User talk:YouCanDoBetter
Welcome
Subsequent paragraph divisions were not influenced by your worthless interventions. Go hug your boyfriend if you feel needy, and don't troll an experienced writer.
Don't put a cleanup tag on my work.
- It was more than warranted, and I'll be back to either put the tag up or clean it up, probably the latter. Thanks for the heads-up anon, and no, it's not reflective of someone writing to an academic standard.YouCanDoBetter (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
|
YouCanDoBetter, you are invited to the Teahouse!
Hi YouCanDoBetter! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:08, 5 March 2019 (UTC) |
Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Nick Moyes (talk) 09:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).
Your thread has been archived
Hi YouCanDoBetter! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
Your thread has been archived
Hi YouCanDoBetter! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Your thread has been archived
Hi YouCanDoBetter! You created a thread called Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing
|
Notice
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
– Muboshgu (talk) 20:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
Your submission at Articles for creation: It's All Right (Kinks song) (December 23)
- If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:It's All Right (Kinks song) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
- If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:It's All Right (Kinks song), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
- If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
- If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.
Concern regarding Draft:It's All Right (Kinks song)
Hello, YouCanDoBetter. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:It's All Right (Kinks song), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.
If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.
If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 08:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Officer and a Spy
Why the reversion on Roman Polanski's page? The text was put in back when the film's title wasn't known yet, but we know now. Incerto501 (talk) 03:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn’t know if it was vandalism because it said 2013 and was linked to a book. We can put it back in, but it should be with 2019 and the right link/formatting in italics. Thanks for letting me know. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:58, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Got it, thanks for clarifying! Sorry about the link error, usually I check that first. It's actually already linked twice earlier in the article so I left it unlinked but italicized this time. Incerto501 (talk) 15:42, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- No problem, have a good day! YouCanDoBetter (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
Disambiguation link notification for December 29
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited For Free (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Michael McDonald.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 4
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lyman Ward.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
Standard ArbCom sanctions notice
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in gender-related disputes or controversies or in people associated with them. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}}
on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
Newimpartial (talk) 12:44, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Nick Cave discography has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Robert McClenon (talk) 16:00, 10 July 2022 (UTC)- Thank you very much, Robert McClenon. I'm still working on the page and making it better, but I'm glad to see it's already at a level where it can be published on here. Thanks again! YouCanDoBetter (talk) 04:46, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Keith Richards discography has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
Robert McClenon (talk) 16:01, 12 July 2022 (UTC)Your submission at Articles for creation: Mick Jagger discography has been accepted
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
.Thanks again, and happy editing!
BuySomeApples (talk) 07:35, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Disambiguation link notification for August 21
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bono, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Silver and Gold.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
–::== Tweeden ==
Please review WP:BRD, our page on best practices for resolving editorial disagreements when your edit has been reverted. It does no good simply to assert, as you did in your edit summary, that you are correct. That leads to edit warring, which is unconstructive. Please self-revert your second edit so that the status quo remains in the article while you advocate for your view on the article talk page. See also WP:BLP Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 23:11, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
- Normally I would agree, but there doesn't seem to be any justification in the first place to place undue emphasis on the politics of a subject when it is not relevant, e.g. "Roger Waters, a self-proclaimed socialist and musician with a history of conflict with Jewish commentators, gave his support to the Black Lives Matter movement." If I hear a single reason why Jones is worth mentioning or Stone's politics are worth mentioning, I will self-revert immediately. But at the moment it seems like politically-motivated, off-topic editorializing. Not looking for a fight, just a reason, I don't know who added this in the first place but it seems like they were just trying to go off-topic. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 00:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- The place to say that is on the article talk page -- before undoing the revert. I did not say it is all excessive. But you need to justify each part you think should be cut. Please self revert. SPECIFICO talk 01:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Pre-code Hollywood. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. 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.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- 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 and 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.
- Please stop edit warring and go to the talk page and make your case for your edits. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Notices
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}}
on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.
You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.
To opt out of receiving messages like this one, place {{Ds/aware}}
on your user talk page and specify in the template the topic areas that you would like to opt out of alerts about. For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.
SPECIFICO talk 01:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Not vandalism
Hi, YouCanDoBetter. Please don't misuse the word "vandalism" in edit summaries, as you did here and here. If you take a look at our WP:Vandalism article, especially WP:NOTVAND, you'll see that neither of those edits were vandalism. (And you'll also see that "Intentional vandalism", as you wrote here, is a tautology; it's not vandalism at all if it's not intentional.) Bishonen | tålk 03:51, 29 December 2022 (UTC).
- This is, in actuality, a vandalism campaign by a rogue user, and is certainly not a mere case of disruptive editing. Whatever you want to call it, it's sabotage, it's hate-based, and if someone else can effectively deal with it, then do it. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 04:07, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- I looked at the contributions of the /64 range (which is all the same person) and I'm afraid I don't understand how for instance changing "black comedy" to "dark comedy" is "sabotage" or "hate-based". Our article Black comedy begins "Black comedy, also known as dark comedy, morbid humor, or gallows humor, is a style of comedy that..", so "dark comedy" is apparently considered an option at least by some. Is it because of these edit summaries that you call it hate-based? That seems a bit of a stretch. Differences of opinion are not vandalism. Bishonen | tålk 11:19, 29 December 2022 (UTC).
- If you're going to label trolling "difference of opinion", we're not having a dialogue here. I'll stay out of editing these pages, if that makes it easier. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 21:46, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- I looked at the contributions of the /64 range (which is all the same person) and I'm afraid I don't understand how for instance changing "black comedy" to "dark comedy" is "sabotage" or "hate-based". Our article Black comedy begins "Black comedy, also known as dark comedy, morbid humor, or gallows humor, is a style of comedy that..", so "dark comedy" is apparently considered an option at least by some. Is it because of these edit summaries that you call it hate-based? That seems a bit of a stretch. Differences of opinion are not vandalism. Bishonen | tålk 11:19, 29 December 2022 (UTC).
Heathers
I don't need to cite sources for summarizing the reviews being mixed or the film being a commercial flop when it is verified in the article. And your removal of "certain" from "certain polls" lends the impression that it's beyond just the few polls that were cited. But if you're fine diminishing the quality of the article, for whatever purpose... all the while dismissing the effort another editor puts into explaining their actions... have at it. I'll save my emotions for a worthier avenue. 𝒮𝒾𝓇 𝒯𝑒𝒻𝓁𝑜𝓃 (talk | contribs) 04:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- I don't believe the reviews being mixed is verified in the article, it would need to be a substantial percentage to qualify as mixed. You haven't explained how it's mixed yet. Almost all films that are considered to have a positive, unmixed reception have well-over two bad reviews. If it's mentioned elsewhere in the body that it was actually mixed, and not just some bad reviews, point to it and I'll back off. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 04:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
You're accusing me of "emotionality" because I specified how many polls are actually cited? Lmao 𝒮𝒾𝓇 𝒯𝑒𝒻𝓁𝑜𝓃 (talk | contribs) 23:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Where are your sources for the claim that it has been ranked as such in polls? Apart from the three polls themselves?? Youre a total hypocrite. Leave me alone. You can have this article with your Ninja sidekick, who dismisses relevant(!) essays concerning summarizing in the lead in leiu of explicit sourcing(!)... 𝒮𝒾𝓇 𝒯𝑒𝒻𝓁𝑜𝓃 (talk | contribs) 23:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
- Easy, skipper. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 23:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Lmao Some wikipedian 𝒮𝒾𝓇 𝒯𝑒𝒻𝓁𝑜𝓃 (talk | contribs) 00:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
The Pale Blue Eye cast
Hi. I have undid your edit here because I'm not sure what "end credits based on tombstones" you are referring to? The cast list is directly based on the end credits as you can see here. Mike Allen 14:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's not a big deal to me, but the way I was taught is basing the order on the individual credit slides (sometimes referred to as "tombstone credits") before the scroll. I don't know if there's a policy either way as to which takes precedence, so I'm not pushing for it. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:38, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'll look into it, but until then I'm good with keeping as is.
Come Away with Me genres
I’m not quite sure why you keep adding Jazz as a genre. The AllMusic review doesn’t state jazz anywhere in the review. I’m assuming you’re adding jazz because it’s listed under Genres right below Release Date and Duration. That is not what we follow per Template:Infobox album states — The field should include the music genre(s) that best describes the album. It should come from a reliable source and also be stated and referenced in the body of the article. Jazz is not stated as a genre in the body of the article, so please refrain from adding it back unless you find a reliable source that actually calls the album a jazz album. Pillowdelight (talk) 04:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- Duly noted on Allmusic. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Interpolating comments
Hi YouCanDoBetter! Please don't interpolate comments as you did here. Especially because you didn't sign your comment, it appeared like Bgsu98 made it instead. I went ahead and moved your comment below Bgsu98's last line.
When it comes to signing your comments, you may find the "Discussion tools" feature useful. It adds a "Reply" button and it automatically signs your comments. You can enable that in your Preferences > Beta features > Discussion tools. I hope that helps. Cheers! Woodroar (talk) 13:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Curtis Hanson
Great job trimming Curtis Hanson. I was planning to what you did. I couldn't ask for a better follow up. I was planning to do the same
I have to disagree with the trim you gave The Bedroom Window. Though. I think you over trimmed it. Anyways let me know if you intent to pursue the article or would you like I can continue pasting relevant information to it and let you do the rest?
Thanks. Filmman3000 (talk) 04:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'll step aside and let you take the lead. I may help out and trim some later, but you're doing a good job. I'll have to look at The Bedroom Window again at some point, maybe I did over-trim it. Thanks for the heads-up. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 05:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. I re-added a trimmed version of what I had stamped. I will let you know or you will notice my next load. Filmman3000 (talk) 00:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hey I dropped the new load. Come check it out and take the lead. Filmman3000 (talk) 00:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds good Filmman. When I get a chance I'll take a look. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 01:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hey I dropped the new load. Come check it out and take the lead. Filmman3000 (talk) 00:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. I re-added a trimmed version of what I had stamped. I will let you know or you will notice my next load. Filmman3000 (talk) 00:36, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited ...Is It Something I Said?, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Mooney.
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Village People
It was an album, and here's the RIAA ref: https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&ar=Village+People&ti=Village+People&format=Album&type=#search_section Hotcop2 (talk) 01:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'll go the talk page. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 01:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
McCartney
Apologies for my revert. I obviously didn't look very closely. Happy editing! Sundayclose (talk) 13:50, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
- No problem, and thank you my friend. Happy editing! YouCanDoBetter (talk) 19:08, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Discographies
Are the rules you apply written down anywhere? Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- What rule are we talking about? YouCanDoBetter (talk) 02:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- The ones you use to edit discographies, such as solo material first; live albums and compilations for solo work but not for anything else; removal of explanatory notes etc. Bretonbanquet (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just Wikipedia precedent, all the major articles, Neil Young, Bob Dylan, etc. Solo material is the center of the article, all the band material are secondary material in the context of a solo discography. The explanatory notes I was only removing for information that is available on the page, I'm assuming the notes were originally put up when the records themselves didn't have pages, so that's just de-cluttering. But I won't push it any further, just looking for consistency across pages. Ideally the band work that has its own discography shouldn't appear on the page at all, it should just be linked, but there are cases where the artist didn't perform across the whole band discography, so the primary albums/singles are placed there to denote span. But it's not common to mention compiled/remixed/live work. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 02:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- One size doesn't always fit all. Every career is different, and sometimes a solo career is the least significant part of an artist's output - Kirwan being a good example. A sizeable number of his Fleetwood Mac compositions can only be found on compilation albums and live albums, which are now absent from his discography. On Green's page, there's no mention of big chunks of his work with Fleetwood Mac (which is all most people care about), yet there's still a huge list of low-budget solo compilations, which all feature basically the same songs. Don't let consistency be the enemy of clarity and valuable content. Bretonbanquet (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying, but that is why there is a Fleetwood Mac discography page, an institution that is not a part of the body of work done under his own name; same goes for Kirwan, the majority of his written compositions were written for the institution of Fleetwood Mac, but those are their recordings, not his. Anyone looking for his solo discography are looking for his recordings, not the work he did as an employee of Fleetwood Mac. I definitely believe the low-budget comps should be eliminated, the unauthorized one, but that's a discussion for another time. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- These two pages were not intended to be solely solo discographies, but a reference of all that artist's recorded work. The Fleetwood Mac discography page doesn't indicate which releases feature Green or Kirwan, so that page is of little use to those searching only for the work of those two artists. There seems to me to be no reason to disallow information simply because it exists elsewhere in a less helpful form. Taking Kirwan as an example, if only his solo work is to be featured, then there's no point in having a separate page - just merge it with the main article. Bretonbanquet (talk) 03:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- The Fleetwood material is still up on the Kirwan page. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- These two pages were not intended to be solely solo discographies, but a reference of all that artist's recorded work. The Fleetwood Mac discography page doesn't indicate which releases feature Green or Kirwan, so that page is of little use to those searching only for the work of those two artists. There seems to me to be no reason to disallow information simply because it exists elsewhere in a less helpful form. Taking Kirwan as an example, if only his solo work is to be featured, then there's no point in having a separate page - just merge it with the main article. Bretonbanquet (talk) 03:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- It's true though that attention should be brought to the Fleetwood Mac discography at the top, I'm taking care of that. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Honestly, if you're only going to include a fraction of their work with Fleetwood Mac, then it's better to remove it all. Just selecting some of the studio albums and a bunch of singles just looks half-assed. Then redirect the Kirwan discography to his main page. I created that page to help people find all his work, not some of it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 03:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I included all of the work (obviously the outtakes don't count, I trust that's not what you're referring to), but I will suggest the page be merged with the main page. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Honestly, if you're only going to include a fraction of their work with Fleetwood Mac, then it's better to remove it all. Just selecting some of the studio albums and a bunch of singles just looks half-assed. Then redirect the Kirwan discography to his main page. I created that page to help people find all his work, not some of it. Bretonbanquet (talk) 03:26, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying, but that is why there is a Fleetwood Mac discography page, an institution that is not a part of the body of work done under his own name; same goes for Kirwan, the majority of his written compositions were written for the institution of Fleetwood Mac, but those are their recordings, not his. Anyone looking for his solo discography are looking for his recordings, not the work he did as an employee of Fleetwood Mac. I definitely believe the low-budget comps should be eliminated, the unauthorized one, but that's a discussion for another time. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 03:06, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- One size doesn't always fit all. Every career is different, and sometimes a solo career is the least significant part of an artist's output - Kirwan being a good example. A sizeable number of his Fleetwood Mac compositions can only be found on compilation albums and live albums, which are now absent from his discography. On Green's page, there's no mention of big chunks of his work with Fleetwood Mac (which is all most people care about), yet there's still a huge list of low-budget solo compilations, which all feature basically the same songs. Don't let consistency be the enemy of clarity and valuable content. Bretonbanquet (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- Just Wikipedia precedent, all the major articles, Neil Young, Bob Dylan, etc. Solo material is the center of the article, all the band material are secondary material in the context of a solo discography. The explanatory notes I was only removing for information that is available on the page, I'm assuming the notes were originally put up when the records themselves didn't have pages, so that's just de-cluttering. But I won't push it any further, just looking for consistency across pages. Ideally the band work that has its own discography shouldn't appear on the page at all, it should just be linked, but there are cases where the artist didn't perform across the whole band discography, so the primary albums/singles are placed there to denote span. But it's not common to mention compiled/remixed/live work. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 02:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
- The ones you use to edit discographies, such as solo material first; live albums and compilations for solo work but not for anything else; removal of explanatory notes etc. Bretonbanquet (talk) 02:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)