Talk:Livity

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles

Reggae Low‑importance

	This article is part of the Reggae WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the coverage of articles relating to ska and reggae. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.ReggaeWikipedia:WikiProject ReggaeTemplate:WikiProject ReggaeReggae articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Huh?!?::

Can anyone explain why a page on a Rasta concept has a discography? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.144.43 (talk) 06:45, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because someone hijacked an article about a Prince Far I album and turned it into a dictionary definition (with the tracklisting still attached).--Michig (talk) 07:14, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The concept is now this article, Livity, and the album named after the concept is now the article "Livity (album)". —Sburke (talk) 07:48, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article was initially created in 2005 to present an album. It was hijacked by an editor in 2009, while attempting to create a dictionary definition for the concept by the same name. It was then restored after the hijacking was discovered. The "fix" to the article merely hijacked the article again. You are welcome to attempt to create another article about the "concept", but don't be surprised if it is deleted in accordance with WP:NOTDICDEF. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 08:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for this mix-up, and thank you for setting things right. I thought I had read "far enough" back in the revision history, but I didn't, so I got it backwards about what was muddled into what. I looked at French Wikipedia fr:Livity and figured that that was reflecting the original state of things than the English was at-- whereas, well, not. Anyhoo, thanks for making sense of this, because I sure didn't. (I blame this on the stinking white resinous smoke circulating around my room! Although the fact that it's all coming from my GPU might be something I should look into.) Now, as to an entry on the Rasta religious concept of Livity, I ask your advice: I presume it should have a name of the sort "Livity (...something else...)"-- but I'm not familiar enough with naming conventions in this sort of situation to know quite what it should be. It's a core concept in Rastafarian spirituality, and the term isn't used by anyone else, so "Rastafarian Livity" might possibly be read as implying that there's other kinds of Livity going around? Or maybe that's not the way these things work. So... "Livity (spiritual concept)"? "Livity (Rasta)"? I would guess the last one to be apt, on analogy with "Grace (Christianity)"— but maybe better naming practices have evolved since "Grace (Christianity)" article was set up. —Sburke (talk) 09:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos to you for trying. I can honestly see how the article history is messed up. I would create the article in a subpage of your userspace. Since others have objected to the content as a dictionary definition, just create it there and then ask for input, maybe from User:Michig. I would go with Livity (spiritual concept), then create a redirect from Livity (Rasta). You could even ask for assistance at WP:WikiProject Religion. Hope this helps. Best regards, Cindy(talk to me) 01:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Livity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090909084701/http://www.roots-archives.com/release/1591 to http://www.roots-archives.com/release/1591

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:17, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]