhalant use is I'm not sure a description of a patient is enough to claim a link from. Its not something like MPTP where the drug (MPPP) is uncommon and the mistake rarer still. We would expect Epidemiological data.©Geni (talk) 23:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced addition to Ketamine[edit]

Thank you for your contributions to WP. Your recent addition to the article Ketamine did not have a source. If you have a source for this that is a reliable medical source please add it. If I get a chance I will look around for one. I have not removed the addition, but tagged it. I am pretty sure it is accurate so just looking for a source. Also I am not sure "seriously suicidal" is the appropriate encyclopedic medical description. Best wishes and happy editing. - - MrBill3 (talk) 11:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mod (subculture), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stanley Cohen. 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) 09:39, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of suicides[edit]

Hi. Please do not add uncited information or speculation to articles, as you did to the passages on Charlotte Dawson, Vince Foster and Clodius Albinus with your edits to the List of suicides article here and here. As you should know by now, having been editing here since 2006, material added to articles must be supported by inline citations of reliable sources, especially in matters that may be contentious or controversial. If there are sources for these claims in the individual articles on these people, then please add them to the list article. There was a discussion in early 2010 that determined that the list article needs citations for its info. I looked in the Vince Foster article and all indications are that he committed suicide, with no indication or cited sources for murder.

Also, material supported by a given citation, and punctuation, must go before the citation, not after it, per WP:PAIC.

Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again.
I appreciate all the work you're doing to shore up the missing causes of death in the List of suicides article. The cite you added for Jan Potocki, for example, was a useful addition, as the cite already in the article did not support the info, and the passage mentioning his death in his article was unsourced. (I added that source you provided to the Potocki article). However, if you're going to add material, please make sure it conforms to the format in which the article is already written. If you look at the entries, you'll see that each one is formatted as "Name (year of death), description of notability, method of suicide". Adding "Bendjelloul committed suicide on 12 May 2014 by jumping in front of a fast-moving metro train after struggling with depression, as reported by his brother, Johar" or "Police reported on May 22, 2011, that a friend found Brooks dead in his Upper East Side apartment..." represents an unnecessary level of detail and format inconsistent with the other entries, which makes the article look poorly-written.
In addition, if a source is merely cited as an inline citation, then there is no need to use phrases like "the same source". Merely add the information to the passage supported by that source. There is no need to write out a citation twice (see WP:OVERCITE), since you can just add all the supported info before that one citation, per WP:PAIC. And in instances where you do need to cite a source more than once in an article, you don't have to write it out entirely; you can simply use the ref name tag.
Some other miscellaneous points:
  • Sentences end in punctuation (see your edit to Penelope Delta), and are separated by a space (your edits to Malik Bendjelloul, Joseph Brooks and Johannes Vare).
  • In the passage for Johannes Vare, you wrote, "He died by firearms". How many firearms did he use?
  • The citation that was already given for Charlotte Dawson's suicide already indicated the method. While there is nothing wrong per se with adding another citation, all you had to do was add ", hanging" to the passage before the first citation.
  • The source you added for Tobi Wong does not mention Wong, but someone named Phyllis Hyman. In addition, it merely mentions that her death was a possible suicide, and not that a coroner made a determination of that cause.
Thanks again. Nightscream (talk) 00:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Can you please stop violating the format of the List of suicides article with your additions? Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 23:41, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to my last message, or the ones before that in general? Nightscream (talk) 03:40, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
::the last addition had a citation error but it was constructive, because the entry on Atchison did not list the cause of death(hanging). You improved the reference, which was helpful, but you also redacted the cause of death.04:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)+
OnBeyondZebrax, why are you continuing to violate the format of the article with additions of poorly-written detail bloat? Haven't we discussed this at length already? Not only are you adding details that are not necessary in this article, and which are better suited to the individual articles of each person, but you're creating grammatically incoherent passages as well.

In the first place, why are you adding these passages right after the citation for the suicide, without a space in between the two? In the second place, why are you adding what appear to be full sentences without capitalizing the first letter? This is what one of your sentences looks like:

Jeremy Michael Boorda (1996), Chief of Naval Operations, US Navy, shot in chest,[82]he was reported to have been distraught over a news media investigation into whether he had the right to wear two Combat Distinguishing Devices on his uniform, indicating valor in combat. [83]

Don't you see that the first passage is not a full sentence, which is why it didn't end in a period or other punctuation mark? Why did you add a comma to the end of it, and then a new sentence after that citation, without a space, and a lowercase letter on the word "he"? Is that how you write sentences? Don't you preview your edits? Don't you check the article after you save it?

I've been trying to communicate with you over this for months now, often explaining what is wrong with these edits, and you don't seem to respond except by saying, "What did I do wrong?", and then go right back to doing it. Can you please stop? Or do have to alert an administrator to your conduct? Nightscream (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to add the rationale for the suicides. This had already been done before I edited this page. I will use correct grammar in the future.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On my talk page you wrote: The list of suicides have an unusual format. There are several elements, separated by commas, sometimes using a period at the end. Your previous note to me was negative. You don't seem to notice I am trying to improve the list article. In some cases, rationales are given for the suicides, dating to before I started editing the page. I think that this is a good idea.OnBeyondZebrax 20:41, 12 November 2014

My previous note to you was critical, and justifiably so. You have spent months adding incoherently-written detail bloat to the article, and continued to do so, without communicating with me, despite my attempts to discuss it with you, and in far more polite terms above, which you can see if you read my messages to you from August. If my last message was a bit more "negative", it's because the most "positive" messages haven't had any effect on you.

All editors try to improve articles. So what? That does not mean that you have license to malform articles with bad writing or detail bloat. Did I not praise you for the positive aspects of your edits in the first two sentences of my August 13 message above, in order to make it seem a bit more balanced, and that I wasn't just trying to come down no you too harshly? Indeed I did. Did that have any effect on your edits? Apparently not.

The list of suicides articles do not have an "unusual format", nor does it have any format that justifies your edits. Rationales for the suicides should be placed in the articles of the individual persons, and not in the list article, which should just list the person, year of death, notability, method of suicide, and supporting citation, and it has been thus for years, for as long as I've been editing the article. If you disagree, then we can have a discussion on the article's talk page, and perhaps come to some consensus about this. Do you want to do that? Nightscream (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On my talk page you wrote:
I have started a discussion on the List of suicides talk page. Without the rationale, the reader doesn't know why these notable, successful people are killing themselves. Take the Navy officer for an example. He was distraught over having his medals questioned. OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 22:25, 12 November 2014
The reader does not need to know the rationale in the list article. They can go to the person's article, which is where more detailed information on a given person is supposed to be given. Placing it in the list article will cause it to bloat. Nightscream (talk) 22:43, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think the reason a man kills himself over is as important as the method. In many cases, a few words will suffice (e.g., financial problems, cancer diagnosis, depression). We can discuss this at the List of suicides talk page. I look forward to a WP:NICE discussion.OnBeyondZebrax (talk) 22:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled[edit]

Nomination of Brain Lock for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brain Lock is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brain Lock 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.. Gccwang (talk) 08:11, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Reggae 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • their inspiration directly from Jamaica and the Caribbean community in Europe, such as [Alborosie]] (Italy) and [[Gentleman (musician)|Gentleman]] (Germany). Reggae in Africa was much boosted by the

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Pop punk may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Staff|date=4 July 2012|publisher=''[[Rock Sound]]'' (Freeway Press)|accessdate=11 July 2012}}</ref>]]
  • [[The Jam]],<ref>[{{Allmusic|class=artist|id=p4585/biography|pure_url=yes}} allmusic ((( The Jam > Biography )))]</ref> featured poppy melodies as well as lyrics that sometimes dealt with

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:02, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Experimental rock 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:16, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Noise rock may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "()"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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Noise rock that came up past 2010 are [[Roomrunner]], [[Dope Body]], [[Nü Sensae]], [[Sunn O)))]], [[METZ]], [[Disappears]], [[Futurians (band)|The Futurians]], [[Thee Oh Sees]], [[Cloud
  • , Fight Amp, Whores., Bleeding Knees Club, White Spot, Kowloon Walled City, [[Nü Sensae]], [[Sunn O)))]], [[METZ]], [[Disappears]], [[Futurians (band)|The Futurians]], [[Thee Oh Sees]], [[Cloud

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:02, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Instrumental rock 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • [[disco]] produced several instrumental hit singles during the 1970s.n[The Allman Brothers Band]] have many instrumentals. [[Jeff Beck]] also recorded two instrumental albums in the '70s. [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:46, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to History of New Zealand 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.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • The economic reforms were led by finance minister [[Roger Douglas]] (finance minister (1984-1988), who enacted fundamental, radically neo-liberal and unexpectedly pro-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]