User talk:Czello

	Archives
	User talk:Richard BB/Archive 1;

Don't be afraid to leave me a message Richard BB

Filth!

Hi Richard. Just wanted to say thanks for your recent work on the Cradle pages. It's a LONG time since anyone made a helpful contribution. Do more! :D Cheers, Cardinal Wurzel (talk) 07:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I hope to be a lot more help in the future :) Richard BB 12:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet Dreams

[I like bureaucratic discussions] Well, if something can be listened by A-N-Y-O-N-E it is in the PUBLIC domain no? There is no copyright because I simply rempembered the lyrics and wrote them. I didn't take it from a site.--46.246.166.248 (talk) 14:10, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The lyrics themselves are copyrighted, though, regardless of where you found them -- or indeed, remembering them. However, the more important aspect is that we simply don't need the lyrics on the article -- it isn't exactly all that encyclopaedic. As the WP page states, "any quotation of them must be kept to a minimum, and used for the purpose of direct commentary or to illustrate some aspect of the style." There isn't exactly an encyclopaedic point being made by the lyrics there; for an example of what I mean, see the Hallelujah (Leonard Cohen song) article. Under the "Musical composition and lyrical interpretation" section, it states one line from the song and the significance of this line (and why it's important). In short, lyrics should only really be put up when we're trying to make a point about them or a particular thing; there just isn't really much need for them to be there for the sake of being there, I'm afraid. Thank you for your edits, however (and thank you for discussing this further with me), and I hope you continue editing here on Wikipedia. Richard BB 21:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Giti Vaziri Tabar

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because Giti Vaziri Tabar is a famous musician in Iran and it's really crucial to translate her page to English. (her Persian page is also available in Wikipedia</ref>http://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/گیتی_وزیری‌تبار</ref>).Aliha.kasra (talk) 22:46, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the decision to speedy delete it or not isn't up to me -- it's up to an admin. If you leave your case on the talk page of the article, then they'll read it there. Thanks, Richard BB 23:43, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

I just declined your speedy deletion request of Sekuwa. Speedy deletion is only allowed in very specific circumstances, which you can read about at WP:CSD. Simply lacking citations or being of questionable notability is not a valid speedy deletion rationale. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please use WP:PROD or WP:AfD, but be sure to check to make a good faith check on your own for sources that could be used to improve the article rather than deleting it (WP:BEFORE). Qwyrxian (talk) 02:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Righto, apologies if I misused a speedy tag! – Richard BB 12:10, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, I challenged your speedy tag at Khowai Government Higher Secondery School, since the A7 criterion you used has a specific exception for educational institutions. But with a few exceptions you seem to be doing more correct tags than incorrect ones, so don't be disheartened. Alzarian16 (talk) 22:18, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice! I'll try to be a little more conservative in where I nominate articles for speedy deletion in future :). – Richard BB 23:02, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Just to say thanks for following through on the prod. The speedies are always appreciated, just every now and then there might be something worth giving them a chance and a valid article may be worth keeping. Thanks for the hard work and best regards ^Khukri 22:34, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your post on my talk page, hope it answers your question, give me a a shout if not. Regards ^Khukri 22:42, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Daniel McCarthy (podiatrist)

Hello Richard BB, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Daniel McCarthy (podiatrist), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. →Σ τ c. 00:32, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Need a little help

Hi Richard, I believe you tagged an article I created for Speedy Annihilation (Inali-Wakan) - after reading Wiki's guides on "writing good articles", I understand the G11, because I included a link to my site for non-Wiki peeps to contact me. I'm as new as they get in Wiki-World (I just joined this weekend), so I'm still getting the hang of this community. After many requests made to me to put definitions online of words no one can find (except in history books), I started to (Inali-Wakan is one, Scraling is one, etc.) - but now that I understand this Wiki-World a little better, I agree that there is probably no need for articles on ancient Scandinavian or Native American words. Moving forward, I have a few quick questions...

Can you or someone there delete that first Inali-Wakan article from my discussion page? Do User Pages (profile or whatever we call it here), HAVE to be written in third person? (It seemed weird that I was putting "Scott refurbishes stereo zoom microscopes, studies history, blah-blah...", instead of "I refurbish stereo zoom microscopes, study history, blah-blah...") Last question is: can a non-Wiki-member contact/question someone who has contributed, added to, created, etc. articles? (or do they have to be a member?) ~ Thanks in advance for your help... ~ Peace, ScottyHeadbanger (talk) 21:11, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, Scott. Firstly, you can remove the things on your talk page yourself if you so desire. Although we try to encourage people to archive the past discussions on your talk page, no one will mind you removing the three notices I placed on your talk page, so you can go ahead and do that. Secondly, you can write however you wish on your own talk page! You can have a short biography of yourself if you wish (in which case you're free to write in either first person or third), or no details at all. For example, my user page just has a couple of userboxes and the featured picture of the day. here are some details about your userpage and how you should use it. If you're a little unsure about what's accepted and what isn't, scroll down to the "What may I not have in my user pages?" section, which will list a few details for you. And finally, anyone who does not create an account can edit as an IP, and this includes contacting other members. IPs can leave messages on your talk page in the same way you left this message on my talk page. They cannot send you emails, however (and registered users can only send you emails if you allow them to in your 'My preferences' section). I hope this has been of some help to you, Scott, and welcome to the Wiki! Please do not hesitate to message me back if you need any extra help; although you may find WP:WELCOME even more useful. :) – Richard BB 21:43, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks for the fast response! I'm all over this new info like a bum on a bologna sandwich! Looks like I have some Wiki-Homework to do - thanks for all of your info (helpful, two thumbs up, etc.). Have a good night... ~ Peace, ScottyHeadbanger (talk) 00:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I hope you have an enjoyable time on Wikipedia! – Richard BB 15:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MUlticulturalist

I would susgst not forum shopping.Slatersteven (talk) 12:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand that term. Can you elaborate? – Richard BB 12:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Takng cases to more then one venue. to achive the result you want. This may not be the intention (and its not just you. But wwe now have (a spurious) SPI, and the Wikiqueste notice.Slatersteven (talk) 12:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't taken the case to more than one venue. I realise I did mention possibly taking it to AN/I in the future, but that was because of a seeming lack of interest in the Wikiquette post. I can assure you was not trying to forum shop (at least, not intentionally). It seems there has been a revelation on this issue, however. – Richard BB 15:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National Front

Dear Sir /Madam, The National Front are currently taking legal action against all business'/individuals that they are informed of publishing false information, about themselves/members. Any non-members accused of being a member without actual evidence is slander and liable to legal action being taken, as such with the Baby P incident involving Jason Owen being stated as an NF member without evidence provided.

This particular case is being taken up by Ms Bernadette Jagger on behalf of the National front against multiple national newspapers in the United Kindom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

If you wish to enter into further dispute with your sources of information from newspapers, please forward your contact details to:

<redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.201.148 (talk) 19:22, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, please see WP:LEGAL. Legal threats are not tolerated on Wikipedia. Secondly, there is no mention of Jason Owen on the National Front article. Finally, any mention of him will not claim that he is a member of the National Front, just that he has been alleged to be a member. – Richard BB 19:30, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a legal threat, it is only to stat that the article you refer to in the newspaper does say he is a member, a claim that has not been backed with evidence from them thus a claim currently being made against them to retract all mention of such from their articles.

As such your suggestion that they are more believable is alas to be brought into question, when they are having legal action brought against them, using them as a source is inappropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.236.201.148 (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which newspaper article says that he is a member? Although, it is irrelevant anyway as that means that the legal claim should be brought against the newspaper itself, not us. All of the sources that we use in our articles aim to be reliable sources. Even if one particular newspaper makes a claim that the NF disagree with, that does not make that source automatically unreliable. – Richard BB 19:54, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nocturnes

I don't understand what you say on this page; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nocturnes_(album) ---> Genres aren't capitalised ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steephaaniiee (talk • contribs) 20:41, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Our manual of style on music dictates that genres aren't capitalised (as they're not proper nouns). Although the first word of a sentence (in the case of the infobox on the Nocturnes page, the "electropop" genre) is capitalised, every other genre in the same sentence would not have a capital first letter. – Richard BB 20:53, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why you deleted my edits ??? I worked hard... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steephaaniiee (talk • contribs) 21:20, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And as appreciated as it is, we don't need a section for both singles and music videos. In this case, it's far easier to just mention those things in the opening lines. Don't worry, the content of your edits is still in the article, it's just been moved to the intro rather than the bottom. – Richard BB 21:28, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

College Air nominated for speedy deletion

I don't believe this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_Air) qualifies for speedy deletion. It could use some additional work, and certainly linking to other pages would be useful. However, speedy deletion is (as far as I know) usually used when a page has outright unimportant material, such as a person writing an article about their father, when there is little or no actual relevance in an outside way, to any industry or larger community. Clearly the only college radio chart and countdown show in existence during any span of time has, at the very least, importance to the industry. The nomination states that it could be deleted at any time by someone other than the creator who plans to improve the article. However, I don't want to do that without understanding what needs to be improved upon first. I'm not sure precisely what you find to be so lacking. While it could use some interlinking, the article istself seems to state the importance of the chart and its show fairly clearly to me. What do you feel needs to be added or further explained? MXVN (talk) 01:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't believe that the article establishes the notability of College Air, nor any proof of it being remarkable. The radio show's mere existence doesn't immediately warrant its own article. Ultimately, however, the decision is left down to wiser and more experienced editors than I, and so if I am mistaken in this, then they will choose to keep the article. – Richard BB 02:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: College Air

Hello Richard BB. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of College Air, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article is not about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, so it doesn't qualify under A7. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 04:50, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your Recent Page

Hi. You unintentionally created your sandbox in WP:MAINSPACE. You can cerate your sandbox and other user sub pages by adding '/ ' after your name like this: User talk:Richard BB/Sandbox (click the red link), and the name you want to give to your new sub page.

Sorry, I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to. Do you mean me redirecting this article to the userpage of the editor who created it? If so, it's because the page seemed to be him inadvertently creating his user page in the wrong place. – Richard BB 01:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am so sorry... I meant to leave this on his talk page...I don't know how I messed this up. Touch Of Light (talk) 01:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, we all make mistakes! :) – Richard BB 01:38, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion contested: Vince Adamson

Hello Richard BB. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Vince Adamson, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article claims importance/significance of the subject. Thank you. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 02:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello Richard BB! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 12:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Sonya Blade

You are someone needs to do something about user Mpho18[1] on the Sonya Blade page[2]99.174.181.113 (talk) 16:57, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Any reason why neither you (IP) nor Richard BB actually tried explaining any of this to Mpho18 on xyr talk page? Unless this is some sort of long term problem (like a socking user) that I'm unaware, it's not actually surprising that Mpho18 keeps re-adding the same info, because no one explained what was wrong, outside of edit summaries (which many new users don't even know exists). I'm going to leave a note on Mpho18's talk page. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:31, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually in the process of leaving a message on the user's talk page, but have been a bit preoccupied with other things. I had left several edit summaries explaining my reversions; but, as you say, (s)he may not have seen it. – Richard BB 23:41, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Descendants of Wolfgang von Graben

Hi. You supported my prod on Descendants of Wolfgang von Graben. You might like to know that it was contested so I've taken the article to AfD. Cheers, andy (talk) 15:18, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll take a look at it. – Richard BB 15:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SF template image

I was just thinking of adding an image myself, and you beat me to it because i dont know how link an image from Wikimedia Commons that has the same name as a file on Wikipedia. I had to download the image, rename it, shrink it, and upload it, all because someone uploaded File:Gort.jpg years ago (useless image). I will test out my image, File:Gortray.jpg right now, but that doesnt mean im disrespecting you. If you prefer yours, put it back in and i wont revert, but lets try to get discussion going on the talk page. here goes...Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:38, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing; no offence will be taken. I saw that you added the first image and then removed it, so I took the opportunity to see how Asimov on his throne would look. – Richard BB 01:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

South Park Pandemic Episode

"old gimmicks of a national crisis with fast-paced scenes of man talking importantly about stupid things."

"Sic—generally inside square brackets, [sic], and occasionally parentheses, (sic)—when added just after a quote or reprinted text, indicates the passage appears exactly as in the original source.The usual purpose is to inform readers that any errors or apparent errors in the copied material are not from transcription—that they are reproduced exactly from the original writer or printer."

I do not feel the need to elaborate further. Please refrain from contacting me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.74.174 (talk) 01:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]