User talk:Alchemagenta

Untitled album by :$OVIET:FRANCE:

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have perfomed a web search with the contents of Untitled album by :$OVIET:FRANCE:, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Garista. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 18:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed CorenSearchBot tag, the similarities are genuine but do not reflect a copyright violation. Alchemagenta 20:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tramway

I noted that you "again" added reference to Tramway (arts centre) on the Tramway disambiguation page. Rather than just delete it (disambiguation pages exist to direct users to other pages, and should not have encyclopaedic content) I created a stub Tramway (arts centre) article. As you seem to have some interest in this arts centre, I thought you might be interested in expanding that article. Cheers, --Michael Johnson (talk) 10:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you beat me to it - I was going to generate a Tramway (arts centre) stub myself this afternoon, several articles I've come across recently refer to it.Alchemagenta (talk) 12:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and keep up the good work with the wildlife conservation.Alchemagenta (talk) 12:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Zero Visibility Corps

A tag has been placed on Zero Visibility Corps 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 company or corporation, 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 companies and corporations.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the 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. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ukexpat (talk) 13:11, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please disregard the above warning. The article is fine and the tagging of it for deletion was ill-advised and I've removed the tag. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Alchemagenta (talk) 21:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chore of Enchantment

A tag has been placed on Chore of Enchantment, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Avi15 (talk) 13:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...in case anyone's looking, the speedy deletion tag was removed even faster than it was added (thanks, Zzuuzz) and Avi15 blocked for 24 hours following a rash of similarly unwarranted tagging by her/him. The article stands. Alchemagenta (talk) 11:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tenses

Mmm, I understand your point, but it is quite "normal" to use the present tense in that kind of list of historical events. I think you'd find the same if you looked in a similar list in, say, a magazine. The year articles started that way and I've always tried to keep them consistent. Deb (talk) 13:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have mail

Hello, Alchemagenta. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Referencing for "years" in music

I've been thinking about the problem of encouraging editors to add citations to the events placed in the year in music articles, and would like to bounce an idea off you. Having the refimprove tags in each section can emphasize the need for references, but it doesn't seem to really help a lot. Unreferenced stuff still will show up. What I was thinking was that people have a tendency to copy or use the same format for information that they add as whatever they see already there. This tendency can be re-inforced by using a template that can help emphasize the need for a citation by having a parameter for the citation. My idea is that the events section could be set up with each entry being a template entry consisting of parameters for the date, description text, and citation. If the citation were missing, the template could automatically flag itself with a citation needed tag. It would look something like this:

* {{Jan 07|Kid Rock wins a People's Choice Award for his song "All Summer Long"|reference goes here}}

When editors adding new information see a string of templates, then they will add their entry with the template which includes having a reference present.

Your thoughts? -- Whpq (talk) 14:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, the refimprove tags are probably whistling in the wind somewhat and I had been thinking that something additional is needed at edit level. I hadn't got any further than considering adding notes for editors along the lines of . I also think that part of the problem may stem from the customary absence of referencing in other date lists (for example 1815), the principle of which I don't really understand – my belief is that if categorical assertions are made in Wikipedia, they should be referenced, no matter what form they take. Anyway, I think your suggestion of a template is a positive step and I'd be happy to start deploying it myself. Alchemagenta (talk) 14:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]