User talk:Chubbles/Archive 1

Hello =]

Hey there, I just wanted to say thanks for helping in saving To Write Love on Her Arms' article from being deleted here on Wikipedia. I need your help please! My non-profit organization article lowercase people is going to be deleted sooner or later for some reason. If you could rescue it please do so, it's my first article haha. Lp is another another non-profit organization like TWLOHA but deals with art, words, music and social justice. Well thanks for your time, adios.

Edit: THANK YOU!!!

Podunk (band)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Regarding the page Podunk (band), I'm not sure it is notable enough for an article according to Wikipedia's music notability criteria. Can you comment on the notability of this band? — GT 09:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Podunk have been involved in the music scene in and around Austin, Texas, which I believe fulfills the criterion of being involved in a major recognized scene. Also, I heard their song "Wings" (off of the Throwin' Bones album) in rotation on a major eastern Pennsylvania rock station, WZZO, in the late 1990s, although I am unable to say to what extent they received recognition in other parts of the country on radio. They have opened for Tesla and possibly also King's X, though I do not have a reliable source for the latter (which is why I did not include it in the article).Chubbles1212 18:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)Chubbles1212[reply]


Welcome!

Hello, Chubbles, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Mak (talk) 04:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Another hello

...Hello from me as well; I just noticed your excellent articles on music sources of the 12th-14th centuries (Montpellier, Chantilly -- they've been on my to-do list for at least a couple years). Welcome to Wikipedia, from another early music editor. It's a lot of fun here. Antandrus (talk) 04:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did notice those articles, thank you for them! Mak (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Ballade

Unfortunately, no, they have to be changed one at a time. Some users have written bots to deal with this kind of issue. Thanks for the ballade (music) article; we've needed it for a while. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 06:13, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I think "musical form" is fine. Antandrus (talk) 06:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Printers

Nice! (e.g. Petrucci and Attaingnant). The early music-printers have been needing some attention on Wikipedia for a while. Pierre Phalèse needs an article if you're feeling ambitious! Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 22:43, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medieval music

I saw that too -- but because I'm at work I only had a minute to investigate. It was a revert to some version about six to nine months ago (maybe you can find which one?) it's a really, really strange thing to do, especially for a "newbie" who seemingly hasn't visited the article before. I'm going to revert back and put a note on the talk page. Antandrus (talk) 23:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: HBF

I checked out the HBF article and I think you've got it covered; I didn't see any dropped information. Looks good... AuburnPilotTalk 18:54, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PROD

Just so you know, in the future, you don't need permission to contest a PROD. If you disagree with the article's deletion, just remove the tag. If the other editor persists, they have to go to WP:AFD - at that point, you can't remove the tag. Take a read through both WP:PROD and WP:AFD for more info. Let me know if you have any questions. —Wknight94 (talk) 00:42, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your message

...and now you know why I created my own spelling award. Thanks you for pointing that out to me, I apreciate it very much. Incidentally, allow me to present you with:

The TomStar81 Spelling Award
Be it known to all members of Wikipedia that Chubbles has corrected my god-awful spelling on the page User:TomStar81/Spelling, and in doing so has made an important and very significant contribution to the Wikipedia community, thereby earning this TomStar81 Spelling Award and my deepest thanks. Keep up the good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 05:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Codex articles

I just wanted to say thanks for starting articles on medieval manuscripts like the Bamberg and Montpellier codices! They had been on my to-do list but I hadn't gotten around to them yet. Good work! - Rainwarrior 17:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SockPuppett? Come on!

Hi Chubbles! First of all, thanks for your cool comments on the Die Mannequin articles for deletion page. This guy brianyoumans is completely nuts! Second, I must tell you that the unsigned message left by TomasArgon as nothing to do with me. I don't know the person and I AM NOT this person. This is NOT a case of sockpuppetry at all even if this person used the term "Strong Keep", as I did. I would appreciate if you would remove that SockPuppett tag cause that is not the case and it hurts my reputation. Thanks for understanding. I don't have time to lose using sockpuppets anyway. Have a nice day, and again, thanks for your no-nonsense approach! Terveetkadet

re: Todd Zywicki

Thank you for removing my prod on that article. I don't know how I overlooked the notice about the prior AFD discussion. While I am still skeptical about whether that decision was ultimately right, the page is ineligible for the prod process because of it. Thanks again for correcting it. Rossami (talk) 17:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Say Anything (band)

Your recent edit to Say Anything (band) (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 16:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppett? Come on!

Why do you accuse me of "sockpuppettry" ? I NEVER did anything like that! You're accusing me without proof and that's a real cheap shot! I'm asking you to please remove your accusation of "sockpuppetry".Terveetkadet

Deletion review

Hm, yeah. Odd. If it bothers you, try taking it to WP:DRV. If all the keep votes were obvious sockpuppets, or if the reasoning was particularly ridiculous, and the article clearly failed verifiability or copyright or something else non-negotiable, I could see the closing admin deleting, but on a fast glance that doesn't seem to be the case here. Antandrus (talk) 23:51, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy

I couldn't find discussion on why the cultivation section of the Pineapple article may not be neutral. Suggestions? Mmcknight4 17:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Primitive Radio Gods

Hi - this bot auto-spellchecked the above site and corrected an intentional misspelling. Is there some sort of marker that should be placed in the text that will keep bots from making spelling edits there? Chubbles 21:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chubbles, sorry about that. Putting a HTML comment beside the spellings in question, like you've done is a pretty good bet, given all spellchecking bots are supposed to be supervised. I'll make a note of the page so I don't try to edit it again. Thanks, CmdrObot 02:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


re: Hawthorne Heights

Hi, I'll just add Pop Punk along with the others to make us both happy.

Hah, does "the book" mention Revolution Summer? And bands like The Hated, Gray Matter, Embrace, Moss Icon etc. Does it even explore the music of Dischord records, except maybe Rites of Spring? Hawthrone Heights isn't even influenced by emo. I hear no resemblance between them and Moss Icon... 90.227.226.69 08:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wow, reading one book qualifies as homework... modern emo is found in screamo. Saetia and Orchid defineded the genre back in 97, with inspiration from late Portraits of Past work. I must ask, are you blind or did you just forgot to do your homework. Because pop/alt. rock doesn't fit on the emo-timeline 90.227.226.69 08:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
since you read the book, you get the honor to rewrite it. The confusion is right there... SDRE, Texas is the Reason, Mineral is not pure emo. It's indie emo, and since screamo isn't on emo, neither should "The Second Wave" and the so called "Third wave". You could also label it as post-emo. Emo stops after the "First wave", which could acctually be split up into area's in USA. 90.227.226.69 13:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Emo is not as pure as punk or hardcore. But it has its roots, Revolution Summer, and changed a lot before it died out in 94-95. And don't believe the hypocrites on MTV... 90.227.226.69 09:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ivrea

Thanks for starting that page! It's so much easier to contribute once someone's done the heavy lifting of putting out the basics. I'll definitely look for your other Medieval Music contributions! --Myke Cuthbert 02:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turn Off The Stars

Hi! The sources on the band's page did the trick, and I removed the tag. The album page still needs more. If the album charted, put some verifiable stats for that. The more review or mentions in the press, the better. Since the band is new and yet to make much of a splash, WP editors will typically be skeptical until you can show some citations. But I think you can do it, so give it a shot.

Sorry this kinda got mixed in with your userboxes. Don't quite know how to fix that. :-) Realkyhick 22:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TOTS's album hasn't charted in the US, and while it may have charted in Canada, I don't know how to access their chart data (it's not on Allmusic...). Under WP:ALBUM, albums by notable bands qualify if they've gotten reviewed in multiple nontrivial places; the main article now cites a couple reviews, and the article page itself has a link to Christianity Today's review, and that's a pretty big publication. It being a full-length LP, that seems enough to me...
Also, I moved your comment on my userpage here. Chubbles 23:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing: Credential Recordings is an EMI subsidiary, meaning they're on a major label. Chubbles 23:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Having worked in Christian radio for a few years, I would definitely call any EMI subsidiary a major label. I'll remove the tag. Good job. By the way, I have this bad habit of getting user pages and user talk pages mixed up. Duh!! My apologies. Realkyhick 03:00, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea Pigs in Scientific Research

I just want to say that while youre work adding citations and history to the usage of guinea pigs in the lab has been admirable, I think that it is in fact one of the least important parts of the article and that youre hard work might be put to better use in some other part (such as the vague sections dealing with their origins and status in the wild, or early introduction to the west) VanTucky 16:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All that stuff about the really old experiments is really interesting. nice work dude. VanTucky 21:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External Links On Hawthorne Heights Article

I was on the HH article and noticed that the link to the fan site on xanga wasn't on there. so i went to the history and saw that you removed it and marked it as spam or something. i was the one who put it on there, and don't see how it is spam. it is a fan site for HH, doesn't have much on it yet, but it's HH's only fan site that i've seen that is still updated. that is my fan site actually, and the piczo one is too. they're not the same thing though, as you can see if you go to them both. not trying to sound rude to you or anyone, don't want you to think that by everything i wrote on here. but i was just wondering why the link to my fan site got deleted. because i don't think it should have been deleted. thanks. Greendayrox 03:07, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

just wondering, why don't fan sites get linked on here? sorry, forgot to sign it. Greendayrox 02:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gesner

you are right about my citation not containing info on Gesner and Guinea Pigs - that was my mistake. i accidentally cited that link from here. the first time, i relied on the morales, as i emailed a friend who has the book. i relied on 3rd party info, and should not have. it wasn't 'niggling' as you were absolutely correct. the linked article uses four sources - so i guess your idea about using a book is narrowed down to one of those ;) The undertow 04:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for cleaning up my user page :) Postoak 05:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Missa Papae Marcelli

I just noticed that there was no article on this last week and had gotten some books on Palestrina from the library to write it...you beat me to it! Nice work; I'll have to pick another work of his to write (I don't see any others, which surprises me as he is a rather famous composer). Rigadoun (talk) 20:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Updated DYK query On 29 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Missa Papae Marcelli, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Carabinieri 16:08, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VanVoice

Hi, saw you were checking out the article on The Vancouver Voice. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the article and suggestions for improvement if you have any. thanks! VanTucky 03:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the Oregonian did a quick write-up of us so I could cite that if I can find it. But I've never read those, so I've no idea if its similar. Thanks again! VanTucky 04:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Chubbles, youre one of the only users I trust that has seen the article, and I nominated it for WP:GA. I placed some inline citations and copyedited it some. How about maybe evaluating it per good article criteria? any help appreciated VanTucky 05:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, as far as I understood things, size was only a requirement for featured articles. In fact, GA is for articles not large enough to be featured that are still good. The only criteria is: npov, well written, cited and images. seems the voice meets that. Besides, as far as cites go...there isnt many. but second, I have footnoted ones, not just inline url links. anyway, thanks! VanTucky 05:34, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism Templates

You may find it useful to use the vandalism templates as they tend to discourage vandals more than just reverting the vandalism. I've done it for the SOTY vandal, but try to do it in future! Thanks, Asics talk Editor review! 23:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe, for one second, that vandalism templates discourage vandalism. That said, it's useful for vandal ip addresses to be identified so blocks can be instituted, which seems to me to be the templates' real main function. Chubbles 00:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EHEM!!!

Ummm u can clearly see in the page that it is Lloyd's sophomore album!!..and it needed that tag to make the page more effecient..>=| Pretty Ricky aint breakin up yall! yay!! Tam` Tam` =] 04:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ooohhhh sorry wanna be friends? .. =] Pretty Ricky aint breakin up yall! yay!! Tam` Tam` =] 04:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Given the quality and grammar, I don't think it's a copyvio. John Reaves (talk) 05:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to being stubborn about emo bands

Well there Chubbles, maybe I could help if you would stop vandalizing the band list w/ incorrect lists (BTW check my page! Wai, a new userbox w/ a message!) So if you would kindly change it and not vandalize it, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. :)The one and only:Zanny77 22:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on Talk:Emo (music) Chubbles 23:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Daseian notation

Updated DYK query On 11 April, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Daseian notation, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 06:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For Tomorrow

Thanks for your For Tomorrow review and the points you have made, although I disagree with some of them:

  • The romantic house bit is there - "I had this image of my parents living next to The Beatles, so Emperor’s Gate, to me, is a romantic thing" (from the source provided)
  • Of course it has increased massively in stature, the conclusive proof is that one of the biggest music magazines in the world has put it in the Top 50 British songs ever, which I think is more than a little increase considering it reached #28 on its release!!
  • Continuing the previous point, there are three sources fully backing up the claim that it has increased massively.
  • The outclassed bit is also conclusively backed up: "Suede are third on the bill and give a tight, energetic performance. Blur perform very badly - drunken, shambling and embarrasing themselves." (from the source provided) Surely this is a good enough point!

I might have to check the rest of the points made but I would only submit the article if I knew it had a good chance of becoming GA and that the sources were perfect. Dsims209 19:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Re: For Tomorrow

Ok thanks again for your help, I will get underway on updating the article. Dsims209 20:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hawthorne Heights

May I ask what happened to the Hawthorne Heights photo I posted? --Russoc4 21:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I had it on there. I'll see if I can fix it. --Russoc4 23:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea pig GA on hold

 GA on hold — Notes left on talk page. Nehrams2020 08:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Josquin

Greetings! I just saw your 0.7 on the Josquin page and that reminded me to ask you about this. I'm still planning on writing a paragraph -- or so -- on Josquin editions. Do you know how many of the NJE volumes are currently published/available, and what their current schedule for completion is? There's some good material in the Scherr book (currently adjacent to my computer, but I sure wish someone would release it in mass-market paperback, LOL), which I can use, but I need to get to the library soon. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxyrhynchus

Thanks for your message. I agree that this image constitutes a copyright violation. I spoke about this matter before with another Wiki Patrol here. I will go ahead and fix the problem by making a different map with the same name. Please let me know later if the new image still constitutes a problem, and I'll be happy to discuss the matter further with you. Thanks! --Lanternix 00:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mezzamorphis GA (thank you!) and sales figures

Hello, Chubbles; thank you very, very much for your copyedit and GA review of Mezzamorphis! In general (and this is original research on my part), Delirious? dislike giving album sales figures. They have released the numbers for a few of the singles and the total number of albums to date, but other than that, I only know whether specific albums have gone gold or silver. Thanks once more for the review! --3M163//Complete Geek 13:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Cornell

Thanks for helping edit Paul Cornell (Chicago). I was wondering whether you have any advice on citing the Encyclopedia of Chicago. This article cites several articles from the EOC. Most of these articles are reproduced online at the EOC online. Does it matter whether I use the print edition which will remain unchanged or the online edition which is easily accessed? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 21:20, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Identity

I assert that I am the same person as the owner of the e-mail account chubbles1212@hotmail.com. Chubbles 17:45, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wigwam GA on Hold

I am not the best copy editor, but I have attempted to meet your requests. I made a fairly substantial factual discovery about the property while rechecking original sources during copy editing. This slightly diminishes the importance of the topic, but it remains a landmark. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 17:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I agree with your changes. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 23:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Villain

Yes, thank you. --NE2 21:44, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea Pig FA

I just wanted to compliment all the great work you've done in the last few weeks on this article. I'm glad to see it closing in on FA status. Sorry I haven't been around as much the last few weeks to support the effort, but you've done a great job so far. Hopefully in the next few days this will come together nicely. I'll try to help out in reviwing the wave of edits that come during the nomination process. --Ahc 04:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. (I needed something to do this weekend! =) ) Chubbles 04:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I was taking a break from doing a little RC patrol, and wanted to check on the article. Congrats on the GA status. If it gets to FA, I can't wait to hear millions of 'wheeks' from curious users. It was a fun little side project and those editing at the time made it fun. the_undertow talk 10:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No thanks to me needed. All I did was sit back and make talk comments on your hard work! VanTucky 04:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto here. You guys did most of the work. I just poked around teh internets for sources and wheeks... This is all really great news. the_undertow talk 04:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fac

thanks for the heads-up. I guess it's just the idea of this woman's bad experience creating an emotional conflict of interest annoys me. VanTucky 04:41, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Magnificent

Hello Chubbles1212, Thank you for taking the time to review the article The Magnificent. I've made the changes which hopefully address your concerns and would be grateful if you would return to check. Thanks again. --kingboyk 16:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petra

Thanks for your reply, review and recommendations on the article. It is all welcome. I'll work on it as soon as I have some free time. Cheers. Thief12 21:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Hey Chubbles, i was right in the middle of editing my new entry about Chief of police of San Fancisco Thomas Cahill, and you came along and tried to sspeedy delete. Get off my cloudHank chapot 04:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea pigs

It appears that there was a brief discussion several years ago on the topic of the caviidae taxonomic controversy, but that discussion never resulted in any actual consensus. The controversy ought to be mentioned in the article, and the section I inserted did exactly that. Your deletion of it violated WP:NPOV. I have rewritten and reinserted it. Wikophile 03:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trevor Pinnock - GA nomination

I've added new pictures to the Trevor Pinnock article. Clavecin 13:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Symphony No. 3 (Górecki)

Hi, I notice you are quite strong on writing articles related to classical music - I'm thinking of expanding and working Symphony No. 3 up to GA and maybe FA over the next few months, and was wondering if you would be interested in helping out. Thanks. Ceoil 17:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Where I might need most help is in the "Movements" section; I have no training and am worried about making elementary errors when intrepting the sources - I couldn't help but notice you have a BA in music ;). If its any help if have a draft Gorecki sketch here that may be of use. I agree re coverage of modern Polish music is lacking, I've been trying for a while to track down sources for this sorry mess.
Now if you excuse me, I'm off to Amazon to order those two books you recommended. Thanks for the tips! Ceoil 18:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I find it easier to make rough unpolished sketches when gathering sources and toying with the structure. That way I dont need to worry about phrasing, and can leave little notes for myself. Writing a proper article on Górecki is my long term goal, but surprisingly there is only one book dedicated to him, but this was written by a musicologist and contains only scant bio detail. The journal or print sources that I've tracked down all focus exclusively on the 3rd, so I'm kinda stuck at the moment. Ceoil 18:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all that. I've made a breakthrough in the last half hour! Ceoil 19:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It ain't much but it's a start. Ceoil 20:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Birchington-on-Sea GA review

Hi. The changes to Birchington-on-Sea have now been made. Thanks. Epbr123 10:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

eeek!

Hi Chubbles, I know neither of us are mice keepers or enthusiasts, but the Fancy mouse page is suffering from the same "how-to guide" by and for pet owners syndrome that the guinea pig article was. I'll be getting some resources soon, and intiating a rewrite of much of it. Any time you would want to check in on the progress, or even lend a hand, I would appreciate it considering your fine work on Guinea pig. Cheers VanTucky 21:18, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Black Lab

The article Black Lab you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Black Lab for things needed to be addressed. CloudNine 16:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial assistance

I apologize for not recognizing you earlier. I am just getting familiar with this type of userbox. You may want to place the following on your user page:

This user helped promote Joffrey Tower to good article status.
This user helped promote Wigwam (Chicago) to good article status.

TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We always can use good editors. You should come visit the WP:CHICOTW. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 20:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Symphony No. 3

Thanks for all the catches recently. The lead needs a middle paragraph on the musical structure; could you try and summarise the "Overview" section in three or four sentences; or let me know what are the important elements to mention (it would be purely on the score as the libretto is covered by the third para). Ceoil 20:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Ceoil 19:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to ask User:Outriggr for a final copyedit in a few days; do you think there is anything left to be added before it is moved to FAC. Thanks. Ceoil 20:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The cite thing isn't an issue, I normally don't use the template, don't like it it gives inconsistent format results. The fair use issue I'm not too worried about; the text specifically discusses the passages of all three three samples. I wonder though if the two images are relevant. I like them both, and they are both free, but we'll see. Thanks for all you help bty. Ceoil 10:00, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Anhedonia (album) Trivia removal

Thanks for fixing/incorporation for Anhedonia (album) trivia section. I attempted to do so, but felt I couldn't without NPOV violation. Many thanks. If you ever need assistance, feel free to drop by my talk page. RegainTheTruth 01:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC) RegainTheTruth[reply]

Rodsley

Impressed... it was only a few hours old.Victuallers 14:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peiremans

Moved it for you. Good work. --Steve (Stephen) talk 04:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Powerspace

I have placed a copy of the last version of that article at the above link for you to see what was there. I have left the history and original article undisturbed as I guess we will be seeing it back later on. Good luck with this. Spartaz Humbug! 06:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Sidewinders

Updated DYK query On 27 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Sidewinders, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 18:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Densa AfD

Regarding your comments on Densa's AfD, I was wondering if you could take another look at the discussion, and perhaps reconsider your decision. I've since posted the text to one of the articles that's been used as a source. --CA387 21:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Survival

The deletion template should stand.

Why?

(A) The "Joe Francis" linked to in the page is NOT the same Joe Francis that made this movie. I can provide a link to the Joe Francis who made this film, his myspace, if you have any doubt.

(B) IMDB isn't considered a qualified source for Wikipedia. Anyone can list a movie, real or not, on IMDB. That doesn't mean it actually exist.

If you have any doubt, then ask ANY moderator. I already have. The template stays.

Tetris & Dr. Mario

The reason I prodded it is because it is merely a compilation of two games, with not many differences involved in these versions of the games. If it had an exceptionally high average score or sales it might warrant an article (like 2-in-1 SMB/Duck Hunt), but I haven't seen much to say that it does. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:55, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Tamborero, by Victor12 (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Tamborero is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Tamborero, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Tamborero itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for checking. I was tracking Priscilla D who had created lots of articles by translating directly from a Peruvian website. I'm sorry for not checking the history of the article first. Thanks for the quick reaction. Greetings, --Victor12 02:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Guinea Pig as staple food

Hi, you asked me about guinea pigs being a staple food since the 1960s...I replied on the discussion page. I am not a regular wikipedia contributor, but usually add to things I know about, so I apologize in advance for improper formatting.Kingduct 03:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guinea Pig Picture

If I get i get a Higher quality picture can I put it on the article guinea pig?

re:List of post-grunge artists

Theres a very specific reason regarding bands that I removed the red-links. When we have blue-links, it means they assert some sort of notability on Wikipedia and thus had an article written about them. Red-links are completly opposite of that. Red-links show that the band does not even assert the notability to have an article and doesn't needed to be added until they do. Red-links on these kinds of articles go directly against our notability guidline and WP:LC. In addition to that, bands that assert no notability whatsoever and never will, will think it's OK to add their name to Wikipedia if we don't start setting some boundaries. — Moe ε 00:55, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's just the thing, if they don't have an article, they aren't notable, and shouldn't be added to Wikipedia. If you think it should be deleted, you're more than free to go to AFD and place it up for deletion. I don't see the point in this page either if there is a post-grunge category for artists. — Moe ε 01:01, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screaming

I saw a show once that talked about metal screaming and it involved a specialist who trained metal vocalists how to scream "properly." In the show she said this style of vocals has existed for quite some time as throat singing. I would have mentioned this but I saw the show some time ago and I don't remember any real specifics (e.g name of show, name of specialist, etc). I'm not an expert in the subject, only an amateur music lover, which is why I worked my post so... hesitantly. The possibility also exists that I am not remembering the show at all correctly. Best of luck editing. Naufana : talk 22:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ORM-D

If you are gonna delete a prod, that is fine. But don't delete the uncategorised tag as well. That is just plain unnecessary. 172.145.177.55 02:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm kicking myself now...

...for letting the Register be used as the primary source for that stuff I advocated be a part of the Guinea pig article. Long story short, I've realized they are not a realiable source 9to say the least), and that the mention of that gossip-mongering should be removed. As you and I were the users primarily involved in that particular discussion (if my memory serves me), do I have your consent to remove it? VanTucky (talk) 05:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Godspot

Would you care to explain your reasoning behind "Godspot" being notable? I disagree.Bryson430 14:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. I think my point is that we can't have an article for every stylistic choice in Lighting Design, so having a separate article for this seems to be a mistake. Discuss on the article discussion page? Bryson430 19:46, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Stop Vandalism!

Well, if you want to delete an article, go and try to delete List of Jewish Nobel laureates, List of Muslim Nobel laureates, etc. You may think that 'One's religion, or lack thereof, has no bearing on one's suitability for a Nobel Prize'. That's your view. We don't agree with your view. Look, there are list of Nobel laureates based on other religions. RS 02:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really!

Go and put a delation on the List of Jewish Nobel laureates. Then, we will talk about the atheist list. RS 03:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No!

Only if Female Nobel Prize laureates, List of Christian Nobel laureates, List of Jewish Nobel laureates, List of Hindu Nobel laureates, List of Muslim Nobel laureates and Nobel laureates by university affiliation are to be deleted, then List of atheist Nobel laureates should also be deleted. RS 03:14, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No! if you are interested in delation, all should be deleted together. RS 03:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's get serious

Chubbles, I think you have some valid points. However, as I have pointed out, other similar lists exist. You have a degree in Chemistry and Music. I have a Master's degree in Physics. It would be better if we don't categorize people on the basis of religion. I agree with you. If the List of Jewish Nobel laureates, etc were to be deleted, this list can also be deleted. RS 03:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Mazurek

Updated DYK query On 10 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rob Mazurek, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 10:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was my account.

Chubbles, the account User:R-1441 is my account. I made that comment on the behalf of Devraj5000. I have no interest in atheism or articles related to atheism.

The account was blocked on the basis of false evidence. Help me to unblock the account. Thank You. Ravi. RaviJames 02:54, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List Of Metalcore Bands Deletion...

Hey... I noticed you deleted the Article List Of Metalcore Bands... You said... And I quote "it appears to serve no purpose except for constant edit-warring."... I used that page frequently to find more bands to listen to... So if there's anything you can do... I'd like it back...

2006 Huntsville bus accident

For the record, en:Wikinews has a different license from en:Wikipedia,so it's straight to AFD. Circeus 21:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proof String Quartet

Five months after your query at Talk:Proof (2005 film) and still no answer. But hopefully my reply there will at least point you in the right direction. PrimeFan 21:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AR1

Thanks for working on this project. It gets lonely... :-) Bearian 00:33, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion welcome at deletion review for Plot of Les Mis

After Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plot of Les Misérables closed as a deletion, I'm challenging the way the closing administrator acted as in violation of Wikipedia rules. Your participation is welcome at that discussion, Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 14. Please keep in mind that only arguments related to either new information or to how Wikipedia rules were violated or not violated in closing the discussion will be considered. It isn't a replay of the original AfD. I'm familiar with WP:CANVASSING and I am alerting everyone who participated in that discussion to the deletion review. I won't contact anyone again on this topic, and I apologize if you consider this note distracting. Noroton 04:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Black Helicopter

An article that you have been involved in editing, Black Helicopter, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Helicopter. Thank you. -- Jreferee (Talk) 01:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Raein

Hi there; yes, I deleted this article, on the basis that it very clearly does not satisfy WP:MUSIC. I have restored the article to allow you, or any other editor, to bring it up to wiki status. It will not long survive in its present form --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 21:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You suck?

You suck you know you fucking fuck, don't have a clue what the fuck you're talking about. Asshole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.165.113.60 (talk • contribs)

Is this in relation to Jan Slota? Chubbles 21:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For reverting the vandalism to my user page. I haven't had internet for awhile so I'm glad you were able to get it! --AW 18:22, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa!

My first barnstar! That rules. I may move it elsewhere on my userpage, however. You're very welcome. I hope to eventually be largely responsible for killing Infobox:Band. Only Three thousand or so articles to go... :-P TearJohnDown 19:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

eminent deletion...

Per the recent wave of list and "trivia" deletions, I see the demise of the Cultural references to guinea pigs article coming any day now. Slowly, I'm coming to see that this type of article is not really encyclopedic, even if it is useful and fun. I'm thinking that it might be best to take a stab at turning it into a couple short prose sections and possibly re-integrating it with the main article. VanTucky (talk) 23:56, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the subject matter for me, it's the list format. But yes, sounds like a good idea. I was thinking of perhaps of separate groupings for the type of media. VanTucky (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm making a prose version of an addition as we speak in my User:VanTucky/sandbox. feel free to list some ones you want in for sure on the talk of either place. VanTucky (talk) 00:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't moved the cites yet, but how does this look? I have a cite for the last bit. VanTucky (talk) 00:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on my sandbox talk. VanTucky (talk) 00:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you rather do the ISBN's in my sandobx or the article? VanTucky (talk) 01:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marshino at AfD

Hi,

I prodded Marashino last night, and you removed the prod a while after. I've since nominated the article for deletion. I respect your move to remove the prod, but I still would like to have a discussion at AfD as to whether or not this band passes Wikipedia's Notability criterion.

My reasoning is that this band seems to have only received a bit of local press, self-released a couple releases, played at a pay-to-play battle-of-the-bands, and played a show at a festival local to their city. By those criterion, even my band would be deserving of a Wikipedia article; but my own understanding of Wikipedia rules conflicts with this.

Of course, some articles with dubious notability get improved when they go to AfD (I was involved in repairing one of these myself); that's another reason for my taking this article to AfD. It's certainly acceptable, in the case of many stubs here at Wikipedia, to say "it's a bad article now, but it can be improved someday". Unfortunately, without being taken to AfD, these articles may never be improved. The threat of deletion is often needed to inspire people to improve pages (that's how it worked with me, anyway).

Anyway, I appreciate your opinion, that's why I decided to let you know. Feel free to join in on the AfD.

Also, you intervened with my prod of another band, Frosthold. Same as above, I respect your opinion, but I'd like to get the opinion of other editors at AfD as well, so I'll be AfDing that article too. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 14:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above - turns out Frosthold had been AfDed before, a couple years ago, and the result of the AfD was delete - meaning that page might end up being speedy-deleted under CSD:G4. We'll see. No big deal either way. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 14:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Powerspace

You don't need to check with me before you move it. I trust your judgment on the article and it seems to be a fine job of improving. Move it to mainspace whenever you'd like. Best, IronGargoyle 17:34, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nader Shah

Please take another look at the Nader Shah article. I think it is fully sourced, and POV statements have been removed. Thanks.--Agha Nader 17:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD attention request

Not sure if this is out of order, but there's a somewhat contentions AfD (here) that has received little outside attention. Since the AfD was initiated, a number of single purpose accounts (likely sockpuppets) have started editing (and discussing on the talk page) the article; not !voting, fortunately. In any case, I wanted to see if some AfD regulars could stop by and weigh in. I'm not looking to sway !votes here—I haven't targeted deletionists; I'm asking editors that seem to !vote a lot on music-related AfDs. No reply is necessary but your opinion is valued. Pr 2.0 13:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alltell

Have you seen the new commercial with the guinea pig? It's not available online yet, but I was curious. It's quite spectacular. the_undertow talk 23:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I can't find it. I'll look this weekend. It is funny, and the wheeking sounds are great. the_undertow talk 06:45, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

your aid and expertise is requested...

on the Hippopotamus nomination for FA-status. I asked them to add a bit here and there, but even though the article is well-sourced and informative, I can't help getting the feeling that it's lacking something. I think it may just be proper lead-ins to each section or some flow issue. Your evaluation would be appreciated. VanTucky (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chubbles once again you've done a great job. You caught a bunch of stuff I missed. Thanks again! VanTucky (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Here

This is by far the strangest vandalism I have seen today. Is this your sockpuppet? Is VanTucky involved with this? Hahahaha. Joking. the_undertow talk 08:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Because I don't have time for much else at the moment. Within the next month or two, I can hopefully get back to more substantial edits. Inhumer 15:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]