User talk:Koavf/Archive021
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Koavf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
 User talk:Koavf archives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Please do not modify other users' comments or formatting.
I prefer if you respond on my talk page; I will probably respond on yours. Please let me know if you want otherwise.
Removing Song categories...
I am not sure I agree with this. The "song" category relates to creation/first release of song, while the single tag doesn't have anything to do with the song as such. Originally it signified release as a 45 (although the meaning has now moved on...), therefore do not have the same meaning, are not synonymous and should exist side by side. This is even more apparent when talking about pre-50s songs, when first recorded performance and "single" are so different. Removing Year song is detrimental to the whole song category. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- By all means keep the conversation here, but I must admit I can't be bothered getting into another discussion where my opinion doesn't prevail, and I think this is one of them! The problem with the argument, well-given by you, is songs like Fever (Madonna song) which is correctly categorised as 1956 songs and 1993 singles so this gets a double entry, but other songs, because of WP protocols doesn't get the song category which denigrates, almost to pointlessness the whole of the songs by year category - we might as well do away with the whole song by year because we are deleting songs from it which rightfully belong there. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Confused I'm lost here; what is the problem? We have (e.g.) Category:Rivers of the United States and the subcategory Category:Rivers of New York. Of course, all rivers in New York are also in the United States and so belong in the parent category, but merging up every river in the United States would be unwieldy and would defeat the purpose of subcategories in the first place. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- You shouldn't be confused, unless you compare with Rivers of the United States which is whole different body of water to songs! The difference being that not all songs are singles but all singles are songs (leaving aside instrumentals and opinions!), A "song" is specifically a song whether available as a performance, on an album, EP, singly, download or any other method of broadcast, whereas a "single" is a song available singly (broad definition, but it suffices for this conversation). Therefore I contend that single does not equal song (and surely we agree that song doesn't equal single?), so there is no duplication of category. The relevant year is not always the same, for instance I have just cat'ed If You Gotta Go, Go Now as Category:1964 songs, Category:1965 singles and Category:1969 singles. There are also (can't think of an example at the moment), album tracks released as singles in a subsequent year. Why should such songs be categorised twice because there are different years, but when the year of release is also the year of release as a single only be cat'ed once. Doesn't make sense to me, the casual reader now has to look a 2 different categories. Hope that makes sense! Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Okay If you feel like this scheme is problematic, the best place to raise your concerns is probably WT:SONGS. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Actually it is already raised at WPSongs, which says,
- "Song articles should be placed into the following categories whenever applicable :-
- a subcategory of Category:Songs by artist ("Category:<Artist name> songs") and
- a subcategory of Category:Songs by year and (my bold)(a subcategory of Category:Singles by year for singles)."
- Which kinda confirms my thoughts on the matter. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Actually it is already raised at WPSongs, which says,
- Okay If you feel like this scheme is problematic, the best place to raise your concerns is probably WT:SONGS. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- You shouldn't be confused, unless you compare with Rivers of the United States which is whole different body of water to songs! The difference being that not all songs are singles but all singles are songs (leaving aside instrumentals and opinions!), A "song" is specifically a song whether available as a performance, on an album, EP, singly, download or any other method of broadcast, whereas a "single" is a song available singly (broad definition, but it suffices for this conversation). Therefore I contend that single does not equal song (and surely we agree that song doesn't equal single?), so there is no duplication of category. The relevant year is not always the same, for instance I have just cat'ed If You Gotta Go, Go Now as Category:1964 songs, Category:1965 singles and Category:1969 singles. There are also (can't think of an example at the moment), album tracks released as singles in a subsequent year. Why should such songs be categorised twice because there are different years, but when the year of release is also the year of release as a single only be cat'ed once. Doesn't make sense to me, the casual reader now has to look a 2 different categories. Hope that makes sense! Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:48, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Confused I'm lost here; what is the problem? We have (e.g.) Category:Rivers of the United States and the subcategory Category:Rivers of New York. Of course, all rivers in New York are also in the United States and so belong in the parent category, but merging up every river in the United States would be unwieldy and would defeat the purpose of subcategories in the first place. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia Campus Ambassador at IU
Hi Justin, thanks for your interest in the Wikipedia Campus Ambassador role. More details about this role can be found at http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Campus_Ambassador. Here is also a little bit more information; in a nutshell:
The Campus Ambassadors are crucial components of the Wikipedia Public Policy Initiative. Volunteers in this position will be in charge of training and supporting the participating professors and students on Wikipedia-related skills, such as how to create new articles, how to add references, how to add images, etc. Campus Ambassadors will also help recruit other people on campus to contribute to Wikipedia articles, for example by setting up Wikipedia-related student groups and by organizing "Welcome to Wikipedia" social events. In general they will become known as Wikipedia experts on the university campus (in your case, on the Indiana University campus). The estimated time commitment for this role is 3 to 5 hours a week, possibly slightly more at the very beginning and very end of the semester.
The Wikimedia Foundation will hold a three-day training for all Campus Ambassadors in August, and will continue to stay in contact with and offer full support for the Campus Ambassadors throughout the academic semester.
Please let me know if this sounds interesting to you, so we can talk about next steps in the application process. I look forward to hearing back from you!
Annie Lin, Campus Team Coordinator
(feel free to email me if you prefer)
Alin (Public Policy) (talk) 17:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Removing Category for Connie Talbot's Holiday Magic
Why remove from 2009 albums? Why not leave it there in addition to the category you added it to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1archie99 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Your edits to categories
Please do not remove existing categories and add in ones that do not exist like you did here. Thanks :)--White Shadows There goes another day 22:50, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Alright then. Thanks for letting me know so I don't have to worry when you keep on popping up on my watchlist and the recent changes!--White Shadows There goes another day 22:58, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Is "redlink record label" a speedy-deletion criteria? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see why. I've removed the speedy tag pending further discussion. Herostratus (talk) 03:46, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Jhanvieh
Hello, if you have some time, take a look at Jhanvieh , I'm not good at pulling afd, thanks. --SPADA 2 ♪♫ (talk) 15:07, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, after viewing your redirect to the page I created, I can't but help to see that you have been editing some Selena related articles, which caught my eyes, because I am proposing a Selena WikiProject Selena WikiProject so I hope you support the project! And also I can't believe you posted your in detailed personal information regarding where you are currently living in and your phone number, that's like wow lolz. AJona1992 (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
- Oh wow, well thanks for letting me know. And I will contact you, if I need any further assistance of non-Selena related articles lolz. AJona1992 (talk) 19:52, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
speedy delete
Tagging the article again for speedy deletion is not useful. You should nominate it for deletion according to WP:AfD.--Ancient Anomaly (talk) 22:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
- Db, etc. First off, I had no idea which article you were talking about on my talk; I'm guessing it's Jhanvieh. I have since tagged it for AfD, but I don't understand why you think that this is superior to {{db-band}}. If you'd like to explain this, please post on my talk. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
- It was tagged for speedy deletion and it was rejected. There is no reason to tag it again, it will be rejected again.--Ancient Anomaly (talk) 00:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Answer
To answer your question about this edit, the de-capitalization the first letter of template names and removal of links and styling from the publisher field were part of the common fixes made by Dab solver when I used it to disambiguate the Uncut link. It appears that the correct format for Template:Cite web is to have the word "cite" in lower case. Don't know why it removed the formatting from the publisher field - maybe because the magazine names belong in the work field, which automatically italicizes the value in that field? You may want to give your feedback directly to User talk:Dispenser/Dab solver. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rush – Profiled!
Hi, I relisted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rush – Profiled! to today's AfD log, a deletion discussion you created. Apparently it wasn't properly listed in the log on the day of its nomination, and the Afd Bot didn't complete the nomination. Please don't forget to list AfDs properly next time! :) Maashatra11 (talk) 18:06, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you marked this as past of WikiProject Albums. Since it's just a redirect to the artist (as the outcome of an earlier PROD) I removed the template as probably in error, but if for some reason you think this redirect belongs in the WikiProject, feel free to revert me. Regards-- Glenfarclas (talk) 03:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Duh, I'm an idiot. Sorry! :) Glenfarclas (talk) 03:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello Justin, take a look at The Yellow Dogs , the only claim in this article is a sountrack of a movie, according to WP:Music no.10 , it should be redirected to the movie page. the band is not notable independently. thanks Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 06:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- thanks man you're right, that Y i share these things with exprienced editors first. Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 06:30, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Category:Innocent Records albums
The redlink problem was fixed for this CFD. You might wanna close it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi Justin. I was wondering if you would like to withdraw the nomination here, so that the discussion could be closed early. If not, you might want to expand upon your reasons for believing the article ought to be deleted. Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 23:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
MFSL/Magical Mystery Tour
Justin, Mobile Fidelity only ever released the 12" version of MMT - there was no EP from them. Radiopathy •talk• 17:47, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
thanks
Hi, thanks for taking care of Pulse of Persia, I put Afd on Barobax with difficulties! , take a look. Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 10:15, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for constantly clearing up the album articles I create. I 'll be more careful in the future :) Gareth E Kegg (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Backstreet Boys article
I don't see why you have moved Backstreet Boys (US) to Backstreet Boys (1996 album) in this edit. It is clear that it was released in 1997 and only the international version was released in 1996. By calling this a 1996 album you're not only confusing it with the international version, you are also providing wrong information regarding the title. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 9:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
- The only problem is that you moved the name to Backstreet Boys (1996 album) instead of moving it to Backstreet Boys (1997 album). While you have fixed it, there's another small mistake that you made: you moved Backstreet Boys (US) to Backstreet Boys (1996 album) a.k.a the international version, so when someone types in Backstreet Boys (US), they get redirected towards the international version. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 1:20, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Project Majestic Mix CDs deletion
Since you seem to be responsible for the deletion of two albums i wanted to do some research on (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Project_Majestic_Mix:_A_Tribute_to_Nobuo_Uematsu and http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Project_Majestic_Mix:_SQUAREDANCE_-_Limited_Edition) can you please tell me how to view the history of those pages from before the deletion?
Also, is there any process for offering counter-arguments against the deletion of a particular page after the fact? All the fun stuff slowly seems to be going away from wikipedia =/
Thanks!
Daetrin (talk) 01:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks man!
Thanks for the updates to the Chili Pepper's Greatest Hits article. I've been (slowly) trying to clean it up, but you just did a fair amount of the work for me. It's people like you, digging through (seemingly) random articles, purging them of the crap they accumulate over months and years of edits, that keep this place (relatively) sane. Keep up the good work. DKqwerty (talk) 22:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Proper nouns
Perhaps you weren't aware that the MoS now gives specific guidance on the question of such names in runnning prose, adopting the style more widely used by HQ sources and styleguides generally. This has been the case for some months now—see the relevant guideline. PL290 (talk) 06:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, per Wikipedia:Article_titles#Article_title_format, the parts of a proper name that are capitalized in running text are capitalized in article titles. PL290 (talk) 07:31, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Justin, don't worry about this if you haven't already taken care of it. This particular album title is a bit tricky: it's spelt with all lower-case letters on the front and back covers and a capitalised 'T' in "The" on the spine, and The Beatles's official site shows all caps. It's not a simple MoS issue. Radiopathy •talk• 16:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- True That's a good point; I encountered a similar issue trying to move Guns N' Roses, but it remained at that name because the "N'" is always capitalized in other sources. Ugh. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Justin, don't worry about this if you haven't already taken care of it. This particular album title is a bit tricky: it's spelt with all lower-case letters on the front and back covers and a capitalised 'T' in "The" on the spine, and The Beatles's official site shows all caps. It's not a simple MoS issue. Radiopathy •talk• 16:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I noticed you brought forward this afd and the result was redirect to Neutral Milk Hotel. This is actually a notable release. Even if it were considered a demo recording, it was distributed (self-released) among the artists of the elephant 6 collective. This can be noted on page 9 of Kim Cooper's In The Aeroplane Over The Sea (33 1/3), 2005. The threshold for notability with regard to albums is explained by WP:NALBUMS, "Unreleased material (including demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only recordings) is in general not notable; however, it may be notable if it has significant independent coverage in reliable sources." I feel that for this particular case, this coverage exists. I hope you don't object to a DRV. riffic (talk) 14:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Go ahead I certainly do not object to a DRV for this article. I would recommend make a userfied version of the article, with your sources before trying to recreate it in the main namespace. I'm entirely in favor of any article that is properly sourced, even if it's about unreleased demos. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- thanks! I'll work on a userfied version first, I need to find something more substantial than the cooper reference first. riffic (talk) 00:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Categories
Should we be creating a category [Category:Max Sharam albums] when there is only the one album that she has released? It seems to be a bit of an overkill. Dan arndt (talk) 01:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough - will make sure that any new album articles I create have an artist CAT. Dan arndt (talk) 02:00, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Hannah Montana Forever (soundtrack)
Why did you create Talk:Hannah Montana Forever (soundtrack)? There is no article there. 117Avenue (talk) 23:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- That's what I figured, but I thought I should let you know anyways. 117Avenue (talk) 00:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Your recent MFD nominations
I question your nominations of Book:The World's Greatest Tag Team, Book:The Legacy, and Book:MNM for deletion. Were you aware that the current policy/practice (topics do not get promoted without them) for Featured and Good topics is for a book to accompany the topic, just as these are? By looking at the topic itself (Wikipedia:Featured topics/MNM) you can see there is a link to the book built-in to the topic's box. I therefore respectfully request that you withdraw these nominations forthwith and before nominating other books see if they are linked to a topic or not. -MBK004 05:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Oops!! Thanks for catching that. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 08:50, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Book cleanup
Please don't remove things such as :[[Pretty Fly (For a White Guy)|Pretty Fly (For a White Guy)]] in books. This piping lets WildBot knows that the parenthesis are intentional. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for giving them sort keys however. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello, someone merged Heavy metal music in Iran to Iranian Rock article it was a bad move cause th Heavy Metal article is not good, unsourced, unencyclopedic so I seprated the articles again, so we can put afd on it but it’s the 2nd nomination, would you plz take a look, you should know that I'm going to write a goo article about the subject. Spada II ♪♫ (talk) 06:02, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The New Page Patroller's Barnstar | |
| For great work in new page patrolling. I saw you all over today's patrol log. AirplaneProRadioChecklist 01:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC) |
WikiProject Songs for Compositions by Arcangelo Corelli
Are you sure that your addition of {{Songs}} (a REDIRECT to {{WikiProject Songs}}) to the talk page of the Category:Compositions by Arcangelo Corelli is appropriate? I suggest you revert your edit. If you respond, please do so here, not on my talk page. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- Copied from User talk:Michael Bednarek:I'm lost What is the problem with adding {{song}} to Category talk:Compositions by Arcangelo Corelli; is there a different WikiProject that would oversee this article? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:36, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- The members of that category are not songs. An appropriate project is probably {{WikiProject Classical music}}.
- This same point applies to a large number of categories of classical music (compositions, symphonies, concerts) to which you added that banner. I don't think it matters much because almost no reader of Wikipedia articles will ever come into contact with banners on category talk pages, but I still maintain that these are not songs. If you respond, please do so here, not on my talk page. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah First off, please accept my apologies for completely ignoring your request to post to this talk (I looked at it and I thought I read it...), furthermore, I will add the appropriate tag. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Justin, I see you're trying to fix this. Actually there is also WP:WPO which should own the opera categories instead of the classical music project. Sorry that things aren't as simple as they might be and thanks for the effort.--Peter cohen (talk) 16:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
George Orwell bibliography
You recently nominated George Orwell bibliography at WP:GAN. However, it appears to be more of a list than an article. According to Wikipedia:Good article criteria#What is not a good article? lists cannot be given GA status: "Lists, portals, sounds, and images: these items should be nominated for featured list, featured portal, featured sounds, and featured picture status respectively." Therefore, you may do better at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates. --maclean (talk) 01:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Request
Hi Koav, could you pick up this request (since HJ Mitchell is away) by any chance? --Lil-unique1 (talk) 01:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Re: Tag removal
Because there were no prior discussions on the talk pages and most of the "articles" were created as redirects to begin with. WP:ANIME doesn't keep its banner on the talk pages of every redirect. Only on those that were previously articles and have a prior discussion about the article. —Farix (t | c) 16:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Dmy/Mdy
[1] Shouldn't it be {{Mdy}}? Feel free to respond here. Jujutacular talk 20:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes You are correct. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Look for GA assessment
I see that Fences and Windows has met the good article criteria, but I don't know where to find the discussion. Can you help? (feel free to respond here).--SPhilbrickT 15:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- GA By checking "What links here" I found Talk:Fences and Windows/GA1. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:50, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
- D'oh, I should have thought of that. I saw that some other GA reviews were linked into the talk page, so assumed that was the standard practice, but no excuse for not checking what links there. Thanks.--SPhilbrickT 16:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Edits to November 18
Hi Koavf. I'm curious as to what happened here. Were you trying to change all the ndashes? Cheers. (feel free to respond here) Winston365 (talk) 03:22, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes At the risk of sounding like a wiseacre, I'm confused by your subsequent edit to revert me... All of the
–es were replaced with the actual character for an ndash: – (and furthermore, a non-breaking space was placed before them per WP:DASH.) I guess it was confusing, but I think it's entirely appropriate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)- Ok, makes sense. The days of the year articles are all based on a template (not the other kind of template) Wikipedia:WikiProject Days of the year/Template to keep them consistent. To get rid of the ndashes it should probably have consensus to do so, I think in this case the template takes precedent over WP:DASH. You could bring it up on the project page, but I think the ndashes are a good thing in this instance. New users frequently edit these pages, and they may have some difficulty trying to figure out how to type a literal ndash, which would probably have to copy-pasted from a neighboring entry. Winston365 (talk) 03:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sure I'm formatting them all now. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- So I take it you don't want to wait for consensus. Is there really such a rush to have them all fixed at once? I apologize if I caused any offence, none was intended. Winston365 (talk) 03:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry I do not take offense (offence), nor do I intend any either. I (mis)read your statement above as being basically, "Well, you're probably in the right, as WP:DASH will take precedence, but it's nice to talk about it with others." If you really think I should stop, I can... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:01, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- No prob, but if you could stop it would be appreciated. If nothing else, these articles are patrolled by several people that watch all of them, and mass edits to all of them can make the watchlist rather difficult to deal with. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Winston365 (talk) 04:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sure No worries at all; thanks for your feedback. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- I'm still having issues with how to show "& ndash ;" (without the spaces) literally, which is part of why I was a bit unclear. nowiki tags don't seem to help. Winston365 (talk) 04:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC) –
- Sure No worries at all; thanks for your feedback. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- No prob, but if you could stop it would be appreciated. If nothing else, these articles are patrolled by several people that watch all of them, and mass edits to all of them can make the watchlist rather difficult to deal with. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Winston365 (talk) 04:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry I do not take offense (offence), nor do I intend any either. I (mis)read your statement above as being basically, "Well, you're probably in the right, as WP:DASH will take precedence, but it's nice to talk about it with others." If you really think I should stop, I can... —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:01, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- So I take it you don't want to wait for consensus. Is there really such a rush to have them all fixed at once? I apologize if I caused any offence, none was intended. Winston365 (talk) 03:58, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Sure I'm formatting them all now. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ok, makes sense. The days of the year articles are all based on a template (not the other kind of template) Wikipedia:WikiProject Days of the year/Template to keep them consistent. To get rid of the ndashes it should probably have consensus to do so, I think in this case the template takes precedent over WP:DASH. You could bring it up on the project page, but I think the ndashes are a good thing in this instance. New users frequently edit these pages, and they may have some difficulty trying to figure out how to type a literal ndash, which would probably have to copy-pasted from a neighboring entry. Winston365 (talk) 03:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Ndash To show any HTML element like that, rather than writing an ampersand at the beginning (&), write the HTML element for an ampersand: &. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:36, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
- – It works, should have thought of that, thanks! Winston365 (talk) 04:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Let's centralize this discussion here. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 12:36, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Bibliography of Author X ==> Author X Bibliography
Hey there I see where you moved the page of Bibliography of Ursula K. LeGuin to the Ursula K. Leguin Bibliography. If this is indeed the proper naming convention for wikipedia pages, will you move Bibliography of Robert Holdstock too? I am not sure how to move pages. Thanks Npd2983 (talk) 22:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Mahalo from Elvis
With respect, I have made changes to your edits on the article Mahalo from Elvis. This was a compilation album, not a live album. The five tracks were recorded without an audience present (this information is discussed with source in the article on the TV special Aloha from Hawaii), therefore they don't count as live recordings. Also, as the second side of the album consisted of previously issued recordings, this is more correctly a compilation album. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:DASH
In regards to your move of Enriquillo-Plantain Garden fault zone to Enriquillo – Plantain Garden fault zone, WP:DASH specifies no spaces around the dash. Abductive (reasoning) 07:36, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- All reliable sources call it the Enriquillo-Plantain Garden fault zone. You need to ease up on your imposition of an internal WP:MOS guideline on real names of things. It's one thing to go around changing United Kingdom-United States relations to United Kingdom – United States relations since that title is a Wikipedia invention. In this particular case, one of the two terms on either side of the dash is made of two words, but the other is not. Therefore Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault zone is more appropriate, and better still is going back to using the hyphen. Abductive (reasoning) 07:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Then it is WP:DASH that is wrong. Also, you conveniently ignore my point that the name of the thing is given in primary and secondary sources without the spaces. Ralph Waldo Emerson had something to say on this matter. Abductive (reasoning) 08:19, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, it is you that is wrong. "An en dash is not used for a hyphenated name (Lennard-Jones potential, named after John Lennard-Jones) or an element that lacks lexical independence (the prefix Sino- in Sino-Japanese trade)." Accordingly, I will revert you. Abductive (reasoning) 17:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- You really don't understand that Wikipedia follows the sources and operates on consensus. Abductive (reasoning) 18:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- WP:DASH is the result of not enough debate. One can see people constantly getting annoyed as other people go through and make these utterly pointless changes. Nobody cares about dashes, which is both the edits are pointless and why a tiny handful of editors have succeeded in making the changes. But article titles are different than page ranges in refs. Abductive (reasoning) 18:20, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- You really don't understand that Wikipedia follows the sources and operates on consensus. Abductive (reasoning) 18:00, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, it is you that is wrong. "An en dash is not used for a hyphenated name (Lennard-Jones potential, named after John Lennard-Jones) or an element that lacks lexical independence (the prefix Sino- in Sino-Japanese trade)." Accordingly, I will revert you. Abductive (reasoning) 17:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
- Then it is WP:DASH that is wrong. Also, you conveniently ignore my point that the name of the thing is given in primary and secondary sources without the spaces. Ralph Waldo Emerson had something to say on this matter. Abductive (reasoning) 08:19, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
The She
"The She" by the Breeders was not released as a single but as a B-side to their single, "Off You". If you still want to consider that a single release for "The She", that's fine. The She (the title), however, may be more notable as a title of a novel by Carol Plum-Ucci, so, at best, it is an ambiguous redirect.
All that being said, it may be wise to create a redirect for every non-notable song recorded by the Breeders, so every one of their songs is appropriately categorized under Category:The Breeders songs, since this is an accepted way of categorizing redirects. I'll try to get on that when I get a chance, and then for other artists as well. Thanks for the clarification. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 17:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Confusing edit...
If you mean "Songs written by Black Francis" it was because it was listed alphabetically under "S" for songs, rather than the correct "B" for Black. That's why I added the defsort. Cheers. Richhoncho (talk) 01:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Incorrect "fix" of non-ironic non-error
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Big Star
Noticed you tagged Big Star for bare urls a couple of times; well spotted. I think I've now fixed all those that got added (missed one the first time). If you spot more, could you identify which please, to save the hunt. (Do you have something that finds them?) PL290 (talk) 13:23, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks—that clarifies. There were a few Wikipedia:Bare URLs that got added recently, following the death of first Chilton and then Hummel, but I believe I've now found all those. Regarding "any instance of
<ref>httpor<ref>[http. At least, that will spot articles with that type of bare URL formatting", my own preference too is normally to avoid that format by using citation templates; however, in this case, the reviewers I collaborated with when building up this article were not keen on templates, so the templates were removed before many refs were added. Therefore, the refs do indeed exhibit the markup pattern you describe. But they are not Wikipedia:Bare URLs, because other citation details follow the url. You may wish to ignore such instances if they come up again. PL290 (talk) 07:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Gang Starr albums
Category:Hip hop albums by American artists is a parent category for Category:East Coast hip hop albums. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 07:28, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Star trek fixes
FYI [2]. Rich Farmbrough, 21:23, 19 August 2010 (UTC).
- Just for your information - that the change had converted "date" parameters in clean-up templates to "Airdate". I think they are all fixed now, if not I will probably pick them up anyway. Rich Farmbrough, 14:29, 20 August 2010 (UTC).
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Humane societies
Category:Humane societies, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. jnestorius(talk) 12:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Template:De icon
Hi, you changed the Template:De icon. This added an additional line break (see here for example). Whether it is deleted or not, could you please repair this for the moment? --Jaellee (talk) 21:43, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. At least I have learned that I should use {{Language icon|de}} instead. --Jaellee (talk) 21:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Reply per your request
Category:Pages using deprecated templates is added by Template:Tdeprecated, which is used to designate deprecated templates. It should not be added manually, nor is there any need to do so. Debresser (talk) 20:33, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Your deletion of deprecated stack template
Hi there. I just want to let you know that in some cases your are involuntarily leaving red links instead of the existing pics, I believe, due to the fact that the new template does not treat ".jpp" as ".JPG", see the fix I had to do here.-Mariordo (talk) 23:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Error during template replacement on Global warming
Hi! I just noticed this edit [3] on Global warming. Unfortunately, for the last double-image-stack-template-replacement thingy (in Views on Global Warming), you hid both captions and the second image. I'm not sure how to fix it, being unfamiliar with both templates and having stared at it a bit. No need to reply: fixing it will make me happy! - Enuja (talk) 05:05, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment on your clean on Anime/Manga article
First thank for the clean up.
Second don't do it too fast. I received an Orphaned FUR Image Notice because this edit broke the second image link.
Cordially
--KrebMarkt (talk) 07:16, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, just to let you know, your edit
broke the page fairly dramatically. Not having the expertise to fix it, I have just reverted. I mention it firstly in case you want to fix it yourself, and secondly in case there is some systematic problem with the way you are trying to convert the deprecated template. Cheers, 86.174.162.75 (talk) 13:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC).
Edit warring at Bumblebee (other incarnations)
Might I suggest that possible moves of this article are discussed at the article talk page first. Otherwise it is possible that editors get blocked. There is a thread at WP:EAR#Help with Bumblebee (other incarnations) about this. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Please stop
You are posting numerous edits to the Infobox templates. Each one of these masks the medal table, damaging the look of each of these articles. For the athletes you are hiding these medal tables, these are their primary claims to fame. Yes I understand the table can be opened by the user, but that requires unnecessary knowledge and involvement on the part of that user. We are providing information here. Your edits are hiding it. Please stop now. Go back and fix the damage you have already caused. Trackinfo (talk) 22:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Archive size
WP:TOOLONG is about article size, not talk pages. Even if applied to talk pages, the guideline limits pages prose, not total page size. The limit in TOOLONG is for reader convenience, which is inapplicable to talk page archives. Mass unilateral changes to archive settings is not the way to do things. Rami R 16:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I fully agree with Rami R. There is currently an ongoing discussion what is the preferred size for archives. Participate in that discussion with your reasoning. --Kslotte (talk) 16:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- @Koavf, even the technical section doesn't really apply to talk pages, as it assumes a specific correlation between "wikisize" and actual size. Example: Israel is 180KiB of wikitext, with a document size of 651KiB (and that's not including 1.3MiB of addition images, scripts, css and such). Talk:Israel/Archive 33 is 254KiB of wikitext, but with a document size of only 357 KiB (plus 815KiB). Rami R 17:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Em and En
Just FYI, WP:EMDASH indicates that spaced en dashes (which I had used when reconstructing the article – and which I believe were the standard on that article) are allowed as an alternative to em dashes. Not a big deal, obviously, and thanks for your attention to detail. But it's a tomato/tomato type of thing. 8) Scartol • Tok 23:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks I seem to recall the mdash/spaced endash divide, but I guess I always default to mdashes—it just seems safer as there is no complication with non-breaking spaces. It looks like this is not a WP:RETAIN issue, so I guess editors could go back and forth on the matter, but it seems like (thankfully) neither of us wants to do something so childish. For what it's worth, had the article been written with non-breaking spaces and endashes, I would never have noticed, because I use a script that detects endashes without non-breaking spaces. Anyway, thanks again. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- You know what's crazy? I'm pretty sure I used the {{–}} template when I wrote it, and then someone came along and switched 'em. (I know someone did, for one of the FAs I wrote..) Anyway, cheers.. Scartol • Tok 01:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the offer!
Sure I'd love your help. You can guess that other than spending 50% of my wiki-time negotiating to upload photos, I generally edit about 12 articles at a time, since my boredom threshold is so low (I have ADD). Take your pick. probably the articles needing help really bad are The Derek Trucks Band (what a mess!)-- though I just began the article for Mike Mattison, the lead vocalist for that band, and also Derek Trucks, and The Allman Brothers Band. The other articles are certainly Rory Gallagher, whose brother finally updated his website with a million sources to use, and last but not least, Jaco Pastorius, who has a bunch of sources all in the External links section. [SIGH]. I guess the article on The Derek Trucks Band (and all related to it) are highest on the list aince they're all alive, but I'd also love to see Rory get his due, too! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 07:26, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Very big thanks that you looked at the articles and started to make a change! For some insane reason, I can't find a birthdate for Mike Mattison. On my userpage, there's a section at the bottom with a few possicle references for any Derek Trucks (or Trucks' band-related) articles, and I kept a stash of them on the talk page for Derek Trucks. Bless you! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 13:03, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Kijik, Alaska
Curious, why is this in the scope of the Greenland wikiproject? Nyttend (talk) 22:39, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, okay; you did it because it was in Category:Inuit history and because that was a subcategory of Category:History of Greenland? Thanks for the note and for the retagging. Nyttend (talk) 00:37, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Project Greenland
I can understand tagging things like Inuit women and Inuit snow goggles but how do others like Inuksuk Point, Joamie Ilinniarvik School and Iqaluit Municipal Council, all of which are exclusive to Canada, fall under the project? Cheers. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 22:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 00:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Sky Sailing Single
Oh, it must just be that I'm in New Zealand and it's not in our iTunes Store (yet, hopefully). I look forward to it coming out, though. I like it. Thanks for the input, anyway. :) Nickneo111 (talk) 08:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
What to do? I don't know who to address about this. Ron Holloway discovered a stub about him here when I was a new cocky editor, and when I noticed this, I was a fool and agreed to "adopt" him without enough experience. I knew him as an underage kid, sneaking into venues with older friends and saw him play with Root Boy Slim and later with Gil Scott-Heron's band, although I don't have proof he was a member. Problem #1: he then claims to being a "member" of a Dizzy Gillespie's "final quintet" for 5 yrs. until his death and now he is with Susan Tedeschi. It appears he either "sat in" with Dizzy or at most was hired as a touring sideman; again, nothing more from Gillespie, & no credits on albums- which is also true with Tedeschi. In his editing, he places himself on her level, speaking in the first person: "Ron and Susan remembered that another band were playing..)" The problem with his biography is two-fold: He resisted really learning to find reliable references and inline references. You can see in his article halfway down where I just threw my hands in the air and walked away. Problem #2 was that he did not obtain what I'd assume to be a mountain of local newspaper clippings from The Washington Post and the like. There are a few, but to my horror, (maybe because he IS absent from playing on any of the albums that compared to 2 years ago, it appears he created two full pages of Google links to sites like Answers.com and Music Encyclopedias that anyone can add to! He also seems to think that a link to You Tube videos playing live with Tedeschi for example, will serve as a reference. He has discontinued responding to my emails. I'd like to suggest a re-write of the article. He IS notable, but it is hard to determne if hia last musical affiliations are not just jobs as sideman or session musician, rather than a band member.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 00:48, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've told Ron a ton of times that this isn't an armchair chat, and ALL the rules. He only listens to what he wants to hear!!! I've waited perhaps 9 months since his last promise to put in references and those two pages of "results" from Google are all him! When I confronted him with it, his response was some crap about how musicians need the publicity!! I mean it. Then I lean on him, he promises to get together with me to fix it, and then that never happens. Never. He had a gig with Susan Tedeschi a year ago locally, but copped out of picking me up to go to the concert (since he was to give me the clippings on the way there.) It's Ron Holloway himself making all these unsourced claims-- stretching the truth further than it could ever go. I initially saw no reason to question, thinking that any proud, doting parent would perhaps hold tons of clippings of his musical career- and because I'd SEEN him play with several very notable bands. I just chalked it off to him being too busy touring to come up with the references which I'd agreed to insert- and show him how to do inline references. That problem there should have set off a red flag since he actually placed the entire jazz banner and then any possible Category in the external links, and other stuff. If he can be observant enough to learn all this other stuff without ever having volunteered and worked on ANY other article (which I think should be mandatory before writing your first articl), then he could obviously have retrieved really serious references and inserted them properly. It was only this week, working on minor Susan Tedeschi items that I noticed he isn't listed recording with her. Than I saw the same for all the others. No wonder he sat on the phone for an hour from FRANCE (truly!) to complain because someone dropped his article ranking from B level to C level once I quit helping him-- which was only because he wouldn't ever respond to my questions. So, now I see him as a sideman. Here's what I wrote at first to User:Wasted Time R and his answers: [4]
That phone call from France was about a month after the big Beacon Theatre run with The Allman Brothers Band concert. I recall it since he was telling me about meeting Levon Helm and James Jamerson. How do we request a re-write with the article? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 23:53, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Reasoning
In an answer to your paste in http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Genezistan&diff=cur, may i point out that the content of that patch is not relevant to my problem. I miss the defintion of cognitive process, not the lexical details of anybody's associations geenrated by some single words. Am I clear, or you need an example?
Genezistan (talk) 07:41, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Forget it Genezistan (talk) 07:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Question about categories
For the second time this week, I've added a Category (In this case it's Susan Tedeschi and Category:Rounder Records artists) but when I see the page for the Category, it's alphabetized and since there is no "T", she won't show up in the categoty. How to deal with that? --Leahtwosaints (talk) 00:03, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, so the software does it automatically, once you add to the bottom of the external links. Learn something new every day. Speaking of which, on the Ron Holloway issue, I'm adjusting other connected articles, like Susan Tedeschi, Derek Trucks, The Derek Trucks Band, Gil Scott-Heron, etc. to reflect that he has played with them, but I'm not calling him a "band member" or "former member of Dizzy Gillespie's last quintet (which is another thing he claims but there's no evidence there was a "final quintet" at all) -- not unless I see a really solid reference actually calling him a band member. I think that's fair enough. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 00:37, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Charlie Tagawa
What happened to the article????? Please tell me that I can at least retrieve a copy of all of that effort. Scalhotrod (talk) 04:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, please forgive the newbie panic moment, I did not realize at first that you had posted about the Music project on the Talk page. Scalhotrod (talk) 04:41, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
{{recent death}}
Hi Koavf. Please note that the {{recent death}} template, which you added to Robert S. Ingersoll, is only intended to be used for heavily-edited articles. Regards, Bongomatic 05:09, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Huh Who knew? I seemed to recall it being standard for a two-week period after a person died, but I guess I'm ignorant. Thanks for the tip. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- No problem, just thought you'd want to know why I removed it. After thinking about it, I tend to agree that the template is unnecessarily sensationalist unless it's really needed to warn editors about potential conflicts or situations where the information is likely to change fundamentally (not just get more detailed over time). Bongomatic 05:15, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Wrong wikiproject
Nice work tagging motorcycle related articles, however I notice that you are using the wrong project in come cases. For motorcycle sport related articles you would be better tagging them for Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorcycle racing with {{motorcycle racing}}. --Biker Biker (talk) 06:37, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
The Simpsons templates
Did you ever pause to think that maybe there's a reason why the 100+ Simpsons-related templates and categories were not part of WP:DOH? We, as a project, had previously decided that we would only include mainspace articles in the project. Could you please remove them? Here is the category with all of them. Thanks, Scorpion0422 23:19, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- Because the project focuses on mainspace content. What is the point in tagging an article like {{Infobox Simpsons season 1 episode list header}}? -- Scorpion0422 00:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I already pointed out the problem. Our project focuses on mainspace content, and most of those templates are minor and of no value to the project. They also skew the statistics seen in the statistics table. We had previously decided not to include them. I had hoped you would remove them, but if you're too lazy, then I'll do it myself. -- Scorpion0422 00:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but I consider tagging a bunch of articles with templates for wikiprojects you aren't part of, just so you can up your edit count, to be uncivil as well. -- Scorpion0422 02:59, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I already pointed out the problem. Our project focuses on mainspace content, and most of those templates are minor and of no value to the project. They also skew the statistics seen in the statistics table. We had previously decided not to include them. I had hoped you would remove them, but if you're too lazy, then I'll do it myself. -- Scorpion0422 00:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
You stole my idea!
I was just about to add categories of the other Pearl Jam members to complement Category:Songs written by Eddie Vedder cat, and noticed you'd beaten me to it! By a matter of days! Great work on all the alt-music articles too. Lugnuts (talk) 08:22, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
OK Computer guy!
Would you help clean up after me this time? Maybe it's because I'm not feeling well- going to Hospital tomorrow AM if my right leg does not go from it's current beet-red colour, shocking pain, temp. (you don't need details.. anyway I entered Nils Lofgren to the following list: [5] I know, he was born in Chicago, but grew up from infancy right up the road. He was honored with his own "day" in Maryland for composing the theme song to the (formerly known) Washington Bullets, and a few other jingles. I just don't have the ability to focus on it, and it doesn't look right. The three entries that need fixing with references there are Nils Lofgren, Adam Duritz, and Ron Holloway (jeez the guy can find an obscure page like that and put his photo there, but can't figure out what a Reliable reference is and especially, inline references). --Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Template:AR report
I closed this one as no consensus, but I feel as though you may have a stronger argument for deletion, but that the !voters didn't fully understand what is going on. If you check the talk page, it states in the usage that the template is substituted. If this is indeed the case, there is zero reason to keep it as the old revisions wouldn't depend on it at all. Perhaps one could make a database query request to see if it was ever transcluded, or do some informal investigation of a few old revisions. If this is indeed the case, I would fully support bringing this back to TFD or to DRV, and making it clear that it was never transcluded, which would nullify the arguments against deletion. Thanks, and I wish I would have noticed this earlier. I am going to amend my closing statement to make it clear that I support renomination once some investigation is performed. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 15:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- In this case, wouldn't it need to be kept for attribution purposes? The substituted remnants reference it in a hidden comment. –xenotalk 15:48, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think that is necessary given the content. It's a very simple table of links. It would be different if it were prose, or something more substantive (in my opinion). However, one could always move it to a subpage of Wikipedia:Abuse response if one wanted to keep it around for historical reference. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- What particular benefit would be had by deleting it? –xenotalk 16:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- When I type "template:AR" in the search box (or perform a prefix search), I get a list of all templates that start with AR. Deleting this would be one fewer result, and hence, make it easier to find other templates which start with the same name. However, forget that for now. Tell me how this isn't redundant to {{AR links}}? It appears to be almost identical. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- AR links is transcluded in, and generates the "sidebox" of AR report. –xenotalk 16:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, sorry about that. I posted before checking more closely. I would say that would make the GDFL argument even weaker for AR report. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:35, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- AR links is transcluded in, and generates the "sidebox" of AR report. –xenotalk 16:33, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- When I type "template:AR" in the search box (or perform a prefix search), I get a list of all templates that start with AR. Deleting this would be one fewer result, and hence, make it easier to find other templates which start with the same name. However, forget that for now. Tell me how this isn't redundant to {{AR links}}? It appears to be almost identical. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- What particular benefit would be had by deleting it? –xenotalk 16:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think that is necessary given the content. It's a very simple table of links. It would be different if it were prose, or something more substantive (in my opinion). However, one could always move it to a subpage of Wikipedia:Abuse response if one wanted to keep it around for historical reference. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:16, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Deletion What is gained in deletion is one less template for searching, hosting on Wikipedia's servers, etc. There is no point in keeping a template that is providing no benefit and is deprecated from use. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:31, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- The search/prefixsearch thing doesn't really strike me as a compelling reason to delete. As far as 'hosting', deletion doesn't save any space whatsoever (takes up more, actually). –xenotalk 12:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- That would appear to be the main difference of opinion. On one hand, you believe there is no compelling reason to delete, and on the other hand, I believe there is no compelling reason not to delete. Sorry if I am not correctly characterizing your opinion. If this is the case, I believe we are at an impasse. I personally see this particular case as falling under CSD#T3. But that is, obviously, my opinion and is share by some but is not shared by everyone (as can be seen by watching to discussion at WP:TFD). Thank you for your feedback, and I hope Justin doesn't mind all this being hashed out on his page. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 20:47, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Digital filters
I reverted your change to SVG images, since those images are incorrect in including an erroneous a0 multiplier. If you want to change to SVG, you'll need to fix them, or find correct images. Dicklyon (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Invitation to join WikiProject Deserts
|
Black Crowes' "Tribute to a Work in Progress..."
Yeah. I thought I might add a less obtrusive hyphen while I was adding an ellipsis. That en-dash sure looks like an em-dash when it's blown up to title size. Must be a font thing. I can live with it. Cheers, Wikkitywack (talk) 08:40, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
August 2010
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at We Sing. We Dance. We Steal Things.. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. —ΣПDiПG-STΛЯT (talk) 03:32, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- Then will you tell me why you his third studio album should actually be a compilation. What were they previously released on to make it be called that? And if you are referring to the EPs released before the album, that doesn't count because, as stated on the pages, they are live versions of the songs, not studio versions. —ΣПDiПG-STΛЯT (talk) 03:38, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
- I did not make a slanderous allegation. I simply put a message on your talk page noting that I saw you changed it to a compilation album on several different occasions, after it was changed back to being a studio album. I'm sorry if I may have no handled it exactly right, I am still very new at this whole thing, so I'm getting used to it. —ΣПDiПG-STΛЯT (talk) 03:43, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
| This is an archive of past discussions with User:Koavf. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |