This is an archive of past discussions with User:Paul Erik. 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.
The section in dispute has been arbitrarily deleted by grantevans multiple times for many different and irrelevant reasons. I've laid out my case on the discussion page which doesn't seem to persuade this particular editor for another deletion of the entire section. Certainly I am open for a re-write if it is NPOV. I think the section meets that standard now but I am not open arbitrary censorship because this particular editor doesn't like the section. DSatYVR (talk) 14:58, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
This suggests to me that the other editor has at least some willingness to discuss his reasons for removing the material. The edit warring is not acceptable. I've left a note on the talk page in the hopes of encouraging further discussion instead of reverting back and forth. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)19:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Paul Erik, I'd welcome the opinion of third party to resolve this difference of opinion with Mr.Grantevans2. I've taken care to cite credible sources in the "Phony letter writing campaign" section and I challenge the theory that the information presented not worthy of the article. This is one of many events that may have lead to the political downfall of Ms Guergis and as such may be of interest to Wikipedia readers. Any of the singular events, namely her connection the Rahim Jaffer, the verbal outburst(s) at Charlottetown airport and the "Phony letter writing campaign" may be judged are unimportant individually but taken as a whole this series of events lead Stephen Harper to expel her from Cabinet and the Conservative Party. Whether or not Ms Guergis knew of the supportive letter writing campaign is not important. What is important is it is one of the events that may have influenced her life and lead to her resignation. As such I would like to reinsert the section into the article and seek a third party to judge whether or not a deletion or re-write is warranted. I request that the section remain untouched by Mr.Grantevans2 until such time as the issue can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction. cc'd to Paul Erik's talk page. DSatYVR (talk) 04:27, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
The contested section of the Guergis article was submitted to Third opinion review which found in favour of retaining the disputed section. Subsequently editor Mr.Grantevans2 has deleted the section again. What is the next step in the process. It appears the other editor does not feel bound to the Third opinion review process and is determined to delete section not to his liking DSatYVR (talk) 20:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Paul, can I impose on you to get some references for the article Fringe Product? I just added to the article to the canlaw project. I'm not looking for perfection; just some relevant sources for the record label. There is a post on the discussion page about the controversy section being plagiarised. I think that section should be rewritten by the canlaw project. Maybe I'm wrong. But I plan on specifically telling them about the article. I don't believe it'll show up their assessment log as it has been assigned to the Canada project (music=yes) for a while. Argolin (talk) 12:15, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I removed that section, as it looks to me like a copyright violation of the Jam! Canadian Pop Encyclopedia article. There are some references available about the obscenity trial (newspaper articles from around that time) so I'll see what I can put together over the next few days. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)17:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Paul, I had a look around the canlaw project earlier. I don't think the article is indeed part of the canlaw. Most of their article names have the form: HM Queen v. Paul Eric. I think that when they get around to writing an article about the case, this Fringe article will have a main article redirect.
Wasn't this case the first test (of something or other) regarding the 1982 Charter? Do you remember? :) And no, it's a big thank-you! Argolin (talk) 07:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Paul, here I was trying to argue that the article was unknown to the Canadian music project and should not be deleted at that time. Then wallop! You come along and add seven references establishing notability. I almost wet myself. lol! I meant to ask: How did you find this article? Argolin (talk) 23:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
I can't remember for sure, but it was either because of this or because of this. Both are on my watchlist. I do like to give a good "wallop!" to unreferenced notable articles, when I can! :) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)23:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks the for info on how you found the article. Personally, I find it distasteful to delete articles without input from other affected projects (even if not tagged). It seems you and I have been scrolling though Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Bands and musicians. I've been busy adding articles to the Canadian music project (and by default the Canada project). Currently, we have 2,949 articles. I have one list of another 259 to add. My gut says the Canadian music project should be in the high 3,000 numbers. What is your opinion on asking the Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada project for a separate space for Canadian music?Argolin (talk) 01:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for continuing the work of identifying articles for the Canadian music project. As for your question: That's very specialized deletion sorting, and it would be unusual. I don't think it's necessary. I haven't ever seen Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada so overrun with listings that it's hard to find the music-related articles. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
If it's an uncontroversial move, you can move it yourself; it doesn't need an administrator. If it is potentially controversial, it should be listed at WP:Requested moves. An admin is needed to move a page only if the target page needs to be deleted or unprotected. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Paul. The guideline above is out-of-date. I had to revert back to the previous version of Wikipedia to do the move! Argolin (talk) 01:14, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
It's not out of date, as far as I can tell anyway! In the new-features interface, in the upper right, to the left of the search box, you should see an inverted triangle. When you hover the cursor over that, you ought to see a "move" button. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
OMG, you're correct! So I am once again using the updated version of Wiki.
Seeing it with my own eyes isn't a reliable enough source? I need to wait for some other idiot to write a blog about it before I can cite it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbierman13 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I was not speculating about an eating disorder. I realized that was inappropriate after the first post and went back to change it, but you already corrected it. Why her hannds were yellow is not important, but they were, and at the very least that is interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbierman13 (talk • contribs) 05:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
You have repeatedly taken down my posts. I have cited numerous twitter posts with users wondering the same thing as me. I have cited other articles on the internet that mention the discoloration. I am assuming you are her publicist and trying to keep an eating disorder under raps or something, but it will come out. Even if you silence me and block me from editing. I even cited a google search page that had 15 twitter posts in the last twenty minutes. HER HANDS ARE YELLOW. Why do you get to decide that they aren't? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbierman13 (talk • contribs) 05:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
As my first contribution to Wikipedia, I added track titles to the page for Zeus' album "Say Us" . However, I don't know how to add artwork or place the information on its own separate page. Could you lend me a hand?
Good start! I'm happy to try to help you out. You could write the article at Say Us. Click on the red link to begin. Or try Wikipedia:Article wizard if you prefer something more step-by-step. To add album artwork, you would first need to upload the image of the artwork: you can do that using Special:Upload. See also this mini how-to. Then you could add an album infobox to the article and put the artwork in it. Let me know if you run into any problems! Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)21:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Marty Munsch
Hi Paul
Your name was invoked on this edit - a spurious {{db-attack}} on Marty Munsch. Any idea why? The history of the article is that it was a long and involved, and slightly incoherent, vanity page. After it was tamed, the subject - or agents thereof, having failed to rebloat, appear to be trying to kill it off entirely, repeatedly posting CSDs. Since the current form was derived via a fair bit of consensus, they have steadily been laughed off. Just wondered where you come in. Wwwhatsup (talk) 00:51, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
On July 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gigi (music project), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
the links contain relevant information, biography information, and pictures as well as the music of the band posted by the band themselves —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.224.177.16 (talk) 00:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I've restored the page. On a second look, while some of the content may be slightly non-neutral (which I'll attempt to fix myself), it does contain at least a basic assertion of notability. Normally an organization must be national in scope, which a specific university club may or may not qualify for, but this is actually probably sufficient to at least warrant WP:PROD rather than speedy deletion. Thanks for bringing this matter to my attention and bringing your opinion. I make bad decisions sometimes, like all of us, and I'd rather have the chance to fix them, after all! - Vianello (Talk) 15:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Wow, thanks man - you really are awesome! :) If you find anything more for any of these artists, that would be even better, but even if you can't then you've already done more than enough! 24.148.0.83 (talk) 04:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I was wondering, if you have some more time that you don't mind donating, if you would be willing to help finding sources for more artists? As you can see by the redlinks above, five out of the original fifteen AFD nominations by the user were successful (rk post, thanks to you, should be a Keep or at worst No Consensus). He might consider that a disappointing result, but then so do I for different reasons! The nominator has been inactive for about a week, but I would not be at all surprised if he gets back to work on deletions for Magic artists sooner or later. Would you mind seeing if you can find anything for Thomas Baxa, Brom, Clyde Caldwell, Matt Cavotta, Jeff Easley, Larry Elmore, Rebecca Guay, Todd Lockwood, Roger Raupp, Adam Rex, Wayne Reynolds, Robh Ruppel, and Sam Wood? Some of those (particularly Caldwell, Easley, and Elmore) I just can't see being deleted, and some of them have at least a start at sourcing for notability, but I don't know if that's enough to avoid an AFD or even deletion, so if there's anything you can do to strengthen any of them up, I like what you've done so far and any help would be appreciated! 24.148.0.83 (talk) 12:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Cool thanks, you are a great guy! The nominator in question has yet to return to this subject so there's no hurry, but that doesn't mean he won't. You seem to have some good sources at your disposal that might otherwise be difficult to obtain, so that is a great resource. Better to be forearmed and forewarned, I say! :) 24.148.0.83 (talk) 16:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
You've added the "Masters of Dragonlance Art" reference to more than one of the artist pages I mention above. If you wouldn't mind listing out all the artists to whom this applies, I would gladly add a similar note to all that have their own article! If that would be a huge list you'd rather not type out, then I completely understand. :) 24.148.0.83 (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
No problem. I suspect it's not a full list, but the ones noted in the Chronicle review are Brom, Jeff Easley, Larry Elmore, Daniel Home, Todd Lockwood, Mark Zug, Clyde Caldwell, and Matt Stawicki. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Wow, thanks for what you were able to find! :) Would you like to do more in the future? If yes, I'll take some time to figure out what is needed and where. Thanks again! 24.148.0.83 (talk) 05:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
For Tony DiTerlizzi, Google News archives is a good resource for sources that have not yet been added to the article. (I checked after looking in my library's database and getting over a thousand hits, which are a bit hard to search through to find the most relevant. GNews is better at that.) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh wow, I underestimated Tony D! Thanks, I'll try to have a look through all of that. :) I suspect the others won't be so cumbersome. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 00:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
It's a press release for Play Expo in 2008, in which the spokeswoman is quoted as saying "Industry professionals will be there and the keynote speaker is Arnie Swekel, a world-renowned game artist whose work in video games, Dungeons and Dragons card art and numerous books, has years of experience in creating art for the Game Industry." Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, probably not the most significant thing in the world, but wouldn't necessarily hurt to mention. I don't know, I'll leave that up to you since you're doing all the work anyway. :) 24.148.0.83 (talk) 03:33, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
You really helped out when Fred Fields was at DRV - do you have anything at all for Franz Vohwinkel? It's currently not open for editing, but if you do find any sources you could make note of that. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 03:41, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
He's looking much better! A lot of text was removed from that one (in case you can find a source for any of that). Franz was overturned at DRV by the way - I think that one's here to stay for now. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 02:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm going out of town for a few days for Gen Con (is that a surprise?) so if you don't mind I might just toss some requests your way before I leave! 24.148.0.83 (talk) 15:48, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
It was a good time. :) When I came back, I did some more work on Jeff Easley in a manner similar to what I was able to do with DiTerlizzi recently. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 04:01, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I would have to assume that your estimation is correct, given the "expressionst" reference. Although Paul Kirchner's connection to comics makes that a possibility as well, your first instinct is probably the right one, here. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 05:45, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I appreciate it all the same! If you can add just one more source to an article, then you've added one more source than it had. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Lots of text was removed
I was wondering if you would do one last favor regarding the artists in the "Magic" category. I pointed out above how JBsupreme (who has now been inactive for a month after being blocked for something) removed a bunch of text from the Jeff Miracola article. Well, he actually did that on quite a few articles in the category, as he went looking for things to delete. I know you already searched for sources for some of these articles, but if you don't mind maybe you could take a look at these, in case you can find a source for any of that? Some he chopped, some he sent to AFD, some he just tagged, some he completely skipped over - there didn't seem to be any particular rhyme or reason as to why he did what he did, when and where. :( So yes, no, maybe so? 24.148.0.83 (talk) 11:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
JBsupreme believes that WP:BLP policy allows any editor to remove unsourced material simply because it is unsourced, but that is not a view that has achieved wide consensus (see this RfC). He also at times seems to have misunderstood WP:SELFPUB. ArbCom asked him to change his deletion practices but never specifically said anything about his removal of large swaths of text, as far as I know. I can look at a few of the articles, as I did with Jeff Miracola, sure. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)15:39, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
I was going to just restore the text for Volkan Baga, but it looks like someone originally copied that from here. :( I put a few things back in, though, but don't want to have a copyvio. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 12:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Yep, I went to his bio page on his website to start citing things, when I noticed "Oh... exact copy." :) Ah, hopefully Coulthart, Darrow, and Dorman will work out better than that. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 17:53, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I know! :) He did the cover art for yesterday's TFA subject, so a bonus for him. Thanks for getting Coulthart - I have been busy with other stuff lately, but that should end very soon. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 05:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
I checked Geof Darrow, and it looks like not only was the text already restored, but it was expanded on and sources were added - bonus! :) I just restored the removed text for Dave Dorman. If you have more sources for either article, let me know, otherwise that's OK. 24.148.0.83 (talk) 03:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Like the phoenix, I have died and risen from the ashes! Now that everything is stable for me again, I will take a look at these in the near future and simply restore the text - if you are able to add anything to them then great, otherwise I will just restore the text and move on. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 19:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
That's unfortunate - thanks for the catch, I put back in the text that (as far as I can tell) was not copyvio. That was about as bad as the copyvio I found at Volkan Baga! And thanks for adding more to Dringenberg. :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 12:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I must be wicked, because I never seem to get any rest. :) Anyway, I restored the rest of the text from those articles. If you have any additional sources for Darrow, Dorman, Leach, Lee, McCaig, or McNeill, then that would be super swell. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 03:10, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Nothing new for Dorman or Lee, nothing at all for Leach, and for Darrow it's tough to sift through it all to find the most relevant. There's probably some useable material in that Google News archive search. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I see what you mean! To be honest, I'm going to have to say that Darrow is in pretty good shape - leagues better than where he was a few months ago at least - and there is no likelihood of any immediate threat, so I'm just going to go ahead and leave that one as it is. I posted that Google News search link on the article's talk page. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 05:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Cool! I've added the removed text back in for Malloy and Moeller. I'm going to get to work on Moeller's article using the source you found. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 02:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
I restored all of the removed text for Mullins, Terese Nielsen, and Post. For David Palumbo, the article had been rewritten and even sourced, so I only put back in the parts that had not been part of the rewrite. For Cliff Nielsen, I did not restore that one sentence as it only refers to a part of his family. Time for bed. :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 05:32, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Awesome. :) Palumbo seems to have been sourced by someone else, you got Post during the AFD, and you got Terese Nielsen after the AFD. I'd say the three of those are safe! :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 05:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
I've said thanks maybe a dozen or more times already, but I really do commend you on your efforts to help me out with the Magic card artists, as I'm sure people who would care to read and edit those articles would if they knew how much you have helped. :) However, I have to level with you; Magic is not what I am interested in, as I am primarily a Dungeons & Dragons player, and D&D articles are what I edit on Wikipedia. Magic and D&D just happen to have a high cross-over rate, and when I noticed the artists articles getting put up for deletion, and saw you helping out, I figured it was good to shore up all the artists from the genre in case the same editor or someone else came back to finish the job. So, if you are willing to continue helping me, I'd like to ask if you would take a look at some articles on D&D artists as well? There are a few dozen, but since you have taken care of more than 40 of them already that makes for a lot less to look at. ;) What do you say, yes, no, or give you a well-deserved break first? ;) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 05:45, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey there. Lewis Pulsipher wrote an article about himself, and the article was put up for speedy deletion. If there's anything you can do to salvage this one, please do! :) BOZ (talk) 19:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
FYI, I tweaked your CBC R3 userbox into the userbox format; you may (or may not) want to switch the one on your userpage. Cheers, -M.Nelson (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Paul Erik. You have new messages at Argolin's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Losing my ever-loving mind
I'm spending way to much time (sometimes over an hour each day) reverting the WP:EGRS categories that continue to be inserted in biography articles by the 166.216.130./ IP range. It looks like the ANI discussion you linked to in your edit summary here resulted in a range block for at least some of the 166.216.130 range - is it not a possibility to enact a wider range block? If not, I may begin a slow descent into madness. Note that I've been tracking some of the IP addresses in the warnings I provide on the IP talk page example here. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots22:32, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Over an hour a day? Yikes. It would be nice if we could do a range block—I don't have experience with them, so I can't say what is or is not possible here. Maybe it's time for another post to ANI? (Thanks for the work you've put into this!) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)23:38, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
yup - about an hour a day. A particular target article pops up on my watchlist, and when I revert I check the IPs contributions and - low and behold! - multiple edits consisting of (for the most part) unsourced category additions. I then go through each article they've touched and read it to make sure the category they added is not supported by sourced content prior to reverting. It's painful, and my last raise doesn't cover this added aggrevation. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots23:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Wow--if any band article ought to be deleted, it's probably that one... That's good for you, cause then you have room for your own band! Drmies (talk) 19:00, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello there. I'm Addihockey10. I've just reverted a revision which contains someones real-life phone number, if you could hide the revision that'd be great : here it is! Thanks!
--Addihockey1003:45, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
On 21 September 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Will Munro, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midnight Peacocks request
I'd like you to review your !vote in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Midnight Peacocks . You stated, that the band meets wp:BAND criterion #1, but I disagree with this statement, for the simple reason that it's a wrong statement. You gave us an article that includes primarily an interview. I'll copy paste the part of wp:BAND crietrion #1 that is relevant, so you can understand what I mean:
1. Has been the subject of multiple (you have given so far only one article) non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable.
This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries EXCEPT for the following:
Any reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician or ensemble talks about themselves, and all advertising that mentions the musician or ensemble, including manufacturers' advertising.
With regards to you blocking this user, this editor is a recurring problem with what seems to be a dynamic IP, so the blocks aren't very effective. He has form for inserting false credits into film articles. Is there any chance of an IP range block?
You're right—the block is not so effective when there's that much IP hopping. I don't think I can issue a rangeblock without checking to see how much collateral damage there would be to non-vandal users in the range; someone like Avraham (talk·contribs), who has checkuser privileges, might be a better person to ask. Or you could go to WP:ANI for potentially faster service. :) Thanks for keeping a lookout; some of the vandalism is quite subtle, so more difficult to notice. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)15:52, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for replying. I've taken it to ANI so I'll see how that goes. Hopefully there is something that can be done. The IP concentrates mainly on animated features so I will probably notice when he next pops up. Betty Logan (talk) 16:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for writing me
Up until you messaged me I was not even aware that there was social communication between users and am not to familiar with the way to use the talk pages, and the only way I can immediately see as a way to respond is to click edit to the right of your comment. I'm not sure if that is correct or whether you will be notified as such so I'm just typing up a quick message here to let you know I "responded" on my talk page above your comment . Thank for taking care of us that are new to editing wikipedia pages.
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Paul, no hard feelings but I don't think it is appropriate for an Administrator to tell an Editor to change their vote in a deletion discussion. So I put it on the ANI to see if it is ok. Mr.Grantevans2 (talk) 22:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Dear Mr. Erik,
I am so sorry for the inconvenience. One of my friends used my computer and changed the Mika (singer) article. I am so sorry. I will change it back as soon as possible.
You're probably right, but the assertions were unreferenced. Perhaps I should have flagged as unreferenced BLP instead. Thanks!!! jsfouche ☽☾talk01:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, sorry about the mistake regarding the These Kids Wear Crowns article. A person I know hacked my user account, and vandalised the article substituting his own name. I had no knowledge of this until today, as this is not an article I would be inclined to visit anyways. I will try to make sure this does not happen again, but I don't know how hackers are able to get in anyways. I try to focus on adding only relevant/factual information to articles.
It's raining thanks spam!
Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks. • Ling.Nut (talk) 03:43, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I had a feeling you'd bring that up. This isn't even the same kind of situation (and I already explained why); plus, I am being extra careful. I did read the link you pointed out (by the way, a more appropriate link would have been WP:NAC, which I also read and am following), and I really don't see where I went wrong. I hope you're not assuming bad faith, and I don't meant to either, but I have to ask...do you really have a problem with the close, or do you have a problem with me closing it? Erpert(let's talk about it)19:44, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I know that sort of makes it look as if I'm assuming bad faith; it's not really how I meant it – it's just that the community has already spent a fair amount of time reviewing your NACs in the past. No, I wasn't referring to any part of the guidelines at WP:NAC. I was talking about how you frequently do not do step 5 correctly, and you sometimes miss doing step 8 (which was worse in this case, because there were multiple articles). Repeating myself a little here: you're not reducing the the workload of admins who work at closing AfDs if there's not some trust not only that you show good judgment, but also that you are taking the time to follow all the steps. It does not save time and work if admins know they have to be checking up on you like this. Sorry if that comes across as harsh. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)19:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
That actually doesn't answer the question. Anyway, which part of step 8 didn't I follow? I seriously don't see it. And no disrespect intended, but why don't you get that this isn't the same kind of situation as what happened in the past? You keep bringing it up but you don't actually state how those AfD closes are the same as this one (other than their merely all being AfD closes). Erpert(let's talk about it)20:11, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
which part of step 8 didn't I follow? You didn't remove the AfD tags from the articles after you closed the discussion as "keep". You didn't add an oldafd tag to the talk pages. People have to clean up after you, as Pgallert did here for you, for example. As for your other points, you're not seeing this from the point of view of admins who close AfDs. If I'm looking over the daily AfD logs and see something has been closed as NAC by someone who has demonstrated that they are familiar with AfD practices, I can think "good, one less thing to be done". If it's someone who is repeatedly not careful enough, if it's someone who has already demonstrated that they haven't sufficiently familiarized themselves with the general practice at AfD, then it's extra work to have to check up on what happened with the closure. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)20:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
That's what you're upset about? Well, I apologize for that, but to my knowledge, that's the only time I can recall forgetting to remove the tags from the articles (thus, it wasn't "repeatedly", as you claim). I don't even think you would have known about the closure at all if I hadn't mentioned it to Xeno. And you still didn't answer my question as to how this closure is different from past occurrences, but I'm getting to the feeling you aren't going to (maybe because you don't want to admit that you see my point?). Speaking of that, I'm not trying to violate WP:POINT here. Erpert(let's talk about it)21:04, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
I actually think it's commendable that you asked for an opinion from Xeno, and at this point I'm thinking it might have been better if I had waited for him to respond, as he is generally much better at explaining things than I am. I had thought that the previous discussion at WP:AN was not just about the specific problems around a "speedy keep" or two that you did, but the whole general issue of you being careful and experienced enough to close AfDs that others would have confidence in your ability to continue to perform NACs; that's the similarity to past discussions, as least as I see it. I might be wrong about that, I admit, at least with respect to the emphasis. But still: The fact that today I had to repeatedly mention Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Administrator instructions and you could not see the problem until I spelled it out—that does not inspire much confidence; sorry to be blunt about it. And if you go back to previous closes you have done, you'll see problems with step 5, and with adding tags to talk pages. Maybe you could focus on other areas of editing instead of one that has brought problems? I didn't think you were violating WP:POINT, not at all. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)21:31, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Dj Buddha
you deleted the "Dj Buddha" page i was working on for what reason... that is his myspace page.. He's my boyfriend and after all the work and time i put into making this page for you deleted because i copied his own Bio from his myspace? He has been on platium selling albums and is a very important person to the music scene but hasn't had the right people to help him promote himself, now that i do it for him you deleted.. please let me know what can be done.. thank you
his page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.
Hello Cammyab. I appreciate it is very frustrating to put a lot of work into an article, only to find it has been removed. However, there are two problems, and you've touched on both of them. One is that Wikipedia must be extremely cautious about copyrighted material. Every time you open an edit box, there is a message below it saying "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." Anything posted to MySpace is under copyright unless it explicitly states otherwise. Since Wikipedia produces an encyclopedia that can be freely copied and redistributed by anyone, under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, we will remove anything that is incompatible, and things copied from other websites are almost always incompatible. We cannot host copyrighted material.
I processed the ticket that you suggested here. But generally I don't think it is a good idea to help people's assistants with doing that. It encourages promotional COI editing when we'd be better off keeping the text off Wikipedia as copyvio in the first place.--Chaser (talk) 05:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't feel all that strongly about whether or not the RfC closes with or without a summary statement, as I don't think it will make much of a difference going forward (if more problems occur) but I do appreciate you taking the time to notify the participants. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)05:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:The Ghost Is Dancing EP.jpg
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:The Ghost Is Dancing EP.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk04:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey, Paul Erik. Hope you're having a great holidays. Not sure is this is the proper channel for this or not, but it has recently come to my attention that the page for myself as a writer has been erroneously redirected to the page for my band Rock Plaza Central. At one point, a separate page existed to discuss my work as a musician andauthor. It is linked to from various other pages, including lists of canadian writers, and perhaps ontario and new brunswick writers, too (haven't checked that yet).On this page, I believe it listed the books I had written up to thatpoint, which have been studied on several university courses in North America, andalso mentioned the music I had written and performed with the band Rock PlazaCentral, which appropriately had its own page. At some point, however, thepersonal page was redirected to the band pagehttp: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock_Plaza_Central as if the band page only represents myself and not the other members involved, and I believe this is aproblem. Really, they should exist as separate identities, with the band pagereflecting the music the group of us have made to together and of which I am apart, and a page that says I play in the band but also discusses my work as an author. I'm listed on page of Canadian authors, for example, but then the linksends the reader to the band page.
It looks as though, from going through the page history, that you may have created the original author page in the first place. So I though maybe it made sense to approach you about fixing the error. Is there something that can be done about this? It's not entirely fair to the other people who perform in the band.
You can contact me if you like at chrisrulesbigtime at sympatico dot ca.
Thanks for your message, Chris, and best of the season to you too. I'll see what I can do about the separate article, which had looked like this. Another editor had redirected it to Rock Plaza Central probably because it contained no citations to third-party sources (see our guidelines on notability). What would be needed are some news articles that are primarily about Chris Eaton rather than being mainly about the band. Searching around just now, I found this from Chartattack.com, and there appears to be something in the National Post as well (June 30, 2009). There's this and this from Exclaim!. Are there any other newspaper or magazine articles that you are aware of, which focus mainly on your writing? Have some newspapers reviewed any of your books? Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:38, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, hope you've had a happy New Year so far! :)
Hopefully you are still interested in helping me out with Dungeons & Dragons artist bio articles, as we have discussed previously. If so, I think a good place to start would be with some of the most prolific ones, namely: Valerie Valusek, Mark Nelson, Paul Jaquays, Jim Holloway, and Stephen Fabian. Jaquays is an article in pretty good shape already, source-wise, although it never hurt to add more! :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 01:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Sure. I couldn't find anything for Valusek. For Nelson, using the search terms "Mark Nelson" + "artist" gets too many false positives (way more pages of hits than I'm willing to wade through). "Mark Nelson" + "dungeons" was not useful. Do you have any suggestions for a relevant search combination for him? Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
It's odd about Valerie; she was a very prolific artist for a while and then kind of disappeared completely, and now there's nothing to be found for her. Maybe cross Mark Nelson with "comics" or "RPG" or anything that makes logical sense from this page? 108.69.80.49 (talk) 06:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
"Jim Holloway" brings up pages of hits, but there is nothing for "Jim Holloway" + "artist", nor for "Jim Holloway" + "Dragon", nor for "Jim Holloway" + the titles of any of the video games or modules mentioned in the article. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:06, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Holloway might be another case like Valusek; extremely prolific, but only in a limited field, so not very much press. I found a list of artistic credits; looks like just about everything he did is game related, although he did some coloring book work for Golden Books. Thanks for the extra bit on Jaquays, and I saw your add on Fabian as well. :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 02:50, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Oh well, thanks for the additions to Daniele and Waller, and especially Sutherland! Got anything for Ken Frank? David Martin might be especially difficult since there is more than one artist with that name. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 18:42, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
I tried "Ken Frank", "David Martin", "David L. Martin" searched with "artist", "illustrator", "dungeons", "dragons", "magic", "RPG", and various titles of their listed works, but sadly I was unable to find anything for them. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:23, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm back! :) I concur about the two Wayne Englands probably not being the same person; at least, I haven't seen anything to connect them as of yet. Let me know if you find anything for Prescott, LaForce/Diesel, and Otus. On a somewhat related note, I'd like to see if you have anything for unsourced article Robert J. Schwalb as well. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 00:10, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Steve Prescott is a common name with a huge number of hits. Using various search combinations with the artist's works noted in his article did not turn up any sources. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I don't know about Schwalb. I found some of the same stuff on Google, so I will try to see if I can dig up more info. Thanks for the finds on Otus and LaForce! :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 03:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Any help is good! Is there more in the reference you added to LaForce that could be recycled to other articles? The title is very suggestive of just such a possibility. :) 108.69.80.49 (talk) 03:41, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Every little bit helps. If there's nothing else for Schwalb, that would be unfortunate, but there are some citations to awards he has won now at least. 108.69.80.49 (talk) 12:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Paul, a few days ago, I made an edit to List of Agatha Christie's Poirot episodes (which was reverted). After reading WP:V, I concluded that I needed to provide inline citations per WP:BURDEN (which I did). It seems the WP:WAR do not apply: the reverts are done anon and always 24 hours apart. Can you protect the page from unregistered users or put some other protection on it? I'm standing by my edits: no one has proved they are wrong. Thanks. Argolin (talk) 00:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Argolin. It looks as if this is a content dispute in which there has not been enough discussion. You've edited the article to show when the episode "The Clocks" aired for the first time. (Apparently it aired in Norway on 30 December 2009.) Others have changed it back, because the episode has not yet aired on the original network (ITV). I see that The Guardian says "The Clocks is already in the can for a broadcast next year (meaning 2011)". So, what needs to be discussed is whether List of Agatha Christie's Poirot episodes should list original air dates in any country or original air dates on the original network. (Semi-protecting the page would give you an unfair advantage over the unregistered users in a content dispute; it's typically used for protecting against vandalism from a large number of IP users.) Let me know if that's unclear at all. Happy new year, Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)12:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul, thanks as always and Happy new year for you too. If you're interested there is a guideline: WP:MOSTV. I've read somewhere that the episode order is based on the air date from the orignating network (can't find it in the guideline). It seems my edits are correct per WP:V and should stay. The reverters should have cited the source you found at The Guardian per WP:V and that would have been the end of it. I am amazed (but not really) at the latitude given to unregistered users.
You rock at finding references! I'm much better now at finding and editing inline citatations for articles. I will be creating my third article soon. I have to reread the WP:NM to ensure the band meets the guideline. When done, I'll post something here for your help with WP:INCITE. Argolin (talk) 03:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Maino & Premo
You gotta admit though, the similarity is uncanny. I saw an unlabelled photo of Maino and I thought it was DJ Premier. I had to look at their differing arm tattoos to be sure they were different people lol.Hoops gza (talk) 17:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Help! : Posting the truth is a violation and I get a warning? Please, tell this is not true.
To whom it may concern,
I have been warned about adding unsourced content (see email below) and if unsourced, which seems to be vague in definition, means I have posted false information about Kojen, THIS is false. If I deleted something, that was in error, but anything I post on Wikipedia is fact, not opinion, and I am astute about this. I remain neutral and post nothing but fact.
I feel that the removal was unjust and unwarranted. People need to know the facts and Wikipedia is where I go for factual information.
Removal of any facts from your site seem detrimental to the actual purpose of it origins. I feel the perhaps someone doesn't want the facts revealed.
If you wish to remove my posting, I am fine with this since the Kojen entry is gone. However, I am saddened that I get a warning of being blocked because I post facts and remained neutral. Again, if I removed something, it was an error on my part.
I have lost a bit of faith in Wikipedia now and hope that in the future my truth will remain visible for all to see.
Thank you.
PS: I enjoyed Jimmy Wales on The Daily Show.
Sorry that my warning was as harsh as it was. The problem was not that the information you attempted to post was "false", it was that it was material that was critical of an organization which had no sourcing (such as citations to newspapers, books, or other reliable sources). It contravened Wikipedia's policy of verifiability, so multiple editors removed it. (See also the essay Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth.) You may not have realized you were doing something wrong, but you used multiple accounts to edit war to include it. The usual approach in such a situation is to discuss it among editors, but you kept changing IP addresses so it was difficult to know who to talk to! By the time you were editing from the "Truthaboutkojen" account I had the (obviously false) impression that you were uninterested in discussion and so the warning was issued. Again, apologies for the multiple misunderstandings.
Paul, Can you review the The White Wires article for me? I created the article; it doesn't seem correct that I can now rate/assess it. I'm sure it passess WP:NM and has sources per WP:V. However, those judgements are up to you and the rest of the wiki community. Thanks Argolin (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey, nice work, Argolin. I'll take a closer look at it soon. One quick comment, though: When you are quoting something directly from a newspaper review, such as The Ottawa Citizen calls the band energetic and entertaining, be sure to put quotation marks at the appropriate places. Nice to see you are starting to get your feet wet with more article creation and editing! Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)14:38, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm really tired of adding music articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music. Almost done; my guess is there is about another 500 music groups and musicians to go. After adding so much excrement its time to start adding/editing articles I'm interested in! For sources I know that wikipedia places a higher value on national newspapers than local ones. That's a big problem in Canada as the Globe and Mail requires payment to access anything old. The National Post hasn't been around all that long. I used the Ottawa XPress assuming it's value is medium as a 3rd party source. I put a few blogs in as I don't think they are banned outrignt. Let me know your thoughts on the article; I'll be creating more like The White Wires going forward. Thanks again. Argolin (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
I just realized I've actually heard this band on Radio 3! (Their song, "Be True to Your School" – good one.) I find searches in Exclaim! and in Chartattack.com often fruitful, and they are reliable sources for music at a national level. I also usually check nowtoronto.com, eyeweekly.com, straight.com, and some other local music periodicals. I have access to archives of The Globe and Mail back to the 1980s, through my library, so if there's anything you want me to check, feel free to ask. For this article, you've done a good job, Argolin. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:43, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Radio 3 love them! The White Wires song "Pretty Girl" sounds like a big mash of Hefner and The Gruesomes. In fact, their song "Girly Girly Girly" stinks of The Gruesomes. That's all my original research and will be kept out of the article! LOL (unless there are 3rd party ref's!) We do have an unidentified user(s) adding unreferenced material. However, the big complaint I have is with citation style (I guess). I could not find a Canadian (GA or FL) source to base my citations. The style I used is simple and elegant (based on a US source)!!! Check it out... The White Wires. Argolin (talk) 07:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I've always taken citation style to mean consistent use of fist name,last name, article, joural, date (dd-mm-yy) as opossed to last name, first name, date (MM-DD-YY), article, journal. The citation "method" I've come across makes complete sense to me. If you edit the "References" section, you see all citations there as opposed to seeing reflist. Seeing all the references together allows you to judge the quality of the citations (3rd party citations etc...). Is that an offer to help with the white wires? The article needs more content. lol... Argolin (talk) 04:32, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Apologies for my slow reply. You've done a good job of gathering together opinions of the band's style from a variety of sources. One thing you need to be careful about is presenting opinions as facts—we're not supposed to do that on Wikipedia, even if there's a footnote to a reference. You'll need to rewrite parts of it to indicate right in the text that these are music critic's views of the band's music. And as I said before, it's great to see you moving into more article writing and editing! I note as well your excellent use of the discography list template here; I'm learning something new that I can make use of in my own editing. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)00:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I knew you would get to me eventually... :) I'm amazed at the amount of info there is out there on Canadian indie bands! As much as I dislike google, I've been using them. You can't google search with only the band's name; a few searches with different search terms will eventually get you info on the band. I copied the article anyway from the sandbox (less the music style section) to the live article because of the structure change (including the discography section) and, to my horror, to fix some of the incorrect reference links! The musical style section just didn't seem good enough for a wiki article. I'll take another few days and work on it some more. I have two questions to post to the discography list template people. It's not really clear what to use for the "Type" parameter when noting a Cover song submitted on a Compilation album. Further, when an orginal song is submitted and Type=Compilation, do you list the other tracks other bands have submitted? I am leaning towards noting all tracks with who covered it and who did the original. Finally, I used the {{Discography list}} as it seemed to fit. At this point I don't know if any of The White Wires albums meet WP:N per WP:ALBUM. It's usage also it fit, as there is a lot of info on their releases (various labels, covers, release format: they love vinyl). P.S. I will make a specific edit to the live article when I know from discog people. Argolin (talk) 03:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul, does the article satisfy class=C? Once I add Going Gaga 2, Wikipedia will be the only on-line source for a complete discography. I know it's not B yet. I've seen many articles at C when I would have rated them as class=Start. I ask as I understand the differences between Stub & Start, but want to get more of a handle on the other classes. Argolin (talk) 05:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks very much. To be pedantic, I've only referenced one source; there are 38 citations, and 4 notes. I'm game on trying to get more articles promoted. I'm working on my baby, but am open to adding a few more. You? Argolin (talk) 18:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul, purely as info for you, searching the web for The White Wires after your newspaper search (above), I found: <ref name="ottawacitizen(blog)">
For speedy deletion, I assume you mean CSD A7 – but it would not qualify for that, as there are numerous credible assertions of importance: he is signed to a major label; he was written about in an article in the Ottawa Citizen; he had a charted hit. Any one of those on its own would be enough to escape an A7 speedy deletion.
Prod is intended to be for something that is non-speedyable but which would be an uncontroversial deletion: something that you would expect no other editor would likely object to. I wouldn't suggest prodding an article about a musician who is purported to have had a charted hit, unless it was an obvious hoax.
That leaves AfD. If this article were to be deleted, that would be the way to go. But I would probably argue to keep this article. There is an entire article about him in the Citizen, and additional evidence to support the statement that he had a radio hit; those chart positions noted seem unlikely to be made up. But if you disagree, and would like a wider range of opinions, you could certainly bring it to AfD. P.S. Thanks for asking for my suggestions! Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:35, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
I thought it was a hoax. I looked in the Ottawa Citizen for verification and got nothing. The ref you added is a blog? There are some big claims made in the article. I won't bring it to Afd (if that's your opinion). Just a thought... We have one Justin Beiber... we don't need another... I think we're full in that category lol... Argolin (talk) 00:19, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Ha! Yes, that category is full. :) No, it's not a hoax: the article in the Citizen is for real, and supports a good deal of what's in the article. The additional reference is by one of the staff of TVWeek. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:20, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I have encounted a duplicate entry: Jamie Thompson (Canadian Musician) and Jamie Thompson. I believe one or the other qualifies for speedy deletion. The guideline WP:SD for placing {{db-a10}}, {{db-same}} on the article indicates "recent" but does not indicate any timeline!!! However, I think the first one has to go: it has only one edit from April 2010. Before I do that, I should copy relevant info between them (ie. merge)? There is a disambiguation page which does not list our Canadian guy. So far, I have added the two articles to Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music and others. Help please!!! Argolin (talk) 01:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
WP:A10 does not apply, because it is not a recent creation. (It was created in April 2010.) In the speedy-deletion world, "recent" generally refers to a creation within hours or days, rather than months or years. Also, if you merge anything, then the original page history has to remain in order to preserve the documentation of which editor contributed to the article. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Now, it seems to me that Jamie Thompson is incorrect as there are other people out there with that name. However, the Jamie Thompson article was the first to be created. Date of creation does not matter: it is a question of clairty? Searching wiki for Jamie Thompson should always go to the DAB page? Argolin (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
There is no other Wikipedia article about someone named Jamie Thompson... unless I am missing something? (I just did a search.) If there are multiple people by that name who have articles, then in that case you're right, we would turn it into a disambiguation page. (If there are just two, then it could be handled with hatnotes.) The exception is if there is one person by the name who is far more notable than the others, as explained in WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:34, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes :) I'm wondering what happend to the talk page. There's nothing yet at the log telling us that both pages were added to our project, or that the redirect was established. Argolin (talk) 05:55, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm pleased that I could help you for once. :) I thought you maintiand such a list and that's why I asked. I started one for myself a few months back when I realised that I will be creating new articles (or citing poorly sourced ones). It's by now way complete; but it's some cites that are in our Canadian music articles. Now, I copy the The White Wires#Citations section to an article that I'm adding ref's to. Argolin (talk) 01:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
Can something be done?
Paul, what can be done about user Dolovis? Her talk page contains complaints about other wikipedia guideline violations. Instead of posting in the Afd debate, I posted my concerns to this user's page here [4] (it's been blanked out). This user likes shutting down discussions asking you not to post to their talk page in the future. Argolin (talk) 00:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
If a user has recurring problems, and direct discussion with them does not seem to help, then sometimes a larger discussion is initiated at WP:RFC/USER. If it comes to that, it appears that User:Resolute and User:Djsasso would both be in position to certify a RFC/U.
Can I offer some feedback to you? Just an observation, and take it with a grain of salt. I think it was a good idea, first off, to post to the user's talk page rather than posting in the AfD debate. Your first attempt at discussion led to this response. It's not the response you were hoping for, but I probably would have left it at that. (At least the user recognized that it was a good thing that you had saved the article from deletion.) I've found that even if users don't immediately say that they understand a concern, often their behaviour does change as a result of having brought it to their attention. Your next comment telling them they were "in violation" (if you were feeling frustrated, I do understand, and can relate to that!) led to a rather defensive response, so that additional exchange might have only inflamed the situation, rather than getting the result you hoped for. Time will tell if this user becomes more diligent in researching subjects before nominating for deletion. There are many users on the project who are not sufficiently careful with deletion nominations. I take heart, though, in that even ill-advised AfD nominations often have a beneficial result: better-sourced articles. I really do commend you, though, for your attention to WP:ATD. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:39, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello! The article Will Munro has finally received a Good Article review. It seems able to be passed, pending resolution of a couple of small issues. Please head over to the review page and see what I've had to say. Let me know on my talk page when you believe the issues have been resolved, or if you require further advice. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi Paul. The seven days since I undertook the review expires tomorrow, and there does not appear to have been any work done on this article. If you would like me to hold the review open while you address the issues identified, could you please indicate that intention by commencing work on the article prior to Wednesday? Many thanks. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:19, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
omg Paul! I didn't know you were a fan of Idol lol! (hope you don't mind me jumping in) I remember now that I came across this Category:Canadian Idol participants days before I came across Alex Lacasse. This along with the rather dubious WP:NM articles I've previously been forced to add to our project started me on my way to real article creation. Anyway, I have no real plans to go through Category:Canadian Idol participants and it's parent Category:Canadian pop singers looking for articles to add to our music project. To avoid overbannering (which I was reminded of recently), I had hoped that many of these articles would be added via my examination of the genere based categories.
How about you adding them to our project? I'd sort of rather be caught dead, than aiding in the dribble that is reality tv: LOL!Argolin (talk) 00:54, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I've come accross a Datsik "musician" article not added to any project. It was deleted per WP:BAND 23 March 2010; see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Datsik (musician). Two things: can you do your thing and confirm his non-notability?; Second: what now? In the past, I would just add the article and move on to the next item on my list (as I was Skeptical that the Canadian music project had knowledge of, and/or any input in the deletion of the article). Argolin (talk) 23:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
If the article was pretty much identical to the article that was deleted by the AfD, then it could be speedily deleted using CSD G4. But in this case, that would not apply, because (checking the deleted versions of the article) I see that this new version already has some improved sourcing: the coverage in Spinner. A second AfD would be needed if it's to be deleted again. Doing a little research, though, I see that The Province calls him "one of the most popular dubstep DJs around", he gets a little bit of coverage in Eye Weekly, [5][6], and even some brief coverage in the Liverpool Echo, so I would think, with the coverage in Spinner as well, it's notable enough to stay. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)00:08, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I'm going to add White Lung as a music article. I can only really find two WP:RS; the many times written up in Exclaim! and the reviews in Chart (magazine). I'm having a hard time figuring out what to write about. Can you help find sources? The White Lung in place isn't an article but rather a redirect [7] to Asbestos. Naming the article White Lung (band) won't help the matter. In fact, is White Lung (band) a preferred name over White Lung? My perliminary article is in User:Argolin/sandbox6. Thanks again Paul, I know I've sucking up a lot of your time recently. Argolin (talk) 00:51, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
I've turned White lung into a disambiguation page. Yes, I think the best place for your new article would be at White Lung (band). Once it's made, we can add a link to it at the bottom of the disambiguation page. I didn't do an extensive search, but searching "White Lung" and their album name did not turn up any hits in my library's database, I'm afraid. But it does look as if the subject is notable enough. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
A couple of other minor issues to note: The fact that a band has a page at CBC Radio 3 does not necessarily indicate that the band has received any airplay on CBC Radio 3. There are over 14,000 band pages; most of them have not been placed "in rotation" on the radio stations. Also, just for your information, "Footnotes" or "Citations" are not commonly used as headers: the more common ones are either "References" or "Notes" – see WP:FNNR. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Paul my claim of WP:BAND #11 is I don't think is a minor issue. I suppose you're being nice (don't LOL!!!)? I've re-edited NoCore and its Afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NoCore. I will of course change my preliminary article.
Many thanks for your reference to WP:FNNR!!! I will probably have to remove my iTunes naming note per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources#Sources_to_avoid. However, the WP:MOSMUSIC has no guideline regarding the naming of Footnotes/Notes/Citations/References sections. I think I understand your point in the naming of the Footnotes section: I should name the section References with a subsection Citations, as few music articles are structured with the Footnotes section. Argolin (talk) 07:41, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Paul I added a multiple issues tag to the above. About two-thirds of the Music career section is a direct copy of http://www.rapdict.org/Caine. I added a copypaste template. Looking at the edit (which was mostly undone) I added multiple issues tags as the article had a new unreviewed article banner dated March 2010. I am checking now as I wanted to confirm the copyright issues had been taken care of. Argolin (talk) 00:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Not really the answer I was expecting! :) It was speedily deleted before Wikipedia:CSD#A7. I'll have to re-read the Afd guidelines again. The article's creator was warned about copyright violations in the past. I believe sockpuppetry is involved (but that's a whole other wiki guideline)! Thanks. Argolin (talk) 03:25, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
I agree absolutley agree with the removal. I assume that you are not allowed to delete it as nomiminator. It was speedy deleted the first time as not demonstrating WP:N. When the article was recreated (I believe by the same user; I can't tell anymore; the logs are gone) the orginal issue of demonstrating WP:N was not resolved. When I stated above that "About two-thirds of the Music career section" was a violation WP:COPYVIO, that meant about half of the article was in violation. There were many other WP:GUIDELINES issues (my edit log is gone for this article); I remember noting PEACOCK, Spam, WP:BLP UNSOURCED. I may have noted Template:External links. This may have been incorrect as the actual problem is that the remaining external links were all buy me sites per Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources#Sources_to_avoid. Argolin (talk) 05:14, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Paul, it's back! LOL!!! All of the WP:COPYVIO violations have been resolved. LOL!! Sorry I can't stop it. The article has structure LOL!!, but no content. There is nothing claiming WP:BAND or even WP:N. LOL!!! Even though I AM NOT A DELETIONIST, can I speedy delete this one? There are two references: one to nothing, other not exibiting notability. LOL!Argolin (talk) 05:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
It's a bit of a judgment call as to whether we ought to view it as asserting WP:MUSICBIO criterion #1 because it lists sources (and evaluation of sources is discussed at AfD). Another advantage of having a full AfD discussion is that (if it results in deletion) we could later speedy-delete as CSD G4 if the article keeps getting recreated. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)19:23, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Paul I need to impose upon you for another search. There are many newspaper articles for Opera Canada. None that I've been able to find deal directly with Opera Canada. Most newspaper articles cite Wayne Gooding (the current editor) espousing about this/that Opera. I have a list of Directors / Trustees (2000–2009) if that helps. The preliminary article is in User:Argolin/sandbox7. Argolin (talk) 03:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Sure. Is there anything in particular you would like me to search for? "Opera Canada" gets hundreds of hits in my library's database, and it's a lot to sort through. At a quick glance, I see a couple of articles from the Toronto Star that could be used to add a little more content, especially "Opera community rallies to save ailing magazine", 13 October 1991, p. C5. I'd be glad to add it to the article once it's in mainspace. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
The Star article looks great. I'll have another go and try to find it myself. I'm trying to expand Contents and reception section. The article's name is based on other publications such as Opera (magazine). I want to disambiguate it so that there is no ambiguity as to what it is. It is a magazine independent of all opera companies in Canada. But, hey I'll remove the disambiguator in the name if that's what you recommend. Argolin (talk) 04:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Regarding page deletion "03:10, 11 February 2010 Paul Erik (talk | contribs) deleted "Stephen Shank" (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance ...)
Hi,
Just checking why this page deletion was made: "03:10, 11 February 2010 Paul Erik (talk | contribs) deleted "Stephen Shank" (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance ...)
The article that I deleted last year had no sources, and said nothing beyond identifying him as a director who was born in Brussels. Please go ahead and create a new article, with sources. It is not protected against re-creation. See Wikipedia:Your first article for some guidance, but let me know if you need further help. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitch MacDonald until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention)17:49, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Re: speedy deletions
Technically that may be so, but the articles I deleted were in such poor shape that I couldn't, in good conscience, leave them on the site. That and most didn't have any tangible content to them, so went by the spirit of A7 rather than the letter. WizardmanOperation Big Bear19:30, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not sure that's the ideal way to go about it. Some can be redirected to the school district, no-content is a different speedy, and Prod can work well enough most of the time. That's not to say there was anything really worth keeping; I just don't think it's a good idea that admins act in a unilateral fashion like that. But I won't make a fuss about it. ...beyond the fuss I just made. :) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)22:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
duplicate entry?
Hey Paul me again. I think I've discovered a duplicate entry: Dallas Green (musician) and City and Colour. The first article is quite a mess (invalid citations, infobox problems, link-rot, structure). Lots of talk here [8], but little being done to fix anything. I didn't go through the second. Argolin (talk) 19:09, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh my!!! If that's the case that we keep both, serious pruning must be done on Dallas Green (musician). His discography is misleading listing all the albums in City and Colour and Alexisonfire without a simple see: discography City and Colour, Alexisonfire. The text within the article is also very misleading: "On February 12, 2008, Green released a new full-length studio album entitled Bring Me Your Love." He didn't release it: his City and Colour recording alias released it. I've added to the problem by citing the City and Colour's 2009 Songwriter of the Year to him per here [9]. The Juno's named him (not his alias) as winning. The City and Colour article contains no reference to Julius Butty per User Bearcat's assertion in the Afd. I've tried looking for Julius Butty here [10]] and here [11]. That article is also wrong claiming a Juno award nomination. However, that's a separate isse.
Both articles should remain. Dallas Green and City and Colour both meet our notability guidelines. I added a note at Talk:Dallas Green (musician) about there being separate Juno Awards: Green has won an award for songwriting, and City and Colour has won one for Alternative Album of the Year. The discography in the Green article has been handled as is often handled in musician biography articles when the musician has been part of multiple bands: the albums for which the musician was a member of the band get listed. If there comes a time when Green is no longer a member of Alexisonfire then any albums the band releases after that would not get listed in Green's article. I don't understand why you think duplication is a problem; it happens quite often. If I've missed the point of what you are saying, please let me know! :) You're right that some of the wording needs adjusting to clarify that albums are actually City and Colour albums. I don't think it warrants putting a big tag on the article, though. And something about Butty's production work probably should be added to the City and Colour article, if someone can find a source for that. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:41, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm bascially saying that they are the same. A merger is probably out due to his Juno win as Dallas Green (even though it was recorded by his alias band City and Colour)? I added the citation to the DG article in the WP:LEAD section. I'll go back and make that clear. I was going to point to the Dan Boeckner. There is a clear separtation of what he's done with each band. This is a poor example as it is a class=Start. Shouldn't we use
The precedent seems to be now that we delete individuals who haven't made anything of themselves after Idol, which those two have not. As I said at the other AFD, someone like Michael Sarver has a post-Idol claim to notability with a charting album. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention)02:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I believe this article to be a contravention of WP:COPYVIO. The article's creator is not active on wikipedia. I placed a notice on the discussion page, but it is not very active. Should I go ahead and place {{db-copyvio|url=http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=U1ARTU0001657}} on the article? It looks like a copyright violation right from the start in 2006! I've added this citation on the discussion page and in the article itself as an in-line citation.
Argolin, you are absolutely right. Good find. I double-checked the earliest version of the article, and checked using web.archive.org that it matched the Canadian Encyclopedia article from the same time period. I've deleted it as a copyright violation. We should probably check the same editor's other contributions for similar problems. Thanks very much! Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:15, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
I checked the user's talk page. There was a warning about an image in copyright violation. Other warnings about creating articles without references. The login used has not been used since 2006. The article's gone: I can't see who created it anymore. Is looking other articles created by the user part of the checklist? Argolin (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Right, sorry, I forgot that would have disappeared. The user was SingSong (talk·contribs). Yes, just as we check the contribution history after we revert someone's vandalism, it's a good idea to check other contributions of someone who has violated copyright. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
My apologies, BOZ. I've had only very intermittent Internet connection over the past few days—things should be back to normal a couple of days from now. Have you looked through the news archive link? If there's a specific one behind a paywall that you think I should take a closer look at, let me know. Otherwise, let me get back to you on Tuesday or Wednesday. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)14:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Looks like some interesting stuff in there! His grandfather's obit reveals that his grandfather and father were both named John Flint Dille, Sr and Jr respectively, but I don't know if it mentions the youngest Flint by name. This one may talk a little about his role with American Tail. This is freely available, and while interesting because he has some quotes about how his grandfather would have appreciated a 1984 flight of the shuttle Challenger, is probably not useful for an article about him. This one is also available freely, and talks breifly about plans that he and his sister Lorraine Williams had to being back Buck Rogers. This one is freely available, and it looks like it might be a good source which discusses him directly and in detail! This one is a brief note attaching him to a possible Buck Rogers film; there are others like it, but this one seems to have the most detail so far. This one is a paysite, which I believe contains his father's obit. This one talks about his involvement in a recent Buck Rogers comic, as well as about his work in the video game field. This one, a bit more specifically mentions briefly his involvement with the Sin City video game (try cross-referencing Frank Miller with Flint Dille and you'll probably come up with a lot! Although a lot of them are just brief name-drops for Dille.) That was what I saw on the first three pages of Google News, but if you think it's worth it to look deeper I have no problem with that. BOZ (talk) 18:47, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
All right – the non-freely available ones, in order:
The New York Times obit is too old to show up in my database.
The Chicago Tribune review has a paragraph (78 words) about Dille's writing.
That bit from the Trib might be useful, depending on what it says. I think I was mistaken about that being his father's obit, and may have been his uncle's. This, this, this, this, this, and this might be useful, don't know, cause I can't see them. This page crashed my internet I think, so I didn't get to look at it. This page wouldn't open for me. That's the next three pages on the Google News archive. BOZ (talk) 23:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The Tribune article is critical of Dille's writing, for example saying, "Screenwriter Flint Dille has provided a story that is frenetic and fast-paced—in the end, too hyper..." although also notes, "Dille periodically tosses in bits of relatively sophisticated humor." I'll try to dig up the others. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:26, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
The Sun-Times article is in my database, but not the full text.
The Hamilton Spectator article is not in my database.
The Miami Herald article is not in my database.
The Orlando Sentinel article does not provide much critical commentary about Dille's writing directly; essentially it just notes he wrote the screenplay.
The Press-Telegram article is not in my database.
The Philadelphia Inquirer article says just this about Dille: "There are all kinds of game-related books to choose from but the recent The Art of the Video Game by Josh Jenisch, The Art of Halo 3 by Prima Publishing. and The Ultimate Guide to Video Game Writing and Design by Flint Dille and John Zuur Platten are heady, thought-provoking choices."
The page that crashed for you is a press release, but it says "...the game allows players to relive their favorite movie moments and go beyond in a movie-inspired storyline penned with the help of Flint Dille, best known as the writer of the acclaimed “TRANSFORMERS” animated series."
I think there's enough to restore it to userspace to undergo improvements in sourcing. If you ask Fetchcomms, who closed the AfD, to restore it and move it to your userspace, I'll help with some of the sourcing. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the start on that - I don't know if I'll have the free time today, but I'd like to start incorporating some of the more useful reliable sources we found above. BOZ (talk) 14:10, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help; I moved the page back into article space, with a note on the talk page. I think it's good enough to go live again, at least at the very minimum. BOZ (talk) 23:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Paul, same thing. Any chance of working that magic wand of yours to save the article at the current Afd? There's one keep and one delete; I don't know if that is enough to save it! Argolin (talk) 00:08, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Argolin. I actually did a search when that article appeared on the Article Alerts, but sadly could not find any sources. He was just a touring musician for Strange Advance, maybe? (See here.) I notice he's not credited on their albums, Worlds Away and 2WO. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Oh no!!! I don't like to loose an article like this. You and me know he is a musician. He is listed on a Quickflight album here.
Please respond: I suppose the (admin) nominator should not have mentioned the unsourced articles (now sourced per WP:V), or that the other two bands do not have wiki articles? I believe this statement implying non-notability to be completely unfair: the non-existance of a wikipedia article does not mean non-notability? Argolin (talk) 04:15, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Although most notable bands probably have already had articles written about them, you're correct that the absence of an article does not necessarily mean that a band is non-notable. At an AfD, everyone in the discussion ideally will share responsibility in researching whether a related subject is notable, as part of researching the notability of the subject of the article under discussion. Have you found some evidence that either Rent Party or The Lookaways is notable? I did a few searches like this but could not find anything. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:41, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Good work on the Strange Advance article. For Rent Party, those would help with verifiability, yes, but I don't think that databases such as repertoire.bmi.com have been acceptable as counting towards WP:N notability. It might end up that the article will be redirected to Quickflight (which appears to account for most of his notability), with a brief note there about his work with other bands. Not all musicians who have worked with notable bands end up getting "kept" at AfD. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)17:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Come the day I actually propose a (musician/band) article at Afd, it is non-notable per WP:BAND. Full stop. Statements about the sources (or lack thereof) are necessary only to the extent that the reference fails WP:V; meaning it should not be considered part of WP:BAND #1. If I'm way of the mark, please say so!
Thanks for the big reminder that a source may be verifiable leading to WP:EXIST but may do nothing for WP:N (or in this case WP:BAND). I guess at this point, I don't understand why (from above) "Not all musicians who have worked with notable bands end up getting "kept" at AfD." Ric deGroot is a keep based on my reading of WP:BAND #6. What am I missing? Argolin (talk) 00:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the slow reply. Thanks for that reminder about the WP:EXIST essay—I've read it before, but had forgotten about it. Have you seen User:Uncle G/On notability? That one was helpful to me when I was trying to understand what Wikipedia's "notability" was all about.
As for the "keep per WP:BAND #6" issue, by a strict reading of it you are right, but what I think you might be not getting is that WP:MUSIC is a guideline rather than policy, and therefore more flexible around interpretation. As I wrote above, DeGroot was just a touring member for Strange Advance, and there does not appear to be much written about his role in Strange Advance at all, so I think it's a bit of a stretch to say he was a member of multiple notable bands. The other piece you might be missing is that editors have become much more cautious about including BLPs of marginally notable people, out of concern that we are hosting too many poorly-watched biographies that could have problematic content added to them, affecting the lives of the people written about. Not so long ago, some admins starting deleting articles without seeking consensus even though the articles did not meet WP:CSD (see discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Rdm2376's deletions). Following that, there were multiple discussions and changes (for example, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people/Phase I; don't read it all—too much!) that have been part of a cultural shift where there is less acceptance of marginally notable biographies. WP:MUSIC guidelines may not have been fully updated to reflect that change.
Hi Argolin. Yes, I think that's probably the best approach for what you are planning. Note that MOS:DAB suggests having only one blue link per entry, to make it easier to navigate to the most relevant article. (So, don't link Toronto and Ontario, for example.) Sorry I have not yet responded to your questions one section above; I will! Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)23:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the excellent advice as always! Please check my edits at Hooded Fang. I know that you will get to the above (we both know it's not a pressing issue). Argolin (talk) 00:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Paul, I am trying to create more articles. I just created the one above and was going to include the instruments played by everyone. It looked too busy/messy User:Argolin/album. Any thoughts? Argolin (talk) 20:50, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
Very good work. (You've followed through on a previous request on my talk page which I never got to!) I agree with you that's a difficult decision: add all the available information and have it look too messy, or leave it out for the sake of a neater format. I'd probably include the information, but really you could go either way. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:50, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Paul. I'll put it in. Maybe I'll come across a similar article later which uses an appropriate template. Argolin (talk) 23:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
If you think it's clear from the sources that Baby Eagle is a band, and not just the recording alias of Lambke (I don't know; I haven't looked), then yes, you would change the redirect Baby Eagle (musician) to point to the new article. Then you would change the hatnote at Jericho 941, and you would not need to create a dab page. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I now believe that the Baby Eagle is a recording alias of Lambke. I've corrected the hatnote at Jericho 941 from a redirect to Steve Lambke to Baby Eagle (musician). I have not found any other reference to Baby Eagle (musician) in wikipedia. I know that I can create the album articles for Baby Eagle as they meet WP:N. However, as Baby Eagle is his alias, should I just incorporate what I have into his existing article?
Paul, I've successfully resurrected an article in the past by contesting a WP:PROD; see Adam and the Amethysts. However, Wildlife (band) is an entirely different animal. I'm stepping up now and stating that this deleted article meets WP:BAND as evidenced by [16] and [17] and [18] and [19]. There is an almighty Allmusic entry (there are a few) [20] but I can't say for sure if its' the correct one as the article is deleted. I've not done a full-fledged no-holds-barred Canadian search for the band, but in my mind if the CBC and the library both have an entry: the article meets WP:BAND. Argolin (talk) 05:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Argolin. Good to see the work that you put into the Adam and the Amethysts article. For Wildlife (band), I think you would need to find more sources. Directory listings provide evidence of WP:EXIST but are not strong for evidence of WP:N. Also, the library listings you've found are not all about the same band. Allmusic seems to have listings about various bands called Wildlife, but not any actual entries (where Allmusic staff have written something about the band), unless I've missed it...? Also remember that just because an artist is on the CBC Radio 3 website (which has something like 14,000 artists) does not always mean that they've been played in rotation on the station. But I think I actually have heard them on CBC Radio 3. Maybe try a search for "Wildlife" + "Dean Povinsky", or "Wildlife" + "Easy Tiger", and you will find some evidence of WP:N. The only source that the deleted article had was this. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)12:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I found two more [21] and [22]. I'm not necessarily claiming WP:BAND 11; it's another verifiable source for a citation. I can't see what was in the original article. It's had a troubled time on wikipedia being recreated and deleted a few times. If it was assigned to Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music we could have done something at the prod/Afd. Are the two reviews enough to undelete it? Argolin (talk) 22:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Great! I also found this from the National Post, and this from Voir. There's this from News Durham Region and this from Now. So we're well on the way to meeting WP:BAND criterion #1!
You've taken a look at the deletion log? It was never deleted by AfD or even by Prod, only by CSD A7. Some of the deleted articles were about different bands of the same name. You could ask JamesBWatson (who deleted it) to undelete the most recently deleted version, which was about the Toronto band. Or I could ask him, if you prefer. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)23:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
I'll ask him and tell him we will cite it properly. I've seen the log, but alas not the deleted article. I came across the article here [23]. And yes, the Canadian music project is getting one similar! It will help those that are interested in saving articles from those deletionists and hopefully lead to better artilces beeing added to the music project. Argolin (talk) 00:24, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
I know I was already bugging you about Flint Dille, but current AFDs kind of take priority. :) I was notified about Beth Sotelo; this AFD has gone on for a few weeks now, but decent sources have yet to be produced in that time. Another user nominated Marcelo Del Debbio, Lee Gold, and Geoffrey C. Grabowski for AFD, as well as put PRODs on numerous other game designer articles. Would you be able to check and see if you can find sources for any of these? BOZ (talk) 14:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Sounds good - if any more of the PRODded articles get sent to AFD, I will let you know, but I figure those are the bigger priority at the moment. BOZ (talk) 23:04, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again for your diligence. If any more turn up at AFD, I will let you know. I don't want to overburden you with the list of PRODded bios (although the PRODs were removed from several of them, which were not subsequently send to AFD), unless you have the time to check those as well. BOZ (talk) 23:01, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
And for Kubasik, this article comes up, but it's a very brief mention of him. I found there's also a Christopher Kubasik who is an executive with Lockheed Martin. A Christopher Kubasik who directed and acted in the Chicago theatre scene in the 1980s might or might not be the same person as the writer; there's no biographical information anyway, only credits on two plays. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:05, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Probably not a lot that can be added to Koke and Kubasik then. In addition to the PRODs on Drye, Goodman, Holian, and Nixon, there is also now a new AFD on Ann Dupuis. BOZ (talk) 11:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Sorry I couldn't find anything relevant for Dupuis—lots of unrelated hits, especially for a social policy professor by that name in New Zealand. I'll try to get to the others later today. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)14:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Okie dokie; let me know about Goodman and Nixon, and then unless we hear more from the editor who has been nominating all of these, I think we can assume that is enough. :) BOZ (talk) 11:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
I added one reference for Nixon, which was all I could find. "Joseph Goodman" brings up way too many articles to search through, as it is a common name. When I combine "Joseph Goodman" + "Goodman Games" nothing comes up. "Joseph Goodman" + "Dinosaur" was also unsuccessful. Phew, that is enough for now! :) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Have you seen the website ? This is no commercial and certainly not spam. This is a good old fashion website, 100% legal offering free scores which will be very useful to anyone who's seeking informations on a song on wikipedia.
I understand you're very suspicious and I think I know why but there are still honest people on the web.
Thank you.
jbvoinet
Hello. Are you affiliated with www.traditional-songs.com? Please be aware that the adding of external links to a large number of Wikipedia articles can have the appearance of spamming. Thanks, Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 11:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbvoinet (talk • contribs)
Thanks for pinging me on Wildlife (band). As you suggested in your edit summary, I had somehow missed seeing your post about it. I don't have a lot of time available now, so I will leave it up to you: whatever you decide I will accept. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:57, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I hope you have no objections to me changing the references you've provided (and the one's I'll add) to named references. I'm apparently supposed to seek consensus (or ask the creator) when changing to a named references format. The WP:CITE isn't clear upon consensus to move named references to the {{Reflist}} template. If you do object, I'll gladly comply and move the references back up to the body of the article. Argolin (talk) 05:03, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
That's okay with me to change it to your preferred citation style. I feel you deserve it, as you brought the question of the band's deletion to my attention in the first place! :) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)11:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Paul. I like using citation templates; placing the named citations within the Reflist template makes complete sense and cleans up the body of the article. I didn't know you were bilingual! Something else for me to ask you about. lol. Can you please check the citation for Voir? Thanks, Argolin (talk) 00:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Great work, Argolin. For the Voir title's translation, it's a difficult one because "tardif" is a play on the the author's name! Here's some minor nitpicking: newspapers, book titles, and print magazines require italics, but websites and web-only magazines do not use italics. I definitely can understand why you like the Reflist template; it's just taking me some time to get used to do things a different way. :) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)01:25, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I was pretty sure that Retour was anglicised to Return; I was really surprised when the translator returned "Late" for the author's name. Adding my two ref's and converting the citations to named + moving to reflist took a while. :) I didn't have the Voir or the Durham Region News listed on my citation/sources page: User:Argolin/Sources Which citations need correcting? Argolin (talk) 02:01, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
In the lead, Chart and Exclaim! need to be in italics. In the citations, baeblemusic.com and radio3.cbc.ca and collectionscanada.gc.ca/lac-bac/search/all are showing up in italics. Also, Now should be written just as Now, not with the (magazine) disambiguator showing. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Paul: I shouldn't forget that too soon! I updated my sources page. For Chart there are no itallics? It started life as print then went completely on-line (as you probably know). Argolin (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, yes, good question. Chart should be written in italics, but not Chartattack.com. Strictly speaking, I guess any recent article should be cited as Chartattack.com instead of Chart. I'm not sure I would advise doing that, however. People who review sources at AfD discussions are sometimes too quick to dismiss "web-only" magazines, and so referring to the magazine as Chart serves a purpose of reminding people that it has a long history as a major music publication in Canada. At least that's the reason I haven't gone and switched all the citations to Chartattack.com instead of Chart. Maybe I'm being too worried about deletion-minded editors. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)02:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I'm using the {{Cite news}} template which has an issn. Obvously journals/magazines/newspapers get one. Is that too suttle a thing for the deletionists. Maybe I should switch my Chart reference to an oclc number (as it is on-line now)? See here: User:Argolin/Sources#Magazines click through on the 1198-7235 number in the reference. (You know all this yes?) Argolin (talk) 03:05, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I had known about issn but did not know about oclc. I've noticed that in featured articles (and in general) it's unusual that these numbers are included (although it is common to include ISBN for books). You're getting into an uncommon level of detail in your citations, but I don't mean to suggest that that's a bad thing! Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:15, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Once again, this is just a preliminary search. I was under the belief (I suppose mistaken?) that new articles could be speedy deleted; older ones should be WP:PRODDED or WP:Afd. Your comments/opinions/searches? Argolin (talk) 01:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Argolin. It's generally recommended that articles that have been around for a long time be deleted via Prod or AfD, but there's no policy against speedying an old article. For DbClifford, I also did a quick search and found this from The Vancouver Sun, and this article says that DbClifford had a #1 hit in Japan. There's also a full article about him in Canadian Musician (May/Jun 2007. Vol. 29, Iss. 3; pg. 42, 3 pgs). There's an article about him in the Times-Colonist (Sep 8, 2005. pg. D6), and a few other mentions in other newspaper articles over the years up to 2007. So, as far as I can tell, he would meet notability guidelines, and it is reasonable to request undeletion of the article. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)14:29, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey Paul, I'm having computer problems and have to go off-line now. I'll be back in a few hours to cite the two articles. Argolin (talk) 20:27, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Paul, I had an edit conflict with yourself on your last edit. I have at least one more citation to add (its within the reflist template as a plain http). I hope I changed your text back to your intended edit. I always sort the named references. I don't know if you've noticed but should you include a duplicate citation with the same name it will ignore one (even if the html link and everything else is different). Argolin (talk) 03:08, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh Paul, I'm sorry but I need to suck up more of your time. I created an article for Gramercy Riffs (band). It seems (maybe) that the band themselves as User talk:38.96.130.98 are trying to edit the article. The edits keep getting reverted as vanadalism by various bots. I believe their second album is available on iTunes but has not yet been officially released by the band. I somewhat agree with the band that iTunes is a gorilla and will not accept changes (I was listening to a Definitely Not the Opera episode regarding spelling that iTunes would not update). However, I believe legitimate changes are being reverted regarding dates. Also, the article is considered a WP:BLP and must accept input from the subject of the article? I couldn't find the appropriate guidelines regarding self-editing (or input). I posted a talk page entry here User_talk:38.96.130.98#Gramercy_Riffs_.28band.29. Help please! Argolin (talk) 03:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Please, no apology necessary! It appears the bots are reverting things as "vandalism" which are not vandalism, so a report ought to be made to the bots' owners. Is there any particular reason to believe that the IP editor in question is associated with the band? The IP address resolves to a location in the US, not Canada. Anyway, it appears that there is one band from St. John's, a pop band by that name. There is a second band, a blues/country rock band from Wales, that has the same name (see their MySpace page). This edit summary appears to be accurate, as far as I can tell. (I'm not sure if the Welsh band is notable; otherwise I would suggest creating a separate article for them.) Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)03:35, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
The IP in question is removing ref name="itunes.apple.com2" to their second release (which the bots are picking up). I know its not unheard of bands releasing two albums in the same year: but a new band? There is no mention of their second album on their myspace page or at their official site [33]. Maybe its IP 174.89.145.180? I'm somewhat confused as to figuring out who has done what edit. Many appologies. Argolin (talk) 04:04, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh my! That is a pretty big error on my part. I guess I should reset the article as I created it without the self-titled album? I further suppose that I should accept the changes done to the band membership? It looks like the two members in the UK did not record anything with the band in Canada. The original article is at User:Argolin/sandbox11. Argolin (talk) 04:33, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Well, as you indicated above, using iTunes as a reliable (or not-so-reliable) source can be risky. Yes, I would accept the IP editors' edits; they appear to be constructive. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)04:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
You said I copied and pasted my article on the monsters, but I changed words, grammer, and added words and sentences. Therfor it is not considered copy-write. Also, the article before me was a person's opinion! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanerusso (talk • contribs) 11:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, I changed many of the sentences and edited some other things. If this is still not good, than I can change it more. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shanerusso (talk • contribs) 00:32, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Block of User:Bad4nr
Although his edits were certainly vandalistic, he seems to have been mistakenly editing the wrong page. I hope you don't mind that I've gone ahead and unblocked, since he genuinely seems to have been in error. – GorillaWarfaretalk • contribs01:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, it looks like we both had the same idea at the same time. I've tried to incorporate your additions into the version I saved (mine had a bit more in it or I would have done it the other way round), but please feel free to edit it further. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 16:59, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
On 15 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pedreña, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the famous golfer Seve Ballesteros, who recently died, hailed from Pedreña, located across the bay from Santander in Cantabria? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Generally don't you keep these, for AfD purposes, and esp since the page is a redirect and will be created at some point? CTJF8311:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I had been thinking no, in this case, because it would eventually appear at a different title since they're supposed to be disambiguated by year not network (and there was nothing but project tags on the talk page anyway). But I see someone has already created a redirect at the "Fox Television" version of the title, so you're right that it would probably be useful. I'll restore the talk page and add an oldAfD tag there. Thanks. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)12:29, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I have so much praise I could give you Paul Erik. You are pretty much my archetypal quality editor, and I will leave it at that. I'm glad you are here and I'll miss you, to the extent I can miss anonymous internet strangers, when you are gone. I know this barnstar may seem like it is kind of coming out of nowhere, but you deserve it. Seriously. ☺ jorgenev09:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know. I had blocked because their previous edits were clearly vandalism such as this, and I should have just noted "vandalism" in the block log, rather than adding "edit warring". Their recent edits since their block appear to be in good faith, and since they've never been warned about the consequences of edit warring, I've added a warning to their talk page instead of blocking them now. We'll see if that helps; if not, a block can be issued (and it might be faster to report it to the noticeboard WP:ANEW as I might not be around consistently). Thanks again. Paul Erik(talk)(contribs)05:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Thank You!
Thank you for locking UFC 132. I posted on two other admin talk pages to see if someone would lock it. I would try to revert the vandalism, but it was coming too fast. Mr. C.C.Hey yo!I didn't do it!00:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
My observation is that WP:BEFORE places a far greater burden on the nominator, TenPoundHammer in this case, than on an editor who chooses to comment in an AfD debate. The Hammer seems to disagree. I agree with you that these are discussions rather than votes, and that one policy-based recommendation outweighs 10 "I like its" or "I don't like its". However, a bolded recommendation just makes it easier for the closing administrator to sort out the opinions. I wish you well, and appreciate your participation in this discussion. Cullen328Let's discuss it05:19, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Old block asking for unblock
Back in 2009, you blocked User:A Haydu for disruptive editing. I looked back through xyr contributions, and xe basically made 2 good edits, followed by 2 vandalism edits, at which point xe was blocked indefinitely. Xyr created an unblock request today which states that xe was 15 when the edits were made, and is more grown up now. I'm inclined to give a 17 year old a chance to not undo the mistakes xyr 15 year-old self made. As you were the blocking admin, will an unblock be okay with you? Qwyrxian (talk) 06:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Two years later, two years older, certainly I wouldn't object to an unblock and a second chance. Thanks for letting me know. 11:22, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I represent Moshi Monsters and would like to update these Wikipedia entries with some new factual information. I am happy to edit these entries myself, but if you would prefer, I can email you with a bulletpoint list of edits/additions (all with references), for you to update the article.
If this is notable, it's difficult to imagine what isn't. As you note, I deleted as spam, not for lack of notability, and a previous editor had tagged it as spam too. Nevertheless, I've restored, removed the unsourced spammy claim, and added a {{fact}} tag. Jimfbleak - talk to me?12:01, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Didn't pick that up, but I've still removed the spammy claim. If it received general acclaim it should be easy to find a transparent reference. One opaque reference does equate to acclaim. If it's notable, there should be many reviews, both positive and negative Jimfbleak - talk to me?12:10, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
92.20.139.59 (92.20 as I call him) has vandalized your userpage, and stole my warnings. As a result, I tied him up and gagged him (Humor translator; Got him blocked from WikiPedia via reporting him to the WP:AIV) to keep him from doing anything else. You are lucky I noticed. Look in the history to see what he did, okay? Thank you, my friend. Ezekiel!Talk to meh.See what I'm doin'.21:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions with User:Paul Erik. 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.
