User talk:Dissolve

Nicole Atkins

I did indirectly refer to the Sicilian heritage through the Badalamenti quote, but perhaps I can squeak it in somewhere else. You're probably right about the Sweden discrepancy too. I have to go back and check the liner notes. Re: relationship with Parlor Mob, I thought it best to leave out for the time being. Thanks for the feedback! User talk:Terrapin7 14:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I added sicilian to the article. It's pretty common to mention heritage (when known) at the beginning of biographical articles. It looks like someone added the other studio to the article, it should probably be added to the album article as well. Relationship: it might merit inclusion since they're living together and have been together for at least a couple years. Great work on expanding the article! dissolve^talk 23:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure her entire family is Sicilian though? I know Arnone, her mother's maiden name, is Sicilian. I thought Atkins was more of an Anglo/Celtic name. Maybe you could say "She is of Sicilian heritage" since we know that to be at least partly true. I'll leave the relationship up to you. I don't think he's quite as famous yet and I figured Atkins wouldn't want her personal life all over Wikipedia, but I may be wrong. Thanks for the compliment! User talk:Terrapin7 19:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

In the source I cited, Atkins states "My family is Sicilian", so I basically just re-phrased that per WP:V. dissolve^talk 00:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

non-linear narrative

Nice work expanding the article Nonlinear (arts). --Cinematical (talk) 00:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Contemporary music

Hi Dissolve, I wonder if you would be interested in joining the new WikiProject Contemporary music that I helped organize recently? Our goal is to help improve Wikipedia’s coverage of the subject. Best, --S.dedalus (talk) 04:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Response to WΔZ being removed from Splatter Article

So far the only reliable source I could find was here[[1]] on the Total Film website; [[2]] But it seems obviously clear that this is part of the "Torture porn" genre so could someone add it to this article please? Clearly if anyone looked into this it would be obvious with the premise alone (which I might add isn't too disimilar from Saw...but with a more scientific approach complete with a major morality point too...I might add) Hopefully these following offical sites might be enough too: [[3]] [[4]] --COSSOCO 23:17, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the lesson

Just finished reading your comments and the appropriate links. It was very helpful. I get it now and understand fully. Thanks for your assistance and best wishes.Ceyx106lucifer (talk) 20:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your clarification

I believe you are right then. The page needs clean up. However, I also believe that the external links where placed to promote his services. Whether he himself did or not, can not be proved. But it was the design of someone from Denmark. I think these links should be deleted and replaced with the references you so expertly found. A question, if an audio engineer was involved (and credited) on a top 10 charting record in Australia, does he qualify for a biographical page as per WP:Music? Thanks for your help. Jrod2 (talk) 20:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation again. So, in recapping, you are saying that WP:Music doesn't apply to engineers and producers but WP:Bio does. WP:Bio states that several verified sources citating the works of these people are needed to qualify for an article at WP. Since Holger meets the requirements under WP:Music (as a musician) he is entitled to his own article, and because he is also an engineer all his websites that promote his services as such, are admissible. Is this your position? Please confirm. Regards. Jrod2 (talk) 18:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The Open Road

You linked Michael Meredith even though he doesn't have an article. You may want to create one about him if you know enough. Meldshal42_{Comments and Suggestions}^{My Contributions} 20:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought the writer and director of several feature films with numerous google news hits, would probably be notable, so I red linked the name per WP:REDLINK. If you don't think he's notable at this time, I won't disagree, as I haven't looked into it enough to write a stub. dissolve^talk 03:22, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

A Sniper

Anyone can say they are anyone - that doesn't make it so. A Sniper (talk) 04:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Greif article

That is fair enough. A Sniper (talk) 19:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way you can place a 'resolved box' at the COI page as this appears to now be sorted out? An admin has struck the page completely and is rebuilding with citations, and I have absolutely no objection. I thanked the user and he's been reconstructing step by step. That would be one less issue to deal with as I'm now besieged by WP:NPA (at various talk pages) and trolling (for want of any other word to describe it) by Jackmantas. Thanks, A Sniper (talk) 21:38, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. It looks like it's been re-written based on sources. dissolve^talk 16:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Fracture (2007 film)

Hey. I notice a little while back, you moved Fracture (film) to Fracture (2007 film) citing WP:NAME. For the future, note that WP:NAME#Film titles says the year of the film should only be used in the title if necessary - that is, if there were two films named Fracture then we would use "Fracture (2007 film)" and perhaps "Fracture (2008 film)" as the articles' titles. Thanks for trying to help out! —97198 talk 14:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

There are multiple films with the name Fracture. Please see Fracture (disambiguation), Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films)#Between films of the same name and IMDb. Perhaps you missed the other article? A search would reveal it. dissolve^talk 16:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake! Thanks for that. —97198 talk 01:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

QUESTION

Is there any reason why you (Dissolve?) have decided to remove all links to my blog - Soul Bible - on various pages?

As per the comment I left on your talk page, the links do not comply with Wikipedia's guideline for external links. dissolve^talk 18:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Buckley

I noticed you're on a bit of an edit spree recently! Any chance of input into the Jeff Buckley article? I've written a more appropriate lead but some things don't feel right still. Looking to bring up to a GA at some point. And if you know anything about Tim Buckley that page is just crying out for improvement. Tell me if you're interested. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 19:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. I think I'll remove tribute songs we don't have a reference for and put the Jeff Buckley article up for GA status. Tribute songs can be put back in if a reference is found. Do you think it's ready too? Sillyfolkboy (talk) 00:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:Maceo Parker 2005.jpg

A tag has been placed on Image:Maceo Parker 2005.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Maceo Parker 2005.jpg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Polly (Parrot) 22:02, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Carly Pope

im getting seriously tired of you editing my work. the reference link is just!Pezzy (talk) 20:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:BLP#Sources. Self-published sites are not considered reliable sources and should never be used in a biography of a living person. dissolve^talk 20:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

the site has been approved by the star and it has been the ONLY reliable reference for this actress since 1999 Pezzy (talk) 20:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

The site states that it "is in no way connected to Carly Pope"[5] so also fails WP:SELFPUB. dissolve^talk 21:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Pennsylvania townships that surround boroughs

Hello ... Regarding Youngstown borough in relationship to Unity Township: Now that you've brought it to my attention, I see where you got the sentence, "One of the oldest boroughs in the township is that of Youngstown." (That Westmoreland County history book is fascinating, by the way.)

One way of looking at this is that there are two different senses in which a place could be described as being "in a township." For example, Lawson Heights and Pleasant Unity are in Unity Township and are administered as integral parts of that township. On the other hand, Youngstown borough is "in" Unity Township in a different sense; it is surrounded by Unity Township but not administered by it. Email communication is welcome; see my user page for link. Canadian2006 (talk) 03:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Good points. I think I was going by the later definition rather than the former when I added the fact as I wasn't aware that Latrobe and Youngstown are surrounded by Unity Township, but not technically a part of it. I think my source was a website that listed villages, towns and boroughs geographically "in" the townships, rather than by governmental makeup. Do you think an explanation of that might make a useful addition to the township articles?

Wikipedia's threshold for inclusion is WP:Verifiability, so it seems historically, Youngstown was a part of the township, at least until it became a separate borough, so the inclusion of that in the history section might be worthwhile. dissolve^talk 03:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

All of the above sounds reasonable. As you can see on my "contributions" list, I have changed some of the township pages to distinguish between the two types of situations (for example, Unity Twp. Hempfield, Twp., Derry Twp, Ligonier Twp.). I hope that's okay. (Incidentally, I live in western Canada now, but I'm originally from Latrobe. I'm taking an interest in my hometown area.)

In Pennsylvania, a rule of thumb is that a township never administers a city or a borough (or vice versa). Canadian2006 (talk) 04:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I think your definition of "in a township" is the more accurate one, so I support the edits to the township articles. dissolve^talk 05:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

JB

Yeah thanks for that, was thinking of removing that myself anyway. I'm 100% sure there are references somewhere but can't find where they are. I also remember a story about one of the band pouring beer over Matt Johnson when he was doing some meditation or similar to that. Does this sound familiar to you too? Maybe it's in "dream brother". Otherwise, i'm sure this will pass GA and highlight a couple more problems on the way to FA. I suppose a critical reception section is still needed too. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 09:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

The trivia on the Colors article

Whats up with the tag on that trivia? Don't every movie articel have a trivia? Agtax 19:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Trivia sections should be avoided as an article develops, but are acceptable at an early stage for film articles. See WP:TRIVIA and MOS:FILM for the relevant style guidelines. dissolve^talk 19:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

What about renaming the section as Details? Agtax 20:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Buckley GA review

I've dealt with a number of problems brought up by the GA review but i'd appreciate your input seeing as you've contributed so much to the article. Also i'd value your opinion on the whole discography move too. Thanks. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 09:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re:Evans

I was going with his credits as a performer - specifically "he started performing as a band member and/or musical director for acts such as The Jimmy Castor Bunch, Brass Construction, New Edition, Willie Colon and as a musical director for The Force M.D.s, Afrika Bambaataa, and others." Chubbles (talk) 14:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Buckley GA article

I'd just like to congratulate you personally for the hard work you put in to the article, especially looking for and adding citations. It's quality citation as well as the article only had very minor problems passing the GA standard. General clean up, a musical style section and a little more press reception to his albums and i think it might pass FA standards. Also maybe a section in his legacy about posthumous releases, especially considering more has been released in this way than when he was alive.

Well done and keep up the good work. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 22:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a very interesting story in itself! Make sure to keep an eye on the article for improvements/vandalism etc. I thought it very strange that DreamBrother83 went on to repeat year old mistakes; talk about not learning from history. My main two worries are: getting cites for the musical style section (i guess 50 critics calling his voice "silky smooth" or "ethereal" doesn't give one iota of real musical information, just a bunch of press hype) and getting free images. Fan made images seem hard to come by and I kind of assume The Estate of Jeff Buckley will be very reluctant to release some. My plan is to give them so good an article that they can't refuse! Let's hope the article stays free of anti-Guibert diatribe... Sillyfolkboy (talk) 11:00, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:KatyPerry.jpg

Could you please forward the emails to permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org so an OTRS tag can be added? Thanks. BJ^Talk 16:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I forwarded the emails. dissolve^talk 00:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

In media res

I think that I checked the correct edition of the source (the 2004 edition), but I can't get to it right now and so I can't tell you for sure. However, when I checked, I couldn't see the information on p. 319 and so I then checked the index for references to Homer or the Iliad and found none, which led me to believe that the source was cited in error. I know I looked at the right source, but maybe it was the wrong edition?

In any case, I don't have a problem with most of what's written in the lead of the In medias res article. My issue is just with the statement that Homer "established" the technique. I'm a student of ancient Indian religious literature and I know that, for instance, the Mahabharata also begins in media res. What gets tricky is the fact that the Mahabharata was written over many centuries and it's not quite clear exactly what the time frame of its composition is. It is believed that composition began in the 8th or 9th century BC, which would mean that the Mahabharata either predates or was contemporary to the Iliad and the Odyssey. So, it's difficult to say who exactly "invented" the technique.

In addition, there's a problem of the fact that many sources talk about the technique of in medias res, but very few talk about when it was started. Also, Western scholarship is naturally more focused on ancient Western classics than ancient Eastern classics and so, when scholars think about and casually mention the first noted instance of the technique being used, they naturally think of the oldest of the Western epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey. Their attention would not turn to other epics from the era or from prior to that era and they may casually say that Homer invented the technique without having thoroughly researched such a statement. My point is that there's a lot of ambiguity when it comes to the origins of the technique and so all I'm saying is that the article should not give credit to Homer for inventing the technique when it is not quite so clear. That's why I'm saying that we should reword it to point out that Homer is the "first noted instance in Western literature" or perhaps "the most prominent example" (since he is almost always used as an example in literature classes of of what in medias res is). Thanks for understanding! --Hnsampat (talk) 20:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

It could also just be the semantics of "establish". I was probably just thinking of the author that made "stable or firm" the wider use as a literary tradition, rather than necessarily being the first to use it. I don't object to the current phrasing of the statement and support any effort to eliminate systemic bias. dissolve^talk 21:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Move per MOS

[Dissolve (Talk | contribs) m (moved Ego trip (magazine) to Ego Trip (magazine): Capitalize per WP:MOSTM) Please don't do this sort of thing without discussion, that's just a guideline. 86.44.22.206 (talk) 13:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The Manual of Style represents consensus among editors. If you can make a case why the article should not follow the MOS and build a consensus for it on the talk page, I'd support it. The article title is also specified in WP:NAME, which is policy. dissolve^talk 16:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Please discuss moves based on a guideline before making them. It's quite simple. 86.44.22.206 (talk) 18:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Please see the principle: Be Bold. dissolve^talk 18:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and you were bold, and we are were we are now, and I'm requesting you to please discuss moves based on a guideline before making them. Yanno? 86.44.22.206 (talk) 19:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

The move was based on policy: WP:NAME. I specified the guideline WP:MOSTM because it further explains the policy. Any controversial moves, i.e. an article that doesn't have only a dozen articles linking to it, or articles with discussion of the title on the talk page, I take to WP:RM. dissolve^talk 19:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

That part of WP:Name purports to detail convention, nothing more. It explicitly indicates the possibility of exceptions, to stop robotic interpretation. It seems to be therefore a mere summary of the MOSTM with sensible weakening of that page's import, seeing as it is the product of basically two authors. Nevertheless, it may be the case that that part of WP:Name needs changing. I suggest in the interim that you revise your concept of what is and isn't controversial. Large sections of the MOS describe best practice accurately. But it is not the bible, it is large and sprawling, and many sections are the product of a small number of editors attempting to provide a house style for editors. Which is fine, but i wouldn't go moving pages boldly on it as a matter of course and nor should you. 86.44.22.206 (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2008 (UTC)