User talk:Y2kcrazyjoker4

The cake on your userpage...

... is the best thing created by anyone ever. Aranea Mortem ^{(talk to me)} 14:26, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Glad you got a kick out of it, I was hoping someone would! Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for From the Sky Down

Materialscientist (talk) 16:03, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Sarajevo

Hey mate, I'm finally back from my months of summer activity. Shall we work on the finishing touches of U2 concert in Sarajevo before taking it to FAC? It looks like it is really close, but I remember a few months ago you said that there were a few things you wanted to work on before nominating. Melicans (talk, contributions) 16:15, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

I've been looking for something to keep me occupied. I'd love to promote a couple of articles actually, and this one would be great start. I'm gonna have a look at the referencing to start things off, then I'll work on reviewing the prose and doing some copyediting. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Let me know when you want to nominate it; I have one up already at FAC (Mothers of the Disappeared), but can have a second if you put it up as a co-nom. I'll put it up for Peer Review in the meantime; hopefully that will give us some indication of it's readiness from a third party! Melicans (talk, contributions) 22:12, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds good. A peer review isn't a bad idea. I haven't yet re-read the prose myself, but I will likely get around to that sometime in the next week. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 22:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

U2 360 Troll

Obvious vandalism/trolling, and now numerous sockpuppet accounts. Any idea how to report/set up an SPI? Not that it will do much good since it is apparently a dynamic IP... Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

You could open an investigation here, but I'm not sure if it'll be necessary for now, since the 2 sockpuppetted accounts that were created yesterday were blocked. The IP is the only thing that remains unblocked, and I don't think a sockpuppet investigation is the proper forum for that (I could be wrong). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

A new one ('Ellie G. was robbed', or something like that) was just created and posted on the talk page. If it weren't for the semi-protection (which expires next month), I have no doubt that tripe would have been edited back in. If it gets past the minimum account age/edit threshold, or when the semi is lifted, I guess SPI is something to look into. Melicans (talk, contributions) 19:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Why would The Fray and One Republic support a band like U2? One is rock, the other two are pop rubbish.188.141.24.232 (talk) 08:30, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

So? Kanye West and Jay-Z are rap and crap, yet they both opened. Genre has nothing to do with who is chosen as an opener. If the bands that were chosen were too similar to U2, were would the variety be? And of course, saying that they are "rubbish" (or to use my own words, "crap", is entirely subjective and no basis for inclusion or removal. We deal with facts, not editor opinions. Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:04, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

So, everything I said about waiting on that sockpuppet investigation? Ignore that - I just opened this up. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully this whole sordid affair will be wrapped up along with the closed SPI. =) Melicans (talk, contributions) 23:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

One Republic

How are they in any way, shape or form rock? They are a boy band. 188.141.24.232 (talk) 08:20, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Why are you asking me idiotic questions? I didn't book the bands. The fact is they played those concerts, whether you like them or not. If you keep this crap up, you will be permanently banned, so I suggest you stop. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 11:07, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Since when were One Republic rock?

Calling them a rock band as an insult to Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Nazareth and other real rock bands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellie G Was Robbed (talk • contribs) 17:56, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

What is 'rock'? From that one overarching definition you have hard rock, soft rock, pop rock, synth rock, rock opera, alternative rock, rock 'n' roll, and a myriad of combinations within. Who are you to judge what is and isn't rock? Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Move along - nothing to see here. The sockpuppet investigation will have this guy banned soon enough. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Achtung remaster

Dunno if there is anything in here you can use, but this PDF from Universal Italy finally lays out everything in the boxset (including the DVD and LP contents), and if my Italian is correct it also confirms (for the first time from an official source) that it is remastered. Melicans (talk, contributions) 04:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Ohhh! Great find. I'll probably hold off on adding anything to the article until it's from a more "official" source (e.g. U2.com), but this is great, thanks. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:33, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Email

Were the files clear enough to see? I don't have a scanner so photographs were the best I could do. Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Yep, I can make the images out. I'm trying to decipher the highlife riff, but my limited knowledge may prevent me from being able to interpret that part. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:16, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Heh, I'm just glad you can read it. I could barely tell what the tempo was, I'm that illiterate with sheet music! Melicans (talk, contributions) 18:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Ryan Braun. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. You appear to be edit warring. Please note that you were asked to take your comments to the talk page instead. Also note -- this is a GA article, that has gone through GA review and the concomitant review by multiple editors. Most of your changes appear to be of the highly subjective IDONTLIKEIT variety, and fail to respect the consensus of other editors who have edited the article, and reviewed it for purposes of GA. I see that you have been blocked multiple times for edit warring, but not in the recent past; I hope you would take to heart the fact that that is not an acceptable way of resolving issues where you have a different point of view than others in the community. Please stop edit warring, and bring your comments to the talk page. Thank you. Epeefleche (talk) 19:48, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rogers Hornsby/archive1

Hey. Just wanted to see if you had any further comments, or if you'd be able to support if everything now looks good to you. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

I haven't scrutinized the prose too closely, but I can do so if you need. I'll try to get around to it this weekend. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:12, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

30 seconds to Mars

If you have trouble with anonymous IPs on 30 Seconds to Mars articles, check to see if they are from Italy. If they are, drop me a note, and I'll block: it's ItHysteria, a long-term banned editor.—Kww(talk) 15:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

According to IP-lookup.net, the most recent IP 79.31.37.81 originates from the host "host81-37-dynamic.31-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it", which is indeed Italy. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

That's why I mentioned it, and why I had already blocked it.—Kww(talk) 16:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

The Beatles/Years Active

There is a discussion occuring here involving debate about whether or not the Beatles were "active" during 1994-1996. Your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 22:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

"One Tree Hill"

Thanks for adding all the Composition information. I was wondering though, do you know what key it is played in? Melicans (talk, contributions) 05:35, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I couldn't determine the key directly from the sheet music, but I thought it was C since that is how the song begins. According to Music Notes, it is C major [1] . Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 05:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Cheers. Looks like the MusicNotes sheet is from a different source as it has 123 bpm instead of 120. I'm a bit hesitant to mix and match so I probably won't put it in. Thanks again for adding it all! Melicans (talk, contributions) 05:51, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Achtung Baby TFAR

Achtung Baby can now be nominated at WP:TFAR. It's within the necessary date range and there are only 4 date requests at the moment. I started to do it myself but couldn't figure out the best 1200-character blurb, so I figured it would be best for you to do it yourself. I think File:Bono as The Fly Cleveland 1992.jpg should be used as the image since it's the only free image of a band member from that era and the U2 infobox image has already been on the Main Page on at least two occasions (if not more). –Dream out loud (talk) 05:56, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out, I knew the eligibility date was coming up soon. I agree about the picture, it would complement the TFA blurb perfectly. I'll write something up shortly. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:46, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Looks like we'll have to wait, as there are 5 requests already up. In the meantime, you can view the blurb I put together here. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

If there are five requests already up you can bump the one with the lowest points value. If one is due to vanish in the next few days it may be easier just to wait, but if they are all for dates a while in advance bumping would work. Melicans (talk, contributions) 22:21, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: Princess of China

You are still going against WP:CITEKILL. In the space of three words, there are 6 footnotes. It looks awful. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, then pick one or two of the most prominent references and use those. Point is, plenty of reliable sources have called the song "electropop", so there is no reason why it shouldn't be one of the genres listed. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:18, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I will fix it using a coded ref. And there is no reason why Alternative hip hop can't be included. Coldplay is an Alternative rock band, and Rihanna is an R&B/Soul and Reggae artist. Alternative hip hop is a combination of those genres, hence it should be included. And you formatted some references incorrectly. You must include the publisher paramter. I would have thought you would have known considering you actually promoted some articles to GA status. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:22, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I know how to format references - I've done them quite frequently. Are you really trying to hold it against me that I forgot the publisher field? Forgetting that doesn't make the references incorrect - maybe incomplete. Regardless, instead of patronizing me for neglecting something, perhaps you should be thankful someone added 90% of the reference information, or even any references at all. As far as alternative hip hop, I think your interpretation of the genre differs from what others consider alt hip-hop, hence why there does not seem to be many reliable sources that call the song as such. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Include the publisher parameter then! 90%? You added about 3 or 4 sources in the entire article. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, and I don't WP:OWN the article, it's up to you if you want to add sources in. My interpretation of Alt hip hop is what the Alternative hip hop article says, as well as the fact that the combination of Coldplay and Rihanna results in an Alternative hop hop influenced song. And at first, you was saying it was an electropop song, even though two of the three sources didn't actually say electropop. Anyway, we have clearly got off on the wrong foot, so let's forget about it. Calvin • ^NaNaNaC'mon! 17:43, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Foster The People Infobox Image

Regarding the photo of Foster the People wearing suits at the MMVA's.

We are the official representatives of Foster the People and would like your help in selecting a photo that is both true to the wikipedia community as well as the band's image and preference.

Can we have your support in selecting one of the band's approved press photos for their wikipedia image?

Thanks for your time.

--Jsmith2122 (talk) 18:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Promotional pictures of the band are certainly eligible for use on Wikipedia if released with the proper copyright/permissions for reuse, but as far as I know, a band-approved image would not necessarily take precedence over another image just because the band has approved its use. Visibility and ease of identification of the subject, along with the Wikipedia project's ability to redistribute the image freely, are the primary concerns for image selection in articles. As it stands, the image of the band at the MMVA's is the clearest image available depicting all 3 band members. The promotional pic you added is darker and harder to see the band in. Although it may be more in line with the band's image or how they wish to portray themselves, it's not a better image for identification. If the group has another image available that would be more appropriate for identification/clarity/etc, then it would certainly be a candidate for use in the article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:35, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for this information, it is very helpful. We will add an image that is clear and that shows the band better. If the new image is up to your and wikipedia's standards, we would appreciate your help keeping the image as the official infobox photo and not using the Much Music Awards picture. Please also let me know if you have any objections to the new image when it is posted and the reasons why. Thanks again!

--Jsmith2122 (talk) 19:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

If an image that you upload is indeed your own work, that's fine - you could use the same copyright/permissions from the first image and upload it to Wikicommons. If not, it would fall under the guidelines WP:Non-free content. Just wanted to let you know before you upload anything. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:24, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you again! We own all of the images I have posted so far. They are official images that the band own. We have given credit to the photographers though. I just updated the image. Please let me know if this is an acceptable image. --Jsmith2122 (talk) 19:34, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Looks like someone has tagged your image - you'll need to demonstrate proof that you either own the image yourself or have received permission from the author to use it on Wikipedia. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:13, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Josh the Tree

I should be able to finish going through the refs this weekend, or failing that early next week; depends on how work on my three essays go. Preliminary thoughts from what I've read so far while going through the refs is that it will need a pretty thorough copyedit before FAC. The prose is very passionate and detailed, but I'm not so sure it is at the level FAC demands. Prose is generally my weakest suit though (most of the Opposes I've had at FAC have been based on that alone), so I may not be the greatest judge of that quality. Journal articles that don't have pages, etc, probably won't be too big an issue. Nikkimaria generally does most of the sourcing at FAC, and she didn't have any problem with a lot of those articles when I nominated "Mothers of the Disappeared" most recently when I explained how we had access to them.

Speaking of "Mothers", my plan was to nominate it at TFAR to coincide with the 25th anniversary of The Joshua Tree. If the album article isn't ready by that date, I think it would be a good fallback as a song from the album (it should still have the date relevence). Or possibly "One Tree Hill", which I think will be my next FAC nomination after I polish away some of the quote farming (as the PR put it), if that is ready. Either way there should hopefully be a couple of good choices for 9 March 2012! Hopefully we will soon be able to get Sarajevo up as well in the next month or so. Melicans (talk, contributions) 04:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Achtung Baby

This is a note to let the main editors of Achtung Baby know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 19, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 19, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Achtung Baby is the seventh studio album by rock band U2. Released on 19 November 1991, it was produced by Daniel Lanois and Brian Eno. Stung by the criticism of their 1988 release Rattle and Hum, U2 shifted their musical direction to incorporate influences from alternative rock, industrial music, and electronic dance music into their sound. Thematically, the album is darker, more introspective, and more flippant than their previous work. Recording began at Berlin's Hansa Studios in October 1990, but the sessions were fraught with conflict, as the band argued over the direction and quality of their music. After nearly breaking up, they made a breakthrough with the improvisation of the song "One". With improved morale, they completed the album in Dublin in 1991. Achtung Baby received favourable reviews and went to number one in several countries. It spawned five hit singles, including "One", "Mysterious Ways", and "The Fly". The album has sold 18 million copies, and in 1993, it won the Grammy Award for Best Rock Performance by a Duo or Group with Vocal. The record and the multimedia-intensive Zoo TV Tour were central to U2's 1990s reinvention. Achtung Baby has regularly appeared on critics' lists of the greatest albums of all time. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 00:03, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	For your work expanding Foster the People. Your contributions are greatly appreciated. Happy editing! -- Luke (Talk) 03:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it! Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:55, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Mylo Xyloto cover

I just wanted to tell you that the album cover for Mylo Xyloto is the one with the grey background. I've yet to see one physical or digital album with the announced cover. I won't change it to the grey background until I've heard otherwise or have seen actual pics of someone owning Mylo Xyloto with the announced cover. Please take this message into consideration and get back to me when you have a word on the subject. Thanks!

Easy4me (talk) 17:22, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Every review of the album or online listing that I've seen (such as that on Metacritic of even Coldplay's own website) has used the full graffiti image. Each format seems to have a different variation of the artwork (e.g. different cut-out/filter), but I think the canonical cover is the full graffiti one. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Reference material at Google Books

Where was it decided not to include convenience links to reference material at Google Books?

-- J. Wong (talk) 18:52, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

There was no explicit decision or consensus, but the general editing pattern for the article has been to not use Google Books as a courtesy link (other references, like Billboard magazines from the 1990s, don't currently have them). I mostly don't like using them because the URL's are too long and having a lot of them can add a lot of length to an article. That said, it's not that big an issue for me, I was just trying to adhere to some kind of consistency. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:20, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

I think convenience for the reader overrides concerns about size (although the article is pretty big). Consistency would apply only to other Spin articles that might be there. -- J. Wong (talk) 03:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Derek Jeter help?

I've been trying to emulate the job you did on Mariano Rivera to get DJ's article up to FA, but based on an oppose vote I just received, I might not have done enough. Would you mind helping me out? Your fresh perspective on that article would be invaluable to me. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:09, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

I have to admit, I'm not as familiar with the ins and outs of Jeter's career like I am Mariano's. I can pretty much tell you what he did each year of his career - Jeter, not so much, so it'll require a lot more research from my end to make sure everything is covered. As part as prose and organization of the article go, I can certainly help with that. I don't know what pace I'll be able to assist at, so I most likely won't be able to "save" the current nomination. Is there a certain area you would like me to start with? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:50, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I can worry about the content, the ins and outs. I don't think there are any criticisms of the level of detail or sourcing. The biggest problem I'm running into is prose. If you could give it a quick look and let me know what you think, then I'd have a better idea of what to do, and whether or not I can get it to pass this time through. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:28, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

It might help if I actually linked you to the review page - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Derek Jeter/archive3. Thought I had initially. Whoops. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

El Camino

hey i saw you are trying hard to improve the article, but there's just a problem, you only want to add the positive things about the album and it's not the way that Wikipedians do. we indicate all the things about albums. if you think something should remove from an article first bring it up in its talk page and let's talk about the whole thing, then we all decide it together to what should we do about that situation. we all want to improve articles, so let's not fight over something, let's discuss our ideas first then put them out there.

thank you Reza ^(Let'sTalk) 21:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to adding negative things, I added the criticisms that The Observer noted throughout its review. But as you can see from the Metacritic rating, reception has been overwhelmingly positive. That is reflected in the weight of positive/negative statements in the prose. If you average the scores of the reviews in the article together, you get roughly the same score that Metacritic shows, so I don't think there is any misrepresenting of positivity/negativity. There is pretty much the same proportion of positive/negative reviews in the article as there are listed on Metacritic (21 positive/2 mixed at MC, 9 positive/1 mixed in article). Furthermore, it's not necessary to split out a paragraph that says "However, not all reviews were positive". That sentence kinda screams "well, duh" (not every review will actually be positive). Hope you see what I'm getting at. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 21:16, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

ok whatever, but it's kinda a "well, duh" and people should know about it. it seems like we the writers are covering for the band and it's so unprofessional for us. and about the allmusic review. in the most articles, at first comes allmusic because it's the most important source of reviews and people looking for it at first and then going to the rest, no matter when the review is published. that was why i put it behind Spin.

and why did you remove the personnel section? please at first bring your ideas in talk page cause with no offence, your edits are getting annoying and it seems like you're bossing around the article. let's talk about what you're doing first then remove contents.

thank you. Reza ^(Let'sTalk) 22:58, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The personnel section was an accidental removal, probably due to an edit conflict on my part. As for the Allmusic review - I don't know what you're talking about when you say "it's the most important source of reviews". That's an opinion, unless there is some Wikipedia policy that says that particular source is preferential to everything else available. In many cases, Allmusic is being downgraded as a reliable source (ratings, for example, for old reviews are arbitrarily decided and don't always match the tone of the reviews). I don't see why we should lead off with it - the most objective thing to do, in my opinion, is just start with the first review published, which was Spin. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:03, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Need your decision

please come and discuss your idea about this stupid thing... Talk:Princess of China#Alternative_Hip_Hop.3F

thank you Reza ^(Let'sTalk) 01:59, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

"One Tree Hill" FAC problem

Hi; hope you're not too busy. I've run into a wee bit of a problem at the "One Tree Hill" FAC. A spotcheck is underway, and there have been some unusual problems. It seems that FN 4a-d, 6a-c, and 9 (all McCormick) are turning up different page numbers in the spotcheck than are present in my book. Can you check your copy to verify that the page numbers are correct? There is also a concern about the use of McCormick in the first two paragraphs of "Inspiration" as it is considered a primary source. Per my reading of WP:PRIMARY I think the usage in paragraph 2 is okay (though readings by other people may differ) as it is used only for a few quotes. Paragraph 1 in that section seems to be a bigger issue, as there is a definite over-reliance on primary sources.

I hate to ask this, but I only came home yesterday and didn't bring my books (they add far too much weight to my luggage for international travel), and I won't have access to them again until 3 January at the earliest. Would you be able to check the sources you have to see if there is anything that can replace McCormick in paragraph 1? There may be a bit too much detail in there to begin with, so if you think it needs a drastic pruning please don't hesitate. If you can't find anything or are unable to help out (understandable given the time of year), please let me know and I'll try to find another workaround to fix this problem. Cheers, Melicans (talk, contributions) 04:47, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks like the last-minute crisis has been averted (phew!) I was able to make some changes courtesy of Google Books and the article was promoted a few hours ago. I'd love to get it on the mainpage on 3 July; it would be nice to see Greg remembered on that day. Do you think we'll be ready to go on Sarajevo in the New Year? Melicans (talk, contributions) 00:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, after I'm not home for the holidays, I'll have access to everything again and will be able to help with whatever articles you'd like to collaborate on. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 05:14, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

I won't be on much between now and the beginning of the New Year, so I'll wish you a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year now (before I forget). Here's to a productive year on Wikipedia, and an even more productive one to come! May you be filled with Achtung spirit, and may the sky not fall down! Happy Holidays! Melicans (talk, contributions) 22:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Adele 21

Hi there. I was just wondering why you reverted the "confessional singer-songwriter" expression from the 21 article. You said it was un-encyclopedic. Why is this? A confessional singer-songwriter is a very standard (and encyclopedic) musical expression; Adele, who performs in same vein as the traditional singer-songwriter, released what is a known as a deeply confessional album about her tumultuous break-up. This article mentions Adele when discussing the "dormant tradition" of the confessional singer-songwriter. I did not think it needed much defending when I was writing the article. My main issue is incorporating the sources, but it's something that I'm currently working on. Orane (talk) 22:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why something about the "near dormant singer-songwriter tradition" is only mentioned in the lead, not the article body. And to me, that sounds like the opinion of a journalist, something you need to attribute to the person and not state as fact. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:11, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

What about the expression is contentious for you? The fact that the tradition is "near dormant", or that fact that the album is a confessional? If it's the former, then that can be easily sourced. If it's the latter, well it's explained throughout the article that the album is a confessional album. It's not that important a point that it has to be spelled out explicitly in the article. Orane (talk) 21:15, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the "confessional" word, but rather the statement "near-dormant singer-songwriter tradition". First, something should only appear in the lead if it's mentioned somewhere in the rest of the article, so yes, please spell it out. Otherwise, it's not essential to the article. Again, the statement "near-dormant singer-songwriter tradition" is someone's opinion (e.g. I don't think it's a dormant tradition), but it is included in the article as if it's fact that singer-songwriters don't write with a confessional tone anymore. Either attribute the original quote to someone or remove the statement. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Just wanted to thank you for your edits to the article. Greatly appreciated, and I see what you mean about the "near-dormant" point. I just had an attachment to the sentence. Orane (talk) 19:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Your honest opinion: do you think it is possible to have the article featured anytime soon? In what area(s) is it lacking? Orane (talk) 20:19, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad to help. I definitely think it's worthy of being a Good Article. You could nominate it now and it would probably pass with ease (and in my opinion, you should always get it to Good Article status first). As far as getting it to be a Featured Article, I still think there needs to be some copyedits, and you'd probably want to make sure descriptions of song styles and things of that nature are properly attributed to the authors. But it's definitely on the fast track to making it there. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 20:34, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Copy that. Will look into the copy edit. That's been my main problem from the start. I'm good at copy-editing other people's work, but can't seem to get my own just right. To be honest, though, I've never been a fan of the good article process due its informality, among other reasons. I'll do my best to incorporate your suggestions. And feel free at any time to dive in and edit away :) Orane (talk) 23:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Little Lion Man (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bluegrass

Roll Away Your Stone (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bluegrass

The Cave (song) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bluegrass

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited El Camino (The Black Keys album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lonely Boy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Snow Patrol Lineup

Hi there, thanks for you contributions RE Snow Patrol. I have been to 2 shows and 1 radio acoustic session in the last 3 months where Johnny McDaid was introduced as a "band member". I heard it with my own ears and he was definitely there. There are numerous examples of this on the internet - <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSAichZXXm4|title=Snow Patrol play Studio Brussel|date=19 December 2011|publisher=youtube|accessdate=20 December 2011}}</ref> where Gary Lightbody openly refers to McDaid as a band member. I was at a TV show here in New York recently where Johnny and Gary performed a song they had written together. They were introduced as "Snow Patrol".

Re: Pumped Up Kicks

User talk:Nikos 1993#Re: Pumped Up Kicks Nikos 1993 (talk) 15:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Occupy Pittsburgh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page KDKA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Source changing

Hello, I would appreciate it if you would stop changing My Best Friends Girl's genre. I had a source for it, It's obvious there's a significant amount of rockabilly in the song, thanks.

MajorHawke (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Quote box styles?

Hi. I noticed you have a concern about quote box layout in W. E. B. Du Bois ... I posted a question at Talk:W._E._B._Du_Bois#quote_box. The article was just promoted to FA status last month, and is scheduled to appear on the WP main page next week, on 23 Feb. My preferences it to have the article in top-notch form for that day. During the GA promotion, peer review, and FA promotion, none of the editors had an issue with the quote box layout. I presume your concern is mostly a matter of taste? Or is there some WP guideline that I'm not aware of that mandates a certain tint for quote boxes? The MOS suggests that, when it is simply a matter of taste, the choice should default to the original style used by the initial authors of the article. Thanks for your help. --Noleander (talk) 17:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

At Wikipedia:MOSQUOTE#Quotations, under the block quotations section, it says, "Block quotations using a colored background are also discouraged". For me, colored or stylized quotation boxes are too distracting - they draw attention away from the prose and instead to the quotation. I can appreciate you wanting to look after the article for its upcoming TFA, which is actually why I glanced over the article recently to look for anything in need. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:57, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. Do you have any objection to (1) enlarging the font size a bit to 90% (I cannot read the default size well, and I presume other wont either since my eyesight is average); or (2) using the default tint employed by the {{quotation}} template (a very light grey)? --Noleander (talk) 19:02, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I presume that the 90% and light grey are okay? I'll go ahead and make those changes. Cheers. --Noleander (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Sure, that's fine. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:55, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Song structure (popular music), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Call It What You Want (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Article restructuring at the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 02:42, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry!

Hi - sorry about the incorrect reversion on Foster The People - I undid your (perfectly correct) cleanup in error. Didn't mean to - and you had already reverted it by the time I noticed. Apologies again. Bonusballs (talk) 13:52, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I assume now you meant to undo the same vandalism that I did. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:54, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

An invitation for you!

	Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. Please accept this invitation to join WikiProject Baseball's Hall of Fame task force. We are dedicated to improving articles relating to baseball Halls of Fame around the world, including their inductees. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to our members page. Happy editing! – Muboshgu (talk) 01:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

RE: No Line on the Horizon

Regarding our previous edits, I started a post at the article's talk page and asked a couple of editors to comment there. Dan56 (talk) 03:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Saturday Night's Alright for Fighting, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you to seek consensus for certain edits. Thank you. Radiopathy •talk• 22:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Someone like You

It surprised me the first time that page was moved, but per WP:Capitals#Composition titles it should be "Someone like You". "Like" is a preposition in that usage, and 4 character prepositions aren't capitalised.—Kww(talk) 17:08, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure?

Are you sure Vampire Weekend never opened for U2? 79.97.153.17 (talk) 17:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

What makes you think Vampire Weekend or Ellie Goulding ever opened for U2? Do you have any reliable sources that say so? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Eyes Open

Are you blind or just an idiot, because there is no composition section on this page, so you adding "Country" back on after saying genres need to be sourced is making you a hypocrite, because it isn't sourced. NYSMtalk page 20:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll just go ahead and ignore the extremely combative tone of your message and assume you are having a bad day. Because I doubt you want me to lodge a complaint against you. To address your concern, I was reverting several genre warrior changes made by an IP editor and this just happened to be one of them. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 21:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Current/Past Members of the Beatles

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:29, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 01:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

You are awesome!

You're the bomb! 24.222.82.103 (talk) 22:53, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 22:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Help Survey

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)

Completed. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:30, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the copyediting on the TASM article. I admit I can overdo it with how I word it on Wikipedia. That's what I get when I am one of the only major contributors on the article. As long as good sources aren't removed I will feel fine though. ;) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:28, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem - if there are problem areas of the article you want looked at, let me know and I'll run through it. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I kind of want the viral campaign section to be trimmed just a little...maybe to the most important details over anything. But other than that I would say the article is mostly doing pretty good. Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 14:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Brad Pitt's page

Hi, you can now link Brad to Not On Our Watch Project's recently-created Wiki page. Leilapaz (talk) 16:15, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Matt Cain's perfect game

Yngvadottir (talk) 16:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

2012 Rolling Stone 500 Greatest Albums for Boy

I believe the reference should go back to the 2003 citation. Although I know the online list has been updated to the 2012 listing, the placement of Boy was unchanged as was the citation text, and the web page makes no reference to either the 2003 or 2012 versions of the list. So the original citation was in 2003, which was published in that year. Furthermore, your edit implies that it was added to the list in 2012 and a reader would not know that it was actually placed there in 2003 and would be unaware of any significance you mean to impart to its having remained on the list in the same position for 9 years.

If you think it should reference the 2012 placement, you still need to reference the original placement, which was the original cite made by the article. And the cite should be to the original magazine article in any case, which is more significant.

Thanks -- J. Wong (talk) 19:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

TFA requests

Does your comment at WP:TFA/R#Nonspecific date 1 constitute an oppose !vote or merely a comment? Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Block quotes vs quote boxes

Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4. I reverted your good-faith edit to Manhunter (film) as it seemed to be a simple misunderstanding. Block quotes, which should have a transparent background, are those which stay in line with the article's prose, and are generated by using <blockquote>TEXT</blockquote>. The result is something like this:

I only mention it because sometimes there's a man... I won't say a hero, 'cause, what's a hero? But sometimes, there's a man. And I'm talkin' about the Dude here. Sometimes, there's a man, well, he's the man for his time and place. He fits right in there. And that's the Dude, in Los Angeles. And even if he's a lazy man—and the Dude was most certainly that. Quite possibly the laziest in Los Angeles County, which would place him high in the runnin' for laziest worldwide. But sometimes there's a man, sometimes, there's a man. Aw. I lost my train of thought here. But... aw, hell. I've done introduced him enough.

Keeping the background clear means that it doesn't disrupt flow in the article as block quotes are intended to be used as part of said prose. However, a quote box is more of an ornamental thing, boxed off to one side much in the manner of an image; a degree of colour there is useful to enforce their role in breaking up large portions of text, again in the same way as an image would. Given that Manhunter is light on images I felt that retaining the little flash of colour as important to keep the text from seeming too dense. I've clearly rambled on too much here, but I figured it was more explaining than I could manage in an edit summary. GRAPPLE X 19:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Request for review

Hi there Y2kcrazyjoker4! I was just wondering whether you could help review the 20–20–20 club list I nominated for FL. I understand that you're probably busy, so there's no need to commit to anything and take as long as you need (as I nominated the list less than a week ago). A quick scan through would be great. Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Sgt. Pepper straw poll

There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:23, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Paterno

You've already exceeded 3RR on Joe Paterno today. I agreed with one of the reverts you made -- but even so, I suggest not editing the article again for a while. thanks. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Don't edit war

Instead of edit warring, please discuss proposed changes to the Joe Paterno article on its talk page [2], per WP policy. Thank you. Qworty (talk) 20:06, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Adam Dunn

I guess you felt too much was devoted to other Sox players? Anyways, I've changed the wording and also added a ref as one was not there before. Zepppep (talk) 16:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

The way you had it written, the other Sox players making the All-Star team was irrelevant to Adam Dunn's article. That info should be in the 2012 Chicago White Sox season article. The way you summarized he was one of 4 players is much better. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Keep in mind I wasn't the original one to mention the 3 other players. I just felt it was misleading to lump all 4 of them into being chosen by their peers; heck, Peavy didn't even win the Final Vote. I was even hesitant editing it to the point I had, because I too was thinking the list was getting a little long and off subject. If readers want to find out who the other 3 are, that's what links are for -- or so I feel. Zepppep (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Baseball Infobox vote

For the most part I've stayed out of the infobox discussion so far, but I am interested in participating in the vote. However, I'm a little unclear on one thing: To pick any of the categories as an example, the All-Star selection seems to indicate that a player must have been selected 14 times to have it listed in the infobox. Is that correct or is it actually that the 14 is the limit? That may be a stupid question, but I just wanted to make sure. AutomaticStrikeout 23:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The text is just an example. There is no quantity cut off. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 04:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, ok. Thank you for the explanation. AutomaticStrikeout 16:14, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests.
Message added 13:47, 20 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cheers, TBrandley 13:47, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Achtung Baby

Regarding this change, it's a fact well established in the article. Although I couldn't find any reference in the article to RS ranking it the 4th best album of the 90s. Perhaps a revert plus the addition of the RS rank is in order? --Merbabu (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2012 (UTC) PS - if not a revert, then a reword? --Merbabu (talk) 23:36, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't have a preference one way or the other. I'm not sure if we need the most acclaimed record of the 90s part, but certainly it being ranked among rock's great albums should be in the lead to reflect the legacy section. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 02:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for following me even onto non-U2 pages to revert my bid to make these pages read a little less like a fansite. I've commented on the relevant album talk pages. Especially when you look at quite how many WP album pages make boasts like this, you realise quite how meaningless these phrases are. On Achtung Baby, it looks as if we could both live with losing the first half of the sentence but keeping the second. N-HH talk/edits 09:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Fifth-highest

I see your concern. However, in the case you are worried about, it would be strange to refer to someone as "fifth highest" as opposed to the "fifth person to ever lead" or "fifth person to hold the record".—Bagumba (talk) 17:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it would definitely be strange to read it that way, but I could definitely see someone doing that, particularly when talking about statistics and ever-changing leaders in those categories. The rules for hyphen use seem to be flexible enough that they would permit it, but flexible enough to allow it to be ommitted, too. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Seeing your perspective, I'm not enough of an expert to insist on removing the hyphen in this case.—Bagumba (talk) 17:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Nexus 7

G'day Y2kcrazyjoker4, I saw you have been improving the article Nexus 7 ever since it was moved from my sandbox. Since you are a major contributor to the article, I want to know if you see any flaws within the article (significant exclusions of info, etc) that need to be addressed. I also request that you be my FAC co-nom in the near future, because you have made significant alterations to the article. Cheers, and have a great day. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 07:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

There are a few things I didn't see in the article - first, the description of the rubberized pockmarked back that many critics loved - and second, the reports of some issues with the LCD display requiring returns. With that said, I think the article is pretty comprehensive at this point and I would love to help you as a co-nominator, but it might be worth waiting until the article is a bit more stable. Several competing products will be released in the coming weeks, and we don't yet have sales figures for the Nexus 7, so much of the article may still change. Hope that helps. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you work on the rubberized back, while I work on the display issues. That'd speed things up, the article would settle more quickly, and hopefully we'll nominate the article for FA sooner. Thanks for the comment; cheers. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 07:09, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm done with the LCD display issues -- I'll just wait for you now, unless you want me to work on it myself. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 05:31, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get the info about the pockmarked back added at some point this week. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:23, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

As the PR is almost over, the FAC is getting closer. Do you have any last-minute concerns? If the answer is no, please get ready :) --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 00:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I honestly don't think that enough time has passed to nominate it for FAC. The device has been on the market for 8 weeks, and the article is probably not stable enough at present to make it through the nomination process. Let's see how the device plays out with consumers or wait until some actual sales figures are released. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 00:44, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

If you say so, let's wait a few weeks. But it doesn't look like sales figures will be released as Google did not release such figures about the Galaxy Nexus. Thoughts? --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 01:08, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

As we let the article settle down for several weeks, are you interested in working with me on a new article? --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 00:54, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

It depends on the article - my availability and potential unfamilarity with the subject might make that difficult. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Harry Houdini (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Magician

Kelen Coleman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bluegrass

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Unexplained removal of sourced content

As you were insisting for a citation in your decision,why do you make precarious changes like this then? & I've seen the other one you did in Rooster as well,both without citation nor properly explained. Bloomgloom talk 13:28, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The changes you are making have been consistently uncited (or not backed up by the reference) or against the consensus/status quo of the article. My "Rooster" edit was my mistake, I thought I was reverting a change by you. In any case, I would recommend reading User:Realist2/Genre Warrior. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:50, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I thought I was reverting a change by you,That's pretty lame it's quite clear that you intentionally edited this & the previous edit by the relative IP is not mine either. Bloomgloom talk 15:50, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hendrix

Thanks for the improved Hendrix photo. It's great and the article sorely needed it. Evenrød (talk) 16:50, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, glad I could help. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Check my brain

Well,yea its not exactly psychedelic & I won't push it further,but there is a term known as 'heavy psych' applied for fuzzy stoner bands like Clutch,Monster Magnet & many other bands originated from Palm desert,CA.And 'BGWTB' is a very much stoner rock-ish album,what do you think personally? Bloomgloom talk 06:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Heads up

Just wanted to tell you if you didn't know already your Jimi Hendrix and John Lennon pictures are nominated for deletion. I don't know if you got the message or not. But I think those photos are great, and it would be a shame if they got deleted. You can discuss the matter by going to the two picture files and clicking on the nomination for deletion box discussion. PositivelyJordan (talk) 22:55, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

I saw that - I don't know Dutch, so I can't truly decipher the copyright status of the archive's images aside from reading the Google Translation. Hopefully, those more informed than me will be able to save the pics. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:26, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of 2012 Green Bay Packers–Seattle Seahawks game for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2012 Green Bay Packers–Seattle Seahawks game is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Green Bay Packers–Seattle Seahawks game until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. SGMD1 ^Talk/_Contribs 19:50, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

AFD you may be interested in

There's an AFD regarding Lance Easley going on right now that relates to the Seattle-Green Bay game here. Go Phightins! (talk) 01:44, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

The penalty would have ended the game

Straight from the NFL statement: "While the ball is in the air, Tate can be seen shoving Green Bay cornerback Sam Shields to the ground. This should have been a penalty for offensive pass interference, which would have ended the game."

Well, of course it would have ended the game. It was the last play of the game, and was not a defensive pass interference penalty (which would have resulted in an untimed down). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 04:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. You have new messages at Talk:2012 Green Bay Packers–Seattle Seahawks game.
Message added 04:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SGMD1 ^Talk/_Contribs 04:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nexus 7, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

What are you trying to do?

Hi, i'm the user who has been reverting you edits in the Muse band article, you want to remove the genre progressive metal, and actually metal, because you say that there aren't enough sources, however the problem i have with you is not that i can't found sources, the problem i have with you is that when i go to muse's talkpage: [3] there is a discussion about adding or not adding the genre progressive metal that shows that it, in fact has 10 sources backing it up (plus two that i've found by myself), and you comented in that discussion, you are aware that there are numerous sources to add prog metal, but now, you are removing it saying that it isn't notable ignoring the discussion in the talkpage in wich you participed, I don't know, but to me this looks as if you are acting in harassive way. Invited (talk) 02:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your unhelpful removal of content

... As you did on iPad mini. The cellular data information is very relevant, so please reformat rather than remove it if you object to its presentation. Thanks. T. trichiura Infect me 18:51, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Neutral notice for Talk:Batman:_Arkham_City#The_Plot

I don't know how to do the neutral notice thing. There is a discussion at the above about the plot for Arkham City for the current one versus a substantially different one. It's a case of 1 stance vs another so it won't go anywhere alone so your input is requested if you have any interest. Thanks for reading. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 22:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

the size readjust was done to fit in section better...for a reason

hello. How are you. Not sure what your issue is with that size matter. What you did though was totally unwarranted, and you gave no explanation for it.

The size readjust was not done willy nilly, but to make it fit better in that section. You reverted WITH NO EXPLANATION, against WP policy.

The size re-adjustment was done for a reason. It fits now in the section, without spilling over into the next one. So what's the problem, sir? Please leave the edit alone.

I meant well. And the re-sizing was arguably needed. It's encouraged by Wikipedia to try to fit images in subsections, so that they don't spill over into other sections, making it look out of place and disorderly.

So, to be frank, you disrespected by good-faith adjustment for NO reason at all, except "you don't like"...again, against WP policy. You didn't explain anything really. Regards. Gabby Merger (talk) 00:16, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

edit-warring over image size?

I took the time to communicate to you, and instead addressing anything now, you just rudely revert, with no explanation yet again. Please stop edit-warring.

Sir, the point is the edit was good faith and you give NO explanation for reverting...you're in violation.

I told you why I readjusted the image. Why are you so against fitting the image better in the section, so that it does not look sloppy going over into the other section? The point is that you had NO WP VALID RIGHT to revert it simply because "you don't like"...

The WP policy is that images CAN be readjusted according to text and according to preferences.

"should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences)"

and

"enough to reveal relevant details without overwhelming the surrounding article text."

There are other things too.

But regardless, what is wrong with trying to fit image more into the section, so that the image does not spill over into other sections?

Why do you have such a problem with that? You want that mini-tablet image to be shown larger I guess. It would be fine IF THAT PARTICULAR SECTION WAS BIGGER. But it's not. But that's all I was trying to do. Why are you so against it? Gabby Merger (talk) 01:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to resize the image. It's not overbearing in size - the upright parameter specifically fits it to a width appropriate for the image's dimensions. The image's size should not be dependent on the amount of prose in the section - if you think the section is too small, then more prose should be added to account for this. The only reason I can think of to resize an image that small is if it is a logo that does not need to take up so much space. On the contrary, this image gives good perspective on the relative size of the tablet compared to a user's hand, and shrinking it does not improve the reader's ability to understand the topic. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 04:11, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

As I said, I actually agree in a way that the other size before that was better...and I never would have reduced the size if the section that the pic is in was a bit longer. The problem (and this is not just my own whim or feeling, but something that's been discussed and suggested in WP for years now) that spill-over into other sections is not the best, though not necessarily wrong per se, but it's preferred (for obvious and logical reasons) that the image where the section belongs to DOES NOT get into other sections, because of size. So yes, in a way, this "Mini tablet" section could be longer. And maybe it will be elaborated upon.

But I'm not sure why the shrunken size took so much away from the proportion-to-hand thing that you're talking about. You can still see the hand in the smaller size of the image. But anyway, to re-iterate, I only did the size reduction because of the section size issue, not for willy nilly reasons out of nowhere. I would have left it alone if the section was bigger. And if there was no annoying spill-over. That's all I'm saying. Regards. Gabby Merger (talk) 04:47, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Psychedelic Pill, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cinnamon Girl (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:46, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Motörhead

I note you have reinstated your edit to Motörhead's genres, with the edit summary "this is not the way genres are supposed to be written for one, and secondly, "rock and roll" is not backed up by the reference

I agree that the capitalization was incorrect; as Template:Infobox_musical_artist#genre states:- most genres are not proper nouns and should not be capitalized. However, the first word in a list of multiple genres should be capitalized.

However, I am confused by your statement "secondly, "rock and roll" is not backed up by the reference" as there is no reference attached to the genres, whereas there are 96 to the article.

Motörhead's genres are frequently changed, which is why there is the warning in hidden text, not to change them without discussion. There has been much discussion on the talk page, including several references to "rock and roll". To quote just one reference [4] "The music is exactly what you'd expect. We're pretty much set in our ways," Kilmister said. "It's straight-ahead rock ‘n' roll. It is not heavy metal."

Arjayay (talk) 14:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

There is a hidden comment directly before the genres in the infobox that is a link to the band's Allmusic entry, with no mention of "rock and roll" as a genre. I also would like to point out that the "rock n' roll" colloquialism that is used to refer to the rock star lifestyle/attitude is not synonymous with the rock and roll genre that originated in the 50's with music like Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, and Elvis Presley. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:25, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I missed the hidden comment, but Allmusic are not the arbiters of these things, and, as shown in the reference above, Lemmy was not referring to the life-style, but the music. If you have ever seen Motörhead, you probably heard Lemmy's standard introduction "We are Motörhead and we play rock and roll" Arjayay (talk) 14:46, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:BackToTheFutureLogo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:BackToTheFutureLogo.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Genre addition for The Killers

Do you have a source for The Killers being in the genre of heartland rock? We should only place genres in the infoboxes of band articles that are sourced, otherwise it can lead to edit warring over editors' subjective thoughts on genres. Angryapathy (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

The band is no stranger to the "heartland" descriptor.... [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:U360-at-the-rose-bowl-cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:U360-at-the-rose-bowl-cover.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Daddy's Gonna Pay for Your Crashed Car (U2 song)

Hello Y2kcrazyjoker4, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Daddy's Gonna Pay for Your Crashed Car (U2 song), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A10 wouldn't apply to a good faith expansion compared to a redirect. Especially not if there are possibilities to merge. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. And why would you remove the links if you see potential for an article?[10] Tikiwont (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

In all honesty, I don't think there are expansion opportunities. The songs are non-notable and currently just duplicated info from the album article (except for live performance info). I don't see why a separate topic is needed for the songs when there are articles that already exist for them and already have an editing history (as it stands they are redirects but at one time did have content). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 21:02, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

That's a fair argument but somewhat different from what A10 is about not least because it has a redirect clause. If the songs are still not deemed notable enough the answer might then be to redirect the new creations as well. To facilitate things I'll do the merge. Cheers--Tikiwont (talk) 21:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Layla

I wonder if you can fix issues that I raised in article talk page. --George Ho (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Layla/archive2. --George Ho (talk) 04:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Holding My Own (The Darkness song) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to The Scorpions

Hot Cakes (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Dan Hawkins

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Nexus 7 issues

The nexus 7 is a nice device I own one, but it has firmware issues. People should know , if you have a nexus 7 drain it your self and see the pain people are seeing.

Wilee (talk) 14:41, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

I have a Nexus 7 and have had no issues. Google has made no comment about the issue, nor is there any information available about how widespread the issue is. Thus, I don't think it warrants a mention in the article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:43, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Notifying you that Batman Arkham City is up for FAC

I've nominated this article again, it failed last time not through opposition but lack of interest. It's a quality article encompassing all the available information in a neat, presentable and interesting way, so I hope you can lend your voice to the discussion if you have the time. Thanks for reading. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm in the process of writing a challenge map section as we speak, just difficult to find sources for it. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 16:51, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the Gameplay reorg, wanted to do the same thing once the ref spot check was done. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Glad I could help. I posted on the article talk page about a few things I think would be valuable additions to the Gameplay section. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

• I don't know if you're interested in the first game but I'm in the process of building up Batman: Arkham Asylum now, try and get that to FAC too, would appreciate your input. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I'd be glad to help copyedit the article and point out any areas that need expansion. Work on the Asylum article may even benefit the City article if we come across items while working on the former that we want to incorporate into the latter. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

At the moment I've expanded it as much as I can and am trying to make sure everything is sourced so I don't end up in the situation I did with Arkham City, where pretty much every item of info added before I started working on it ended up being unsourced, I spent most of the FAC process just fixing that. Some of the gameplay still needs sourcing but not much, and I can't find any info on the comic really, and some of the awards. Other than that, the big thing will be copy editing and then formatting all the refs and archiving them properly. But definitely if any information you can think of that can be added or you know of, let me know/add it. It's a bit harder with this game because searching for "Batman: Arkham Asylum" will bring up either the graphic novel by Morrison or Arkham City articles where they mention Arkham Asylum. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:19, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I have a question about the info you added to Arkham City a few months ago about it being sixth rated of all time. I was looking at the info to see if it was at all applicable to Asylum, but looking at the source, a version of Arkham City is third highest rated if I'm reading it correctly at 96, with only , am I misremembering your reasoning or is this not the correct source? Darkwarriorblake (talk) 13:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Excluding the duplicate GTA4 entry (for a different console) from the Metacritic list, there are 5 unique games with ratings higher than 96. Thus any game with a score of 96 would be tied as the sixth-highest-rated game. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 00:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:You-got-served-poster.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:You-got-served-poster.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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:06, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Grouplove Logo

Hey,

Was just curious, why do you keep removing the Grouplove logo from the article's infobox. I apologize for restoring it multiple times without messaging you, I am just wondering if there is any other place in the article where the logo could work better. I feel that adding the logo to the article would help better represent the band Grouplove. Would love to hear your concerns.

Thanks, --Carmenshields (talk) 00:36, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Per Template:Musical artist, an image of the artist is to be used in the image field. I don't know if the logo can be added elsewhere in the article, but generally unless it is a very famous, widely used logo, musical artist logos tend to be removed from articles because they are non-free content. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 03:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast response! Will keep in mind, thought though since that is the official logo of the band and used on all of their album art that would be acceptable under fair use. Thanks. --Carmenshields (talk) 01:10, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Snow Patrol Chasing Cars.ogg)

Thanks for uploading File:Snow Patrol Chasing Cars.ogg. 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:01, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Links

Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4. Re: our discussion here, I was hoping to get some clarification on my question. I read WP:OVERLINK but am still wondering why the links were not inserted earlier in the article instead of later? Any light you could shed would be appreciated. Best Robvanvee 10:00, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I can't tell you for certain, it may have just been an oversight on the part of the editors. Or perhaps the links were there and were at one time removed. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Zooropa

Hi, I'd like to apologise for my handling of a relatively minor disagreement with you over this article a few days ago. I'm not an habitual multiple reverter and am extremely embarrassed at having resorted to such behaviour. I disagreed with your interpretation and having had a bad day wasn't in the mood to enter into a sensible debate. Childish, and I apologise again for that. I shan't revert your edit again. FWIW, my take on it is that, along with many U2 followers, the reviewer saw Zooropa as the final flourish of the ideas and music that came out of the Achtung Baby sessions, Zooropa coming as it did as an extended EP in the midst of a tour to promote the previous album. From that viewpoint, the phrase "coda" would appear to make sense. Whether technically true or given one's individual interpretation of what the reviewer's ultimate viewpoint was, I thought that at least illustrating what is perhaps a less familiar term to some readers might be useful. Whatever, it's really not worth falling out over. I imagine that we will come into contact again at some point in the future and I hope that this episode doesn't adversely colour your opinion of me going forward. Best regards, danno_uk 00:22, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate it. I wouldn't worry about it too much though. My only problem is that Zooropa doesn't fulfill the definition of "coda" as specified in coda (music) so much as it just fulfills the generic dictionary definition of "coda". Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Inception

Hello! See Talk:Inception for a discussion about mentioning the nationality in the lead section. Since the nationality is disputed, at the very least we should not mention anything in the lead sentence. In absence of that, identifying the language is a proper cultural alternative. TheOldJacobite is another editor that endorses the use of this term. For example, Amour (2012 film) is a French-language film that has a mix of different underlying nationalities. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

There is a related discussion at WT:MOSFILM#Nationality in lead sentence, if you're interested. Erik (talk | contribs) 16:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, I was not aware of that discussion. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Stone Temple Pilots

Would you mind going back and changing all your "number one" to "No. 1" (or similar) for this article? You changed all of them, and this isn't correct when referring to chart positions, etc. I would normally gladly point you to proof of the matter, but the Manual of Styles have changed so much since this article became GA that it would be more a waste of my time hunting this down than anything. Besides, I opened up a query at WikiProject Albums MOS, but I doubt there'll be a response for a very long time. Thanks ahead of time. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:05, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree. I haven't seen any articles, songs or albums, pass through through the FAC process successfully using the abbreviation "No." instead of "number". Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 05:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Believe it or not, in that case, that's ok. There's a gap in consistency between GA and FA articles that are pretty noticeable. (Another one is citing websites: in GA, there've been discussions that approved listing example.com in the work parameter of a citation template, while FA wants those websites listed in the publisher parameter.) Are you intending on taking STP through the FA process? If you interested, I ran it through a peer review one or two years ago and it got some feedback. That's as far as I had time to take it, at the time. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 07:58, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough about the album to take it through the FAC process, unfortunately. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh ok. I see you've got some FAs under your belt. I tried it with a shorter article a few years ago, and the process wasn't what I expected. Every piece of criticism boiled down to "flow", and that's just the most abstract bit of advice I've ever heard. I get discouraged if I can't reach the top, so I stopped writing and moved into imaging. But I may try the FAC process again in the future. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 20:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Wish

I just was reading some interview of you and another members of Wikiproject u2, and I saw that you were looking for new users to fill the list of members so they can help to increase the articles. I've been following U2 for almost 7 years, I'm now 18, so I'm sure I can help at least a little. So I need some answer. Please, reply to my talk page as soon as you reed this. Thank you and sorry for the bothers. kind regards.

Template:Respuesta MissBono (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject U2 needs your help!

Hello! This message is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please join the discussion on the talk page!Miss Bono (talk) 12:49, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Arena rock

Since when did you decide that it wasn't a genre? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Since it's not listed in List of rock genres, nor does the arena rock article identify it as a genre. It's a performance style/marketing term/buzzword. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

This is precisely the case for cock rock as well. Both terms are used as broad-sweeping blanket statements to identify artists from multiple genres that satisfy certain criteria. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll discuss at the List of rock genres then. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Y2kcrazyjoker4, you have been making a very large number of edits around genres. Genres are often a source of disagreement on Wikipedia. I suggest the way forward is to consider basic Wikipedia policies around reliable sources and consensus. Perhaps it would be useful for you to seek some consensus on a project page before making so many changes, and considering what reliable sources say more. Bondegezou (talk) 09:50, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Please

I need som response to the message for input the Wikiproject U2. Miss Bono (talk) 19:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Bono's talk

I left you a message on Bono's talk. Miss Bono (talk) 13:35, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Led Zep

The reason I haven't really pursued the changes to this article, despite the obvious problems, in case you are not aware, is this.--SabreBD (talk) 15:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

What obvious problems are you talking about? I asked you 100 times to name one specific problem, which you failed to do. MadeinJapan (talk · contribs) 16:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

I see - I was not aware of this. Thanks for letting me know. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:11, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Just to say thanks for your efforts in maintaining the quality of this article. I really appreciate them.--SabreBD (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Join The Discussion

Please, feel free to join this discussion   Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:57, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Message from WikiProject U2 (April 2013)

Announcements and news for WikiProject U2
April 2013: Update: there is currently a roll call going on at the project's talk page. If you are actively participating in the project please add your signature to the list. If you do not, you will be listed as inactive. Your name will be moved to the Inactive/former members section and/or the the project userbox will be removed from your user page. Thanks for your help!

You are receving this because your username is listed in Category:WikiProject U2 members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile and move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list.
Cheers.

–pjoef (talk • contribs) 09:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject U2 invitation

Hello! This message is to inform you that Wikipedia:WikiProject U2 needs your input! Please, join this discussion on this talk page!

You may add yourself to our member list below by clicking here!

Project U2 member list

Melicans (talk · contribs) 14:11, 21 June 2007 (UTC) Dream out loud (talk · contribs) 16:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC) Pjoef (talk · contribs) 16:43, 10 February 2008 (UTC) The 80s, from Boy to Rattle and Hum plus the ONE Campaign Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk · contribs) 03:05, 22 April 2010 (UTC) Lemurbaby (talk · contribs) 03:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC) Difop (talk · contribs) 20:26, 19 October 2012 (WEST) Miss Bono (talk · contribs) 11:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC) The entire career of the band plus Bono and Ali Hewson. Cullen328 (talk · contribs) 22:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC) Teancum (talk · contribs) 14:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC) PBASH607 (talk · contribs) 03:13, 18 June 2013 (UTC) Mayast (talk · contribs) 19:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC) Upcoming songs and album (2014) c_meindl (talk · contribs) 10:45, 6 February 2014 Taking a WikiPedia class and had to join a WikiProject. I am interested in supplementing song stubs and articles! atuldeshmukh1 (talk · contribs) Calidum (talk · contribs) Wish I had seen this sooner. 01:00, 11 September 2014 (UTC) Fylbecatulous (talk · contribs) returning to active status; just based on a feeling... Fylbecatulous talk 15:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC) [[User:<Pushandturn>|<Pushandturn>]] ([[User talk:<Pushandturn>|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/<Pushandturn>|contribs]]) 00:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC) optional: Im a longtime U2 fan and I went to the U2 360 tour and love sharing their music!

 Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:39, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Eve Hewson

What happened to the personal life section of her article?? And what her infobox doesn't show James Lafferty as her boyfriend?????? please reply! Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:50, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't know, I didn't touch the article except adding Wikilinks... Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Was it a vandalism of User:John ?? He didn't explained why he did that!.. Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:57, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't know, I would recommend you consult the article history for specifics. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

This is the closest it says: (cur | prev) 21:08, 4 April 2013‎ John (talk | contribs)‎ . . (4,012 bytes) (-682)‎ . . (ce, trim unref and repetition) (undo)  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

BTW, Thanks for signing for the WP U2. Cheers! Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

If you click the "prev" link next to any edit, you can see the changes between that version and the previous version of the article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I just check that and he deleted the whole section and the name of her boyfriend without an explanation.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The explanation is in the edit summary: "unref" means the information was unreferenced. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

What's Next

What can we do to keep improving the WP: U2?? I need your help on That.Pleaseee :)  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:03, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your attention, If you know what I mean  Miss Bono (zootalk) 15:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Bono's Article

What do you suggest as those 'more pressing matters for the article'.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:13, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Y2kcrazyjoker4!
If you have time, please reply to Miss Bono. I know you have worked as a primary contributor on many articles about U2. Miss Bono is new to Wikipedia and she is not familiar with it.
Thank you so very much. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 19:12, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm very busy at the moment. I will have to respond with more thought in care in a few days. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 20:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

info

The u2 2010 concert in Barcelona was notice for the uncompliment of the sounds level and municipal law, the angry neighbours concentration and the fees paid by an "ecologic" group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.39.155.209 (talk) 21:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2013

Look, I'm not going to give you the generic warn, but don't change genres without sources or consensus. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:48, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to In the Evening, without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

This includes Immigrant Song, Silversun Pickups, and especially Run (Snow Patrol song). You have written FAs in the past. You perfectly know how WP:NOR works. Stop and discuss or cite. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

You will also know, since you edit the genres of several articles, that Snow Patrol was never included in the Britpop movement and it is quite distinct from the post-Britpop movement they do fall under. I will not let the sloppy writing style of some random author of a Spin magazine article lead to inaccurate information being added here. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:17, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know that, but it is not my or your work to decide when references are wrong or right, just to cite them as they were written. If you have a problem with Spin calling them "Britpop", or if you assume their are "post-Britpop", contact Spin or Andrew Beaujon and complain with them; or open a RSN case to decide why Spin is incorrect and it should not be cited this way. Also, this doesn't explain the other addition of unsourced genres to non-SP songs. Read WP:GWAR (if you haven't) to know how you are acting with those unsourced and original changes in this moment. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Check out Allmusic: it lists Britpop as a genre for Oasis, but not for Snow Patrol (or the album "Run" is from). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:25, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

"SP is not listed as Britpop, therefore they are not Britpop", still being original research. Stop edit-warring or WP:AN3 will be involved here. You are not a newbie, stop acting as one. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Run (Snow Patrol song). Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The boilerplate message really does not add any value to this discussion. Look: This very article from Spin discusses the work of 4 bands from the post-Britpop movement. It says post-Britpop in the review of Embrace's album but interchangeably uses the Britpop term in the section's title. It's clear here the publication is not applying any consistency to the terms and thus is not a great source to derive this information from. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Another article that says Snow Patrol is post-Britpop. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:34, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The warn is a generic message to tell you "stop, or ANx will be required. As I told you, you have the option to contact either, the magazine or Andrew Beaujon. They are not Tom Cruise or Barack Obama or any other celebrity to ignore your messages, but instead you continued changing genres, first from AR and PBP to Rock alone, you are changing all of them without any evidence the song itself is any of them. The song has a genre, the album may have other. Madonna raps in American Life (song), should rap be added to the genre of the song and the album without references but "because the song is a pop rap/hip hop/rap song, it has those genres"? Of course not without evidence that seconds you. The same here. Alternative rock was there for years until I found the song genre is Britpop due to that reference. No source mentioned or called "Run" as "alternative rock", if not, it would have both genres. Your Spin's reference still trivial and still original research. The ref you are complaining was written by Beaujon, the source about the album was written by Mikael Wood about the album, and the third one is from another newspaper. You are now combining references to make a fact, per WP:NOR "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any of the sources." I mentioned your FAs because if you include unsourced content or original research, what are going to do the FA reviewers: pass your article with unsourced alleged ideas or pass it with those supported by references? Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 23:48, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

If some hack at Pitchfork decided to write an ironic article that called the song "rap", would you blindly just add it to the article and say "yep, that's rap" without using any common sense or discretion? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

If the article uses irony in a sense like "Madonna has now become the greatest rapper thanks to 'American Life'", no, it is likely joking about Madonna, not the song. Also, if your point is "Beaujon is wrong" or assume he is wrong (cn per WP:BLP) his review has nothing to do with irony as he is not using irony in it. You can't use the performer main genre in all the songs s/he/they have released. Leona Lewis's main genre is R&B, should Hurt: The EP be labeled as R&B because of that, or viceversa? WP:NOR seconds that you can't do changes without proper sourcing. Other solutions are that you search for consensus to change the genre somewhere like talk page--I don't remember the article, but I once removed a genre that included no reference. I was reverted with the summary "consensus on talk page"--, contact Spin or Beaujon, find a reliable reference citing "alt. rock or post-Britpop", use WP:RSN, but do not change genres by simply alleged "ideas or facts", especially if they are based upon your experience. The truth is not always a reliable source: "the sky is blue, you don't need a reference for that, right?". Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 00:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Please see

Talk:Immigrant Song Mlpearc (powwow) 18:31, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

WP: U2 Newsletter for May 2013

Hello, I need some of your help to add fresh information to the U2 News' section here Wikipedia:WikiProject_U2/Outreach/newslettermay13. Thanks!  Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Ok

I'll step back.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:41, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I don't mean to be critical, but usually reviews/nominations are handled in a very linear process (not to mention the Featured Article nomination will most likely bring up some issues that would have been found in the peer review). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:44, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

I will totally step back.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 20:03, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Also I wanted to know where is the right time to post May 2013 Newsletter???  Miss Bono (zootalk) 20:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

WP U2 New barnstar

Take a look and give us your opinion on the WP U2 discussion. Thanks  Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:23, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

WP: U2 Newsletter for May 2013

The U2 WikiProject Newsletter WikiProject U2 Issue VIII - 1st May 2013 If you would like to contribute on the revamping of the WikiProject, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. You may also contact our project coordinator Miss Bono. If you would like to help out with future newsletters, please contact the Outreach Department.
Quote of the month “ You can cover the world with your thumb Still so big, so bright, so beautiful. ” — U2, "Stateless" U2 News Apr 28, 2013 – Promoter of U2’s Red Rocks concert Barry Fey dead at 73. Apr 25, 2013 - Bono revealed the working title of the new album is "10 Reasons to Exist" The band have been recording in Dublin, New York and the South of France over the last few months. Jan 2013 – New species of trapdoor spider Aptostichus bonoi named after Bono. Nov 04, 2010 – U2, Gaga, Metallica, Swift Win Big at Billboard Touring Awards Dec 14, 2009 – U2 Scores Top Tour of 2009, Second of Decade. Mar 03, 2009 – New York names street 'U2 Way'. Dec 12, 2008 – Nobel laureates crown U2's Bono 'man of peace' Project News We are looking to update the Tasks section at the Main Page of WikiProject U2. Please, if you want to collaborate feel free to contact Miss Bono The Collaboration of the Fornight Department is now available. Feel free to visit it! The The Outreach Department is also available. Feel free to visit it! We have now the Morleigh Steinberg's article. Cleanup listing for WikiProject U2 is available. Slug (song) has been FA nominated by Dream out loud. Wide Awake in Europe has been GA nominated by Dream out loud. Cullen328 is working on an article about the controversial Vaillaincourt Fountain in San Francisco. U2 played at the fountain in 1987. Member News We have updated the Membership list. There are four new members this month. Picture of the month U2 perform at Charlottesville, VA on October 1, 2009 U2 performing at Charlottesville, VA on October 1, 2009, during their worldwide U2360º Tour, launched in support of the group's 2009 album.	From the Editors Welcome to the May edition of the WikiProject U2 Newsletter. This month's theme is No Line on the Horizon, the twelfth studio album by U2. The Album No Line on the Horizon was released on 27 February 2009. It marked the longest gap between studio albums of U2's career. The band originally intended to release the songs as two EPs, but later combined the material into a single record. The supporting U2 360° Tour, spanning 2009 to 2011, was the highest-grossing concert tour in history, with ticket sales over $736 million. The singles for this album were "Get on Your Boots", "Magnificent", "I'll Go Crazy If I Don't Go :Crazy Tonight" The Album's Cover Hiroshi Sugimoto (Berlin, 2008) The cover art for No Line on the Horizon is a photograph of Lake Constance, taken by Japanese photographer Hiroshi Sugimoto; titled Boden Sea, it is one of 200 pictures in his Seascapes collection. New Members Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:10, 3 April 2013 (UTC) Unreal7 (talk · contribs) 12:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC) Teancum (talk · contribs) 14:08, 6 April 2013 (UTC) Fylbecatulous talk 12:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC) Did You Know? That the word "baby" is on Achtung Baby twenty-seven times. That Bono's first car was a secondhand Fiat Uno 127. He had an accident driving that car, crashing into a telegraph pole. That the full name of the song "United Colours" is "United Colours of :Plutonium"? That "Winter" and "White as Snow" were both written for the 2009 film Brothers? That "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" is the most covered U2 song?
Article Statistics Make visible or invisible by clicking [show] or [hide], respectively.	Notes Make visible or invisible by clicking [show] or [hide], respectively.
Written by Miss Bono.

WP: U2 Newsletter for May 2013

Please, join this discussion. We are happy to hear new suggestions for next Newsletters. Thank you.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 15:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

WP U2 Revamped New Barnstar

We apologize for any inconvenience that this may cost. Please, Take a look at the WP U2 Revamped New Barnstar and give us your opinion on the project discussion. Thanks  Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Good job keep Mariano Rivera's page up to date. Keep up the good work. NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 20:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Ad:Nexus 7: Difference between revisions

Ad:Nexus 7: Difference between revisions

Please explain your motives before reverting again. Thanks. --Nux (talk) 22:10, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Only one site has even touched on this topic and not a reliable one, at that. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Ad:Nexus 7: Revision history

Ad:Nexus 7: Revision history

It's a Google's tablet why not just google the information ;-P. I haven't found a single success story and also have the tablet in question and microphone doesn't work. Not important? Well try to talk with an 8-inch tablet at your ear. --Nux (talk) 18:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Neither of those references are reliable sources. It appears a lot of original research was done on this subject. And I haven't read a single review by a critic that brought this up. Tablets aren't going to have every possible feature, just because something was omitted doesn't mean it needs to be haphazardly added to the article as if it's a problem. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Reports of users are real problems. That's not original research. OR would be if I would say I tried one of my headphones and it doesn't work. I've tired more then one, but that could be a problem with my device. Problem is there are reports from all over the world about non-functional external mic and no success stories. Not even one. Also look at this - note that ifixt makes teardowns and also did a teardown of Nexus 7.

As for why this wasn't noticed by reviewers - they usually don't have time to test throughly. See here when one of the users assumed it worked, but then noticed it's actually tablet microphone that pick up sound. --Nux (talk) 09:42, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Please do not make the link public. Here is a rough translation:

ASUS CASEID=RTM20130509xxxxxx-xxx

Dear Customer.

Thank you for contacting Technical Support Asus.

Nexus 7 is not a phone and there is no calls function. The ability to use the SIM card is only for accessing the Internet.

Your device has a headphone jack and two built-in microphones.

Sorry for the earlier confusion. I did not think you want to use the tablet as a phone. These are not equivalent devices.

Hope this will end our small editwar. --Nux (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

No Line on the Horizon Box Set

I was wondering if I can upload a shot I took of the complete Box Set version of the album just like you did with The Joshua Tree. can you help my with the policy and those tricky stuffs?? Miss Bono (zootalk) 15:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Grace (U2 song)

Need some revision. Thanks.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I will open a discussion at Grace's Talk. Please, join. Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

One Tree Hill for TFA

What do you think of it??? Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:33, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

reverted Portlandia edit of mystery

I undid your revision to Portlandia (TV series) because you did not explain the reasoning for removal. As a longtime editor, I am surprised you don't habitually provide an edit summary. Perhaps in the future you could make more of an effort to explain why you are making a change. Possibly this will benefit even you when you look back years later at edits, as well as those who monitor Recent changes, an article's edit history, and individual editor's watchlists. —EncMstr (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Random Access Memories

WP:ACCESS is a Wikipedia style guideline that must be followed. WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason to remove it; and plenty of articles implement it.  — Statυs (talk, contribs) 02:21, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Leader vs. Champion

Hi. Hope all is well. I noticed you changing "champion" to "leader", as here. I was wondering why. Some people might think them equivalent, and wonder why one would change a perfectly appropriate format that was first chosen to a second format. Some people might think, as I do, that champion is better, as it connotes that one is a champion for the period in question -- a champion is only a champion at the end of the period in question, while one can be a leader any day of the season on a leaderboard and not be the champion at the end of the day. Third -- indeed, the list linked to is entitled a list of champions. Thought I would ask your thoughts in making the change. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I see your point. However, the term "champion" usually seems to be associated with an organized competition or team title and not with leading in a statistical category. I think this would be something the WikiProject Baseball should gather a consensus for. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 05:10, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Cite web vs news

Saw your edit summary about using {{cite web}} if the source is found on the web. However, this is contrary to the documentation, which says it is used "to create citations for web sources that are not characterized by another CS1 template." In fact, pretty much all these templates have a url parameter. Not sure if it make any difference as far as formatting. I don't really care if it gets changed back, but maybe one less thing for you to worry about enforcing in the future. Cheers.—Bagumba (talk) 01:11, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

If this article appeared in a physical newspaper, I would agree with it being a news citation. However, I would assume you found this on the web and don't know if there is even a physical version of the article or not. If that's the case, would this not be handled the same way as any other web site (e.g. a web citation)? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 05:07, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

There's nothing at cite news that says it has to be a physical newspaper. If a website is affiliated with a news organization, I usually opt for cite news, whereas MLB.com I would use cite web. At any rate, I see your perspective at least. —Bagumba (talk) 05:25, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 1987]], [[1991 World Series|1991]]), [[Major League Baseball All-Star Game|MLB All-Star Game]] ([[1985 Major League Baseball All-Star Game|1985]], and [[NCAA Men's Division I Basketball

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

U2 Rock band

Hey!! I added a source. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2009/10/68500358/1 I do have the image of the cover of the game. besides why you always appear to revert my edits and not when I ask for your help?? Ms.Bono^(zootalk)☆ 17:28, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

For a band that has been around 37 years, how is speculation that the band was considering doing their own video game 4 years ago worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia article? Anyways, the Rock Band series has concluded development, there is no chance that a U2 Rock Band will ever be released. If the game was going to happen, it would have been made by now. No news has appeared on this topic since 2009, anyways. The reason I don't help with everything you ask is sometimes the requests you make seem like spam - I don't really have the time or energy to be working on barnstars and newsletters. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:41, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry then. But what about when I asked you for help with GA or FA promotions? And you could explain me that the first time I asked you for help so I wouldn't waste my energy and time trying to catch someone's (I thought it would be interested in the subject) attention with spams. Anyways, sorry for all these month of spaming (which were things of a new editor getting used to WikiLife and looking for help of major editors in her interest area). I will try to find my own way around here without bothering you.

P.S. I admire you for all your work with U2 related subjects.

Bye forever.

Ms.Bono^(zootalk)☆ 17:52, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Whole Lotta Love

Hello Y2kcrazyjoker4,

I don't want be involved in genre wars about this song but "heavy metal" is not the genre which can be used to describe "Whole lotta love". I agree Led Zeppelin is a pioneer of the "heavy metal" genre, but I don't think it's a reason to describe the band itself (nor its sound) as "heavy metal". In fact, I think the word "heavy metal" is improperly used to describe any heavy rock sound, even if it's not heavy metal. For example, AC/DC sound is often describe as a "heavy metal" because it is quite heavy, even if it's more described as "hard rock" or "blues rock" by music critics. Heavy metal is a genre which features too much subgenres to be used like this, especially for the "so-called" first heavy metal bands such as Led Zeppelin or Deep Purple.

Led Zeppelin is much more a hard rock/proto-metal band rather than a true "heavy metal" band such as Judas Priest, Metallica or Iron Maiden, and Whole lotta love is a perfect example of a hard rock/proto-metal song with blues influences which looks like heavy metal but which is not really heavy metal. For example, this reference talks about the the proto-metal crunch of “Whole Lotta Love.” and supports my view. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:15, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

That's all well and good, and I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I hear a lot of opinions in your message, unfortunately. I see the source you provided calls the song "proto-metal", but there are many, many other reliable sources that have called the band (and most likely the song) simply "heavy metal". I don't really see the point in getting specific about whether it's "proto" or not, the "proto-metal" term redirects to heavy metal music anyways and it seems like it's all semantics about timeframe and what not. All I know is that Led Zeppelin were considered one of the first heavy metal bands, not a precursor to the genre (which is what the "proto" prefix would imply). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 02:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I know Led Zeppelin is very often regarded as one of the very first heavy metal bands (Allmusic describes the band as the first "true metal band" for example) and I agree some Led Zeppelin songs can be described as heavy metal songs, such as Immigrant Song (even if the song is more often described as a "hard rock" or a "proto-metal" song by music critics) and the . But not all Led Zeppelin songs are heavy metal songs. Nobody's Fault but Mine or Black Dog are for example described as hard rock/blues rock songs by references that are found on the two Wikipedia articles and like Nobody's Fault but Mine, Whole Lotta Love borrowed elements from blues songs. So I don't think "heavy metal" should be used to describe "Whole Lotta Love" (which is certainly not the heaviest song Led Zeppelin recorded) because the opening riff of the song is closer to hard rock rather than heavy metal (and the part after the psychedelic interlude too). Synthwave.94 (talk) 01:43, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. You have new messages at Theroadislong's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mullen and Clayton

I have added info to Clayton and added a picture to Mullen. Please check both up. Thanks! Miss Bono ^[zootalk]☆ 18:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

U2 by U2 and U2 iPod Special Edition

Hi Y2kcrazy...

I am a little worried because, there is nothing about U2 by U2 or The U2 iPod Special Edition in U2 main article. I was wondering if it is okay to add something about that? Can I do it by myself or you will do it? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 16:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

The U2 iPod is mentioned in the 2000-2006 section. I'm not sure the U2 by U2 book is important enough that we need to mention it in the band article, though. For example, the band's compilation album and reissues aren't mentioned either, otherwise the article would become bogged down with details. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:48, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I get it, I just thought that as U2 by U2 is the story of the band told by the band, it deserves to be mentioned in the article. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 17:30, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Photo of Odin Lloyd

I don't think the photo of Odin Lloyd was spam. Perhaps it should be deleted on grounds that a link to a picture is not a recommended Wikipedia practice.--Gciriani (talk) 20:19, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

FA possible articles

Hi kcrazy,

I am asking you for help since you are one of the best editors who works in U2 related articles. Melicans left a message here about possible U2 FA article and I would like you to check them. Thanks, your annoying co-worker

Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:55, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Adam Clayton Article

Hello, I added a couple of thing to the article. would you mind to take a look at it and fix whatever it's wrong. Thanks. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 16:18, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

All done. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I will add more tomorrow, would you mind reviewing it too? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 19:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Recent edit: Alternative music

See this. Do you think it should stay that way or the previous one? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 12:37, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm undecided on the change, but leaning towards "it needs to be reverted because it is uncited". Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:01, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

I will revert it. Thanks for the thoughts. Oh, we have an upcoming interview for us in the Signpost. more details in the WPU2 talk. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 15:16, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Robin Thicke may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Blues & Soul'', November 2008 |publisher=Bluesandsoul.com |date= |accessdate=2013-06-30}}</ref>}}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:31, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

U2 Barnstar!

		The U2 Barnstar
		I hereby award you the U2 Barnstar for your efforts in helping Wikiproject U2. Congratulations! I know we are not good friends but we have one thing in common, U2. I wanted to say thank you for everything you do for the project. And I admire you... Enjoy this barnstar. Miss Bono [zootalk] 13:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate the kind words. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome. I hope we can solve our differences in the near future. And sorry if I have done something that bothers you in any way. I didn't mean to. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Walk On Video

We have a section for the two videos of the song. I need, if possible that you find some reference to source that whole section or at least the part that says that one of the videos was filmed in Rio de Janeiro. Thanks. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 15:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

At the moment, I've found this. Not sure if there is a better source available. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:18, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok thank you so much. I cannot follow the link due to my internet restrictions, but it surely works. Can you add it to the article? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 16:37, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

walk on the whole article

I am trying to improve the article, but due to my lack of Internet access I cannot find anything to add to the Composition and theme section. Do you think you can find something similar to the first sentence of the same section in City of Blinding Lights? Many thanks! Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 14:19, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I haven't read U2 by U2 in a while, so perhaps there is some information in there I can add. To my knowledge, there hasn't been a lot of information in books or magazines about the development of the song, so we'll see. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I've just read U2 by U2, there is nothing about the tempo or keys. Just about the inspiration. I don't know if there's something at u2.com or at atu2.com, please give it a try there. Thanks! Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 14:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Is it bad having quotes on articles? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 15:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Not necessarily, why do you ask? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:36, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I am adding info to Elevation and I found it would be good to have a quote by Edge on the rythm pf the song, but I wasn't sure. Anyways, please, check that out in case I've mess it up. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 15:44, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Can you do some copyediting to the Elevation article? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 18:26, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I'll look at it the first chance I get. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:54, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Mother's Milk

Could you do me a favor and weigh in at Talk:Mother's Milk? The guys that took it to FA are not around any more, so it's a bit hard to monitor and discuss. --Laser brain (talk) 13:23, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Warrior

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Warrior (Kesha album), have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you to seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. --Thevampireashlee (talk) 12:30, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Wake Up genre issue

Adding cited, applying genres isn't really disruptive editing. And just undoing my changes without explaining why you did so is not going to convince me to stop. 3jz01bcs (talk • contributions) 17:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I disagree. Having to sort out your constant genre changes to the article is very much disruptive–by nature, an edit war is disruptive. First, I had to instruct you how to cite your changes. Then, I had to stress the WP:RS policy of Wikipedia, as the sources were not reliable. Even if you have progressed past those issues, the real problem here is that you are still being a "genre warrior" and focusing most of your edits on making the genre field of article in line with what you feel is right. I really need to stress this essay to explain why all these edits are counterproductive. Take this quote from the essay, for example:

“ Most of the time, one genre per infobox is sufficient. Some guidelines for picking the best genre out of many options: pick one which is the most all-encompassing, or which reflects the style of music the group is best known for (at the time of the album, if it's an album article). For example, progressive rock is a very wide field. It can include the experimentation of A Saucerful of Secrets, the fusion of orchestral and rock music in Atom Heart Mother, the sound collage found in The Dark Side of the Moon, and the folky songs on More. These sub-genres can be mentioned in the body of the article, and "progressive rock" can be a summary of them all, for the infobox. During the time of these albums, Pink Floyd were regarded as a progressive rock band, regardless of their dabbling in other genres on any given album, and this fact should also be a guide to the genre used for album articles, as long as there is no compelling reason why that categorization should be considered inappropriate for a particular album. ”

Ultimately, you could find 25 different reviews of Wake Up that describe it 25 different ways, but that doesn't mean it falls under 25 genres or even needs that level of detail about the sound in the genre field. Just let things be. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:24, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

U2 by U2

Hey! I am working to create the article for u2 by U2. Do you think you can find a picture of the cover and upload it. Let me know. Thanks :) Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 16:00, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply - I can upload the image, but I'm concerned that the U2 by U2 book is not notable enough for its own article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks, no problem for being late. Take a look at this ♣ and teññ me what you think of it. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 16:12, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

WP U2 in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to revisit WikiProject U2 for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 13:14, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Would you consider participating? I was thinking about waiting until you and Dream out loud have answer all the questions, you are the masters here :D Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 19:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

I will try to respond sometime in the next few days. No promises though, I'm a bit busy right now. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:34, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

ok, no problem. thanks. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 19:37, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

U2 Awards

Hey, Y, I was checking this out and saw some awards received by U2 that don't appear here. Can you check that please and tell me if I should add the rest of the awards? Reply asap, Thanks. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 13:48, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I would definitely add any missing Billboard awards. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Also, it [the article] doesn't say that U2 received any touring artist award in 2012 but in 2010. What would you do? Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 14:43, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

I missed this at first, but the Billboard Touring Awards are separate from the Billboard Music Awards (hence, the confusion). Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:53, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

So, we should split it into two sections or leave them all together?

I am confused, in the article I pointed out (Bb Touring Awards, it says that U2 won the Top Tour Award in 2010, 2011 and 2005, but it doesn't mention 2012. So I went right straight to 2012_Billboard_Music_Awards and I found that they won the Top Touring Award that year. Then, I went to 2011_Billboard_Music_Awards to see if the names of the categories matched and they did. So I am more than confused now.

In the first link I gave you said that the Top Touring Artist that year was Top Tour: Roger Waters for The Wall Live and not U2 for 360º. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 14:55, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Adam's wedding

Can you find some references on line to the statement someone made on the article? Finally he married. Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 16:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Copy-edit

Thanks for the copy-edit you did for the Grand Theft Auto V page. Would you be able to continue at some point on the Development section? I really want this section as tight as possible. CR4ZE (talk) 02:55, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I can look at it at some point. It might not be right away (maybe after the game is released), but I will review it. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, any time you can. I want my first FA and can't do it alone. CR4ZE (talk) 12:30, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Mo Award
	A picture of my favorite baseball player for the author of my favorite Wikipedia article, Mariano Rivera. – Muboshgu (talk) 12:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Bloom6132 and I are planning on finishing up the Core Four Good Topic soon. – Muboshgu (talk) 12:34, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

I should be able to help with the Core Four article, as well. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 22:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Mariano's status as 'retired'

I love your work and love your article, Y2k, but I think at this point it's silly to continually revert attempts at making his article reflect his retired status. For one, you asked for headlines on his retirement, Here is one. More importantly, you repeatedly ask for his 'retirement papers'. Such papers are entirely voluntary in MLB, we list thousands of players as retired who have never signed official papers. He was under a one year contract that has ended, repeatedly stated his intent to retire at season's end, and now that we're at season's end has again said "I'm done" (the link I posted). Staxringold _talk^contribs 17:00, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:OVERLINK

First of all, no need to publicly insult my intelligence with "you really dont understand WP:OVERLINK". Second, WP:OVERLINK states "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article" and that's what I applied. -- Lyverbe (talk) 21:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I think you are misunderstanding how to apply the rule. Key related subjects (e.g. actors from the film, main characters) shouldn't be omitted simply to adhere to a subjective guideline. Generally, topics should be linked in the lead regardless, and then they should be linked once in the body of the article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 02:03, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nike Mag, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nike (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Green Day and U2 image and others

It has a fair use in that article. Why did you remove it. It was an image used to depict the performance of both bands together at Louisiana Superdome.

And, why cannot the quotes be there? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:23, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Because it all seems very excessive. Not every space in the right-hand margin of the article needs to be filled with something. Some of the images, like the skyline or New York and Miami, are merely placed for decoration. (See WP:PERTINENCE: "You should always be watchful not to overwhelm an article with images by adding more just because you can.") To me, the whole point of the timeline article should be the chronology of the various events in U2's history, not the decorative elements that we can place next to the prose. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

oh, I get the point. I don't care about the Miami or the NYC images, thinking well they were unnecessary, but what about the image of the music video for "TSAC". Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:53, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Any copyrighted image that is used with a non-free use rationale should be limited in its use, and it generally should only appear in articles in which it is used to identify the subject (e.g. the music video section of "The Saints are Coming" is the most relevant). For example, the Achtung Baby album cover image is only used in the album article to identify the subject of the article, since the image is copyrighted and not a free image. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:52, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok, can I add the image to the TSAC article? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:05, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't see why not, just be sure to adjust the non-free use justification on the image page to account for the fact that you're adding the image to a different article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:10, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Should I erase the non-free justification from Timeline of U2? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:14, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I would just modify it slightly so that it works for "The Saints are Coming" article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 15:18, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Done, please, make sure everything is ok. Thanks. Oh, also, can you find a reliable source that states that the new song by U2 was full released yesterday, 30 Oct? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:21, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if you celebrate Halloween but... Happy Halloween!

	Hello Y2kcrazyjoker4, Miss Bono has given you an lovely bat, to wish you a Happy Halloween! You see, these things promote WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else an Irish Leprechaun! Enjoy!
	Spread the goodness of a lovely bat by adding {{subst:User:Miss Bono/Halloween}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

The WikiProject U2 Newsletter – Issue IX: Rattle and Hum – 1st November 2013

Issue IX: Rattle and Hum – 1st November 2013

Column-generating template families

The templates listed here are not interchangeable. For example, using {{col-float}} with {{col-end}} instead of {{col-float-end}} would leave a <div>...</div> open, potentially harming any subsequent formatting.

Column templates

Type	Family	Handles wiki table code?†	Responsive/ mobile suited	Start template	Column divider	End template
Float	"col-float"	Yes	Yes	{{col-float}}	{{col-float-break}}	{{col-float-end}}
	"columns-start"	Yes	Yes	{{columns-start}}	{{column}}	{{columns-end}}
Columns	"div col"	Yes	Yes	{{div col}}	–	{{div col end}}
	"columns-list"	No	Yes	{{columns-list}} (wraps div col)	–	–
Flexbox	"flex columns"	No	Yes	{{flex columns}}	–	–
Table	"col"	Yes	No	{{col-begin}}, {{col-begin-fixed}} or {{col-begin-small}}	{{col-break}} or {{col-2}} .. {{col-5}}	{{col-end}}

^† Can template handle the basic wiki markup {| | || |- |} used to create tables? If not, special templates that produce these elements (such as {{(!}}, {{!}}, {{!!}}, {{!-}}, {{!)}})—or HTML tags (<table>...</table>, <tr>...</tr>, etc.)—need to be used instead.

• Read this in full
• Archive
• Subscribe/Unsubscribe!

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of WikiProject U2. You are receiving this because your username is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject U2/Outreach/newsletterdelivery. To unsubscribe, remove the line containing your username from Wikipedia:WikiProject U2/Outreach/newsletterdelivery. Thanks. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} and pjoef (talk • contribs) 11:06, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

About ZooTV article and MacPhisto

The other day when I had a little bit of Internet access I could download a page that described each one of the shows where MacPhisto appeared. The speeches and the calls where explained, so I was thinking about making an article or a sub article for that, just wanted to ask for your opinion on this. I don't know much about this but, isn't MacPhisto enough relevant to have his own article? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 16:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I highly doubt that any of this would be notable enough to warrant its own article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

What about adding the list to the MacPhisto section in the ZooTV article? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what makes this list you're talking about notable, though. The Zoo TV article goes over each of Bono's live characters and explains how they were conceived, what their costumes were, and what kind of personality they had. I don't think there needs to be a list of what he said while in character as each of these personas. We're talking about a tour that was 157 shows, too. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about to add everything Bono said. I was talking about, the shows where he played MacPhisto, like... date of the show, and name of the person/company he phoned. I was not sure, so I asked you first. Please don't get mad about my question. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not getting mad, I just don't see how a list like this would pass various Wikipedia guidelines (WP:NOTDIARY, WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:FANCRUFT). Furthermore, if you add information like this for MacPhisto, it would be probably make the rest of the article unbalanced in comparison to the sections on The Fly and Mirrorball Man. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see, I haven't heard about tha Fancruft before, I better read that, I don't wanna look like a crazy fan or something. Thanks for the help and for your opinion. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 20:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, I making a draw of MacPhisto to add it to the section in the ZooTV, since we have a picture for The Fly and none for MacPhisto or The Mirror Ball Man, I am not sure I can make one of latter because I have never seen him in a picture close enough to catch the details. I would appreciate your thoughts on this. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 21:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

U2 for FT

I just read about this Wikipedia:Featured_topic_candidates/U2/archive1, and I would like to work toward have that Feature Topic. What do you think? I will ask User:Ironholds to see if he can make a peer review for Bono and I will start working in The Edge article's improvement. I would like to know if you are interested in this. Thanks. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Mariano Rivera

Yes so lets deprive people from useful links. No room is being saved by not listing all of the years with links. There will be two lines regardless. Sorry but thats silly BS.--Yankees10 21:18, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

By the way, you removed the All-Star Game MVP for who knows what reason Wait what? When was there a consensus about AS Game MVP's not going in the infobox? Please provide a link or something because I don't remember that at all.--Yankees10 21:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying, but if players want to reach the article for a specific All-Star Game, it's in the body of the article. An infobox is supposed to be a summary of the person, and all too often, it becomes a link farm. Regarding ASG MVP not being included in the infobox, please see here. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 22:13, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Portal:U2 for peer review

• Portal:U2

Miss Bono and myself have requested a portal peer review for Portal:U2.
We would appreciate any helpful advice at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/U2/archive1.

I would also like to remind all members of WikiProject U2 (and other interested editors) that U2 Live at Red Rocks: Under a Blood Red Sky (talk · edit · hist) has been put up for peer review (PR) by Dream out loud (t · c) on 10 November 2013; see discussion. Any feedback would be much appreciated!

Thanks in advance and happy editing,
pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of WikiProject U2. You are receiving this message because you are a volunteer at Wikipedia:Portal peer review, you have contributed to the development of the portal, or you are an active member of WikiProject U2. –pjoef (talk • contribs) 14:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Xbox 360, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Online gaming (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Doin' It Right

Regarding your recent edits to the article, please see the discussion I've started at Talk:Doin' It Right regarding genre. jhsounds (talk) 18:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Nexus 7

Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4, regarding the Nexus 7 revert: The battery issue is an incredibly commonly reported issue (Google 'Nexus 7 won't turn on'), and is the chief cause of returns to Asus. What isn't so widely reported, and not officically by Asus/Google, is the cause, which is that the battery can shift by a couple of mm within its housing, causing the cable linking it to the motherboard, which doesn't have the extra length, to disconnect. Community fixes usually boil down to sliding a piece of card between the battery and the side of the phone, as per answer. I'll try to find a more 'official' type site explaining the issue and fix before adding the statement back to the Nexus 7 article. Cheers Grunners (talk) 10:58, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ronan Tynan may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• yankees_game_after_NmiZdYsI7VFwNBCZA8QxwI "Tenor Booted from Yankees Game After Anti-Semitic Slur"], ''[[New York Post]]'', 16 October 2009, p7.</ref>

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Xbox SmartGlass may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• Windows RT]] tablets, [[Windows Phone]] (7.5+) smartphones, [[Windows Server 2012]] PCs, [[iOS]] 5+) devices and [[Android (operating system)|Android]] (4.0+) smartphones.<ref name="Smart glass

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:34, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Arkham Origins

Why are you being a douche over this. I undid PART of your edit, PART, because it repeated info, and you've now reverted it twice, first time saying it wasn't explained why, the second time saying "the only thing awkward is saying a game moved its development away, as if a game has self awareness or Rocksteady was originally involved in the development of this game" yet editing the entire sentence into a worse state with the exact same problem in repeating that WB Montreal developed it and saying it in a poor way, where you are clearly straining to say it in a different way just for the sake of making the edit. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:35, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Do you really expect a civil response calling someone a douche on their talk page? Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:46, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

You're edit warring over nothing, there's nothing civil about the situation but I was significantly more polite in my wording than I wanted to be. Darkwarriorblake (talk) 23:56, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

QOTSA

Welcome to Wikipedia. I have noticed that some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Queens of the Stone Age, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you to seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. STATic message me! 17:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

A quick search shows hundreds of sources that could be used - plenty of critics have called them "stoner rock", I've chosen just a few. Hopefully this illustrates my point. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:05, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Genre warring

You'd better stop genre warring. Your arguments based on your personal knowledge don't matter. I warned you when reverting you but of course you didn't want to listen to me. Moreover you violated WP:SYNTH on Radio Ga Ga. Anyway here's what you got.

First off: if "stadium rock" was a genre, why doesn't the Wikipedia article for it identify it as a genre? Why doesn't that article have the genre infoboxes that every other genre article has? Furthermore, I don't think you have a clue what WP:SYNTH is for: that guideline says that you cannot use Fact A from source X and Fact B from source Y to arrive at your own conclusion - the guideline isn't outlawing the referencing of individual facts from separate sources, nor is it saying that the entirety of reference has to be used. Secondly, you are just as guilty of 3RR as I am, so I have no idea why you think reporting me is your solution. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:44, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't care of what Wikipedia says. Wikipedia is not a reliable source in nature. I only trust sources I'm able to find, that's it. Unlike you, I didn't reach 4 reverts, here's the huge difference between you and me. You violated WP:SYNTH because you removed stadium rock while it is perfectly mentionned, along with pop rock, in the corresponding review (or if you prefer you cherrypicked pop rock, which is certainly not a good idea). Anyway you shouldn't have started an edit war with me. That's all I have to say. Synthwave.94 (talk) 18:54, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Once again - you don't understand how WP:SYNTH works. If your argument is that you can't use multiple sources to cite multiple genres, then why would you keep synthpop as a genre, since that clearly comes from a different source than the one that sources pop rock and stadium rock? I removed stadium rock because it's not a distinct music genre. It's a performance style, or a movement in music touring/performance from the late 1970s. But there are no distinct stylistic elements of the music of "stadium rock" itself to separate it from other genres of music... unless your other identifying criteria is that it falls under the broad category of "rock anthem". You say Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but don't you think if there were enough reliable sources in existence to call "stadium rock" a genre, the article would have been formatted to call it a genre? Critics and journalists can call music whatever they want, but that doesn't make any description that they throw around a "genre". Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:21, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

So why does About.com(which is, as far as I know, a reliable source commonly used on Wikipedia) calls arena rock a "genre" in this case ? Synthwave.94 (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

I'd put more stock in that if it was more than just a one-off article by someone writing for About.com, but I do not see any critical analysis in that article or any other about what makes music itself "stadium rock", other than the artist was from the 70's/80's and performed in arenas/stadiums. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 19:57, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Genre discussion

Hello. Could you chime in this post I made about music genres? I would appreciate your input. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:41, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Radio Ga Ga

Could you please discuss in article talk rather than edit warring? If you continue like this I will have no alternative but to block you. Thanks. --John (talk) 19:05, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4. You have new messages at Muboshgu's talk page.
Message added 21:52, 21 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Go Phightins! 21:52, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Jim Thome

Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4. I wanted to thank you for your copyedits on Jim Thome, and wanted to ask you what your initial reaction would be as far as an FA candidacy. Are there any blatant oversights in the article? Does the prose need additional refinement? Thanks in advance. Go Phightins! 22:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

The last time I had looked it over, it looked like the prose was in good shape but that there were some seasons that were glossed over - while a lot of achievements/milestones were mentioned, it seemed as though a summary of overall performance for those seasons (e.g. end of year stats) was missing in some cases. I haven't read through the article more thoroughly since then, but I can do that if you'd like. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 22:58, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

If you wouldn't mind a thorough read-through, I'd appreciate it. Go Phightins! 15:05, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Jim Thome may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• he had hoped to draw the attention of [[Scout (sport)|scouts]], his relatively small stature ({{convert|6|ft|2|in|cm}}, {{convert|175|lb|kg}} meant that he attracted only passing interest—the
• to [[Fangraphs]], totaled 71.6 [[Wins Above Replacement]] (WAR).<ref>{{cite web|title=Jim Thome >> Statistics >> Batting|url=http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=409&position=1B/DH|work=FanGraphs

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Circle of Life

Can you remove soft rock in the infobox, I can't edit because of semi-protection. Its lead article says "Elton John sang a pop version." 183.171.179.51 (talk) 07:55, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Orel Hershiser's scoreless innings streak

You were among the discussants at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Orel Hershiser's scoreless inning streak/archive1 in January. There has been a WP:PR and I hope that you would re-evaluate the the current nomination.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:19, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I can't improve the article if you fail to communicate when I respond. Could you comment on the new version of the article.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:36, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

It's been less than 24 hours and you're getting anxious? I can't be available on Wikipedia every day of every hour... I'll respond shortly on the discussion page. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 13:07, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

The admins might be getting restless with this one. I would appreciate it if you could state your current position on the article fairly promptly.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

April 2014 GA Thanks

Thank you for your editorial contributions to Orel Hershiser's scoreless innings streak.

This user helped promote Orel Hershiser's scoreless innings streak to good article status.

.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:20, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Rivera

God read WP:Own like right now.--Yankees10 23:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't see how any of the changes is an improvement over the way things were.... Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 00:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

There was nothing wrong with my edit. And there definitely should have at least been a reason for the revert. Anyways let me explain some of my changes. First was moving the K's before the saves: This is was a pure consistency move with almost all other infoboxes having the saves after W-L record, ERA, K's in that order. Second was changing WHIP to Walks plus hits per inning pitched: We have earned run average and not ERA, so I figured it should be the same with WHIP. Third is removing Award: Theres no reason for the word to be there just like "winner" after Gold Gloves and Silver Slugger is not necessary. Aren't we trying to save space in these infoboxes? Award is not necessary. Last is the AL Championship Series to ALCS: ALCS is the most common phrase, plus it saves space by just using ALCS.--Yankees10 01:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Moving saves and WHIP last is OK by me. Unabbreviating WHIP to be seems to be at odds with your desire to save space (IMO, I think most people are concerned with saving vertical space so that infoboxes don't take over article pages). I think the difference between WHIP and ERA is that people still say "earned run average", whereas you never hear someone say "walks plus hits per inning pitched". The main problem I have is that having the full link adjusts the table format so that all of the numbers are squished to the right. I would be OK with it if you can break up the wikilink to span 2 lines instead of 1. "ALCS" might be common to baseball fans, but to casual readers who may not be familiar with the sport, I find it helps to spell out as much of the abbreviation as the infobox will comfortably permit. For the MVP Awards, I find it appropriate for consistency reasons to keep the word "award" at the ending (we don't currently say "AL Cy Young", "Delivery Man of the Year" or "AL Rolaids Relief Man"). Most people are not familiar with what these designations are. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 21:52, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:U2-joshua-tree-20th-anniversary-box.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:U2-joshua-tree-20th-anniversary-box.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. –Dream out loud (talk) 03:29, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Black Keys - new album (Turn Blue) release date

Hi - you recently reverted my changes regarding the release date of The Black Keys new album, Turn Blue.

The basic fact remains, per the band's own website: The album was not released today (05/12/14). The album will be released tomorrow (05/13/14). How is the French Amazon website a more valid source than the band's own website?

http://www.theblackkeys.com/turnblue

("AVAILABLE MAY 13TH")

I apologize if the edit I made was not done correctly. Please make the edit accordingly to Wiki's standards so that the page no longer lists the incorrect date.

EdgeDC (talk) 18:20, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

The first date on which an album becomes available is the release date, regardless of what the band's website may say (e.g. its US launch date). See here: "Only the earliest known date that the album was released should be specified; later release dates (incl. re-issues) can be mentioned in a Release history section." Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 18:33, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ghoulardi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• The Akron-based band [the Black Keys]] paid homage to a Ghoulardi catchphrase with their 2014 album ''[[Turn Blue (album)|Turn Blue]]''.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

10 review max

Yes, you are correct in that application for the ratings box; however, it is wrong to just include a mere ten reviews when it has like 50+ in order to gauge the critical thought consensus in prose.HotHat (talk) 00:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Re: Charlotte Hornets

Your recent editing history at Charlotte Hornets shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Tom Danson (talk) 19:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring on '"Sgt. Pepper

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Please stop introducing errors and edit warring over nit-picks. This article is highly vetted and none of your concerns override consensus. We do not add quote marks to quote boxes and please do not mess up the article by putting all the in-line quotes into quote boxes. You are messing up the narrative. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:12, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmmmm, very good point. I'm glad to see you've thoughtfully responded to my edits in a meaningful way. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:14, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:New-years-day-video.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:New-years-day-video.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 17:53, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

June 2014

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to an article, specifically New Year's Day (song), may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Werieth (talk) 01:48, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chromecast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

You are invited to WikiProject Google!

SD0001 (talk) 18:00, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

The Closer

I don't know about you, but you just have to read Mariano's book "The Closer". It's a great book. NintendoFan (Talk, Contribs) 11:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - I actually started reading it on a recent flight. I definitely enjoy it so far. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 12:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

U2

Yes, they did indeed, I remember a movie from the 80s called the courier used at least one song, if not more. Good spot. Murry1975 (talk) 13:18, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

he movie and a Gabriel Byrne fan site that states "Elvis Costello provides the soundtrack music that includes songs from U2, Hothouse Flowers, and The Pogues".Murry1975 (talk) 13:28, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Ghost Stories (Coldplay album)

Sixteen-year-old kid FilBenLeafBoy added alternative rock on the infobox without notice, but he added on talk page: "I think that Ghost Stories is both Electronic and Alternative Rock. Songs like "Oceans" and "Magic" for example are Alternative rock... I added two times alternative Rock in "Genre" but an anonymous user insist to delete it. What do you think about it?"

If there's any reliable sources for being an alternative rock album, just wait and see. 183.171.161.89 (talk) 03:07, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 29 July

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Chromecast page, your edit caused a URL error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:27, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Review on FARC

Hello Crazyjoker! Since you've been editing articles about rock music some time, can you offer an opinion on Flea, which has been an FA removal candidate for a while, but the process is currently on hold because the lack of reviewers. Thanks a bunch.--Retrohead (talk) 08:31, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nba-jam-dunk.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nba-jam-dunk.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:57, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to Blue Jeans (Lana Del Rey song)‎, without providing a source or establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Littlecarmen (talk) 10:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mark Foster (musician) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Warrior (Kimbra song)| Warrior)]] from [[Vows (album)|Vows]], by [[Kimbra]] featuring [[Mark Foster (Musician)|Mark Foster]] and [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mark Foster (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Keyboard. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Peer review on Death of Osama bin Laden

A peer review is being held at WP:Peer review/Death of Osama bin Laden/archive1 to enhance this article to FA status.Forbidden User (talk) 16:35, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

SI.com dead links

Hi. I just saw that you fixed up a whole bunch of dead links from SI.com's moving around their content. A whole bunch of SI.com vault articles got tagged as dead on Jeter's bio too, and I need to fix them before its TFA, but I'm having a devil of a time finding the new links. How did you go about it? Simply searching the vault or Google is getting me nowhere. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

SI.com's search feature is an absolute abomination now. I've had to try several combinations of info in my searches to find the new URLs: article title, player name, author name, date. Sometimes I've had to go to Google to find them. Sometimes I had to reference an archive.org version of the dead article to pull a quote that I could search on Google (in quotes). But even then, I didn't have 100% success. Some articles from as recent as 2-3 years ago appeared to have gone completely dead. If you give me the citations for the articles you're looking to fix, I can try to find them for you. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 16:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

You could also try looking on archive.org for archived versions of the article. Go Phightins! 16:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

It is indeed a mess. Thanks for fixing the ones you found. I'll keep looking through archive searches. It's a shame archive.today isn't allowed because this is the only version of that article I can find even after Google searching a quote (aside from someone who's hosting the article's text on their Angelfire page). – Muboshgu (talk) 17:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Muboshgu - Is this it? Go Phightins! 17:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Falling (Haim song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Idolator. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Input at FARC

Listen, since you've been here relatively long, can you offer an opinion regarding Manila Metro Rail Transit System FA status here? I've argued that the FARC was advancing too long and most ineffective, but additional comment are needed because of the low interest. Appreciate if you can jump in.--Retrohead (talk) 08:01, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Dude, available to check the review, or should I contact another user?--Retrohead (talk) 08:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't really have the time, nor is the article in my area of expertise. Sorry. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 17:40, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Your recent behaviour

Hi. There are such things as hatnotes. Redirects do not have to live forever when a notable subject of the same name arises. If you want to retain the redirect, do so through discussion, not by making personal attacks. — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

My apologies. I overreacted, thinking that you were replacing the article history with a new one for U2's album. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 14:24, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Red Hill Mining Town

added a link pointing to National Union of Mineworkers

Songs of Innocence (album)

added a link pointing to Dulcimer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Radioactive (Imagine Dragons song)

Can you replace with song's genre and description from source that does not have in every sections?

• http://www.allmusic.com/album/radioactive-mw0002495543 ("Melding elements of dubstep with sweeping alt-rock")

183.171.165.193 (talk) 08:13, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't take it personally...

I'd consider megalomaniac a compliment! Melicans (talk, contributions) 20:43, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey, long time, no talk! This was bound to happen - with such a flurry of editing happening in the article, it's quickly become a breeding ground for... less than stellar edits, and that's required a quick trigger finger on the revert button. I'm glad there are people that can see what I'm trying to do with the article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 23:57, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that's the one bad thing about this release and as soon as it dropped I knew it would be chaos. With a long leadup there's time to get the article organized ahead of time. Without even a title, everyone tries to do everything at once. It was pretty easy to see what you were trying to do, to be honest. All it took was actually looking at the edits that were being made! Better source? Check. Better prose? Check. NPOV integration into appropriate section? Check. I don't even know why the talk page complaint was made; why bother if you don't even know why you're doing it? Bizarre. Melicans (talk, contributions) 00:37, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Problem solved. Now back to your megalomania! Melicans (talk, contributions) 01:43, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation Page on Songs of Innocence

Hey, I thought the disambiguation of the U2 album was necessary simply because the title is taken from an extremely well-known book by Blake (which Bono all but confirmed by saying he may make a second album called "Songs of Experience" which forms the second half of Blake's book) and querying "Songs of Innocence" still redirects to that book's page, disambiguating the two on the album's page may be quite necessary to clear up any confusion users may have.Artimaean (talk) 21:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

There is no reason to add a disambiguation hatnote regarding the book, though, to the U2 album article. There's no way you could have reached the album article accidentally looking for the book. If you searched "Songs of Innocence", you'd have been directed to the book page. If you started at the disambiguation page "Songs of Innocence and of Experience (disambiguation)", you can clearly have the book and U2 album differentiated for you, making any potential confusion a non-issue. Thus, an article with "(album)" at the end of the title doesn't need any further disambiguation from a book. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 00:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 29 September

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Heinz Field page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:37, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Orel Hershiser

I notice that you just edited the Orel Hershiser infobox. There is currently some contentious editing regarding the main image. Could you please comment on the talk page for the record.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Track list numbering

There is currently a Rfc and discussion at Template talk:Track listing#RfC regarding track listings, about how the songs in a track listing should be numbered. The result could have repercussions for every article of albums originally released in vinyl. If you are interested, please join in the discussion there. Lewismaster (talk) 13:35, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Android Auto logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Android Auto logo.png. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:43, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Build, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Franz Ferdinand. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:12, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

State of Grace (Taylor Swift song)

A user added "arena rock" on genre field with source (arena rock is performance style, not a genre), and does not mentioned alternative rock. Perhaps there's "Critical reception" section, says "rock anthem".115.164.87.241 (talk) 10:48, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Turn Blue (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Grammy Awards task force

You are invited to join the Grammy Awards task force, a subproject of WikiProject Awards and prizes dedicated to improving articles and lists related to the Grammy Awards. If you are interested in joining, please visit the project page and add your name to the list of participants.

---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:31, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Born to Die (Lana Del Rey album)

I pointed "alternative" in the infobox from source that is she won "Best Alternative [artist]" on MTV EMA. But I know the category which represents the album, and the source is radio website. Whether any reliable authors described the album as "alternative" or not. 183.171.183.242 (talk) 07:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

'Hours...'

Adult contemporary is a radio format, not a genre. Can you find reliable for better genre? 183.171.181.91 (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Pumped Up Kicks

The source says it includes those lyrics; it didn't specifically state those specific lyrics caused the song to be taken off the radio. Pyrotle…the "y" is silent, BTW. 04:45, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

It Won't Be Soon Before Long

There's an IP added unproperly sources, especially Rolling Stones where says "one of major pop rock sellers" does not means a pop rock album. Has any reliable sources for other better genres? 221.120.123.162 (talk) 01:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

The Police having the biggest band in the world title?

The Police had that title years ago on their wikipedia, why changed it now? It was originally like that, also, The Police had the best selling album by a band in 1983 and the best selling single with Every Breath You Take in 1983. Can you give me any bands that were bigger and more popular than The Police in 1983? Give me one and I would remove it and won't re-edit it again. Also, look at Led Zeppelin, their page says Biggest band in the world from 1971-1975 but you don't do nothing about that but they were the biggest band in the world from that 4 year period. They put out grossing tours and successful selling well albums. The Police did the same in 1983. They were the most popular rock band or band of that whole year, they had the best selling album in the U.S. and also in Europe, they had the best selling single as well. What is wrong with that title? Are you a hater of their music or what? Led Zeppelin has their, been having theirs for years and The Police as well. The Police section makes sense because it says Biggest band in the world in 1983 and 1983 only which they were, commercially they were. Accept that fact, find me a band from 1983 that was bigger and more popular. Find me one. The Police was the biggest band in the world in 1983 and it's been like that for years until you changed it. Leave it like it originally does. Also, how about Led Zeppelin? They had theirs, let The Police had theirs.( Mikeis1996 (talk) 02:05, 27 January 2015 (UTC) )

You are arguing this like it's a simple yes/no question. "Biggest band in the world" is completely subject to interpretation. It's not a title you hold like "prime minister" or "prince". It's an opinion, not a fact. And if you intend to put it in the article because that's your opinion, then it surely it doesn't belong. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 02:13, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

I actually add the most popular band in the world because that is what my sources claimed. Also, how does Led Zeppelin keep theirs and not The Police? Why do you hate that title? They were the biggest band in the world in 1983, they were the most popular. I think the most popular is more appropriate so I think that is right. Especially when my sources claimed they were the most popular band in the world during that time period. Face it, The Police were the biggest band in the world in 1983. Also, why don't you ever check Led Zeppelin wikipedia and come back and give me your response on the section of biggest band in the world from 1971-1975. I want to see your response on that.( Mikeis1996 (talk) 02:21, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Also, the biggest band in the world is not a opinion, it is a fact. The biggest band in the world doesn't mean the greatest by any means, it means the most successful and most popular band in the world. You didn't even show me any bands who were more popular than them in 1983. Also, why change the most popular band in the world? I got two sources to back it up, it is right there in the section of Synchronicity. Also what award are you even talking about, are you just making random things or random ideas up? Your getting too hard on me in the subject, to me and many other people, the biggest band in the world is not announced in any award at all, the biggest band in the world is the most successful in terms of singles, radio play, tour grossing and also, album selling. The Police had all of that in 1983 but you want to change it for a silly section. Career peak sounds boring and bland, it should at least be re-named to the most popular band in the world because the most popular band in the world is more appropriate than just saying the biggest. What is wrong with the most popular band in the world title? Is not a award or nothing, it is right there in terms of commercial success. Accept that fact, biggest band in the world means the most successful in terms of album sales, singles on chart positions and tour grossing sales, The Police were simply that, career peak sounds bland. The most popular band in the world sounds more fit.( Mikeis1996 (talk) 02:34, 27 January 2015 (UTC) )

Disambiguation link notification for January 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Keith Moon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tom-tom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:03, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song) FAC

Hi Y2kcrazyjoker4! Would you like to comment at the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/City of Angels (Thirty Seconds to Mars song)/archive3? Your help would be very much appreciated.--Earthh (talk) 14:38, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by U2

I've completely revamped List of songs recorded by U2 with the intentions of getting to FL-class soon. I based it off other lists at WP:FL#Songs recorded by artists, and with a well-written lead and a few images, it's not far from getting that FL nomination. If you could help out with the lead (and/or find others to do so), it would be great for the project. –Dream out loud (talk) 18:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

U2`s New Image

Hey, I know that you're apart of the U2 wiki project and your goal is to improve the Wikipedia page. But the band's old wiki image was very concealing, due to the picture's bad lighting and etc. So I've decided to upload a newer image that is more prominent. Please let me know what you think? Correctingsection0062 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:01, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to discuss a proposal of year by film release

You're invited to join a discussion here. It's about a proposal about an idea of having film by year articles made and produced by certain countries, such as [[2013 in films in United States of America]], [[2013 in films in England]] and such. BattleshipMan (talk) 06:52, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Invitation

Thank you for using VisualEditor and sharing your ideas with the developers.

Hello, Y2kcrazyjoker4,

The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you were one of the very first testers of VisualEditor, back in 2012 or early 2013. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work better for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too. 

You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.

More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.

Unsubscribe from this list • Sign up for VisualEditor's multilingual newsletter • Translate the user guide

Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Nexus 10 successor

The Nexus 7 (2012) and Nexus 10 were both sold together. Although the Nexus 10 stayed out of stock for quiet a while it was never technically retired. The Nexus 7 (2013) and the Nexus 10 were both removed together, when the Nexus 9 was released. Its not a slippery slope at all. Its 100% timeline and fact, the Nexus 10's successor was the Nexus 9 - Galatz^Talk 00:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposal in MOS:Film

I could use a comment from you on this part of MOS:Film on the proposal about having year in film articles have the release dates of specific countries that made that certain film. BattleshipMan (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Coachella attendance 2014

Hi. How are you? I was wondering if we could compromise on the Coachella attendance numbers. I have attended Coachella multiple times and I actually live in Indio, CA. Have you attended Coachella also? So the "tickets" are actually wristbands on human's wrists which let one human in for the 3 day weekend. They sold 96,500 wristbands for one weekend. So, 96,500 people attend each weekend. The total attendance for 6 days is 193,000 total. 96,500 multiplied by 2 equals 193,000. That is 96,500 wristbands multiplied by 2 weekends. The reference is wrong because it multiplies 96,500 by 6 days for a total of 579,000. I feel that is a meaningless and misleading number and not encyclopedic in nature. Also, if you review previous years attendance the number of 579,000 is misleading. Attendance figures are 158,387 in 2012 and 180,000 in 2013. Thus, 2014 attendance should read 96,500 attendees each weekend for a total of 193,000 over both weekends. If you do feel the number 579,000 is accurate, then we should edit all the past years attendances so the attendance numbers across all years are comparable and relevant. I am simply interested in the most accurate information we can provide. The reference cited is half correct and half incorrect. I accept the number 96,500, and I accept the number 96,500 multiplied by 2 for 2 weekends, but I do not accept 96,500 multiplied by 6 for 6 days. The same humans attend all 3 days and should not be counted in triplicate. Some of them stay on site in the campgrounds right? What do you say? Have fun at Coachella this year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozmaweezer (talk • contribs) 11:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I have been to Coachella (the last 2 years) and am going again this year, so to answer your question, yes, I am pretty familiar with the ticketing/attendance for the festival. It's funny you mention this topic, because I am working on a table in my sandbox that would add an "average daily attendance" column that would compare attendance/ticket sales on the same scale for each year. The attendance/sales figure available for a given year have come from Billboard, so if they use an aggregate attendance figure or total ticket sales... I really have no control over that except to report the figure they used and try to make it as clear as possible what they are saying. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk

• contributions) 17:21, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh wow! Your sandbox is really cool. Thanks for replying to me. Another complication is in the beginning they offered a combination of passes at different prices. A one day pass, a two day pass, and a three day pass. Those early attendance numbers are hard to analyze because figures are not available for the break down of true attendance in those years on a day to day basis. We can't believe everything we read on the internet. You do have control over what you post and what you report. So just because Billboard posted the number of 579,000, we should take a step back and use our common sense. I feel Billboard made an error. Or at least I feel the Billboard number is out of context within the Wikipedia page. It seems over-hyped or exaggerated. I also feel the term "aggregate attendance" has multiple meanings and should be dropped from the page. It could mean aggregate over both weekends which is where I get my number of 193,000. Or it could mean aggregate of all the days which is 579,000 which to me is a number with no real meaning. There were not 579,000 people there. There were not 579,000 wristbands. There were not even 579,000 wrists. I feel it would be more encyclopedic for the Coachella Wikipedia page to simply list "ticket sales." Thanks for responding to me. Long live Coachella. I feel it should state, for improved accuracy and realism, "In 2014 the festival sold 96,500 tickets each weekend for a combined total of 193,000 tickets over both weekends." Or something to that effect. We can still use the Billboard article referenced because it states 96,500 per day attendance. We will just use our discretion and common sense. Sorry I type so much!Ozmaweezer (talk) 10:06, 5 April 2015 (UTC)