Jump to content

User talk:Crestville/Archive 2

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

Revolution In The Head

[edit]

Yeah I got it but I loaned it out, got the '97 edtion - will check the local Library see if they got one - let you know as soon as poss. yeah? Vera, Chuck & Dave 14:24, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, I need to go up the road anyway, no harm in checking! let you know if they got it. Vera, Chuck & Dave 14:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cresty! No luck I'm afraid, They ain't got it! Do you beleive that???. They got lots of music books, (words and chords) and pulp fan things that say stuff like "George likes honey on his cornflakes" and the like, but nothing serious - sorry pal. Good luck with yor Xams! Vera, Chuck & Dave 13:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Provocation

[edit]

Be careful of using provocative phrases even in reverting what you believe to be vandalism [1]. "rv vandalism. You can't catch me weirdo" is inappropriate. --Tony Sidaway 15:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're still at it. This and this show you still using provocative edit summaries. I'm giving you a last warning. --Tony Sidaway 18:44, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about now? I was reverting a POV (and possible vadlised) edit, and giving a reasoned explianation as to why. Where's the provocation in that? Would you rather I not revert such POV edits and compramise the quality of the articles? You've still done nothing about Feline1 and you're monertering every little thing I do, calling me on the smallest, most insignificant things. Are you trying to pick on me or something? That's uncalled for, coz I'm doing good work. I don't need threats of blocking, it's uncalled for. Byeee--Crestville 18:49, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's look at the edits with those summaries, shall we?
  • "Revert rediculously POV (and untrue) statement. The Beatles were the Motzarts of pop. Jackson's just a chancer who outstayed his welcome in the late 80s" was a revert of a statement "Michael Jackson could be called "the Mozart of pop music". At the same time unique and universal. Breathtaking temperament combined with exquisite elegance. A hard working genious from the golden age of pop." Well I agree that it's biased, but your edit summary was wrong. All you need to say, and in fact the best thing to say is "revert (WP:NPOV)".
  • "it's not, but apparenty it was. Don't be a fool, read the dates before you start foaming at the mouth." was in response to a pretty nasty comment. You shouldn't rise to the bait. Attacks don't merit further attacks. For this you could give an edit summary "revert. For verification, see Billboard R&B chart".
Please try to avoid these provocative edit summaries. I can't put this too strongly. It's one of your few faults as an editor, but it's a very serious one. --Tony Sidaway 19:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone removing your comments from talk pages.

[edit]

Just thought you may like to know that someone is removing your comments from talk pages; see here [2]

Shaggy dog stories

[edit]

You may be indifferent to know I have a small repetoire of shaggy dog stories; the punch line to one is "A Hod's as good as a Sink to a blind Norse". Cheers.LessHeard vanU 15:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles

[edit]

[3] Please don't partonise my beautiful people. Put a feather in yer cap.--Crestville 09:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What was that all about? In addition, please explain to me what you just said or trying to say as I am not familiar with British English. I don't think the comment I left on the edit summary was rude or anything. —RJN 18:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yorkshire whatisms

[edit]

There are many different ways of describing the language/dialect/colloquialisms/Yorkshireisms.. on the Yorkshire page. Mad Baron wanted the title changed because there is no such word as Yorkshireisms, and the aristocrat is right (because I checked). Can we settle on one?

I also think the intro sounds a bit like the dialect page. (Think of professor with pipe scenario..)

P.S. The sentences,

"I don't see how the phrase "you chimp" is related to my comments", and

"The thing to do is apologize, not advise him to ´take the rod out of his arse´",

have just made me laugh like a drain for the first time in ages. It´s pure Blackadder.

andreasegde 11:13, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but there is no such word as Yorkshireisms. Bugger, gnashing of teeth... I think there should be... To whom should I send my stamped-addressed envelope (with a five-pound giro in it), to get it accepted, I wonder...? andreasegde 12:32, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I don´t give two monkeys, because I liked Yorkshireisms, or Yorkshire slang, better, but The Insane Aristocrat/Mad Baron disagress. Bugger it, let´s call it anything - no, don´t call it "anything", that would confuse... Sod it, what would people from Yok-sha call it? Hmmm...

By the way, I nipped in on the sly (sh*t, there´s another one) and put yours in. ("Tek-rod-out yer arse" still makes me laugh. I´m going to start using it on Austrians.)

andreasegde 13:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tact

[edit]

A friendly word for you.

See here. Remember we all have to start somewhere. This guy is interested in writing about Michael Jackson, and that was apparently his first go. So best not to frighten him away because he was obviously trying, even if he got it wrong this time. --Tony Sidaway 02:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I read the link, and I see no problem with tact here. If Tony (Hello Tony :))writes that the new editor is a beginner, then tell the new editor (as Crestville did) that the stuff he´s written is not "up to scratch", and then he will surely improve. I think it´s called "cruel to be kind"...

I was also told, on my first editing venture, (and in no uncertain terms) what was expected, and I complied, and learned. I thank the editor that told me that.

andreasegde 15:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles info box

[edit]

Why not put it in History of The Beatles? - DavidWBrooks 15:18, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:Feline1

[edit]

The user says "I must try harder" and, for the moment, I'm inclined to assume good faith. Meantime, in all honesty, I commend you for your effort to maintain a sense of humor, if perhaps a tad sarcastically. Feel free to write if there are additional issues you feel the two of you have failed to work out. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 20:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crestville, as a man who has written articles on the pleasures of Coming Again and Getting the Horn, I put it to you that you are but Derek to my Clive. I would not dream of disappointing you by failing to provide a suitable rejoinder every time you return to my talk page with another of your bold little messages. I dare say we could quite happily, to paraphrase Basil Fawlty, keep it up until one of us dies. I assure you that these purely personal pleasures between us are not indicative of my avowed intentions to not bite the ankles of wikipedians in general with overly acerbic comments on their work. You might also wish to note, I do hopefully provide a fair bit of good work on articles, some of my larger works including Immanuel Velikovsky, Kraftwerk, The Tourists and a multitude of tidbits on various music-related entries. --feline1 21:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Trivia

[edit]

Nice one, Crestville! "As for "consensus" - you've got one admin and three strong users who disagree with you". You hit the nail on the head. Buy that man a pint.

This is exactly what has been "peeing me off" for a while now. What, or who, is this freakin´ concensus? It seems to me that "they" use it as a ´fact´ to confirm their decisions. It makes my blood boil, so it does... grrr... andreasegde 22:57, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Right, I´ve had me marching orders. No problem at all... All in life can not always be sweet, as they say... Wait a minute, I think I read that badly. The Trivia section will stay? That´s great! If not (and I am not sure if I´m getting this) then I refer you to my first comment.

Such is life... Have lots of fun...

andreasegde 20:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I am speechless (which is unusual for me.) Thank you very much for your extremely kind and supportive words. I don´t mind that you´re a "gobby little fucker", ´cos it makes me laugh. I read your last "anti-wikipedian!" sentence and I laughed myself daft. Humour is a rare commodity on these pages...

Anyway; roll on... Which book do you recommend as the best on the Fabs? I had them all in the past but read them until they were in tatters, (especially Shout!)and I need to buy a new one. Any good new ones about? (I have never read Goldmann´s book, on principle.)

andreasegde 05:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will do. I think I know Shout word for word, but I will check out the outrageously-priced English books over here in Europe. They tax your goolies off. andreasegde 18:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meh

[edit]
Aww, did you miss me? That's so cute. --Myles Long 22:11, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Room 101

[edit]

Sorry, but there is no such list in existance. So far the wikipedia list is the most accurate on the internet. ISD 15:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Alternative music

[edit]

Hello, I'd like to invite you to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative music. I see you've done a lot of work on Oasis and Britpop-related articles, and we'd certainly appreciate help from someone more familiar with the British side of things. WesleyDodds 09:20, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right now I'm going to be working on Britpop since I have the references on hand; with the material avaiable I don't see why this shouldn't be a good article once we cite everything. Basically let's work together on it, and I'll certainly need your help when it comes to proper grammar since I'll for obvious reasons be instinctively writing with American English. In regards to other British alternative rock, I need help filling out the section on UK alternative on the Alternative rock page. As you can see I only got it to about 1995. I mean, I could bullshit about post-Britpop like Coldplay and recent indie rock like Franz Ferdinand, Bloc Party, and Artic Monkeys, but I really don't now that much about the period in a historical context and you might have better luck putting that in context than I. Also, if you need any help with any related articles, flag it up on the project talk page. WesleyDodds 03:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 3, July 2006

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 003 – July 2006

Beatles News
Project News
  • New article classification system, for our use and for Wikipedia 1.0. Very important and we need editor involvement. How can you help? Rate articles! It's easy:
    • Visit Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Article Classification and read about how to grade.
    • Visit Category:Unassessed Beatles articles and select an article to review.
    • After deciding what grade it should have, modify the invocation of {{WPBeatles}} on the talk page to add parms. The template itself gives you the parameters to use. For example, change {{WPBeatles}} to {{WPBeatles|B|Low}} if you think it's a low-importance, B-class article. Save your changes and make sure the talk page is now showing the ratings.
    • Click on the link in the template to edit the /comments subpage and explain why you rated the article the way you did. Don't forget to sign with ~~~~. Save that too.
    • Questions? Ask Kingboyk or Lar for help.
  • Want to stay up on new project developments? Watchlist all of the WikiProject pages plus The Beatles and each of the 4 members, to get a feel for what's happening. Also monitor and regularly review Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/The Beatles articles by quality log. If an article is listed on there as "added", go check the article's history. If it's new since the Project began add it to the Project Log as a new article and up the counter by one :)
Member News
Issue of the Month

Preparing articles for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

From the Editors

It was a bit of a struggle to get this month's newsletter done, as we did it without a lead editor. Hopefully, next month you'll jump in and be our lead editor. Big news is that WP:1.0 is coming along nicely and our article classification system has changed to conform to it.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 004 – August 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Michael Jackson

[edit]

Hey Crestville, re your query on the talk page, I did not want to make an outright accusation. I was trying to drop hints so they cut it out. The users in question are User:I'll bring the food and User:Ehmjay. Their behaviour that day was just bizarre. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 03:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reasonably sure it's the case but I'm not 100% certain, that's why I didn't want to "out" them on the page. The not signing their comments was just a minor thing that capped it off...their whole editing that day was really weird and their user pages are a bit strange as well. I'll bring the food hasn't been back since I posted that comment and I think Ehmjay knew I was talking about them. I think s/he was just playing ignorant. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 09:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You vandalizing on Wikiquote

[edit]

Please don't continue to vandalize wikiquote under the username Crestville and then ignore talk page warnings. Thanks. Wazzawazzawaz 23:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've done no such thing. I contribute to wikiquote in a constructive was and have had no talk page warnings.--Crestville 23:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of indulging some sock puppet who hasn't even bothered to create a proper fake userpage for himself, the person vandelising wikiquote has spelt their name with a capital I in place of a lower case L so as to create a username that looks like mine but is seperate. All well and good and hilarious, but if I were to suddenly choose to stop contributing in a clever way and start randomly vandelising wikipedia, don't you think I'd choose a fake name that was as differant from this one as possible? You didn't box clever there did you son?--Crestville 23:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You continued vandalisim of Wikiquote and your own Talk Page is NOT APPRICATED. Also pleas try to avoid making preocative edit summrries. Thanks. Wazzawazzawaz 23:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, whatever. Funny lad, you are.--Crestville 23:44, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, please stop with your arrogance. There is continued vandalism going on, on Wikiquote under username: Crestville, and his page has a link to this page. You will be blocked if you continue. Thanks. Wazzawazzawaz 23:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As well you know that's not me. My user name is CRESTVILLE. His is CRESTVILIE. They look the same but are differant. It's supposedly a joke. Check the "user contributions" section and you will find no vandelism, so any attempt to rile me has fallen flat on its face. Hard lines.--Crestville 23:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay enough is enough. I'm talking to someone else. Good day lad. Wazzawazzawaz 23:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, good luck with that.--Crestville 23:54, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Good day. Wazzawazzawaz 23:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As have you.--Crestville 00:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet Accusations

[edit]

Please stop accusing me of being a sockpuppet of User:CrestvilIe as you can see I am a MAJOR contributer over on Wikiquote. Wazzawazzawaz 00:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, they all say you're a vandal over there. Looks like the joke's on you.--Crestville 00:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets and impersonators

[edit]

The two above sockpuppet/impersonator accounts, including User:CrestvilIe, have been blocked. (Don't thank me; I'm not the one who did the deed). --EngineerScotty 05:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: My imposter

[edit]

No problem. -- Where 14:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The Beatles Trivia

[edit]

Check it out. I have worked my knackers off (for the umpteenth time) to make sure there are no bullet-points. I will now proceed to a party and intercourse my brains out, if there are any willing participants... Have fun. andreasegde 18:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you enjoy yourself. Tell me how it went.--Crestville 14:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Nahhh... didn´t get any joy. Had a few free pints, though. They always taste better when they cost sod-all, do they not? Sorry to read about the git that has been impersonating you. "You know it don´t come easy", as they say. You deserve to be respected.

Anyway; It is always a joy to read your comments, because they make me laugh a lot. I will also put "hard lines", and "box clever" into the Yorkshire 'thingy-me-bob'. (That´s another one, isn´t it? Bugger...)

One of my favourite comments of yours is, "YOU MUTHÄPÜTBGJNDNVFKVKVJDNV!!!!! - you erased my lyrics!!" (or whatever it was) and you replied, "I sure did." (I´m laughing now, by the way...) Cool perfection. Excellent. Another one is: "Can I call you Crest, by the way?" and you answered, "No, you can not".

So I will finish by saying this: Let´s have more support for "Cresty". (I´m really sorry; I couldn´t resist it... laugh...) Hit me where it hurts... andreasegde 18:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impersonators/sockpuppets?

[edit]

Frankly, I'm jealous! (I truthfully came over to say "thanks" for the rv. on the Ringo Starr article - I am aware that some people don't care for your style, but I think that if some folk feel insulted by your approach... then they probably deserve it - but couldn't resist reading the last couple of items on your talk page!!) Cheers, mate! LessHeard vanU 22:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why have you protected the Michael Jackson page?

[edit]

So far as I can tell, it is not being vandelised.--Crestville 21:41, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't protect the page; I just added the notice. The page was protected at 14:03 at 28 June 2006 by User:Alkivar. His reasoning was, "libel postings mean this needs to go back to semi." I don't know what this is referring to, but it is customary to leave the semi-protection notice up there until the issue is resolved. — Rebelguys2 talk 21:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Big Push

[edit]

As a member of WikiProject Dad's Army you must do your bit for the big push, see the project talk page for more details. I expect everyone to create at least one page, or write one plot. Thank you for your help up til now and for all your help in the future. Mollsmolyneux 15:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Samual Lister.jpg

[edit]

Hello,

I wan't to transfer this image to commons, but at the moment I don't see any evidence for "This image is copyrighted. However, the copyright holder has irrevocably released all rights to it, allowing it to be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, used, modified, built upon, or otherwise exploited in any way by anyone for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, with or without attribution of the author, as if in the public domain." – could you please say why you consider it to be PD? Greets, --Tolanor 23:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Arniep's edits to Michael Jackson page

[edit]

this user has replaced the recent 2006 pic you championed in your edit war with me with a pic from 1984. i just thought i'd give you a heads up and ask that you help enforce the "wiki policy" that you spoke of when i attempted to use a 1980s era pics as a primary photo. so for Arniep is refusing to listen and keeps editing back to his last version, simultaneously reverting other edits that came afterwards. Drmagic 13:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


ok maybe i exaggerated a bit. nonetheless i was just surprised to see Arniep's image up there and no one taking him to task as they did me. the issue with images is so complex i cannot devote time to studying the laws of usage. i have nonetheless come to agree that the primary photo should be a current one, though i prefer the classic MJ look more. Drmagic 14:10, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you were wrong about that "current image" policy

[edit]

This was posted on the Talk:Michael Jackson page. not starting a fight, but i thought you should read this as this all got started with you reverting my edit days ago:

There seems to be some confusion about Wikipedia:Image use policy here. Anyone insisting that we use "the most current" image because of policy is confused. There is no such policy. What is policy (see Wikipedia:Fair use criteria), is that images under a freely-reusable license are used whenever possible. One can see a small selection of images with such licensing at commons:Michael Jackson. Uploading unfree images, or images without verifiable source and licensing information, is just creating more work, as freely-licensed images exist and unfree ones will be deleted. Thanks for understanding. Jkelly 20:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Drmagic 21:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson image

[edit]

Please note, that per Wikipedia:Fair use criteria, policy dictates we can never use a fair use image, if a free image exists. Since we have a free image of Michael Jackson, we can never use any non-free image, as the lead image, such as the one you added. This applies, regardless of whether one image is more current, or looks better. --Rob 21:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I already knew that. I just didn't realise it wasn't on commons. Someone told me it was. I've explained all this to Drmagic. He is quite content to whinge that people are reveting edits but is too lazy to actually read the image policy pages (I think he once asked me to "read it for [him]") and so never quite understands what is going on. Typical Yank.--Crestville 12:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles trivia on the chopping block

[edit]

Dear Beatles editors, I have just seen a header that “The Beatles trivia“ is being considered for deletion. I would like you to take a look at it and vote to keep, or delete. The consensus will win the day, as they say…. I will not vote, as I have been personally involved in the construction of the page. andreasegde 01:42, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: WikiProject Fawlty Towers

[edit]

Hello, you signed up for the Fawlty Towers wikiproject, and it is up and running (only just) - may need a hand to start with because I'm not too familiar with wikiprojects, (stubs and templates in particular). Hope you are satisfied join me and improve the standard of articles related to unarguably one of the most influencial television programmes of all time! Regards! Foxearth 10:58, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

No Probs Pal!

[edit]

Alright Mate? Whilst you got your eyes on, have a look at the last edit to (song) Her Majesty for me please _ wot the friggin' hell is a stacked ajective? or am I just a thick Micky? Cheers Vera, Chuck & Dave 22:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... makes sense, thanks for your time Cheers mate, Vera, Chuck & Dave 22:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pepperstool

[edit]

Whatever differences you have had with fellow editors, edits like this one can demonstrate that you are prone to being provoked beyond the boundaries of civility. Please consider that, belittled though we may feel, responding in kind damages our efforts to collaborate on the sum total of human knowledge. Please be mindful, and thank you. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 05:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Make a nice mantra--Crestville 16:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reply to both of you on my user talk page. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 17:23, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
People don't always "get it" immediately—and, people don't always deserve to be called "vandals". RadioKirk (u|t|c) 22:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked at the talk page and I see you being flip. Do you have diffs to demonstrate the accusation of sockpuppetry? RadioKirk (u|t|c) 22:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I've looked at the recent history as you've pointed out to me and, yes, this person is adding some scorching POV to articles (and even admitting so). At the same time, yes, there are some legitimate (if heavy on the POV) edits from this user you wish to utterly dismiss as a vandal and to whom you respond with such diatribes as "I find the condecending edit offencive. Go and listen to Hard-Fi in your country villa, you upper middle class, lower lower intelligence snob. BTW, I'm not on the dole you four letter word." I am not saying to you, "maybe we should be nice to him because...", I'm saying we must all abide by WP:CIVIL—you to him, him to me, me to you, etc.—otherwise that policy goes to hell in a handbasket. I'm also saying, sometimes, working together is impossible, so we must sometimes work apart. Meantime, I will again remind the user about WP:NOR and WP:NPOV as two more policies by which we must all abide. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 05:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

time waster

[edit]

'Whatever' is a bit non committal for me unfortunately. I'll certainly try to stop "vandaising". And in future, do not refer to me as 'lad' as this is yet more provocation. Ok?

More dismissive really.--Crestville 12:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And is being dismissive not provocation? I think you'll find that it is in some cases. Remind me though, what exactly is "vandaising"?

That is not for you to decide. I am deeply offended and have reported you again.

Ok then. Please sign your comments.--Crestville 16:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fun stuff

[edit]

Ay-oop duck! I´m going to start a page called "Crestville´s one-liners". "Saying less is more", would be the sub-title. Do you think it would get deleted? (Ouch!! Sound of being kicked in the nether regions...) A laugh-a-day keeps the evil doctors of editing away, as they say.

I thought you would like this (maybe you´ve seen it) on the Zak Starkey page:

"Gallagher cheekily added that he wouldn't mind Starkey joining Oasis permanently, saying, "If he came to me tomorrow and said, 'I want to leave The Who and join you lot permanently,' I'd say, 'Brilliant. Get me your dad's autograph and you're in.'" Great stuff. andreasegde 15:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You think they'd have more of a sense of humour about that sort of thing.--Crestville 16:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was joking about the Crestville page, although it would be brilliant, but definitely not allowed. (Sound of a kick in the groin). The weather is as hot - over here in Austria - as a jam doughnut in a pregnant elephant´s arse, by the way. I am sweating my cobblers off.

You´re studying law? Please inform me when you become a barrister, as I believe you will have the jury "laughing in the aisles" with your witty retorts/one-liners. I pity the poor criminals (a great "double-act"). "No, I weren´t the one that topped her in the bog - honest." Crestville: "Yes... I´m sure you didn´t, Mr..., sorry, what was your name again?" Have fun. andreasegde 16:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The single most disgusting comparison I have ever heard. Brilliant - can I use it?"

I´m laughing my socks off - again. My stomach is starting to hurt... Yes, you can use it, but only as long as you say "citation needed", and "this phrase has been nominated for deletion by the well-meaning editors of Wikipedia" when you repeat it. If you don´t, I will sue your socks off... andreasegde 16:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bugger, I have just written (albeit in jest) a "legal threat". This could get me kicked off Wiki. Honest Guv, I were only ´avin a laff. Please don´t make me clean the parade ground with a toothbrush again... andreasegde 14:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I´m really glad you didn´t mind, but when I saw the red link it was instinctive to change it. (I´d had a few tins as well, hic...) I didn´t think about it, I just did it. Does that mean I´m getting to be a Wiki-head? (New word) or a Wikiholic? (I will not entertain the idea that I may be a "Wikiwanker...") Ho-hum. I will never find a link to my old school, because they tore it down and spread salt over the ground where it stood, just to make sure... andreasegde 14:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I would not entertain that idea either. It was very nice. But is there anything sadder than coming on wikipedia pissed? I always feel guilty afterwards, like I own myself better than that.--Crestville 19:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

[edit]

Just added the link to the new template for the WikiProject Dad's Army userbox --Mollsmolyneux 18:06, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

[edit]

Good grief, waiting for the final decision on the Beatles trivia page is like having a baby. That is a POV, because I have never had the experience of having a bowling ball pass through my colon, or an umbrella being fully opened in my anus. andreasegde 14:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't lived--Crestville 14:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You did it again. (Sound of man holding stomach and making "guffawing" sounds...) andreasegde 14:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


My word; gobsmacked is not the word. The Beatles trivia has been saved! Wonders will never cease. andreasegde 16:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi, Yes I like it. It makes you want to open the album articles where you should be presented with a concise accurate history of each one (I think!). However, Please Please Me is pretty awful. The others are better although ramble on a bit. I feel there's a lot that could be just stripped out. Possibly better to have less than more, and build on that. But visually seeing all of the album covers is great, makes me want to go and play them all.--Patthedog 18:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are lots of inaccuracies as well as being written in a rather amateurish fashion, the latter being purely my own opinion. In terms layout though it’s all there. The thing is, as a user you only have to spot one mistake to make you mistrust it all. PPM was partially inspired by a Bing Crosby lyric “…Please lend a little ear to my pleas…”
I don’t think sixty-niners had been invented yet in 1963! I pretty sure it was mutual masturbation although I can’t put my finger on it. --Patthedog 19:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha ha. Have a look on the appropriate wikipedia page, I'm sure there'll be a diagram of something. Otherwise, just keep blindly searching, who knows what you might find.--Crestville 21:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Orphaned fair use image (Image:Sexy.jpg)

[edit]
Warning sign This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Sexy.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 04:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yok-sha help

[edit]

Can you look at the page, when you´ve got a few mintues? It´s got to be wiki-fied, but I´m not sure how much to do. andreasegde 16:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I took your "Grrr" out of my page, because I thought it was from someone else (nudge, nudge, wink, wink...) It was unsigned as well, which is why I was supicious. (Crestville not signing? Blow me down - what is the world coming to? I´ll go t´foot of our stairs...:)

When I found out it was you, I had a good laugh. Grrr.... andreasegde 19:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I 'ad a feeling that were it. It was an insult, so I didn't sign it.--Crestville 19:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I have just had a good laugh about The Beatles talk page:

"That's nice, I'll put the correct one there instead, then. Would you like some tea? You seem to be rather on edge"...

Wikiquette, everyone. C'mon now...

"Don't ruin the atmos."--Crestville 20:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

´Effin brill. You are a comic genius - I´m still laughing. andreasegde 15:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]


With all due respect, Rik Mayall, Eddie Izzard, The Pythons, Ade Edmondson, whoever wrote Father Ted, Stan Laurel, Eric Morecambe, Spike Milligan, Chris Rock, Les Dennis, Bill Hicks, Paul Merton, Bill Bailey, Vic and Bob and Peter Cook all qualify as comic geniuseses. I've just too much time on my hands. Though that man was getting worked up over nothing. [BTW, I will award a barnstar to anyone who can spot my deliberate mistake in this post!]--Crestville 22:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, apart from "geniuseses", I think I´m right on the nose for Les Dennis, or maybe Les should get one on the nose... (Shouldn´t be too harsh on Les though, because his wife did play "hide the sausage" with Neil Morrissey.) I have no real idea what a Barnstar is, but if mentioning it to prospective partners is impressive (having no Jaguar or bulging bank account to speak of) then I want one. andreasegde 18:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I knew you´d give me a Barnstar with a joke in it. :) Why did I ever choose that stupid user name? Makes me sound like a cross-dresser from the Urals... andreasegde 12:57, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Please Album

[edit]

--Patthedog 09:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)== Please Please Album ==[reply]

I think I need some advice please. I’ve been trying to reorganize the "Please Please Me" album article. So far I’ve rewritten the opening section and the cover and further down rewritten “I Saw Her Standing There” “Misery” “Ask Me Why” and “Love Me Do”. The thing is: am I wasting my time as a lot of this is repeated as articles elsewhere, although, in my opinion, not as lovingly put together as mine!? What do you think?--Patthedog 08:03, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should have told you about the template. I couldn't resist when I saw it. hehe. You're right about the articles about songs, I'll review my selection. (Ctrl+C Ctrl+V the wrong album error on Force Of Nature, I really need to review my strategies)

Right. Many thanks for looking at all of this. I shall carry on then until I either keel over or I’m arrested. Citations aren’t a problem, I’ll put them in. Sorry about the Nothing was ever going be the same again, but we just had to wait a little longer……”. bit, I just got carried away. With "And the fact that it had been written by two members of the group meant that it broke the mould” I was trying to say that up until The Beatles came along, groups would be given material to record. It was most unusual, and in fact, quite outrageous to want to do your own stuff. “Love Me Do” then was really very different in that respect (especially as it was their first single). Suppose I rephrase it or use a quote? Anyway, I’ll do as you suggest with the song articles. I think I could be in for quite a bumpy ride though! So far I’ve just been splashing around in some backwater as I don’t think the Please Please Me (album) article can be on that many watchlists. I can’t be the only person though that thinks the songs (probably all of them!) need tidying up? Ok then, where are those books…………?(I must stop doing that)--Patthedog 09:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FAC - Noel Gallagher

[edit]

Hi there, I've written some comments about the article up there. Try and ignore my disorganised thought process, and the way I went back and added 3 more comments later on. I just did a once-over of the article, went through and did some dabbing, wikilinking and emdashing... you know, all the fun stuff. Cheers, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 17:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, bloody hell. The one time I press 'preview' instead of 'save', and I close the page. Lesson learned: don't edit Wikipedia at 4AM. I'll do it again tomorrow. At a more appropriate time, perhaps? — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 17:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Err... sorry, I've been busy out in the real world... whatever that is... and I haven't had time to make the changes I wanted to. I'll do it right now. — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 14:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeh, but nice to get these things out of the way. Ugh, I'm using Wikipedia to relax. This has got to stop. — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • 14:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Morecambe

[edit]

Sorry about the smart alec comment. But surely I'm entitled to one – it's what I do best. I'm obviously missing something about the name. Are you saying that Eric was called John rather than Eric for a short while after he was born? Grant 22:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright, so long as I know they're in jest. I didn't actually write that sentence, but from what I understand, he was never really called John. I just read the section on his birth in Morecambe and Wise by Graham McGann and, after saying "John Eric was born on...." he is never again reffered tro in the book as John. This would imply he was never called John by his parents. My Grandad, who only is four years younger, has a similar thing. His name is Joseph Derrek Hodgson, but from birth his parents used to called him Derrek (sic) and so sdo we. However, at school he was always known as Joe, because that's the name which appeared on the school records. That's how it would sometimes happen back then.
Ah. That confirms my suspicions. Despite having a juxtonym grandfather, you appear to have embraced the schizonym-centric mindset that says the main forename 'ought' to be placed first. This is just not the case. There is no reason to assume that anybody's first forename is (or should be) more significant than the second (or third). It is merely that a majority (but not an overwhelming majority) of the population happen to have their main forename first. I've just had hours of fun explaining this to ING Direct, and I pointed them towards the List of non-trivial juxtonyms – which is how I came upon your Eric Morecambe article. Would you bother saying, "From birth John Winston Lennon was known as John, rather then Winston"? Of course not. So why say the equivalent about Eric Morecambe – except to reinforce a popular misconception? Grant 13:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think of the article as a whole? I did a major re-write about a week ago and would be interested in an impartial opinion.
Very informative. But many a true word and all that... You could have run the text through a spell checker before you posted it. No offence – *8^)
On an unrelated note, are you new to wikipedia? I would be more than willing to help you get aquainted to the world if you wish. The more the merrier and all that bollocks!--Crestville 22:50, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've been wikipediin' for a few months now. The most substantial page I've created is IAAF World Cup in Athletics. By the way, I've probably got a copy of Revolution in the Head knocking about somewhere. Were you after some information? Grant 13:23, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 4, August 2006

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 004 – August 2006

Issue of the Month

Despite it being the lead news article of last month, there is still help required in the assessing of articles and the migrating of comments. Lar is willing to provide assistance to those unsure how to do this.

Beatles News
  • The Beatles in the news. Suggestions: [5] [6]
Project News
  • The Beatles article, the "Flagship" of the Project, is currently under review with regard to its Featured Article status. It is hoped that the review will identify those areas that need some(/lots of) remedial work, and that the Project participants and those editors who are involved in the the FA admin pages to can work together to "save" the status of the article.
    • At the moment there is some discussion as to why it has been listed, and what may be needed to help it retain its FA status. It may well be that some work is going to be required in formulating a plan of action, and then some more in achieving those aims.
    • The FA status is obviously quite important to the Project, and it would be appreciated if participants are able to provide assistance in keeping the article up to standard. The editors would be grateful if those persons receiving this Newsletter could spare some of their time, energy and brainpower in keeping this jewel in our crown in its proper place. Please go to Wikipedia:Featured article review/The Beatles and get involved! Thank you.
Notable updates
Member News
From the Editors

As mentioned in the Project News section, The Beatles article has just been listed for a review of its Featured Article status. Working on this is quite important.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 005 – September 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Hey, Joe...

[edit]

...Where ya gonna go, With that cake in yo hand?

Happy Birthday! LessHeard vanU 23:14, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ps

[edit]

There is an Oasis related query over at The Beatles trivia... LessHeard vanU 20:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Removal of comment

[edit]

For your information your comment was removed as I added a similar comment to this page and it was removed by the original author of the article with justification. This is not "childish" behaviour but constantly watching a user, following their every move and interfering where it is not necessary is. Sound familiar?

You might also want to consider that calling someone "childish" is antagonising and a provocation. If you continue with this persecution I will report you for victimisation through repeated personal attacks.

"Pepperstool 08:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)"[reply]

Click click.--Crestville 15:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday

[edit]

Happy Birthday to YOU

Happy Birthday to JOE

Happy Birthday, Dear CRESTVILLE

Happy Birthday, to YOU

(Sound of very loud applause...)


May you have many more... Noel Gallagher 00:01, August 2006 (UTC) John and The Beatles 00:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noel Gallagher

[edit]

I'm pretty impressed with your article on Noel Gallagher! However, it needs a copyedit to make it flow better. One thing I noticed was the overuse of the word "also". You are very close to having a FA-worthy article though. Keep up the good work! - Ta bu shi da yu 23:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, a helpful editor has been removing most mentions of drug use from Gallagher's article. Our story goes like this...
Hi there! I was wondering why you made this edit. Gallagher's drug-use in his early days is pretty widely documented – he's even had a few laughs about it during interviews. And the fact that he ripped off "Get It On" is also pretty well-known, although I agree that may have been written in a slightly POV way. But do you think that we should just remove his recreational habits from the article? I wouldn't want to start an edit war, so I just thought I'd see what you think. This paragraph states that if an allegiation is notable, verifiable and important to the article, it should not be removed. And personally, I think Gallagher using drugs was one of the best things to happen to British music – without it, Oasis would have just been some shoddy garage band :) But that's just me! Well, please let me know your thoughts. Happy editing, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 14:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Under the "Remove unsourced or poorly sourced negative material" paragraph of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, statements like these are to be removed immediately if they are not properly sourced. Claims of plagiarism and illegal drug abuse are clearly "negative material." If they are well-documented, just find reliable sources and add the material back, citing those sources. Make sure that what the article says on these matters matches what the source says. No disagreement about content, just about sourcing -- statements like these now must be verified, not just verifiable. The editor formerly known as Harmonica Wolfowitz 17:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bah. He may have a point, though... Just thought I'd let you know, since it's really your baby. Cheers, — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 23:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, apparently "drank heavily" is not "potentially defamatory". I'm not sure where the line is drawn, myself. — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 23:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good-o. — riana_dzasta • t • c • e • ER • 00:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

[edit]

How do I complain about a particularly noxious individual? This is the first time I´ve had reason to, and something needs to be done... andreasegde 13:02, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that it´s an admin and a few cronies. I think I´ve got it sorted. Lose my temper? Nah, not me - I like to kill ´em with kindness. (I also have an advantage; I´ve got a girl´s name....) bigirlsblouse 09:40, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Michael Palin

[edit]

Hi, totally forgot about the infobox in Michael Palin. See the talk there in case you also forgot. What do you think about the one I just added? I am still not sure if the article needs one, but this one gives a bit more information. Otherwise the one you wanted is also fine. Sorry for this late response. Garion96 (talk) 03:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MJ

[edit]

Your view is sought at a discussion. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 23:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rutles

[edit]

Alol!! You've missed your vocation Joe, you should be on the telly Pal! How's the exams going? Cheers, Vera, Chuck & Dave 14:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Well done pal, I'm really made up for you - a man of letters eh? The Fire Fighting is going well at the moment as it's pissing down here in London, and the little feckers can't set fire to any skips! Mind you having said that , they'll nick some petrol from somewhere given half a chance! Once again, well done, take care pal and celebrate as much as possible! Very best wishes, Stig O'Hara.

Capitalisation of The Beatles

[edit]

Hi Joe, I got a Yank "writer" on my page giving me grief about The Beatles. I've asked Kingbonk & LessHeard Van U for help, neither have responded. Can you help me with him please? Cheers,Vera, Chuck & Dave 09:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Joe. Vera, Chuck & Dave 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nickname: I was laughing a lot, because I was waiting for yours :)
Congratulations on the exams! Wonderful news. (Can I borrow a fiver, BTW?) :) The very dead, deceased, and not breathing at all Spike Milligan 19:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My name is Earl! Well, not really :)

[edit]

Hey, you said on my talk page that I'm "the spitting image of actor Jason Lee". So how do you know what I look like? Did you see my pic on one of the other sites that I have a user page at, myspace or last.fm? Or do we know each other somehow? :) --luckymustard 16:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

[edit]

Have a look at my user page, under “You've been nominated”. I hope I’m not “stuffing ballot boxes” by doing this, but everybody can have their say. andreasegde 22:44, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 5, September 2006

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 005 – September 2006

Beatles News
Project News
  • Unfortunately, the Featured Article badge on The Beatles was revoked. The article was immediately nominated for Good Article status, which it received later that same day. Project member Kingboyk said of the nomination, "I'm quite happy about it really, as I feel that GA is about where we're at and gives some incentive to work on the article."
  • We have a new category for Beatles articles needing attention. If you're looking for something to work on, the articles in this category and the subcategories need some TLC. To put an article in this category, tag its talk page with {{WPBeatles|attention=yes}}.
  • Kingboyk has given {{WPBeatles}} another major overhaul, and has assessed all of the Beatles articles. He would be grateful if other editors would leave comments on the state of articles, needed improvements and so on, by clicking the Comments link in the template. Also, feel free to revise the gradings—the assessments were done quickly, and article quality can change.
Member News
  • Liverpool Scouse has offered to take any desired pictures of the Liverpool area, upon request.
Issue of the Month

The featured article status of The Beatles was revoked.

From the Editors

A month of slow progress and some amazing efforts. Still need help getting comments shifted. Don't forget to log your accomplishments!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 006 – October 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Please explain

[edit]

Although I appreciate the necessity for citations against stated information I feel as though you've only singled out the information in articles that I have added to. Any particular reason?

I am quite happy to cite the references of this detail but in some instances I think you are being over zealous as an editor. Either that or you have deliberately targeted me.

For example, in 'Good Day Sunshine' do you really need a citation for "John Lennon and George Harrison add harmony vocals during the choruses" when you can actually hear their vocal contributions? If so, why have you not requested a citation for the other 'unsupported' comments on the page such as the one about it being written by Paul McCartney or the one about it being Paul playing bass guitar on it? Or Ringo the drums? Or the one about the cover version?

The same principle applies to 'Girl'. You want a citation for the mention of McCartney's lyrical contribution comment that I added which is fair enough but you seem to dismiss the controversial and unsupported comment before it about the Catholic church. You also ignore the comment about the representation of the "deep breathes" and the one about the "vocal percussion". You cannot have this both ways and must add 'citation needed' tags to all these comments.

Can you understand why I am perhaps suspicious of your behaviour? It all seems rather uncannily convenient. Maybe this is just a coincidence but I would greatly appreciate it if you can clarify this. I am quite happy to remove all information I have added to this site if that would please you more and save you the effort of adding citation tags. It makes no difference to me either way.

Incidentally, as this is related, you said in your "bury the hatchet" entry that "As I (i.e. you) am not an admin, I do not have the apperatus (sic) to constantly survay (sic) your actions" which we both know is not true. You only have to 'watch' me as a user and you can see all my activity and I yours.

Thanks. Pepperstool 09:23, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are not credited with these edits. He is. And I am still unfamiliar with the particular "watch" system which you reffer to.--Crestville 16:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I almost made that same point (but decided not to), that I'm not familiar with watching someone else's activity. If I watch their user page, everything that they do definitly does not show up in my watch list. However, I can click on "contribs" and see what someone does, but that is not on the "watchlist". --luckymustard 17:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! So you can! Cheers for that. Dunno what that has to do with the "watch" function though. And even if I had looked at Pepperstool under "contrib" the edits which I worked on would not have appeared, as they were done by User:217.205.87.151.--Crestville 17:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC) --Crestville 17:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Come on now chaps you're thinking this through. The User: 217.205.87.151 can be more than one person for a number of reasons. The main one is that if a company or school or college or university has a communal network with a number of PCs where many people can access the net and individuals do not log into Wiki then they will have the same User number when they edit pages. Therefore same User number will be attributed to many entries/edits without it necessarily being the same person. In fact, theoretically it could be hundreds of people. This is one of the reasons why sock-puppetry is so common and why the banning of particular User I.D’s is not considered good practice as it penalises everyone for what may be only one person’s actions.

The issue regarding User: 217.205.87.151 is one such case that I can relate to. I have made edits without logging in under this user number but I am in no way responsible for all edits by this user. This is not a deliberate attempt to deceive but merely the occasional lapse in remembering to log in. Can you please clarify for me two things though?

Firstly, you said to me: "have followed him/her as they had made some odd edits to other Beatles pages, ranging from simply sloppyness to vandelism". Now, seen as I have made edits to Beatles pages under this user i.d. can you tell me what these edits are that you consider one or all of the above? As far as I can see I would not consider any of my entries to these pages as either of these and I'm slightly concerned if you do. The edits you on 'Good Day Sunshine' and 'Girl' were both made by me. Although citations may be required (and I can provide them) I was concerned that you had targeted entries made by myself and ignored information which I can also prove is inaccurate should I want to.

Secondly, you said: "please refrain from removing information where you could provide a source". Can you tell me what I have removed because I'm really not sure what if anything I have deleted and if necessary I will provide you with a source?

Last couple of things to mention. You can watch another registered user. I don't know why you seem to think you can't but I know for certain I can watch ever single entry or edit that you make. I didn't set this up intentionally on you as a user but I know that I can do it should I want to.

Regarding the citations, they are as follows: The information about McCartney and Starr being the only instrumental performers on 'Good Day Sunshine' and also that Lennon and Harrison contributed harmony vocals in the chorus is from The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions by Mark Lewisohn. The CD inlay does not mention this point though.

The comment about McCartney's contribution to the lyrics of 'Girl' is also mentioned in 'The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions' but is backed up by McCartney himself in the biog 'Many Years From Now'. The rhyming couplet line preceding it I believe is also qualified in the same book but that needs checking. The reason why this is probable is because of McCartney's Catholic upbringing. Lennon, as you well know, was not brought up a Catholic. Until someone else can bothered to read that book again though it will have to remain speculative and therefore may need removing.

I hope this all makes sense. There are no hard feelings as you say but because I expected you were aware of my original points I believed your intentions suspicious. If this is not the case then fair enough.

Pepperstool 08:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The citation you require for 'Run For Your Life' about it being a Harrison favourite is from the book 'The Playboy Interviews With John Lennon and Yoko Ono' which is well worth the read for many insightful details as well as Lennon's thoughts on the Beatle song catalogue via a personal song by song analysis.

Pepperstool 09:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archive

[edit]

I thank you most sincerely, Crestville. You changed my talk page as well, which means we are now 1-1. :) Ahhh... isn´t being nice a wonderful thing? Yes it is. Have fun. andreasegde 20:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you put a second archive in there as well! I am speechless (which is not like me at all, as you know) and I can´t say anyth...(gulp)....... andreasegde 20:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dads´ Army

[edit]

I know you like it, but I thought I´d let you know that I watch it on BBC Prime every day (because they repeat lots of things). It´s one of the only things on Prime that I look forward to. "They don´t like it up ´em" always makes me laugh... andreasegde 16:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It´s on again! "Come in, your time is up." andreasegde 16:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Dad's Army Role call

[edit]

There is currently a role call going on for this project and if you wish to contiune to help out with this project please see the project talk page. --Mollsmolyneux 11:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geez

[edit]

You know, dude. It's been one hell of a shit to have this tendonitis. And these times I put under more strain my hands, but I think that I just have to move on and regain form. I want to drum and continue working normaly with my hands again. And obviously I just don't know... At these kinds of times, it seems that I make my most substantial edits. Anyway, I just have to be back again and become better.

Regards: Painbearer 21:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's good to have it. I was on Noel opinion about the Greatest hits. Anyway, yeah I think we miss some standout material of tHC and BHN. Like "Born on a Different Cloud", "Stop Crying Your Heart Out" and "Stand By Me" and maybe "Girl in a Dirty Shirt".

It's worsening. I will have a substantial break around the next week.

Regards: Painbearer 21:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Monthy Python

[edit]

Hi, I am working again some on the Michael Palin article and I saw this fact you added (a long time ago) in the Monty Python article. [7], the second half of that paragraph. It certainly seems to be true, but do you have a source for that so that I can add that to the articles? I couldn't find it on the net or in the python book I have here. Garion96 (talk) 13:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sourcing that one. Do you still have that book? My library doesn't have it and it would be handy to use for this article. Garion96 (talk) 00:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lennon and his comment

[edit]
Now, now.... (but it did make me laugh.) I told you it would get some stick :)
I still think that if there was a section - which nobody in the whole world has at the moment (about Johnny and his nasty bits) it would balance the whole article out. It doesn´t have to be Albert Goldmann style, but just something that shows his other side. I once read where he said, "Oh, in Greenwich village, where all those Wanna-bees live, y´know?", which opened my eyes a bit. That would be more argued about than his "Jew" comment. Anyone seen a self-aggrandizing dead crocodile hunter about? Crikey! --andreasegde 17:06, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On second thoughts (and being on the wagon) I refute my previous comment as being a load of old bollocks. There you go - I´ve insulted myself. BTW, Pathedog thinks I´m a cheerleader, but the thought of me in a tutu holding two pom-poms would be, quite frankly, an horrific sight to behold. I would probably get arrested. --andreasegde 09:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, I have realised what you meant about being an Admin. It´s like correcting homework (which I have done). You were absolutely right. Perusing mistakes, and adding (citation needed) is easy, but somehow being in another dimension. Does that make sense? --andreasegde 22:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 6, October 2006

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 006 – October 2006

Beatles News
  • The site of the former Casbah Club, operated by Mona Best (mother of Pete) in the basement of her house, and where the nascent Beatles played and rehearsed, has been accorded Grade II Listed status following a recommendation by British Heritage.
Project News
  • Some Project articles are having their Featured Article status reviewed, and the comments are not encouraging. The articles are A Day in the Life and A Hard Day's Night (song). (She Loves You has already had its FA status revoked.) Please participate in the discussion and help improve the articles!
Member News
  • As usual, the self-effacing individuals who contribute to the Project are far too modest to mention any Barnstars or other awards they may have received. Obviously they feel their editing/contributing is reward enough.
Issue of the Month

The lead article of the Project recently lost its FA status, and now some of the other articles are being reviewed. Citations and references within articles are again the major concern. Contributors who have literature (books, magazines, links, etc.) are especially needed to provide the necessary citations. It is not enough for editors to know the facts; they need to be backed up by other sources. All help, both within the articles and the discussion, would be appreciated.

From the Editors

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 007 – November 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Come back, Kingboyk! The children miss you!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

A small token of my esteem

[edit]
The Barnstar of Good Humor
I present this Barnstar to an editor who never fails to make me laugh my socks off. andreasegde 18:16, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Make sure these barnstars get mentioned in the next newsletter! Get the glory while you can is my advice :) --kingboyk 11:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Britpop reference

[edit]

I see you included a reference in the Britpop article from John Harris' book, but you forgot to include a page number. Could you include it in the citation? WesleyDodds 23:20, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Bradford-panorama-01.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bradford-panorama-01.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Clayton, Bradford.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Clayton, Bradford.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 16:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 7, November 2006

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 007 – November 2006

Issue of the Month

Again, the issue of the month is inline citations. A Day in the Life, A Hard Day's Night (song), and Get Back have all been defeatured, as they failed to satisfy criterion 1(c) of What is a featured article?, and other song FAs are due for the chopping block. Inline citations are an important aspect of articles—they ensure verifiability and reliability, and they remove original research. Additionally, they give readers the option to read the original source material and view it within context.

Basically:

  1. All direct quotations attributed to Beatles members pooled from interviews need full inline citations.
  2. All critical comments about songs or albums need full inline citations to notable music critics, magazines opinions, or reviews, as opposed to being merely comments by Wikipedians.
  3. Inline citations need: author name, article name, publication date, and name of publication. Such info is still preferable even if quoting from an interview posted upon a website; when this is the case, place the URL link at the end of the citation with the date it was last accessed. (This will help editors retrieve the page using the Wayback Machine, should the link go dead in the future.)
Beatles News
  • The Beatles are due to release a soundtrack album, LOVE, at the end of November, as a companion to their Cirque du Soleil adaptation of the same name. It will feature remastered and remixed versions of their previously released songs, including some new medleys.
  • Paul's getting a divorce. Pain, arguing, and fighting abound.
Project News
  • The Wings tours are really nicely documented now (see Category:Wings tours), but Category:The Beatles tours is almost empty. Kingboyk and the rest of us would love to see (and read) articles on each Beatles tour, including the pre-fame tours of the UK—and the Hamburg trips, of course!
  • The hottest Project page this month has been Paul McCartney, involved in the Featured Article drive, as mentioned above.
Member News
  • Our project members are too modest to report any awards they may have given or received.
From the Editors

Wherever possible, editors should help to trim down on list-like prose within Beatles articles. They should convert list-like sections into fluent, cohesive prose which ties an article's sections together. Lists make articles disjointed, awkward, and difficult to read.

Be sure to take part in the Featured Article drive, and don't forget those inline citations!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 008 – December 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.


Image:Bob mortimer.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bob mortimer.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

  1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
  2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Nilfanion (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


AfD Nomination: The Comedian's Comedian

[edit]

I've nominated the article The Comedian's Comedian for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that The Comedian's Comedian satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Comedian's Comedian. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of The Comedian's Comedian during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. Bwithh 02:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images in user space

[edit]

Hello. It might be a good idea to remove Image:Oasis - (What's The Story) Morning Glory album cover.jpg and Image:Pepper's.jpg from your user page, since fair use images should not be used in the user space according to Wikipedia:Fair use criteria #9. Thanks. Khatru2 07:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

[edit]

Haven't seen you around for awhile, but I hope you're doing well. --andreasegde 19:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read a review over here about the new Fabs album, but it wasn't positive. I've been working me socks off on the Macca page for the last month - and me bird don't mind, believe it or not. I think she's havin' it away with the milkman... :) Macca's just got a GA, and it's going for an FA soon. I finally learned how to do in-line citations, and I went a bit bananas with 'em (350 so far). It's better than playing the 'Civilisation' game on the computer, I suppose.
Anyway; I hope you're keeping well, and quaffing those delicious pints of golden nectar now and then. (I won't think about cheese and onion crisps, pork scratchings and fish and chips, 'cos I'll go potty...) --andreasegde 10:59, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lol - You rotten bugger :)) A pint of John Smith's 'smooth' and some Fish and chips (wi' scraps, no doubt. Mmmm... greasy fingers...) I have a bottle of Sarsons malt vinegar, and I sniff it now and again just to remind myself of what I'm missing. (Is that sad, or what? or what...?)
Yup, I'm a Brit in the land of big sausages and leather trousers, but I'm going to London in Feb with an English class from the local steel company. London's miles better now than when I lived there. What do you think of the work on Macca, BTW? --andreasegde 17:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot - Nottingham's 'Goose Fair'. The worst job in the world: The bloke that walks around with a mop and bucket and cleans up the puke (after 11 o'clock at night) around that whirly ride thingy... "Aye-up, duck"... :) BTW, Look for an Austrian thing called a "Bosner". (Rhymes with 'hose') --andreasegde 00:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have decided to come "out of the closet". --Andrew Edge 02:35, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 8, December 2006

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 008 – December 2006

Issue of the Month

Wikipedia's standards are improving all the time, with the result that many articles in The Beatles Wikiproject are being nominated for review of their FA and GA status - and many are losing that accolade. It is difficult, with such a large number of articles and the ease with which editors may make changes which are detrimental, to maintain the standard of articles, let alone improve them. As ever, members efforts are both appreciated and needed to keep the Project on course.

Beatles News
  • A Beatles compilation called "Love", featuring tracks remastered by George Martin (with his son Giles), has been released and has made number 1 in Canada.
  • The impending divorce between Paul McCartney and the former Heather Mills continues to make the pages in the tabloid press in the UK.
Project News
  • The hottest Project page this month has been Paul McCartney (see above and below).
Member News
From the Editors

If one is to be mercenary about the subject, it should be noted that Paul McCartney is going to be more noteworthy than usual in the near future as his divorce case comes to court. In that case it is great to note that a small group of Project Members (plus another individual who does not feel compelled to register himself despite important contributions) have worked very hard, and in an atmosphere of good humour, to take the McCartney piece to a succesful Good Article nomination. Perhaps this is the method to use for future articles, a small dedicated team concentrating on one subject at a time. Of course, all members are invited to join any existing group or even go about forming their own. Please note any such action in the Project Log.

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 009 – January 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Macca

[edit]

We need your vote on Macca's talk page about which section to fork. (1,000 words less and we have it in the bag...) --andreasegde 05:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, thanks for the funny stuff (which always makes me laugh a lot) and the good advice. Ta very much, r'kid. --andreasegde 19:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've got one for you. Where did Ernie Wise's mother live until her death? In a block of council flats in Swarcliffe, Leeds. What a tight git he was... --andreasegde 20:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

this edit

[edit]

Oh, come on. They're not that bad! I mean, they've written some good songs, like.... errrr... yandman 13:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lennon

[edit]

A suggestion has been made on the John Lennon talk page about how much information should go in. It would be nice of you to add a comment, if you wish to... --andreasegde 14:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have put in some references in the George Toogood Smith article, as I know you are interested in it. --andreasegde 20:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

McCartney

[edit]

There's really nothing to discuss. The only way you could think an MBE isn't a person is if you don't know what it stands for, which isn't really a valid excuse given that it's linked to in the article. Proteus (Talk) 23:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, of course I've heard of the 3RR. I've blocked people for breaking it. What was your point...? Proteus (Talk) 23:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's that supposed to mean? Proteus (Talk) 23:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Since I haven't broken it, I still don't know what you're talking about. Proteus (Talk) 23:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

laughing

[edit]

Have you noticed how some people on Wikipedia have absolutely no senses of humor, especially when it comes to important things like peerage? But I am still laughing from this: "he called my friend an idiot - I like him!". Tvoz 23:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And yet I'm the uncivil one... Proteus (Talk) 23:34, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You surely are, what's your point?--Crestville 23:35, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That you bunch are saying I'm uncivil and then insulting me on each others talk pages? Hardly the bastion of civility you hold yourselves out to be. Proteus (Talk) 23:38, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

God I wish I didn't get involved in things like this. Merry Christmas, and have a nice time. Proteus (Talk) 23:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hey, Joe, can you send me a pint? Tvoz 06:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Joe...(II)

[edit]

Where have you been? I thought you had fallen under a whelk, or something!LessHeard vanU 23:41, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I may have to go out and buy the blasted thing - there doesn't seem to be a cd sized pressie with my name on it under the Chrissy tree!LessHeard vanU 23:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Kidda!

[edit]

Where you bin hiding Joe? I'm fecking pissing meself here! Thanks for that man, I luv yer!! Cheers Vera, Chuck & Dave 23:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same to you Joe, Have a really good one like! Cheers La, Vera, Chuck & Dave 00:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Happy Christmas (War Is Over)

Cheers Joe

God Bless, Vera, Chuck & Dave 12:39, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

20%

[edit]

Hi - too bad about the pint - I could use one. Yes, about my minority status - I'm told that about 20% of wikipedia editors are female. I also think about 99% of the other 80% are 14 year old boys, actually or mentally, with no senses of humor, not a lot of writing talent, and also not a lot of ability to actually compromise or reach consensus because it's too big a word for them. But not the Beatles group - a great bunch you all are - welcoming even to a Yank, not averse to being edited, smart, funny - it's a real pleasure. Don't worry about not knowing I'm a girl (that made me laugh too - my kids are 20 and 23, so it's been a while since anyone carded me in a bar.... ) - I don't offend easily. Hope you have a nice Christmas. Tvoz 06:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Collins mention

[edit]

I forgot to respond back. Sorry. You can view it on Youtube... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA61wnO_ci8 It's in one of those parts. Apologies, I can't remember which one. I really don't think Noel has seen it but Gonzo said something like "there's an entire paragraph dedicated to it on your wikipedia page"...Bang Bang You're Dead 22:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Gem_Archer.jpg

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Gem_Archer.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:03, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair-use image removed from your user page

[edit]

Hello, Crestville. I've removed Image:Oasis Logo 2.JPG from your user page, as it is a copyrighted, unlicensed image that is being used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. Unfortunately, by Wikipedia policies, no fair-use images can be used on user pages; please see the ninth item of the Wikipedia fair-use policy and Wikipedia:Removal of fair use images. This image has not been deleted from any articles. If you have any questions, please let me know. —Bkell (talk) 08:45, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's back!

[edit]

Yes, the return of the young whipper-snapper (who's always up for a scrap) is to be welcomed with open arms. Socks are being laughed off, tha' knows. Mr. Forty years old, thick as pig-shit, and proud of it... MBE (badge only appointed) Some time in the morning... 7 January, 2007

The Beatles and forking articles

[edit]

I have a problem that I would like to impart to all you good 'Beatles project' editors, and it is this:

  • Should anything directly Beatles-related be in the main Beatles' article, and only 'personal' stuff put into the Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Starr articles? I have the disturbing feeling that I'm repeating stuff in both Lennon and McCartney articles that should only be in the main article.
  • But... if only personal stuff is included in the individual Beatles' articles, would it make them too confusing/random, to read?

Please answer (on a stamped and self-addressed postcard please) on our talk page. (This might be more interesting than talking about MBEs... :) andreasegde, Mr Hornby, and Sir Sean de Garde 15:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who is this imposter

[edit]

...who is posting under my name? Someone has hijacked my account! Could the administrators please delete my account, so I can re-register myself? Crestville 11 January 2007

We've been through this before. It was quite funny the first time, now it's just boring. Come up with something original and I'll play.--The one, the only, the original Crestville 12:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The "one, the only, the original Crestville" is instantly recognisable for his exemplary humour and intelligence. If the imposter can come anywhere near those dizzy heights, he/she/it should be happy (but change the 'effin user name). There you go; stick that in your pipe and smoke it. :)) andreasegde 22:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you.--Crestville 13:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mimi

[edit]

I didn't know that you started the stub about Mimi, but I'm really happy/hope that you like it. I suppose I might be too critical of her, because maybe she was exactly what Lennon needed, after all that bollocks he went through with Julia and Freddie. It was that era, I suppose. I saw that George Smith has been redirected to Mimi's page, so I'll try to find some more out about him, because he really deserves it. Wait a minute!.... No he hasn't, but it's hard to find if you type it into the 'search' box.

What about Jim and Mary Macca? You could start a stub on them (fingers crossed). Keep well, r-kid. andreasegde 19:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 9, January 2007

[edit]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 009 – January 2007

Beatles News
  • The ongoing divorce proceedings between Paul McCartney and the former Heather Mills continues to occupy the attention of the media - Heather Mills reportedly receiving unspecified death threats.
  • The British Post Office have released a series of stamps depicting various Beatles album covers.
Project News
  • The Paul McCartney article is being primped and primed for submission as a Featured Article candidate.
  • The good folk who have been working on the above article have turned their attention to the John Lennon page. Everyone is, of course, invited to contribute.
  • The hottest Project page this month has been the Macca (Paul for those not in the know!) article, again.
  • Other Project news... Please let the editors know if anything is happening, or just contribute it to the next newsletter.
Member News
Issue of the Month

The question of capitalising of the letter "t" in The of The Beatles has been raised again. It appears that UK style references (here and here) also maintains that the letter should be in lower case. If the Project is to be appear professional then it may have to change the format. Polite discussion is invited at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Policy. If possible, please provide sources/references to support your position.

From the Editors

It has been a fairly quiet time with regard to the Project (or at least that is how it seems). If you are reading this and wondering why your efforts in respect of a Beatles article has not been mentioned, it may be that you haven't told any editor. This is your Newsletter, which means you can contribute to it, so please do!

If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy!

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 010 – January/February 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!

Contributors to this Issue
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

Mimi Smith

[edit]

I reviewed it as a B article, then I thought I'd 'jump in the deep end'. (I have nominated it for GA). To Hell with the doubters - let rip, unfurl the pennants, and 'strike while the iron's hot', as the boys and girls from the 'East Leeds Labour Club Pensioners International Line-dancing Formation Team' say (when they put their dentures in). Sir Sean de Garde and the other mob 02:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note from Mimi

[edit]

Now listen here, young Crestville, I'm waiting for your quote-thingy about my dear John phoning me when the fool was with that black-haired witch in New York. He always paid for the trans-atlantic calls, by the way, so don't think I have the slightest intention of paying you, you cheeky young man, because I prefer to spend my earnings on respectable things, and not waste money on this thing you call Wiki-'Peedles'. Right - I'm off to feed the cats. Mary (Mimi) Smith 19:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bugger, I'll have to see if my local 'W. H Schmidt' has a copy. andreasegde 17:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple personalities

[edit]

It said, in the last Beatles' newsletter, that "Sir Sean de Garde appears to have developed multiple personalities." This is very true (and made me laugh an awful lot) but it is necessary when one is faced with talking to one on one's pages that one has contributed to. (Work that one out... :) The changing of one's name brings tremendous amusement to one - as other editors are wont to do the same. I refer you to members, Vera, Chuck, and Dave, LessHeard vanU, and Crestville, who have given one a terrific amount of pleasure in the general 'laughing gear' area, because of their inovative choices of Nom de plumes. One can only hope that this practice does not offend one's own sense of normality. One can only live in hope. :)) Who am I? 20:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You got it mate, rescuein' cats - I told 'im dozens of times. that's wot we do, Rescue Cats! But will 'e 'ave it? Naar, not bleedin' likely, always runnin' inta burnin' buildins an fings, gettin' clumped wiv all sorts! Wotta dopey git, is it? Up The 'Ammers! Cockney Dave, Blue Watch
I know you do Joe. I was in doing P.E. yesterday, and LFB were receiving 15 three nines calls every two mins!! Cheers La, Vera, Chuck & Dave 15:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The truth is that Our Ear'ole, not wishing to put his issue chopper in harms way, decided to open an access/egress point with the use of extreme prejucice by means of his own upper body. He seems to have 'dented' said mass. All I can say is that it must have been one very pretty pussy cat on the other side of that door! Hugh, Pugh, Barley, McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble and Ringo

Joanna Lumley

[edit]

In case my actions weren't clear, I deleted the discussion because I believe it violates the policy on biographies of living persons. Talk pages are not exempt Pendragon39 20:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, be pedantic Pendragon39 17:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sex Pistols

[edit]

Pretty much. I also decided that since Oasis seemed to like them enough, they would try to rip them off in their songs like they did the Beatles. it will get rid of thebeautifulgame's all-caps yelling.ErleGrey 16:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Paul McCartney

[edit]

I have nominated it for FA. andreasegde 22:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mimi: Your stub has just got a GA rating. What about creating a stub for Jim and Mary McCartney? Mine's a pint, and a bag of pork scratchings 22:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Jarvis Cocker.jpg)

[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Jarvis Cocker.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 16:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crestville/Archive_2&oldid=1142945375"