User talk:Derek R Bullamore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Obscured jaguar.jpg Beware! This user's talk page is patrolled by talk page stalkers.


WELCOME!! Hello, Derek R Bullamore! I want to personally welcome you on behalf of the Wikipedia community. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you haven't already, you can put yourself in the new user log and the list of users so you can be properly introduced to everyone. Don't forget to be bold, and don't be afraid of hungry Wikipedians...there's a rule about not biting newcomers. Some other good links are the tutorial, how to edit a page, or if you're really stuck, see the help pages. Wikipedia is held up by Five Pillars...I recommend reading about them if you haven't already. Finally, it would be really helpful if you would sign your name on talk pages, so people can get back to you quickly. It's easy to do this by clicking the button (next to the one with the "W" crossed out) one from the end on the left. If that's confusing, or if you have any questions, feel free to drop me a at my talk page (by clicking the plus sign (+) next to the tab at the top that says "edit this page")...and again, welcome!--ViolinGirl 00:20, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

"Only Man"[edit]

There is a discussion regarding "Only Man" in which you may be interested. Please visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Only Man to take part. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


Hi, and thanks for your work on the English Wikipedia.

I noticed an article you worked on. Just a short note to point out that we don’t normally link:

  • dates
  • years
  • commonly known geographical terms (including well-known country-names), and
  • common terms you’d look up in a dictionary (unless significantly technical).

(This even applies for infoboxes.)

Thanks, and my best wishes.

Tony (talk) 09:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


Please take a look at the refs for Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland. Thank you!--BabbaQ (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

OK. Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I have already fixed the refs for Jackie Ferm, Peder Lamm and Ingvar Oldsberg but please take a look at them just in case. Cheers.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
All seem OK to me. Cheers, - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:09, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the refs at Eurovision Song Contest 2014, Tinkara Kovač, Kevin Borg and Stefan Löfven. Thanks!--BabbaQ (talk) 14:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
And Ann Heberlein, Bengt Dalqvist and Johar Bendjelloul. Thanks!--BabbaQ (talk) 18:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
OK and Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Check out Princess Estelle, Duchess of Östergötland, Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland and Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Now I finally know what interests most Scandinavians - celebrities, Eurovision, royalty and gruesome crime. Mmmm, it is much the same as with many people in the UK ! Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Yeah that basically covers it ;) Take a look at Nicky Hilton, Donatella Versace and Greg Poehler. Thanks!--BabbaQ (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Please take a look at the refs at Mattias Flinks article. Thanks,--BabbaQ (talk) 22:32, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - sorry for the delay. Regards, - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:26, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
No worries! Please take a look at Anders Eklund (murderer) as well. Thanks!.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:29, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:43, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Please take a look at Sofia Hellqvist and Bråvalla festival. Thanks.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:26, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Also Jan O. Jansson and Dagmar Hagelin. Thanks!--BabbaQ (talk) 16:44, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
And Sophia Rosenhane. Thank you :)--BabbaQ (talk) 18:37, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Please take a look at Alice Teodorescu and Fittja gård. Much appreciated.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

The word "is" should be capitalized in song titles[edit]

Hi, according to MOS:CT, the word "is" is a verb and so should be capitalized in song titles. I have corrected "Sometimes Love Is Letting Go" in Back to the Drive. Best wishes, Peter Loader (talk) 20:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Beverley Sisters[edit]

Were they really all born on the same date? (Obviously I know two of them were, but...) Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:18, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes they were, as far as I know. Allmusic is one vaguely reliable source.[1] - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 13:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Seems reasonable. That article needs a lot of care and attention. I seem to have a thing about sister trios at the moment... Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:22, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Well, if the Ross conglomerate is anything to go by, you will undoubtedly be able to verify the Beverley's birth/marriage/offspring details in a trice. I seem to think I found locating more general references for the threesome rather difficult. Of course, their heyday pre-dated t'internet by some margin. Even my copious library has next to nothing on them. Anyhow, good luck and if I can help, then you know where I am. When I'm here - which currently is not very often ! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
The Rosses' life history is almost as contorted as their dancing - which is quite something! Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Good grief - they were made of rubber !! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 15:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Well done Guy, for your sterling work on this article. It is much appreciated. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:59, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Freddy Cannon[edit]

Any ideas about birth year? The article has at various times said 1936, 1939, and now 1940. Whitburn says 1939, Allmusic says 1940. I can't find anything definitive. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:38, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

I have 1940 from Murrells, Joseph (1978). The Book of Golden Discs (2nd ed.). London: Barrie and Jenkins Ltd. p. 111. ISBN 0-214-20512-6.  Of course, it could be a show biz date of birth ! But at least that coincides with Allmusic's claim. Any help ?
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:36, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I have my suspicions that it's 1936, but nothing definitive at all. I could give you the birth and death dates of his parents, but not Freddy - which is quite odd. I'm pretty sure he wasn't born in 1939, as there's evidence of a stillborn brother that year. It had better be left as one of those great unsolved mysteries of our time - at least until he passes to that great amusement park in the sky... Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
I suspect you are right with 1936. It does not make any sense to pretend you are only one year younger than you really are. The norm, in my experience, is that between two and four years are shaved off. Mind you, an extreme is Andy Kim.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:05, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Well, someone called Andre (sic) A. Youakim aka Kim got married in Los Angeles in 1977 at a given age of 30 - but you might already know that! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I am certain Kim was born on 5 December 1946. Still, it is hardly worth arguing the point any more on that one. Another who will rock off the mortal coil eventually.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Maybe someone should start Category: Musicians who conceal their date of birth? Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:45, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
A shorter list might be found at Category: Musicians who do not conceal their date of birth !!
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Wrecking Ball (Miley Cyrus song)[edit]

Can you put two sources [2] [3] (which are says pop ballad) to "Composition" section (next to "... pop ballad;")? Hope it match, but make sure the same link on "References" section in this case. (talk) 08:14, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Aren't you forgot? (talk) 06:50, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I have been away on holiday, as is clearly stated on both my user and talk pages, hence the delay in replying. I will make a couple of points. What is stopping you from effecting the edit ? Plus, the phrase pop ballad is already referenced in the 'Background and composition' section, so there is no real need to add any further citations. Lastly, why are you asking me ? - I have no interest in, nor have had any significant editorial input to, this article.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 09:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Chart succession boxes[edit]

Please note that there is no consensus for the addition of succession boxes for record charts. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Record charts/Archive 11#Request for comment: Use of succession boxes for an example of these prior discussions. See also lists are recommended instead, see You Make Me Wanna... for an example. Succession boxes are more appropriate for political offices and the like. Adabow (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

I have never been part of the discussions over the use of succession boxes, but from a brief glance at the linked discussion you gave, can see that there is no consensus for their use. However, equally, there is no consensus for their removal (not shouting, merely highlighting). In that case, I would proffer that it is each editor's preferential stance that is taking the high ground. It has been my preference to try to complete the lineage for all UK Singles Chart number ones. From partaking in this 'project', I can tell you that all UK number ones from 1952 to the late 1990s (as far as I have gone thus far) has a succession box, whether I have added them or not (the vast majority of which were in my place prior to my efforts). My aim is simply for consistency throughout.
I might also add that the discussion which you referred to is over three years old, and perhaps needs revisiting. From my lengthy experience on Wikipedia, I rather doubt you would find true consensus either way.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

The Medicine Man (Dallin)[edit]

My understanding of the Linkrot tag is that it should not be removed until all the bare URLs have been removed. Sometimes this requires a good deal of research to resolve an apparently dead or incorrect URL. For example, for The Medicine Man (Dallin) that means research on the first URL with the Association for Public Art, where I happen to be a member, and I can resolve the problem, but not right away. Same situation exists with Botanic Garden of the Irkutsk State University. I am going to ask user:Carriearchdale to allow me to replace the Linkedit tags she has removed. I hope you will concur with me on this matter.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:43, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:29, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Your Edit on List of people from Ann Arbor, Michigan[edit]

Hello Derek,

Recently, I have come across one of your edits given here: Although I understand you are trying to contribute to Wikipedia, which I completely encourage, please be mindful of the quality of the sources you use. Blogs are typically frowned upon, as they may contain biased, unwarranted information. Please see Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources. Please contain me if you have any further questions, or simply need help finding reliable sources; I am more than happy to help. Simply reply to this message on my talk page. Thanks.

--JustBerry (talk) 16:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Soliciting comment...[edit]

Hi! Would you care to review or comment/vote (support/oppose) at my FA nomination for the article New York Dolls (album)? Information on reviewing an FA nomination's criteria is available at WP:FACR. If not, feel free to ignore this message. Cheers! Dan56 (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. JustBerry (talk) 23:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Wow, this is amazing. I didn't previously have Derek down as a vandal but now my eyes have been opened I just want to poke him with a stick for his great wickedness. Can we please have a little bit more detail on the evil vandalism he has perpetrated? ... Unfortunately I do not seem to have the expertise to recognize it, but I am sure that it is there. Best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh yeah - "I've Been a Bad, Bad Boy" - look at my pure evil intent [4]
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:38, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Typical case of Scottish Terrier Bitch Vandalism! DBaK (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

List of 1960s musical artists[edit]

Hi, I started this. Feel free to add more!♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:55, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I'm undecided whether to add to it, or propose it for deletion. What's the point of it? The number of articles to be listed would run to thousands, and I can't see how it would add to anyone's knowledge. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

In addition, it is often arguable to simply define any artist as being 'of the 1960s'. For just one example, Eric Clapton certainly was, but his solo work did not commence until the following decade. I know there is a lot of work that has gone in to produce this list, which I applaud, but I doubt it really adds anything of significance to the encyclopaedia.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Miserable bastards :-) Why is it useful? For anybody wanting to know about what musical groups were active in the 1960s. I was looking to broaden my listening scope and find some new bands to listen to. For such a purpose the list is tremendously useful. lists are not supposed to always be "significant", they're generally there to improve browsing and consolidate topics.♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

If you want to discover new music, join this site - it's excellent. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:02, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Listen Doctor, if you wanted to know what to listen to from the 1960s, Ghmyrtle and me could have put you right. We were there; well, sort of, as young nippers. Our views on music of that period are the only 'significant' ones you could ever want ! Ever !! Anyhow, I object to being called a 'miserable bastard'. However if you had said 'grumpy old man', rather like my wife often does, then I would be in total agreement.
Can I suggest someone creating a 'List of 1960s musical artists who sent me into a real spin'; OK, I'll do it - Sandie Shaw - now I need a lie down.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:27, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
I had Marianne Faithfull under my desk once... Well, under the lid of my desk anyway.... Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:53, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I am already pretty knowledgeable about music from those decades but there are numerous bands I haven't heard of and want to check out. The lists of jazz musicians and standards I also find very useful for expanding my musical tastes. Thanks for the recommendation Ghm.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:45, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Oh to be a journalist, who can keep rehashing the same story in the same newspaper for thirty-five years!!! Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:32, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
Hee hee. I have been in the company of a couple of journalists in recent times. I might suggest to them that, if they get sort of a story to run, to try regurgitating some old piece of theirs to keep the wolf from their door !
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:45, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

List of deaths in rock and roll[edit]

I'm trying to coordinate discussion on criteria for inclusion, on the article talk page. You may like to contribute. Thanks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:08, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

I have done so... not very positive I'm afraid.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Peter pullan[edit]


I have seen that you have edited the topic Peter pullan I was just wondering if you are related to him. If so please could you let me know as he is my great great grandad — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:31, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi; no Peter Pullan is not related to me in any way. It is just the fact that he played for Yorkshire County Cricket Club that aroused my editorial instincts. Sorry I can not help further.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for marking link rot?????????????[edit]

I just got blocked for daring to mark articles with link rot problems.
Blocked for tagging a problem?????
Could you and the rest of the link rot specialists possibly come to my defence?
Thanks so much, (talk) 12:40, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Having looked at your talk page history, then the answer is a polite no. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 21:27, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Why not? We have collaborated now over a period of years, and have spoken before.
You have been on break so there has been an accumulation which is not normally present.
Lazy lumps have been deleting valid tags rather than just fixing the trouble themselves, or waiting for your group to look into it.
They are committing 2 cardinal sins: claiming ownership, and deleting valid tags without first correcting the problem.
Please look at it again.
As I recall, we have the same rank: Master IV.
My mistake. You're III, I'm IV. (talk) 12:40, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)
IP blocked for evasion of their present block. Acroterion (talk) 00:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Useful source?[edit]

Don't know if you've seen this - published this month. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:41, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

I was completely unaware of this publication. Are you ordering a copy ? How much is it ? Generally, I have found that there is less subterfuge regarding Motown artists details, than many other pop practitioners. I must say that Motown stuff is not my favourite by a long way, but it might be a decent reference source. Thanks,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 09:49, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
A lot of it seems to be there online - who needs dead trees??! Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:12, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

This mean anything to you? Me neither. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:48, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Nope. To be honest, I am a bit surprised that her name appears in five Wiki articles. Never heard of her - and she is not notable, as far as I can see.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 09:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
I think you're probably right. There's certainly enough material about her to write a decent stub - here, (blocked link), here, here - but she doesn't really seem to have impacted on anyone's consciousness to any great extent. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:58, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

And another possibility. So notable he seems to have two sites! Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:45, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

You don't half find them ! Actually, the latter link you listed for Barbara Ruskin mentions Sharon Tandy who, on face value, does not seem much more notable, but she has a Wiki article.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:57, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
The Fleur de Lys anyone ?? - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 11:04, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Garbage genres discussion[edit]

Hi. You're a past editor in the Garbage articles, would you mind giving your input on the latest discussion? Talk:Garbage_(band)#Genres --Lpdte77 (talk) 02:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Frankly, if I had my way, all mention of musical genre(s) would be removed from all articles. There is way too much time wasted here arguing the toss over this issue right across the board - one man's meat is another... etc.
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 09:42, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Tame Impala[edit]

Can you Reflink to the page? Thanks. (talk) 03:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

RIP Reflinks[edit]

Interesting query above, as the answer has to be No, as Reflinks is no longer available due to the Toolserver being shutdown on 1 July. Face-surprise.svg Face-sad.svg See User talk:Dispenser/Reflinks#FYI: The reference converter seems to be shut down. Complaints to Loss_of_Reflinks_tool --220 of Borg 05:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

For some reason, it has burst back into life. Hooray ! - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:12, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Preston Shannon[edit]

Hi there. Thanks for creating the Preston Shannon article. I came across it because a bot sends me all Mississippi-related new pages. I'm just wondering if Shannon meets the notability requirement for a musician. I found it odd the his personal website, as well as his Allmusic bio, don't mention the Grammy nominations. When I went looking for them, they were poorly referenced (one source said there were 2 nominations, another said 5). I didn't want to tag the article, because you're an experienced editor. Let me know your thoughts. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 15:55, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) If you look at this video (and look carefully at the wording of some of the sources), it seems to suggest that he was in the running to be nominated, but was not actually on the shortlist of nominations. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:38, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
On reflection, I have removed the sentence pertaining to the Grammy Award nomination(s) which is, on closer inspection, unsubstantiated. Thanks for pointing this out. As far as notability is concerned, there is a fine line surrounding many blues musicians. I have started articles on many such musicians and always try to justify the notability criteria before I embark on the exercise. So, specifically with regards to the notability guidelines :-
Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. - I believe that there are at least three references within the article that show that this to be the case.
Has released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable). - Bullseye Blues is about as major as any present day blues musician can hope to record for. Also, Rounder Records (and it subsidiaries) has housed many notable artists over 40+ years.
Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. - Prominence in the local scene is hopefully proven by his regular appearances at B.B. King's Blues Club in Memphis.
Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc. - his appearance on The Voice (U.S. season 2) falls under this category, OR presumably under the following...
Has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.
Frankly, most of the other criteria would not apply to nearly all living blues musicians (there is the odd exception, such as the aforementioned B.B. King, of course). I will plead a little innocence in that I am English, and clearly have no local experience to determine levels of notability against others in that field. I hope this clears things up. Kind regards,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:42, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with "Australian rock" article[edit]

I noticed that your have made some improvements to the "Australian rock" article. I appreciate your contributions. With contributions such as yours, the "Australian rock" article should become, in time, a great article. Thanks. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:42, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Pretty please[edit]

...don't make conclusions about something you don't know about, here you marked an Azeri source as Russian. Max Semenik (talk) 18:52, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Format changes[edit]

Hi Derek ... just to let you know, when you change the ref column formats from "2" to "30em" or the like, it results in markedly inferior presentation on both my PC and ib my iPhone. Lots more white space. Single-column. I think it's better left as the original format you are changing it from. Otherwise, we have editors engaging in the silly back-and-forth changes we used to have w/dates, before we decided how to handle, e.g., numerical dates vs. non-numerical dates (answer: leave it to the first format used).

If we have an RfC, with community-wide participation and agreement to get rid of "2" columns (with I would be against), we could at that point have a bot do what you are doing, and save you for the more substantive good work you do. At this point, I think such changes are best not made, reverting the first format used, in the absence of such an RfC. Best. --Epeefleche (talk) 22:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Maybe, but it smells to me of I just don't like it. Plus the fact if we leave everything as it stands, we can end up with 30+ references in an ever expanding article that sprawls out in a long single column. It eventually looks like a laundry list. To be fair, I feel no consensus applies either way. Don't lose sleep over this - me either. Regards,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure why -- in your reverting the established format, established by the editors who preceded you -- you don't take the self-introspective view that perhaps your own edit is IDONTLIKEIT.
Of course, in this sort of circumstance -- much as with the dates example I pointed to above -- neither the editor who established the format in the first place, or the one who came in years later and changed it, "likes" the other's format. Yet, as with dates, where there are 2 acceptable format, it is an exceedingly mindless waste of editors' time to simply revert each other. With dates, we have taken the approach that if an acceptable format is in place we leave it as is.
I've no problem with you changing the format where it forces a single column. My concern is where it forces a "2 column" format, you are changing it to an "em" format. That may well work well on your screen. On both my screens, it is singularly unhelpful -- as it results in a single column. Where the "2" results in 2 columns. Best. Epeefleche (talk) 23:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, ask you a quick question?[edit]

I have a quick question about a page you worked on a while back. I'm a reporter for the Wall Street Journal. I can connect with you here, or feel free to email me at or call 704-650-4130. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffthechimp (talkcontribs) 19:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Talking here is the easiest for me - unless the matter is of a delicate nature ?
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


Can you reflinks to the page? (talk) 16:57, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 17:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Your 5 seconds of summer post[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if you could edit the 5 seconds of summer again because your information is wrong. 5 seconds of summer is not a pop punk band whatsoever, and the depend pop punk group on Facebook is really offended by that. The band would ruin pop punk if they were considered it. A classic example of pop punk is man overboard, the wonder years, the story so far, handguns, neck deep, real friends, etc. 5 seconds of summer sounds nothing like that and sounds like one direction. Could you please update this again because, I would like people to stop calling them pop punk. How annoying would it be if you told someone you like a genre of music and they think it's so mainstream band on the radio?!

Thank you, -A fellow pop punk fan — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I could spend forever answering your post, but I will just make three points. Firstly, it is not my information, it is Wikipedia's. Secondly, I have very little interest in musical genres, which I find to be very subjective and subject to different interpretations by virtually everyone. However Allmusic list the band as "punk-pop" here. Thirdly, whatever your opinion, or mine, Wikipedia relies on verifiability which, amongst other things, states "verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of its editors. Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it".
Oh, and if I have managed, without any action on my part, to really offend a group on Facebook, then I'll die happy.
With respect, I suggest you might like to read Wikipedia:Five pillars before considering editing the encyclopaedia. Regards,
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:13, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

A thought[edit]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment#Louis ("Blues Boy") Jones. One for you? Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Not really. I struggle most of the time to 'prove' notability for my blues boys and girls. From my initial investigation, he does not warrant a place on [5] and most of them are very borderline at best. The case of Preston Shannon springs to mind, whilst at least Kelley Hunt seemed more secure. I normally use any entry at Allmusic as an initial pointer in the notability stakes. I seemingly can not find Louis ("Blues Boy") Jones listed. I would if I could, but this seems like WP:MEMORIAL to me
Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
You're probably right, especially as many of the online mentions of him I can find seem to have been placed by his daughter. I'll show willing, and see what develops! Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)