User talk:Akamad

Welcome to my talk page! Please sign and date your entries by inserting --~~~~ at the end of your post.
Do note that I will be replying to your messages on your user talk page as well as this page. Thank you! :-)
Start a new talk topic.

This user is happy to help new users. Leave a message.

Talk archive

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived.

Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 (June 9 2005 to December 26 2005)
• Archive 2 (December 27 2005 to January 24 2006)
• Archive 3 (January 25 2006 to January 3 2007)

Van Morrison Article POV (?)

Looks like you're a really busy guy. I haven't heard from anyone else that they think the article was POV. So, I guess it's just one of those things. Maybe the person that tagged it just doesn't like Van Morrison. I can't tell you the number of hours I've put into the article. I'm working towards maybe getting it rated at least a GA. More work needed though, I know. Thanks, Agadant 20:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Agadant. It's not that I'm a busy guy, it's just that I've been overseas for the last few weeks and haven't had too much internet access, so I haven't been looking at what's been going on with wikipedia. So I missed what happened with the whole POV business. But I've read through the posts on the talk page. I have to agree with you that it definitely was POV, it's a good thing you spotted that and have worked to fix it. Keep up the great work (you're definitely a big asset to the Van article)! - Akamad 00:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

What up!

Congrats on your continued Wikizenship! --JeeSpot 17:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Rules about Footnotes

As you probably saw on the discussion page for Van, I'm working on the footnotes for the article as was requested by HeavensWrath. This is the 1st article I've worked on so it's been a process of learning by doing. ( I work better that way anyway.) I want to get the article rated higher and everything verified so there won't be any questions about POV or accuracy. I'm willing to try to find sources to footnote for what has been entered over the last few years, but I'm not sure exactly when something has to be referenced. Can you give me some general rules. I've read the Wiki articles on footnotes and references but it doesn't always seem clear. I checked history and sent a message to one person who entered something asking for a reference, and will wait before removing it or try harder to find something on it myself. (Is this the right way to handle it?) ........ If something: for instance Van receiving an OBE is easily verifiable, does it still need a reference? If one whole paragraph can be sourced in one book, can only one footnote work for the paragraph by using the multiple page numbers? (As I noted on the article talk page the footnotes and citation numbers will be out of order until I get further along.) Hope this is okay. Thanks for any help or advice....(whenever you get a little time)....Agadant 02:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

If something is easily verifiable, it generally does not require a reference (Van is a singer for example). It really comes down to personal judgement, if you feel people will dispute any material on the article, cite a source for that material. Any and all negative comments about a living person have to be referenced, as per Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. When it comes to entire paragraphs, I would say it's fine to put multiple page numbers in the footnote and only reference it once. Like I said, it really comes down to whether or not you feel people will question any of the material on the article, if they do question it, or you think they will, then it needs a reference. Hope this helps. All the best. - Akamad 19:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

VM article

Thanks for the information. Think it was just exactly clear cut enough to be very helpful. Agadant 20:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

gwenno

pls stop vandalising gwenno, she looks a bit like becki but not much if u no the difference.