User talk:Woknam66

Archive page

Notability of episodes

Since the "Woody Interruptus" merger proposal has failed, and deletion is out of question at this time, I have started a discussion about developing a proposal about notability of episodes in WP:village pump (idea lab)#Notability of television (or radio) episodes. Join in. --George Ho (talk) 19:08, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Timeline Edits

Any reason you're undoing my edits? Just because you create a timeline doesn't mean some one else cannot tidy it up and improve.Yellowxander (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

You claim to "tidy [them] up and improve," but all you actually do is change them, usually making them look worse. For example, you recently changed List of Girlschool band members. You changed the width and the colors, which is pointless. You also changed "Recording of Live and Video Albums" to "Live Recordings," which is worse because A. Readers might think the lines represent when the albums were released, as opposed to when they were recorded, and B. Not all of those albums were released as live albums, some were only released as video albums. You also moved Denise Dufort to the bottom, even though she should be at the top because she and Kim McAuliffe are the only permanent members of the band. So you didn't actually make any improvements, all you did is make it look worse. Another example is your recent edit to Fleetwood Mac. When JALEXANDER06 made the original timeline, he added "...The collection of guitarists, vocalists and keyboard players are categorised as 'Lead'. Due to the unique nature of the band, the roles of these members vary from song to song." And he was absolutely correct. Categorizing members of Fleetwood Mac by instrument is unfair because they often change in each song. Again, you didn't improve the timeline, you made it worse. Woknam66 ^talk _{James Bond} 16:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I do have a point which maybe you'd like to work together with in an effort to standardise the timelines across wiki?..

In terms of colours, Red being the most dominant works bests to represent the front person. Blue for Bass and Green for Guitars simply for letter association, leaving purple for drums as yellow looks really bad so shouldn't be frequently used, though orange not as bad so works good for keys.

In terms of ordering, the general way of listing members in any kind of list is basically the unwritten rule of vocalist, lead guitar, rhythm guitar, bass and drums, regardless of who has been in the band longest or who owns the band or who started it. In an effort to standardise the timelines across wiki it would be a good step to addopt this approach rather than every timeline being different. And even in this format the tables are clear enough for anyone to see who has been in the band the longest no matter where on the table they are positioned.

I'm not looking for arguements, wars or to be right, I am glad I have found someone else who has the random passion for the timelines so it would be great if we could come up with a guideline together? I tried to make it a project but i'm not really sure how to do that kinda thing so indepth! I thought there would have been one already! I managed to find the info page on the table though and the only rule it gave in terms of the graph, was to be 800 pixels wide, which is correct otherwise it's too wide for the page.Yellowxander (talk) 14:42, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

A couple comments:

1. I definitely agree with your color choices, I made most of my timelines using purple for bass and blue for drums, but I see your point with the letter association.

2. I think your order would be right most of the time, except I really think that permanent members should be at the top most of the time, to denote who "owns" the band. For example, AC/DC is run by brothers Angus and Malcolm Young, as can be determined from reading the main AC/DC article, and putting them at the top shows that. Also, Iron Maiden is run by bassist Steve Harris, who makes all final hiring and firing decisions, and putting him near the bottom would diminish that fact. However, in Deep Purple, even though drummer Ian Paice is the only permanent member, he is not the leader of the band, as the main Deep Purple article shows that all of the members are about equal in terms of leadership. This is why I think it's important to put permanent members at the top when they are also the leaders of the band, because then when permanent members are not at the top, it means that they are not the leaders.

3. You said that the width shouldn't be more than 800 pixels because then it won't fit on a computer screen. However, computer screens come in many different sizes, and i think that we should try to find an average width before choosing a width for timelines, because (for example) on a 1920x1200 screen, and timeline that's 800 pixels wide will only take up half the width of the screen.

4. The problem with standardizing timelines is that many bands don't fit into the standard format, for example:

• The original members of Asia reunited in 2006, and a continuation of the other members continued as Asia Featuring John Payne, and I had to work some magic to keep both of the bands on the timeline.
• There are currently two bands that go by the name L.A. Guns, and I had to work similar magic to put both of them on the timeline.
• Steppenwolf went through a couple years of questionable lineups, while cumulated in real lead singer and band-leader John Kay suing the company behind these lineups, so I decided not to include them on the timeline.
• Trapeze never had anyone who was just a lead singer, they always had one or two of the band members singing, so I put a thinner red line through bars to denote when one member also sang.
• The Yardbirds eventually "became" Led Zeppelin, so I decided to include Led Zeppelin's members on the timeline as well. also including the Yardbirds "reunion" while making it look good was a challenge, but I think I did it very well.

5. Most bands can use a normal timeline, but I haven't added all the stuff I like on time timelines to all of the timelines I have made or edited, feel free to look through the timelines I have made or edited and comment on them.

6. It may be a while until I can respond again.

Woknam66 ^talk _{James Bond} 23:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

cool glad you you pretty much agree, I can give in to those instances of members ;). I can imagine those members with double line-ups being pretty tricky! I'll look at what you did. As for the width, the problem isn't that wide screens will show it too small, but that small screens it can be too big. but also, wider than 800 pixels the graph goes off the the wiki border so it prevents the page from being tidy, but all that needs doing to correct graphs too wide is maybe the internation between years.Yellowxander (talk) 14:14, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Now I like that idea of the thinner red line for vocals!!Yellowxander (talk) 14:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

New discussion

You were involved in the previous discussion, so you should be aware of Talk:Woody_Interruptus#Merger_proposal.2C_part_deux.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:09, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

New discussion

thank you so much for your contributions to wiki via the timelines!

i am an artist based in Seattle and was inspired to begin archiving timelines for bands- i have you listed as a contributor and creator:

http://bandwidthlife.tumblr.com/ty

do you know any other timeline makers i ought to contact?

m.l.

i can be contacted via email at bluemonk@uw.edu

128.95.41.196 (talk) 21:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 23 November 2021 (UTC)