User talk:Michig/Archive14

semibeings

Hope I am putting this note in the proper space...Just wanted to thank you for your vote to keep The Semibeings page. Thank you for the points you made and your time. Much appreciated. Cutelit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cutelit (talk • contribs) 15:50, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Star De Azlan

I think precedent would disagree with you regarding a peak on Hot Country Songs being insufficient. The fact that it's a "specialist chart" is immaterial. A Billboard chart is a Billboard chart. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:01, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, remind me what this relates to. I vaguely remember looking at this article before but can't remember where I may have commented. Looking at it again, #51 on a specialist chart manufactured from something as easily manipulated as airplay doesn't seem sufficient on its own to confirm notability. I've seen articles on artists with one placing around that position on a national sales chart struggle to be accepted as notable. To be honest a placing on the chart they publish of singles that are just outside the Hot 100 is more of an indication of notability than such a low placing on one of their specialist charts. I know here in the UK the singles chart well beyond the top 100 is available within the industry - the top 200 would include virtually anything that sold at all - the line has to be drawn somewhere. I'd say top 30 on a specialist chart or top 100 on the national sales chart is good enough for notability. Less than that and it needs something else. --Michig (talk) 18:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah - I see - the Not (music) talk page.--Michig (talk) 18:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Thin Kids

Can you please have a look back at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Thin Kids, and - with hindsight - do you think any action is now appropriate - change to a redirect or something, perhaps?

Just asking because I was checking back on things I'd PRODded, that were not deleted in the end. Thanks for having a look; be interesting to see what you think is best (if anything). Cheers, Chzz ► 07:46, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd still be in favour of keeping it separate. The available sources have not yet been added to the article - I'll put it on my todo list.--Michig (talk) 18:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff Allen

Thanks for your input on this article. When I started out creating it, I thought it would be a fairly simple task - three quarters of the way through, having discovered the widescale confusion over his non-relationship to Hello, I almost wished I had never begun ! After many blind alleys and much effort, I still was not very proud of my 'final effort', but you to the rescue. Cheers,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 12:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would presume that the bands he was in would have received a fair amount of coverage at the time, so print sources probably exist in someone's loft somewhere. I think there's just about enough there now.--Michig (talk) 18:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Valentine

Since you have declined the speedy delete/move, can you at least fix the talk page? Currently, it redirects to the album page. I still believe the album is the primary topic, having been around much longer, and having established its notability. But, I am not going to grouse about it. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 13:36, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Please feel free to start a discussion re. having the album at the primary topic. The film has already received plenty of coverage and is certainly already notable, but you may be able to achieve consensus for the move. --Michig (talk) 13:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From ALAN JAMES GEORGE

You have no right to delete a page that you know nothing about. Give me one good reason, besides you have nothing better to do than not mind your own bisness.

ALAN JAMES GEORGE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.6.9.169 (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe if you gave me clue which article you're talking about I could explain why it was deleted.--Michig (talk) 18:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

apologies and request to reinstate the article The Branding Clinic

Dear Michig please accept my apologies, i wrote my page at the suggestion of a colleague and obviously didn't know the rules. I would like to restore it to my user page so that I may work on it as I didn't save the copy elsewhere to recreate/significantly EDIT my entry. Or decide whether an entry is even warranted. Can you please restore so I may do that? Thank you.

Klad22 (talk) 12:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC) klad22[reply]

Replied here.--Michig (talk) 18:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Privacy policy and ANI reports

Dear Michig, I am a bit concerned over this ANI report in which you made reference and provided a link to a youtube account. I checked that account and there seems to be personally identifiable information on it. The WP:OUTING policy says

Posting another person's personal information is harassment, unless that person voluntarily had posted his or her own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia.

(emphasis added) Meaning, you cannot disclose information located off-wikipedia unless the editor in concern already has. I believe this has been removed from your report to ANI and a note attached by another admin. I am certain you did not intend to out anyone and don't see this escalating in any way. Basket of Puppies 18:19, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't my intention to post anybody's personal information and I don't believe that I did. Presumably they posted their own information there where it is publicly available. I simply pointed out that the two accounts with the same distinctive name exist. --Michig (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No offense meant

Sorry if you took my comments at ANI as being any sort of question regarding you or what you were saying. That wasn't my intention at all, and I regret apparently making you think I was impugning you. John Carter (talk) 20:17, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Natural Vibrations

Last December you assured me that these "citations" to the band's own website would be replaced with real citations. It hasn't happened yet. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to where I made such an assurance? --Michig (talk) 06:09, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article titles/album moves

It's not redundant in the least. In many cases, it is helpful to clarify between an album title and song title of the same name. It's also likely that there will be albums of the same name released in the future, so it makes sense to provide more detail when it is easily possible to do so, as it is in this case. There is no downside to the moves that I made, and there are only benefits.Hoops gza (talk) 18:21, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't appreciate you reverting my edits without discussing it first, in the process wasting both of our time.Hoops gza (talk) 18:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously in these cases if it was necessary to clarify that it was an album, then there is no point in not clarifying further what artist made said album. Also, a bunch of these albums have songs of the same name, so the article titles were wrong any way you choose to look at it.Hoops gza (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, who do you think is going to constantly check to see whether there are two albums with the same name? No one. Please stop reverting my edits.Hoops gza (talk) 18:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Matt McGloin

I noticed that Matt McGloin was recently created and deleted. This is an article that I am considering making. He is a quarterback for the 2010 Penn State Nittany Lions football team. Last Saturday was his first start at the positions and he may well receive more starts in the future. He has attained the highest ranks of his amateur sport and is as such, notable. I didn't get to look at the article before it was deleted. Was it horrid? Sometimes this happens when inexperienced users create an article for someone who has just come onto the scene. Dincher (talk) 22:20, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content was "Matt McGloin is a college football quarterback for the Penn State Nittany Lions. Matt Mcgloin is a walk-on Qb for the Nittany Lions. He wears the number 11. College Career 2010 After Rob Bolden was hurt Matt McGloin came into to relieve Bolden. He threw for a nice 326 yards. He also threw for 3 touchdowns and 1 interception. He did very well and had a rating of 142.2. The previous year he only had two attempts. He did not complete either." Feel free to create a new article - I wouldn't have thought it would be much help to have this restored but I will if you wish. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 23:08, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, restoring wouldn't be much help. I am also going to hold off on creating the article. He might not do much else. Dincher (talk) 23:26, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Thanks for your help and input into additions and notes I made. Harleancarpenter (talk) 18:26, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you feel that we've achieved something even if you're not totally happy about it. I recommend again that you bring together some sources on Zarjaz and create an article on him if you have enough to satisfy WP:V and WP:N - that would be the best place to add details about Zarjaz rather than in other articles. I found a short Tronics review and have a book showing an Independent Chart placing for Tronics if these would help. I don't know if the books on Creation Records make mention of Les Zarjaz? There's a bit about that band in SPIN here. I looked for something on The Gits but none of my books on the punk era have anything.--Michig (talk) 20:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of links

Hi, would you care to explain why you were removing links to Richard Conant, claiming that it had been speedy deleted, 10 minute before it was deleted? DuncanHill (talk) 20:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably some problem with Twinkle when deleting it. The removal of links appears to have worked ok but not the deletion, which someone else then did a few minutes later. --Michig (talk) 20:32, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oasis

I commented on 24 September that Oasis and The Rain are separate entities (in haste removed the tag) but believe enough time has elapsed for movement. In truth its a trivial issue hence lack of input, also the wikilink provides info on them.LisaSandford (talk) 07:50, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

give me a reason for why did u delete http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Mitchell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.208.157.98 (talk) 08:14, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Parodies of Harry Potter

No one's said anything on the talk page in two years. Do you really think that's gonna help any? Every single time I've posted to an article talk page I'm met with deafening silence. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 01:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps more tellingly, you haven't raised any concerns on the talk page, ever, despite two attempts to get it deleted at AFD. I don't see many edits to the article from you either. There is an expectation that other approaches to dealing with article issues will be explored before taking an article to AFD. I've also done this on occasions with no response, but there have been plenty of times when other editors have engaged and progress has been made. You can't win them all. Perhaps raising specific concerns on the talk page with a proposal of how to deal with them would get a positive response. You never know. --Michig (talk) 09:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rdlf123

I 100% disagree that my edit is SPAM. Stating that this is a "last warning" is totally unreasonable when there is total sincerity in adding a legitimate external link that relates to the article and would be of significant interest to readers as further expansion of information. Rdlf123 (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented on the user's talk page. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I did wonder why an anonymous editor was replying, but it's clearer now :) --Michig (talk) 17:20, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Bruce

Hi Michig... I noticed your work referencing and expanding the article Charlie Bruce - good job. You may not be aware that the DYK project has recently adopted new rules allowing nomination of newly-referenced BLPs that have been two-fold expanded. This article is close to qualifying - it needs expanding by about 300 characters, plus a reference in the currently unreferenced section, and a suitable hook. With the article so close to qualifying, I thought you might like to consider putting in the little bit of extra effort to needed for a nom and a possible DYK credit / main page appearance. Regards, EdChem (talk) 13:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a couple of sources, but have also trimmed it so it's now a little shorter, so may not be what you're looking for.--Michig (talk) 18:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of vegans

As a sometime editor on this article, your input is welcome at a discussion about a possible format change to the article: Talk:List of vegans#Change of formatting to match List of vegetarians. Betty Logan (talk) 04:18, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glen Adams

I responded to your comments on my talk. I also added some more on Talk:The Upsetters. I see you switched to the Trojan Obit as the definitive ref but, looking at it it does seem like a synthesis of the wkipedia article, so could we be going circular? Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It may be based to some extent on the WP article, but it appears to be the original source for his birth date. The previous source indicated the Trojan obit and WP as its sources, so I figured that the Trojan one was at least more definitive than that one. Hopefully another source will appear. I suspect David Katz might write an obit for The Guardian before long, or one or two others may appear that can be used as sources. Some of the recent reggae obits I've seen have seemed suspiciously close to the WP articles, however.--Michig (talk) 18:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vito Schnabel

Thanks for your support on this. I don't know the guy personally, and it's disturbing to me that NONE of the people who voted for deletion of this article even bothered to look him up. I detect heavy male jealousy:D--Aichikawa (talk) 20:39, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Aeroplanes

Hi, I created the article for The Aeroplanes, an indie/rock band from Liverpool. Last week it was tagged for deletion for lack of "notability" so I have taken some of your advice that I saw in the history of another of my pages for Welsh band Murry the Hump and have added a bunch of references from newspapers etc. I'd be keen to hear if you think if I could improve the page in any way. Thanks. Mattsephton (talk)

Looks like a good start, and there should be no problems regarding notability. The bare URL references could do with formatting, and the image may get deleted as a non-free image that could potentially be replaced by a free one. The indie chart placing and iTunes record could both do with sourcing. I'll have a further look over the weekend some time. Cheers. --Michig (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your continued help. Mattsephton (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:39, 11 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Madchester

Are you sure Madchester isn't a genre (I assume you mean that it is just a scene), because Allmusic, for one, says that it is.—indopug (talk) 04:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus at the Madchester article is that it isn't a genre. The allmusic article on it is pretty awful. You can get a much better overview from Dave Haslam's Manchester, England - 'Madchester' was a label for the whole scene in the city at the time - house music, the Hacienda, drugs, fashion, and bands and musicians as diverse as 808 State, A Guy Called Gerald, Happy Mondays, and The Stone Roses. To try and say that these were all playing the same genre of music is a non-starter really.--Michig (talk) 07:35, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

S Is for Space (album)

No need for a redirect. S Is for Space was unclaimed until just now, when I made it a redirect to the band. The (album) was completely unnecessary in the article's title, and redirects with qualifiers in them are often awkward. Since S Is for Space already redirects, also redirecting the existing article would be redundant. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The correct capitalization would be S is for Space, at which there is an article about a Ray Bradbury book. That article should have a dab hatnote pointing to the band, after which S Is for Space (album) could be deleted. S Is for Space would be better redirected to S is for Space. --Michig (talk) 18:30, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help - Spread Eagle article nominated for deletion

Please join the discussion. I have a really aggressive deleter on the article. He hasn't even read the sources and what I wrote to indicate notability. If you say it should be deleted, I can accept it, but I don't think you will. Wikipedia:Articles_for_Deletion/Spread_Eagle_(band)

Thank you Moonslide (talk) 00:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sooo much

Moonslide (talk) 09:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you sooooo much as well.

Google is a wonder, thanks for bringing me into the 21st century!!! 86.54.124.177 (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your tag on Unstable

Quote:"Lots of sources in the article, but there are either primary sources, places to buy their music, or websites that simply contain the word "unstable" in the title and have nothing to do with music."

Note:I also want to state to you that use of the link of where to buy the album was used to prove the validity that the album is sold on many markets, and sites, and wasn't just a home made ordeal, it's an album. It was unmarked (not listed as 'buy album') it was a source for editors to see, so they could see this was an officially distributed album, and it deserved coverage n the worlds encyclopedia.

Response:Okay that is very disagreeable. Plugging that an album is available is on every single wikipedia band page. That is completely different than saying 'support unstable', 'buy their albums' I don't know where some of the strange sources come from. The bands official webpage came offline on Sunday January 23rd 2011, although an official site should be considered a reliable source. What band doesn't sell their album on an official website? Because it's listed on the same page as information doesn't mean the source is being posted as promotional. It's the page the info came from.

Quote: "None convey any notability and I am unable to find anything better."

Response: The encyclopedia of metal (Metal-Archives) is considered a reliable source for any metal band worth while. Why? The website is very picky about the bands listed, and do not list bands who don't qualify as metal, and bands with no notable releases. Spirit of Metal is the same exact deal. It is a reliable source to look up metal bands with actual releases. A bands official myspace provides a biography with information, album details, links to blogs that are direct from a band, ect. A good example is when you go to a bands wikipedia page and you see "According to the official myspace", however you argue that's not a reliable source... so question, should every article linking to a bands official myspace be deleted? The bands official facebook doesn't even provide room for advertisement. Unstable's is updates from the band directly, videos that evidence big show performances, and list the info used for the source. Use of OFFICIAL venue links to back up and create evidence of performances of big national shows, which the band has indeed played sound like reliable and necessary sources when claiming such things. No Clean Singing, a heavy metal review, and heavy metal band archive is a prestiged European metal website, and they only review bands, once again, that are worthwhile, and where it is sourced is relevant, and backs up the albums large distribution that was claimed, because it wasn't just claimed, it's factual. Once again, photo evidence of Unstable albums in music stores, and hundreds of loose copies (which would be unnecessary is they weren't sold on a large scale) can be provided. Also, you might not find anything better because the band is still establishing itself on more national websites that are considered reliable. Job for a Cowboy up and coming didn't have a huge internet presence, but was recognized on wikipedia because they self produced at the age of 16 the EP Doom.

Quote: "Same is true of Thomas John Stanford and their album and EP."

RE:Their releases were released from a licensed independent label, a label that might not be Roadkill Records, however it has significance. Many bands on wikipedia have had releases exclusively on iTunes, which both albums are listed on. They have distribution in Long Island record stores, photo evidence can be supplied of the albums on sale. A band with more than out of house distribution holds significance. To say 'the same holds for their album/EP' is ridiculous. How do the pages self promote? The list the facts, the tracks, and the meaning. Why shouldn't an album written as a concept album be explained on wikipedia? Just because some album pages are blank doesn't make listing the concept and facts (who produced, ect) doesn't make it self promoting, and certainly doesn't discredit it's significance. The Thomas John page tells what a man who has traveled and played music around the world has done. His significance is that he's a solo artist with two upcoming albums (lil Eazy E, who's the son of Eazy E, and before he released an album, wikipedia had him listed a year before either of his albums were released, and listed one as upcoming)and the singer of his band. He indeed screams, raps, and freestyles, just like Kerry King uses a whammy in his guitar solos. It's only a statement of the mans work, not promotion. Look at any artists page, it says these things they're known for. No Clean Singing is proved reliable as an outside source of the band says he does these things on the album he's reviewing, so it's not just stated to make the performer look good. Coming from the slums of Brooklyn and growing up to be an accomplished and uprising artist, who earns a living in music, with a deal with a licensed independent label, sounds like a factual description of the man's history.

No listen, my main response is that this page is desired to be removed because Unstable is not signed to a major label. But here's the deal, the band had a presence in New York, and facts (such as a widely distributed album, that is being secured on other markets by the bands LICENSED independent label, and secured deals in other states, meaning this is not just a 'made it at home' album by a local band) show the band doesn indeed have significance. And with those facts stated, why aren't a lot of bands removed? The only thing that was correct was improper use on one source within the entire article.

Outside of that, what good reason could you have to take the page down than a personal vendetta? -Makk3232 (not logged in before)

Furthermore

7.Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

Response:Well give me a way to show verifiability. . .In Long Island the band's following is a result of playing multiple styles of music, like it's a gimmick, like KISS with the face paint, they play a bunch of styles of music. That honestly what there known for. I mean if you listen to there songs its heavy, than the guys rapping, then screaming, I mean c'mon I can't make this stuff up it's in the music. The point is they've built a following, and a label, and there self driven success because they have a following otherwise how, and why would the band waste its time and effort?

I'd appreciate the removal of the tags for deletion, I feel I've stated a fair case, and I really don't see why you discredit the bands importance in music. So I really would appreciate that removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Makk3232 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I didn't place any tags on this article. My only edit to it was to remove the hangon tag that was not needed as the article was not tagged for speedy deletion. Secondly, we have criteria for including articles on bands here - see WP:BAND - having a record available to buy is not something that meets those criteria. Metal Archives is not considered a reliable source here - it has been discussed before and that consensus is unlikely to change. The reason the article is at AFD is nothing to do with the band not being on a major label - the main problem is the lack of coverage of the band in reliable sources (newspapers, books, magazines, etc.). You're not going to win anyone over here by making accusations of personal vendettas. You ask how to show verifiability - the only way is by citing reliable sources. Fansites, MySpace, facebook, etc. won't be sufficient here.--Michig (talk) 17:40, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relax with the tone, it wasn't literal, it was figurative for "I can't see any other reason why", not that I really though that so back up.

The band's major gigs are sourced with links to the venues they played and proof (such as pictures of them playing the venue) are indeed necessary and reliable information. Anyone can say they played Gramercy Theartre, however backing it up through the site is necessary. Halftime Howie is a Long Island radio host, his show is heard all over the Nassau, Suffolk area, and he happens to have a facebook. Does that make him, a locally prestiged and very real radio host not reliable then, because that's press. Newpaper articles will be added, and again I don't see where you're coming from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Makk3232 (talk • contribs) 00:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also would like to add for somebody who states in there 'bio' that they believe that people shouldn't be deleting articles left and right on this site, I figured you'd appreciate where I'm coming from. I'm not a bad person for being firm on my stance sir. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Makk3232 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:N, WP:MUSIC, and WP:RS. The article will be judged on these - that's how it works here.--Michig (talk) 06:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt. Understand that under the impression that you and others have tagged this article (I know why you did know not the point I'm making) I'm going to debate it for the sake of saving it. I hope you can understand, it's nothing personal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.123.101.137 (talk) 17:30, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Calculus article?

If you were interested in creating an article on the band Dr Calculus and adding a (redirect?) blue link from the Stephen Duffy/Pigbag pages I could fill in/send you the biography! Roger Freeman (one half of Dr Calculus.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.238.103 (talk) 12:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would need evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources (books, magazine, newspapers) or it would be difficult to stop an article from getting deleted. I can't find any at the moment.--Michig (talk) 17:54, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to point out that there's a useful biographical rough guide if you want to use it later at the Dr.Calculus Discography at Discogs site ( http://www.discogs.com/artist/Dr.+Calculus ) - this also has the correct details of where we originally met (Record Mirror publication incorrect!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.238.103 (talk) 13:42, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose a verification from Stephen Duffy ( business@thelilactime.com ) on a biog from me wouldn't count as "primary source" material to be mentioned in View History / notes if there was a query? PS the date on the reverse of the original Dr Calculus Programme 7 sleeve is 1984 as it is on the Discogs / ebay websites (1985 in the Stephen Duffy Discography)...? Rog —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.238.103 (talk) 11:51, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PPS If you are still interested there are magazine sources at http://www.duffypedia.com/publications/RecordMirror_DrCalculus_9Aug1986.pdf http://www.duffypedia.com/publications/Clipping_DrCalculus.pdf and extra info on Duffypedia site's Discography / Stephen's Projects links. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.238.103 (talk) 12:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Record Mirror one looks like a good source, the other one is a bit on the short side. I'd need more to write an article as there would be a real risk that with only these as independent sources it would get deleted and the work would be wasted. For now it would probably be better to use these to expand the Dr. Calculus section in the Stephen Duffy article. If you find any more let me know, and I'll do something with them when I have some time. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 20:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice, while I'm at it there's more quotes at! - Duffypedia.com / Publications / the ups and downs / Issue 3 - scroll down to p15, Issue 7 - p7, Issue 12 - p15, Issue 16 - p23. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.194.238.103 (talk) 12:37, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on WP:Albums?

Thank you for your previous responses at the talk page for WP:Albums. Would mind assisting with some input to a recent inquiry of mine about genre inclusion in album article infoboxes? Dan56 (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

About Arsames

Hi friend, Thanks for the help on Arsames. Nice to meet you. Stay tune --Peace (talk) 11:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Questions

Hi Michig, I am a PhD student from the Carnegie Mellon University. I am interested in the Wikipedia community, especially the group mechanism of collaboration of the week. I noticed that you have participated in WikiProject Alternative Music’s collaborations before. Could you please take several minutes to answer the following questions if possible? Thanks for your help!

Q1. How many times (approximately) have you participated in Alternative Music Collaboration of the Week?

Q2. How much do you learn from participating in Alternative Music Collaboration of the Week? A. A lot; B. A little bit; C. Not at all (please skip Q3 if you choose C)

Q3. What did you learn from participating in Alternative Music Collaboration of the Week? Please provide examples if possible.

Q4. Do you have any negative experience of Alternative Music Collaboration of the Week?

Q5. What do you think are some of the reasons for Wikiproject Alternative Music's cancellation of collaboration of the week?

You could leave your answers either in your or my talk page if possible. Thanks for your time! We have the same goal to make Wikipedia a better place.

Cheers --Haiyizhu (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete AfD

I think you may have forgotten to list Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piotr Bikont at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion? The template is showing the listing as a red link. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 15:18, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks ok to me - I think the link can show red for a while due to caching.--Michig (talk) 17:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, once I purged my cache it turned blue. Cheers, --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 17:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Naglfar (band)

Noticed you restored this, claiming sufficient coverage. Would you please be so kind as to prove it? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 18:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the talk page, as I indicated in the edit summary when I removed the prod. --Michig (talk) 18:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deprod Danny Quinn

[1]The "redirect" was put there by the same person who created the page. People keep creating articles for characters in this show. They always end up being deleted or merged back into he main page ( List_of_Primeval_characters). Having a placeholder page is just an invitation for this cycle to begin again when someone notices it isn't a redlink as it was a few days ago. Since you've deprodded it now I have to let it stand. Thanks.Barsoomian (talk) 08:33, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Owl City concert tours

Hey Michig, I left you a note/question. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Andi Sexgang - question re: repeated deletion of simple factual correction

Hi Michig - I'm not sure why you keep undoing my corrections of Andi Sex Gang's given name. (BTW - it is Andi Sex Gang rather than 'Andi Sexgang' as shown currently.) I have opened a thread on this at the Biographies of Living Persons noticeboard - link is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Andi_Sexgang In the thread there is a link to an article confirming his actual name. Hope this is enough to correct this error. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.155.242 (talk) 14:35, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simple - there's a reliable source cited in the article that states that he was born Andrew Hayward, and no source has been presented to support your change.--Michig (talk) 15:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michig, be careful, the IP's change does not constitute vandalism, per WP's definition.

WP's definition is:
Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, and inserting patent nonsense into a page. Vandalism is prohibited.
Further:
Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing.
Yes, I see your point, there was not referernce to the name the ip was putting in,but it didn't meet the defintion of vandalism. Just a heads up for you. KoshVorlon'_Nal^uboutes _Aeria^Gloris 16:05, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree with you. Removing material backed up by reliable sources and replacing it with unsourced material that contradicts those reliable sources, while also leaving the citations there, giving the impression of legitimacy, is not constructive. Had the IP questioned the first revert and stated why they believed the change was appropriate it would be easier to assume good faith, but to do it again makes this difficult. Please read the blog entry put forward as a source - do you think that's an honest statement of the guy's past or is he perhaps making some of it up? He may wish people to believe his birth name given there (and his various arrests, art exhibition aged 4, etc. etc.), but that doesn't make it true, and when this sort of disinformation gets pushed on Wikipedia, it should be treated accordingly. Of course, if some sources can be provided that show that it's all true, that's another matter, but where are they?--Michig (talk) 16:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HI there - I'm the guy who made the edit. I didn't really think it was necessary to include a reference as a simple search on google seems to indicate that the info on the wikipedia page is the odd man out. I thought that the wikipedia editors might do a little web search before accusing somebody of vandalism. I don't think that was very nice, I was just trying to fix something. Like the other user who posted above, I thought vandalism was defacing a page rather than correcting a simple mistake on a name. You guys are funny here. Oh well ..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.155.242 (talk) 17:13, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I posted this on the Bios of Living persons page, just re-posting below so excuse the intrusion.

OK - I think you've actually persuaded me. I wasn't expecting that. He must have changed it at some point later. I think that most reasonable people could have come to the same conclusion I did, though ----- so maybe the page should include 'Andreas McElligott' somewhere, as that seems to be the 'real-life' name he is using these days, and if it's not included there somewhere I would bet that other users in the future would probably try to 'correct' the omission. Any thoughts on how this could be done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.155.242 (talk) 18:23, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've suggested that it's included as an alias. Apologies if I misinterpreted your edits as intentionally disruptive. --Michig (talk) 18:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message from WikiProject Punk music

Announcements and news for WikiProject Punk music

Febuary 2011:

Update: There is currently a roll call going on at the project's talk page. If you are actively participating in the project please add your signature to the list. If you do not, you will be listed as inactive. Your name will be moved to the Inactive/former members section and/or the the project punk userbox will be removed from your user page.

Thanks for your help

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

--Guerillero | My Talk 02:10, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Capercaillie albums

You have new messages

Hello, Michig. You have new messages at Chzz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{user:chzz/tb}} template. File:Ico specie.png

Chzz ► 09:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Viezee

I agree it should be deleted, no hits in google books, probably a vanity article, it does happen from time to time. PLease deelte it. I'd db author it but I'm not the sole author.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Service award level

There has been a major revision of the the Service Awards: the edit requirements for the higher levels have been greatly reduced, to make them reasonably attainable.

Because of this, your Service Award level has been changed, and you are now eligible for a higher level. I have taken the liberty of updating your award on your user page.

Herostratus (talk) 08:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

burning spear - not vandalism - protection rather

Michig, Vandalism was the last thing I meant to do. I am a dear friend of Burning Spear's and he personally asked me to revise the errors in what has been written on his entry -

His actual birthday is March 1 1945 not 1948 as noted and protected on your entry. This is basic information that can be confirmed by Burning Spear's own website. An email from sonia Rodney to me this morning confirmed this to me. This is only one of several factual errors on the entry. Reggae journalism has traditionally been filled with errors and as a reggae journalist of 20 years standing, it is very frustrating for my changes made solely in the name of historical accuracy to be removed.

in the interest of accuracy,

RR

">— Preceding unsigned comment added by Restlessreal (talk • contribs) 16:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have the greatest respect for Burning Spear and am a huge fan of his music, but the fact that MRI may have allegedly acted improperly is not a reason to remove any mention of his deal with them from the article. I have added a mention of his dispute with them. Please provide reliable independent sources for any claims that you wish to add to the article. Thank you.--Michig (talk) 19:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Scott

Spike7744, who only seems to edit this article, repeatedly removes all reference to one of Scott's most high profile bands Lowgold. As a solo artist, Scott is largely unknown and wouldn't warrant an article without his involvement as a drummer in previous bands Slowdive and Lowgold. I have previously left a message on the talk page, which has been ignored.

As you are an established admin, could you please warn this user that they shouldn't be removing referenced information from articles?

Thanks. 92.5.93.29 (talk) 18:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Lowgold article only mentions him playing on one track, so it really a significant part of his career?--Michig (talk) 18:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He played on numerous b-sides also and toured with the band. The fact he only appeared on one track wasn't particularly promoted at the time - he was in the band prior to them releasing anything, was present on every photoshoot and gig when the band were signed to Nude and I have also added a reference to the article with a quote from the band lead singer about the impact of him joining the band. That he was the drummer in Lowgold is indisputable and the removal of that information from the article is dodgy at best. And his involvement in Lowgold, despite not being a huge band, clearly eclipses anything he's been involved in since. 92.5.93.29 (talk) 18:39, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it should not be removed - I've added another source to back up his membership. If it gets removed again feel free to revert and open a discussion with the editor concerned.--Michig (talk) 18:47, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Winston Rodney

Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Burning Spear

Hi, the subject or someone saying they are the subject is wanting to get all mention of the disputed distribution company removed from the article. He also wants to make himself three years older by altering his dob to was he says is correct. I suppose you know all this. He is going to be struggling I know - what if he blogs or tweets his corrected dob, as most people would not usually lie to make themselves older - could we accept that? - we have book cites only for it at present. Also I was reading this blog post from october 2011 http://www.burningspear.net/blog/ sad story about the death of his son, also the story about the dispute with the distributor - disputes don't go on forever and this edit could well be correct now - as I see it, so what who is distributor or was is, the reader loses little to nothing if we were to just remove this part.... He signed a distribution deal for the label with MRI/Ryko,[10] but according to his blog has been trying to end the contract since 2007.[11] - anyway - just some thoughts and a link to the report as you appear to have some small involvement at the article. Off2riorob (talk) 18:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've commented at the noticeboard on the issues raised there - perhaps you could partially revert your edit? The information in the edit linked to above may be true, but including a claim of law-breaking by a company without reliable independent sources to back it up is surely a non-starter, which is why I reverted it.--Michig (talk) 19:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All I did was add an archive link via wayback in exchange for a dead link? Let me have a look...yes, I didn't add any content Michig, the dif I presented above was to a previous addition that has already been removed. Off2riorob (talk) 19:21, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies - it was another editor that removed a little more than was necessary.--Michig (talk) 19:25, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, some content was hidden from view by user:Collect. Thanks for commenting at the BLPN, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 19:27, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, RestlessReal here - It was Sonia Rodney for Winston Rodney who contacted you regarding Spear's birthday. If you'd like to contact me at estherbean2000@yahoo.ca I can give you their direct contact information so that you can verify the changes they asked me to make to the Burning Spear entry were only made in the interests of accuracy. Spear is retiring and is very concerned that his artistic legacy is properly represented. Thanks and I hope we can clear this up to everyone's satisfaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Restlessreal (talk • contribs) 17:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have found a source that supports the 1945 date of birth so have changed the article. I hope Spear will continue to record and/or perform to some extent. It would be interesting to get Spear's account of how he was introduced to Coxsone Dodd, i.e. by Marley or Joe Higgs. If he could put out a blog entry or something describing those early days it would be great.--Michig (talk) 19:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Smiley photo reduction

What you've done with this is just fine re: sizing. I try to keep non-free images that I upload to 350px or less. The reason for limiting the size of copyrighted images is to prevent their use (counterfeiting, etc.) for anything other than the informational purposes here; the size limit applies to non-free images only.

We normally have a bot (ImageBot) that automatically resizes copyrighted images over 400px, but I don't know why it hasn't been doing that lately. There are over 100 images there to resize. (And this is all the luck I'm having finding an example for you is the link. :-) )

Even if your size reduction didn't work out as it did, you wouldn't need to have your original uploaded image deleted. Uploading a change to the file, just as you did with the reduced photo, works fine. Hoping this helps, We hope (talk) 22:26, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]