Got something to say? Bring it!
|This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original talk page is located at
- 1 Tenacious D 2006-2007 Tour
- 2 Tenacious D
- 3 Tenacious D FA Nomination
- 4 Category:Rage guest programmers
- 5 Revert
- 6 who cars
- 7 Snowman (album)
- 8 hi
- 9 AfD nomination of Scintilla Juris Fraternity
- 10 Tenacious D FA drive
- 11 WikiProject Floorball
- 12 Tenacious D
- 13 Moby
- 14 Perth
- 15 TFN
- 16 D&D enthusiasts
- 17 Cleanfeed
- 18 Leeroy Jenkins
- 19 stop changing the tenacious d article
- 20 Here are my notes on the B&TG wikipage since you are interested in controversy
- 21 Speedy deletion declined: Joe McKee (musician)
- 22 Please notice ip 220.127.116.11 , 18.104.22.168
- 23 ArbCom elections are now open!
Tenacious D 2006-2007 Tour
Thanks for helping on this page. I myself attended a Tenacious D concert, and know what you mean by "At this point, Jack and Kyle die and are sent to Hell. The songs that follow are played with the band." However, I feel it is a bit open-ended, ie non D-Sciples won't know what it means.
- Re: the "sucked into Hell" bit in the set list - I think its more or less clear to anyone, as it is described in the Show Structure section as to what happens. Actually, Im contemplating the "Sample Set List" and wondering if it is even worth keeping. The show I saw (Melbourne) had the songs in a different order, and skipped a lot of the covers. Perhaps it would be better to simply flesh out Show Structure with the "plot" songs for each section ie Flash/Wonderboy, Kielbasa, Lee and Saxaboom before Hell, with Kickapoo, the Friendship Quadrilogy, The Metal, Papagenu, Beezelboss, Car Chase, Storm The Gate and History afterward. Perhaps a mention of Pinball Wizard and Tribute in the encore (Pinball being especially appropriate what with the movie plot being a lot like Tommy). I dont know. Perhaps Im rambling. But definitely I think that the "sucked into Hell" bit is clear and important.
- I agree, it is important. But it seems somewhat informal. Also, thanks for joining the WikiProject. As far as the set list is concerned, I think it is quite important as being a sample and it is notable as it is the Madison Square Gardens set list. I went to see the D in Glasgow and the set list was almost exactly the same. On a side note. Would you be interested in helping me set up a page detailing the last tour? Tenacious D Fans (talk) 10:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Metao, I've been loving what you have been doing recently.
I requested a biography peer-review and it yielded good results. I think if we could cross out everything on this page then we would be close to getting FA.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tenacious D Fans (talk • contribs) 16:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC).
- Thanks Metao. I can really see the D article becoming featured in the near future. Tenacious D Fans (talk) 08:17, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Category:Rage guest programmers
You are most welcome to revert if you wish - its just that the use of the full afl term in the title - it looked like a west australian league! no problems if you want to put it back - it will just need every clue to show its NSW and not WA - cheers ! SatuSuro 07:56, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
OK its too ambiguous a title - it either needs (NSW) at the end,or some other qualifier otherwise it is going to go on and become a lame I didnt read the article first' type fiasco for subsequent editors working on footy stuff SatuSuro 09:09, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
who cares if there is too much information. More information is always an asset. If you don't want to read it, then skip it.
- Please sign your comments. Also, see WP:FAN. Thanks. Metao 06:18, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Not sure why you changed my edit to the additional artists section, as it was only a minor factual correction which gave credit where it was due. For the record, I am Aaron Wyatt, the viola player who was on the album, and so I know that the second violinist was Dan Russel, not Dan Wyatt. I'm also adding an edit to correct the spelling of the first violinist's name, and I hope that it doesn't also get editted back out in this fashion.
PS, I had to edit out a link in the Tenacious D 2006-2007 Tour section, as it was tripping the spam filter and making the posting of any new messages impossible. Obviously this can be accessed in the page history.
You fixed one of my stuff ups and your thing said rv self linking, I was trying to link an Ep then write an article but I was tired so it never happened. There was no self linking —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juhkit (talk • contribs) 12:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Scintilla Juris Fraternity
An editor has nominated Scintilla Juris Fraternity, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scintilla Juris Fraternity and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Tenacious D FA drive
I got a peer review for the D here and I think if all these points can be covered then there is a good chance this article can become FA class. Would you be up for helping? Tenacious D Fan (talk) 15:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Ill do what I can. Not much time for full-blown edits these days. Metao (talk) 05:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Loving the edits. I'm going to sort out some of the dead-link cite and rearrange the discussion on POD criticism then I think the article will be ready. What do you think about the Complete Masterworks Part 2 ;). Tenacious D Fan (talk) 10:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi Metao, do you keep adding 'Pippy Baliunas' to Moby's page? It is incorrect and does not appear anywhere at the URL you are citing
- I have no idea what you are talking about, but I'll have a look. Metao (talk) 00:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ah, okay, I was reverting a change. You're right, the cite sucked - I think it was actually a cite for Degenerates. It was a better Degenerates cite than the one you replaced it with, so I removed the Pippy bit and put the reference back. Degenerates doesn't appear to be a residency, btw. A residency is a contract between an artist and a venue, involving a regular series of gigs. Degenerates appears to be an event - it moves around - which he regularly plays at. Events are like festivals - you don't have a residency there, just an association with the promoter. Metao (talk) 00:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Moby. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Skier Dude (talk) 03:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
I agree that the example is a bit too detailed (actually, I am not the one who added it the article); however, it seems to me that the discussion about the checksum clearly belongs in the article. While the algorithm may be "interesting trivia for we engineers and maths types", as you write, it remains an integral part of the Tax File Number, and I am pretty sure that quite a few people (e.g. programmers) look at this article hoping to find this information. In comparison, have a look at International Standard Book Number or Universal Product Code, which contain a full section on the topic too.
More importantly, the presence of the check digit and the associated algorithm were the subject of quite a bit of discussion about the future of the TFN, and whether it should be replaced with a stronger scheme — which clearly is encyclopedic. I thought the references were in the article, but in fact they are in the external link which you removed, .
Clearly, this article should be rewritten and updated to present day standards (footnotes, better references), but I think the content on the check digit should be kept. What do you think ? Schutz (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
- Whops, I thought I replied to you here, but in fact my reply was never saved... Let's start again.
- I unfortunately don't have time to look again for references right now, but I could put this article on my TODO list. Last time I checked, I found some public submissions regarding this topic, but unfortunately did not write down the references — this is why I remember that there was a public discussion. I hear your "disagrees", but am not sure what they mean in terms of what should be mentioned or not in the article. The TFN itself is just a (relatively insignificant) bureaucratic creation of the ATO; if it deserves an article, then I don't think we should be too restrictive on which information is included, as long as it is sourced and encyclopedic. Even if only a few people are interested in the topic, it seems to me that the checksum and the discussions around it (even restricted to ATO internal discussions) are encyclopedic. The fact that people would prefer to look at an official source does not seem to be a very strong argument for not having the information here (especially when no such source exist, since the checksum is 'secret' — but then, of course, we have to wonder what this means in terms of sourcing...). I am personally not so much interested in checksum digits anymore, but I know that Wikipedia would have been my first port of call when I actually was, and this is information that I would have been glad to find here (I did not, obviously, which is why I created the article after I actually found the information :-). We should still trim the examples, of course, but I don't think there is anything to gain by removing this topic from the article altogether. Schutz (talk) 11:47, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
So happens that I'm (part of) the original author. I've undone your removal of the check digit section. Having this section is consistent with the US and Canadian equivalents and that's as far as I bothered to look. Sorry mate, your arguments hold no water, you didn't bother explaining your
vandalism edit either on the TFN talk page or my talk page, so I'll be putting it back if you remove it again. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 10:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
- Im not sure read through our entire conversation, but never mind. Ill accept the validity of the section, although really the section makes several claims that are unsourced and could qualify for deletion under WP:NOR. Better to have something than nothing, though, I guess. Ive deleted the worked example again, though - this is patently unnecessary and goes a little overboard on length. The article is about the TFN, not the TFN's checksum, so it is enough to mention that there is one, and link to how it works (ie check digit), but there is no need to go into detail about exactly how it works right there on the page. There is nothing unique or special about the TFN's implementation of a modulo-11 checksum, as far as I could tell from the example, that would make it notable and qualify for a lengthy description. Metao (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
All but 3 of the entries had extant references to the subjects playing or having played D&D. I added references to those 3, as well as added more people to the category, with references. LovelyLillith (talk) 07:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Could you add a few of the technical details to your claim made on the Cleanfeed talk page? I'm assuming the IP comment was from you because of the split tag you added. As it stands now, only the UK system has any technical data presented. I don't agree that the page should be split but can see a problem developing if all national efforts in this direction end up on the page. "Cleanfeed" is the name being used by these three governments for similar programs and, at least for now, seems like a good start to a general article. CanuckMike (talk) 14:49, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
- That's what I get for assuming :-). I'll respond on the talk page to keep the discussion centrally located. As for details, how do the systems differ? Even a one-liner on the talk page or a "hey, Mr. Observant, try this link" on my talk page would be appreciated. AFAIK, the lists themselves differ along with administration but the technology used is similar if not identical. CanuckMike (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
I undid your removal of the information I added to the Leeroy Jenkins page. It had a cited source and fit the section, so there's no reason to remove it. Thanks. HarlandQPitt 02:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
stop changing the tenacious d article
Walt Frazier is famous for saying tenacious d and other weird things such as swiss cheese d, bounding and astounding, hacking and whacking, dishin and swishin, vorsiferous, serendipity, not Marv Albert
What is your problem exactly? You were wrong when you wrote Marv Albert originated the term Tenacious D and I am right when I say it was Walt Frazier and I have proved it many times. Ask any NY Knicks fan in the world or any basketball fan in general and they will also tell you the same thing. YOU ARE WRONG. Keep changing the article and I'll just change it back - you won't win. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff62284 (talk • contribs) 02:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
You wrote -"The band is named Tenacious D, after a basketball term. It is not especially relevant to the band, especially in the absence of reliable sources, who coined the term"
I'm telling you as a basketball fan for over 20 years that there is nowhere else that the TERM Tenacious D could have orginated from! No one out there calls games or says the weird things Walt Frazier does, the references I gave showed many of his crazy expressions. The only better proof I can give you is having you meet Walt Frazier face to face I suppose. Frazier has been saying Tenacious D for years, no one else came up with that before him. If you are talking about maintaining wikipedia you must leave my info because it is 100% accurate. Walt Frazier "coined" the TERM Tenacious D and there would be thousands of people who would tell you the same! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff62284 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Frazier also says "Swiss Cheese D" to describe poor defense because it seems to have "holes" in it. Now If I try to reference that will you reject it because there is no "proof of origin?"
Don't you think that the terms Tenacious D and Swiss Cheese D would be too coincidental for anyone other than Walt Frazier to "coin"? Especially so if the people are younger than him! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff62284 (talk • contribs) 02:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Wow are you serious? Any kind of article I could send you that "credits" him for coining the term would be hearsay and you would just reject it. All of the references I gave are absolutely accurate. You are wrong, bottom line and like I said before you won't win. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff62284 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I would assume Wikipedia is about providing accurate information but you keep deleting the accurate info I give! The article first said Marv Albert was credited for first using the term or "coining" the term Tenacious D and all I did was correct that with accurate information. Now all of a sudden you say that knowing who coined the term isn't important to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff62284 (talk • contribs) 02:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Here are my notes on the B&TG wikipage since you are interested in controversy
A second controversy - Bendeguz is an actor, although 7 claim he is a history major. It may be true that he is a history major, however nothing is mentioned about his acting on the show while he is clearly acting a part. Evidence visible at http://www.shakespeare-by-the-sea.com/?page_id=101 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 12:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Joe McKee (musician)
Hi. Just to let you know that I have declined the speedy deletion of Joe McKee (musician). Musicians who are members of a band that have an article on Wikipedia are not eligible for speedy deletion. If you still believe that it should be deleted, then I would suggest WP:PROD. Stephen! Coming... 11:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Please notice ip 126.96.36.199 , 188.8.131.52
Hi , Please notice, ip user 184.108.40.206 and ip 220.127.116.11 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/18.104.22.168 , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/22.214.171.124, Vandalism a lot of articles , please stop these ip user , thank youMBINISIDLERS (talk) 08:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)