User talk:Kelpin/Archives/2007/September
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Same editor
They're both in the same range editing the same article on the same day. They're clearly the same.--Rambutan (talk) 12:33, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:21, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Advice
First off, thanks for coming to me :-) - I appreciate it. The tag you are looking for: {{subst:notaforum}}. That's the warning on discussion pages. It's best right at the top, eye catching.
To tell users off for being naughty, here is the warnings {{subst:uw-chat1}}. If they continue to post off topic just keep going up in increments of one, e.g. {{subst:uw-chat2}}. I hope this helps, friend! And well done for being dedicated to the project. Tell me how you get on. ScarianTalk 11:03, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
The Answer to The Answer
Your cleanup has been noble. There are still lots of issues with the page. No refs for anything... the lead claims sales figures but has no inlines to support them. Plus the line "They are tipped for big things from many in the rock music industry." is straight weasel words... and poorly written weasel words at that. :D . The History section is much better than it was but still needs lots of cleanup. The first 2 sentences of the sections opening paragraph are both run-ons. No encyclopedia article should use first name references in its text(unless its about 2 brothers or 2 people with the same last name) This article uses the first names of all the bands members like they're next door neighbours. "James had a burning desire to follow his own muse"?????? How encyclopedic is that line? The whole history section reads TOO familiar. Too loose. The choice of wording needs to be gone over and 'encyclopedic' terms substituted for teen slang. "Gigs" are "concerts" or "performances"... "trawled through the ranks of everyone they knew in the Northern Irish music scene in their search for the ultimate rock voice" = "auditioned many vocalists from the Northern Ireland music scene in search of a specific vocal style that matched the bands music" (or whatever?). "building up a set The Answer could really rock with".... please!!!
Other issues are.... there's a trivia section which = ugly... The discography section uses images that are not fair-use... the source of the image in the infobox is questionable and the licensing is incomplete... The external links section contains a link to a discussion group.... lots of little things that need to either be repaired or deleted completely.
Can you see where I am coming from? It's like I tell everyone (or quote directly in my edit summaries WP:CITE, WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:ATT, WP:AWW, WP:MoS.... read these, study these, know these like the back of your own hand... and every article you edit will be better when you are finished. And, as far as music articles go... style-wise... read WP:MUSTARD... it's all in there.
Hope that wasn't too harsh. And hope it helps. Should you decide to keep working on it... it can only be for the better. The article needs a lot of work. BTW... I noticed a couple of editors who seem to be fairly regular showups in the articles edit history... Hopefully they(one in particular) don't try to assist you since ne of them is a self-ordained music expert who couldn't fill a thimble with his so-called "expert musical knowledge" :D ... but I digress.
Good luck with your article. And drop a line anytime you have any questions. I will gladly help... or at least point you in the right direction to someone who can. Have a nice day!!! 156.34.142.110 19:23, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- You may have it :-D You did some good work there. If you ever need any help and Libsey [The I.P. whom gave you help] is busy then feel free to bug me. Take care (Have a good day at work. I'll pop in from time to time throughout the day if you need any help, friend). ScarianTalk 08:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Barclay's
I thought the I.P. did, working in London and all. Feel free to revert any damage he may have done then. I got an 'E' in my A Level Business Studies course so I'm in no position to make an educated judgement on the situation. How are you today? ScarianTalk 16:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Those are highly respectable qualifications, I'd say you know quite a lot! :-) ScarianTalk 17:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I've fixed it - you need to put the </ref> tags inside the === tags.--Rambutan (talk) 17:43, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Fix
[1] - just needed to be closed :-) Take care! ScarianTalk 18:54, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Btw, you could indeed, if numerous verifiable sources [e.g. news papers] printed, write how it seemed a bit 'injust'... You just gotta report it as 'Criticism of the decision' or something like that... but, in all honesty, it'd be difficult to write that sort of thing without seeming bias. Could try it though! ScarianTalk 19:05, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Archival
Could you consider archiving your talkpage? It's getting a bit long!! :-) Rambutan (talk) 19:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Robin Hood
Y'welcome. There's so much vandalism on television articles, it's easy to miss a bit. It wasn't that long ago when Robin of Sherwood grew an extra series, and 'twas nearly a day before anyone picked up on it. --Mark H Wilkinson (t, c) 14:51, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Good catch
Nice work reverting the vandalism on Eagles. As a regular editor perhaps you can keep an eye out for any edits from the IP range 77.107.X.X. There are many edits from this IP range that blatantly ignore several Wiki policies, guidelines and project decrees. You can probably already see that from their recent ignorance of WP:FAIR on both the Eagles article and the T.B. Schmidt article. I am currently compiling a Check User Request concerning this IP range and their probable "puppet master". The owner of all these IP socks is likely an editor who appeared in May and has since violated WP:OWN on a number of articles including several related to The Hooters. This editor appeared not long after the previous owner of The Hooters got permanently blocked from editing Wikipedia. It's a tangled web but there are so many similarities between all the IP/Puppetmaster edits that the RCU will likely reveal them to be one in the same person. And if they can be linked back to the original 'blocked' editor... then more serious action may be taken to restrict that IP range from being able to edit. 77.107.X's refusal to follow Wiki-policy is sad because they obviously want to try and contribute to several articles that they have a personal interest in. But policy/guidelines/concensus comes first... so unfortunately an RCU(request for check user) is inevitable and the result will likely be perma-block. You and Scarian seem to have worked out a positive team effort for editing. Perhaps you should install some of the available anti-vandal tools to help you speed up your editing. Do you use Popups? They are almost a "must-have" these days and are the one tool I miss after my decision to reject my username and go with the "purity" of editing as an anonymous IP. Lupin's Tools are also an excellent tools for tracking changes on Wikipedia. If you really want to see the "ugly" in Wiki... install Lupins Tools and click on the "Filter Recent Changes" link. It's a 'naughty' filter that shows any "bad words" being added to Wiki in real time tracking. It's really quite shocking to see how much vandalism occurs to Wiki every second. Another tool I recommend is Twinkle. Twinkle did not exist before I "went anon" so I have never been able to use it. But I've read all the documentation and seen it used to great effect in the battle against vandalism. I've also seen it abused by editors who rolled back changes that were not vandalism... only edits contrary to the opinion of the Twinkle user... which is absolutely wrong and that user's Twinkle-powers should've been revoked. But I digress. Good luck with your editing. If you have any questions don't hesitate to ask. And, if you can help policy patrol any 77.107.X edits... that would be a great help. Have a nice day! 156.34.142.110 15:19, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, Ol' 77 just pseudo-vandalised the Randy Meisner infobox so you may want to watch that one too. 156.34.142.110 16:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: Genesis
Already have four PT albums already (Deadwing, In Absentia, Fear of a Blank Planet, Sky Moves Sideways) Will (talk) 19:53, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Re: Eagles
Actually I think you can do it yourself. There is an exception in the three-revert rule for obvious vandalism. See WP:3RR#Exceptions. That's what I argued here anyway. Let me know if you still feel uncomfortable doing this, and I'll revert it for you. --PEJL 13:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Reverting vandalism
I just saw your report at WP:AIV and wanted to let you know that you can revert vandalism as many times as necessary. The three revert rule does not apply when dealing with vandalism. --Ed (Edgar181) 13:23, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Walt Whitman
Requested semi-protection here --Nate1481( t/c) 15:43, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Speedy deletion
To report a page for speedy deletion, put one of the speedy-delete tags on it. See Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion. Thanks, NawlinWiki 15:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)