This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
A tag has been placed on
Bis (Scottish band), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see
Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to provide more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately, and also put a note on
Talk:Bis (Scottish band). An administrator should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read
our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 1 under
Articles. Please note that articles must be on
notable subjects and should provide references to
reliable sources which
verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{
hangon}}
to the page, and then immediately add such material.
Adam Riley
Talk
05:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! - CobaltBlueTony 23:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
It is Times Roman. There's no official word from Nokia that they used Times Roman, companies never do that. But, if you have Word or other word processing or graphics software, you can test it yourself.
First, see this screenshot I just made: [1]. Now, compare it to the Nokia logo: [2]
I used font Times New Roman, because I don't have Times Roman on my Windows system. Now, the large C and P are written using font size 48, while the rest of the letters use font size 36 — all letters are written using capital letters.
Yes, you can see some negligible differences between the two, like the "P" letter which is slightly different from the logo. However, didn't I say I used TIMES NEW ROMAN. If you look at the Times Roman article, it says there are some minor stylistic differences between the two. As I said, the old Nokia logo uses Times Roman, and here's a screenshot of a Times Roman printout, where there's a 100% identical P (and the rest of the letters the logo uses): http://www.identifont.com/samples/adobe/Times.gif. Finally, compare it to Times New Roman I used in Word: http://www.identifont.com/samples/adobe/TimesNewRoman.gif.
You don't need any more references or citations than that. -- -Majestic- 22:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Neon white. Please be very careful when using the word "vandalism" on Wikipedia. Accusing another user of vandalism when removing unsourced or material sourced from blogs, forums or other unreliable sources is entirely inappropriate, and tends to highlight either a lack of experience with WP practices, or that an editor feels they WP:OWN a particular article. It also completely fails to assume good faith, an essential quality for members of the WP community. With particular regard to One Nine Nine Four, hopefully you're now aware about the need for any WP content to be reliably sourced, and are getting a better idea of the style expected of WP articles. Give me a shout if you have any questions. Cheers, Deiz talk 11:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
We've had two major re-writes to the page, 1 by someone living in Japan based on Japanese sources: [3] Another version by a recent editor: [4] Can you take a look at these and let us know what you think? Denaar 13:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
You placed an {{ unsourced}} tag on the article Nimrod (slang). The article presents two sources, though they were in an "External links" section rather than a "References" section, and are not footnoted since the article is all of one paragraph. This was merely a formatting mistake - not a lack of sources. I would politely suggest you take a bit more time to examine articles before slapping on cleanup tags which may not be necessary. — Swpb talk | edits 22:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Noticed that a few of your edits were in pages regarding the subgenres of hardcore. Requesting your opinion in Talk:Alesana. Thanks.
Neon,
Welcome to Wikipedia. I think the emo article can be greatly improved but to do that we need to use the right sort of sources. We have some good ones dotted throughout the Talk:Emo (slang) page. But the ones right now don't stand up to scruitny. The Daily Mail article, for example, has been widely ridiculed. Please help us to improve the article by adding better content with better citations. I will wait a little, but I will restore my changes shortly (if no-one else beats me to it).
Kind regards,
Cedars 10:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Awkwardanniecover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Noticed that the album cover for Awkward Annie by Kate Rusby that you uploaded has just been tagged non-free use. I had a lot of the covers I uploaded tagged so just thought I'd help you out 'cos I didn't understand the bot message for ages. All you need to do is add a ratinoale for each use to complement the 'boiler plate' - you can see an example on one of my album covers here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Feist-monarch.jpg
Sorry if you already knew this! Take it easy mate Cavie78 13:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Please don't post on my user page. If you want to post use my discussion page. On the matter of Apples and Pears, I think you'll find that editor SocJan is the one who started not abiding by Wikipedia codes. Tony 20:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Tony
You cannot just delete content from an article because you don't like it. The three works of Joseph Geraci had been removed by the author. I was restoring them. I assume you know the works. If so, why are you deleting a work that has the expression "perspectives of boy love" on the front cover (Dares to Speak)? Boy love is pedophilia. Loving Sander is also, without doubt, a story about pedophilia. Sander is a 12-year-old boy. A man loves him and has sex with him. That is pedophilia. The Deaf-Mute Boy is described on the cover as a love story. The relationship is between a man and a 13-year-old boy. Also, it is not necessary to have references/citations for every Wikipedia edit, though these are desirable. If you wish to argue for a work's deletion, please argue it on the talk page. Tony 13:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)Tony
Re: Your comments on Wikipedia policy and "Tony Sandel's" difficulties with them: After you (Neon white)in response to an RfC, deleted the OR plot summary of the story "Apples and Pears" on the eponymous page, Tony restored that material -- posting it on the GUY DAVENPORT page.
I would prefer not to delete this reverted A + P summary without first getting your agreement. (You may consider this note my support for deletion -- and retrospective support for your welcome action on the A + P page.) Thanks for taking an interest. SocJan 02:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
If you have comments concerning article's content, leave them on article's talk page. -- Vision Thing -- 17:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that there are many countries across the world where political parties are motivated by religious nationalism. Why single out India ? Also, nationalism is probably multi-faceted in a large, diverse country like India. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations 18:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you decided to redirect From Dusk 'til Dawn to From Dusk Till Dawn, and moved the book to From Dusk 'til Dawn (book). That is fine. However in doing so you you have created a number of misleading links (see here) If you are going to move articles around and redirect the previous article somewhere else, it is your responsibility to ensure than links are updated accordingly by checking the "what links here" page. A good place to start would be Template:Alibend. Rockpocke t 22:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Ahem...just because you disagree with his removal of the quote does not make him a vandal. It's unduly self-serving to the organization and its founder, and it is not necessary for the notability of Campus Watch. DodgerOfZion ( talk)
I agree with DodgerofZion, you need to read WP:VAND, which states:
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism ... Do not use these [vandalism] templates in content disputes; instead, write a clear message explaining your disagreement.
It seems you are the one who has violated many policies/guidelines ( WP:SELFPUB, WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, and WP:VAND). Please stop violating polices and accusing me of vandalism. Thank you. — Christopher Mann McKay talk 21:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi!
The IP (or various IPs????) does not want to accept all our reverts and removals, I should say. Even a little discussion on the talk page does not convince this funny IP that TOKIO HOTEL indeed have claimed a lot of times that they consider Glam Rock part of their musical influences. I tried for a semi protection about 10 days ago but it was declined. :-(
Do you think I could have another chance for a semi protection if I tried a second time NOW?
--
Fromgermany (
talk)
17:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi!
My request for protection was accepted. Unfortunately only semi and for two weeks. :-) Seems we must watch it again after a fortnight. :-(
--
Fromgermany (
talk)
09:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Please read the message I've left on the article's talk page about our dispute here. Your input would be greatly appreciated. --- J.S ( T/ C/ WRE) 19:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
The citation request tags were placed AFTER I removed the refimprove. I've scanned the whole article before I removed the tag. -- Cahk ( talk) 01:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I sort guidance after nominating the article for GA which resulted in extensive rewrite on the article. If you have any comments or suggestions, I welcome your feedback in making the article better. -- Cahk ( talk) 08:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Your analogy is not the correct one.
"Cascada" is a spanish word, from which the group derived their name, at least according to Natalie (who confirms that in the youtube video i put as a reference.).
Birmingham's BRMB pronounces it with /a:/. Natalie herself does that, and she has described herself as being English.
Please see the video and then re-consider your deductions.
Regards -- Lord Anubis ( talk) 16:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I apologize for being rude to you. Anyway, I think that the info should stay deleted because they are sourced from unreliable sources. Please go over the whole discussion in the debate archive and find out why. I don't feel like explaining the whole thing right now. Marcus2 ( talk) 03:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I find this quite possible, do you have anything more to add that ties them together? — Rlevse • Talk • 17:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I've just copied the article to a sandbox at my user page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SocJan/Sandbox and given it a new title along the lines that have been suggested, and a far less POV introduction. Have a look, see what you think. SocJan ( talk) 02:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
But the AFD was done, they kept it. ViperSnake151 15:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
edit: oh wait... nm. ViperSnake151 15:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Listen to a real glam rock artist (if you know any other than supposidly Tokio Hotel) before believing anything that can only be found on one non English-speaking site. I must say that I'm unaware how Italy defines glam rock, yet if they are glam rock in the Italian sence, feel free to edit the Italian page but stay clear from the English page. Your bullheaded atitude does not make anything you said more true. Face the facts (look up Tokio Hotel in the All Music Guide which is way more reliable than mtv). Just out of interest how old are you? Your behavior does not seem very mature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath ( talk • contribs) 20:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see the above link as I have requested arbitration for a dispute that you are involved in. Feel free to contribute there. Regards, henrik• talk 11:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 16:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Stop being a dick by calling them emo. You may have sources but anybody can just put that under "Criticism". So seriously I know you fancy yourself a little up there and a little more important but please don't take out your stupidity by labeling a band you don't like "emo". Besides emo is there personal opinion as well.....-- Velanthis ( talk) 02:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
see emo. it's a genre of music that applies to a number of bands. Also read WP:CIVIL to read on how to edit in a civil manner. --neonwhite user page talk 19:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC) --neonwhite user page talk 19:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you nominated this article for deletion not long ago. I am attempting to make the case that the band is, in fact, notable, and have requested review at WP:DRV. Your comments are welcome. Chubbles ( talk) 23:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
What stopped me from doin them is that I never had the time to do it and i didn't know all their chart pos. off the bat, if you really want to know --- Crocodileman ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
You deleted a reference to the TNPs winning a Juno when in fact they have won one. That was a pretty easy fact to check too so I'm curious about why you did that. BigRockFan ( talk) 03:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I do normally assume good faith, but you and SocJan have a campaign to deny the existence of pedophilia, the example of Death in Venice being the most absurd. Your denial of pedophilia in Guy Davenport's fiction is equally strange. The word exists and it describes exactly the situation in both examples. The title you two have chosen is so bad you would be better deleting the article as I have suggested. Tony ( talk) 13:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Tony
Why did you remove the links from Saturday Nights and Sunday Mornings? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.216.165 ( talk) 18:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out to Will that I have a right to make my opinion known (heck, it says so on the Notavote template!). Please note that I'm not a sockpuppet (as the checkuser shows), only an SPA. Academic38 ( talk) 20:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
This Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision may be reviewed through the above link. Further to the relevant findings of fact, Waterboarding and all closely-related pages are subject to article probation ( full remedy); editors working on Waterboarding, or closely related pages, may be subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, whereby any edits by that editor which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, may result in a block. ( full remedy).
Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block length shall increase to one year ( full enforcement). Before such restrictions are enacted on an editor, he or she must be issued with a warning containing a link to the decision.
For the Arbitration Committee,
AGK (
talk)
14:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
This information appears on the genre box...and I think it's clear enough that emo derivated from post-hardcore to understand that IT POST-HARDCORE IS NOT A FUSION GENRE OF EMO. Emo shouldn't even exist at all, here look at this vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbdh0Qm_5A0
So is anyone gonna change the information fo the genre box? I'm going to keep discussing this until it GETS CHANGED. The-15th ( talk) 19:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
This is the comment I left on the talk page for Emo...what I'm trying to say is that Emo (even if it does not exist) dereivated from Post-hardcore and not the other way around but in the genre box of Emo, post-hardcore appears as a fusion genre of Emo. Any way to change this? There is a clear difference between Emo and Post-hardcore to not be noticed. The-15th ( talk) 19:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Yeah, you sit here gaming Wikipedia making sure the content that you desire and only the content you desire is in the articles you edit. So good luck with that, buddy. ~ Floppie( talk • contribs) 06:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Please stop vandalising the power pop musicians list by adding and re-adding arists that do not meet the critera. You do not have an accurate understanding of the subject matter that you are editing. You could find a reference for almost any artist if you tried hard enough. That's where nuance comes in, and you seem to be lacking in that department. Judging by the other topics that you have edited on Wikipedia, you really don't belong on the power pop page. Please, just leave it alone. You're part of the problem, not the solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.188.1 ( talk) 03:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Your sources are weak, and if I provide sources that contradict your sources, what then? Why are you adding emo and pop-punk bands to a list of NOTABLE power pop bands? How are Paramore notable for playing power pop? Caberet-style pop singer Mika has never been labeled as being power pop. Why add him? He's not bad or anything, but that's not what power pop is. Did you know that? So, if I find some odd review that classifies, say, Michael Jackson or Metallica as power pop, should they be added? Real answers, please, if you have them. You're not a bot.
A Request for Mediation has been filed on the Waterboarding article concerning the content dispute in the first six words of the article. You have been named as a party and your participation would be appreciated. I believe this is the best approach to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Please indicate your agreement here. Thank you. Neutral Good ( talk) 20:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
What's going on here? Do you have any diffs handy? Herostratus ( talk) 05:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC) Yikes, also "= February 2008" Herostratus ( talk)
Think about it: what does anybody want to know when searching webcam on wikipedia? History of webcams: fine it's there Technology of webcam: more or less that How the hell can I use my webcam to adress my need, which are not by the manufacturers.
That's why the software listing matters (and should be put in the software section). I can hardly come up with the interest of british public cams. Actually, no I can't. Who cares, except the advertisers of those sites?
So if you really want to stick up to the topic, you have to let great softs links. Even if that seems a priori contrary to the wiki's basic rule. On the opposite, having an article on the wiki doesn't make it pertinent. Again the UK cams. Try to have your brain to work.
So, either you allow some kind of soft listing - which again are what users are looking for for THIS precise topic, either you remove the UK cams that look like porn.
Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.229.203.59 ( talk) 21:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
On my talk page, you responded to Tony Sandel's comments by saying "assume good faith". Tony was mainly disagreeing with you over technical/content issues and that is not a violation of WP:AGF. Herostratus ( talk) 19:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Besides User:Pinkpowerranger I didn't act any further, but I saw the resembalances between the two accounts because they were editing in the same articles and adding the same types of images. Sorry I can't help further (I was trying to keep that situation under control.) Nate • ( chatter) 05:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Your edits to the page, while courageous, were misguided. They have been reverted. The list stays the way it is. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 00:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, we're just not going to agree then. I gave a great justification and you won't accept it. I also find those other lists horribly boring. Adding the flagicon to the list isn't inane or non notable (as adding number of members and such would be). The flagicon is simple, uniform and takes up little space. All list should have it. It adds a little something to them. It breaks absolutely no neutrality. It doesn't mean that the bands are nationalistic or any of that crap (as it might for a person), only that they come from a certain country. Since we won't agree I see no reason to go further with this conversation. You will see what happens. And if the people dedicated to those lists suddenly give up on them now, so be it. Also you forgot the thrash list, which is probabaly the most well done. Not to mention there are other metal lists you missed. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 01:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe that you are misguided in your recent edits regarding flag icons. Putting flags on a large list, especially a list of bands, is the right way to use flag icons. WP:FLAG states that flags must be helpful. The flags are helpful to the people who read the lists. They assosciate a country with the band. The country can often tell the reader the style of music. For example: I am a metal fan. I know that Norway is a great black metal producing country.(see Dimmu Borgir) I also know that if I see a flag icon of Norway on a list of black metal bands, that the band with that flag will have a similar playing style. That is not always the case, but it is in a great many cases. Undeath ( talk) 06:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
This new article discussion may interst you. 156.34.142.110 ( talk) 18:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
"nationalist pride or decoration" were the words that you have thrown out there to justify your deletion of flags from the articles. The lits with flags have NOTHING to do with "pride" or "decoration" but rather education. Their purpose was to inform rather than look pretty. My comments were supposed to come off as saying that the flags serve an educational purpose, rather than a vanity purpose. Also, there is no way that it was fancruft. If it were fan cruft, the list would have much more than just a flag. Until you can cite a specific rule violation of WP:FLAG, your edits will, more than likely, be undone. Undeath ( talk) 02:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect, if you aren't sure something is vandalism, don't revert like you did here, where you added vandalism back into the article with the edit summary, "not sure this was vandalism looks like a good edit, removing non-pro reviews". Please get in the habit of actually looking at the edit history. The "good edit" you describe is vandalism added by a vandal-only account. There is no song named " Cunnilingus" by Kate Nash. — Viriditas | Talk 08:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't like the saying "I told you so..". However, I did say it was a losing battle. People are in favor of flagicons on those lists and people have gone crazy before about it. There's been numerous battles on those metal lists. People have tried to get them deleted a few times before because of the Categories. As it stands, flagicons are here to stay on those lists, at least. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 18:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I realize all of that. I may have come off sounding like a n00b to you, but I'm not. I know all about wikipedia. I know about the "rules" and guidelines. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 21:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, remember this one (the AfD)? Having survived, the page is now receiving attention from only three editors, all relatively new, and while there is no edit warring (everything is confined to the talk page), I think it could really benefit from some "outside" attention. Things start to get difficult here, in relation to a single sentence in italics a few paragraphs down.
It seems clear to me that User:PigeonPiece is a reincarnation of User:Obscuredata, who was banned for sockpuppets, and if so then he/she is working with an "undeclared" conflict of interest, apparent here in relation to that previous account.
Now, I'm not trying to get carte blanche to do whatever I want, and I don't even expect or anticipate that you would agree with my perspectives on things there. Again, the main thing is simply that I think some outside attention would be useful. If you have the time and interest... thanks, Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 22:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
You asked about sources and here they are: [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Would these be enough? ;-)
I've misunderstood your meaning on that page and now I get it. I don't think any bands (boyband or not) can be objectively calculated for how many records they sell. Newspapers have quoted them selling anywhere from 36 to 50 million. I've found most sources (the current ones) to be ~40 (not including the latest album) so that seems to be a fair statement to make. -- Cahk ( talk) 22:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Neon, you should check the edits more carefully. All I did was revert some test edits that had replaced the content with "hi". And please, WP:DTTR -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow ( Talk - Contribs) 18:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Please see my comment to you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Futurekids. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 12:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
How is the offspring Pop punk? Only bands like Blink-182 and MxPx are pop punk. PLEASE change the genre to something that sounds like them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Workersununite ( talk • contribs) 19:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Why did you remove this? [15] Without an explanation or justification I can see the removal as vandalism or testing. If you object to the paragraph you should state why you do so. WhisperToMe ( talk) 11:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, it's my mistake! Sorry 'bout that.. WhisperToMe ( talk) 17:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate - good work with the Freebass article and for helping stop the speedy delete. I've just reverted your minor edit so that the opening sentence reads "Freebass are" instead of "Freebass is" though because the article is about a British band. Don't want to get into an argument/edit war so here's the justification: American_and_British_English_differences#Grammar Cavie78 ( talk) 13:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
What I added was sourced to an academic journal. Please examine the diffs more carefully in future, and at least read the edit comment, in which I said it was sourced to an academic journal. I don't appreciate templates on my talk page, espcially when the templates are really puzzlingly wrong... -- Relata refero ( disp.) 07:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
You may have noticed that the various articles we've been working on have been proposed for deletion by an editor who is being investigated after making insinuations against Haiduc and me. Your input welcome. Tony ( talk) 07:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Tony These are the articles afd List of books portraying sexual attraction to children or adolescents, List of films portraying sexual attraction to children or adolescents, List of songs portraying sexual attraction to children or adolescents,
You reverted my edit saying it was vandilism but in fact My edit was removing vandilism (they are clearly not emo, listen to there music, then real emo music, like Madalin Marison, you can hear the diference).-- Kingdom of crash and spyro ( talk) 15:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I note your additions to the list of tomboys in fiction. One has a review source which seems fine. The other two seem less satisfactory. I don't want to discourage a good faith effort but others might not be so tolerant. If unsourced entries are allowed then this might open the floodgates to lots of OR. What I'm not understanding is why the anime fans care so much about this. Colonel Warden ( talk) 19:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
But what's the difference between Hayley Williams and [[Lacey Mosley if anything Hayley deserves an article due to considerably more sources-- KingMorpheus ( talk) 23:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated List of emo artists, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of emo artists. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sceptre ( talk) 14:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
hey neon white, since you are a stickler for all things wikipedia, i figured you could figure out how to make this page correct.
Richard Steel was a member of the band
MORNINGWOOD, proof in numerous sources, including spin, rolling stone, etc. . .
http://www.spin.com/articles/morningwood. Someone keeps changing his page to remove it, perhaps you can help, since you seem to be so good at those things. Thanks!
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
A tag has been placed on
Bis (Scottish band), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see
Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. If you plan to provide more material to the article, I advise you to do so immediately, and also put a note on
Talk:Bis (Scottish band). An administrator should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read
our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 1 under
Articles. Please note that articles must be on
notable subjects and should provide references to
reliable sources which
verify their content. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template {{
hangon}}
to the page, and then immediately add such material.
Adam Riley
Talk
05:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! - CobaltBlueTony 23:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
It is Times Roman. There's no official word from Nokia that they used Times Roman, companies never do that. But, if you have Word or other word processing or graphics software, you can test it yourself.
First, see this screenshot I just made: [1]. Now, compare it to the Nokia logo: [2]
I used font Times New Roman, because I don't have Times Roman on my Windows system. Now, the large C and P are written using font size 48, while the rest of the letters use font size 36 — all letters are written using capital letters.
Yes, you can see some negligible differences between the two, like the "P" letter which is slightly different from the logo. However, didn't I say I used TIMES NEW ROMAN. If you look at the Times Roman article, it says there are some minor stylistic differences between the two. As I said, the old Nokia logo uses Times Roman, and here's a screenshot of a Times Roman printout, where there's a 100% identical P (and the rest of the letters the logo uses): http://www.identifont.com/samples/adobe/Times.gif. Finally, compare it to Times New Roman I used in Word: http://www.identifont.com/samples/adobe/TimesNewRoman.gif.
You don't need any more references or citations than that. -- -Majestic- 22:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Neon white. Please be very careful when using the word "vandalism" on Wikipedia. Accusing another user of vandalism when removing unsourced or material sourced from blogs, forums or other unreliable sources is entirely inappropriate, and tends to highlight either a lack of experience with WP practices, or that an editor feels they WP:OWN a particular article. It also completely fails to assume good faith, an essential quality for members of the WP community. With particular regard to One Nine Nine Four, hopefully you're now aware about the need for any WP content to be reliably sourced, and are getting a better idea of the style expected of WP articles. Give me a shout if you have any questions. Cheers, Deiz talk 11:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
We've had two major re-writes to the page, 1 by someone living in Japan based on Japanese sources: [3] Another version by a recent editor: [4] Can you take a look at these and let us know what you think? Denaar 13:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
You placed an {{ unsourced}} tag on the article Nimrod (slang). The article presents two sources, though they were in an "External links" section rather than a "References" section, and are not footnoted since the article is all of one paragraph. This was merely a formatting mistake - not a lack of sources. I would politely suggest you take a bit more time to examine articles before slapping on cleanup tags which may not be necessary. — Swpb talk | edits 22:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Noticed that a few of your edits were in pages regarding the subgenres of hardcore. Requesting your opinion in Talk:Alesana. Thanks.
Neon,
Welcome to Wikipedia. I think the emo article can be greatly improved but to do that we need to use the right sort of sources. We have some good ones dotted throughout the Talk:Emo (slang) page. But the ones right now don't stand up to scruitny. The Daily Mail article, for example, has been widely ridiculed. Please help us to improve the article by adding better content with better citations. I will wait a little, but I will restore my changes shortly (if no-one else beats me to it).
Kind regards,
Cedars 10:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Awkwardanniecover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:02, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Noticed that the album cover for Awkward Annie by Kate Rusby that you uploaded has just been tagged non-free use. I had a lot of the covers I uploaded tagged so just thought I'd help you out 'cos I didn't understand the bot message for ages. All you need to do is add a ratinoale for each use to complement the 'boiler plate' - you can see an example on one of my album covers here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Feist-monarch.jpg
Sorry if you already knew this! Take it easy mate Cavie78 13:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Please don't post on my user page. If you want to post use my discussion page. On the matter of Apples and Pears, I think you'll find that editor SocJan is the one who started not abiding by Wikipedia codes. Tony 20:42, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Tony
You cannot just delete content from an article because you don't like it. The three works of Joseph Geraci had been removed by the author. I was restoring them. I assume you know the works. If so, why are you deleting a work that has the expression "perspectives of boy love" on the front cover (Dares to Speak)? Boy love is pedophilia. Loving Sander is also, without doubt, a story about pedophilia. Sander is a 12-year-old boy. A man loves him and has sex with him. That is pedophilia. The Deaf-Mute Boy is described on the cover as a love story. The relationship is between a man and a 13-year-old boy. Also, it is not necessary to have references/citations for every Wikipedia edit, though these are desirable. If you wish to argue for a work's deletion, please argue it on the talk page. Tony 13:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)Tony
Re: Your comments on Wikipedia policy and "Tony Sandel's" difficulties with them: After you (Neon white)in response to an RfC, deleted the OR plot summary of the story "Apples and Pears" on the eponymous page, Tony restored that material -- posting it on the GUY DAVENPORT page.
I would prefer not to delete this reverted A + P summary without first getting your agreement. (You may consider this note my support for deletion -- and retrospective support for your welcome action on the A + P page.) Thanks for taking an interest. SocJan 02:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
If you have comments concerning article's content, leave them on article's talk page. -- Vision Thing -- 17:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The problem is that there are many countries across the world where political parties are motivated by religious nationalism. Why single out India ? Also, nationalism is probably multi-faceted in a large, diverse country like India. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations 18:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you decided to redirect From Dusk 'til Dawn to From Dusk Till Dawn, and moved the book to From Dusk 'til Dawn (book). That is fine. However in doing so you you have created a number of misleading links (see here) If you are going to move articles around and redirect the previous article somewhere else, it is your responsibility to ensure than links are updated accordingly by checking the "what links here" page. A good place to start would be Template:Alibend. Rockpocke t 22:24, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Ahem...just because you disagree with his removal of the quote does not make him a vandal. It's unduly self-serving to the organization and its founder, and it is not necessary for the notability of Campus Watch. DodgerOfZion ( talk)
I agree with DodgerofZion, you need to read WP:VAND, which states:
Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism ... Do not use these [vandalism] templates in content disputes; instead, write a clear message explaining your disagreement.
It seems you are the one who has violated many policies/guidelines ( WP:SELFPUB, WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, and WP:VAND). Please stop violating polices and accusing me of vandalism. Thank you. — Christopher Mann McKay talk 21:43, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Hi!
The IP (or various IPs????) does not want to accept all our reverts and removals, I should say. Even a little discussion on the talk page does not convince this funny IP that TOKIO HOTEL indeed have claimed a lot of times that they consider Glam Rock part of their musical influences. I tried for a semi protection about 10 days ago but it was declined. :-(
Do you think I could have another chance for a semi protection if I tried a second time NOW?
--
Fromgermany (
talk)
17:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi!
My request for protection was accepted. Unfortunately only semi and for two weeks. :-) Seems we must watch it again after a fortnight. :-(
--
Fromgermany (
talk)
09:47, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Please read the message I've left on the article's talk page about our dispute here. Your input would be greatly appreciated. --- J.S ( T/ C/ WRE) 19:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
The citation request tags were placed AFTER I removed the refimprove. I've scanned the whole article before I removed the tag. -- Cahk ( talk) 01:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I sort guidance after nominating the article for GA which resulted in extensive rewrite on the article. If you have any comments or suggestions, I welcome your feedback in making the article better. -- Cahk ( talk) 08:22, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I disagree. Your analogy is not the correct one.
"Cascada" is a spanish word, from which the group derived their name, at least according to Natalie (who confirms that in the youtube video i put as a reference.).
Birmingham's BRMB pronounces it with /a:/. Natalie herself does that, and she has described herself as being English.
Please see the video and then re-consider your deductions.
Regards -- Lord Anubis ( talk) 16:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I apologize for being rude to you. Anyway, I think that the info should stay deleted because they are sourced from unreliable sources. Please go over the whole discussion in the debate archive and find out why. I don't feel like explaining the whole thing right now. Marcus2 ( talk) 03:08, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
I find this quite possible, do you have anything more to add that ties them together? — Rlevse • Talk • 17:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I've just copied the article to a sandbox at my user page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SocJan/Sandbox and given it a new title along the lines that have been suggested, and a far less POV introduction. Have a look, see what you think. SocJan ( talk) 02:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
But the AFD was done, they kept it. ViperSnake151 15:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
edit: oh wait... nm. ViperSnake151 15:07, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Listen to a real glam rock artist (if you know any other than supposidly Tokio Hotel) before believing anything that can only be found on one non English-speaking site. I must say that I'm unaware how Italy defines glam rock, yet if they are glam rock in the Italian sence, feel free to edit the Italian page but stay clear from the English page. Your bullheaded atitude does not make anything you said more true. Face the facts (look up Tokio Hotel in the All Music Guide which is way more reliable than mtv). Just out of interest how old are you? Your behavior does not seem very mature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorwath ( talk • contribs) 20:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see the above link as I have requested arbitration for a dispute that you are involved in. Feel free to contribute there. Regards, henrik• talk 11:43, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waterboarding/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny 16:39, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Stop being a dick by calling them emo. You may have sources but anybody can just put that under "Criticism". So seriously I know you fancy yourself a little up there and a little more important but please don't take out your stupidity by labeling a band you don't like "emo". Besides emo is there personal opinion as well.....-- Velanthis ( talk) 02:58, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
see emo. it's a genre of music that applies to a number of bands. Also read WP:CIVIL to read on how to edit in a civil manner. --neonwhite user page talk 19:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC) --neonwhite user page talk 19:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, you nominated this article for deletion not long ago. I am attempting to make the case that the band is, in fact, notable, and have requested review at WP:DRV. Your comments are welcome. Chubbles ( talk) 23:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
What stopped me from doin them is that I never had the time to do it and i didn't know all their chart pos. off the bat, if you really want to know --- Crocodileman ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
You deleted a reference to the TNPs winning a Juno when in fact they have won one. That was a pretty easy fact to check too so I'm curious about why you did that. BigRockFan ( talk) 03:54, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
I do normally assume good faith, but you and SocJan have a campaign to deny the existence of pedophilia, the example of Death in Venice being the most absurd. Your denial of pedophilia in Guy Davenport's fiction is equally strange. The word exists and it describes exactly the situation in both examples. The title you two have chosen is so bad you would be better deleting the article as I have suggested. Tony ( talk) 13:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)Tony
Why did you remove the links from Saturday Nights and Sunday Mornings? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.42.216.165 ( talk) 18:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out to Will that I have a right to make my opinion known (heck, it says so on the Notavote template!). Please note that I'm not a sockpuppet (as the checkuser shows), only an SPA. Academic38 ( talk) 20:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
This Arbitration case has closed, and the final decision may be reviewed through the above link. Further to the relevant findings of fact, Waterboarding and all closely-related pages are subject to article probation ( full remedy); editors working on Waterboarding, or closely related pages, may be subject to an editing restriction at the discretion of any uninvolved administrator, whereby any edits by that editor which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, may result in a block. ( full remedy).
Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After 5 blocks, the maximum block length shall increase to one year ( full enforcement). Before such restrictions are enacted on an editor, he or she must be issued with a warning containing a link to the decision.
For the Arbitration Committee,
AGK (
talk)
14:25, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
This information appears on the genre box...and I think it's clear enough that emo derivated from post-hardcore to understand that IT POST-HARDCORE IS NOT A FUSION GENRE OF EMO. Emo shouldn't even exist at all, here look at this vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbdh0Qm_5A0
So is anyone gonna change the information fo the genre box? I'm going to keep discussing this until it GETS CHANGED. The-15th ( talk) 19:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
This is the comment I left on the talk page for Emo...what I'm trying to say is that Emo (even if it does not exist) dereivated from Post-hardcore and not the other way around but in the genre box of Emo, post-hardcore appears as a fusion genre of Emo. Any way to change this? There is a clear difference between Emo and Post-hardcore to not be noticed. The-15th ( talk) 19:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.
Yeah, you sit here gaming Wikipedia making sure the content that you desire and only the content you desire is in the articles you edit. So good luck with that, buddy. ~ Floppie( talk • contribs) 06:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Please stop vandalising the power pop musicians list by adding and re-adding arists that do not meet the critera. You do not have an accurate understanding of the subject matter that you are editing. You could find a reference for almost any artist if you tried hard enough. That's where nuance comes in, and you seem to be lacking in that department. Judging by the other topics that you have edited on Wikipedia, you really don't belong on the power pop page. Please, just leave it alone. You're part of the problem, not the solution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.188.1 ( talk) 03:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Your sources are weak, and if I provide sources that contradict your sources, what then? Why are you adding emo and pop-punk bands to a list of NOTABLE power pop bands? How are Paramore notable for playing power pop? Caberet-style pop singer Mika has never been labeled as being power pop. Why add him? He's not bad or anything, but that's not what power pop is. Did you know that? So, if I find some odd review that classifies, say, Michael Jackson or Metallica as power pop, should they be added? Real answers, please, if you have them. You're not a bot.
A Request for Mediation has been filed on the Waterboarding article concerning the content dispute in the first six words of the article. You have been named as a party and your participation would be appreciated. I believe this is the best approach to an amicable resolution of the dispute. Please indicate your agreement here. Thank you. Neutral Good ( talk) 20:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
What's going on here? Do you have any diffs handy? Herostratus ( talk) 05:19, 24 February 2008 (UTC) Yikes, also "= February 2008" Herostratus ( talk)
Think about it: what does anybody want to know when searching webcam on wikipedia? History of webcams: fine it's there Technology of webcam: more or less that How the hell can I use my webcam to adress my need, which are not by the manufacturers.
That's why the software listing matters (and should be put in the software section). I can hardly come up with the interest of british public cams. Actually, no I can't. Who cares, except the advertisers of those sites?
So if you really want to stick up to the topic, you have to let great softs links. Even if that seems a priori contrary to the wiki's basic rule. On the opposite, having an article on the wiki doesn't make it pertinent. Again the UK cams. Try to have your brain to work.
So, either you allow some kind of soft listing - which again are what users are looking for for THIS precise topic, either you remove the UK cams that look like porn.
Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.229.203.59 ( talk) 21:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
On my talk page, you responded to Tony Sandel's comments by saying "assume good faith". Tony was mainly disagreeing with you over technical/content issues and that is not a violation of WP:AGF. Herostratus ( talk) 19:21, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Besides User:Pinkpowerranger I didn't act any further, but I saw the resembalances between the two accounts because they were editing in the same articles and adding the same types of images. Sorry I can't help further (I was trying to keep that situation under control.) Nate • ( chatter) 05:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Your edits to the page, while courageous, were misguided. They have been reverted. The list stays the way it is. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 00:04, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Well, we're just not going to agree then. I gave a great justification and you won't accept it. I also find those other lists horribly boring. Adding the flagicon to the list isn't inane or non notable (as adding number of members and such would be). The flagicon is simple, uniform and takes up little space. All list should have it. It adds a little something to them. It breaks absolutely no neutrality. It doesn't mean that the bands are nationalistic or any of that crap (as it might for a person), only that they come from a certain country. Since we won't agree I see no reason to go further with this conversation. You will see what happens. And if the people dedicated to those lists suddenly give up on them now, so be it. Also you forgot the thrash list, which is probabaly the most well done. Not to mention there are other metal lists you missed. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 01:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I believe that you are misguided in your recent edits regarding flag icons. Putting flags on a large list, especially a list of bands, is the right way to use flag icons. WP:FLAG states that flags must be helpful. The flags are helpful to the people who read the lists. They assosciate a country with the band. The country can often tell the reader the style of music. For example: I am a metal fan. I know that Norway is a great black metal producing country.(see Dimmu Borgir) I also know that if I see a flag icon of Norway on a list of black metal bands, that the band with that flag will have a similar playing style. That is not always the case, but it is in a great many cases. Undeath ( talk) 06:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
This new article discussion may interst you. 156.34.142.110 ( talk) 18:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
"nationalist pride or decoration" were the words that you have thrown out there to justify your deletion of flags from the articles. The lits with flags have NOTHING to do with "pride" or "decoration" but rather education. Their purpose was to inform rather than look pretty. My comments were supposed to come off as saying that the flags serve an educational purpose, rather than a vanity purpose. Also, there is no way that it was fancruft. If it were fan cruft, the list would have much more than just a flag. Until you can cite a specific rule violation of WP:FLAG, your edits will, more than likely, be undone. Undeath ( talk) 02:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
With all due respect, if you aren't sure something is vandalism, don't revert like you did here, where you added vandalism back into the article with the edit summary, "not sure this was vandalism looks like a good edit, removing non-pro reviews". Please get in the habit of actually looking at the edit history. The "good edit" you describe is vandalism added by a vandal-only account. There is no song named " Cunnilingus" by Kate Nash. — Viriditas | Talk 08:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't like the saying "I told you so..". However, I did say it was a losing battle. People are in favor of flagicons on those lists and people have gone crazy before about it. There's been numerous battles on those metal lists. People have tried to get them deleted a few times before because of the Categories. As it stands, flagicons are here to stay on those lists, at least. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 18:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I realize all of that. I may have come off sounding like a n00b to you, but I'm not. I know all about wikipedia. I know about the "rules" and guidelines. Blizzard Beast $ODIN$ 21:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, remember this one (the AfD)? Having survived, the page is now receiving attention from only three editors, all relatively new, and while there is no edit warring (everything is confined to the talk page), I think it could really benefit from some "outside" attention. Things start to get difficult here, in relation to a single sentence in italics a few paragraphs down.
It seems clear to me that User:PigeonPiece is a reincarnation of User:Obscuredata, who was banned for sockpuppets, and if so then he/she is working with an "undeclared" conflict of interest, apparent here in relation to that previous account.
Now, I'm not trying to get carte blanche to do whatever I want, and I don't even expect or anticipate that you would agree with my perspectives on things there. Again, the main thing is simply that I think some outside attention would be useful. If you have the time and interest... thanks, Nomoskedasticity ( talk) 22:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
You asked about sources and here they are: [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Would these be enough? ;-)
I've misunderstood your meaning on that page and now I get it. I don't think any bands (boyband or not) can be objectively calculated for how many records they sell. Newspapers have quoted them selling anywhere from 36 to 50 million. I've found most sources (the current ones) to be ~40 (not including the latest album) so that seems to be a fair statement to make. -- Cahk ( talk) 22:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Hey Neon, you should check the edits more carefully. All I did was revert some test edits that had replaced the content with "hi". And please, WP:DTTR -- ÐeadΣyeДrrow ( Talk - Contribs) 18:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Please see my comment to you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Futurekids. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 12:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
How is the offspring Pop punk? Only bands like Blink-182 and MxPx are pop punk. PLEASE change the genre to something that sounds like them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Workersununite ( talk • contribs) 19:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Why did you remove this? [15] Without an explanation or justification I can see the removal as vandalism or testing. If you object to the paragraph you should state why you do so. WhisperToMe ( talk) 11:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, it's my mistake! Sorry 'bout that.. WhisperToMe ( talk) 17:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi mate - good work with the Freebass article and for helping stop the speedy delete. I've just reverted your minor edit so that the opening sentence reads "Freebass are" instead of "Freebass is" though because the article is about a British band. Don't want to get into an argument/edit war so here's the justification: American_and_British_English_differences#Grammar Cavie78 ( talk) 13:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
What I added was sourced to an academic journal. Please examine the diffs more carefully in future, and at least read the edit comment, in which I said it was sourced to an academic journal. I don't appreciate templates on my talk page, espcially when the templates are really puzzlingly wrong... -- Relata refero ( disp.) 07:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
You may have noticed that the various articles we've been working on have been proposed for deletion by an editor who is being investigated after making insinuations against Haiduc and me. Your input welcome. Tony ( talk) 07:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Tony These are the articles afd List of books portraying sexual attraction to children or adolescents, List of films portraying sexual attraction to children or adolescents, List of songs portraying sexual attraction to children or adolescents,
You reverted my edit saying it was vandilism but in fact My edit was removing vandilism (they are clearly not emo, listen to there music, then real emo music, like Madalin Marison, you can hear the diference).-- Kingdom of crash and spyro ( talk) 15:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
I note your additions to the list of tomboys in fiction. One has a review source which seems fine. The other two seem less satisfactory. I don't want to discourage a good faith effort but others might not be so tolerant. If unsourced entries are allowed then this might open the floodgates to lots of OR. What I'm not understanding is why the anime fans care so much about this. Colonel Warden ( talk) 19:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
But what's the difference between Hayley Williams and [[Lacey Mosley if anything Hayley deserves an article due to considerably more sources-- KingMorpheus ( talk) 23:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated List of emo artists, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of emo artists. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sceptre ( talk) 14:20, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
hey neon white, since you are a stickler for all things wikipedia, i figured you could figure out how to make this page correct.
Richard Steel was a member of the band
MORNINGWOOD, proof in numerous sources, including spin, rolling stone, etc. . .
http://www.spin.com/articles/morningwood. Someone keeps changing his page to remove it, perhaps you can help, since you seem to be so good at those things. Thanks!