User talk:Koavf/Archive029
 User talk:Koavf archives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Please do not modify other users' comments or formatting.
I prefer if you respond on my talk page; I will respond on yours. Please let me know if you want otherwise.
By the way, I'm not an admin--once a month, I get a request for admin help. See WP:AN.
Oh-OK and Community Trolls
Hi Justin. Thanks a lot for your additions to the CT page, and sure, if you have any more specific feedback I'd be happy to hear it. When you're working on a page basically solo, it's always good to have some input from others. I'm glad you liked it overall. I really had to hunt high and low for the sources because there are so few and really milk each one for all it's worth to include the amount of info I have on there. The article was actually the first one I created when I started Wikipedia in 2006, but at the time I didn't know much about proper sourcing conventions, or using reliable sources and stuff like that so for five years it was kind of a crappy article in some ways. I'm glad I got to finally clean it up. I'm hoping to polish it in the next several days and then maybe nominate it for GA. So, yeah, if you do have any feedback, by all means, lay it on me. Or if you wanted to just go through it and reword things you think need rewording or possibly cut things you think need cutting, that'd be cool, too. However you want to do it. By the way, that's cool you met Magnapop and R.E.M. Oh, and about the Complete Recordings, yeah I did look various places online but couldn't find any reliable info. Actually, I do have a copy of the CD myself, but to make a long story short, it's with some of my stuff on another continent right now, so I don't have access to it. Anyway, take care and talk to you again hopefully soon. Moisejp (talk) 01:48, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Justin, thanks again for your additions. Ooh, the picture of Matthew Sweet is kind of scary! But that's OK, it's good to have some pics in there. I went ahead and nominated the article for GA, but there's such a backlog of nominations, it probably won't get dealt with in a while. Yeah, I did check Christgau's site and it does have the part of the liner notes that was the blurb he wrote about the band, but not anything about the song-by-song personnel credits. Oh well, it would have just been a little point, possibly having a better idea when Sweet might have left Oh-OK, but at the end of the day I don't think it would have added that much extra to the article. Right now I'm planning to order the book Party Out of Bounds: The B-52s, R.E.M., and the Kids Who Rocked Athens, Georgia, by Rodger L. Brown. I know it does mention at least Sweet's disengaging from the Athens scene, and how that angered a lot of people, and I'm hoping it will mention more that I could use in the article. I'm also hoping to, in the long term, scan through any R.E.M. biographies I can find at libraries and stuff. But right now I'm not near any big libraries. I have used Google Books, and the Look Inside! feature that's included for some books on Amazon, but I've taken that as far as it can go. There may well be Community Trolls (or other relevant) mentions in other R.E.M. books I haven't seen yet, so I am hoping to eventually check more of them. There are also a couple of magazine articles that I know exist (that I don't think necessarily mention the Trolls, but I know do talk about other elements I have in the article) that I've seen on eBay that I may someday splurge and get, but right now I am on a budget. And I've scoured the Web, but most of the little info there is about CT is unreliable sources. I've also started a Buzz of Delight article, which is just bare bones right now, but I'm hoping to flesh it out, and of course a lot of the same background info and stuff that was useful for the CT article I'll also be able to use for it. Cool, anyways, thanks again for your help! Talk again soon. Moisejp (talk) 17:47, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- What I really hope might surface in my future research is answers from reliable sources to the enigma about whether there were sometimes other members and whether there was other activity by the "loose-knit" group than what is described. This website, and another one that doesn't seem to be working right now, suggests that Peter Buck and Curtis Crowe may have been in the band at times. [[1]] This one says, "A single was released but did not include the songs featuring Matthew Sweet." [[2]] I'm not sure if the latter is true or is misinformation, but it is possible there was some other CT activity going on, possibly even after Sweet left Athens? And the info that Buck and Crowe at least at times played with CT seems very plausible. But of course I can't use the websites above for the article, they don't pass Wikipedia reliability standards. But anyway, yeah, that's the kind of info I'm really hoping I may be able to find at some point. Moisejp (talk) 18:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking at your R.E.M. books. BTW, could I ask which ones you have? Just so I know not to bother hunting those ones down. Incidentally, you said you brought your copy of your Hib-Tone single for R.E.M. to sign when you met them. When Matthew Sweet met them in 1982, he did the same thing (brought the Hib-Tone single to get signed), apparently. I don't know if that's a common practice for R.E.M. fans and is old hat, but, anyways... Talk to you again later on. Thanks again for all your help. Moisejp (talk) 03:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Justin. Wow, it sounds like you have lots of R.E.M. books. That's too bad none of them mention Community Trolls. About Gray's It Crawled From the South, I have the revised edition of that, and it does mention the Trolls in a couple of places. It ended up being one of my main sources. Johnny Black's Reveal also has some stuff I could use. OK, I'll try to check out Talk About the Passion at some point in case there's anything you missed because it doesn't have an index. By the way, when you were looking in your books, did you just check Community Trolls? If it's not too much trouble, could I ask you if any of them say anything about the following: Matthew Sweet, Just Like a Movie, the Stitchcraft show, "Tainted Obligation(s)" (in the old days not everyone knew it was a Community Trolls song, so it's possible the song is mentioned without any mention of the Trolls). Only if you have time, though. If there's ever anything you need help with (for example, if you need help working on a particular article), just let me know. Yeah, I did look online to see if there are any Matthew Sweet biographies out there, but there doesn't seem to be anything. Anyway, I am ordering that Party Out of Bounds book, so hopefully it'll be useful. Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 16:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Justin. How's it going? I noticed you put the 40 Watt Club building photo into the CT article. Actually, you may or may not know this, but the photo used to be in the article for the longest time. Then, when I was cleaning up the article for GAN, I realized that I couldn't find any reliable source saying that was definitely the location of the 40 Watt Club in 1983. I looked at various histories of the 40 Watt Club online, from reliable sources and not, and they all seemed to give different information about where the venue was located when, or else they did not give clear info about it. So I removed it. If you know of reliable source, great, I'd be happy to include the photo in the article. But otherwise, I'd rather play it safe and leave it out. Let me know what you think. Thanks! Moisejp (talk) 16:55, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Justin. Wow, it sounds like you have lots of R.E.M. books. That's too bad none of them mention Community Trolls. About Gray's It Crawled From the South, I have the revised edition of that, and it does mention the Trolls in a couple of places. It ended up being one of my main sources. Johnny Black's Reveal also has some stuff I could use. OK, I'll try to check out Talk About the Passion at some point in case there's anything you missed because it doesn't have an index. By the way, when you were looking in your books, did you just check Community Trolls? If it's not too much trouble, could I ask you if any of them say anything about the following: Matthew Sweet, Just Like a Movie, the Stitchcraft show, "Tainted Obligation(s)" (in the old days not everyone knew it was a Community Trolls song, so it's possible the song is mentioned without any mention of the Trolls). Only if you have time, though. If there's ever anything you need help with (for example, if you need help working on a particular article), just let me know. Yeah, I did look online to see if there are any Matthew Sweet biographies out there, but there doesn't seem to be anything. Anyway, I am ordering that Party Out of Bounds book, so hopefully it'll be useful. Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 16:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking at your R.E.M. books. BTW, could I ask which ones you have? Just so I know not to bother hunting those ones down. Incidentally, you said you brought your copy of your Hib-Tone single for R.E.M. to sign when you met them. When Matthew Sweet met them in 1982, he did the same thing (brought the Hib-Tone single to get signed), apparently. I don't know if that's a common practice for R.E.M. fans and is old hat, but, anyways... Talk to you again later on. Thanks again for all your help. Moisejp (talk) 03:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- What I really hope might surface in my future research is answers from reliable sources to the enigma about whether there were sometimes other members and whether there was other activity by the "loose-knit" group than what is described. This website, and another one that doesn't seem to be working right now, suggests that Peter Buck and Curtis Crowe may have been in the band at times. [[1]] This one says, "A single was released but did not include the songs featuring Matthew Sweet." [[2]] I'm not sure if the latter is true or is misinformation, but it is possible there was some other CT activity going on, possibly even after Sweet left Athens? And the info that Buck and Crowe at least at times played with CT seems very plausible. But of course I can't use the websites above for the article, they don't pass Wikipedia reliability standards. But anyway, yeah, that's the kind of info I'm really hoping I may be able to find at some point. Moisejp (talk) 18:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Album category deletions(data transfer from User:Driftchambers talk)
am looking into this - https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:Categories Drift chambers (talk) 8:30 pm, Today (UTC+1) & https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Category:Songs_by_artist Drift chambers (talk) 8:32 pm, Today (UTC+1) Avoid categories that, by their very definition, will never have more than a few members, unless such categories are part of a large overall accepted sub-categorization scheme, such as subdividing songs in Category:Songs by artist Drift chambers (talk) 8:41 pm, Today (UTC+1)
Shiny Happy People revert
Hi Justin, I see you reverted my section about the possible references to the recreational drug abuse of Benzedrine in article about R.E.M.'s Shiny Happy People.
It might have been nice if you'd discussed that first, but I agree that I didn't have proper external citations so I've added a section on the article's TalkPage to discuss it further. Thanks. - GrahamStw (talk) 20:14, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Re: Breaking Bad sources
Yeah, this one looks like it's going to be a tremendous resource. I hope to turn my attention back to the Breaking Bad episode articles soon. — Hunter Kahn 14:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Question
I recently changed C.Peter Wagner's wikipedia page back to what he wanted on it. We are new to this process - so since he is living, doesn't he have a bit of say in what his page says?
Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.163.137.195 (talk) 21:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Another Question -
So do I need to attach ISBN numbers to his list of books to keep those on the site? Would that qualify as documented? Do we have to take off Peter's commentary on each title at the end?
Thanks for your help. We (Wagners and I) appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmemrick (talk • contribs) 16:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Gus dies.png
Thanks for uploading File:Gus dies.png. 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 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).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:29, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Removing Dead links
Hello Koavf, I have restored a dead link you removed back in June. We have several tools capable of retrieving archived copies of dead links, and we don't usually remove links just because they are dead. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 15:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- In case you're interested, one of the easiest tools is Checklinks. Best wishes, Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Singer-songwriter compilation albums
Category:Singer-songwriter compilation albums, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξxplicit 22:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Singer-songwriter EPs
Category:Singer-songwriter EPs, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξxplicit 22:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Live singer-songwriter albums
Category:Live singer-songwriter albums, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξxplicit 22:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Singer-songwriter video albums
Category:Singer-songwriter video albums, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξxplicit 22:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Question
Not long after you moved File:An Earthbound Misfit I.jpg to File:Pink Floyd - Learning to Fly.jpg, I deleted the resulting redirect at File:An Earthbound Misfit I.jpg. User:Floydian has insisted here that the redirect is necessary. Thoughts? -FASTILY (TALK) 06:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Merge discussion for Agata (given name)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Agata (given name) , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. NeoUrfahraner (talk) 10:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
In Rainbows - Personnel
You removed the "Citation needed"'s I added on the In Rainbows page, section personnel. I added those for a reason, there were a lot of instuments added, and while I think some of them are correct I have serious doubts about others (for instance I don't think that Jonny played viola on In Rainbows) but I didn't want to remove them in case somebody could give me some citation for those, (and I have been looking for them but it is quite hard to find information about who played what on Radiohead records). So if you think there is no citation needed anymore, please tell me your sources for these instruments.--Merijn2 (talk) 12:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
File:An Earthbound Misfit I.jpg listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect File:An Earthbound Misfit I.jpg. Since you had some involvement with the File:An Earthbound Misfit I.jpg redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). FASTILYs (TALK) 19:39, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Network Template TFD 2
You participated in the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_October_7#Network_templates. A new discussion about the same templates has been restarted at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_October_19#Network_templates_2. Feel free to express your thoughts at the new discussion.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:54, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Class work beginning for online ambassadors
My class has started editing their articles - please watch over them as they start. Thanks! See the list here. Awadewit (talk) 19:34, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
- It looks like the students are really going to need help with sources - please help them! Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 02:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
New Page Patrol survey
 New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Koavf/Archive029! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
Portal:Friends
Thank you for editing Portal:Friends.I wrote the title F.r.i.e.n.d.s because that's how it is shown in friends tv show's title video.Looking forward your contribution to the portal..--nijil (talk) 19:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
thanks..:)--nijil (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Flickr link
What's the full link for this image? I don't know what else to call it; by "full link" I mean the page with the caption, comments, license statement, etc. I'm hoping that you're also the Koavf that commented at http://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/lkgy2/til_the_wikipedia_page_on_copyright_is_under Nyttend (talk) 02:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks fo rthe quick reply. I must admit that the whole storyline is rather funny...Nyttend (talk) 02:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
File source problem with File:National Bank of Rolla Building.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:National Bank of Rolla Building.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.
If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.
Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 02:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Christian death-related art
Category:Christian death-related art, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 15:50, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Regarding the bare link tag issue
I just wanted to stop by and say that I fully supported your addition of that template to pages which obviously needed it. It was even helping, I noticed several editors who would fix the links to remove the tags (I might have even done it once or twice, I can't remember offhand for sure). Of course, now there's a wholesale reversion effort going on (which I have no intention of participating in...why fix the pages with the tag when you can just remove it?). Anyway, I just wanted to show my support for your work. MrMoustacheMM (talk) 03:46, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- (See here, here) If this ill-advised task had continued, probably several hundred-thousand pages or more would have been so tagged. To adopt your logic, and turn it around: why tag the pages when you can just fix them? If there are humans who want to put serious work into fixing barelinks, then it would be better to provide them a list of articles to work through, rather than tagging the articles directly (so they can remain so tagged for years or more). Or even better: create a proper bot that will expand the bare links automatically. Mass tag and run is not a viable solution to this issue. –xenotalk 14:40, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Maintenance Bare links are a problem. Problems can't be fixed without being identified. If you could apply {{Barelinks}} to hundreds of thousands of articles, then hundreds of thousands of articles need to be fixed. What am I missing here? I don't have the interest or expertise to make a bot that will fix these automatically, but I can tag pages that I find. Saying that I could "just" fix them assumes that there aren't several times more man-hours in fixing than there are in tagging--which is patently untrue. And what's the point of even having a maintenance template if it's not going to be used? The arguments that "this applies to too many articles" and "there are better things you could have done" are in no way arguments against doing what I did. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:19, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- If you don't have the interest or expertise, what makes you think someone else does? I think the barelinks maintenance template should probably not be used at all - there are simply too many bare links for a template to be worthwhile (at the very least, it should not be placed en masse by an automated process). However, this is all very much beside the point. I am mass reverting your edits because it was an unapproved and ill-advised bot task (unless someone steps forward and indicates they are going to put serious work in cleaning up articles upon which you placed the tags). –xenotalk 15:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Others I know that others have the interest because it happened--as pointed out above, persons started working on cleaning up bare links. Even if no one else does at all, as long as we have the template, it should be applied where it is applicable, right? You may recall that during this discussion, it was nominated for deletion with this same rationale: either use it where it's appropriate or don't have it. It was WP:SNOW kept. So what do we do? Do we have it, but not apply it where it's relevant? What's the point of that? You keep on saying that it was ill-advised, but I honestly have no idea why. You also write that they shouldn't be added en masse, but it's still not clear to me why: I think they should be added instantly to all articles that warrant it. Then we can start working through them. If they're not tagged, pages will still have bare links, but it will be harder to identify them--tagging can only help. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- It may be applied by humans, not unapproved bots. If there is someone who wants to put serious work into cleaning up barelinks on the scale of tens-of-thousands of articles, then they can be given a list to work through. There is no need to tag articles in the tens-of-thousands. If barelinks are such a serious problem (and there stands ready an army of human editors to work through this tedious problem), then ask for a change in the software to automatically apply a maintenance category similar to Category:Pages with missing files. There is no need for a garish tag when lists and hidden maintenance categories can serve the same purpose. –xenotalk 15:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Filters I seem to recall requesting an edit filter for this very issue, in fact (I could be mistaken.) The amount of articles that have a problem is irrelevant to whether or not something is a problem or should be fixed or should be identified as such. If you think that maintenance tags are garish, let's have them all converted to hidden categories. Also, for what it's worth, I'm not trying to be combative, but I really think that your position is nonsense. I appreciate you remaining civil and engaging me in this discussion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Since you feel barelinks are a major problem (though peculiarly indicate you will not work on fixing the problem directly yourself), then petition for a feature in the software so barelink tags will trigger an automatic maintenance category, (continue to) seek consensus for an edit filter, or request someone to write a bot to automatically convert barelinks (or, of course, seek consensus and request approval to continue with your automated tagging). We can disagree on the utility of the visible tags, but that is still beside the point: an automated process should not have added these tags without approval, and I will continue to revert the unapproved edits. –xenotalk 15:41, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Filters I seem to recall requesting an edit filter for this very issue, in fact (I could be mistaken.) The amount of articles that have a problem is irrelevant to whether or not something is a problem or should be fixed or should be identified as such. If you think that maintenance tags are garish, let's have them all converted to hidden categories. Also, for what it's worth, I'm not trying to be combative, but I really think that your position is nonsense. I appreciate you remaining civil and engaging me in this discussion. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- It may be applied by humans, not unapproved bots. If there is someone who wants to put serious work into cleaning up barelinks on the scale of tens-of-thousands of articles, then they can be given a list to work through. There is no need to tag articles in the tens-of-thousands. If barelinks are such a serious problem (and there stands ready an army of human editors to work through this tedious problem), then ask for a change in the software to automatically apply a maintenance category similar to Category:Pages with missing files. There is no need for a garish tag when lists and hidden maintenance categories can serve the same purpose. –xenotalk 15:31, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Others I know that others have the interest because it happened--as pointed out above, persons started working on cleaning up bare links. Even if no one else does at all, as long as we have the template, it should be applied where it is applicable, right? You may recall that during this discussion, it was nominated for deletion with this same rationale: either use it where it's appropriate or don't have it. It was WP:SNOW kept. So what do we do? Do we have it, but not apply it where it's relevant? What's the point of that? You keep on saying that it was ill-advised, but I honestly have no idea why. You also write that they shouldn't be added en masse, but it's still not clear to me why: I think they should be added instantly to all articles that warrant it. Then we can start working through them. If they're not tagged, pages will still have bare links, but it will be harder to identify them--tagging can only help. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:29, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- If you don't have the interest or expertise, what makes you think someone else does? I think the barelinks maintenance template should probably not be used at all - there are simply too many bare links for a template to be worthwhile (at the very least, it should not be placed en masse by an automated process). However, this is all very much beside the point. I am mass reverting your edits because it was an unapproved and ill-advised bot task (unless someone steps forward and indicates they are going to put serious work in cleaning up articles upon which you placed the tags). –xenotalk 15:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
- Maintenance Bare links are a problem. Problems can't be fixed without being identified. If you could apply {{Barelinks}} to hundreds of thousands of articles, then hundreds of thousands of articles need to be fixed. What am I missing here? I don't have the interest or expertise to make a bot that will fix these automatically, but I can tag pages that I find. Saying that I could "just" fix them assumes that there aren't several times more man-hours in fixing than there are in tagging--which is patently untrue. And what's the point of even having a maintenance template if it's not going to be used? The arguments that "this applies to too many articles" and "there are better things you could have done" are in no way arguments against doing what I did. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:19, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Re:Thanks
You're welcome. Any time. fgtc 18:22, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Long Live the King (EP)
Hi Koavf, I just wanted to let you know that I took a look at your recently created article Long Live the King (EP)-- The image greatly improves the article. Kind regards and happy editing! Amy Z (talk) 20:58, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Germany to Germany for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Germany to Germany is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Germany to Germany 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. Aspects (talk) 03:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Nomination of Lex (song) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lex (song) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lex (song) 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. Aspects (talk) 03:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Lost AfDs
I found 4 AfDs you started on the same day that did not get properly transcluded in the AfD log. I have added them to the current log, and I see other AfDs you started that day got into the log properly. You may want to check to see if other AfDs you have started are also lost. Monty845 20:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Arab–American relations
Category:Arab–American relations, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 00:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Western Sahara Positions Map
Hi Koavf!
There is the map! [3] Thank you for uploading it to commons. You're so nice! Zambitious (talk) 01:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
![[3]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Western_Sahara_positions_new.png){kind=link}
Thank you
Thank you very much Koavf. Take care. Dr.K. λogosπraxis 05:02, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
ANI notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Very old AfD's regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —SW— confer 18:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Confused by your revert that the Tracklisting template "smashes" the text - using the template, the text is the same height and width, and makes the tracklist only slightly longer than before (compare old & new in separate tabs). IMO the template "airs out" the list, making it easier to read. - Salamurai (talk) 07:39, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- The Infobox wrap problem you described doesn't occur, however; I checked a few of the shorter articles with that template and narrowed the browser window - the table stays a set width % of the space. I've seen that happen with wikitable setups, however. And the particular article doesn't have long titles that are being smashed.
Effectively you're telling me you don't like and don't use it. That doesn't make it wrong for others to use it for a cleaner presentation. -Salamurai (talk) 17:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)- Where is the specific policy on using the table? I have searched, and read about half the archive of the template's talk page, and haven't been able to find it, for months now. Can you direct me? I mean, it's not "required" anywhere, is it? Just a different presentation. - Salamurai (talk) 17:23, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Your note
Thanks for your note. The main reason I removed them is that I thought that all three had already been linked in the article. I now see that the third one had not. It is a short article and it is simply redundant to have the first two items listed again a few sentences after you have already seen them linked. To put it another way if they were being mentioned in another paragraph they would be unlinked per WP:OVERLINK. On the other hand that is just one editors interpretation and I don't have any problem with your restoration of the section. I might suggest that you add a "t" to your edit summary as in "rvt" (as in revert) because when I first read your edit summary I thought that you (by using "Rv") were saying that you were reverting vandalism. You are such a long term and respected (by me anyway) editor that I didn't think that could be right so I went further and checking your edit history I figured out what was going on. You certainly don't have to do this it is just a suggestion. Cheers and happy editing. MarnetteD | Talk 15:34, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- I know what you mean. When we get in the editing groove summaries can take as much time as the whole edit :-) MarnetteD | Talk 15:49, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Non-free use of File:Dar Williams - The Beauty of the Rain.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Dar Williams - The Beauty of the Rain.jpg. However, there is a concern that the use of the image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. Details of this problem, and which specific criteria that the image may not meet, can be obtained by going to the image description page. If you feel that this image does meet those criteria, please place a note on the image description or talk page explaining why. Do not remove the {{di-fails NFCC}} tag itself.
An administrator will review this file within a few days, and having considered the opinions placed on the image page, may delete it in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion or remove the tag entirely. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Moe ε 10:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- The same problem also exists for File:The Decemberists - Long Live the King.jpg, please make sure to give uploads fair use rationales. Once you provide a rationale you can remove the bad fair use template. Also, I have reduced the resolution of the image per WP:NFCC, so the reduced template needs to stay for an administrator. Thanks, — Moe ε 10:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- Sure, I can re-size the above images. I did around 200 because that is the approximate size it appears on the article it is used on. — Moe ε 17:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Done — Moe ε 17:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
- If you ever need something re-sized I can help, just drop a line and I'll do it for you. — Moe ε 23:53, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi Koavf, You have tagged this article with "barelink tag", So, check it now, please.KremBrule (talk) 13:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Françoise Hardy canta per voi in italiano
Hello Koavf. You can put a better picture for the sleeve of the record, Françoise Hardy canta per voi in italiano. You will find her on this link: http: // www.popsike.com/Francoise-Hardy-CANTA-P ER-VOI-IN-ITALIANO-Mint-LP/120319657783 .html You will just have to extract with Tool screen shot. The result will be very suitable and without major deformation. By hoping that my help is useful for you, I wish you a good continuation. Alain S. - Paris - France 82.226.28.41 (talk) 13:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC).
Re: Using my userbox
Message added 00:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Message added 02:50, 16 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Jim10701 (talk) 10:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
I dropped your name there, in the section "Issues concerning capitalization of some music articles." Please come by and add your comments. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:58, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Albumcaps
I am requesting your further input here (or wherever the discussion may end up).—Ryulong (竜龙) 00:24, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Futurisk orphan status
Hi , I see this Futurisk page has an 'orphan' status ("as few or no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; suggestions may be available. (July 2011)"
I have introduced a few relevant links back to the page, see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&redirs=1&search=Futurisk&fulltext=Search&ns0=1&title=Special%3ASearch&advanced=1&fulltext=Futurisk (please note, the 'Futu-risk (ergo proxy)'( animated show) links are unrelated so unlinked to the band Futurisk)
Other than these, I do not see any other possibilities at this time, although I will introduce a couple of new pages regarding pages for the noted members in the band as time permits.
Does the page still have keep the 'orphan' status in the meantime though since there a few pages that link back to it?
Thanks