User talk:Jgm

Hi. Can you please stop deleting the mondegreen section of the Romeo and Juliet song by Dire Straits. It is a common misconception (the lyrics' mistake, that is) which was propagated by a printing mistake in an early release of the song. The transcription was poor. To ask for proof of the lyrics not being as I have indicated is a bit silly as to prove a negative is... well, I'll let you imagine that.

Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.29.111.174 (talk) 01:17, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missed your comment somehow the other day. "1990's" is universally wrong, and it's a pet peeve of mine, but unfortunately the lack of a search engine at the moment is keeping me from hunting them down. Oh well, eventually. :) - Hephaestos 06:43, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

That's OK, I figured out easily enough that your thoughts on the subject pretty much match mine. *grin* - Hephaestos 17:40, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC)

We can't use mp3 because it is proprietary or something -- ogg vorbis is open source. It's pretty widely supported (plays in iTunes with no problem), but that's on a Mac so probably doesn't help you. Try asking at the village pump, and place whatever information you find out at Wikipedia:Sound and Wikipedia. Tuf-Kat

Re: the listing of Disneyland Roller Coaster accident on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. It has already been deleted so there is no need to list it. If it keeps re-appearing, it's evidently a candidate for speedy deletion and a sysop will pick it up, it doesn't need to be listed again. The VfD page is currently over 80 kilobytes long which is far too big for its own good, which is why I took your listing down.

-- Graham :) 18:34, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Wondering where you moved the digression, please followup at Talk:Negativland. Thanks. --Lexor|Talk 15:30, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Insensitive - Lacking in sensitivity to the feelings or circumstances of others, unfeeling. Many people including myself were upset by his comments which were truly ignorant and insensitive. The fact that his comments were not said with regard to the feelings of other make them insensitive. This is not a point of view. That I found them upseting was a reaction to the insensitive nature of the words. User:Isis chastised me once for using the phrase 'unfortunate death'. To censor such phrases from Wikipedia is to fall victim to NPOV madness. Mintguy (T) 14:49, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Just dropping a note to let you know that I appreciated your edits on Led Zeppelin. DryGrain 00:13, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

After the Goldrush - Allmusic.com and my CD copy seem to think it is After the Gold Rush --Tagishsimon

It is true that the songs were not banned. It is true that a list was circulated of songs to be sensitive about. I guess the fact that it was largely generated by program directors and not the corporate office has been left out of my edits. Perhaps I need a different wording. I'll think about it. Thank you for bringing the Snopes page to my attention. —Mulad 02:36, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

I was interested in your comments on the deterioration of the Fahrenheit 9/11 article. With a controversial topic, everyone wants to make sure his or her side is properly represented, which I suppose is how it slides into being a debate transcript. Do you have any suggestions about specific changes or the general direction that the article should take? I'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts. JamesMLane 22:51, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Agree re. Black Dog (song) being inappropriate for the 13/8 rumour. But why remove the fact that JPJ wrote the riff? I understand this is generally accepted. Plant wrote the lyrics and Page the solo and other guitar parts, but JPJ has been widely credited with the riff. --HighHopes 23:11, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion philosophy

The deletion policy, as I read it, is aimed at articles as they are, instead of how they could be. Of course, people vote to send things to Clean Up when they see a bad article that they think is notable or important (the Intel/AMD article, for example, was a miserable stub, but folks got excited and changed it while it was on VfD). In practice, people forget the policy and tend to vote for things that seem possibly important, and a lot of reviewers go off to Google and see if there is notability, etc. As I read the deletion guides, though, articles should be deleted if they cover "non-notable" subjects. That's where most of the debate seems to happen. In the case of Ecmyru, I know I want to believe that it's an important non-profit, but the article as it is didn't give its readers information to suggest that there were many members, that it was doing important things in Wales, etc. Denni and I were both saying, essentially, "Please, authors, give us a reason to keep the article. Tell us something to make the case for notability." Things only get deleted if they're non-notable, violate copyright, are dictionary definitions, are nonsense, or are incurably point-of-view. It isn't a case of "must be bad" as much as "must fit in an encyclopedia." The notability line is important in this regard, and I, personally, set the standard high by insisting that the article, as it comes to VfD, tell me about the notability. I feel like no one should be listing for VfD unless they've already done the Google search and used the Clean Up pages. Geogre 01:09, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Long and Winding Road

I have added more references to the article; for details see the nomination on WP:FAC. Johnleemk | Talk 16:08, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I have done the same for I Want To Hold Your Hand. Johnleemk | Talk 15:39, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Re: Margin of error

Thanks for your comment. I made a reply at the fac page. Let me know what you think there or at my talk page. Best, Andrew (Fadethree) 21:35, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Again, thanks for your comment. I moved the discussion over to the margin of error talk page, and I made a reply there. I'll get to work on editing once I properly wake up. Best, Andrew (Fadethree) 15:02, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I just wanted to let you know that I have made some revisions to the Margin of error page to reflect the large number of polls that use 95% as a standard. Thanks for highlighting the issue for me. Best, Andrew (Fadethree) 22:01, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Neil Young

I'm not going to fight you over this, because it's just not important, but you are wrong about the policy on embedded external links. The policy is that one doesn't add an external link like this, but a numbered external link after a statement (or clause) by way of indicating the source is perfectly normal and in fact encouraged as part of the citation apparatus. [1] -- Jmabel | Talk 05:30, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

Neil Young

As I said, I don't necesarily object to the deletion of this material: I just wanted to correct you on the external links policy, before you might go around deleting some of the apparatus that makes it possible to fact-check articles. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:51, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

List of songs

Thanks for completing the merge on List of songs whose title constitutes the entire lyrics - I got as far as creating the redirect before WP decided to go into slowdown! -- sjorford 09:25, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

WikiUser

WikiUser has some very odd ideas about his and other peoples edits here at Wikipedia. He threatens things that are totally incorrect, such as taking me to mediation without there being any sort of article content dispute between us. As for his disagreement with you I will continue to monitor his edits and agree with those that you have made - if he reverts I will put it back to your version. Be aware of the three revert rule when dealing with him and, basically, ignore the rubbish that he's spouting! violet/riga (t) 18:39, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

WikiUser appears to be a crank with a persecution complex and a nasty habit of spewing invective at anyone who makes edits he doesn't like (see e.g. [2], for which he should really have been banned). A lot of us have been on the receiving end, even including Jimbo. Frankly, if he hasn't changed his ways after six months' editing, much criticism and several temporary bans, I don't think he ever will. If he does decide to pursue a complaint against any of us - something that I would regard as an abuse of process - I won't hesitate to take him to the ArbCom to seek a lengthy ban. -- ChrisO 14:56, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Steve Dalkowski

Responded to your comments, thanks for the feedback. I'm a little confused by your objections about converting it to US style, running a spellchecker only found one word spelled the British way. Is it the grammar you don't like? Could you go into more details? Zerbey 01:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

for the edit on the Purple People Eater entry. Much better now. --sturgeonslawyer

Reverted history of Latvia

Hi! Just wanted to tell you that I had a look at the slightly tangled history of the article and the only thing missing after the revert was an external link (it shows in the difference between revisions [3]). --Juzeris 13:52, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Waking the Tiger

I don't know, actually. SimonP closed the discussion as 'keep', I changed that to 'NC'. Neither of us deleted it, and it's currently on RFU. Yours, Radiant _* 07:41, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

Monty Hall problem

Hi - You made some comments at WP:FAC about the Monty Hall problem article a while ago. I'd like to address them, but I don't find them to be specific enough. Can you please rephrase them to be more specific? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) July 3, 2005 22:00 (UTC)

Chicago picture vote

If you don't want to vote for Picture #3, please don't write anything in the Picture Vote section. Instead, use the Chicago Main Page Picture Vote section and comment under the picture, or post your comment in General Comments. There has been debate recently and comments will not be allowed in the Picture Vote section, only real votes. Please either vote for the image or move your comment into the appropriate comment section ASAP. Shoffman11 23:27, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Picture

Sorry, when I added the Support text to your vote I didnt realize you left it out intentionally. I didnt mean to force anything upon you or anything, I was just trying to make things simple since the vote has been much more complicated then I thought. --Gpyoung ^talk 23:35, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Take

I thought keeping the article take was a borderline case myself -- there's enough there to make a nice little encyclopedia stub. I would say to go ahead and remove the wiktionary tag, expand the article if you can, perhaps include a picture of a clapboard (huh, there's no mention of film clapboard there) -- see if we can find a free pic of one of these. I'll leave a comment at the page supporting your decision so people don't think it's entirely one-sided. — Catherine\^talk 15:45, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Most cleanup tags are added unilaterally and can be removed unilaterally if you feel the problem has been addressed. "Move to Wiktionary" is a little different in that it is sometimes the result of a Vote for deletion, so it's good to check the history on who placed it and why -- if there's a VfD involved, then it's probably best not to second-guess the community, unless the article has changed drastically since the vote. In this case, it looks like Beland placed the tag himself, so I think we're fine keeping it. There may be more to be said -- directors who use many or long or unusual takes, the demand for Beatles alternate takes before Anthology, etc. — Catherine\^talk 06:25, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Jam

Wondering about your edits to California Jam.

If you check out www.californiajam.com and google "california jam" in google groups, you will find that Scott Lifshine is an integral part of California Jam history. There have been 79,000 refererences to California Jam on usenet - most by or about Lifshine's recording of the concert. While it may seem strange, his obsession with the event has eclipsed the event itself 35 years later.

Reconsider the Lifshine entry to California Jam.

Also, take note that Lifshine has enemies on usenet who love to torment him regarding his obsession and have already vandalized Wikipedia regarding Cal Jam.

Jgm, have a look at alt.music.deep-purple. The posts under the name of wereo_gogg and wereoboy are by Lifshine, and pretty much speak for themselves. It's been going on for years. To suggest that he is an integral part of rock history (he calls himself the only one who matters in music) is, shall we say, unencyclopedic. --Puddlejumper 12:00, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

World Music

Hello! - My initial reply is on my talk page but i'm still in the middle of working on this "World Music" article and related things. It'll take me a little while to pull it all together because it involves working across multiple pages of music artists in relation to the main World Music page. --wayland 11:59, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could you tell which ones you're referring to? --wayland 02:54, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Editing problems

I think it was caused by this script I'm using. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- W P Talk 02:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for helping out at Beatles for Sale and saving me the trouble. Johnleemk | Talk 09:42, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Millenium Park

Hey thanks for cleaning up my post about the park! i had a bad dream last night about the park and i saw the existing page as an ad for the park. I wrote the thing on the fly, and i appreciate the new wording :) i really appreciate this! i hope the picture stays up. as it is completely appropriate. how did you run across this article?

victor

Millenium Park

Hey thanks for cleaning up my post about the park! i had a bad dream last night about the park and i saw the existing page as an ad for the park. I wrote the thing on the fly, and i appreciate the new wording :) i really appreciate this! the new wording will probably help quite a bit!!! i hope the picture stays up. as it is completely appropriate. how did you run across this article?

victorgrigas

Classic Rock

I've seen lately that you have been editing a lot of the artice Stairway to Heaven and it seems that you've edited other musical articles too. I was wondering if you would contribute to my classic rock survey. There is more information on it on my user page. Thanks a lot and hope you contribute. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 02:09, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

General

Hey, insightful philosophy =) [I saw your page from editing the Wikipedia:Requested_articles/music section.

Wskora 14:56, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

==Lost==

Good work with that deletion of all the Lost material from the Oceanic Airlines article. Definitely more than I would have cut, but reading over it, there's nothing I'm wanting to put back in. Mad kudos Dave 06:12, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blues

I have tried to address your objections -- as far as I feel able to do so. Please don't hesitate to provide further objections. Vb 11:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for creating List of songs used in television commercials. I moved what you wrote to what I think is a better place where more people will see it: the main Television commercial article. Regards, --Unforgettableid | Talk to me 18:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers

Hi! I don't mean to intrude, but I noticed you have made some edits to the Cheers article in the past! I've given the article a serious reworking and I hope it can garner your support on it's FAC. Thanks again! Staxringold 01:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Holmes

Greetings! You commented on the article Katie Holmes when it was on WP:FAC. I've redone the article and hope to renominate it on FAC soon. But in the meantime, I'd be grateful for your comments on WP:PR at Wikipedia:Peer review/Katie Holmes/archive1. PedanticallySpeaking 21:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May we borrow...

Hello. I'd like, with your permission and with attribution, to copy Wiki cream to Talk:Monty Hall problem. We are discussing the possible WP:FARC of a once excellent (FA, Mainpage 23 July 05) piece of work that has, over an eight month period. seriously deteriorated. Your analogy is perfect. :-) hydnjo talk 19:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you, this way I'll quote your words directly rather than providing a link that may or not be followed. I've been hovering around Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page doing whatever to help keep things going (before hell freezes over) and noted that your response to DL was well... interesting. So, I hope you don't mind, I dropped in for a look around while you weren't here. ;-) --hydnjo talk 03:49, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know, there may be hope for Monty after all. And, I havn't yet posted your words of wisdom anywhere but on my talk. hydnjo talk 01:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ZigZag disambiguation

I'd say ZigZag (magazine) is secondary to ZigZag (software) if the former was created 1969 in UK and discontinued after five years or so, and the latter was designed in 1965 and still goes on internationally. --TuukkaH 08:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Replied on my talk page.) --TuukkaH 16:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WTC

I hope I addressed your issues about the WTC compared to the Chicago buildings. Also, JHC was not designed by Mies. (Gary Joseph 01:51, 9 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Copyvio

Are you sure the lyrics are copyvio? It just seems strange to think of information that is so easily available online as copyrighted. How much would qualify as fair use? Thanks, TheJabberwʘck 06:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stairway to Heaven

Agreed with your removal of the "Toolshed" claim, but why take out the backmasked message? Isn't it about as on-topic as you can get in a section about messages in a reversed version of the song?

By the way, I agree with you that the messages are bogus. But I think maximum information about the subject is the best way to convince people of the truth. TheJabberwʘck 04:13, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. A sub-article is a good idea. I'm going to try and get permission from Led Zeppelin's record company to use the lyrics, and if they give me permission, I'll definitely make an article. Does Backmasking in Stairway to Heaven sound like a good title? If I can't get permission, I'm not sure there'll be enough to make a sub-article. There used to be a Stairway to Heaven Backwards, but it was deleted. TheJabberwʘck 03:19, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No response. Does the current version look OK to you? I don't think it's copyvio to use the backwards lyrics; see Talk:Stairway to Heaven for why. Λυδ α cιτγ 01:11, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Freddie Mercury is not white

Freddie Mercury is known for a fact to be Indian and not white. Your deleting him as a major non-white rockstar is wrong. Just because few people know it, doesnt make it false. Part of Freddie's legacy is the fact that he was the first Indian (and, consequently, Asian) rock star in the history of the genre. He looks white of course, but he's of the Parsi ethnicity in India. Parsis are South Asian Zoroastrians whose ancestors originated in the Middle East millenia ago. As a result, they look fairer skinned than other South Asians, but indeed have mixed racially with them to a point (as proved by recent genetic studies). See Freddie's article and the Parsi article. He goes back on. He's not a white Briton, despite trying to pass of as such. -User: Afghan Historian

Led Zeppelin article

Hey JGM (and Warrens) - I've just had a thought about what has been said about the length of the Led Zeppelin article - would it be possible to make the page appear shorter by putting large sections - such as the band's history - into drop-down boxes (as used for Wikipedia "Contents" lists)? I think that if it would be possible to do that (and have them set to "hide" as default and let the viewer "open them up"), that would be a good idea.--RichardHarrold 14:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Favorite Songs

My survey has changed. I am now continuing my mission for the best songs, but now I am accepting all genres. I'm giving you a chance to revote for your top ten favorite songs of any genres (not just classic rock which is still the best). I've made a executive decision to keep the existing survey results and just add on to that with the new entries. My feeling for doing this is because classic rock is the most influential genre in music currently so it should be expressed more in the survey. Thank you for contributing in the past, and hopefully in the future. ROCK ON. RENTASTRAWBERRY ^{FOR LET?} röck 03:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another copyvio question

Thought you might know something about this. Λυδ α cιτγ 16:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs featured in television commercials

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article List of songs featured in television commercials, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Extraordinary Machine 18:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sixteen Candles

I am confused. Your most recent edit summary was "restore slightly modified "ratings" section (see talk)", but what you restored does not address the concerns on talk and there was no addition to talk.

As discussed, for most information, imdb is not a reliable source. The R->appeal->PG story is unsupported.

As discussed, the article has the source saying "both versions" include X and Y, though the source does not say that and there is no basis for the content selected.

The paragraph, in fact, is contradictory. The movie, we are told, was rated R. The rating was appealed. It was given a PG. But there are two versions? That means the film was re-cut and re-submitted, not the rating was appealed...

Now there is a new uncited claim as well. ("Current...")

Mdbrownmsw 15:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion at Talk:Sixteen Candles. - -- Mdbrownmsw (talk) 17:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Led Zeppelin project

	Hi! I've seen you around on Led Zeppelin related articles... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject Led Zeppelin, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of Led Zeppelin on Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us. --MegX (talk) 23:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Led Zeppelin... You're not in this picture... yet! Todo: Current guidelines may be viewed at the main project page

Jgm, I've seen your high quality edits on a number of Led Zeppelin articles. I've set up a portal and wikiproject to help organise and co-ordinate articles and would be delighted if you could sign up.

MegX (talk) 23:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Cream

FYI I've copied your thoughts at Monty Hall talk. I thought it appropriate for the goings on there lately and hope you don't mind. Thanks, --hydnjo talk 03:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eagles project

Please accept this invitation to join the Eagles WikiProject (the band), a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the The Eagles. Simply click here to accept!

Basketball 110 16:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genesis

No worries...thanks for the note. MrMarmite (talk) 07:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page moved

Hi Jgm, I wanted to let you know I moved I'll Sleep When I'm Dead to the disambiguated page, as you requested. I'm afraid that when a redirect already exists at the desired location, non-admins can't move the page, because it requires you to delete the targeted redirect first. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scaruffi

Current guideline from the parent project is that Scaruffi is a usable source. Until that guidance is changed, the reference should stay. To remove it otherwise is tendentious and pre-judging the outcome. Thanks. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:59, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: Yellow Submarine (film); The Show Must Go On (Pink Floyd song); List of music radio formats; Humpers; Relative Ways; Britannia Row Studios; Pick Withers; Guy Fletcher; Prayer (song); Terry Williams (drummer); Bill Szymczyk; Saturday Night Special (song); Paul McCartney discography; Rock 'n' Roll Music; Harmony in My Head; Family of Free Love; Dubbing (music); I Love You But I've Chosen Darkness; Fire Party

Cleanup: Born/Dead; The Beatles Anthology; The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan
Merge: Band on the Run; Smash Mouth; Open tuning
Add Sources: Zum zum zum; Don't Look Back (Boston song); Joe Walsh
Wikify: Between the Buttons; Oakley Haldeman; RIAA certification
Expand: Beatles '65; Pennywise (band); American Baby

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WGN-TV

Thank you very much for backing me up on my argument on proper grammar. Rollosmokes (talk) 07:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Semi-instrumentals

I have moved your proposal for deleting this category from UCfD to CfD as that is clearly where it should be. You also did not sign your nomination. --Bduke (talk) 01:20, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wolves of the Call revert

I am looking through my copy of WoC, and I don't see an explicit reference to either Andy being an analog for C3PO or of the Wolves resembling Doctor Doom. I don;t want to revert you, but I think the tags required citation of such. If it isn;t in the book, then a citation of a reviewer noting the similarities would be enough. Failing such inclusion, I would have to re-add the citation needed tags (thanks for letting me know about the how tag, btw - did something replace it?) at the end of the day. I will wait to hear back from you. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 17:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Post-grunge

Hey man, no hard feelings about the U2 - Vertigo revert, I kinda figured somebody would disagree with me. However, post-grunge is clearly not a non-existent genre, that is not true at all. There is a wikipedia page on it, All Music Guide lists it as a genre for a large amount of bands and it began as a more commercial version of grunge, a sub-genre of alternative rock. I have no problem that you have reverted me but please try to improve your reasoning in future. James25402 (talk) 09:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

I would suspect that actor is more common in, say, experimental theatre. This overlaps with self-identification, but not entirely. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with those points; also agreed with your position, Jgm, that it would be good to head this one off at the pass. Re: "most of the points" in my essay...it's an essay, so if there are points you disagree with, feel free to edit them or post on the essay's talk page. (Feel free to respond here, I always watchlist after posting on a talk page.) - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 13:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Thanks

Thanks for your efforts:

This user helped promote Millennium Park to good article status.

--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

S King thanks

Thanks for the reply on my talk page. I will check out your Stephen King recommendation. Ebonyskye (talk) 18:14, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genesis Wikiproject

Hello! I am just wondering on if you would be interested in joining a Genesis Wikiproject, if I were to make one. I am currently thinking about starting one, as I think it would be nice to get all Genesis fans to work together and collaborate. If you would be interested in the idea of having such a project, please respond to me on my talkpage. Thank you, and have a nice day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 00:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carly Fiorina

In the course of our shared collegial "business" to improve Wikipedia, it's still fair to point out that I for one will apply, if necessary, WP:3RR with regard to the subject article. Cheers. -- Iterator12n ^Talk 04:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kottke page

Hi. Yes, I noticed the changes to the Kottke article lately... I've been mulling them over but I see you did a bunch of good work. I added one quick minor addition re: the Ice Fields work. Also, there was more orchestration than just "Range" on the Leo Kottke album - don't recall all the titles right now though. I have a lot of documentation about the Capitol/Denny Bruce years but it is all in personal emails with all the players of that time period so not able to cite it as is, plus a lot is personal stuff, not encyclopedic. All in all though, the article is a lot better than it used to be. Not as "fan" biased as musician articles tend to be on Wikipedia. Thanks for the note. Always appreciated.Airproofing (talk) 02:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The timeline is incorrect for the first albums. 12-String Blues was first and was recorded live in the Twin Cities at the Scholar. Followed by the Takoma (Armadillo) album, then Circle Round the Sun. He did not have an exclusive contract with Fahey but it worked out for him. He owed Fahey another album which ended up being fulfilled by Kotte-Fahey-Lang. See my article at http://leokottkeconnection.bravehost.com/circleblues.html I won't have much time to correct it right at the moment. Airproofing (talk) 03:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I couldn't let it be, so I did a real quick edit. It needs to be cleaned up. ha! Airproofing (talk) 03:10, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

INXS

I've a problem with some of your recent edits to INXS, as indicated on its talkpage, I am undertaking a number of major edits in an attempt to get the article up to B-class in actuality instead of in name only. Before I got there the Lead was very brief and did not adequately summarise the article as per WP:Lead and hence would not qualify as B-class (criteria are listed and discussed on the talkpage). Instead of demoting the article's assessment I decided to edit it myself. The questions I attempt to answer when framing a Lead are: "Can it stand alone? Does it describe enough to get a casual reader to read on? Is it only teasing with unfulfilled comments?"

In some of your recent edits you significantly trimmed back the Lead removing all single/album titles and a broad description of their chart successes, while I was about to increase the Lead with information on their international successes. The current Lead retains the statement "INXS achieved international success with a series of hit albums singles through the 1980s and 1990s." Besides being worded awkwardly, this statement is not substantiated/exemplified within the Lead: a casual reader would have to read further in the article to find any single or album information.

Consider the POV of a casual reader: if I had a general idea about INXS but couldn't remember any of their songs your Lead gives me nothing to go with, if I could read that they sang "Original Sin" or had the album Kick then I might be interested to read more: it confirms this is the band I want to know about.

Some of your changes are okay e.g. I prefer "fronted by" to "led by". However, I think his death should be mentioned in first paragraph to explain why he is no longer a member. BTW, check sp, of Hutchens vs Hutchence.

I've decided to contact you directly with my thoughts so that we can co-operate to get this article up to B-class (if not GA?).

Can you provide an explanation for your trimming back of the Lead?Shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

INXS collaboration?

Are you interested in a collaboration to get this article up to genuine B-class, if not to GAN? I have asked another long-term INXS editor, Jav72, the same question but have not had a response yet. At the moment I have not altered your version of the Lead pending your explanation for the deletions.

Jav72 has independently fixed the problems with the second paragraph.

I have gone on to edit other parts of the article including creating an Early years section to expand upon The Farriss Brothers, their time in Perth, the reason for the name INXS, early manager Gary Morris (& some of his ideas) together with quotes and refs. I intend continuing through the article making further edits per section. A second or third set of eyes correcting/editing these additions would be welcome: I tend to get too wordy and not see my own errors.Shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:27, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spotty is okay, see you at the article/talkpage.Shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 19:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another example farm

Like the Classic rock farm... look at Album-oriented rock. A horrible article strewn with pov fan favourite lists. Thoughts? The Real Libs-speak politely 20:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Criminal recklessness

I think the trouble with that title is that it has very specific meanings in English and Welsh law, in Scots law, and some jurisdictions in the US. I am not sure that would be a good rename/move without us all mulling it over more. SimonTrew (talk) 00:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RPM categories

The RPM Country Tracks archive is available here. I added the categories to "I Can't Stop Loving You" and "Heartbreak Hotel" because cover versions of the songs reached #1 ("I Can't Stop Loving You" by Conway Twitty on September 16, 1972[4] and "Heartbreak Hotel" by Willie Nelson and Leon Russell on September 29, 1979[5]). Eric444 (talk) 05:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carly Fiorina

Just after the article was semi-protected to guard against wp:blp violations, you reinserted the offending material? Please see my note on the talk page or at wp:blp/n. Adding a link to the source doesn't make it any less poor of a source, and it doesn't make the content any less controversial. (Please consider responding at the noticeboard or on the article's talk page instead of here.) user:J aka justen (talk) 14:46, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lollipop

Hi, I understand why you removed the template, and maybe a general section warning wasn't the right idea. The part I interpreted as original research was the unreferenced sentence, "The term may have derived from the term "lolly" (tongue) and "pop" (slap)." a little insignificant 00:08, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. a little insignificant 00:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fiorina

I summarized your opinion regarding the "Worst CEOs" commentary on Talk:Carly_Fiorina; if I mischaracterized your view please correct me. Rvcx (talk) 16:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Shaw Brown

Dear Friend, I was the singer of rock band The Misunderstood and have subsequently become much more successful and influential as a Gemologist and Jewelry Designer head quartered in Bangkok, under Royal Patronage of HM The King of Thailand. Somehow I have reached to heights in Thailand not before reached by any foreigner before me. And there are over 500 local and global 3rd party published articles and 36 TV shows to back it up. Now, I am not boasting... I'm just establishing my notability to be in Wikipedia, where I have been for 3 years, and to which I have donated money anonymously over the years. The reason I'm writing is to ask your expert help. I just saw the excellent edit job you did with The Misunderstood in making exactly as Wikipedia wants it. I think you did a great job. I have the same problem with the page about me Richard Shaw Brown and I would be highly obliged if you could do the same excellent editing on that page so it will be top notch and and remove the COI tag. Thanks in advance. Best wishes and again thanks.--Rickbrown9 (talk) 23:58, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Just before this has the chance of getting personal, please forgive me if sometimes I come across as a little angry. You just would not believe the amount of bollocks I've had recently across the articles I've been editing (see my talk page and its archive). I'm somewhat protective of DSotM since it took so long to get to FA (and I didn't have much help), but I don't own the article, and I don't want anyone to think that I believe I should have the last word.

I do appreciate that your edits are in good spirit, and I don't want you to back away from the article—but hand on heart, I think that some of your edits are making the article's structure worse.

I attempted to explain on the article's talk page but I think I came across as a little insensitive and a bit of a twat, so if it was offensive I'd like to apologise now. Parrot of Doom 20:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment, I do appreciate it. I'm pretty involved with the Floyd articles, I've gotten Meddle to GA, DSotM to FA, WYWH to FA, Animals, The Wall, and Pink Floyd are at GAN, and The Final Cut is at FAC. I have the other studio albums to do, as well as the individual biogs. I make no complaints, but I'm doing this almost entirely on my own, and every day I check my watchlist to see clowns changing the British wording, track timing, inserting unsourced material, etc etc. It's hard work keeping my eye on everything. Parrot of Doom 20:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, with regard to the album's symbolism - the statement is a summarisation of what all the sources say. I'd have to use rather large page ranges to reference it. I agree the legacy section needs more material, but I think you'll find that such detail is astonishingly difficult to find online. I think most musicians would rather pretend that they're too original to be influenced by anyone like the Floyd. Parrot of Doom 20:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting your opinion

Hi. I've started a discussion here. (Actually, it's a restart of a prior discussion that went cold; you can just scroll directly down to the first post I made today in that section if you want.) Can you offer your thoughts? I think it's very important. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Revolution 9

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Revolution 9. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revolution 9. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Mix (magazine)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Mix (magazine) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Waking_the_Tiger_(2nd_nomination)

Kindly participate in the voting if you are still around. Thank you.--Jondel (talk) 07:13, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]