User talk:Walter Görlitz/Archived Talk to 2013-12

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

IndianBio

You need to go and talk to the editor on Talk:Red (Taylor Swift album), and see why?HotHat (talk) 05:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Happy New Year 2013

Happy New Year 2013
I know that previous interactions between you and me weren't as good as they should have been, and I apologize again for being harsh and blunt sometimes. Notwithstanding, I just wanted to wish you a Happy New Year for 2013 :) — ΛΧΣ21 20:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. And the same in return. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Canada page

Could I get you to revert the tag addition at the Canada page - its on pages 20 - 28 - the book Gregg Lee Carter (3 June 2006). Gun Control in the United States: A Reference Handbook. ABC-CLIO. p. 267. ISBN 978-1-85109-760-9. Retrieved 2 January 2013. - talks about the book in question referring specifically about the views on gun control...thus a cross ref confirming the books mention of this topic. PS Happy new years!!Moxy (talk) 20:16, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to remove it after adding your reference, which isn't the one listed (and I didn't think it was, hence the tag). --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok i will - They even go so far as to talk about pellet guns (a review).Moxy (talk) 20:40, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that. Thanks for checking. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

The Royal Royal

You may want to have your say.HotHat (talk) 05:59, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Re: 2014 FIFA World Cup qualification – CONCACAF Fourth Round

Those are local times. Honduras is in UTC−6, Panama is in UTC−5, Mexico City is currently in UTC−6. Chanheigeorge (talk) 06:50, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Spaces

Readability.

— Lgfcd (talk) 20:16, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
When you're done, I'll be removing them then. If it's not prescribed and several tools remove them, it's not appropriate to add it. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

GONE

I have retired!HotHat (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Sad to see you go.
May the road rise up to meet you.
May the wind be always at your back,
May the sun shine warm upon your face,
And the rains fall soft upon your fields,
And, until we meet again
May God hold you in the palm of His hand.
Godspeed. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Music websites

I think the following articles need to be created if Jesus Freak Hideout has an article on Wikipedia.

  • Christian Music Zine
  • Indie Vision Music
  • Louder Than the Music
  • New Release Tuesday
  • The Phantom Tollbooth
  • Worship Leader

What do you think about that?HotHat (talk) 03:41, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Agree with NRT, Phantom Tollbooth & Worship Leader. Not sure about the other three. Not familiar with them. Not sure which notability policy they would fall under but suspect that if other RSes are writing about them that they should be enough. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Look at what I just did Worship Leader. I am being BOLD! I hope this does not backfire in my face like some other things that I got started on here.HotHat (talk) 06:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

A page you started has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Need You Now (Plumb album), Walter Görlitz!

Wikipedia editor Hasteur just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Looks good, only concern I have right now is the lack of independent RS content. I am concerned that this may not pass the WP:NALBUM mark and suggest that as soon as the ablum is released and there's reasonable reviews, that they be plugged in.

To reply, leave a comment on Hasteur's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Proposed deletion of Need You Now (Plumb album)

The article Need You Now (Plumb album) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Forthcoming albums are not notable without substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. The ONLY source that mentions this album is one tweet. We do not have reliable sources attaching the singles to this album, giving a release date, the track listing or anything else.

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. SummerPhD (talk) 03:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Need You Now (Plumb album) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Need You Now (Plumb album) 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/Need You Now (Plumb album) 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. SummerPhD (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

New article

I have created a new article entitled This Time Around, and I am wanting to know what you think of the new page.HotHat (talk) 05:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Just one change. Looks fine. Care to dig-in on the article that's been nominated for deletion twice (see above)? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
I found AllMusic and New Release Tuesday and put it on the deletion nomination.HotHat (talk) 06:37, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I have created a new article entitled, The Alignment, so what do you make of it?HotHat (talk) 00:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Pretty good. Should have mentioned this before, but {{Cite music release notes}} will do what you're using the note field for. Add it once with a ref name and reference it after that. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Re

In Àngel Rangel, I do not put incorrect information. The subject has been discussed numerous times. Catalonia is not included as a country but as a region of Spain. And that was already included there, I just moved to change. And please, stop chasing me, because I'm not vandal and I do a decent job for a long time here. --Marcospace (talk) 17 January 2013 (UTC)

As long as you make incorrect edits, I will revert them. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Test Management

Hi Walter

It would make me feel better if we could discuss my link here rather than me/you reverting things. Please could you let me know what you think I should do to this page I'm linking to. Perhaps there is something I can do to make the page more suitable for inclusion on the test management page as a link?

I genuinely feel that these videos (that cover products from multiple vendors) are good for the QA and test management community as a whole. I've spent a lot of time creating them to help people. I've seen these issues raised countless times as a consultant and really feel they help people get the best out of ANY test management solution they implement.

Ps just for info these are all the blog posts I've written over the past few months. The page I'm linking to on my site was an attempt to collate all of this information in to one useful resource page that helps people with the QAComplete (SmartBear vendor) and Quality Center (HP vendor) products that I mainly deal with....

I've put a lot of work in to this over the past few months. I'm sure it's helpful to a lot of people out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wechlin (talk • contribs) 17:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Would love to hear your thoughts. Thank you :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wechlin (talk • contribs) 17:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm glad you've put a lot of work into this over the past few months. It will be helpful to a lot of people, but the rules, as I understand them, are simple: if you host them on a site that is selling something, they're not acceptable. You have to compare them to sites like http://kaner.com, http://www.satisfice.com/blog/ and http://www.developsense.com/. Perhaps you cold see if StickyMinds or some other source will pick-up the blog posts and mirror them on their site. It would be a lot easier to include them as sources or see also links if that was the case.
Of course, I'm just one editor. You could take them to the Wikipedia:External links/Noticeboard where a wider range of editors, many of whom know the WP:EL rules better than I do, can comment. We work by WP:CONSENSUS and so if they say that the blogs are great, then you can point to that decision and tell me that I'm wrong. Oddly enough, as a software tester, I know that people can be wrong. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Walter thank you very much for your advice on this. A friend of mind, Herb Isenberg, runs automated-testing.com. He suggested he put the content on his site (which is not selling anything). So I hope it's okay that I've linked to the material on his site. I would welcome your feedback again. Thank you.

Wechlin (talk) 10:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, and thank you for your help and support in guiding a Wikipedia newbie. Wechlin (talk) 10:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

That will deal, in part, with the commercial aspects. However it then would be a question of whether it's a self-published source and whether anyone else thinks you're a recognized expert on the subject. If you could have some of your articles published in a reputable publication such as Better Software or their on-line arm, StickyMinds.com or any of the other testing or development publications, it would help calm those concerns. It then shifts from the external links noticeboard discussions to reliable sources noticeboard. I'm not saying that anyone will challenge the sources, but it's always a possibility. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

That's a fair point. I'm reading up on this aspect on Wikipedia now. I have had a number of articles published though. Whether I'm considered a recognised expert is a fair question and one I clearly can't call. Maybe a couple of my favorite articles that I've published would help calm those concerns.

Wechlin (talk) 16:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Lets see

I can't wait to see if SummerPhD tries to get Run nominated for deletion!HotHat (talk) 07:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Release date is much sooner, and an AllMusic review, so it's less likely. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:48, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
I am giving you this source here in order to help you to keep Need You Now from getting deleted.
Furthermore, this may help your case even more so.HotHat (talk) 08:02, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
The JFH link was already in the article and removed. When it turns into a review, it will be more useful. The ad is just an ad. It's not likely to be deleted. Two keeps so far. We'll see what consensus has to say. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 08:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Move question

I noticed you removed the Chalk Outline (song) articles around, which is fine. I finally dug up the only guidance on the question of naming at WP:SONGS, which while not official, I guess is fine. It's consistent at least.

My question is how did you technically do that? I looked at the logs and I didn't see any deletion of Chalk Outline (song) before you moved it. Is this some technical feature I was unaware of? Shadowjams (talk) 20:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I have more Wikipowers. In the past, I have not been able to, but this time I was. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:20, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Odd. Now I'm thoroughly confused. Shadowjams (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Kings & Queens

Hello Walter Görlitz, I want to see where this one goes now. Lets see?HotHat (talk) 22:09, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Looks good. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Skillet

Hi Walter,

I've edited out the new album title "Rise" out of Skillet's Wikipedia page. The video previously referencing this fact has been taken down. The album title and release date are still pending and are subject to change.

Thanks,

Skillet Publicity The Media Collective www.themcollective.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.195.158 (talk) 21:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll be restoring it shortly then. The video previously referencing this fact was live and still exists as a reference since I verified it. The album title and release date are welcome to change, and when they do, we'll add a reference to this conversation. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Web Testing- Revision

Hi Walter- you removed BlazeMeter from the web testing page. You mentioned that only tools with articles listed on WP are eligible. The BlazeMeter article went live yesterday. Is there a status I need to be aware of or a period of time I have to wait after it goes live to be able to link to the web testing page? Appreciate the clarification. (DanielaSzt1 (talk) 16:04, 30 January 2013 (UTC))

When I looked, the company page existed but not an article for the product. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit?

I put Barry Robson on the list of Most Designated Players per country on the Designated Player Rule page and you removed it stating “Barry Robson was released yesterday”. It is not a list of current Designated Players, it is a historical list of all the players that have been DPs. If I'm wrong then why didn't you delete Marquez, Reyna, Jarju, Schelotto, Caraglio, Ljungberg, and all the other players that got released? Rather than simply picking on my edit. Acmilan10italia (talk) 17:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

If Robson, the third Scott, was released, Scotland no longer had three DPs but only two. I'm sorry if that wasn't immediately obvious. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:13, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
It appears that the list contains historical players, which is odd for a list like this. I will discuss at the article to discuss removing them all. Feel free to revert until consensus is reached. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:23, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
I reverted it to keep the continuity until the consensus is reached. Acmilan10italia (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Template

What do you think of it?HotHat (talk) 23:51, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I suspect that you're doing this to make it easier to start new articles. Looks good, but some of those sources may include user reviews such as NRT. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Good point, I am aware of that, so I will write that in the intro as well, which I forgot to do.HotHat (talk) 23:59, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, not trying to be creepy, but this talk page is still on my watchlist. Nice job HotHat! I've been wanting to do a list like that for a long time but haven't gotten around to it. Thank you!--¿3family6 contribs 19:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of soccer clubs in Canada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vancouver Whitecaps (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) 11:26, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Contested PROD of Kekuta Manneh

Since you contested the proposed deletion of this article, I'm just letting you know that I've taken it to afd. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Jaakko Juuti

Thanks for adding a reference on the page, I'm not so accustomed to the standards here yet. Fmurto (talk) 10:02, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

One space or two spaces?

Hey Mr. Görlitz. i was wondering why Wikipedia bots remove my second space when i write articles using two spaces! i am just used to doing this because it separates sentences more apart compared to the single space between words. Any reason why Wikipedia wants only one space? Please let me know if you know the answer. Thanks! --LABcrabs (talk) 20:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

You may write with one or two spaces after punctuation. The MoS allows for both. However, when presented, it will only display one because this is the correct typographical representation. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
See MOS:PUNCTSPACE and Sentence spacing (with all the linked articles there). --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Falling Up former members undo

I've know all of them for close to 10 years now, not as a fan, but as a personal friend. Andrew and Michael were the only two to use turntables. When Mike left the band he was given the turntables leaving the band with none and were never replaced. The band went in a new live direction at that point and Adam never used turntables. I called to verify that he didn't use them in a random single show and he hadn't. Again, Andrew and Michael were the only two to use a turntable. Not Jessy or Adam. --ToJme (talk) 18:35, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Saw that explanation. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

NASL footnote

I don't disagree with your comment, it was just difficult to locate an article that actually discussed the topic. A glance at most any NASL history sight exhibits it, but not in a easily accessible way. You have to interpret the data provided. Most of the soccer loving world is use to the 3-1-0 scoring system for Win-Tie-Loss. And especially after the NASL did away with ties in 1974, I know first-hand that the league's tables often proved to be a puzzle for Europeans. The footnote answers the question quickly. Also checking any individual NASL season's wiki-page clears it up, but you shouldn't use a page to source another page, right?

On another note, should your edit read win-loss-draw record instead of win-loss record, given that 2 of the 5 times this happened ('68 and '69) were pre-1974? I don't know the answer, just raising the question. -cheers --Creativewill (talk) 20:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

reliable resources

Mr. Gorlitz, I saw your removal about my last edit about the conference information. I will go back check for the reliable sources for these conferences. My intention was to show there are a lot of available sources/information about the movement.

I read all of your comments about me and other author. I am also aware what Fullbucket is trying to do. While he/she is claiming about unbiased and reliable sources, he/she only introduced two or three articles which were known as criticizing the movement and all information is given around these articles. We are talking about a global movement with 7-8 million supporters. There are hundreds of reliable but positive sources are also available and I hope someday, some WP:BOLD authors bring them here to make this page more informative.

I want to ensure you that I am not here to prepare an advertisement/supporter page. I am an academician and you are going to see my continuous contribution/involvement to the Wikipedia community. Thank you --GlobeNthink (talk) 16:39, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

AIV

Thanks for your report at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism about the "Rick" vandalism at Adam Young. My response is here. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:31, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Probably a better choice than blocking every anon that does this.
Very impressed that you responded here. --Walter Görlitz (talk)

Thank You

Hi Walter,

Thanks. I think I corrected those links...wasn't sure quite how to do it so I just copied the other links with double brackets [[ ]] and that seemed to work.

Where do I put the four tildes Jeffnailen (talk) 22:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC) ??

Jeff


RFC on CCM

I am contacting both you and the IP user involved in the CCM dispute because I have now requested for comment on that talk page. The IP user has left a very lengthy complaint on my talk page. Please read that, and comment on the CCM talk page. Thanks. — nerdfighter(academy) 02:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It's less of a dispute than an editor who doesn't have a clue what a RS is, how to add refs correctly. But I'll read the current incoherent diatribe and respond when I have time. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Don't just give up on us :)

Hello, how are you ?? I know we have been pain for you at the Spanish records page, but just don't give up on us :) because without a user like you being patient with new users as us we won't go anyway in that , So to be productive help us fix each section after that we can talk about any new records which might be as you said not needed . (like the 1st section about individual records : Removing the youngest to score x goals because it seems just in this page not founded in any pages you gave us ) Finally Thank you for understanding us and trying to help just again dont give up on us and always remember we are new users trying to get guided by people like you :)

thank you again

2602:306:3878:81E0:ACD7:6FE5:3DBA:365 (talk) 04:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Alt

What does "alt" do? I thought it was a broken intended caption. As for the size, I feel it's kind of small but I suppose it may be policy to be that size. It seems to me a lot of free use images on this site are unnecessarily small in articles, but okay. --occono (talk) 16:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

What it does is listed at alt attribute. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:14, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Ah I understand now, sorry for the confusion. --occono (talk) 17:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Nobody knows everything. I suspected that it was just a misunderstanding of what alt attributes were. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

im sorry

my brother got on my account and did stuff to a lot of band pages that i like im still trying to fix them myself

Imagine what happens when your daughter gets on your account! Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I disagree with your arguments

Hi, I am perplex when links were removed - Specially because you are impeding the publication of a different perspective. That is not what Wikipedia is about. I will put them back but i would like to find a middle ground if possible. There are millions of pages out there with Hot Topics with sections called Critics. Your arguments, with utmost respect, are excuses to remove the links. I am not publishing links nor do i want them advertised - As a part of a constructive approach, i would like to see a different perspective ... Or do encyclopedias write about one side of a coin and ignore the other? Kind regards Cesar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cesargarciarincon (talk • contribs) 18:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

They were removed because they're not from a reliable (or you could say reputable) source. The author of those articles has not been recognized by anyone else as an authority and they have not been vetted by peers. If they had first been published in a reputable publication, it would be a completely different matter. As such, they are simply self-published sources, and diatribes at that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
However, I could be wrong. You're welcome to call me out and request that the site be recognized as a reliable source and not a self-published source at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. That would be the best location to determine if they are indeed reliable or not as there are editors who monitor the discussions there who know all of the rules of what does and does not constitute a reliable source. Present your case there, notify me of it here and I'll present my case as well. I would not like to be wrong about something as important as this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:46, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Walter, much appreciated ... Will you kindly guide me through the "acreditation process" please - and i beg you to assist me on this while i finish my job. I am also fine with you making sugestions and recomendations as my intention is not to spam (G-d forbids) but to contribute in a productive way. Again Walter, may you please - apologies in advance- kind;y guide me through this "acreditation process" Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cesargarciarincon (talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not an accreditation process. It is a determination as to whether the site would qualify as a reliable source. As it stands, since it contains reprints of what could be copyrighted material, I can't see it passing.
  1. Go to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard
  2. Scroll down until you see "Click here to start a new discussion".
  3. Click on "Click here to start a new discussion".
  4. Provide a Subject or headline in the field below "Subject/headline:". The URL of the website ( www.metropolitantabernacle.org ) is sufficient. You may also want to look at some of the other headings for ideas.
  5. Make a case stating that I and other editors have removed the site from articles that you have edited and that we have stated that the site is not reliable.
The process will then start. It may take a few hours or a several days to discuss. Possible outcomes:
  1. The editors there will determine that the site is sufficiently reliable in all situations.
  2. The editors there will determine that the site is sufficiently reliable for some situations or statements, but not others.
  3. The editors there will determine that the site is not sufficiently reliable and should not be included as a reference or used as an external link.
  4. The editors there will determine that the site is serious threat to Wikipedia and will be placed on a "black list" and any attempts to save an article with the URL will be prevented.
I hope that helps. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Walter, you stated that an article by Peter Masters, minister at Metropolitan Tabernacle, who holds a PhD and is widely published, is not a WP:RS. I think you need to look at what constitutes a RS a little bit.ReformedArsenal (talk) 01:50, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I couldn't agree more. If it is widely published, it is a reliable source. However, it's published on a site that may not have the rights to reproduce the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

What is next... ??

What is next...?? most people think X goals are not needed (just one said its useful ) so whats next ?? we need to move on because we cant have all one agreement cant we ?! so what is next .. ?? does it consider a consensus as that?? or no consensus is reached ?? if you consider this as a consensus just go on and remove them and lets fix other issues then ! we need to move on ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3878:81E0:68D4:96B9:34FF:D41E (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I will let you correct your own mistake.

I got my information from the Assemblies Of God publication "The Pentecostal Evangel" http://www.pe.ag.org/Conversations2009/4963_Camp.cfm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.42.13.157 (talk) 08:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

You made a mistake too. They are a primary source. http://www.todayschristianmusic.com/artists/jeremy-camp/features/breaking-camp/ : "Camp had moved to north San Diego County after earning an associate of theology degree from Calvary Chapel Bible College in Murrieta, California" Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I also heard an interview with him on New Release Tuesday's podcast that casts doubts on the AoG article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

re: French Montana

Thanks, good to know.--I am One of Many (talk) 06:21, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

SPI cases

Hi Walter. In the future, can you submit Nagatomo socks under Random user 1085 instead? Thank you. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Of course. I saw that after I opened the second recent case. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Frontaal Canvassing

I saw that you templated Frontaal for canvassing. What canvassing action did he take? Are you referring to his contacting me on my talk page? If so, he contacted me after I had already involved myself in the discussion, which, at least as I understand it, is not canvassing. In fact, as WP:CANVASS says, "Campaigning... may be appropriate as part of a specific individual discussion". Would you still consider his conduct their to be canvassing, after considering the fact that he was merely continuing a preexisting discussion? Ducknish (talk) 20:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Considering he hasn't yet involved himself in the discussion, yes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
He's making an entirely covert effort to sway opinion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
However (and I may be wrong in my interpretation here) it seems to me that canvassing refers to covert attempts to bring other users into the discussion. Since I had already involved myself in the discussion and made my stance clear, I don't see his contacting me as really fitting the definition of canvassing. He was simply arguing his viewpoint in a different forum, a forum that was linked to in the discussion and fully available for the curious to see. Ducknish (talk) 22:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
You may have a point. I'm not sure it's appropriate although the term I used to describe it could be wrong. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

{{Use mdy dates}}

Hi,

Regarding this edit: where are you seeing the recommendation to place this template "near the top"? I can't see anything about that on the template doc. As a bot-only note which nonetheless has the potential to cause whitespace issues with the parser if placed in and around infoboxes et cetera, it would seem optimal for this to be placed out of harm's way along with other user-invisible templates in the footers. Am I looking in the wrong place? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Here: {{tl:Use dmy dates}} Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. That appears to have been put in undiscussed, and given that it's both impractical and incongruent with similar templates (per my comments above) I think the best course of action here may be simply to remove that line from the documentation. Any objections? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 16:26, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
The User:Ohconfucius/script/MOSNUM dates.js javascripts do the same. Perhaps a discussion should happen before making that change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
I've asked Ohconfucius for his input. Cheers. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 10:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Retrospective to my (principally technical) decision to place the template at the top, we've indeed discussed this at the template talk. It seems that there is a consensus of sorts for not changing the placement. -- Ohconfucius ping / poke 13:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

As I've just said to Ohconfucius, seeing as there is a weak consensus for keeping the template at the top then the documentation should reflect that, though I primarily agree with Sillyfolkboy's rationale in that discussion and will probably still move the template during maintenance sweeps. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks for keeping me in the loop. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey

I made an account

Stgw (talk) 21:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Welcome. Careful with the WP:GWARing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:32, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The Lone Bellow (album)

If you want to look this over it would be appreciated by me.HotHat (talk) 06:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks good. The caps on the infobox sources need to addressed and with that many genres, a section with references to support all of them might be in order. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, I took your advice.HotHat (talk) 04:31, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I noticed. I un-capped the genres in the infobox. Looks thorough! Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

re: Kupono Low

This discussed a couple of years ago. See here. – Michael (talk) 04:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

New Release Tuesday

I am giving it to you and the whole Wikipedia community. if we can keep it?HotHat (talk) 05:54, 4 April 2013 (UTC)


WikiProject U2 invitation

Hello! This message is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please, join this discussion on this talk page!


You may add yourself to our member list below by clicking here!

Project U2 member list
  1. Melicans (talk · contribs) 14:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  2. Dream out loud (talk · contribs) 16:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  3. Pjoef (talk · contribs) 16:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC) The 80s, from Boy to Rattle and Hum plus the ONE Campaign
  4. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk · contribs) 03:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
  5. Lemurbaby (talk · contribs) 03:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
  6. Difop (talk · contribs) 20:26, 19 October 2012 (WEST)
  7. Miss Bono (talk · contribs) 11:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC) The entire career of the band plus Bono and Ali Hewson.
  8. Cullen328 (talk · contribs) 22:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
  9. Teancum (talk · contribs) 14:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
  10. PBASH607 (talk · contribs) 03:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
  11. Mayast (talk · contribs) 19:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC) Upcoming songs and album (2014)
  12. c_meindl (talk · contribs) 10:45, 6 February 2014 Taking a WikiPedia class and had to join a WikiProject. I am interested in supplementing song stubs and articles!
  13. atuldeshmukh1 (talk · contribs)
  14. Calidum (talk · contribs) Wish I had seen this sooner. 01:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
  15. Fylbecatulous (talk · contribs) returning to active status; just based on a feeling... Fylbecatulous talk 15:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
  16. [[User:<Pushandturn>|<Pushandturn>]] ([[User talk:<Pushandturn>|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/<Pushandturn>|contribs]]) 00:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC) optional: Im a longtime U2 fan and I went to the U2 360 tour and love sharing their music!

 Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:37, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Indie Vision Music

This website is just as notable as musicOMH is to secular music, so I created it, which lets see how this whole thing goes.HotHat (talk) 06:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

man

can you make a pattern kits no logo with wikimedia commons?

[1] sr rennes (jan 2013-may 2014)--Principal adjoint (talk) 13:45, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

can you or can't?--Principal adjoint (talk) 13:49, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
can you make the kit? urgent!--Principal adjoint (talk) 13:50, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
I can, but I won't. The commons football editors of kits are a bit unpleasant to work with. Drop a note at User talk:Luxusfrosch. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:55, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
you know other designers football jerseys?--Principal adjoint (talk) 14:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Only Luxusfrosch. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:30, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vancouver_Whitecaps_FC&diff=542459739&oldid=542049996 as an example. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
designer and not English? Good news: this dog Bruno-ban left and wikipedia commons. we can remove the logo set banned today?--Principal adjoint (talk) 14:34, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
You can request that they be removed, but it usually takes a week. If they're used in another project, then they won't be removed. The best choice is creating new kits. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Why will not you draw? It takes a little more time and it is urgent!--Principal adjoint (talk) 14:49, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
As you can see by the example, I'm not good at it and it does take time, which I don't currently have. A kit for 2014 can't be particularly urgent. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
It's settled. Supermaen drew ... but with the logo.

PS: This kit has been worn this weekend.--Principal adjoint (talk) 15:22, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

A second kit, without logo, can be created. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:24, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

italy and uruguay

[2] [3]--Principal adjoint (talk) 19:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Problems with a user

There's a user named Zuagery who is constantly genre warring. After several times of being given advice on editing and several warnings about a user's genre warring, the user still consistently genre wars, and adds unsourced and completely ridiculous genres, then adds unreliable sources that mention nothing of the band/album/etc being in the genre, just to get his genre wars accepted. Constant genre wars. His genres have no consensus and no matter how many warnings he gets, he continues to genre war. Even I've reported him plenty of times but there's no response, including when I request a page protection. Since you're on Wikipedia often, can you please watch the following pages?:

Some genres he adds include alternative rock, metal, glam metal, gothic metal and pop punk and others I've seen. But he says that I'm a vandal for restoring sourced material and consensuses.

Stgw (talk) 23:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Hello Walter--I'm happy to see you got yourself involved with this terrible mess also. I'm not yet convinced there are sides that actually have it correct. It's all fan edits, and the only difference that I can see is that the fans disagree, both armed with a complete lack of reliable sourcing. Zuagery is now blocked again, but I don't know if that will help. Anyway, thanks, and I sent an extra box of aspirin your way. Drmies (talk) 17:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the warm greeting. I discovered quite early that any edits made solely on opinion are not going to be beneficial. Sourced genres and discussion are the only way out. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
You just saw my edit to Craig Mabbitt, I suppose. I felt almost guilty. A look at the edit history suggests that some of this material was the topic of an edit war earlier, and I wonder why: clearly it had nothing to do with the subject, but with one of the bands he sang in. I wish we had a dozen or so editors and admins who know metal and the associated reliable sources well enough, instead of just a couple. Anyway, thanks for the help--it's an uphill battle, keeping this project from becoming a collection of fan pages. Once we're done with metal, we'll clean up K-pop. Drmies (talk) 22:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Not K-pop. That's too much of a mess! Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:37, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Greg Janicki‎

Hi Walter, many thanks for removing the vandalism at Greg Janicki‎; in future, if you ever come across something like that (i.e. unfounded accusations being made about a living person), please ask an Admin to see if the information needs removing from the history. GiantSnowman 16:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I normally would but I have been insulted when applying my own moral judgement on things like that in the past so I don't usually bother any longer. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Ryan Smith

I didn't create the page, for the record; it was originally created at the incorrectly cased title by someone else last year sometime, and I moved it to the correct title — but then just within the past few days somebody else cut and pasted a new article back into the original redirect, apparently because the article got merged into a subsection of a third target article instead, and the new editor was trying to recreate it as a standalone article again. Bearcat (talk) 22:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I noticed the edit history. A script notified you, and I saw that the anon recreated the page. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Cool. Just to let you know (although you may already have seen this too), I rolled it back to the redirect and pageprotected it the same way the correctly-cased title already has been. Bearcat (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

rise against

Hey while I'm looking at it a little, can you watch the Rise Against articles? I noticed some users/ips have replaced a sourced genre with a genre that the source doesn't call it. Eg: on the Make It Stop (September's Children) the genre was sourced as punk before but gets replaced with alt rock. Also I've noticed a user and ips adding post-hardcore without any sources, including on the main article. Try to make sure there isn't genre warring, unless there's a source, it's a constructive edit.

Stgw (talk) 23:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

AFCShandong

AFCShandong here. Sorry if I caused any problems. Just trying to edit pages on Chinese footballers to make them grammatically correct and fix some outdated information. I did not know that I was causing any harm or trouble.

AFCShandong (talk)

Please explain on the AN/I page. I find it hard to believe that you didn't know you were causing trouble based on all the warnings on your talk page though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

To be honest, I really didn't really know complex Wikipedia editing is. I'll look up tutorials and I promise that whatever you mentioned will not happen again, such as overlinking, removing sections etc. Also when the notification came up with new messages, I ignored that because I thought it was just spam or something similar in that aspect. As I said, I'm truly sorry and I'll make sure it doesn't happen again.

Request an email

Walter, I'd like to have a private word with you but I see you have email turned off. Would you mind sending me one and I'll reply, keeping your address confidential. Toddst1 (talk) 16:50, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Silverline

I want to know do you think that this band is now notable because the article has been deleted three-times.HotHat (talk) 03:18, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

The Full Armor of God Broadcast

Hello my old colleague! Been quite a while. I see we once again have come together on this matter. I am most interested in your help in finally getting a stand alone article for it. I still implore that even though the media files used as reference are hosted by the subject, that the acknowledgements of the artists and groups who recognize the program are in fact it's most credible source. After all, it is highly unlikely that all of these artists were imitated by imposters. If you look at other much more notable programs like The Howard Stern Show or Dr Demento they too are not sourced by much printed reference. I know you value this subject too, as I know you have advocateed on it's behalf in the past. Any thoughts, my good man? I most welcome your input. Blessings. Armorbearer777 (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Stern's article has secondary sources to support notability.
Dr. Demento has a few as well, but not as many.
If Doug van Pelt had written about the show in HM, that would be enough. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I should clarify, written a feature article about it, not a mention or a short piece. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
  • In all due respect, it would seem that the HM Magazine article has more than it's share of issues too. I think to some degree there must have been a bit of rivalry to some degree. I know the two entities have mutually acknowledged each other, with radio spots airing on Full Armor and ad space in HM. Not sure why they never did more together.. Nite, my good man. I apprecaite you. Armorbearer777 (talk) 06:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
You clearly do not understand what a reliable source is, let alone a secondary source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I interpret "audio source on the Internet" WP:Published as reliable source. If i am interpreting incorrectly, please explain. I am not meaning to seem sarcastic. I do want to work with you and learn from you. I respect you as a Wikipedian. Sorry about the HM Magazine comment, that was perhaps sarcastic. But in love, I adore the magazine and hope to help the article in any way I can. Armorbearer777 (talk) 08:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
You're still missing it. The broadcast itself is not a reliable source about itself.
Look at the criteria at WP:BAND and WP:NALBUMS. A notable artist can have a non-notable album. Similarly, just because a notable artist speaks on your show doesn't mean that the show is notable. You need to have a reliable source discuss the show at length. Multiple sources discussing it in a minor way might also help meet the criteria. So the premise that because an artist appears on the show does not make the show in any way notable.
Also, "independent of the subject" is huge here. The source itself should not be associated with the subject and having episodes aired on the show means they're not independent of the subject. The shows with articles you mentioned above do have sources that are independent of the subject. I notice that my questions about whether the sources are reliable has resulted in two editors from deciding that the article should be nominated for deletion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry Walter, I meant no harm to Christian Metal. Just when I think I am getting the hang of contributing to wikipedia, I realize how little I know. I have managed to make a good amount of little contributions, but only one stand alone article Bikers for Christ, but it was so easy to source because there are so many articles written about them. You are right, there are allot of things I don't get. Please keep in touch, if I may ever be of any help to you on any of our mutual interests. Blessings to you my friend. I don't want to hurt The Full Armor of God Broadcast more than I already have, so I am just going to stay out of the discussion. I would love to try to help more with HM Magazine and Christian Metal more, please let me know how I can help. TY and again, I'm sorry for any inconvenience. Armorbearer777 (talk) 15:24, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

You are right. This subject is not notable enough for Wikipedia. How long before it is deleted? No sence dragging it out. I concede the point. Bless you and all the great work you do for Christian Metal. I am going to focus my wiki efforts elsewhere now. If I can ever help you with any Christian Metal stuff, please feel free to leave me a to do list on my user page. Thanks again. Perhaps I could help with Clean Ups? Armorbearer777 (talk) 23:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Once an AfD has started, it must run its course. It will take about seven days. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

About U2

No problem. I was wondering if it's still on your mind not being part of WP:U2. i think you are a big help for it. Reply at my talk page...  Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I have thought about it and I'm not much of a "content provider". I'm more of an observer who (usually) knows when to revert something. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Please, take a look at Talk:U2#New_material and tell me if the site I have post is or isn't a fansite Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Probably a fan site. Certainly not a RS. But it is verifiable. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

But it's the official U2 website.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Oops! I never thanked you for that comment about me of being a stellar editor. I don't think I deserve it. But Thank you very much  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:26, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
The site is registered to Carolina Feher da Silva, Santana de Parnaiba, Sao Paulo 06539-025
This person may be acting as an agent for U2, but it's curious that it isn't registered to the band the way their official website is (NOT US LIMITED c/o Principle Management, 30/32 Sir John Rogersons Quay, Dublin 2). Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
how can be possible that it's the official website and the owner is not related to U2??  Miss Bono (zootalk) 20:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I suspect that it's not an official website. The phrase "Fã Clube do U2 no Brasil" may be a clue. I'll let you translate. Again, I'm discussing http://www.ultraviolet-u2.com/noticias/2013/04/14/dallas-schoo-teria-confirmado-album-novo-e-nega-sh/ Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
ahh, you were talking about the references for the new Tour. Oh, my bad, I was talking about the new material From The Ground Up, I got that information from u2.com. The reference for the Tour said in English: U2 Fan Club in Brazil. ;) it is in Portuguese  Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Crystal Lewis Essence Awards

I wanted to include the Essence Awards performance because it is significant in that she was performing at a major awards show and she was singing as a soloist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.149.198 (talk) 21:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

notability on Size 14 and Robt Ptak Wiki pages

Hi do you know how I can confirm the notability on the Size 14 and Robt Ptak Wiki pages as both pages have been confirmed by references and sources

Thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subtitlemeplease (talk • contribs) 04:50, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Find reliable sources to support their notability as a band or artist or under the general notability guidelines. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:04, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Reliable sources have been added — Preceding unsigned comment added by Subtitlemeplease (talk • contribs) 20:35, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Long-belated mate/maté discussion follow-up

Hi,

I see you've been patrolling both Yerba mate and Mate (beverage) for vandalism and such. I ended up letting the pages stay out of my sight because I was busy with a heap of stuff, and I chose to take advantage of our holiday here to take a look at them. I'm personally satisfied with how the articles ended up addressing the names. I fixed a "hyperforeignism" to "hypercorrection" in one of them just now, as a quick look at the former article shows that the former is not really suited to describe the addition of the extra accent; I believe you will recall how many times the latter word was brought up in that whole discussion last year...

Anyway, I'd like to thank you for your continued effort on the two articles; I'm not exactly a Wikipedia regular so I'm not suited to taking care of them that way. Also, I'd like to thank you, either again or belatedly, for summoning me back then; I think things there should be settled for a long while, but should another such a discussion open again, kindly let me know.

Best regards,

Vítor Cassol (talk) 19:59, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Glad to do it. Glad to drink it. Have a great holiday. I agree with the change. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:01, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

2013 Canadian Championship

Does the away goal rule apply? Kingjeff (talk) 03:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I can post the rules from my programme from today's game tomorrow if required. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
There is a section in the programme, the heading of which reads: "Explaining aggregate/away goals rule". It then explains the specifics, in point form, of goal combinations required for the Whitecaps to advance. It doesn't explain the away goals rule, but it does indicate that extra time and penalty kicks would be required if the aggregate and away goals are even. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
It would be good to have the rules listed. Not a whole document of rules of course, but some of the basics. Kingjeff (talk) 04:28, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Date correction

Did you want to correct your WP:ANI post "starting in November 2013"? I am guessing you might have meant a date in the past, perhaps 2012? Apteva (talk) 07:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes I would, but the discussion is now closed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:02, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
It is actually okay to make such a typographical correction to a closed discussion – just do not add anything else. It helps, because years from now someone will be reading the old ANI archives and it makes it more obvious that it was 2012 and not 2011 for example. Apteva (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
It is never permissible to correct someone else's typos in a closed discussion. But your own, yes. Although I would not do this after it has been archived, without unarchiving it first. That would not be a good idea, to make any changes to an archived discussion, while it is in the archive. Apteva (talk) 19:00, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Made the change. Thanks for the suggestion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback At U2 talk

I post something interesting. You might want to comment or being of great help. please reply Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:47, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion requests

[4] [5] [6] [7]

tu es invité à voter (fr) merci --Principal adjoint (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I would love to vote in favour, but there are some Wiki projects that don't consider small logos to be a copyright violation. best to create a second copy and use that instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:21, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Answer a question about an article?

I've asked another user to look into this, but I figured I'd ask you as well: I've written an article in my userspace about "Kai", the guy that got known for a viral video back in February that is now suspected of killing someone. There's quite a bit of coverage over the last few months (more now, of course) and I think that he just manages to pass notability guidelines, but I'm slightly hesitant enough to where I'd rather have one or two people read the article, look at the coverage, and weigh in as well. The article is here: User:Tokyogirl79/Caleb Lawrence McGillvary. Every time I keep getting ready to move it to the mainspace, I hesitate since it's at that relatively thin line of notability. I just don't want to move it, only for it to get nominated for AfD and end up being not notable enough to pass. (Thus wasting a week's worth of time for people when I could've just asked someone.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Other than a few sources that may not qualify as RSes, the subject clearly meets WP:GNG. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:55, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm going to go ahead and move it- thanks! Which sources looked dodgy? I'll try to see if I can replace them. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if http://www.mediaite.com/ is a RS.
http://www.vice.com/read/catching-up-with-kai-the-hatchet-wielding-hitchhiker doesn't appear to be a RS, but it might be a good interview nonetheless.
http://mashable.com/2013/02/10/kai-hitchhiker/ doesn't appear to be a RS.
The rest look very good. I didn't check the sites too closely so I could be wrong about all three. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:33, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

2012–13 FC Bayern Munich season

Would you be able to participate and help write in the review and events section? Kingjeff (talk) 18:25, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I may have some time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Can you give an opinion on the table showing friendly matches for the article? I'm trying to cut size to help meet that part of the Featured Article criteria. It did cut it by 1.5kB. Kingjeff (talk) 06:05, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Newsletter

Hi, I noticed you are not on this list. From June 2013 there is a new "in focus... " format, book reviews, Christianity-DYK, etc. that refer to some articles of interest. Please just take a look at the June issue (should be released soon) and see. You just need to add your name to the list here. They are also offering a 3 month money back guarantee deal next week. History2007 (talk) 08:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Shane & Shane

Go and look at the album articles, and tell me what you think if you want.HotHat (talk) 02:41, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey!!

I didn't post that in the infobox of U2, I was pointing out that it was wrong. Maybe I didn't explain very well. I was asking if I could remove Green Day form the infobox. User:Scsigs was the one who post such information. Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Oops. I was writing on the article's talk page as you were writing here. Thanks for clarifying. I assumed it was an error. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:30, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok, no problem. I think that was what happened. Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:24, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

1978 World Cup Final

Walter,

You're absolutely right, my correction on the 1978 World Cup Final page was less than neutral and unbiased but there has been new evidence provided by a retired Peruvian senator in a government enquiry that corresponds with the accusations of cheating involved with the qualifying game between Peru and Argentina. I fully accept your retraction of my impulsive addition but stand by my assertion. I'm no writer, but presumably you are and since new evidence has come to light that turns the qualifying controversy into a genuine case of corruption, this deserves to be added to the official record.

Lloyd John — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.37.26 (talk) 00:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

add a reference. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:48, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Lone Bellow

{{Talkbackl<bridget_tlbassistant>}}

The Lone Bellow would prefer to have the new page listed as the primary wikipedia page.... It contains more up to date information & accurately represents the bands new album!

Would you be obliged to help?Bridget tlbassistant (talk) 21:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Not obliged, no, but I'm quite willing to help. What exactly do you mean by "the new page" and "primary Wikipedia page"?
Are you saying that there's a different article on the band somewhere on Wikipedia?
Why would a subject have any real say about what's on their Wikipedia article anyhow? It's not a marketing tool, it's a page about the band that uses reliable sources to explain what is known about the subject. That's the case for every Wikipedia article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Bands appearing on Leno receive a 100% increase on their Wikipedia page following an appearance, compared to the prior week

o Most significant increase of any social media or website

· Twitter and Facebook are less reactive metrics and increases are much smaller on these sites. Artists appearing on Conan receive a 95% increase in daily likes and Fallon artists receive an 80% increase. Information was not available for Leno specifically.

· Bands appearing on all late night talk shows see a track sales increase of approximately 40%

The full article can be found here: http://www.hypebot.com/hypebot/2013/03/social-media-impact-for-musicians-conan-obrien-beats-out-other-late-night-shows.html

Based on this information, it seems like there are a few obvious steps we could take to create maximum impact.

· Ensure Wikipedia page is accurate and up to date

· Ensure socials are active immediately during and after a performance

o Use socials to link to the track played during the live performance and to highlight a YouTube video of the live performance for repeatability — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bridget tlbassistant (talk • contribs) 22:39, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

OK so? My issue is not how Wikipedia can fit into your marketing strategy, but what in the article is inaccurate. You can be as strategic as you want, but Wikipedia is not your tool. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Genre warrior

There's an ip called 86.6.72.37 who is warring over music genres without any citations or removing cited genres. He's been warring A LOT. Can you watch over Blink 182 articles. But even there's also been genre warring by many IP there. I thought you could watch the blink 182 articles. 70.192.201.223 (talk) 21:20, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

No time right now. Perhaps asking an admin at WP:ANI. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

ZOEgirl article section titles

Hello Walter! i was wondering what the best approach would be to the ZOEgirl article section titles. i think at least some are necessary, but they could be shortened. Please feel free to let me know! Thanks, --LABcrabs (talk) 22:31, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Good faith

It's kind of hard sometimes. The world knows the "Maracana Stadium" as "Maracana Stadium". It is its official name as well. Everyone who knows football a bit knows that. And a guy from the Middle East changes the name of the Stadium to "Jornalista Mario Filho". Sorry, but this can only be vandalism. MarcosPassos (talk) 15:35, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Tim Timmons (musician)

Do you think he is now notable or not?HotHat (talk) 08:42, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I am going to go ahead and be BOLD and create the real article now!HotHat (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Good call! I totally missed this request. There was no problem with it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:33, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Neymar

Hello, I just wanted to personally thank you for your hard work to remove the edits from FC Barcelona that keep putting Neymar as a player. As you and I both know, the transfer window doesn't open until July 1, and Neymar doesn't become a Barca player until then. It looks like we've got a lot of work ahead of us to protect that page from those who are ignorant of this, but I'm writing you to thank you and encourage you to keep up your hard work. Together, we can prevent people from continuously miss-editing our Blaugrana. Thanks! P.S. Sorry I wrote this on your user page first. I'm new to Wikipedia and did not know that there was a difference to your talk-page and user-page. I cleaned up everything that I put, so I hope no harm done. Malik Conn 11:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malikconn (talk • contribs)

Nomination for deletion of Template:FAI League of Ireland Premier Division 2008 Table

Template:FAI League of Ireland Premier Division 2008 Table has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Kingjeff (talk) 03:33, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Youth years

I understand that youth teams are displayed with players the same age as North American high schoolers. But youth teams and high school teams are different. I usually go with the number of years a player has played youth soccer as well the number of years they played in the college level. I don't know if high school teams qualify because college coaches scout players from the youth development system whether it's the USSF Development Academy, under-17 national team, etc. because that's where all the top prospects come from. – Michael (talk) 18:13, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Good job on your tireless contributions on behalf of Christian music articles. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 07:26, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

English Football season

the English football season is over, contracts may run to the end of the month but the season itself has ended. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 09:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

It may be over, but the football project doesn't remove players who are leaving until 30 June nor do we add incoming players until 1 July. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
The n you need to go and edit every other English club's article as they all have the loans removed when their season is over. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 02:03, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Sure thing. Let me know which ones need to edit and I'll inform the football project and we can get to work on it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:13, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


That's easy, its every article other then Arsenal, because you are the only person that has ever reverted those edits. Jimmy Skitz's Answer Machine 12:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

While I must assume good faith and not make personal attacks I must also call you a liar since I watch several other PL articles and they too are being edited in this same way. So no soup for you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
And to be both fair and precise, I acknowledge that not all PL articles are kept to this standard, the larger, more well-known ones are. And I am not the only one making these edits. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:01, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Software release life cycle

Hello, Walter

Long time, no see. I almost miss you.

Just wanted to drop you a short notice: Although I agree with this removal, I don't think I exactly agree with its reason. I agree with removal, because the external link was not in compliance with WP:ELNO. The part I disagree is that WP:NOTHOWTO applies to Wikipedia contents only, not the contents of external links. External contents do not even need to adhere to WP:NPOV.

Please don't take me wrong; I don't mean to be irritating. I just wanted to make sure that if the guest editor or third editor (registered or guest) decided to start a dispute resolution, you are going to know how to reply.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 18:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I've seen NOTHOWTO used both ways, and I was tempted to just use ELNO. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:30, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Advice for a noob?

Hello,

I noticed you've removed all of my additions to Comparison of issue-tracking systems and Test management tools. I admit I'm new at adding to Wikipedia, but I thought I'd done everything right. Could you let this noob know what mistakes I made, so I can prevent the loss of hours of work in the future?

I appreciate any and all advice you can offer.

Thanks,

Gojiro42 20:06, 13 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gojiro42 (talk • contribs)

Discuss. If you think someone has unjustly reverted the material you put hours of work into talk about it.
You've edited a few lists. You can see what points are held in common with other items in those lists (do they have articles or not) and by looking at the edit history (what sort of things get added and removed).
Other than that, just read some of the guidelines and pillars and be WP:BOLD. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:13, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Some further advice please

Hi Walter,

I intend to register as a user for Wikipedia later this summer, because today ClueBot NG has reverted my edit to the article about the song Under My Thumb and seems to have given me a #1 warning for my edit.

My edit was a helpful one as per WP policy on songs. The bot is wrong this time. I removed some of the unsourced long random list about cover versions of the song. WP policy is that articles about songs should not contain long unsourced sprawling random lists about covers. So therefore I removed the unsourced content as per WP policy - WP:SONGCOVER.

The reason I have not previously registered as a user for Wikipedia is simply because I like the annonymity and didn't feel it was necessary to register, but it seems as if not registering may have counted against me by the bot.

I reported the false positive, but my edit has not been restored, and I imagine that I may still have a #1 warning against me. Please could you advise how I can appeal against this. Thank you.86.176.1.11 (talk) 14:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I reverted to your edit and then made two additional changes.

Thank you for doing that Walter. It is appreciated. Do you know if the warning I had from ClueBot will therefore be reverted, as ClueBot was wrong?86.176.1.11 (talk) 14:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know how ClueBot works. And don't worry about having warnings. It doesn't affect your ability to edit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you.86.176.1.11 (talk) 15:07, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Caretaker managers in Managers Template

Hello mate, could you please provide your opinion on including caretaker managers like Brian Kidd in the Club Managers template on Template talk:Manchester City F.C. managers#Brian_Kidd. I am trying to build consensus and your input is invaluable. Thanks. JMHamo (talk) 20:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Jesus Navas

Walter, It was not me who made the original edit to show Manchester City, the edit I made was to fix the formatting as it was messed up, so I fixed it. Please check the article's history to see I am telling the truth. Then I changed the club's country to England from Spain as I assumed Manchester City was correct. The current edit is fine with me. Freddiem (talk) 03:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm sorry if that caused you concern. I will attempt to triage the problem better in the future. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
We're cool. It's the knucklebrains who edit without signing on and then they don't preview their edits and leave things a mess, who are a concern. Freddiem (talk) 05:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

XDEATHSTARx

Hi. If I wanted to change the move request to XDeathstarx would I need to start over or just edit the info in the template? Thank you for the help. Taroaldo ✉ 22:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

No. Our discussion will be fine. It will be a regular user like you or me who make the move in the end, so no one should be confused. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Taroaldo ✉ 23:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit warring

If the problem on Spitfire starts up again, don't revert. You've crossed WP:3RR, and I will block if I see you doing it again. The article is semi-protected now, but even if a new account pops up, it shouldn't be you that deals with it.—Kww(talk) 20:23, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

But it's clearly vandalism. Even if it were not ,and as precedent has been set, "I have good motives". Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
It's not clearly vandalism. He's clearly editing against guidelines, so I felt comfortable making the judgement call to semi-protect the article instead of blocking you both, but there's no reason to believe that his intention is to damage Wikipedia. Being right does not excuse edit warring. There are clear exemptions at WP:EW#3RR exemptions, and "being right" and "had good intentions" are not among them.—Kww(talk) 20:39, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
As you'll see from the link above, having good motives apparently is an exception as it worked for that editor on an article in which I was watching but not editing. I do, however, agree that this probably wasn't a textbook example of vandalism and appreciate the lenience you have shown. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:42, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Pending changes privileges

You might want to speak about your reviewer privileges to whoever is responsible for maintaining them. I'm not entirely sure why, but your most recent edit to FC Bayern Munich (this one) was not automatically accepted. There could be a perfectly legitimate reason for this, but it could also be a bug. Just thought I'd let you know. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It was because it was done with a script. I should have rejected the change, but I reverted instead. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

URL usage in Paul Stookey article

Hello. You inserted an "http://" in the Paul Stookey article's infobox after I had just left it without the protocol. The template allows no protocol prefix and prepends "http://" if there isn't one. So it was fine as it was. See Template:URL description. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 14:43, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

You're limiting your view: Template:URL#Examples lists all of them. It was fine before you changed it too. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Um, right. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 01:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
I'll assume you're an using irony or possibly sarcasm to mask your embarrassment at someone pointing-out that you were wrong when you were trying to point-out the same thing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Neither, sir. It was more like a yawn. And I feel no embarrassment. It's allowed to have a URL without the "http://". It works. As an example, the Trinity Western University article uses twu.ca in the URL template. --- Wikiklrsc (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Because that's the way it was created. If it was working and using the template there's no need to change it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Question?

Do you think the following website are reliable and noteworthy to take reviews from? (Yes/No)HotHat (talk) 03:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

  • Jesus Freak Hideout yes
  • New Release Tuesday yes
  • Indie Vision Music I'm not familiar with it
  • Christian Music Zine I don't think it is
  • Christian Music Review I don't think it is
  • The Phantom Tollbooth for older albums, yes
  • The Christian Manifesto I'm not familiar with it
  • CM Addict No
  • Christcore No
  • CM Spin First I've heard of it.
  • Alpha Omega News I don't think it is
  • Alt Rock Live I don't think it is
Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you.HotHat (talk) 04:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

U2 and IP Address

Hello, Walter. I am afraid that IP address is causing so much mess in U2's page. Can we do something about it? Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:29, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes. I reported the anon. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:30, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Wow! That was quick! Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Thank you so much, Walter. It seems like IPs like to vandalize U2 pages Miss Bono (zootalk)☆ 18:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
If you watch Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism, you'll see that it's not just anonymous editors who like to make unconstructive edits. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, thanks for reverting again. Seems like we just have to live with vandals in U2 page :) Ms.Bono(zootalk)☆ 14:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Guardiola

Hi Walter. I don't have the time this morning to devote to "fixing" the rest of FC Bayern Munich wiki, so I thought I would share this with you in the hope you did. Pep Guardiola's official start date is today, not July 1, 2013 [8] [9]. Bayern made this announcement last month. I went through and made some of the updates, but unfortunately I don't have the time (mostly due to a day-long meeting I'm about to jump into) to finish the rest of the coaching staff. Here's the latest on that [10]. Any chance you can assist with the updates? Erikeltic (Talk) 12:46, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I have not yet looked at the Bayern Munich article, but it's been common knowledge that he was taking the reigns today since April. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:35, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
among other, similar edits. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I think you may have misunderstood my intent -- it was not to call out an error on the wiki because I thought you'd contributed to said error, but just to ask for help in fixing a couple of things because I had no time to do so. At any rate, it appears that the page has been updated properly. Erikeltic (Talk) 17:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
I didn't quite know which way so I was trying to cover both possible directions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Ummm

Why did you revert the template update? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Because I am opposed to updating the timestamp on use dmy and use mdy templates ever and certainly not when no changes to the article's formatting occur.
Why are you saving the changes when no content changes occur? Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Because I checked the template for compliance and updated it as intended by the documentation and discussion of it. The purpose is to prevent needless reparsing and rechecking for compliance. Its been three years; it is not like a citation needed template; it should be checked for consistency and adherence to MOS periodically. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:50, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
You're wrong. There was nothing out-of-compliance on either page, save an extra line on the second page. No change was needed. I do check regularly for consistency and since the WP:DATERET states that "The date format chosen by the first major contributor in the early stages of an article should continue to be used" which is why I insist that the date not change when updating the pages. It's not a timestamp for the last check. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:01, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Uh... DATERET is not even related to this. I'm not changing the format so that doesn't make sense or apply to the change. Please re-read my post above; you do not seem to understand what was done or why. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:23, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Uh...DATERET is quite clearly related to this.
While you are not changing the format, you're changing that tag date.
Please re-read my post above. I understand what was done and why but you seem to be applying your own rules for your own reasons. That date parameter is not for when it was last checked despite your desire to make it that way. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
The way in which DATERET is related is that in by knowing when the template was first applied one can determine several things: the first, it narrows-down the search through the history to determine who made the change. It also can be determined if it was applied correctly. I have had to reverse date format changes that were applied incorrectly several times and it's quite frustrating to work backward to the time. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
If ever you come across an article with wrongly applied format template, you can have it changed in a number of ways. The simplest is to remplace "dmy" for "mdy" within the template or vice versa, with an option to use an out-of range date (such as any month before say August 2010) in the |date= parameter so that I catch it more quickly when running systematic sweeps. Another is to let me know on my talk page, and I will flip dates willingly upon citing justification. Alternatively, you may load the script and change the formats yourself. For each of those, the script will update the audit date. Regards, -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 07:38, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Again, its in the documentation. Template:Use dmy dates "After being tagged, and bearing in mind article evolution, a WP:bot can eventually be programmed to clean up formats periodically, correcting any new introductions since its last visit, and updating the visit date on the template." - I am no bot, and there is unlikely to ever be a bot because of all the articles that use "On July 4, 2012, 31st Battalion..." or "12 Aug 25 puppies..." which totally messes up intrawiki links, formatting and issues with TIES. No robot can parse June 03 to get June 2003 for context either; which I have to check as well. The tag is not to be removed; and instead updated when compliance is checked after a fair amount of time. Its not a personal decision; it's been a part of the history for a long time.
  • On the second issue because of edit conflict, TIES wins over this "first contributor" issue and because the change is marked, I do not see how this template tagging enforces a style or adherence to it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:39, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Chris drew my attention to this discussion. I'm not claiming ownership or anything, but I am the architect of the tagging system. {{Use dmy dates}} and {{Use mdy dates}} were conceived by "borrowing" the same templating system as cleanup tags, but for different purpose. It is not a cleanup template, and there was never any intention to use it as such, any more that it should be used a guide to WP:DATERET. The template does not claim to set the date format in stone, as it is accepted that the date format may have been incorrectly determined, and is always open to challenge by any editor.

    The template documentation says: "After being tagged, and bearing in mind article evolution, periodic script or bot runs clean up formats, correcting any new introductions since its last visit, and updating the visit date on the template." You will see that the intention of the updating has not materially altered since it was clearly laid out at the time of inception years ago. The modus operandi seems to have consensus.

    Whether or not changes are made, the script will update the date on the template, so that we know it has been given the once-over. It is a bit like the datestamps to ensure that your fire extinguishers have been checked (and fit to be used for another year). I'd ask you to just consider its use as an "audit date" to ensure the entire tagged 'library' of articles has been checked for compliance. In the meantime, more and more articles are being tagged until we get 100% coverage. By looking at the article history, you get an audit trail back to the month when it was placed or the last time it was updated, and look at who dunnit. Just like you can trace this notional updating to the month of performance, and search in article's history to find that ChrisGualtieri was responsible for the tag. In closing, I'd mention that Chris is doing this job with my full cooperation, and I am in no doubt that he is carrying out the work in accordance with the original intentions. I'd be pleased to further explain anything else that is unclear. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 07:26, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Mario Götze and Jan Kirchhoff

Mario Götze's and Jan Kirchhoff's uniform numbers are supported here. Kingjeff (talk) 06:13, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Jars of Clay

This is ours if we can keep it. Inland that is!HotHat (talk) 07:13, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

It's a case of WP:TOOSOON. No RSes have been provided and I'm not sure any will exist for another month. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:31, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Actually, New Release Tuesday and Christian Music Zine, and they talk about the release date, and NRT even has the artwork, but I am going to wait on that till later though.HotHat (talk) 07:48, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Are those enough?HotHat (talk) 08:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
I am off of here to get some rest, hope you have a great day and weekend ahead.HotHat (talk) 08:13, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure. It depends if those mentions are just one-liners or have feature-length articles focusing on the releases. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
I guess if it gets deleted it means that I was a little to errant in my BOLDNESS, and I would just chalk it up to that if it happens. I just want to thank you for always being a great help on here and giving me guidance, when I mostly need it or rarely don't.HotHat (talk) 02:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

As an apology for my oversensitive behaviour on my talk page, I give us this brownie.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 06:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
Mmm. Tasty. Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Canadian charts

Actually, Billboard does do the Canadian albums chart just go look here for August Burns Red Rescue & Restore album at No. 15. By the way, this is done through Nielsen SoundScan. Sorry, I had to bring this up to you, but I just wanted you to know.HotHat (talk) 07:25, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I learn something new about my own country! Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:23, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Christian Music Zine and other sites

If you want to use Christian Music Zine, New Release Tuesday or Indie Vision Music, heck even Jesus Freak Hideout you need to go to here and discuss the matter with this editor, who seems to know nothing about the Christian Music genre.HotHat (talk) 02:38, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Not entirely sure I do, but I saw that he doesn't know those magazines. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Websites

I have started the discussion, so lets talk if you want.HotHat (talk) 07:52, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Got'em linked.HotHat (talk) 03:33, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You said you wanted it, so I am giving you this link [11].HotHat (talk) 06:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: July 2013

Just a quick thing. According to WP:3RRNO, one of the rules for exemption is "Reverting obvious vandalism". Surely you can agree (as the person who passed on the warning) at least that this was obvious vandalism for football pages. The user was adding a player without any source of prove that this player/person was actually on the team. It is obvious what his intentions were. I am not asking this because I fully disagree with the warning (in someways I agree) but for future reference on footballing articles. Hell, it even says on the page (hidden, mind you) that "Any unconfirmed and unsourced signing/transfer will be reverted at sight" and "Do NOT add new players before their signing is officially announced by the club". Both of which he failed. --ArsenalFan700 (talk) 20:37, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Agree. I should have removed it sooner. My apologies. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:38, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

DC United

Hi, if you could review the article, D.C. United, because in the beginning there are things not correct the club. It says in the full name, Comets, instead of the name of the club, at the top they put Los Mariachis, a user can set the page nonsense. Greetings. --Sebastián Alfaro 16 (talk) 16:42, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

The Lone Bellow

I've asked for Admin assistance on my talk page about the problems on article The Lone Bellow. The IP user and this new Dougster guy seem to have a conflict of interest, so I wanted some advice. You may have noticed that I called out the IP user for editing from an address likely owned by the record label. I want the Admin to see if Dougster is similarly conflicted. I decided to write to you as I can see you are interested in this article being compliant. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  — 19:52, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Brad Friedel

Hello again, there is an error in the article Brad Friedel, because in the beginning says "Bradley Howard Friedel (born May 18, 1971) is an American football player" and also in a section says "Honours" and that is incorrect? --Sebastián Alfaro 16 (talk) 02:56, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes. American spelling should be used. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:48, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

New article

Just wanted to let you know that I created Morning Rises, which you can see if I made any mistakes.HotHat (talk) 08:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Only concern is three of the review sites not being "notable". Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:25, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
All three are in fact notable because they have editorial staff, which TenPoundHammer said qualifies them to be used as review-based webzines.HotHat (talk) 21:38, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

are you free?

Was wondering if you were free before asking for your help.Lucia Black (talk) 20:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I will have some free time over the next few days, so yes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
I was mainly wondering if you could put your two cents in the template track listing. Ii beliebe your opinion will finally decide whether theres consensus or not...and knowing andy mabett, he will most likely wait another month until he claims he has consensus again and tries to push forward with it. I just want to put an end to it.Lucia Black (talk) 11:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Done

I went ahead and got it done with Music review sources, if you would like to edit go ahead and be my guest.HotHat (talk) 07:46, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is "Talk:Canada ‎". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 00:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice and thanks to Moxy for starting the discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

"WP:MOSNUM"?

Walter, why the revert at John Elefante, when WP:NUMERAL says, "As a general rule, in the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine, if they are expressed in one or two words, may be rendered in numerals or in words"? --Musdan77 (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Because it also says "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all figures" and so really either would have sufficed, but it's been the other way for a while. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, but to me, as a general rule, it's preferable to be spelled out in words in prose (especially in a article that's on the shorter side), which I think trumps "been the other way for a while." --Musdan77 (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
OK. Want me to revert or do you want the honours? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:17, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Done. Thanks. --Musdan77 (talk) 04:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

A topic in Wikiproject Football about the Israel FIFA issue

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Football#FIFA_records_of_Israel_and_false_information_given_by_another_user, Please read.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I responded there that I was not taking sides and simply maintaining the established state of the article. Thanks for your care in correcting any inaccuracies in the article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

A minor change to DRN

Hi there, you're getting this message as you are involved in a case at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard which is currently open. Today DRN has undergone a big move resulting in individual cases on subpages as opposed to all the content on one page. This is to inform you that your case is now back on the DRN board and you will be able to 'watch' the subpage it's located on. Thanks, Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign) 13:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions

I have got another started New Publications.HotHat (talk) 05:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Walter Görlitz. You have new messages at Talk:U2#Release_Dates.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Miss Bono [zootalk]☆ 14:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Policy development

You are more than welcome to comment on Ground rules.HotHat (talk) 07:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Expansion of Major League Soccer

It seems like the Expansion of Major League Soccer page may be on the verge of an edit war over the past few days. I see that you have made constructive edits to that page in the past. Perhaps you can take a look and see if you can contribute towards a constructive resolution? Barryjjoyce (talk) 02:32, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Questions

So, I take it by your comment that Shine Bright Baby's new LP entitled Dreamers is notable because of the following reviews: CCM Magazine , Christian Music Review , Christian Music Zine , Indie Vision Music , Jesus Freak Hideout' /, Louder Than the Music and New Release Tuesday . Is this the case? Just asking.HotHat (talk) 08:19, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I got another one does these sources CCM Magazine (Andy Argyrakis), Christian Music Zine (Joshua Andre), Houston Chronicle (Kent Matthews) and Indie Vision Music (Jonathan Andre) make the band notable? Furthermore, they have pages on Jesus Freak Hideout, Louder Than the Music and New Release Tuesday, and they have had an article on Air1 about them. CMSpin talks about the upcoming release.HotHat (talk) 09:23, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

I suspect that Hollow Bodies will chart and so when the reviews start rolling in, we know it's on its way to fame. That was the point of the statement in that AfD. I'm not sure if Dreamers will chart, but one could argue that from a GNG standpoint that multiple sources have written about it and so it may meet that criteria. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:10, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

FAC comment

Hi. If it's no bother, would you like to voice your support/oppose and comment at my FA nomination of Confusion (album)? It's a relatively short article to review. If not, feel free to ignore this message. Dan56 (talk) 04:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I would have voted in favour, but it's in an archive now and can't support or oppose now. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:19, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Interesting. It's in both active and archived locations. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:21, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Blown Away

I think you might want to take a listen to this album. By the way, I did not donate because you don't have to do so in order to download the album. It is a truly great worship album.HotHat (talk) 08:44, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Name change

I have had this under my crawl for quite sometime, which it is in reference to Jesus Freak Hideout, and this is because the F in Freak should not be capitalized. It should be Jesus freak Hideout instead, and even they don't capitalize the f in freak. They call it Jesus freak Hideout and JfH Artists Database not JFH Artists Database. So, I think we should mirror that, but even Microsoft Word said that the Freak is to be freak. Just go and type it in, and it will correct you if it is F.HotHat (talk) 03:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I would go for all caps. You might want to discuss at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

TPT (Software)

Please excuse for capitalizing an already red link to non-existing page. I am currently preparing the missing "Classification Tree Method" article. I would ask, if we can re-include the (now gone) link once I'm finished with the article? I do not want to risk an edit-war with you. OMPwiki (talk) 13:11, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Which revert?

What article were you talking about when you wrote this? I find that the vast majority of editors really don't give a hoot over the yyyy-mm-dd format even in reference sections, so it would have been really unfortunate to have bumped into one of the three remaining editors who insist on preserving the format. More unfortunate given that one of those three has gone inactive. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 13:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

This was my contribution to the edits. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Ah, yes, it was just plain bad luck for you to bump into the other editor who insists on anal interpretation of WP:RETAIN. My recommendation would be to edit around the problem. -- Ohc ¡digame!¿que pasa? 14:56, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Mad at myself

Well, if I took the apt amount of time to read these policies and guidelines on Infoboxes, Tables and Text, then I may not have included breaking marks in them because it is not kosher to users/editors with access issues. So, I am deeply and regrettably sorry for the mistakes that I have perpetuated on these people and this encyclopedia. This is mostly in reference to Jesus Freak Hideout and New Release Tuesday in critical reception sections. Both are to be utilized, but not with a break, and both ratings must be reported. May God forgive me!HotHat (talk) 20:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I think we are going to have to go back to using two box sections for Jesus Freak Hideout and New Release Tuesday, and less frequently for Christian Music Zine and The Phantom Tollbooth. This is all that I can come up with because if we don't use both we are give an WP:UNDUE precedence to one over the other, and that is clearly not allowed.HotHat (talk) 20:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I think I'm entering this conversation half way through it and I don't fully understand the start of it. I know that there's a war going on to use lists (both flat and bulleted, depending on the cabal and the infobox under discussion) but I don't think there will be any martyrdom required for those who have, in the past, used line break. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Inland

Listen here!HotHat (talk) 04:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Billy Graham as Critic of Catholicism

Your revert of my categorization has an understandable rationale. I've explained where in the article my edit is supported, and re-added it. Since the demise of the category "Anti-Catholicism" for biographies per WP:CFD, the "Critics of" category is the only way to note such things. All the best, Rinne na dTrosc (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Guitargeek.com guitar rigs

I have been moving Guitargeek.com links to the External links section because they appear to be unencyclopedic.

You reverted this change to Brian Welch's bio, saying that the Guitargeek stuff should not be an external link, per WP:EL. I was going by WP:ELYES #3 which says we can link sites "that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to ... [the] amount of detail..." I think the link is interesting but I moved it out of the article body because the text surrounding it does not tell us anything about Welch the man or Welch the musician. It's just text pointing to a too-detailed diagram. It would be different if we could say in prose that Welch started with one rig, changed his mind, used another brand, and so on; something that shows the process of being a musician and helps the reader understand Welch. Binksternet (talk) 21:20, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

The key phrase for me is "cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons." This can be integrated into the article though, unless you make "other reasons" extremely broad, and in that case, most of Wikipedia would be in ELs. It tells guitar players volumes about Welch's sound, and hence, about the musician. It says nothing to the average reader though, but we don't write every article for every possible reader. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:37, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I can't speak to all of the reverts that you did, and I did see them, only this one. Again, I won't edit war over this, but a player's sound is often a distinguishing feature of the player and agree that prose would help explain it to more readers. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:39, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
The difference between your version of the article and mine is the position of the link (reference section or links section) and the following bit of prose: "A detailed gear diagram of Brian 'Head' Welch's 2002 Korn guitar rig is well-documented." Do you think that this prose is encyclopedic? Honestly? I think the guitar tech types will be able to find the link better in the links section. They don't need that bit of prose, and the other readers really don't. Binksternet (talk) 21:49, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

TDWP Discography

on the TDWP discography, the only thing i deleted were my own comments that were no longer relevant, not anyone else's

From samcooke343

Hi Walter, no hard feelings about the Owl City edits - glad we got it sorted in the end.

Regards, Samcooke343 (talk) 20:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely. I wasn't married to the term, just the references. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia status

This is what you have earned with your time on Wikipedia. I just wanted to let you know.HotHat (talk) 07:06, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

This editor is a
Master Editor III
and is entitled to display this
Bufonite Editor Star.

DC United nicknames

I quickly found a couple of sources for "DCU" and "Black-and-red" and added them back in. Where sources are easily located, you might consider tracking them down yourself; or, if you don't feel like taking the trouble (I certainly understand that), add a "citation needed" tag. Both are better than simply removing uncontroversial content. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

I might, but it's not my strong point. CN tags in the infobox are not a normal. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:40, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Two bad options, I agree, yet still the third - removing the info altogether - seems like the least good still! JohnInDC (talk) 14:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Prodding

I noticed you placed WP:PROD tags on Contagious (Third Day album) and Third Day (independent album). I've removed them, as articles that have been to AfD, ever, are not eligible for use of proposed deletion. These probably should be merged, but the way you do that now is through the normal merger process. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

No. These non-notable recordings will need someone else to babysit them through that process. The fact that no one else commented on them is a louder statement of fact. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:26, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Deletions

Have your say?HotHat (talk) 13:10, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

The Civil Wars

Thanks for your help there. I'm planning a major clean up on the article per the Resume and Timeline tags on the article. I'm done for today but next time I'll put an Under Construction tag on it so you know what I'm doing and there are no conflicts. cheers!-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:08, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


CCM Magazine

Well, I just want to inform you that the publication is going to try to go back to a printed version, and now they are back to doing PDF's, so go look at Overcomer, for the way to site them now. This makes me a little bit angry and somewhat perplexed.HotHat (talk) 04:32, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Intercontinental is not world

Well, I suppose you're going to do the same edits on Manchester United, FC Barcelona, and AC Milan articles. Cheers. 189.122.80.218 (talk) 22:25, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

No. You may do so though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:46, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
They all actually won a FIFA Club World Cups. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Still, Intercontinental is neither world nor worldwide, right? BTW, why won't you do the same on these articles? 189.122.80.218 (talk) 19:13, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
It depends on its use. It could be, as is the case with the event you're discussing, between two continents, which is not "world". However, when the FIFA Club World Cup is played, it's not just between two continents and so it affects more than just two and "world" or "international" would be a more appropriate heading. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
I see, but I've found official FIFA source that, in fact, legitimizes the "world champions" title. [12] 189.122.80.218 (talk) 19:35, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
It indicates that they were winners of the Toyota Cup in 1981, although the larger discussion is about something a bit different: the evolution of the event. You may want to seek input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football‎. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:41, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

2013–14 FC Bayern Munich season‎ match summary

would you be able to take on a couple of match reports? Please and thanks. Kingjeff (talk) 05:14, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Admins Ignore Abusive Editors

Hey Walter - I came to your page looking to ask for advice on this attempt at getting ANY admin to stop this fool when I saw the link of your own experience with trying to get admins to act against disruptive editors. After reading that, I think I'll just crawl into my hole and hope for the best... Take care! Ckruschke (talk) 16:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke

I think that admins don't want to appear biased toward editors. Let me know how this turns out. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
Which somewhat mirrors society today's "Tyranny of the Minority". Pass all these laws to protect "the disadvantaged" which largely results in the small minorities throwing their weight around and doing whatever they want while the majority has their rights infringed upon. Thanks for being there Walt! Ckruschke (talk) 16:57, 6 September 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke
He apparently freaked out with a swearfest which I've been told finally triggered admins interest. You can see the resolution that he's been blocked here: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive810#Anti -religious POV-pusher engaged in disruptive edits. Scroll all the way down. Ckruschke (talk) 19:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)Ckruschke
It's interesting what triggers some editors. I'm glad this finally found a satisfactory resolution. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:00, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Updating Template:Infobox album

Hi there, As a regular contributor to articles in the WP:MUSIC project I believe the following discussion will be of use to you. Please could you take the time to read the proposals at Template_talk:Infobox_album#Time_to_Update_the_Infobox_for_the_Industry_and_Accessibility regarding the updating of Infobox album. Kind regards → Lil-℧niquԐ 1 - { Talk } - 00:41, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

8:18

I took and put in excellently "solid record", just to let you know.HotHat (talk) 19:08, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

I noticed and it's much better that way. Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:19, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thanks for correcting me on those edits. I plan to stay and help however I can, but I will try to do it the right way. Thanks again Shepherd of Fire (talk) 03:47, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
Mmmm. Stroopwafels! Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Robin van Persie

Which table didn't it match? He now has 38 International goals in 78 matches. I don't edit articles without verification. 2.17, 10th September 2013 (IST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krzy32 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

There was a table of international appearances and goals below the league statistics.
I realized that he played today and it was odd that only the goals were updated and not the matches played. It should be better now. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:50, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. I was going to update the no. of matches after the match was over. 2.25, 10 September 2013 (IST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krzy32 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Christian dance, electronic, and techno artists, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sheila Walsh (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) 11:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Come Now Sleep

You asked and I delivered it into existence.HotHat (talk) 14:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Your Edit of the Data Modeling Page Ken Evans 16:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

You deleted the external link to The ORM Foundation website on the grounds that it is "not a support site".

Sir you are wrong! I set up this site in 2007 expressly to provide support to the object-role modeling (ORM) community. Since then I and others have provided free support to thousands of ORM users. (Which you would have seen if you had spent any time actually looking at the forum.)

Object-Role modeling is arguably the most powerful method of data modeling that there is.

Please acknowledge your misjudgement and re-instate the external link!

I'm also rather curiuous to learn about the reasoning process that you used to dercide that my site is "not a support site". Please enlighten me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The ken evans (talk • contribs) 16:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Phoenix club (association football)

I happened to be looking at the page Phoenix club (association football) and noticed that there was no North American section on the page. Surely some obvious clubs would fall under this category wouldn't they? After all, there appear to be 20-25 teams named after old NASL clubs alone. I wasn't exactly sure if there was a specific criteria needed to be considered a Phoenix club, and wanted your thoughts before I tackled the endeavor. Cheers! -Creativewill (talk) 02:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there are a number of editors who believe that when the original NASL folded all teams ceased to exist and that the current teams are not affiliated with them at all. The New York Cosmos have the strongest claim, but it's not clear why they're not there. Feel free to add other clubs as you see fit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:02, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't just thinking of current teams using old NASL names. Wouldn't the current SJ Earthquakes be considered a phoenix of the SJ Clash? After all, there was no MLS team in San Jose for 2 years time during the change-over. Staff moved to Houston and the kind of started over, but kept the Clash's legacy. Likewise the same might be true if Miami gets an expansion team (as is the rumor) that would replace the Fusion. Also do phoenix clubs need to exist in the same league (a-la Philadelphia Atoms and Fury) as you hinted at? Or do the many incarnations of the Ft. Lauderdale Strikers count as phoenixes? In another case, I know that a new Edmonton Drillers team was created in the 1990s by their previous NASL owner Peter Pocklington to play indoors. So what does that make them? Do phoenixes need some tie-in to the previous team? I guess I'm a little confused as to what makes a team a phoenix... the name, the city, the supporters, or perhaps a combination? On the page the definition is: "...a club that is created following the demise of an existing club. Usually, the phoenix club is created and supported by the supporters of the club which has ended." That's a pretty broad brushstroke to me. Maybe I should just put a few up that I think are obvious and see what the response is.

Firefox

Hi Walter, I note that you've recently uploaded a new screenshot of Firefox for OS X. This does draw some issues with the choice of platform guidelines, but that's not why I'm querying the image. My installation of Firefox 24 on OS X 10.8 seems to have a different default state to the one you uploaded, and I was wondering whether this is because of something you have altered on your copy, or because you are using an older version of OS X; my copy has three buttons next to the search bar, rather than your two. My extra button is a bookmark display option and, as I only use the browser as a testbed, I know it is present in the default state. As we're meant to show software in its default state, could you clarify whether this icon is missing from the default state in the setup you are utilising? Thanks in advance!  drewmunn  talk  08:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I have uploaded the screenshot posted by him separately i.e, File:20130920125838!Firefox Screenshot.PNG, and used in the infobox.Himanis Das  talk 13:23, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. That answers a longstanding problem. I initially did this because an editor on the Firefox article has been edit warring over keeping Windows. My copy has been modified from default. I didn't completely reset it before taking the screenshot. I should have set-up a default profile to take it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:04, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Excellent, cheers; at least I'm not going mad!  drewmunn  talk  18:29, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't know if my response qualifies as a true psychological assessment. Please consult a professional. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
I fear that if I do that, I'd be incarcerated... Anyway, your image has remained almost undisturbed for an entire day; for the Firefox article, that's some achievement!  drewmunn  talk  18:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

JMeter is functional testing or unit testing?

If you look at JMeter's official website, https://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/intro.html, then it clearly states that JMeter does two things performance testing/load testing, which I guess we both agree on.

But, it also states further down, in the History section https://jmeter.apache.org/usermanual/intro.html#history - "We redesigned JMeter to enhance the GUI and to add functional-testing capabilities."

So, hence I think JMeter is for functional testing. Also, I am currently using JMeter for functional testing.

Please give me any citations for JMeter being Unit testing.

In light of this, I am going to revert it back to functional testing on the wiki page. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.238.125.2 (talk) 19:59, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

That's a false dichotomy. It's primary purpose is non-functional testing, primarily performance testing. However it can be used for unit tests, which was being described. It can be used for functional testing, but those tests are generally unit tests. If you revert it, I'll do the same. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

2013 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final - Road to the final

Hi, if you could you check the spelling again in the article of 2013 Lamar Hunt U.S. Open Cup Final in the "Road to the final." Greetings.--Sebastián Alfaro 16 (talk) 20:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Spelling was good, but caught a WP:OVERLINK and WP:NOTUSA. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Singe association?

From one of your edit summaries (article "Robin Thicke", infobox): "singe associations are not appropriate here". What's a "singe association"? Contact Basemetal here 15:34, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

"Single". Typo. See the infobox. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:36, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Red (Taylor Swift Album)

Thanks, I was combining both of them, but then I found my mistake. Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dste (talk • contribs) 02:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Mistakes happen. I'm sure a better source will materialize. Still, with 3 million albums sold in the US already, a change of 100,000 isn't much! When some bands don't even sell 50,000 though... Glad it all worked out. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:24, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Request for feedback

Hi Walter, I noticed recently (here) that you are more familiar with the Wiki mores. I wonder if you could share your thought on this matter. Thank you. -- Mdd (talk) 19:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Los Angeles, California v Los Angeles, California

I know what you're saying. They both redirect to the same place. What I meant by MOS was that sometimes it comes down to a matter of personal taste since as far as I know -- and please correct me if I am wrong -- MOS doesn't mandate either approach. I'll try not to step on your toes. Yours, Quis separabit? 14:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

That's not quite correct. Los Angeles, California redirects to Los Angeles. The latter doesn't redirect to the former. It actually isn't about personal taste or is a MOS issue. WP:NOTBROKEN is the guideline and "just to fix redirects" isn't one of them, but intentionally introducing a redirect isn't appropriate just because you like the way it looks more. There is no MOS to support that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:08, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Jason Gray (musician)

Thanks for all the cool help and the great corrections you have suggested. As gratitude, I dedicate to you the song I am listening to for tens of times while working the page of this talented artist. It's called "More Like Falling in Love" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rzOdXJu5UA co-written with Jason Ingram. werldwayd (talk) 07:03, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 13:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

2014 FIFA World Cup Final Draw

Hi.

I just noticed the 2014 FIFA World Cup Final Draw. Do you think speculations like "It is expected that Pot 2 will contain the qualifiers from Asia and North America,.." and so on should be on wikipedia?. I feel like that dont belong on wikipedia. WP:CRYSTAL? QED237 (talk) 20:53, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Not unless the expectations are supported with a very reliable source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
The first paragraph is supported by BBC, but I consider removing it anyway. QED237 (talk) 21:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
If it's stated as being an expectation, I can't see he harm, but I do prefer certainties. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:30, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Melodic Metalcore

How would a semi-protect be put on the melodic metalcore page. People without accounts keep going on and changing genres. Shepherd of Fire (talk) 03:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Great question. Wikipedia:Request page protection has the instructions and the place where you add the requests. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:03, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Concerning your AIV report

Hello!

I've blocked the editor you reported at AIV. Given that they've had a plethora of warnings and continue genrewarring regardless, it's a month-long block. Feel free to keep an eye on them - if they continue disrupting after the block expires, let me know. Regards, m.o.p 01:46, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:57, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

2002 FIFA World Cup

I understand the premise behind WP:COMMONALITY, but there are still likely to be people who will insist on using "stadia", hence why I changed the word to "venues". Apart from changing it to a completely different word, there's no way anyone could find any fault with that. – PeeJay 00:39, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Understanding the premise behind COMMONALITY and actually trying to obverse it are not the same. It's not whether some people who will insist on using the term, it's whether all editors will understand it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:42, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
And I'm pretty sure all editors will understand the word "venues", hence the change. This way there can be no controversy in the same way that there could be between "stadia" and "stadiums". – PeeJay 01:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Excellent! Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:24, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Real Madrid Captains

Normally, I would wait for an official annoucement from the web site, but it seems that the only reference is from the annual team Christmas party. After Raǘl's departure, three vice-captains have been each season since Iker Casillas was named captain (maybe because a goalkeeper is rarely subbed off???). Anyways, apparently the captains remain the same each year until they leave or retired. The party is about two months away so we can wait until then. Thanks Raul17 (talk) 01:29, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

OK Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Nederlandse Omroep Stichting

So what's not professional about the Dutch national news service NOS? You deleted this edit on the basis that our public broadcasting news service is not a professional source. That seems kind of biassed. Do you have any explanation for your views? NeoRetro (talk) 18:44, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't declare who the writer was. I stated that. There's no about indicating who does the writing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:38, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Church Clothes 2

Feel free to work on this if you want: User:3family6/Church Clothes 2.--¿3family6 contribs 02:24, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Software testing spamlinks

Hi WALTER, Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ownyourstuff (talk • contribs) 04:22, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Article work

You may want to edit No More Hell to Pay.HotHat (talk) 21:29, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Narnia

Hi. Regarding this edit, are you aware that there was a discussion on the talk page? I also can't help being curious why your edit summary was worded exactly the same as mine when I made a similar revert last week. Rivertorch (talk) 08:43, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't. It was the same because it was the same edit. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:35, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Forgive me for being dense; after eight years, diffs and reverts still sometimes confuse me. But never mind the summary. You did revert, and since the IP went to the trouble of following my suggestion and using the talk page, I wonder if you'd be kind enough to read the thread and comment there. Rivertorch (talk) 18:42, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Reese Roper

Hi, I don't know how to use wikipedia. I deleted the first citation on the Reese Roper page linking to http://sederkegger.com/2013/08/23/does-five-iron-frenzy-still-got-it/ because the citation is erroneous. I wrote the article and the information therein does not correspond to the info given on the wiki page.

NASL manuals of style for playoff pairings

Walter: I just noticed an inconsistency in the season recap pages of the old NASL. In the playoffs sections, there is no uniformity from year to year as to which teams are listed first in the pairings. Some years (e.g. 1982) the higher seed/home teams are listed first, as is done in most of the footballing world. Other years (e.g. 1974) have the higher seed/home teams listed second, as is the common format for sports in North America. The only thing that seemed to be consistent was that the winner of the Final was always listed first, no matter their seeding. You know from our previous contact that I always value your input. I'm willing to go through the seasons and make them uniform throughout, but I wanted your opinion as to which would be the "right" way to go; higher seed/home team listed first or second? Many thanks in advance! Regards. Creativewill (talk) 00:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I would suggest fixing the problem instances to meet association football standards rather than North American sport standards. Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

That was the way I was leaning as well. Thanks. Creativewill (talk) 13:50, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

small thing, but not accurate

Walter, this is Sara Groves. I'm not in my element here, so you will forgive me any wiki-missteps! I appreciate your professionalism. My page says that I had a lonely childhood based on an interview from years ago where I describe myself as a 'lonesome' dorky-type kid. I did not mean in anyway to categorize my entire childhood as lonesome. (The article even mentions that I was smiling when I said this) I had a great childhood - I lived in my head, and had a particularly lonesome stretch in Jr High that sparked a desire to lean into songwriting, but overall, it was a good time.

This is a small thing, except there isn't much more information on there, and it ends up in interviews, introductions, and anywhere people are trying to find information about me. I tried to change it myself to better reflect what the article says, but it looks like you changed it back. Any help is appreciated. thanks, Sara

not sure where the tildes go Grovesroad (talk) 21:13, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Spitfire recording start date

Thanks for the message regarding spitfire My name is Caleb I am production assistant to darrell brown Who produced the album spitfire for leann rimes There is a problem with the date 2011 added as a start year for the recording of spitfire The interviews that state 2011 as a start year for recording spitfire misinterpreted the answer she gave.. It is not correct Leann was referring to songs and an earlier dann huff produced record that was shelved I was production assistant on spitfire and the initial recordings of that record happened in spring of 2012 Nothing on spitfire was ever recorded in the year 2011 That is why I keep changing it back I can't post studio invoices and or afm contracts to support it But since I work for the person who produced the record I'm trying to keep some simple facts true. Thanks for listening to me I would appreciate it if the year of 2011 was removed. Thanks Caleb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophiasdad (talk • contribs) 16:38, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Catholicism and Mennonite differences

Hi, Walter. I'm Catholic. What is a Mennonite. And what's the difference between Catholic and Mennonite Churches. 174.91.68.16 (talk) 19:43, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

There are a lot. I suggest you Google "differences between mennonites and catholics". One of the biggest is non-resistance of the Mennonites. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Matthew West

Walter, why would you revert the (correct) changes that I made in the genre parameter?? I thought that you, of all people, should know what goes and doesn't go in this infobox field. --Musdan77 (talk) 19:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

"restore some of the genres lost in the cleaning and restore spacing also lost during the cleaning" Indenting is a preference and not part of any MoS. The genres that were removed were pop music, rock music, adult contemporary, and indie pop. Not sure how that's a MoS change either, but I restored the ones that were referenced in there somewhere but left the references in the article where you moved them. Not sure why you would remove the genres and state that it was in compliance with some MoS. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:19, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Indenting is not at issue. OK, let's take each "genre" one by one: "CCM" is generally not used on WP in infoboxes. "Contemporary Christian" is preferred -- I think mainly because the M is for music, which is not used in the parameter. That one is pretty minor compared to the others. "Pop/rock" is not found in the main body or sourced. The word "pop" is mentioned in one place ("rock" is not at all) - in "Pop/Contemporary Recorded Song of the Year" and "Pop/Contemporary Album of the Year", but pop is the style of CCM, not a genre (in this case). "Adult contemporary" is actually not a genre at all. It's a radio format -- made up of different genres. And "indie pop" - same as with "pop/rock". Personally, I would like to see a parameter for "style", but that could cause more conflict and confusion than it's worth. --Musdan77 (talk) 23:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
You have made statements like "Adult contemporary" is actually not a genre at all. It's a radio format before. I don't care. It's a genre to many and I've explained why when discussing AOR. Personally I would like to see a section for style and have all of the genres referenced there as well. As for referenced, you removed the reference when you made your edit: http://www.allmusic.com/album/something-to-say-mw0000579887.
"but ultimately impersonal Christian pop, large on indelible melodies, soaring hooks, and a *pop/rock* sound already championed by CCM peers"
Granted, some of the genres are referenced from the genre could, which is not a RS. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I removed the "reference" along with the referenced "indie pop" because it doesn't say that it's a genre (and if it did, it would be wrong). I haven't read what you've discussed about AC, but that's your opinion. It doesn't matter how many people think it's a genre when the evidence is so much against it. Anyway, I don't need to tell you that these entries either need to be sourced or removed. --Musdan77 (talk) 01:11, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
But you did read what I wrote about AOR because you argued that with me. You also did read what I wrote about AC because this discussion is all I've written about it.
Feel free to read the summary of the band at AllMusic. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Explanation

Walter, I frankly thought that my copyedit in the Merry Christmas to You (Sidewalk Prophets album) didn't need more than a "ce" explanation: the sentence that contained the "No." usage was a bit of a mess in its wording and way it described the charts; I'm used to using "number". (You'll note that in WP:NUMERO, it lists "number" before "No." as the two acceptable methods.)

I don't care enough to revert back, which is why this is here rather than on the article's talk page, though in my opinion, an edit that fixes such a badly written sentence should be given a certain amount of leeway with regard to the stylistic choices employed. Obviously you don't agree, but your edit summary was incorrect given the circumstances of the edit. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Nor should you care to change it back. Don't change the format. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Walter, it was in the middle of substandard text including "the No. 177 sold", so I naturally adjusted it the first time. I'm very sorry you feel the need to be ungracious to people making real improvements to articles. With any luck, our paths won't cross again. Regards, BlueMoonset (talk) 22:36, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
To make you happy, and so you don't wish me into the corn field, thanks for updating the totals. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:38, 23 December 2013 (UTC)


Tomica

Tomica keeps reverting my edits on Unapologetic, Talk That Talk and Loud, quiet frankly, I find it disheartening I've edited and he removes them and keeps starting a genre war with it, I don't know who gave him the right to just do it like that and who died and put him in charge, please can you try and sort it out for me? 86.170.120.104 (talk) 20:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

He/She doesn't provide a reliable source for the addition of Contemporary R&B as a genre on Rihanna's albums and adds some blogs or sometimes even not a single source. The person was even warned a couple of times and also works from different IPs and sockpuppets. User @Dan56: can also approve you this! 20:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Walter_Görlitz/Archived_Talk_to_2013-12&oldid=1147977266"