User talk:ChrisB

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Archives: 2007 | 2006 | 2004-2005 | BetacommandBot

Death of Kurt Cobain[edit]

How's about you and me get together and figure out how to save this article? Specifically, there needs to be weight to the most notable and verifiable theory - suicide. We should also discuss the events leading to his death, as that is very relevant to this article. I suggest we remake the article in a subpage of one of our user pages and then link it in the talk page and see what the reaction is. I'd understand if you don't have the time to do something like this, but even if you don't contribute heavily, I'd appreciate your input anyway. Hazillow (talk) 02:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

List of early emo groups[edit]

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article List of early emo groups, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 13:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

WNNX/WWWQ[edit]

Hey, 99X Online should have a page of its own since it is still an existing radio station online and on HD-2 right? --Rwils (talk) 01:45, 5 July 2008 (UTC)



Hey, I have a few questions for you. You do realize that the call letters WWWQ are following Q100 over to 99.7fm, the WNNX call letter will be replaced by the new call letters of the new station that's premiering on 100.5fm right? --Rwils (talk) 17:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


Truce. I disagree with you, you disagree with me. Neither of us is getting anywhere by going at each other's edits. I have a lot of information that isn't necessarily "public" yet and was editing based on that, but apparently that's not good enough. Fine. It's unfortunate that happens to be Wiki policy, but I understand the necessity for it.--InDeBiz1 (talk) 07:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up on the article. The other poster keeps trying to say that because he's "in the biz" that he should get special treatment. <shrug> I'm a television producer in Atlanta with my own share of "inside knowledge" too, but hey. I guess he feels he knows better. I always thought WP policy trumped everything else... --Mhking (talk) 23:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

You've made lots of good edits trying to sort out the WNNX / WWWQ / 99X pages with the current situation down there. I do expect a lot more changes to come in the next week or so. I still stand by thinking that the terrestial WNNX items should stay on that page as opposed to moving to the 99X page... albeit that would make the WNNX page mega-long. However, this would be consistent with what would have happened if 99X did not go online only. The history of the frequency (and Sean's take on it) should stay on the WNNX history page; keeping two different copies may result in edits to one and not the other. So, to sum up my opinion (which you can do with what you may): it's trying to separate articles about on-air content vs articles about the frequency itself. If the article stayed "99X" all along, then it wouldn't be an issue with merging stuff together as all the 99X stuff could stay on one page, but because someone decided to call 99X as "WNNX", then that's where all the merge madness happens. The 99X today is something completely new from what it was a week ago on WNNX, hence my transition plan suggestion of making it a new article (with links to WNNX) as opposed to trying to force both pages to contain the same info. (ex: Jimmy Baron is not a former 99X staffer, he's a former WNNX staffer... as 99X in its current state never existed before). Anyways, there's my 4 cents. RadioBoy2003 (talk) 13:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


You do realize now that the new call letters for Rock 100.5 are WNNX right? You need to switch the WNNX call letters over to Rock 100.5 and WWWQ over to Q100. The FCC has made the switch. If you don't believe me just listen to the Station ID at the top of the hour. Rwils (talk) Tuesday, 2008-01-29 21:39 UTC, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

WWWQ Edits[edit]

Hey, how come you don't like my bit about the WWWQ stunting and format change? What's up with that? I tried to be as accurate as possible. Matsuto77 (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2008 (UTC)Matsuto77

RE: WWWQ Edits[edit]

Ah, okay, I suppose you're right. But perhaps a brief mention of it in the WWWQ article would work? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.205.161.58 (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


Cobain Death[edit]

It is ALREADY an issue on the discussion page, to which I responded that I'd re-add the content but wait for citations regarding the rest - before I re-added the content. Two people wanted it in, two people said something, you said nothing. I'd very much like to keep it in the discussion section but you should have - and could have - responded. Not waited until it was put in and then talk about how ridiculous edit wars are after editing it and still not responding. NeoApsara (talk) 18:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

99X[edit]

This message is regarding your edit summary to 99X. Please use a phrase more specific than "revert" unless the edit you reverted was the most recent edit made to the article, which yours was not. Georgia guy (talk) 20:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


Updated Nirvana Sales[edit]

Just read your response in the discussion section...Chris....whether something is irrelevant is up to the mind of the beholder. Many would disagree that updated sales are mere trivia. They indicate a bands continued popularity with new generations over time. I do have cited sources stating that Nirvana have sold over 60 million albums worldwide. However, you must realize that it's sometimes impossible to get just one source stating that any band has sold a certain amount worldwide. In Nirvana's case, one could cite published sales data from worldwide sales organizations such as the RIAA in America, CRIA in Canada, and ARIA in Australia just to name a few. By adding up these documented sources, one can arrive at Nirvana's 60 million figure. The Neilson Soundscan company, which measures album sales in the U.S. lists that Nirvana have sold 4.5 million in the U.S. alone since 2002. I can revise the sentence with a verifiable source if you think it would be relevant. Would it? I do rememeber seeing a 2006 documented source that did list Nirvana as selling over 60 million worldwide. Thanks for your response. allaplgies (talk) 04:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


99X Craig/Fram Dismissal[edit]

Actually, these two are no longer employed by Cumulus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.32.226 (talk) 14:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Call sign switch[edit]

I have switched the 2 pages WNNX and WWWQ as requested. I will leave you to sort out the content & links as you probably are in a better position to do this.

Keith D (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Re-associated missing talk page. Keith D (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


Current FF pic[edit]

Don't you think it's taken too far back to be of any use? Do we have any alternatives? ScarianCall me Pat 00:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

What's the deletion review link for the dead Nirvana pic? ScarianCall me Pat 01:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
No worries found it... but yeah... We need a new Foo's pic... Does Flickr have fair use licenses? ScarianCall me Pat 01:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I couldn't find a single decent picture... Did you? ScarianCall me Pat 15:42, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Q100Atlanta.png[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Q100Atlanta.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

cobain[edit]

begining of the year jan.,feb.,march,april,may,middle of the year as follows,June,july,august, latter part of the year sept,oct,nov,dec. now i will change it to read as follows in the latter half of 1991 get back to me if this wording pleases you more before an edit war breaks out--Wikiscribe (talk) 04:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

okay i tried to compromise but it seems like you are unwilling and will look favorable for me if you revert me again and i will seek an administrator,also it seems like you are being ridiclous in making a big deal about this why is it bothering you so much the administrator who made changes to that page right after i did seem not to have had a problem with it--Wikiscribe (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I have the obligatory task of reminding you of WP:3RR on the Kurt Cobain article. I have reverted to your version and I agree with you. But so as not to appear biased I must notify you of it. Hopefully the other user involved will discuss rather than continuing to revert. Regards, ScarianCall me Pat 17:09, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Nirvana[edit]

Do you think Scream should be added to the Nirvana article as an associated act? I may be a stickler for details, but since Grohl didn't help found Nirvana, and came in as a replacement drummer, Scream has no ties to Nirvana. Just fishing for an opinion. Jmlk17 04:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: FF socks[edit]

Sure thing. Done. Check users can be obtained to check IP addresses of registered users but this case is too obvious. The SSP is just a formality so we can get a block on this dude. Some people never learn! Thanks for the message and keep up the good work with the article(s)! ScarianCall me Pat 02:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Spooky873[edit]

We managed to get the three meat puppet accounts indef blocked and Spooky got plugged for 48 hours. Good job. I've struck the comments on the FF talk page of the socks/meat puppets. I'm not sure on the best way to get Spooky to stop being an ass though... Any ideas? ScarianCall me Pat! 00:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Kurt Cobain's shotgun[edit]

As you know I changed "A shotgun, purchased for Cobain by Dylan Carlson, was found at Cobain's side. Cobain's death certificate concluded Cobain's death was a result of a "self-inflicted shotgun wound to the head. (which is both misleading and false) to "A shotgun, purchased for Cobain by Dylan Carlson, was in between Cobain's legs with his hand still gripping the barrell. Cobain's death certificate concluded Cobain's death was a result of a 'contact perfotrating shotgun wound to the head'. The report estimates Cobain to have died on April 5], 1994. Which was then changed by you to "A shotgun, purchased for Cobain by Dylan Carlson, was found resting on Cobain's chest" which, whatever your intentions were, is lending weight to a conspiracy of murder and obviously an enyclopedia should reflect the consensus view, which is that Cobain shot himself. Therefore I have changed it to "a shotgun, purchased for Cobain by Dylan Carlson, was lying inverted across Cobain's chest with his left hand wrapped around the barrel"

No police report mentoins a resting shotgun:

1. Homicide Office Follow-Up Report (pg 3 of 15) "There is a [shotgun] between the victim's legs with the barrel pointed towards his head and his left hand wrapped around the barrel. The shotgun is inverted with the trigger and magazine trapdoor pointing up. The barrel end is just above his beltline...the damage to the interior of the mouth indicates that the shot was taken in the mouth...the webbing of the left hand has the impression of the shotgun barrel in it."

2. Major Investigation Summary (April 8) "...with a shotgun on his chest...the shotgun had been placed in Cobain's mouth and discharged. There were marks on Cobain's hands consistent with the firing of this weapon."

3. Statement of Officer Von Ledanvowski (April 8) "A shotgun was laying across the victim's body; the butt of the gun was between the victim's feet, and the muzzle was at about the the mid-chest level of the victim." Iconoclast322 (talk) 05:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sg96promo.jpg)[edit]

Nuvola apps important blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Sg96promo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:27, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Matthew Good demo tapes[edit]

As long as you're nominating, you might have a look at Broken (demo), Left of Normal, and Euphony (album). I don't see why these are any more notable than the other two. Since you started the AFD, I'll let you decide whether or not to add them. // Chris (complaints)(contribs) 01:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)



These demos are well-known within the Matthew Good fan community and deserve recognition as releases. There are few
sources with which to cite these early demos because Matthew Good himself has only recently started to acknowledge their
existence. Previously, he denied them ever having existed to dissuade people from purchasing them illegally from a
former bandmate who released them on a 2-disc set without permission. The law-suit has been settled in favour of Good
and he has even offered up a few mp3s from these old demos up on his website. They are also notable because they
represent his earlier folk-based roots, to which he has returned on his more recent solo endeavors (see Hospital Music).


The Foo Fighters' first demo Pocketwatch (album), had the same story up until a few years ago when they decided to
include a reference to it on their official site. Simply because an artist does not wish to acknowledge their earlier
roots does not mean that the rest of us have to deny any record of them. Leave them up. Please.
- Haircut-Rabbit

Boy...you really, really like Nirvana[edit]

Like a lot. I thought I loved them because I had the bootlegs but you're fucking obsessed with them and the Foos.

It's great to have you back :-)[edit]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Pacelogo.gif)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:Pacelogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:99Xlogo.jpg)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:99Xlogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Musicbarnstar.png The Music Barnstar
For editing on Dave Grohl.
tsunamishadow (talk) 19:38, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Kurt Cobain[edit]

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Kurt Cobain/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:15Hours.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:15Hours.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:15, 31 December 2009 (UTC)


Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Sunnyday.jpg[edit]

Copyright-problem.svg

Thank you for uploading File:Sunnyday.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. kiac. (talk-contrib) 13:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Nirvana FA review[edit]

I have nominated Nirvana (band) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Sir Richardson (talk) 14:27, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Sg91promo.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Sg91promo.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:Mcdonaldloggins.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Mcdonaldloggins.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

File:LTSOlaser.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:LTSOlaser.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 06:40, 29 August 2011 (UTC)