Jump to content

User talk:Chubbles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.241.189.89 (talk) at 04:44, 22 January 2008 (Burma again: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Regarding LLN again

The list of bands... are we absolutely certain that all of these bands exist? There are certainly no sources for many of them that I can find. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 01:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through, removed the links to bands without pages and deleted bands for which I could find no references at all (beyond forum posts, or more usually lists of LLN bands seemingly copy-pasted from the Wikipedia article). Blackmetalbaz (talk) 04:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great job!

Hello Chubbles. You wrote on your user page that many Wikipedians believe that many of the articles you write shouldn't actually exist. I disagree. I think you have done a great job for Wikipedia. I really admire you contributions. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 08:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Action Action

What part of "repost" was unclear? Reproducing a deleted page without explicitly fixing the flaws that got it deleted doesn't really work. --Calton | Talk 15:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Nostradameus

An editor has nominated Nostradameus, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. 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 "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 by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nostradameus and 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. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 17:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the harsh title

Sorry for being harsh labelling. I have been here almost as long as Wikipedia has been around. After 50000 edits I have zero tolerance for junk articles and nn spam pages. I don't call it sledgehammer editing. For the articles that worthless and deletable... it's called "shovel editing". You are a good editor. But we can agree that we disagree on some things. I can guarantee that we agree on many more issues as far as Wiki is concerned. I believe in the Wikipedia project and have made it a grand hobby. And I also promote that "anyone can edit" by remaining anon and not returning to the username that I had for the first 2 years of my "wiki-existence". I am much more comfortable in the "purity" of IP editing. But it has a price. I brick up against "anti-anon" bias every day. And Wiki itself... the encyclpedia that anyone is supposed to be able to edit... has it's own built in bias that prevents anons from creating AfD and CfD cases. So Speedy D is all I have. And I use it wherever I see the need. Perhaps the next time we cross paths it will be to cooperate on an GA or FA or something similar. I don't just revert vandals and rm junk. I am a librarian with easy access to all kinds of reliable sources. Occasionally I step away from vandal hunting and just edit. My co-workers are Wiki editors too (although not at the same level of participation that I am). If you see a 156.34 editor... it's usually one of us. Feel free to ask for help with a citation. I/we participate here for one reason... to create a quality/trustworthy/respected resource. Someday it will be. 156.34.221.33 (talk) 17:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chubbles if some of the entries have articles then feel free to put them back in. But do not undermine the list as a valid resource by adding in a bunch of high school bands and never-will-be's. 156.34.212.152 (talk) 14:52, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
to answer your question about being careful..

I was polite and careful 4 years ago... along with everyone else. And English Wikipedia wound up with over 1.5 million useless understatement articles. Now it's time to backtrack. My edit motto is "turn up the good, turn down the suck". Two end results from that are 1)Some people get ticked off that I don't 'edit with hugs' and 2)An encyclopedia that will someday be a valid and trustworthy resource. right now it is a long way from that .

Also, my IP is only dynamic when I am away from my office. When I am back at my desk my IP is static. You've probably seen it show up in your watchlist. It's the IP page with all the barnstars for doing such good work around here. As a logged user I had many B_stars. I have promised a few admin friends that when my IP page reaches 20 B_stars... I will go back to using an account. I will never get one for being "lovey-dovey" though. My AGF dried up years ago. Now, for an editor to get on my 'whitelist'... they have to earn it. BTW... you are on my whitelist. I can tell when an editor is working hard to try and improve Wikipedia. Just because they disagree with me... doesn't mean I don't respect their efforts here. You could lose the anti-anon bias though... Wikipedia was built by anonymous editors, not admins. Always remember that. My nickname here is "Libs" go figure... I am a librarian Feel free to call me that.


and here's one of my old chum Sango's little tokens

File:Resilient-silver.png The Resilient Barnstar
Always improving and learning as you go. An "in advance" token for an editor who resparked my long dead AGF that some editors truly care about Wikipedia. "Libs"


156.34.212.152 (talk) 02:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good work...

The Barnstar of Diligence
For your work on referencing and rescuing numerous articles on notable bands that might otherwise have slipped through the cracks. Keep it up! Tony Fox (arf!) 21:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Trial Five (band)

Hey!

Would appreciate if you could do a write-up about this band, I've been keeping up with the taqwacore scene, and this band stands out as being the only all-girl band in that genre. They were also the only females to sing at the ISNA (Islamic Society of North America) convention in its 40 year history. I've already submitted a request for creation with a bunch of publications they've been in, including Rolling Stone and The Guardian.

Thanks! Greg S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.106.111 (talk) 17:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hasan Salaam

Hi, I found better sources for the references and cleaned up the Hasan Salaam article. Can the refimprove be removed or is there more I need to do besides expand the stub? Webhat (talk) 14:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Webhat (talk) 14:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Article on Echovalve (Band)

I have been following this rock band for over 2 years. They were just recently signed by Rock Ridge Music and their debut CD, "helloagaingoodbye" will be released on 3/18/08 (US) & the end of 3/08 Europe & Canada. They are based out of Atlanta, GA. I also added a request for article in the music section before I found you... ;) Thanks for considering doing this! Jackie Atlbelle40 (talk) 16:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

per request. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 16:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of speedy deletion notice of The Supremacy

Your reason for removing the speedy deletion notice of The Supremacy in my opinion is not valid.

Per Wikipedia:CSD#A7: "No indication of importance/significance. An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. This is distinct from questions of notability, verifiability and reliability of sources. A7 applies only to articles about web content or articles on people and organizations themselves, not articles on their books, albums, software and so on. Other article types are not eligible for deletion by this criterion. If controversial, as with schools, list the article at Articles for deletion instead."

Nothing in the article states why the band is important or significant. You used the reason "rockdetector link asserts a sliver of notability" when the criteria states it is distinct from the question of notability.

Anything you could add to help me understand why this page is not a candidate for speedy deletion would be appreciated. Thank you, Aspects (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Technologie.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Technologie.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Same Name Question

Hello Chubbles. I put the following question on the Help Desk yesterday and got a response that eventually led me to you. Any and all help would be much appreciated! [FYI, if you are interested and want the references about the band--newspaper and magazine articles, TV shows, etc--I'm glad to forward them along.] Thanks!

We need help on a name question. Currently, under the listing for "The Voltaires" you have a U.K.-based band listed that formed in 2004. We would like to list our U.S. band, also "The Voltaires" in that listing, or in a different listing of its own. Our band formed in 2001; we have a CD ["all about her"] that came out in 2003, and we can be found on the website www.thevoltaires.com. What do you suggest we do? We don't really have a problem with the existing listing, but we certainly want to be included in Wikipedia. Thanks for your help!

17:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:BAND and WP:COI before creating an article on your band. If you decide to create one, I guess the obvious thing to do is to create it at The Voltaires (US band) and put a 'see also' link (created by for example) at the top of The Voltaires. Perhaps The Voltaires should be moved to The Voltaires (UK band) as well, but that can wait until we see if you article avoids immediate deletion (the fate of so many new articles). Good luck! Algebraist 18:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
(EDIT CONFLICT)You could list the band at The Voltaires (US band) or something to that extent and put a disambig on the current page. However, I urge you to consider these things first. Please read over WP:COI as it is generally not acceptable to have someone write about a person/organization/band/company/etc if it is them, or if they are directly associated with it. If the band meets wikipedia's music notability criteria (and at first glance it looks like it does) you could request that someone else make the article at Requested Articles or Articles for Creation. Each one of these pages has its own policies and practices noted at the top so make sure to read each one and decide which one fits your situation best. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

What do you suggest? Thanks again... R.N.Goldberg (talk) 16:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here or There?

No problem on the info. Sorry for being dense but I'm a new contributor: Am I supposed to post it on your user page or on mine? Thanks! R.N.Goldberg (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rusty Eye

Vandalism? Someone made a mistake on a very subjective musical matter. Still, it was fixed days ago. There's no error, there's no conflict. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.43.106 (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rusty Eye

I understand that Rusty Eye is not a NWOBHM band (which covers British bands from 1979 to 1982), they are just NWOBHM-influenced (that was the initial conflict of interest). That error was fixed. Please stop putting the COI tag on this site or it will be deleted. There is no conflict anymore. Rustyeye (talk) 06:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the user needs some help knowing what WP:COI actually is. ScarianCall me Pat 11:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So what's the conflict? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.43.106 (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read that document? Chubbles (talk) 17:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did read it. What proof do you need? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.43.106 (talk) 21:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, pretty much everyone who has ever edited this article is convinced that you (User:Rustyeye, and 68.81.43.106 when not logged in) are a member of the band, or the band's manager, or some sort. It is possible that the band does not meet the criteria for inclusion in the encyclopedia and that the page acts merely as an advertisement, rather than an information source. This is the reason the tag keeps reappearing. Chubbles (talk) 21:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a music journalist that believes in these guys, like many other people in the LA music scene. I edit, add and cleanup their wikipedia article quite often so the press, fans or people that want to know what their artistic proposal is about find reliable information on a reliable source. As far as advertising, I’m not sure exactly what do you think they are selling on wikipedia since the article is just facts on their career so far, like many other articles on artists in here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.43.106 (talk) 21:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW... If it's about "notability and verifiability" Just do some research on Rusty Eye. Let's hope you find out why I like them so much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.43.106 (talk) 21:54, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello -

I have translated the article on Bill Flagg that you requested from the German Wiki.

Enjoy! Scbarry (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I am currently in the midst of also translating a German article about Isis, an all-female jazz fusion band. If I'm lucky, I'll get that one done tonight, too. You didn't request it, but I suspect you'll be happy to see that one, as well. :-)

Have fun. Scbarry (talk) 01:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Oh yeah. I'm not very good with categorizing. The article on Bill Flagg hasn't yet been proofread, but if you'd like to add some appropriate categories, that would be appreciated. I'll bet you know what should be there. Scbarry (talk) 01:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Alejandro Núñez Allauca

A tag has been placed on Alejandro Núñez Allauca 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 a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Gromlakh (talk) 06:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandro Núñez Allauca

That may be true, but the article doesn't cite any references and the subject appears to be a non-notable person/musician. If you can beef it up to show his notability and add some references, by all means, please toss a {{hangon}} tag on there and do your thing. Gromlakh (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can clearly see you're not a newbie, and if the article was requested I'd say that's a pretty good sign that he's notable. I've removed the tag; have fun beefing it up! Gromlakh (talk) 06:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm too busy...

with stupid deadlines and travel and stuff, but I'm fairly sure this band has enough to slip above WP:MUSIC. I opined keep last time around, and I've gone neutral on this one but provided a couple links... I'm just far too tied up to spend the time to find good refs. If you get a chance, you might want to take a look and see what you can find. Cheers! Tony Fox (arf!) 21:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to the magic of iTunes, I've just grabbed some of their stuff myself. Not bad at all. Good work on the emergency referencing! Tony Fox (arf!) 06:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with this one. Spartaz Humbug! 21:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I replied at my talk page

JERRY talk contribs 05:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Burma again

Talk:Burma#Survey