User talk:Edgarde/2010

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

File:MeddleUScover-250.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:MeddleUScover-250.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. –Dream out loud (talk) 00:58, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

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

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

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

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

User:Black Kite/FUO info

Hi there - I've restored this; I deleted it a while back as it was starting to get a little out of date, but it's generally still relevant. Black Kite 21:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you much! / edg ☺ ☭ 22:18, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Giselle Lorimer

Sure, delete her if you want. I don't really understand people like you who seem to have a mania for deleting articles which some people might find interesting but you feel that the presence of this article makes Wiki a significantly worse place then go ahead. I don't care. SmokeyTheCat •TALK• 12:22, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Just as a matter of idle curiosity why did you want to delete the article? Like I say I don't mind but I don't understand. Okay, she was of very minority interest but how is Wiki improved by her absence? I've been an editor here a few years now and It's never occurred to me to want to delete any article.

Just wondered. SmokeyTheCat •TALK• 10:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Replied to on User talk:SmokeyTheCat. / edg ☺ ☭ 11:00, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I very much doubt that Giselle Lorimer will ever become notable. Her books are very much minority interest and will probably stay that way. She seems uninterested in publicity anyway. There are numerous hits on her but all they just just cite her three books and her publisher. Not a word of biographical information. She interests me tho and I wrote her a snail mail but I doubt I'll ever get a reply. One of those many little small mysteries of the WWW. Anyway, thanks for the information, happy Wiki editing and I'll see you around no doubt, George George aka SmokeyTheCat •TALK• 08:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank spam!

Hello, Edgarde. You have new messages at User:TFOWR/Thankspam.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TFOWR 21:03, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (television)

What should our policy be on articles that contain lists related to television? You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Stand-alone lists (television). Taric25 (talk) 23:02, 21 June 2010 (UTC) (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Hello, E

Just wondering if youd like to be a friend. I'm trying to get five friends, right now I have 4, and you seem pretty nice. Tell me what you think. Bye. RealityShowsRock (talk · contribs)

BS

		The Original Barnstar
		Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism of Mike Arcuri heads-up

When reviewing and I accept or reject an edit, I usually check the history after to be certain it 'took'. After rejecting a top-level edit of Mike Arcuri for vandalism, I spotted a tangle of 9 stacked edits in the history. On the surface, it appears User:Edgarde vandalised the article, but that's not the case. Both User:Edgarde and User:L Kensington tried to revert vandalism but stepped on one another's edits.

To be clear, no one's at fault (except the bloody vandal). This happened to me and once done, I've not found a graceful way out except manually accept what edits could be accepted and then using brute force to clean up the rest.

best regards, --UnicornTapestry (talk) 04:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

MC Hammer intro edit

Hello, was just curious what the specific reason was for removing the info about how many albums Hammer sold to summarize the "big picture" of the statements made about him in the beginning of the article? What "copyright" was violated? To avoid an "edit war", I'm discussing it with you first. If just the portion about the total amount of albums were sold is enough, I can remove the rest of it. Thanks, happy holiday(s)... 63.131.4.149 (talk) 07:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

(cur | prev) 16:45, 16 December 2010 Edgarde (talk | contribs) (117,692 bytes) (Rejected the last change (by 63.131.4.149) and restored revision 402309569 by 63.131.4.149: WP:COPYVIO) (undo) [automatically accepted]

(cur | prev) 11:49, 16 December 2010 63.131.4.149 (talk) (118,295 bytes) (moved statement with cites right from the award section of this article to the intro/beginning since it "summarizes" article highlights) (undo) 63.131.4.149 (talk) 07:15, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me.

The edit I reverted is repeated verbatim on several non-GFDL websites; it seems to have come from sing365.com, which lists a dead link on thewb.com as the source—both of these sites are subject to copyright (hence "WP:COPYVIO" in my edit summary}. Changing the language to something non-plagiarizing would fix this; however, the edit I reverted had other problems:

The staticmultimedia.com citation links to an empty page. A "MC+Hammer" Google search of that site for articles on Hammer comes up with just a prize giveaway and his Twitter feed.
The rockonthenet.com link does not seem to support the statement. While rockonthenet.com seems to list much music biz history, it does not appear to be a reliable source for analysis of music biz history such as "demonstrating that hip-hop had the potential for blockbuster success" (unless it quotes a writer with suitable credentials).
While the 50 million sales claim needs to be sourced, we also need a source for "demonstrating that hip-hop had the potential for blockbuster success".
The one working citation for sales figures in MC Hammer says 30 million.
The language is hype and unencyclopedic, tho it could be fixed by removing "breaking down numerous doors for rap music and" and rephrasing the rest. We would still need a reliable source for the rest of this claim.

That's all I have for now. I'm going to change "50 million" in MC Hammer to 30, and smudge the direct quote a little. Sorry to make this so hard. Incidentally, I'm not too concerned about whether or not this belongs in the lede paragraph; if you want to add a concise version of the fixed text to the intro, that's okay with me. / edg ☺ ☭ 13:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Gotcha, makes complete sense. I merely moved the statement to "enhance and complete the thought" of the intro. I hadn't confirmed if the sources were legit &/or still working. I can do some checking to see if there is in fact a cite claiming it's 50 million worldwide, and not just 30 million nationally. Seems in my research I've read something about that somewhere for sure, but whether it's a reliable source or not is another story. Thanks for the time to research and explain, I really appreciate it. 63.131.4.149 (talk) 23:00, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

After a quick search (and from sources I've perhaps used in the past for Hammer-related articles), these two seem to be sufficient:[1][2] Others I found are: [3][4] In my opinion, I think some of the "30 million" confusion also comes from the amount he banked after releasing Please Hammer, Don't Hurt 'Em as well. At any rate, let me know if they suit you. Can remove the other "hype" words from the previous sources if necessary and add this back to the intro and award section as you seem fit. I can let you, or do it myself. No biggie, thanks. P.S. I'm in agreement with "demonstrating hip-hop's potential for mass market success". 63.131.4.149 (talk) 23:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I discovered two things. First was that the A&E source provided originally was ok. I didn't see you comment on that one but was included as one of those rejected. [5] ([6]) Second, the Word Press cite I mentioned previously isn't acceptable.[7] I'll go ahead and revert/fix the edit(s) and keep the portion you changed. Let me know if you have any issues with it afterwards. Thanks, take care! 63.131.4.149 (talk) 00:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember the A&E source. Maybe I thought I had checked that one when I hadn't. Your changes look good. Thanks as usual! / edg ☺ ☭ 00:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Green Pajamas - Kim the Waitress.ogg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:The Green Pajamas - Kim the Waitress.ogg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)