This is an archive of past discussions with User:CycloneGU. 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.
Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.
Image copyright problem with Image:Bk spanishharlem.jpg
Image Copyright problem
Thank you for uploading Image:Bk spanishharlem.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If an article is tagged with unref it means you need to cite your sources. See Wikipedia:Footnotes or one of the many fine album articles created by User:Moonriddengirl
Thanks also for updating the infoboxes - obviously, I didn't know the "Type" category identified the infobox, I guess that's the part that messed it up. I was looking at the type of album, which is a classic LP, and was going to mark later ones as "CD". I now know that studio albums are simply "studio" and not the media itself...lesson learned. =)
I took out the followup info, like you said, because it's not related to the album. You can add it to her page if you'd like, which could always use more information.
I saw her perform with Lace at the Canada Day Jam in Toronto a couple of years ago, but I never got the chance to meet her. Eric444 (talk) 02:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of I Have Songs In My Pocket, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://payplay.fm/susserking. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 20:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your message, SmackBot does not generally add tags, but merely dates those that are already there. Regards, Rich Farmbrough 12:54 22 September2008 (UTC).
Your second edit had an edit summary, which was enough to give me pause - it looked like a removal for no reason the first time. Thanks for that.--otherlleft (talk) 19:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: Kenny Rogers discography
First see, MOS:DISCOG; also this links: allmusic & Kenny Rogers. I suggest you enjoy the concept, but not be based or claim things like "the discography of this artist have..." Find out if, Kenny Rogers have books published, that can help you on the search for information. Cannibaloki04:12, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Country music
My God, are you for real? There's a tasklist on my user page (the big bold blue link), and you can help out by writing about any of the red links on my page. You can also help by finding pictures and expanding short articles. Some articles need a total rewrite, like Brooks & Dunn, Alabama (band), etc. are way too short. Alabama should definitely be GA quality, but seemingly no one wants to ever help me. 74 members in that damn project, and not a GA-class writer among them (well, I got Diamond Rio to GA). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)04:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, each Alabama album needs the full writers' names and producers (they weren't produced by Harold Shedd after the late 80s). The last writer to touch those album pages only put the writers' last names. I've already gotten a couple, like Cheap Seats. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)16:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Wait a minute! There is only one song which lends its name to everything else. Everybody knows the song, but not necessarily other sources. There really wasn't much wrong with the way things were, because anyone typing in the name is looking for the song, which allows for the choice of disambiguation and links and gives directon to the artists who performed it. The point you make is valid, that many people might not know that it is a Bob Seger song, which makes it more confusing to now actually rename it that way, when it is the origin for everything else. What really needs done is the Kenny Rogers information fully added to the song article. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 01:48, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I placed my reply on your talk page. Please carry on the discussion there, I'll keep it open during the discussion. =)
You have made a bit of a mess of this. You did not move the page properly. You cut and pasted the information to a new page and converted the existing page to a redirect and left the talk page behind. That is not how it should be done. You also missed a lot of links that now redirect to the disambiguation page. When more than one artist records the same song, and have a hit with it, an infobox should be added to the article for each version. See Mr. Tambourine Man and Black Magic Woman for examples of well known songs, where the cover version was more successful and an album bore the same name as the song. I am going to revert the page to fix it up and, if there is still a need, we can move it properly after that. I'll let you know when things are cleaned up a bit and you can see what I have done to the article. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Yikes, I didn't consider the talk page. Ooopsie. =\
Okie, mental note for future; if a page needs to be moved, ask someone to rename it and provide reasons. Check, I got that for the future. Sorry about that!
I decided to click a random article yesterday after the discussions then and my random click landed on Kevin McCarthy (actor). I clicked the link to other people named Kevin McCarthy to get the page listing the seven people named Kevin McCarthy. The title of the page? "Kevin McCarthy". Interestingly, the page with the actual name lists all of them, not designating the page to a single person named Kevin McCarthy.
The entire We've Got Tonight thing should follow the same principle, as should any popular song. On the title page, list the disambiguations and let the user decide what (s)he wants to view (the song, the album, etc.). My edits to the We've Got Tonight (disambiguation) page still referenced Bob Seger as the songwriter and provided the link to his page at the header (an oversight I corrected later, as I had put Kenny's album first before). I say rename the disambiguation page to be "We've Got Tonight" and the current title page (as reverted) to include "(Bob Seger song)" in the title, as I proposed. This would then resemble the example above. Or are the rules different for proper persons compared to those of titles? (Maybe this is my lone opinion, I just think it's better to list them all together and link correctly to the correct page for each instance in the different cases.)
Thanks again for catching my oversight on how I did it, though. I'll keep the talk page in mind for future situations as I intend to work on many artists still after Kenny. =)
If you want an example of a person with a similar entry, you don't need to look any further than Kenny Rogers. There is a hatnote that points to Kenny Rogers (baseball)], but you have read the article to find a reference to the self titled Kenny Rogers (1977 album), which only the Kenny Rogers discography actually links to. Here there is only one meaning for "We've got tonight", which is the song that everything else is derived from. The article has a link to a disambiguation page, just like Kenny. Disambiguation is not required for the song article name as all notable versions and performers are noted and linked. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 00:50, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Okie, point made about the baseballer. I actually added the (1977 album) link myself, and have to do that for 2001 and 2007 as well as those are self-titled compilations. Mind, the albums preceding and following it also link to the 1977 album. I just felt that the title page should be the disambiguation page, which is why I originally asked TPH whether I should make the changes.
As for disambiguations between albums of the same name, I haven't gotten to that yet as I haven't put those two albums in yet. Once I put them in, I might put more links in on all three pages.
Very interesting. Anyone searching for "timepiece" would not expect the prime entry to be a Kenny Rogers album. There are many uses of the word in Wikipedia and they all refer to "a measuring instrument or device for keeping time". Even though there is not another article with that exact title, the KR album name is a reference to the device, not the other way around, and I would still tend to use "Timepiece (album)" or something. There is another album called Time Pieces: Best of Eric Clapton which is a redirect for time pieces. Timepiece should be a disambiguation page for clock, watch, stopwatch, chronograph, Cox's timepiece, Banjo clock, albums, etc. -Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
To move a page, you click the "move" tab at the top. I moved the Glen Campbell album, you can fix the links left behind so they point to the Glen album. Then when you've done that and made the page for the Kenny album I'll make a dab for you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)03:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Always include the full name in the first instance, and just the last name every subsequent time. For instance, if there are three songs written by John Smith, put "John Smith" the first time, and just "Smith" every time after that. But if there's a song written by Mike Smith as well, you'd use "J. Smith" for the second and third songs by John Smith. Also, if the writer has a page, link to it by all means. See It's What I Do, which I just created, for an example. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)19:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
You don't really need to cite personal research. Most writers are verifiable through either the liner notes or through the ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, etc. libraries, and I've never seen anyone tag a writer's credit with {{fact}}. Just go ahead and put the full names in. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)19:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
hard coding spaces
I'll reply re: WAY where it's due (when you're done!), but I wanted to share a trick with you. To hard code spaces—so that editors can both see and C&P them—try using this code [ ] (check your edit screen between those brackets, you'll see it there). That translates into a hard space that's both invisible to the reader, as well as visible to the editor. Check out "Mortal Coil" where it's implemented as part of {{infobox Television episode}} (which is where I found it in the first place!). — pd_THOR|=/\= | 06:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Heehee, I've seen NBSP used before in other applications. I didn't know it worked on Wikipedia as well. =)
Let's see here. I'll apply a break tag, then have some fun. And now the indent after the break.
That'll give my fingers a break, thanks for the tip! I'm done editing on the reply now, BTW, but I will go back and edit the NBSPs into my comment after you've replied. CycloneGU (talk) 06:28, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I also see what you're doing there, using the line breaks and hard spaces to keep everything lined up, yes? My friend the graphic designer and webmaster will kill me if he finds out about this: I use paragraph breaks. less-than-p-greather-than, if you will, since showing it uses it.
For example, I use it here to keep my next paragraph aligned properly under the one before it. It works with numbering as well:
This is a numbered item
and here's the item I want listed & properly indented immediately underneath.
It's a gross violation of HTML, I know; but it seems to work just fine here within the confines of Wikipedia for what I want. Lemme know what sin I'm committing here if you'd like, every once in a while I worry that by doing this that somewhere down the road it's going to screw up something royally! — pd_THOR|=/\= | 06:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I think the BR tag has the same effect. Sample:
This is your numbered item
and here's your next line.
This is my numbered item and here's my next line.
This is my numbered item and here's my next line after some NBSPs.
The difference? Look at the amount of space between the two lines in each case. Mine uses less. I'll stick with my line breaks and add NBSPs instead of trying to hardcode spaces now, it works well with Wikipedia.
I do not think dashes are bad (well, I did...) but ever since TenPoundHammer starting putting dashes on discographies, I really support the idea. However there is a concern. Originally the blank spaces have 3 meanings:
releases that did not chart (e.g. only released to certain format or country)
unknown peaks (and we will never find out, but the single did chart)
the chart doesn't exist when the single was released (e.g. Canadian Hot 100)
We denifitely need some "marks" to clarify those situations. Well, EnDaLeCoMpLeX just put dashes all over the tables, filled out every blanks. Um... Does that really tell you something? I don't see the difference between all blank or all dashed. I think the dashes only means "released that did not chart", and only covers situation #1. Dashes should denefitely cross-over to #2 because that does not make sense. So when I saw it I just reverted it. Really I don't know what to do with that... Langdon (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)i7114080
I know what you're saying, there are different meanings for everything on Wikipedia and the thing that needs to be done is that everyone finds a common ground. There are several methods that are all correct in their own way, but everyone will use their own method. I am currently chatting with someone about another page where he is contemplating a tracklist format modification and he seems to like my formatting method, so he's considering doing it. It doesn't mean the others are wrong; it just means I think mine looks nicer. *LOL*
As for the dashes, I always assume that a dash means the information is unknown or does not exist (which may mean the album did not chart). If I see a dash, it means to me that someone hasn't checked the charts for it yet, or it didn't chart (I automatically run dashes along a bargain bin album if I post it, they don't chart). Further, it keeps the table looking nice and clean; empty space on a table looks bad and makes the table look incomplete; we want to maintain a complete look. Everyone has their own opinion, that's just mine. =) CycloneGU (talk) 13:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
