User talk:Akrabbim/Archive 1

Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Akrabbim, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! I saw your edits on the Current events page. If you would like to experiment, you should go to wikipedia:Sandbox. Foolling around on real articles is often known as Wikipedia:vandalism and can get your account and IP address blocked. But I don't want to be too harsh, just trying to help. Again, Welcome! MPS 14:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Switchfoot

Continued from discussion on User talk:Walter Görlitz

T-Rex, phil, and I are all thoroughly fed up with this big dispute, and we're willing to just drop the subject. The "Switchfoot and Christian music" has been rewritten extensively, and I don't see how it can get any less POV. Now if its fine with you, I'm ready to make a Switchfoot talk archive, including the pages-long discussion on this subject, so we're just waiting for your okay. I speak for all of us — truce? —Akrabbim 23:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Not ready. Switchfoot and Christian music section doesn't describe how Christian music influenced Switchfoot. It describes how Switchfoot has been a part of CCM and how they don't want to be restricted to that "label". I agree with T-Rex that there should be a God subsection to the influecnes, but CCM was never an influence on their music and if you dno't mind, I've moved it back up. With that said, and if it stays at that level instead of a sub-section of "influences" then I'm ready to archive the discussion page as well. --Walter Görlitz 01:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Help me – anonymous IP block

My entire school (IP 170.158.251.125) has been blocked for repeat vandalism. I have an account, but I still cannot edit, because I happen to be using this IP. Why are registered Users, with no background for vandalism, blocked along with anonymous IPs? --Akrabbim 13:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately you are autoblocked, even though you have an account. The solution to this problem is often suggested and maybe someone is looking into it. In the mean time, you can contact the blocking admin and they might remove the block to allow you to edit.--Commander Keane 13:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The user that blocked me (Wikibofh) doesn't have a registered email, so I can't contact him. Is there any other way I can get around it? I have a registered account, I shouldn't be affected by what IP I'm using, especially since I have no vandalism history. --Akrabbim 13:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll post a note on his talk page and ask him to look at this page, and he'll hopefully shorten or remove the block. Meanwhile, as Commander Keane said, this problem is being worked on. Henrik 13:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Commander Keane, the ever quick and ever helpful beat me to it. But Wikibofh has been notified now, hopefully he'll come by and comment here. Henrik 13:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Try it now. I've unblocked the IP and noted in the block log that you were a victim of collateral damage. Wikibofh_(talk) 13:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks --Akrabbim 14:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Joss Whedon

Hi! You seem to have reverted the page Joss Whedon to a much earlier version. You didn't use an edit summary, so it's hard to see why you did this. I'm going to restore the previous version, if that's OK. If you had a reason for the changes you made, let me know on my talk page or at Talk:Joss Whedon. Thanks! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry. It was an accident. —Akrabbim 14:40, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I just wanted to make sure. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I just wanted to thank you for this edit [1] I don't think thats the first time you have fixed one of my many spelling errors, so I figured it was at least nessicary to thank you for cleaning up my mess... --T-rex 20:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem…oh and you spelled "necessary" wrong. —Akrabbim 17:37, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Template Issues

I've searched Wikipedia's help/template pages and still can't find what I'm looking for. What do you type in a edit page for the "Due to recent vandilism, new or 'something' members are not allowed to edit this page." warning template to show up? Also...what do you tpe to get things to align on a certain side of a page? (Sorry, but I can't get this message to go below the 'contents box.')--WatchHawk 05:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the template that you're thinking of is {{semiprotect}}. You can see it in use in my sandbox. As for the alignment, it depends on what you want to align. You can put the table of contents on the left or right with {{TOCleft}} or {{TOCright}} (this is why my table of contents wont go to the top; I have it aligned to the side). With images, you just pipe the alignment in: [[Image:picture.jpg|thumb|25px|right|caption]]. Infoboxes automatically align to the right, as well as userbox boxes ({{Userboxtop|Name}} and {{Userboxbottom}} with the userboxes in between; you can see that in use on my userpage source code). I hope that helps, and for now I think I'll align my TOC to the right instead of the left. —Akrabbim^talk 13:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

C++ Help

I'm taking Computer Programming II at my high school, but even my teacher doesn't know why my program won't work. I put the file up on my subpage, so if you answer this {{helpme}} and you don't know C++, could you find someone who does? —Akrabbim^talk 14:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I'm sorry, but the {{helpme}} feature is for use by newcomers to get help with editing Wikipedia. Your request is, unfortunately, outside the scope of our service. You can try the Reference Desk, but remember they have a general rule not to do people's homework for them. However, here's a general programming hint: always debug your programs step by step, outputting to the console (couting) frequently so you know what your program's doing. Cheers, Tangotango 14:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Image:Pete Wentz.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Pete Wentz.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Esprit15d 14:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblock – anonymous IP block AGAIN

My entire school (IP 170.158.251.125) has been blocked for repeat vandalism, this time by Can't sleep, clown will eat me. I have an account, but I still cannot edit, because I happen to be using this IP. This is the second time this has happened to me (see conversation below). I pose the question again: Why are registered Users, with no background for vandalism, blocked along with anonymous IPs? —Akrabbim^talk 14:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Email Can't sleep, clown will eat me about the block (and/or use {{unblock}}). Look at Wikipedia pages like Wikipedia:Autoblock to understand why. This query was not suited for {{helpme}}. This talk page is rather confusing also, it would be ideal if new posts were at the bottom.--Commander Keane 14:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, sorry. the {{helpme}} worked last time, but I'll go throught the right channels this time. —Akrabbim^talk 15:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I was just having a think, can you edit via the secure site (here)? Try a test edit on my talk page if it works.--Commander Keane 16:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Collateral damage

{{unblock|Collateral damage victim from the autoblock of IP 170.158.251.125}}

Unblocked. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 19:07, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Samuel Blanning for unblocking me. I appreciate it. —Akrabbim^talk 19:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Show preview

Continued from discussion on User talk:RoryS89

As a user that keeps track of the Relient K articles, I realized that you correct many small mistakes of your own in subsequent edits. I just wanted to let you know that you can click "Show preview" (button immediately to the right of "Save page") to check for typos or to see if links work correctly before submitting your edit. This is more efficient, helps the WikiServer out and makes it easier for people like me to see the changes that you are making without delving through excess history pages. Other than that, thank you for contributing extensively and beneficially to these articles. Your knowledge is appreciated. —Akrabbim^talk 20:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I just signed up a couple of days ago, so I'm not perfect at it. Hey, I noticed you edited the discography. Considering that the Vinyl Countdown is not an actual EP released on a CD like the rest, do you really think it belongs with the EPs? Just wondering. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RoryS89 (talk • contribs) .

Fall Out Boy

Yeah, because I'm going to listen to some high school kid who likes Fall Out Boy. Such inarguable authority to be found guiding the Wikipedia. Spartanpass (talk) 22:50, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Good, he's blocked again. Hopefully if this continues it'll be permanent next time. —Akrabbim^talk 18:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Nosmoke.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Nosmoke.gif. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 16:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

This is what I put as reasoning: "it is a universal no smoking sign, and no copyright restrictions are given on the source page. It also serves to illustrate the concept in {{User:Akrabbim/No secondhand smoke}}." —Akrabbim^talk 16:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Discussion (esp. for Fall Out Boy/Project Rocket Split EP)

Continued from discussion on User talk:Diehard2k5

Please discuss major changes in article's talk pages. Also, cut-and-paste moves are completely unacceptable. Valuble edit histories are lost, which makes it a lot harder to track changes. Most of your edits are fine and dandy, but if you think a page needs to be moved, discuss it on the talk page and go through proper channels described at WP:RM, if it's not uncontroversial and can be fixed with a simple pressing of the 'move' button. For this page, it being relatively new, it's not that big of a deal, and it's too late to anything about it. However, things like undiscussed editing (that is substantial and/or controversial) or cut-and-paste moving create a lot of unnecessary work in resolving it, and you may have to deal with someone significantly more powerful and/or mean than me. Just letting you know. —Akrabbim^talk 02:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem man. I didn't know to move the article. I'll look around next time. Sorry about that. -- Diehard2k5 02:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Blanking your own user page

Continued from discussion on User talk:Diehard2k5

Okay, this is generally very looked down upon in the Wikipedia community. I'm putting back what you took out. I'm not sure exactly what could happen if you do this, but I know that it's bad. I'm not going to report you or anything, but talk pages are there for a reason. You can archive them if you want, but removing discussion (vandalism is another story, like with Stepp-Wolf) is a nono. I suppose this is your fairly mild unofficial first warning from a non-admin about this. I hope you understand. —Akrabbim^talk 02:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Boy, you're picking on me today. =p. Just kidding bro. Sorry again. I just figured that since all the issues in my talk page had been dealt with, it didn't need to be there. Sorry again man.-- Diehard2k5 02:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar I, WatchHawk, award user Akrabbim The Tireless Contributor Barnstar award for his painstaking, endless, helpful, and quality contributions on Wikipedia.

Dance, Dance

Hey bro, I uploaded the image for Dance, Dance, and also added some other info. So you can cross that off of your to-do list. =P -- Diehard2k5 18:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I couldn't find it anywhere and I didn't like that big no album cover pic. I appreciate it. —Akrabbim^talk 23:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem.. For future reference, for singles and such.. its good to look at the import sites where most 7" and CD-Singles are sold.. One good site as a last resort is www.hmv.co.uk -- Diehard2k5 00:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, just wanted to stop by and say congratulations, or should I say, "CONGRATS GRAD!" I'll be starting High School this coming school year; hope you have a good time at college. Lord, please help you college kids!--WatchHawk 02:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I appreciate it. —Akrabbim^talk 15:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes

I've made your life easier and userfied any userboxes that link to User:Akrabbim/No secondhand smoke. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 20:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)}

SU

Hey what's up. I'll see you here in August. AdamBiswanger1 02:19, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Cuse userbox

Dear friend, Currently, it is not necessary to move Education userboxes to user space, because there is no consensus that they can't be on template space. If you moved it to protect it, then you are fine. However, please note that current practice is that userboxes not in template space ought not be included in the Education index. Recently, I haven't removed the userfied boxes, however, someone else certainly could. In short, you are welcome to put that userbox back on template, if you wish, but you don't have to. --NThurston 17:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of Education userboxes being "special" userboxes. I just assumed that userboxes were userboxes, unless they were babel boxes. Personally, I have no strong opinion about the nature of userboxes; I have just been slowly adopting userboxes to help out, as per WP:GUS. I don't know how accepted it is, but GUS seems to be looking forward to the time when the only boxes in template space are babel (see the second point in "After the Migration"), and I don't see anything on the Education article or talk pages. I also don't see why userfied boxes wouldn't be indcluded in the Education directory. Please inform me. —Akrabbim^talk 20:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

OK. The parts of GUS that are included in << >> are pending subject to a developing consensus. The Straw poll was intended to help define which boxes, besides babel, should stay on template. Education has a lot of votes in favor of staying because, like babel, they help you know about the credentials of the editor you're dealing with. So, they may not be consensus that Education boxes have to be moved, at least there certainly isn't right now, making it OK per GUS to stay in template. That's not to say that you can't create them in userspace, but there is a cryptic statement at the top of the article that only templates that start with user can be listed there. Since userboxes in userspace aren't technically templates, they might not be included. If you peruse the categories in the article, you won't see very many userfied boxes. There are a few comments scaterred about regarding this, but most people in Education haven't cared, yet. The hardline anti-UBX people for some reason envision destroying all of these categorical lists, too. That's what I know. --NThurston 22:08, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, OK. I was wondering what those << >> were. Thanks. I suppose I'll move Cuse back to template space for now since there isn't really any problems there yet, and just for consistency's sake. Thanks for the info, I suppose I'll just continue to quietly adopt more of the "fun" userboxes. Appreciate it! —Akrabbim^talk 14:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Continued from discussion on User talk:NThurston

The easiest thing for you to do would be to copy the code from your userfied version and paste it into the original 'cuse box. This leaves both boxes intact with identical content. And it's something you can do yourself without an admin gettin involved. --NThurston 21:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Subuserspace

If someone could design a bot to replace things like "User:Akrabbim/Asplode" (which redirects to User:Akrabbim/UBX/Asplode) with "User:Akrabbim/UBX/Asplode. I've been working on it with AWB, but I don't have enough time, as there are hundreds of transclusions. I think it would be a relatively simple bot task, as it is really only a few simple replacements. The only pages that need it is User:Akrabbim/Asplode, User:Akrabbim/Earthling2, User:Akrabbim/Emptybox, User:Akrabbim/No secondhand smoke, and User:Akrabbim/Towel. I'm just moving them into the User:Akrabbim/UBX subuserspace. It would be appreciated. —Akrabbim^talk 16:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

All done with MetsBot —Mets501 (talk) 19:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Googoodolls.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Googoodolls.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ShadowHalo 02:35, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Prfob split.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Prfob split.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

No longer orphaned, used on Fall Out Boy / Project Rocket Split EP as alternate cover. —Akrabbim^talk 13:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Syncing.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Syncing.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Converting.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Converting.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Veggie rocks cover.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Veggie rocks cover.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 20:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I have updated the non-free rationale for this image, including providing rationale specific to the article(s) that use this image. —Akrabbim^talk 21:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed validity of Image:The Declaration.jpg

Hi! I noticed that you added a fair use rationale for the image Image:The Declaration.jpg. However, according to this, it is not an official album cover, just a fan made one. Because of this, I nominated it for deletion. ≈Alessandro ♫ ^{T • C} 07:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

album naming

You reverted my move of the album ...and everything reminds me, citing WP:NAME. What aspect of the naming conventions disprefers the common and proper capitalization (lack thereof, as it is) versus otherwise? The album itself matched the capitalization, as does Amazon.de. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

The specific passage I was referring you to is from the Album and song titles and band names section of WP:NAME, where only conjunctions, articles, prepositions, and words starting or ending the phrase are capitalized, as with most proper nouns. The convention is also to ignore alternate typesetting on album art, etc. As for other sources using it, Allmusic uses these conventions as well. This was the rationale I used in performing the move to ...And Everything Reminds Me. Perhaps I was not clear in my move summary. As for ...and everything reminds me, a redirect should remain there. Thank you for asking, and sorry for the confusion. —Akrabbim^talk 03:49, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, I just couldn't find the apropos section of the guideline. It seems inappropriate though, even with the album artwork itself and the Amazon referencing. I'm going to bring it up at WT:NAME; not to point you out at all: you're well in the right, I just want to discuss the applicability of that guideline generally. Cheers? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 04:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Discoveramerica.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Discoveramerica.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:All Work and No Play.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:All Work and No Play.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 'image' 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 "Image" 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. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Veggie rocks cover.jpg)

You've uploaded File:Veggie rocks cover.jpg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:16, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:79.75.93.124, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors like this one- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or shared IP header templates (for unregistered editors). However, it should be noted that these exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 14:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I was under the impression that he was a notorious vandal, and was merely trying to taunt/vandalize further by blanking his own user page (filled primarily with vandalism warnings). He had been earlier leaving taunts on his talk page that other editors were reverting under the rationale that he was a new puppet of Light current. He is blocked now for 24 hours, nonetheless. —Akrabbim^talk 14:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Ref Desk talk page

Hello, Akrabbim. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Malcolm XIV (talk • contribs) 15:14, 8 November 2009

Terezín: The Music 1941-44

Copied with permission from email correspondences:

Hello Akkrabbim

I answered at length as to why the articles on "Terezin: The Music 1941-44" and on myself should not be deleted from Wikipedia, although there is a conflict of interest. I placed my reponse on the Alexander Goldscheider talk page, but am not sure if it all has been done correctly. I am therefore approaching you hereby as well, just in case.

May I also add, that www.romantic-robot.com contains more information on 4 CDs that I produced, including the Terezin 2-CD set, and you can also hear excerpts from them all as well.

Thank you.

Alexander Goldscheider

PS. I am not sure what music you listen to on last.fm, but I joined it recently and you can hear my music there as well, under Alexander Goldscheider. If you like classical choirs, and wish to try, then I would humbly suggest "Stabat Mater Part II" and/or "Ave Maria". There are also completely different electronic tracks, such as "Metalmorphosis", written for the same-named exhibition of British Metal in Prague and Berlin, where it was played continuously. AGRR 23:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I saw your additional posts, and thanks for your input. I'm going to post some of my thoughts on your talk page, where it is easier for me to talk about Wikipedia. As for last.fm, I am not that into electronic or classical music. Sorry. —Akrabbim^talk 04:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Akrabbim, very nice of you to let me know. I do not know where you may be, but it is nearly 5 in the morning in London, and I shall be signing off soon - and therefore unable to react to anything swiftly until I re-surface. Kind regards AGRR 04:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm over here in the Eastern US, where it is almost midnight, so I will be going to bed soon too. Don't worry, things won't move too quickly - the deletion discussion will probably go for about a week before any action is taken. Have a good night. —Akrabbim^talk 04:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

So sorry to be coming back this way again, I just read your notes under my talkpage, I will respond later on, but all the figures and arguments I listed on the Terezin: The Music 1941-44 seem to have disappeared.

Can you kindly re-list them, please, or perhaps e-mail me my whole response on the Terezin page, as I spent a fair amount of time on Googling, etc.

Thanks! AGRR 04:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You had posted them on the deletion discussion page —Akrabbim^talk 04:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Got it, thanks, and will answer on Wikipedia from now onwards.

I re-read your fuller response and it is more helpful and kinder than I found the initial couple of sentences under Terezin, so thank you!

I guess I shall have to tackle it all from a slightly different angle so that everything would no longer sound banal and obscure - not that I completely agree it did in the first place, but I very much prefer and like honesty, so I actually appreciate those comments, too.

A pity that the music seems not to have much chance to help the case here.

No need to reply to this, and I shall continue on Wikipedia. Best wishes and regards AGRR 05:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

---

Hello Akrabbim,

I am writing you an e-mail only because I am not sure whether I am supposed to make any more comments or do anything else re the article on myself and on the Terezín double-CD. It would seem I am not expected to make any more comments on the talk pages or in the delete sections, it would seem various people are showing support more than anything else, but as you are in charge of the process I only wish to say that if my participation is required at any moment anywhere, I would be most grateful if you could point it out to me.

I do not expect an answer to this e-mail either, I just do not wish to do anything wrong or find out later that I was actually supposed to have done something and I did not.

Thanks and best AGRR 20:20, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I think that you have done all you need to do. It looks like both articles will be saved. I'm glad it turned out this way. I guess it shows that the system works, to the betterment of the encyclopedia. When I nominated them for deletion, I didn't expect that it would drive other editors to improve them so that they would be worthy of remaining! —Akrabbim^talk 13:52, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

This is very reassuring, and I am very grateful to you for your fairness and kindness throughout.

You will have guessed that the Terezín is an emotional subject for me and not just because 23 of 25 Goldscheiders perished in various concentration camps. It was a major effort on my part to make a breakthrough with documenting that even in the most horrendous and vile circumstances there was the courage, strength and sheer audacity to do more than just survive and to write and produce music that gave further strength to others. None of the composers/musicians survived and I felt it was my duty to do whatever I could not just to preserve their legacy, but also prove that the music itself is eminently worth to be heard. The entry for the 2CDs mentioned absolutely nothing else than the names of the involved, the list list of tracks and the fact that the 2CD set exists. It was hurtful to find that a virtual publication that prides itself in bringing the vastest amount of data considered this may not be worth including. I fully accept and understand the COI, but I simply believed this was the most honest approach. As it turns out, something very positive may come out of this all, namely the fact that Mr. Vejvančický took on himself to write a more substantial article on Terezín and its music and I readily agreed to help him in any way I he may require.

I must also tell you that when I stayed up on Tuesday morning exchanging e-mails with you, I was fortunate to answer the phone and be told that our grandson had just been born! Everything serves its purpose - and it is good that Wikipedia documents and explains a lot of it!

Warm regards, best wishes and thanks AGRR 14:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Fall Out Boy

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Fall Out Boy/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

links

Continued from discussion on User talk:Tony1

When I saw your edit to the Switchfoot article, I wasn't quite sure about some of the changes you made. Could you explain (or at least point me in the direction of the relevant guidelines) why links shouldn't exist in the references, and why you removed links to surfing, Grammy Award, and YouTube? Thanks —Akrabbim^talk 23:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind if the links to publishers go back in the references; but their website is given anyway. A link to "Daily Nebraskan" doesn't seem helpful when http://www.dailynebraskan.com/arts-entertainment/switchfoot-breaks-mold-with-modern-rock-album-hello-hurricane-1.2059264 appears too. But I don't mind.

"Surfing" is a common-term dictionary word that should rarely be linked. Please see WP:LINK, especially since it's within a quotation.

[[Grammy Award|Grammy]] nomination for [[Grammy Award for Best Rock Gospel Album|Best Rock Gospel Album]]"—this is a "chain" link, where the more specific, second link will itself link to the more general, first one. There is no reason to link both. Thanks for your inquiry. Tony (talk) 04:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, that makes sense. Thanks. —Akrabbim^talk 11:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Alexander Goldscheider and Terezin: The Music 1941-44

Copied with permission from email correspondences:

Hello again, Akrabbim,

I note that the article on myself has no longer any deletion addenda attached - shall I assume that it has been accepted, please? The Terezin article, on the other hand, is still under consideration, it would seem. It has been suggested to add more info on its tracks, and as I browsed through the Internet references on the music it actually contains, there are so many notable references and I think it would be eminently worthwhile to list them. I would refrain from adding any personal comments, and simply list the tracks and their respective references.

Best regards and thanks again, Akrabbim AGRR 13:17, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the one biography article has survived the deletion proposal. As far as the Terezin article goes, it doesn't look like it will be deleted, but there isn't any consensus on whether it will continue to exist as it's own article or be merged into something more broad like "Music of Terezin". The discussion is here, and since it has continued for over a week, an administrator will probably come around and close the discussion. Any improvements from then on will be discussed on the article talk page. If you want to post any links with more information to expand it, feel free to do so there.

Let me know if you have any more questions, and congratulations on the birth of your grandchild! —Akrabbim^talk 17:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, one problem out of the way with a positive outcome!

My suggestion with the Terezin entry would be to expand it just with the tracks and major references for the time being, and wait until somebody will create a more substantial article.

I had a look at the article talk page and it is blank. Shall I re-create the article there? I could also ask one of the editors of Discogs to do it - he approached me a couple of days ago and entered himself a lot of data re all my releases, including the Terezin set. Incidentally, I find Discogs reliable and thorough, I must admit. The inputting is very structured and everything is automatically cross linked.

And finally, without wishing to upset you or anybody, could there be a dead simple entry on Romantic Robot, just stating what it did and does with proper references? It would seem quite logical to do it... Warm regards and thanks again AGRR 18:04, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

PS. This is the Discogs info on Terezin: [2] But I would suggest listing only the names of composers and compositions (without indiv. parts) and cite links on them. AGRR 18:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

PS. Somebody just added a lot to the Terezin article, but it was not me and I had nothing to do with it!

I tried to find out who did but could not, I assume it was one of the Wikipedia editors?

I kept my word to you and did not alter anything - not that I am not pleased that other people did...

I would, though, now like to alter a few things myself, in fact only put references to already existing Wikipedia articles on [Klein], [Haas], [Ullmann], [Krása] and [Brundibár] and add a few more under notes and references. Best AGRR 21:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Epeefleche has also been working on it. He added an infobox and a tracklisting, as well as finding some other references. I have since added some detail to the tracklisting. In the future, you can track changes to the article by using the page history. As for the talk page being blank, feel free to add sections to it if you want. Don't just simply write sections of the article there, just leave messages for other editors. —Akrabbim^talk 22:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, well, well - I am completely overwhelmed!!!!! The Terezin CD is now in as well - great!

Not only you in the end agreed to keep both articles in, but you so actively helped me - I find that admirable and touching, if I may say.

I just carried out very minor editing - tracks 11 and 12 appeared as part of tracks 7-10, the overall length of CDs was not correct, 3 of the composers died in Auschwitz rather than Terezin, and I also added a CD front picture.

I also thanked Epeefleche and I have to say that everybody involved meant well and I really appreciate it!

And finally, to close the chapter, what would you advise me to do about an article on Romantic Robot - all I would like to ideally see on Wikipedia is that it is a UK computer and music company that started in 1983, it initially made computer hardware and software (...and just list the items...) and since 1991 concentrated on music publishing and production (....and just list the releases....). The references and notes are clear by now.

Many thanks for everything again, this has been a most reassuring and uplifting experience! AGRR 02:50, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad you are satisfied! (Scratch that, overwhelmed, as you say - that is good too.) It is good to know that working on Wikipedia can benefit someone as directly as this project has. I like working semi-anonymously on projects that interest me, but it is nice to get some good ol' positive feedback and thanks for the effort I put in.

As for the Romantic Robot article, I think at this point any information we have could be incorporated into the Alexander Goldscheider article. If at some point in the future it seems like the subjects diverge too much or there is enough information to warrant a separate article, the editors could discuss splitting the material. For now, more detailed information should be kept just to the AG article. If you want to post suggestions on the talk page, that would be great, but like I mentioned earlier, you should avoid directly editing the AG article.

Glad I can continue to help —Akrabbim^talk 03:56, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

track listing

tx! how did you do that so quickly?--Epeefleche (talk) 20:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Haha, I had started working on it before you made any of your edits today, so it took longer than it looks like. When I went to submit it, I saw that you had already put one up yourself. Fortunately, you didn't have as much detail in yours, so my work didn't go to waste! —Akrabbim^talk 21:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Haha. But mine did. Nice job, I like yours better. You're a talented editor.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, on second thought, can you augment yours by working in the material that I had which your version lacks? I think it is quite poignant -- for example, if you look at the years, you will see that nearly all the composers died/were killed shortly after they wrote their pieces.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:32, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I didn't notice that. I think I can work it in somehow, and if not in the track listing, we could add it into the prose sections. What source did you get that date information from? —Akrabbim^talk 22:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Tx. The source in the footnote that I added to the text.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:20, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Tx. I think you also deleted what instruments people were playing, which I had in my version.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. —Akrabbim^talk 22:46, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Tx. I moved some ELs up. This looks like a keep to me. Its nice to see a nom work to improve an article. Kudos.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that

The image purge worked, dunno why its like that as tis not updated the pics automatically for like 3 days but the purge did fix the problem, thanks for the advice Darkwarriorblake (talk) 19:58, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could help. —Akrabbim^talk 20:05, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

UBX for discussion

An article that you have been involved in editing, User:UBX, has been proposed for a discussion. If you are interested, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. – imis^☂ 00:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Infoboxes

As we've been discussing at te WP Albums talk page, it's best to hold off implementing infobox changes before we settle on how exactly everything is going to work out. After all, it's much more effective to implement changes once instead of having to go back and fix things repeatedly as we hammer out the details. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:50, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Associated acts on Switchfoot

Why is it "unnecessary?" It helps to give light to projects that the Switchfoot members are/were involved with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joberooni (talk • contribs) 04:13, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The infobox is about the band, and none of those bands I removed have any affiliation with Switchfoot other than having one member in common. The "Affiliated acts" field is for notable professional relationships between the bands, not necessarily individual members. See the instructions given at Template:Infobox musical artist. It says to avoid listing bands with only one member in common. It's not like that information is otherwise absent, either - all those bands are mentioned in different parts of the band article, as well as being in the infobox on the respective individual's articles. It's not like the information isn't important, it just doesn't belong in the infobox. I'm sorry I didn't explain when I reverted your edit, as I see now you asked why in your edit summary. That was kind of rude of me. —Akrabbim^talk 05:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries man. Was just wondering what your rationale was but that makes sense! Thanks! Joberooni (talk) 22:11, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Time frames

It is perfectly fine to list years in order insure accuracy of when the band was signed and when it wasn't. It doesn't take up too much extra space. Explain this to me. Joberooni (talk) 00:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

EDIT: Nevermind.

That was easy :) Let me know if you still are wondering about it. —Akrabbim^talk 02:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Got it. :P Joberooni (talk) 01:45, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

AIV help

Thanks for your help. I should be OK from here. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

ronaldo images

Do you think there is any way possible to properly upload these images of Cristiano Ronaldo? [3] Please let me know. I'm dying to put them up and you seem to be very knowledgeable. Mikysilva94 (talk) 02:00, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

I have replied back at WP:MCQ with your original question. —Akrabbim^talk 05:04, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Album Bot

Hey Akrabbim, I was hoping that you could make sure that I am doing what is wanted with DASHBot. Has anything changed? I did exactly what I was told to in the 'Bot work' section. Give me a message if consensus changes. Tim1357 (talk) 03:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

The main objection right now is that when you add a Reception section to a short article, it looks pretty bad, and the template is forced below the infobox (i.e. Freedumb). Someone suggested that you just add the template below the infobox without adding a new section or {{Arprose}}, but I think it would be a better idea to put the new section with {{Album ratings}} and {{Arprose}} below the tracklisting, instead of above it. I think this would be applicable with stub- and start-class articles. The rest of the articles will be fine with it above the tracklisting, where it belongs. There is no official consensus yet, but I think this will fix the problem people have with the process. —Akrabbim^talk 17:17, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Concerns with the 2009 albums page

I think the page has become large and unwieldy, it took minutes to load it up, and it might have the same results for other users. Is there any possible way to compact the page?--F-22 Raptör^{Aces High♠} 21:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that as well. I removed the list from 2009 in music, which was tagged as being too long as well, and I have been busy making sure all of the information there made it into this list. After I had finished with that, I was going to bring it up on the talk page to see what should be done about it. I haven't thought about it that much, but maybe we could break it up into monthly lists? What we would keep on the main list I have no idea. Let's take more discussion to the list's talk page. —Akrabbim^talk 03:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Discussion on WT:RD

No, I have NOT been disruptive at all. I brought up valid points. It is not my fault that people tried to argue something else with me about the signatures. I tried my best to stick to the topic of the diff links, it was kainaw who kept making an issues out of something else. Every comment I post was civil and on topic. I also think that you should give a message to kainaw as well about being "disruptive", as he was as much a part of that discussion as I was and it is unfair to single me out only. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.89.90 (talk) 12:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

We can continue this discussion at WT:RD, where you have already responded. —Akrabbim^talk 13:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Humanities Ref. Desk

Your post at the Humanities Ref. Desk.[4] is disruptive. You can state that a stigma existed without duplicating the prejudice that supported the stigma. The wording "dirty enough to have sex out of wedlock" insults millions of women. Please consider striking the words dirty enough. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 00:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, you're right, I see now that it was a bit crass, I have now reworded it to more accurately communicate what I was originally trying to say. Thanks for pointing that out. —Akrabbim^talk 00:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the wording. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 00:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Image

The Doors is my favorite band, why cannot I have his(her,your) image in my page?, what type of images must I have?, can I have some image related to the music? --Eduardofoxx13 (talk) 02:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

The reason you cannot have that specific image is because it does not have a free copyright. Under fair use, you can only use these particular images in articles that explain the subject in an encyclopedic or educational fashion, and where a free alternative is not sufficient. This practice in no way applies to user pages, so you have to find a free image. All of the free images on Wikipedia are hosted at the WikiMedia Commons. Any file there can be used however you want, and they automatically work with Wikipedia (meaning you can add them to articles or user pages as if they were on Wikipedia already). For more information, you can read WP:FILE, WP:UP#NOT, and WP:FU. Let me know if you still have any questions. —Akrabbim^talk 03:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

You want me to say that any image of WikiMedia Commons is free to get in my user page? --Eduardofoxx13 (talk) 03:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC).

That's exactly right. Also, since many of the images on Wikipedia are hosted at the commons, you can check how you are allowed to use them in the "Licensing" section of the image description, without having to look through commons if you don't want. Here is an example of a free image, and here is an example of a non-free image. —Akrabbim^talk 03:17, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks friend. --Eduardofoxx13 (talk) 03:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Ref desk

I restored it. Bearian (talk) 02:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. —Akrabbim^talk 02:30, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Falloutboy Revision

Can you explain your revision?174.3.98.236 (talk) 03:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Good question. The hatnote is supposed to be short and concise to quickly direct readers that are looking for the Simpsons character to the right location. In this case I find it unnecessary to leave the whole link, including the #Section pointer all displayed, when you can just pipe-link it (or use a different for template) for clarity. —Akrabbim^talk 03:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, let's leave out the section and just have it link to the list. Is that ok?174.3.98.236 (talk) 04:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's perfectly acceptable to directly link to the section, and then have it piped, like it has been. The reader doesn't need to know they are going to a list - only that they are going to the location of info on Fallout Boy. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, Fallout Boy and Fallout Boy are equivalent. Bkonrad seems to agree. —Akrabbim^talk 14:24, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Whiteface Mountain (New York)

Hi. You removed the disambiguation from Whiteface Mountain (New York), but there are "Whiteface Mountain"s in several other states. See http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic/f?p=115:2:2675597580582005::NO:RP::
—WWoods (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

As it was, Whiteface Mountain redirected to Whiteface Mountain (New York), so I didn't think it made a difference. Thanks for pointing out the other similarly-named mountains, but I still think the New York one is the primary topic. The one in New Hampshire is known as Mount Whiteface and the one in Alaska is named after the one in New York, which along with the one in New Mexico both seem fairly non-notable, as we don't have articles on them. Though I'm not familiar with the notability and inclusion guidelines in this topic. So based on what I understand from WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:PRECISION, the NY mountain should reside at Whiteface Mountain. Perhaps instead of the {{for|the mountain in New Hampshire|Mount Whiteface}}, we should have an {{about|the mountain in New York|Whiteface}}. What do you think? —Akrabbim^talk 19:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

82.43.*

Would you care to work on an ANI about 82.43.*? I personally deleted one message from the nosign IP last week. It was a blatant attempt to start an argument, but I stated that it was because he didn't sign his post. That is what you've appeared to propose - deleting his posts if he doesn't sign them. The big problem here is that anyone new to this topic will certainly read this as a few people picking on a new guy for not knowing how or forgetting to sign a post here and there. Therefore, a hell of a lot of evidence to the contrary is required. -- kainaw™ 03:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I think I will. I was kind of hoping that we wouldn't have to get the bureaucracy involved, but I guess that is the next step. I'll drop a note at WT:RD and their user talk when I figure out the best way to propose something. —Akrabbim^talk 04:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Awesome

Thank you for your patience and thoughtful feedback. Rnlrobinson (talk) 03:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

No problem. —Akrabbim^talk 04:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Denez Prigent

Thanks for your copyediting, I appreciate it. Do you think the article is ready for submission to a GA review ? Oyp (talk) 22:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

No, not at this point. It is very thorough with lots of good content and sourcing, but there is still a pretty good amount of content cleanup required. I haven't taken that much time reading through the body yet, but I think there is still minor content trimming that can be done, as well as some paragraph structuring work and other general copy editing. I'm still planning on putting more time into it, and hopefully one or two others will join me from your post on the music project page too. At this point I would probably be given a B-class rating, and maybe when we're done we can open it up to a peer review before submitting a GAN. The reason it wouldn't make GA status right now isn't because of the translation (which I think is pretty well done), but probably because of differences between the French and English Wikipedias' content quality criteria (mostly due to enwp's much larger size). —Akrabbim^talk 22:47, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, so I will be following the article. There may be improvements that I can backport, or maybe it's just a matter of difference between writing in English and in French. I had to write scientific documents in English, with another person copyediting the drafts, and the differences range from inserting a comma at places where there would never be one in French to doing the whole thing differently. Thanks for your commitment, of course. Oyp (talk) 23:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I enjoy working on new and different projects. One thing I noticed is an occasional difference in the order of clauses in compound sentences; they read better in English when they are switched around while tweaking the transitions. It's not even that bad, though, since the meaning remains clear, and at worst it seems just a little off. —Akrabbim^talk 04:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, so please tell me when you are done so I request a peer review, or maybe directly nominate it for GA. After all, what you did already includes a PR and Blaxthos had a look at the article as well, so is a third one really needed… Oyp (talk) 09:53, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

That's a good point, maybe we can go right to GAN, I don't know. And I will keep working on it (I have been busy the last few days) and let you know when I've done all I can - right now I have made it through the Ar gouriz koar section. —Akrabbim^talk 13:50, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Big hair

An article that you have been involved in editing, Big hair, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big hair. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 08:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I guess with two edits in 2006, that puts me in the top 20 editors... —Akrabbim^talk 14:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

What happened to Hotmail?

I'm back at that library today.

When I sign into Gmail I get a message that Javascript has been disabled. I was able to do some stuff in Hotmail last week, but not everything. Another site wouldn't let me do certain things because, it told me, Javascript was disabled. I had to click instead of getting automatically redirected. Several web sites are almost completely useless, including Facebook.

Here is the question you tried to help me with.

I also can't click and get the characters at the bottom of this screen to appear. I have to copy and paste.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I am not really knowledgeable enough to be able to help you. I know enough to be able to tell that it is not the OS, and I hoped that with your follow-up information like the browser you were using would be able to inform someone else watching the thread enough to be able to help. I don't use Internet Explorer myself, so I wouldn't be able to help you to enable javascript more than this would be able to. I hope you can get it working again. —Akrabbim^talk 18:15, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I talked to the librarian. She said make a list of problems I was having. I emailed it to her, and the rest is up to the people who deal with computers at the library. It has been a nightmare for me to get anything done today.

Actually, I did a lot. You can look at my contributions. Just not what I had planned.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I go back to that library tomorrow; hopefully everything will be fixed. It's entirely possible all the problems were javascript-related.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

NO fixes. If anything, it's worse. This time I couldn't even sign in to Hotmail, but at least there was a message telling me it was the Javascript problem. Someone came to look at the situation but there weren't any changes made while lots of people were using the computers. It's apparently every computer, since this is the third of 12 in this place I've used since the problems began.

And Lycos won't send or even save drafts. This wasn't true before.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:10, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:AWB/Tasks

Hi, can you take care of the tasks over there? --JokerXtreme (talk) 10:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look and see what I can do with the time that I have. I'm surprised that there is a backlog filling - a few weeks ago I had to see the change on my watchlist within a few hours if I didn't want someone else to snatch it up! —Akrabbim^talk 11:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hehe, maybe it's a slow period for Wikipedia. --JokerXtreme (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

AWB

Another one for you. Could you please change [[Wild Horses (song)|Wild Horses]] to [[Wild Horses (Rolling Stones song)|Wild Horses]]? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done —Akrabbim^talk 00:20, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Denez Prigent (2)

Do you intend to edit the article again ? No problem if you don't, I'd just like to know. Oyp (talk) 13:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I do, though I have been very busy lately and haven't been able to edit much of Wikipedia at all. I have another two or three weeks left in this semester, and after that I should be able to get on here more. It is on my list for when I do pick up my editing again. —Akrabbim^talk 19:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 02:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

RFC courtesy notice - succession boxes

As someone who has taken part in previous discussions regarding the use of succession boxes in articles for songs and albums, I'd like to notify you of a request for comment that is taking place at WT:CHARTS#Request for comment: Use of succession boxes. It would be nice to finally come to a resolution on this. If you have already participated in this RFC or do not wish to participate, then please disregard this notice. Thanks. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 00:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Nice

I like it. Much better than my version was. Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 18:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Glad to be of service! —Akrabbim^talk 18:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Album ratings default state

Greetings, Akrabbim. At Template talk:Album ratings#Width, there is a discussion about several of the default values for the {{Album ratings}} template. Of the several editors who have commented about the "state" parameter, there seems to be agreement that the best default value would be "plain", so that by default the hide and show options are not there. I'm not too familiar with template syntax and parsing. Would you be willing to change the default to "state=plain"? Thanks in advance. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 00:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I've started a separate discussion thread just about this, at Template talk:Album ratings#The best default would be "state=plain". — Mudwater ^(Talk) 03:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

After a quick discussion at Template talk:Album ratings#The best default would be "state=plain", I've removed the "state" parameter from the template. Feel free to comment there. And by the way, thanks for your work on the template. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 13:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Album ratings prose

Template:Album ratings prose has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Muhandes (talk) 21:30, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Peter Lehmann

Why are you requesting deletion of Peter Lehmann? (I just changed it from a redirect to a disambig with 2 entries though formatting could be improved.) RJFJR (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I am deleting it so Peter Lehmann (disambiguation) could be moved to its place. This was because I created the disambig page before I moved Peter Lehmann (winemaker) from Peter Lehmann. Same result, different path. Sorry for the confusion. —Akrabbim^talk 15:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Deleted and moved. RJFJR (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Ah, you're an admin, nice. Thanks. —Akrabbim^talk 16:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

(ec)I've removed the redirect from Talk:Peter Lehmann to Talk:Peter Lehmann (winemaker), now that Peter Lehmann no longer redirects to Peter Lehmann (winemaker). I'll leave someone else to decide whether Peter Lehmann (author) has appropriate references to secondary sources. At the very least I did feel that Peter Lehmann (winemaker) probably qualified as primary topic. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:45, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I was mostly just responding to the question at WP:HD#There are 2 "Peter Lehmann", but only 1 to find with the search button, and since neither article seemed obviously more popular to me at first glance (I know next to nothing about psychiatry or wine), I guessed that the db page should be at Peter Lehmann. It won't bother me what ends up where in the end; I will also leave that up to someone else to decide :) —Akrabbim^talk 16:54, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk page/Discussion

That was not a talk page. The link that you gave me does not apply there. Quest09 (talk) 21:42, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Conversation continued at User talk:Quest09#Reference desk comments. —Akrabbim^talk 21:51, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Message for Akrabbim

http://tehcake.com/video/Withoutatrace/3x12.html

That's the website address which shows Without A Trace Season 3 Episode 12 called Penitence. Is it okay for you to watch the Episode called Penitence? YES OR NO.(99.88.78.94 (talk) 22:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)).

NO, sorry. I'm not really interested in watching this show. Maybe you could look around to see if you can find any fan or general movie/TV forums where you can discuss these shows and movies with other people who have seen them. Wikipedia isn't really the best place to have these conversations. —Akrabbim^talk 23:00, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

MESSAGE

Can you please watch Penitence when you get a chance? During the Prison Yard Fight in the Episode called Penitence, I actually believed that MacAvoy broke out of prison but 2 of the guards were bribed to take MacAvoy to the church inside the prison. MacAvoy got murdered by his friend inside the Church.(99.88.78.94 (talk) 07:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)).

Message

OH MY GOSH!!!!!!

I'm unable to understand most of the events in the movie called Frequency, so that's why I'm asking questions about the movie called Frequency. On Wikipedia Reference Desk Website, is it okay for me to ask questions about the movie called Frequency?(Sean Archer123 (talk) 05:54, 21 September 2011 (UTC)).

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian maritime history#Green Cape Lighthouse photos

Hi there. As I was the uploader of both images, you could have probably saved yourself some time by asking me directly. Anyway, I am now back from "vacation" so I had time to look at it, and the result of my research is there. I hope this helps. --Muhandes (talk) 17:19, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I don't know why I didn't think to look who uploaded them. —Akrabbim^talk 21:50, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Beatles lineup

Once again, the infobox says "members", not "current members". The lineup from the first record in 1962 until the formal breakup in 1970 was John, Paul, George and Ringo and were often referred to as The Fab Four. Before they became famous, there were two former Beatles, Stu and Pete who were officially Beatles. So to make sure they can never be mistakenly called the Fab Six, the members are John, Paul, George and Ringo and the former members are Stu and Pete. Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Problematic AWB edits

Hi there. I just noticed that you used AWB to add a number of {{Rename media}} tags to images. As a result, you created about 700 broken rename tags, singlehandedly populating Category:Incomplete file renaming requests. I will clean up the mess, as it seems that there are a good number of images that need listing for deletion, but please do not a) use AWB for a template that requires manual input, or b) run an AWB program on behalf of another user. That user should run it himself or herself. For the sake of discussion, the person you were running this for should have known that AWB would have caused issues in this case, so I'm rather puzzled by the whole affair. Sven Manguard Wha? 06:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that the new name field was required. Looking at the output for the code that I was adding (here for example), it doesn't look like to me that the template is "broken". And I think that the reason ("largely duplicative filename") explains well enough that the new name doesn't matter, as long as it is slightly different. As for running AWB to help other users, we have WP:AWB/Tasks set up for exactly this reason, and that is where this particular request was made. There are various reasons why users wouldn't have access to the AWB tool but still need something done using it. —Akrabbim^talk 21:13, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Discussion on linking to streamed copies of albums

Wikipedia policy allows us to link to legal streamed copies of albums. It would be useful to draw up a guideline on how and when to link to such albums; however, there is concern that it may not be appropriate as the music would not be available in all parts of the world. Is the benefit of having access to the music for most users outweighed by the fact that some users will follow a link to find the music is not playable in their region? Your view would be helpful at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 01:47, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorkin disambigs

Who the hell are you to remove the disambig/distinguish from the two Sorkin pages, namely Andrew Ross Sorkin and Aaron Sorkin ??? Clearly these are required to ensure that the proper Sorkin is referenced, especially for TV viewers who confuse the two. I will not go away or back down from your unjust and unapproved reversals either. Govern yourself accordingly. 173.50.106.27 (talk) 23:56, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

There is nothing ambiguous about those two names, other than what is resolved on the Sorkin page. I don't think that there is enough potential confusion that makes the message necessary. In fact it may even cause some confusion to people that are at the right place. And there is nothing unjust about my edits. Those don't have to be approved, just like no one had to approve your edits. It's all part of how the editing process works. —Akrabbim^talk 00:22, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Bollocks!!! Your commonsense is lacking in your recent edits to Andrew Ross Sorkin and Aaron Sorkin, which are nothing short of Vandalism at this point. Please desist from future edits here unless you have a compelling reason other than "I still don't believe this belongs".

173.50.106.27 (talk) 22:33, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you read my reply? I've already explained some of my reasoning why "I still don't believe this belongs". Also, vandalism would imply that my intentions lie in an attempt to detract from the quality of the project, which is not the case. We simply disagree; no one is vandalizing here.

Simply put, I don't see any ambiguity in these two articles that require an disambiguation. Andrew and Aaron are completely different names. We have these notices for cases like George H.W. Bush/George W. Bush and John Woo/John Wu, not Aaron/Andrew. If we put a hatnote on every single person's article that shared a last name with somebody else, then it would be overkill. Once again, I think it could be an additional cause for confusion where there wasn't one to begin with.

Maybe someone hears Andrew Ross Sorkin's name on the news. They punch it in to Wikipedia, and the first thing they see is something telling them that they might be confused with Aaron Sorkin. Now, since they recognize Aaron's name (for being a famous person and all), now they must do additional reading to make sure they were in the right spot all along. If all they could remember was a last name, then Sorkin takes care of everything. I think those cases are much more common than someone wanting to look up Andrew and only remembering Aaron's name. —Akrabbim^talk 23:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

You reasoned: "Maybe someone hears Andrew Ross Sorkin's name on the news. They punch it in to Wikipedia, and the first thing they see is something telling them that they might be confused with Aaron Sorkin. Now, since they recognize Aaron's name (for being a famous person and all), now they must do additional reading to make sure they were in the right spot all along. If all they could remember was a last name, then Sorkin takes care of everything. I think those cases are much more common than someone wanting to look up Andrew and only remembering Aaron's name."

That's the reason as to exactly why the disambigs should also remain on both pages. Thanks for understanding. 173.50.106.27 (talk) 23:52, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. In my example, they ended up at the correct page, without confusion, but then the hatnote caused confusion when there wasn't any to begin with. The purpose of these messages should be to resolve potential confusion, not generate questions. —Akrabbim^talk 23:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I've brought this up at the article talk page. —Akrabbim^talk 15:02, 10 February 2012 (UTC)