User talk:Crumbsucker

This user may have left Wikipedia. Crumbsucker has not edited Wikipedia since March 2017. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome to Crumbsucker's Talk Page.

Please click here to leave me a new message. Remember to sign your posts by adding four tildes at the end.

(Stolen from Linuxbeak.) I will respond on your talk page to messages left here.

Archive: 1

Nominated Bill O'Reilly controversies for delete

You created that page. I wanted to let you know I nominated it for deletion at this page: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill O'Reilly controversies (second nomination). Its only fair that you should know.--Blue Tie 01:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill O'Reilly controversies (second nomination). I would appreciate it if you would also address my concerns about POV Fork. --Blue Tie 14:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject South Park

I have thought of creating a WikiProject for South Park since it is now near its' 10th anniversary and has more articles than ever. I feel we could all do the following things through this project:

Cleanup any short/poorly written/unformatted articles
Merge/lengthen the many character articles
Improve the South Park main page

I have seen your South Park fan template and wondered if you were interested in joining. If so reply to my talk page and I'll get back to you as quick as I can. Thanks, Mr. Garrison

Re: Your sockpuppet

Why are you accusing me of sock puppetry? Do you really think I'd be capable of creating another account to remove the R&B genre from Justin Timberlake's article? This is ridiculous, I'm not afraid of showing my face and assume the responsibilities of my acts. But I wonder what Justin did to be an R&B artist. Funk Junkie 21:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Do you have anything better to do than genre troll?

When did I say Jennifer Lopez isn't an R&B singer? She is, but her earlier albums, On The 6 and J. Lo, aren't – the only urban-oriented songs on them are "Feelin' So Good" and "I'm Real," so I don't think they can be considered R&B. Funk Junkie 17:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alive in Christ article

Hi, I've seen some of your edits on Exodus International.. Alive in Christ is an ex-gay ministry at Park Street Church affiliated with Exodus International. I wonder if you would be willing to take a look at the article? Thanks. CApitol3 00:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Matarazzo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Matarazzo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Oden 02:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invite

Hey, I saw your edit to Civil unions in Iceland, among others, and wanted to invite you to join WikiProject LGBT studies. We'd love to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:53, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Cocktails

Hello. As a person interested in WikiProject Cocktails, you may be interested to know that a name change is being considered from Cocktails to Mixed Drinks. Please add your opinions to the discussion and vote. Also, check out the recent changes to the WikiProject area. Consider becoming an active Participant. Thanks! --Willscrlt 08:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ashley Tisdale

Regarding your comment:

rv silliness. Ashley Tisdale appears in all of her youtube videos.

It's not silliness. It's being cautious. The only ref I can find that the Youtube cite is legit is on www.ashley-tisdale.com, which is an unofficial website. So ... yeah, I'm trying to make people cite sources etc for Disney articles (talk about your pshyco attempts! ;) ). Anyway, since any Tim, Dick or Harry can make a site on YouTube or MySpace and claim legitimacy, I think it behooves us to be careful with that. It could end up into a big, fat, libel/slander lawsuit. Just because Ashley's in all the videos does not verify them as 'her site.' -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 21:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good :) Sometimes tone comes across really weird online :) -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 14:11, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Musicians

Dude. Coincidence that I'm double-posting here :). I partially reverted Switchfo0t813's revert on Miley Cyrus, since the first revert killed the other formatting changes you'd made. However. You saw that coming, right? Category:Christian musicians is "musicians who make Christian music, such as choral music, gospel music, or Christian rock." ... I'm honestly not sure if Miley applies to that, to be fair, since she's really vague about it. She quotes her 'faith' as being important, but I'd personally shy from calling it Christian Rock. I would totally lable the Jonas Bros as being Christian Rock, FWIW. Maybe we should bring this up on the talk page to sort it out with the others? Of course, getting the kiddies on the Disney pages to stop fan-freaking isn't an appealing prospect :| -- Ipstenu (talk|contribs) 21:20, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts on Brenda Song

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Brenda Song. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you.

Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Not) blocked

~~I have blocked for your 8 hours due to blatantly breaching the three revert rule on Brenda Song.~~ As a note, I haven't blocked HongQiGong due to the fact that he/she made an initial change that did not form a "revert". However, in the interum, I have protected the page fully so you can discuss the issue (please read The Wrong Version, as I didn't check which version it actually is that I protected - yours or his/her). The protection is set for seven days; I encourage both of you to work out a comprimise on the talk page. If you manage to prior to the expiry, please contact me and I'll be more-than-happy to lift the protection. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 08:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just woke up feeling really bad with what I just did to you (blocking you for eight hours). The block was, although technically correct, probably not the best choice; and given the circumstances, one block in this situation is extremely injust. As such, I have unblocked you, with my fullest apologies. I am deeply sorry for not understanding the whole situation, and ask for your forgiveness. I am merely a learning administrator, and I am sorry that you had to suffer for me to learn a large lesson. Regardless, the article is still protected - by the way, that The Wrong Version link is meant to be sarcastic :) - and I encourage both you and HongQiGong to engage in discussion before reverting any further on any other articles. Please see my comments on User talk:HongQiGong regarding possible options. Cheers, and sorry again, Daniel.Bryant 10:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Maggie Q

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Maggie Q. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user

If only the above user was really obsessed with ethnicity in general. He's only obsessed with his own ethnicity, meaning he's the standard issue and nothing special. But you are definitely correct in this. What I found on Kelly Hu's page is the kind of blatant nonsense WP:MOSBIO protects us from, so kudos for pursuing this. Mad Jack 22:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Pussycat Dolls' Genre

I reverted that user's edit but they reverted it back to their own. I left a message on their talk page asking them why they keep changing the genre. Acalamari 03:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evanescence

Hi, I've seen you frequently around the article Evanescence and other related articles. Please consider joining the WikiProject Evanescence, an effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage and detail regarding Evanescence.

If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks that you can help with. Thank you!!!

Armando.O ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:55, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts on Ming-Na

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Ming-Na. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 01:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

images

Well how can I get a free image? The one used on PCD's is really quite crap. JJH1992 JJH1992 18:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PCD

I have uploaded a wallpaper to use as Pussycat Dolls picture. Im presuming this is a free image as it is open for the public to use JJH1992 01:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Star

Props for the Star. Hope to see you around in the future. Imageboy1 01:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Afro-Latin Americans

(the source refers to African-Americans, not Afro-Latin Americans. Plus the wiki-text is still is OR (the source doesn't use the term political correctness or say anything about Moroccans or SAfricans))

I agree about the need for sources, I've made many edits to this article myself requesting sources, but we need to be realistic about how much sourcing is necessary.

It appears to me that you are being persnickety in your position. The references provided show the application of the parts of the entire phrase, since there is not --and is not necessairly needed-- a precise definition for the complete phrase, any more than you would need a citation to define "long black coat" when stringing together the meanings of each of the parts would suffice.

The explanation of the development of Afro American applies equally to the development of Afro Latin American.

You obviously didn't look at the other reference which I added to the previous source about Names and Lables which states, in part,

ONE of the most basic ways of showing respect for others is to refer to them by the names with which they have chosen to identify themselves and to avoid using names that they consider offensive.

If this isn't an example of "political correctness", I'd like to know what is.

The prefix Afro is clearly in reference to black persons (the source does say this), and Moroccans or SAfricans are not blacks, hence the additional observation about the area where such people originated. This is not OR, nor a notion which I share with only a few souls but something which could be easily verified by most anyone who cared to. (See Afro American for more on this.)

JAXHERE | ^Talk 14:22, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kirby

I've responded to your comment over at the move request. PC78 21:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nelly Furtado

Crumbsucker, I'm directing this message on your talk page, because you are the only one who is aguing against including Portuguese in the lead paragraph. As I mention elsewhere in the article, I'm not a fan -- in fact, only on Thursday it was the first time I hear her sing (though I think I recall "I'm like a bird" many, many years ago). So I think I'm being non-subjective here in pointing out that her ethnicity is relevant to her notability. I'm 60%-40% on this point. So personally, I don't care if this in the lead. However, I think your keeping it out of the article is showing the other editors a lack of respect. Yes, you are sticking to the letter of the MoS. However, doing so against the will of other editors is not in the best interests of Wikpedia or of article, in my humble opinion. --Otheus 09:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're completely right about being the only one. I misread the context of User:musicpvm's message. Do you mind if I move this discussion from my talk page to Furtado's talk page? --Otheus 12:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hollaback Girl

If you'd like me to provide a statement that it's pop, I can, but that seems like referencing "the sky is blue". Also note that pop rap does not always contain traditional rap but rather rapping the lyrics as opposed to actually singing them. Considering the song's performance on the Pop 100 and Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs, I think it's pretty accurate to say that it's a pop rap song. ShadowHalo 03:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain how exactly hip hop music and rap music are different? Everything I've seen treats them as the same thing (though not all songs that contain rapping are hip hop/rap songs. As you stated, the song does indeed contain much singing and isn't a pure rap song; however, as the sources state it contains a lot of hip hop elements and falls in the intersection between pop and hip hop (which is called pop rap). ShadowHalo 21:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware that rapping and hip hop are different, but rap music and hip hop music are for all intents and purposes the same things. I'm also a little confused as to why you keep saying that there is no rap when the sources disagree. This review at All Music Guide, one of the most comprehensive and reliable music sites, refers to it as a "marching-band rap", and OMH Media's review calls it "rap-pop". ShadowHalo 01:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You demonstrated that rapping and hip hop are different, but as music genres, they're the same thing. Looking at the two reviews by Erlewine, I can't find any that uses all those terms. And OMH isn't user-submitted. The page clearly states that they hire their writers but are encouraging readers to apply, the equivalent of a "help wanted". How about asking for a third opinion since this doesn't appear to be getting us very far? ShadowHalo 02:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinion

If the genre really is in dispute by reliable sources, or different sources call it different things, we don't decide who's right. Rather, the fact that the dispute exists should be noted, and the various positions noted in the prose ("Whatever Magazine describes the genre as rap-pop^[1], while Something Weekly disagrees, stating that no rap elements are present.^[2].) Of course, if one position is strongly in the majority, this should be noted and that position treated with the most weight. Also, please discuss articles on the article's talk, so that other editors may get involved as well. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eva Mendes

Why did you take it upon yourself to remove links on Eva Mendes page? Links provided there are just additional sources to find more information/pictures about Eva. No one is "battling" over it.

--Evarosefan 13:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Jennymac.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Jennymac.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 21:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Do not replace Funk Metal with Rapcore in the band's Genre section of the info-box. It has been decided upon, in a large debate, that the three genres to be placed in that area are Alt. Rock, Funk Rock, and Funk Metal. Do not disturb this much-debated upon section. Regards, NSR77 ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 22:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Criticism of Bill O'Reilly

Criticism of Bill O'Reilly, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Criticism of Bill O'Reilly satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Bill O'Reilly and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Criticism of Bill O'Reilly during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. CO₂ 19:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverts as per stage name?-Please explain

Please elaborate on your reason for your reverting the Dido armstrong article back to Dido (Singer) 'as per naming convention'-as I am lost as to your reasoning. I requested input AGES ago on this move-and you did not reply. Today however you blind reverted it-please discuss. If there is a reasonable and provable reason I'm sure others will gladly leave it that way, otherwise, the amount of editing and improvement under the dido Armstrong heading seems to show a general acceptance of the Dido Armstrong version. I believe that stagename or otherwise-she uses the name Dido Armstrong, certainly not "Dido (Singer)" depending on your answer and general consensus I will adjust the name accordingly or gladly leave it as is. Cheers.--Read-write-services 04:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again you have reverted the article for what amounts to as your personal choice, rather than by consensus I am suggesting that either you (or I), get this seen to and resolved through the wikipedia conflict resolution process-would you agree to this? I (as I stated above) will accept what the decision is by consensus.--Read-write-services 23:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have read this WP:NAMES#Names, have you? The article name (as per naming convention) should be "Dido", which I think we are both happy with, however the disambiguation presents a problem. The Dido disambiguation page entry should read something like "Dido-stage name of the singer Florian Cloud De Bounevialle Armstrong". As you stated, this would place this article under the correct naming convention as you wished, I prefer and wikipedia suggests. how does this suit you? Cheers--Read-write-services 00:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Kingkong bigfinal1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Kingkong bigfinal1.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 (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Block party.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Block party.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 (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect of JC Chasez second studio album

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on JC Chasez second studio album, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because JC Chasez second studio album is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting JC Chasez second studio album, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 17:30, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mwomen.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Mwomen.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. 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 you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 11:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Criticism of Bill O'Reilly

I have nominated Criticism of Bill O'Reilly, 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/Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (2nd nomination). 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) 13:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator)

I have nominated Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) (3rd nomination). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. *** Crotalus *** 19:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Crumbsucker. 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)[reply]