User talk:I'll bring the food

Hi, leave your name and number after the tone and I'll get back to you.

--I'll bring the food 16:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

		Archives: 1 (My user creation to 12th November 2006)

Archived talk page.

The talk page has been archived and is available for viewing on the right, the history on this page is still viewable should you wish to see the history of those comments being posted to this page. I'll have to look at Werdnabot as an option at some point. --I'll bring the food 17:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Appoligize accepted

I can tell you that sometimes it's difficult to tell those doing honest work from those doing something else. Always work in WP:Good faith, when deperate ask for help. There are few options when mostly one works alone. Also try Sun Tzu's The Art of War. --meatclerk 21:09, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Salmon

Just to let you know, I've moved your latest entry to the talkpage. I cannot verify that statement, although I have been looking for something like that. If you can point me to a citation, of worth, I'll be happy to reinsert it for you. If however, you'd like to discuss the matter this link to the talkpage would be a good place to start. --meatclerk 22:45, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

To be clear, I suspect as much with the coloring of farm-raised fish (salmon, trout, etc.), but have been unable to find a citation. --meatclerk 23:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

oh no worry, it comes from: Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition on the use of canthaxanthin in feedingstuffs for salmon and trout, laying hens, and other poultry. By the EUROPEAN COMMISSION - HEALTH & CONSUMER PROTECTION DIRECTORATE [link http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scan/out81_en.pdf]. Retrieved on 13th November 2006 the entire paragraph is based on information from there. If you click the little [1] at the end of the paragraph it will take you to the citation.--I'll bring the food 21:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Just thought I'd say hi. I'm weird.

71.107.40.181 05:37, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

It is completely unacceptable to give someone a barnstar that says, "In a sea of many other completely retarded wackjob contributors..." Please stop using barnstars and edit summaries to make personal attacks against others. If you keep doing this, you will be blocked. --Sarah Ewart (Talk) 03:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

who was i making an attack against? And why have you edited my comment? I believe it is against policy on wikipedia to do that.--I'll bring the food 21:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Refering to the other editors on that article as "retarded wackjobs" is an unacceptable attack and it concerns me greatly that you don't understand that. Another administrator reviewed and concurred with my opinion prior to my commenting here. Refactoring personal attacks is not against any policy on Wikipedia. In fact, the NPA policy, the arbitration committee and the essay, refactoring of personal attacks, all allow some latitude in removing personal attacks. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 19:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

it says many others, it doesn't specify who so it isn't a personal attack. I have no problem refraining from it though, i will simply report and ask for mediation with people who continually ruin articles, annoying me from now on.--I'll bring the food 19:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Original Research vv. Ranges

Before presuming to enforce a rule, you might actually read it.

"An edit counts as original research if it does any of the following:

• It introduces a theory or method of solution;
• It introduces original ideas;
• It defines new terms;
• It provides or presumes new definitions of pre-existing terms;
• It introduces an argument, without citing a reputable source for that argument, that purports to refute or support another idea, theory, argument, or position;
• It introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source;
• It introduces or uses neologisms, without attributing the neologism to a reputable source."

Discerning one's vocal range doesn't meet any of these criteria. To a proper musician this is a matter of simple observation. Since the guideline "does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia," you're out of line. -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by CleffedUp (talk • contribs) .

Please do not make personal attacks towards me. The text you have cited says that "It introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts... in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source;" which is what working out the range of a singer does if you don't source it to a reliable citation. --I'll bring the food 18:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC) Also, whistle register is a neoligism.--I'll bring the food 18:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Complete the quote: "any personal analysis or synthesis of published material that appears to advance a position the editor may hold. That is, any facts, opinions, interpretations, definitions, and arguments published by Wikipedia must already have been published by a reliable publication in relation to the topic of the article." And just what "personal opinion" is "one trying to advance" by publishing a singer's range? The observation of one's range is neutral and verifiable. Further, the same guideline reads "This policy does not prohibit editors with specialist knowledge from adding their knowledge to Wikipedia," leaving you without a leg to stand on in a meaningless quest in the deaggregation of information in the public domain. CleffedUp 05:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

...and the pages in question are apparently gone, making this moot. CleffedUp 06:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

It is quite simple, many people add their favorite singer to the range they think is most impressive for that singer to be able to sing. Such is advancing one's personal position on a subject. Please note that specialist knowledge must be sourced. Such is how wikipedia works.--I'll bring the food 16:09, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Will you please just die!

I'm really not interested in reading your crap! Don't you EVER post anything on my talk page again!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaiwills (talk • contribs) 07:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

If you add original research to a page within my watchlist I will caution you for it. You can't threaten me, so don't even try.--I'll bring the food 19:34, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

soubrette/charakterwhatever

Thanks for your note. Actually not all soubrette roles are comic (far from it, the word refers to a weight of voice) but the Fach article started - I believe - as a translation from the German article. As you will see that I was working on it a few months ago. I agree with you about the Hoher Bass problem, there are probably some other inconsistencies as well. Reg. - Kleinzach 22:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. If you can master the Fach article you will be well qualified to tackle the English Vocal range one! - Kleinzach 22:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I WANT YOUR BABIES

I know in due time, science will advance enough for a young male like me to get pregnant. But i'd rather the babies come ourt of my anus than my urethra...poor babies. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gulfrazthehunk (talk • contribs) 16:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Sorry, I don't want to have babies with you. You'll have to make do with somebody else.--I'll bring the food 18:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the support

Thanks for the support re: my stance on assessing biography articles. I also feel the same way regarding other Wikipedia article topics. I've no objection to articles themselves being rated for quality, thoroughness, etc. but there's no reason for someone to pass judgment over whether Person A is High-importance while Person B is Low-importance. On an unrelated note I couldn't help but notice the "Will you please just die" thread above. That's actually grounds for permabanning that user. I'll be leaving him a warning on his talk page if no one else has done so; if you receive any further messages of that type, please don't hesitate to report the user to an administrator such as myself. (PS - never mind, he's already been permabanned by someone else.) 23skidoo 16:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Clarification

I've asked for a clarification of your comment at Talk:James_Kim#Straw_poll_on_inclusion_of_timeline if thats okay. Not to question you, I just want to be sure on what exactly it is you're supporting. Thanks!--Crossmr 17:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I found the media section a bit off too, but I wasn't really sure what to do with it. A reliable source had commented on that very thing, which is in itself a notable thing, but I wasn't sure how that should be communicated.--Crossmr 18:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Werdnabot is decent, but occasionally it malfunctions. Its never done anything bad to my talk page, but if it malfunctions and is blocked it won't archive until its fixed. I think there have been 3 or 4 occasions since I started using it that its malfunctioned. Usually when it malfunctions though its a week or more until its fixed to start archiving again. Its confusing at first when you realize you've got talk which is well older than what you set the archive threshold at. You start checking sigs, etc and then find out the bot is broken again. As far as archive size, I use popups, which when you hover over a link gives you the size of the page in KB, I try to keep my archives between 30 and 40K (it gives you a warning when you edit a page which is over 32K long I believe, but otherwise won't tell you the exact size).--Crossmr 18:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem, its a really handy tool and the page size I've used a lot. Werdnabot will keep appending sections to your archive until you manually switch it, which includes changing a couple numbers (i.e. from 1 to 2) and creating the new page with an archive header if you wish. A pretty quick and painless process.--Crossmr 18:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Winterval(s)!!!! (12-22-06)

Oh, the weather outside is frightful!... But I hope wherever you you are, that it's warm and delightful! : ) —Randfan!!

Dear I'll bring the food, I wish you a very, very merry Winterval! And since I don't know which you celebrate, I hope you have/had/will have a very happy Holiday!. Hope you and your family have a magnificent day, or series of days! You might wanna install the "SaucyMillionaire" font to see this correctly. Cheers, mate!:) —Randfan!!

God (or your deity/deities) bless you and your family! —¡Randfan!^{Sign here?} 02:30, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

-I was planning to hand these out on the 22nd of Dec. but things got in the way.... Happy holidays! —¡Randfan!^{Sign here?} 21:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Bass

To be a bass my friend, you have to reach at least the E that is below the Bass clef, if you don't you won't be able to hit the notes that are required in a regular bass aria. Besides from that, opera singers need around 2 octaves at least (of full voice, that is) to sing the arias they require. Mark Knofler might have a 2 octave vocal range, but his voice is definetely not trained and would definitely not work for opera. Besides from that, Eddie Vedder is not a bass, he is a baritone, I think you are confused on what a bass is. The only bass I have encountered in rock is type o negative frontman Peter Steele. In regards to vocal ranges, the world record is 8 octaves and even though the average singer has only about two, there are many people who have a lot more than that. When I studied violin at the conservatory in Leipzig there was a singer who had a 6 octave vocal range, he could reach lower than what the current world record for a lowest not was, but that doesn't mean he can actually use those notes; same thing with mark knofler. Kiske 02:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Eddie Vedder doesn't go above F and is most comfortable in the A2-C4 range. Atypical contemporary bass territory.--I'll bring the food 02:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Celine Dion

Hi there. I noticed that you were a bit angry at the fact that I altered the information you added to the Celine Dion article: your edit summary read, "Her coloratura Soprano range is important, and if you want to remove it, you will need a better explanation than that of "tidied", and I do not care whether you are an administrator or not." Let me explain something to you: I did not remove your addition to the article; I pushed it further down to the openinig paragraph of "Image," which seemed more appropriate, as that section discussed how Dion's vocal talent contributed to her being held in high regard. I just didnt think it was approprate to note her "coloratura soprano" in the intro for the addition caused the sentence to sound awkward, and the info was also too specific (IMO, she is known for her overall vocals, not her 'coloratura range'). I know that I probably have a tendency to overprotect the article, since it was my first featured article, and I apologise if my actions seemed hasty.

Also, I noticed that there is an undertone of reproach towards Admins in your edit summary ("I don't care if you are an Admin"). Well, not all Admins are bad, or are power hungry tyrants lol. I think Im one of the good ones :-). Anyways, good luck around Wikipedia, and keep up the good work. I just advise that you be a little more thoughtful in your actions. And try not to assume the worst. Thanks! Orane (talk • cont.) 04:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I know that many people make bad-faithed edits, but you can help by still assuming good faith. Sometimes simple misunderstandings can be avoided if people approached each other with (sometimes unnatural and annoying) courtesy lol. Afterall, it worked in our situation, right? Orane (talk • cont.) 04:46, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

lol. I understand. Anyway, you said earlier that the music-related articles helped you with your talents. Are you a singer/performer? Orane (talk • cont.) 05:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow. I'm impressed. I can't write songs, never could, never tried. But I've sung and performed lots of times (though I have stage fright). Orane (talk • cont.) 05:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the gr8 advise. I'll try it and see if it works. And I don't do open mic night lol; Ive competed in large competitions (and won), but before I go on-stage, I always feel like I'm gonna pass out. Also, I use falsetto only for style, and not for range. You see, my mother encouraged my talent as a child, so when puberty hit, I practised hard, and was able to retain a soprano range while my low/bass range developed. I'm now a tenor. Orane (talk • cont.) 05:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I sing above the fourth octave, without falsetto. Nowadays, many people boast about being able to hit high notes, but they sound like crap when doing so. So I usually try not to boast for fear of fitting into that category. But to tell the truth, my higest note is around F5-G5 (falsetto takes me to C6. It's rather embarassing because I actually sound like a female at the top of my range), and my lowest note is a E2. I'm stronger at my middle range (especially because I also used to do choral singing, where they placed me in the tenor and alto groups). I'm also dramatic : my vocal coach would always teach me how to belt and project my voice. To tell the truth, I've kinda given up on singing. When I moved to Canada, I found that not many people shared my taste for singing. Plus, I don't think my Dad would take kindly to me doing do-ray-me's every morning, five days a week lol. But while I don't sing much anymore (and my medals and trophies are gathering dust at the back of my closet) I'd still like to take it up once more. Just not now. Orane (talk • cont.) 06:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know how I produce E2 lol. I just can. And no, its not squeaky, or inaudible, or strained. If I can't hit a note comfortabely, I don't consider it a part of my range. But as I said, I haven't sung in years, so its almost gone. People are always saying that if I really could sing, then I should still have it after three years. But I disagree, because being a singer is like being an athlete. If the fastest runner stops training for three years, he will loose form. And secondly, when you are a teen, your voice needs a lot of sculpting/trainig (because harmones have a drastic effect on it— especially if you are a guy). You need to practise regularly to maintain your tone, your range, and to smooth the cracks and breaks between registers. Orane (talk • cont.) 20:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration

Thank you for the consideration you gave to my RfA. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. You were one of the oppose votes, and raised concerns. I am more than willing to discuss those concerns with you if you are interested. Please let me know. Sincerely, --BostonMA ^talk 12:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Abandoned Articles Project

This user participates in
WikiProject Abandoned Articles.

Human voice et al

Thanks for the kind words - I enjoy contributing to this project and I'm glad that I have technology which allows me to contribute on an equal footing with sighted people. I'm interested in the human voice article because I did classical voice lessons for a few years - I have trouble projecting the voice however because of scarring in my lungs caused by being born premature. Graham87 02:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello, anyone...

I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 04:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Iodine Clock

They wouldn't give me Ammonium Persulphate purely because they didn't want to hand it over when 'you can just use Potassium Persulphate instead'. No scientific/safety reasoning behind it, I think.Paj.meister 14:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I used 0.005 mol dm^-3 solution Iron(III) Chloride as a catalyst.Paj.meister 16:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

I'll adopt you if you want. Yonatanh 18:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I have made page under my user page for us to correspond under. Here it is. Yonatanh 05:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Funk

Hey it's great that you're adding some sources to the Funk article. If you check the history, you'll see that i contributed large sections of the article, hmm, i'm not sure when but it was over a year ago. Unfort. at the time I didn't know to cite and source stuff but much of it comes from Vincent, Rickey (1996). Funk: The Music, The People, and The Rhythm of The One. St. Martin's Press. Great book. I don't really have much time to geek out and write for free anymore or go back and redo the research to find citations, but if you're interested in citing alot of the facts in the Funk article and eliminating alot of the POV stuff, I'd recommend checking that book out! best wishes. Dissolve 05:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Soprano

Thanks for removing that stuff. You're braver than I am. It seems that the consensus view is that fans of modern pop stars are an ungovernable lot and the best thing is to let them pollute this article (and the other singing articles, see baritone et al.) to their hearts' content, and people interested in actual sopranos will just pretend it's not there. That's wrong, but you're going to take heat for saying so. I wish you luck! \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 02:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I've been deleting that crap for a very long time. I draw the lines at the alto article where I'm attempting to source the claims as a trial of its possibilities. I never noticed that addition to the baritone article but I have now deleted it. Thank you for pointing it out. I have deleted much OR. Most significantly from the whistle register article for which I drew the wrath of what I assume to be about 5 very annoyed angsty adolescents, although the article had several lovely pleasant adult contributors too. Your best bet is to delete it, and tell me if it starts an edit war, I've been doing this a loooooooooooooong time now and I have made progress, and I have skillz getting it removed. Forcing them to source it works occasionally too. It did with Grace Jones. --I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 00:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh my gosh, you cleaned up Whistle Register?! It's a miracle! But where will the fans of the pop stars go to discuss whether or not Christina Aguilera or whomever can squeak out such and such a note if you squeeze her in just the right place? Hah! I like pop music a great deal, but I don't think using the classical and operatic vocabulary to describe their efforts adds anything to them at all; quite the contrary. It's an attempt at bogus faux glamour, and completely distorts the technique and expressiveness (or not) of their art, and cheapens the art of opera singers as well.

If there was a way to keep some of the pop singers who work in both traditions, or in theatrical singing, someone like Julie Andrews, say, that would be nice, but I think it's unfortunately necessary to keep that door firmly closed. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 17:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

quick note to self

http://www.entnet.org/healthinfo/throat/Healthy-Voice.cfm http://www.entnet.org/healthinfo/throat/common-disorders.cfm--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 03:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Rock music Wikiproject invitation

Hello WikiProject Metal member.
WikiProject Metal music is important in expanding encyclopedic coverage of the metal. It brings attention to the lesser-known bands, and significantly improves the quality of the famous ones. Five Featured articles and two formers is proof of that.
This is the stuff I wish to achieve with the somewhat recently resurrected WikiProject Rock music. I hope to also attract attention to rock music articles of all sorts, and hopefully change some to GA or FA status. I invite you to come join us, and embrace the links between metal and rock music in general.
Rock on.
-- Reaper X 04:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

An update on Wikipedia:WikiProject Abandoned Articles

The project has reached the quarter-way point for the work on the list of the oldest 1000 ("abandoned") articles in Wikipedia: 250 articles have been reviewed and updated!

The project now has 21 members. If you're no longer interested, please take your name off the list; you won't get any further messages like this one. On the other hand, if you're still interested, please consider signing up for a(nother) block of 10 articles to work on - if everyone did this, we'd be almost halfway through those 1000 articles!

Finally, please note that project approach has changed slightly - there is now a section for editors to place articles that need to be "adopted", or to adopt articles that need further work. This means that if you find an article in a block of ten that needs more work than you have time for, it has a place to be put.

-- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Whitney Houston

Excuse me, but there is a user named Lilruthlessplaya who is vandalising the Whitney Houston page. I found a source that states Whitney as a coloratura. Here it is. http://www.signandsight.com/features/931.html

But this user keeps insiisting that she is a mezzo soprano and gave me a source(http://www.upto11.net/artistprofile.php?ar=979), but the source is an earlier vesrion of an uncredited whitney wikipedia page. Here it is. http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Whitney_Houston&oldid=18476166.

This user keeps on crediting his/her original research to a credited source and that, to me, is vandalism. Please do something about it.

Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies

Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of unassessed articles tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 20:51, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject 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. Mocko13 22:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

King of Pop

You should be aware that there now is consensus for the inclusion of this label in the lead above all others. I invited potentially dissenting opinion (like Sarah) to comment on this, but beyond suggesting that I offer a statement to resolve this issue, she did not say anything. As a result, there was unanimous support for KOP to be featured in the lead alone.UberCryxic 02:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sarah was consulted when she was still here (just review her talk page...and mine). I know you are not looking for an edit war, and neither am I, but I would urge that you take your complaints to the talk page before making some rather arbitrary decisions. Thank you.UberCryxic 02:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop engaging in an edit war. We are all in danger of violating 3RR. Consensus has been reached on this issue and I would advise you take your qualms to the talk page before modifying the article itself.UberCryxic 03:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

User MPD is not a sockpuppet and the allegation is disconcerting. If you had paid attention to the conversations in the talk page, you'll see that he or she was one of the main participants. I assume that's why he or she reverted you.UberCryxic 03:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I have left some messages at the end of the talk page that I would like you to address as quickly as you can. Thank you.UberCryxic 02:45, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I would like to inform you that Paaerduag has made some suggestions regarding some of the later parts of the Michael Jackson article. You opposed these some days back (maybe a week ago?), but you have not commented on them since. As we want to reach a decision on this matter, we hope that you will join us shortly. I plan to wait several more days for your input, but unfortunately we will take executive actions if that is not forthcoming. Thank you.UberCryxic 11:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi I'll bring the food. Thank you for participating in my RfA. Rest assured that I heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. No unreasonable arguments on talk pages. Please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner (talk, email) 14:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Prince and Blanket's names

What is Prince's full name? Michael Joseph Jackson Jr. or Prince Michael Jackson or Prince Michael Joseph Jackson Jr.? I saw all of those. What's Blanket's full name? Prince Michael Joseph Jackson II? So, Blanket is legally Prince but Prince is not? Kinda confused here. I'm quite sure Prince is his legal first name. When he was born it was clearly Prince.

http://www.nbc4.tv/entertainment/10148762/detail.html?rss=la&psp=news http://www.michaeljackson.ro/infomj/interviews/an-1997/13 Israell 21:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Wacko Jacko

Hi there. I'm not sure whether you care, but the Michael Jackson article that you seem to have edited in the past (when the article was actually good) is being turned into pile a rubbish full of gushing, fanboy rubbish. I don't have the patience anymore to argue with the fool protecting the article from anything besides that which glorifies jackson, but maybe you do. For me, consensus isn't arguing a point (ie the nicknames) repeatedly until all opponents cannot be bother replying or leave, then later instate it and protect it like its gospel, but this dude thinks it is.--MachoMax 02:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Fortunately or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, consensus on Wikipedia involves much conversation and thoughtful exchanges. I tried to do this when I changed the consensus a month ago and succeeded. You will have to do the same if you want to establish a new consensus.

To I'll Bring the Food: I should inform you that I am somewhat worried about MachoMax's interaction with the article. The user called Michael Jackson a "freak" in a recent edit and there seems to be enough evidence to indicate that assuming good faith is not appropriate here. Simply look at the title of this section: "Wacko Jacko," not "Michael Jackson." It seems that the user has an agenda, although I am fully prepared to acknowledge that I could be wrong. I am basing my current opinion on the evidence, which does not seem too promising. Despite the history, I am willing to trust, respect, and work with this user, but the user, in turn, must work within the established confines of Wikipedia policies.UberCryxic 02:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll thankyou not to follow me around to other peoples talk pages. I'm not participating in the debate anymore, thats why I've asked this editor - has contributed good things to the article in the past - to have a look. Though like me, I think he too was probably driven away in by the swarm of Jacko diehards protecting it from anything that doesn't glorify him. Oh well--MachoMax 03:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I was simply trying to get in my own viewpoint so that I'll Bring the Food was not misled by your latest comments. Now, I'll Bring the Food did an amazing job with the article, taking it to Good Article status and nurturing and caring for it for quite some time. But some issues were identified and have now been largely rectified. There is nothing wrong with improving articles, and this article needed some improvements. I am certain that I'll Bring the Food has an opinion on this, and I eagerly await it, but the last time that I remember, all parties agreed to leave "King of Pop" in the lead, regardless of whether they actually agreed with its placement there on principle. Is that a fair interpretation I'll Bring the Food?UberCryxic 03:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I see the pair of you brought a very large argument to my page. Please don't do that, I want no part of that article until it's worthwhile again.--I'll bring the food (Talk - Contribs - My Watchlist) 18:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Rick-rubin.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Rick-rubin.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:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. 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. IvoShandor 11:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I notified you since you wrote the rationale. Just so you know, as a precaution I added the Image to IfD as a precaution against contesting. IvoShandor 11:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

"as a precaution against contesting" are you implying that contesting your decision is wrong? Rick Rubin is notoriously media shy. What makes you think he'll be photographed for wiki any time soon under the GPL?-88.105.10.42 17:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Mass deletion on Soprano

I see you have deleted over 50 names on the Soprano article. Assuming it's not just a mistake, can you please explain on the Talk page? I am really puzzled. I could understand selective deletions but the whole lot! I don't get it. Best. - Kleinzach 13:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Tantalizing Posey

Just curious as to whether or not you opened a case on him being a suspected sockpuppet, since you tagged him. Seems plausible to me. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 03:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Email

You should set an email address. :) --Gmaxwell 05:11, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Pilates

I see that you once visited and commented on the Pilates article. Would you be so kind as to cast your eye over it again. I am proposing the removal of the disputed tag since it now seems to serve little purpose. I have no vested interest in the arguments, although my wife is a very successful Pilates instructor in Europe. - Thanks- Radiotrib 07:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Mozart_-_Deh_vieni_alla_finestra_(Don_Giovanni)_by_Cesare_Siepi.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:Mozart_-_Deh_vieni_alla_finestra_(Don_Giovanni)_by_Cesare_Siepi.ogg. 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.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

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 fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and 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. ShakespeareFan00 17:47, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Once_Bitten_Twice_Shy_sample_from_Twice_Shy.ogg

I have tagged Image:Once_Bitten_Twice_Shy_sample_from_Twice_Shy.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 21:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Rationale now asserted - Thanks :) ShakespeareFan00 15:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Save_All_Your_Love_sample_from_Once_Bitten.ogg

I have tagged Image:Save_All_Your_Love_sample_from_Once_Bitten.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 14:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:White_Rabbit_vs_Can_You_Feel_It_vs_Material_Girl.ogg

I have tagged Image:White_Rabbit_vs_Can_You_Feel_It_vs_Material_Girl.ogg as {{no rationale}}, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 08:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive

WikiProject Biography Summer 2007 Assessment Drive!

WikiProject Biography is holding a three month long assessment drive!
The goal of this drive is to eliminate the backlog of unassessed articles. The drive is running from June 1, 2007 – September 1, 2007.

Awards to be won range from delicacies such as the WikiCookie to the great Golden Wiki Award.
There are over 110,000 articles to assess so please visit the drive's page and help out!

This drive was conceived of and organized by Psychless with the help of Ozgod. Regards, Psychless ^{Type words!}.

Your message re Cillian Murphy

I did not replace your image on the Cillian Murphy article, nor did I leave you the above message about it, so I'm not sure why you want me to edit your Talk page. Is it against policy for you to delete outdated messages from your own Talk page or something? As for your other comments on Cillian Murphy... I do use Show Preview, and I do not publish mistakes that show that I have not used Show Preview, so I'm not sure why you messaged me about that. Also, my edits fill the history page because I am currently the only major contributor to the article... not sure why that's a problem. After all, now the Murphy article has been significantly augmented and is far better sourced. So I'm left confused by your comments. But if you would like to make your concerns clearer to me, please send me another message. --Melty girl 18:21, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Now I see why you think I had something to do with it. Some Wiki copyright expert came along warning that the photo would be deleted, and that user did delete it. But then I wasn't sure whether policy allowed me to then delete that outdated warning from the Cillian Murphy talk page or not. After all, I didn't want someone else to remove the new photo someone kindly added. So I left a note updating the situation noting that the image had been deleted, so that visitors would know it was no longer an issue. But no, I actually had nothing to do with editing the images on the page. --Melty girl 18:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography Newsletter 5

The Biography WikiProject Newsletter Volume IV, no. 4 - September 2007
Project News The three-month long Summer Assessment Drive, organized by Psychless, was a huge success! It ran from June 1 – September 1, and reduced the backlog of unassessed articles from 113,385 to 56,237. In all, over 100,000 articles were assessed. Over 60 people contributed in some way. A barnstar has been created for exceptional work on Wikipedia biographies and for assisting the project. The Biography Barnstar is listed with the other WikiProject awards and can be awarded easily with a template. See the template page for more details. Member News Congratulations to the editors who worked on the newest featured biographies: Augustus; William Shakespeare; Adriaen van der Donck; Alfred Russel Wallace; Alison Krauss; Anne Frank; Anne of Denmark; Asser; Bart King; Bill O'Reilly; Bobby Robson; Bradley Joseph; CM Punk; Ceawlin of Wessex; Colley Cibber; Cædwalla of Wessex; Dominik Hašek; Elizabeth Needham; Frank Macfarlane Burnet; Georg Cantor; Gregory of Nazianzus; Gunnhild Mother of Kings; Gwen Stefani; Hannah Primrose, Countess of Rosebery; Harriet Arbuthnot; Harry S. Truman; Henry, Bishop of Uppsala; Héctor Lavoe; Ine of Wessex; Ion Heliade Rădulescu; Jack Sheppard; Jackie Chan; Jay Chou; John Martin Scripps; John Mayer; Joseph Francis Shea; Joshua A. Norton; Kate Bush; Kazi Nazrul Islam; Kevin Pietersen; Martin Brodeur; Mary Martha Sherwood; Mary of Teck; Maximus the Confessor; Miranda Otto; Muhammad Ali Jinnah; P. K. van der Byl; Penda of Mercia; Pham Ngoc Thao; Rabindranath Tagore; Ramón Emeterio Betances; Red Barn Murder; Richard Hakluyt; Richard Hawes; Robert Garran; Roman Vishniac; Ronald Niel Stuart; Ronald Reagan; Roy Welensky; Rudolph Cartier; Samuel Adams; Samuel Beckett; Sarah Churchill, Duchess of Marlborough; Sarah Trimmer; Sargon of Akkad; Shen Kuo; Sophie Blanchard; Stereolab; Sydney Newman; Sylvanus Morley; Tim Duncan; Timeline of Mary Wollstonecraft; Uncle Tupelo; Waisale Serevi; Wallis, Duchess of Windsor; Walter Model; William Bruce; William Goebel; Yagan; Zhou Tong; Æthelbald of Mercia; Æthelbald of Mercia New Members Congratulations to our 225 new members	From the Editors The newsletter is back! Many things have gone on during the past few months, but many things have not. While the assessment drive helped revitalize the assessment department of the project, many other departments have received no attention. Most notably: peer review and our "workgroups". A day long IRC meeting has been planned for October 13th, with the major focus being which areas of the project are "dead", what should our goals be as a project, and how to "revive" the dead areas of our project. Contribute to the discussion on the the new channel (see below) We decided to deliver this newsletter to all project members this month but only those with their names down here will get it delivered in the future. This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue. Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned or post news on the next issue's talk page New irc channel Lastly, a new WikiProject Biography channel has been set up on the freenode network: #wikipedia-en-bio Our thanks to Phoenix 15 for setting it up. Contributors to this Issue Psychless (talk · contribs) Phoenix 15 (talk · contribs)
Complete To Do List Write an article Expand an article about: a person an actor an animator an artist a bishop a businessperson a diplomat an educator an engineer a lawyer a military person a musician a photographer a saint a politician a scientist a sportsperson a writer Improve an article by: adding references adding categories Review an article Romano Volta • Suzanne Carrell • Mullá Husayn • John Gilchrist (linguist) • Thomas Brattle • Answer requests for comments Work on the Portal Portal:Biography Assess an article Assessment requests Unassessed articles Assessment Progress Biography articles by quality and importance Quality Importance Core Other ??? Total FA 35 1,633 1,668 FL 204 204 A 1 131 132 GA 41 8,361 8,402 B 97 40,195 40,292 C 33 168,276 168,309 Start 2 760,916 760,918 Stub 1 1,034,465 1 1,034,467 List 8,142 8,142 Category 2 345,293 345,295 Disambig 8,163 8,163 File 31,987 31,987 Project 215 215 Redirect 3 45,745 45,748 Template 20,628 20,628 NA 519 519 Assessed 215 2,474,873 1 2,475,089 Unassessed 24,670 24,670 Total 215 2,499,543 1 2,499,759 WikiWork factors (?) ω = 10,822,401 Ω = 5.37
We couldn't do it without you!

To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 15:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC) .

October 2007 newsletter for WikiProject Abandoned Articles

Welcome

The WikiProject welcomes two new members in the past three months:

• Java7837
• Nearly Human

Progress

The WikiProject is now halfway done, numerically, with the 1000 articles identified in December 2006. The first (oldest) 500 articles have been claimed, reviewed, and (when needed, which was almost all cases) improved. Moreover, given the passage of time, many of articles 501 through 1000 have been worked on by other editors (it's ten months since that list was generated). So reviewing the second half of the 1000 articles should be easier.

A slightly different approach

Section 6 (articles 501 through 600 on the list) has been organized differently than the previous five sections. First, blocks are (roughly) five articles each, rather than 10, making it easier for you to claim and finish a block. Second, perhaps more importantly, each block consists of similar pages; if you're interested in fixing disambiguation pages, there are blocks of those; if you're interested in articles (which is what the project originally started out being), there are blocks of those; and there is one block of lists and one of redirects (mostly redirects to articles). So, fewer surprises this time when you claim a block.

In addition, since the project now has 25 active members (though some are likely inactive), having more blocks will make it easier to spread the editing around.

Inactivating your membership

If you received this newsletter on your user talk page and don't want to receive such postings in the future, please move your name, in the participants section of the WikiProject, to the "Inactive" subsection.

About this newsletter

This newsletter is being delivered by Anibot; it was written by John Broughton. Please post any comments about it to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Abandoned Articles, in a section separate from the newsletter itself.
Delivered by Anibot 00:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Michael Jackson's finances

An article that you have been involved in editing, Michael Jackson's finances, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Jackson's finances. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 10:39, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Falsetto

An article that you have been involved in editing, Falsetto, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Falsetto. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Once Bitten Twice Shy sample from Twice Shy.ogg

Thanks for uploading Image:Once Bitten Twice Shy sample from Twice Shy.ogg. 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) 14:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:White Rabbit vs Can You Feel It vs Material Girl.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:White Rabbit vs Can You Feel It vs Material Girl.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you received this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:40, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

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) 16:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jeff Balding

The article Jeff Balding has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable muspc industry professional.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

I'll. bring the food!! Would love your expertise on a page I'm working on.

I'll bring the food! I'm pretty new to wiki and I've been editing a couple of pages that look pretty close to done. Would you be able to check out one of the pages? I'd love to have someone as experienced as you look it over! Thanks so much Purpleturnip123 (talk) 03:53, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

You have been pruned from a list

Hi I'll bring the food! You're receiving this notification because you were previously listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members, but you haven't made any edits to the English Wikipedia in over 3 months.

Because of your inactivity, you have been removed from the list. If you would like to resubscribe, you can do so at any time by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Members.

Thank you! Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:07, 27 June 2022 (UTC)