Welcome!
Hello, Sumori, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Blank
Verse 10:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
The task of creating an article on the music of New Orleans is troublesome. By including zydeco, creole, et cetera, I did not necessarily mean to imply that those are musics which had their start in the city. That would not be possible. However, it seems that New Orleans has contributed greatly to those and other forms and likewise would belong on the Music of New Orleans article. Covering such things as when the music first entered the area, local performers of the traditions...as well as crossover musics which might have emerged. I would definitely include the main articles in their appropriate sections, but would not do so as the article stands today as it is obviously in need of serious construction efforts. I was hoping that members familiar with some of the other music genres would contribute more in-depth coverage as they relate to New Orleans on the page, as I feel most comfortable dealing with the jazz mediums. ( Mind meal 02:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC))
- OK. I get it now. Thanks for explaining. In that case, I feel it is important to clarify in the article that these music do not originate from the city. If you are including these music, you might as well include rap/hip-hop here too, as I understand there is a notable scene for this genre in New Orleans. (Though I don't really know too much about the music...) I agree with you wholeheartedly that it is troublesome to create an article like this. Music of New Orleans is too diverse to cover in a single article! -- Sumori 17:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment to spare, your opinion would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Folk-blues musicians. Thank you. ( Mind meal 08:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC))
- Why did you undo the
edit made by 69.136.244.218? That line was true:
Tom Fogerty,
Stu Cook, and
Doug Clifford perform the
backing vocals. After the second stanza and before the third stanza, they chant, "Who do true two you blue who." During the jam session during the
coda they chant, "I tried my own smile real deal ring sing." Was it unencyclopedic? —
Uncle Dee 21:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- I considered the part to be unimportant and unnecessary. I had thought the edition before 69.136.244.218 edited to be more than adequate for the CCR part. FYI, if you look at the revision made on 7 June 2007, you will see there are others who feels the same way. -- Sumori 14:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
My appologies, I only saw your second edit summary so missed your reasoning. I have to revert a lot of US spelling in European articles and I thought you were just another American teenager who thinks British English is a spelling error. Again, my appologies. - J Logan t: 12:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for picking up a possible error in the link I added to Delta Groove Productions ... you say this is the wrong band ... does that mean that the link further down the page, in the list of artists, is also wrong? Stumps ( talk) 04:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. Yes, this is also wrong, and it should be removed. Sorry I did not notice that when I edited the article.-- Sumori ( talk) 05:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
On the page "lark street" the discussion page was tagged as being part of LGBT studies. I happen to live about 3 blocks away from lark street, and there is absolutely no connection between lark street and LGBT studies. Do you see any mention of LGBT on the lark page? how can a street be studied for sexuality? i'm going to go change the page back no, if you want to revert it again i'd appreciate an explanation.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.67.56.14 ( talk) 09:55, 09 April 2008 (UTC)
- You got me mixed up with somebody else. I have never touched that article before. Please sign when you write comments. Thanks.-- Sumori ( talk) 13:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I'd enjoy having a chance to meet you sometime when you visit New Orleans. However as I'm recovering from a broken leg I will probably have to miss Jazz Fest this year. I hope you get lots of good photos! Cheers, red beans & ricely, -- Infrogmation ( talk) 02:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I hold the CD in my Hand ,while I edit .Greetings-- FAURA ( talk) 17:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
The Fact that you don't know or not find it in www doesn't say an album is not existing ! All the albums i edit are in my collection or easy to find while searching the net. On the Burnley album Lurrie is playing in the Buddy Guy Band,duets with his father and in L.Red's band,on 6 tracks of the album:This should not be "Cleaned Up".I think ,a serious discography should not ignore his collaboration with Sunnyland Slim and Lovie Lee !-- FAURA ( talk) 15:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
CfD nomination of Category:New Orleans songs
I have nominated Category:New Orleans songs ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Songs about New Orleans ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hi TenPoundHammer. Thanks for the message. I just left my comment in the discussion page. -- Sumori ( talk) 03:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Russell Batiste, Jr.
A tag has been placed on Russell Batiste, Jr. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}} to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. -
Realkyhick (
Talk to me) 04:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- I have placed the
{{ hangon}}tag to the article, and wrote my comment in the talk page. I would personally recommend you to do more constructive editing than to go around placing speedy deletion tags to the articles that we took some time to write. -- Sumori ( talk) 05:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
You've uploaded File:NOJazzFestLogo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- For the record, it's recently been replaced with a png format image so this one is no longer in use.-- Sumori ( talk) 00:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
You've uploaded File:PonderosaStomp7Logo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Same situation as above. I don't see any problems deleting it.-- Sumori ( talk) 00:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Only the minimum relevant text should be in the category. Unverified accusations have no place in Wikipedia anywhere, let alone in categories. The comments you are making, if you can verify, should be made on the song articles. BTW I am curious, in amongst the many people who have been accused of similar offences you are so interested in Robey. It was common practice and probably still is.-- Richhoncho ( talk) 11:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- About adding the text, I have written why on your talk page. You agreed to it. I wouldn't have taken down the delete nomination otherwise. While I agree that only minimum text should be included with the categories, I have no choice but to do this as options of deleting or renaming the category was opposed by you. I have been trying to find solutions to work it out, I hope you would do the same rather than just opposing everything that are put on the table.
- Regarding "why Don Robey?" he is, good or bad a big influential figure in the history of blues and R&B music, the music of my main interests, that is why. I am not particularly sticking to him only, but you made the discussion (or should I say argument?) longer than I expected. On the other hand, I still do not understand your claim that only BMI source is reliable though you admitted that such first hand source isn't necessarily correct. -- Sumori ( talk) 11:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think you need to read again what I wrote and why. I said if the article were changed because verifiable information came light then fine, the category could go. Barring adding some tags to your edits I have not changed any of the relevant articles. That is where your comments should be - PROVIDING there is specific verification. You have failed to substantiate the claims you are making against Robey - and they do not belong on the category page either. You cannot use a general "Many songs" to mean specific songs, therefore it is totally wrong to assume (or accuse as I would put) that Robey did not write a specific song. Or to put it another way, a man gets drunk 5 nights a week, but that does not confirm he was drunk every night, or does it confirm which nights he was drunk! By that reasoning the credits on the 5 songs might actually be the only 5 he wrote, as credited, but neither you nor I can prove that! As I said, I neither want AMG giving evidence nor you on the jury at my trial. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Verification...you say. True, none of us can verify if the songs in question were actually written by the writer. Nobody can, unless there is a recorded document of the whole process or something like that. That "nobody" includes BMI as well. If you aren't gonna believe Allmusic or any other sources, why believe them? Makes no sense. Sure, they have legal documents to prove it, but you know very well that those are just technical things to pay the royalties in order, and does not necessarily represent the actual writer. As for the case with Robey, there have been numerous claims that he did not write many (if not all) of songs he was credited to. I say that fact alone is good enough to question the usefulness of the category. Can't see why I have to prove every song is not his, and makes me wonder even more that you are repeatedly emphasizing this point. Please note that I am not saying that it should be renamed to the category for the real songwriters. (that would be so difficult, as it would then involve the process of locating the actual writers one by one. ) I am merely suggesting that such a questionable category should be deleted as it is not only useless, but misleading as well. Is that so hard to understand? Now, can we end this time consuming discussion? Please? -- Sumori ( talk) 16:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, I must admit that I made it sound like the delete nomination is still alive when it's not. I got confused by hearing your same rationale again. But since the category is now kept as is, I think we need to explain that Robey did not necessarily write the songs. That is only a short note and should be appropriate. I find it difficult to see why you continue to revert it before discussing about it. That kind of attitude must stop!!! -- Sumori ( talk) 16:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that AMG confirms that the writers for the songs in the category is Malone/Robey. So if you want to rely on AMG, you had better revert your last edit. Also while you are checking your facts please also see WP:V, something you have painfully neglected to do and the sole reason I am continuing with this. The alternative is to take this to arbitration, which I am more than happy to do. Also you might like to withdraw your nomination in the correct manner, if that is your intention. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 18:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding Allmusic (they do not call themselves AMG anymore), I would assume you are talking about the song credits. That is mere transcription of the publishing details. Having that information there does NOT change the fact that it has also mentioned many of these songs weren't actually written by Robey. Since the category is titled "Songs written by Don Robey," we do need to mention that isn't necessarily true to keep NPOV. I'm not making this up, I speaking with reliable third party source. WP:V talks about that, doesn't it? -- Sumori ( talk) 23:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
In which case Wikipedia:CITE#SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT applies. Also it looks like WP:OR also applies. However, I would suprised if Robey had not claimed a credit or two, it was fairly common in the 30s, 40s, and 50s and looks like it still happens to a certain degree in the 00s. Looking at BMI I am convinced that Robey was capable of writing a good tune or two if not 700+ of them. How about a compromise? Something along the lines of "Robey claimed authorship of songs he may not have written, see main article for further details". It solves my objection of saying he did not write a specific song when we do not know (in reality these 4 of these songs might have been genuinely written by Robey, and RnB/blues credits are suspect at the best of times. Furthermore accusations of song-theft and plagarism are as common as muck at the best of times and can often be discounted as delusional), it does raise the possibility that he might not have written one or more of the songs in the category, but does not attempt to identify which songs. Personally I still prefer to see the category clean with the articles holding the information.
Also, I might add - again, where there is a accusation of song-theft in the relevant article I have not changed it, so the articles do reflect what you are trying to achieve, including the additions you made to the Robey article. I'd rather see the information there, properly verified and left at that. The information is there, the reader can make their own choices. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- > Something along the lines of "Robey claimed authorship of songs he may not have written, see main article for further details".
- That's fine with me. Thank you for showing some understandings.
- > Personally I still prefer to see the category clean
- I know you do. But again, I personally still prefer that category to be deleted, but I took down the claim. I do believe compromises are needed to make discussions fruitful. (or prevent it from getting nasty) I am here to help Wikipedia improve, nothing more. I'm not here to argue. I hope you feel the same way.-- Sumori ( talk) 16:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
As somebody who appears to be interested in song articles you might be interested to know there is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separation of different versions of the same song. You are invited to comment. Regards. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 02:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. The
recent edit you made to the page
OffBeat (magazine) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the
sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative
edit summary. You may also wish to read the
introduction to editing. Thank you.
RaseaC (
talk) 14:41, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, hit the wrong button there. Feel free to delete this message, my apologies again. RaseaC ( talk) 14:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
| Interested in attending a Tokyo Wikipedia Meetup? |
|---|
|
If you are interested in a Tokyo meetup, please visit
Wikipedia:Meetup/Tokyo and voice your interest. |
-- Saki talk 07:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumioko (
talk) 03:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumi-Taskbot (
talk) 19:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
| Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited | |
|---|---|
 |
Yours, Maximilianklein ( talk) 03:14, 1 December 2012 (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) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
|
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Sumori. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Sumori. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Sumori. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Black Top Records catalog for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Black Top Records catalog 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/Black Top Records catalog until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mattg82 ( talk) 16:53, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Oliver Morgan for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver Morgan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
– DarkGlow ( contribs • talk) 21:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
|
| 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 |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rockin' Pneumonia and the Boogie Woogie Flu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lee Allen. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Sumori. Thank you for your work on Nacomi Tanaka. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Hey there! Hope you're having a great day. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia with your article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Have a fantastic day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mickey Champion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RPM Records.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, Sumori, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!
Blank
Verse 10:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
The task of creating an article on the music of New Orleans is troublesome. By including zydeco, creole, et cetera, I did not necessarily mean to imply that those are musics which had their start in the city. That would not be possible. However, it seems that New Orleans has contributed greatly to those and other forms and likewise would belong on the Music of New Orleans article. Covering such things as when the music first entered the area, local performers of the traditions...as well as crossover musics which might have emerged. I would definitely include the main articles in their appropriate sections, but would not do so as the article stands today as it is obviously in need of serious construction efforts. I was hoping that members familiar with some of the other music genres would contribute more in-depth coverage as they relate to New Orleans on the page, as I feel most comfortable dealing with the jazz mediums. ( Mind meal 02:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC))
- OK. I get it now. Thanks for explaining. In that case, I feel it is important to clarify in the article that these music do not originate from the city. If you are including these music, you might as well include rap/hip-hop here too, as I understand there is a notable scene for this genre in New Orleans. (Though I don't really know too much about the music...) I agree with you wholeheartedly that it is troublesome to create an article like this. Music of New Orleans is too diverse to cover in a single article! -- Sumori 17:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
If you have a moment to spare, your opinion would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Folk-blues musicians. Thank you. ( Mind meal 08:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC))
- Why did you undo the
edit made by 69.136.244.218? That line was true:
Tom Fogerty,
Stu Cook, and
Doug Clifford perform the
backing vocals. After the second stanza and before the third stanza, they chant, "Who do true two you blue who." During the jam session during the
coda they chant, "I tried my own smile real deal ring sing." Was it unencyclopedic? —
Uncle Dee 21:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
- I considered the part to be unimportant and unnecessary. I had thought the edition before 69.136.244.218 edited to be more than adequate for the CCR part. FYI, if you look at the revision made on 7 June 2007, you will see there are others who feels the same way. -- Sumori 14:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
My appologies, I only saw your second edit summary so missed your reasoning. I have to revert a lot of US spelling in European articles and I thought you were just another American teenager who thinks British English is a spelling error. Again, my appologies. - J Logan t: 12:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for picking up a possible error in the link I added to Delta Groove Productions ... you say this is the wrong band ... does that mean that the link further down the page, in the list of artists, is also wrong? Stumps ( talk) 04:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. Yes, this is also wrong, and it should be removed. Sorry I did not notice that when I edited the article.-- Sumori ( talk) 05:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
On the page "lark street" the discussion page was tagged as being part of LGBT studies. I happen to live about 3 blocks away from lark street, and there is absolutely no connection between lark street and LGBT studies. Do you see any mention of LGBT on the lark page? how can a street be studied for sexuality? i'm going to go change the page back no, if you want to revert it again i'd appreciate an explanation.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.67.56.14 ( talk) 09:55, 09 April 2008 (UTC)
- You got me mixed up with somebody else. I have never touched that article before. Please sign when you write comments. Thanks.-- Sumori ( talk) 13:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your note. I'd enjoy having a chance to meet you sometime when you visit New Orleans. However as I'm recovering from a broken leg I will probably have to miss Jazz Fest this year. I hope you get lots of good photos! Cheers, red beans & ricely, -- Infrogmation ( talk) 02:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
I hold the CD in my Hand ,while I edit .Greetings-- FAURA ( talk) 17:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
The Fact that you don't know or not find it in www doesn't say an album is not existing ! All the albums i edit are in my collection or easy to find while searching the net. On the Burnley album Lurrie is playing in the Buddy Guy Band,duets with his father and in L.Red's band,on 6 tracks of the album:This should not be "Cleaned Up".I think ,a serious discography should not ignore his collaboration with Sunnyland Slim and Lovie Lee !-- FAURA ( talk) 15:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
CfD nomination of Category:New Orleans songs
I have nominated Category:New Orleans songs ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Songs about New Orleans ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ( Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hi TenPoundHammer. Thanks for the message. I just left my comment in the discussion page. -- Sumori ( talk) 03:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Speedy deletion of Russell Batiste, Jr.
A tag has been placed on Russell Batiste, Jr. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}} to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. -
Realkyhick (
Talk to me) 04:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
- I have placed the
{{ hangon}}tag to the article, and wrote my comment in the talk page. I would personally recommend you to do more constructive editing than to go around placing speedy deletion tags to the articles that we took some time to write. -- Sumori ( talk) 05:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
You've uploaded File:NOJazzFestLogo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
- For the record, it's recently been replaced with a png format image so this one is no longer in use.-- Sumori ( talk) 00:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
You've uploaded File:PonderosaStomp7Logo.gif, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Same situation as above. I don't see any problems deleting it.-- Sumori ( talk) 00:16, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Only the minimum relevant text should be in the category. Unverified accusations have no place in Wikipedia anywhere, let alone in categories. The comments you are making, if you can verify, should be made on the song articles. BTW I am curious, in amongst the many people who have been accused of similar offences you are so interested in Robey. It was common practice and probably still is.-- Richhoncho ( talk) 11:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- About adding the text, I have written why on your talk page. You agreed to it. I wouldn't have taken down the delete nomination otherwise. While I agree that only minimum text should be included with the categories, I have no choice but to do this as options of deleting or renaming the category was opposed by you. I have been trying to find solutions to work it out, I hope you would do the same rather than just opposing everything that are put on the table.
- Regarding "why Don Robey?" he is, good or bad a big influential figure in the history of blues and R&B music, the music of my main interests, that is why. I am not particularly sticking to him only, but you made the discussion (or should I say argument?) longer than I expected. On the other hand, I still do not understand your claim that only BMI source is reliable though you admitted that such first hand source isn't necessarily correct. -- Sumori ( talk) 11:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- I think you need to read again what I wrote and why. I said if the article were changed because verifiable information came light then fine, the category could go. Barring adding some tags to your edits I have not changed any of the relevant articles. That is where your comments should be - PROVIDING there is specific verification. You have failed to substantiate the claims you are making against Robey - and they do not belong on the category page either. You cannot use a general "Many songs" to mean specific songs, therefore it is totally wrong to assume (or accuse as I would put) that Robey did not write a specific song. Or to put it another way, a man gets drunk 5 nights a week, but that does not confirm he was drunk every night, or does it confirm which nights he was drunk! By that reasoning the credits on the 5 songs might actually be the only 5 he wrote, as credited, but neither you nor I can prove that! As I said, I neither want AMG giving evidence nor you on the jury at my trial. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:33, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Verification...you say. True, none of us can verify if the songs in question were actually written by the writer. Nobody can, unless there is a recorded document of the whole process or something like that. That "nobody" includes BMI as well. If you aren't gonna believe Allmusic or any other sources, why believe them? Makes no sense. Sure, they have legal documents to prove it, but you know very well that those are just technical things to pay the royalties in order, and does not necessarily represent the actual writer. As for the case with Robey, there have been numerous claims that he did not write many (if not all) of songs he was credited to. I say that fact alone is good enough to question the usefulness of the category. Can't see why I have to prove every song is not his, and makes me wonder even more that you are repeatedly emphasizing this point. Please note that I am not saying that it should be renamed to the category for the real songwriters. (that would be so difficult, as it would then involve the process of locating the actual writers one by one. ) I am merely suggesting that such a questionable category should be deleted as it is not only useless, but misleading as well. Is that so hard to understand? Now, can we end this time consuming discussion? Please? -- Sumori ( talk) 16:22, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Ok, I must admit that I made it sound like the delete nomination is still alive when it's not. I got confused by hearing your same rationale again. But since the category is now kept as is, I think we need to explain that Robey did not necessarily write the songs. That is only a short note and should be appropriate. I find it difficult to see why you continue to revert it before discussing about it. That kind of attitude must stop!!! -- Sumori ( talk) 16:56, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- I would like to point out that AMG confirms that the writers for the songs in the category is Malone/Robey. So if you want to rely on AMG, you had better revert your last edit. Also while you are checking your facts please also see WP:V, something you have painfully neglected to do and the sole reason I am continuing with this. The alternative is to take this to arbitration, which I am more than happy to do. Also you might like to withdraw your nomination in the correct manner, if that is your intention. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 18:54, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding Allmusic (they do not call themselves AMG anymore), I would assume you are talking about the song credits. That is mere transcription of the publishing details. Having that information there does NOT change the fact that it has also mentioned many of these songs weren't actually written by Robey. Since the category is titled "Songs written by Don Robey," we do need to mention that isn't necessarily true to keep NPOV. I'm not making this up, I speaking with reliable third party source. WP:V talks about that, doesn't it? -- Sumori ( talk) 23:47, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
In which case Wikipedia:CITE#SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT applies. Also it looks like WP:OR also applies. However, I would suprised if Robey had not claimed a credit or two, it was fairly common in the 30s, 40s, and 50s and looks like it still happens to a certain degree in the 00s. Looking at BMI I am convinced that Robey was capable of writing a good tune or two if not 700+ of them. How about a compromise? Something along the lines of "Robey claimed authorship of songs he may not have written, see main article for further details". It solves my objection of saying he did not write a specific song when we do not know (in reality these 4 of these songs might have been genuinely written by Robey, and RnB/blues credits are suspect at the best of times. Furthermore accusations of song-theft and plagarism are as common as muck at the best of times and can often be discounted as delusional), it does raise the possibility that he might not have written one or more of the songs in the category, but does not attempt to identify which songs. Personally I still prefer to see the category clean with the articles holding the information.
Also, I might add - again, where there is a accusation of song-theft in the relevant article I have not changed it, so the articles do reflect what you are trying to achieve, including the additions you made to the Robey article. I'd rather see the information there, properly verified and left at that. The information is there, the reader can make their own choices. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 12:07, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- > Something along the lines of "Robey claimed authorship of songs he may not have written, see main article for further details".
- That's fine with me. Thank you for showing some understandings.
- > Personally I still prefer to see the category clean
- I know you do. But again, I personally still prefer that category to be deleted, but I took down the claim. I do believe compromises are needed to make discussions fruitful. (or prevent it from getting nasty) I am here to help Wikipedia improve, nothing more. I'm not here to argue. I hope you feel the same way.-- Sumori ( talk) 16:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
As somebody who appears to be interested in song articles you might be interested to know there is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs/coverversions with the purpose of trying to establish a standard rule for merge/separation of different versions of the same song. You are invited to comment. Regards. -- Richhoncho ( talk) 02:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. The
recent edit you made to the page
OffBeat (magazine) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the
sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative
edit summary. You may also wish to read the
introduction to editing. Thank you.
RaseaC (
talk) 14:41, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Sorry, hit the wrong button there. Feel free to delete this message, my apologies again. RaseaC ( talk) 14:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
| Interested in attending a Tokyo Wikipedia Meetup? |
|---|
|
If you are interested in a Tokyo meetup, please visit
Wikipedia:Meetup/Tokyo and voice your interest. |
-- Saki talk 07:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumioko (
talk) 03:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
--
Kumi-Taskbot (
talk) 19:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
| Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited | |
|---|---|
|
Yours, Maximilianklein ( talk) 03:14, 1 December 2012 (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) 16:34, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
|
|
You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here! |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Sumori. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Sumori. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Sumori. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Nomination of Black Top Records catalog for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Black Top Records catalog 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/Black Top Records catalog until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mattg82 ( talk) 16:53, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Oliver Morgan for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver Morgan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
– DarkGlow ( contribs • talk) 21:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
|
| 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 |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rockin' Pneumonia and the Boogie Woogie Flu, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lee Allen. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:31, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Sumori. Thank you for your work on Nacomi Tanaka. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Hey there! Hope you're having a great day. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia with your article. I'm happy to inform you that your article has adhered to Wikipedia's policies, so I've marked it as reviewed. Have a fantastic day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the
Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 07:37, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}} to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mickey Champion, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page RPM Records.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 18:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)