User talk:MusicMaker5376/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions about User:MusicMaker5376. 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.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Hair categories

Someone changed some of the Hair categories today. Do you agree with these? I am skeptical, but I will follow your lead. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:02, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I saw that, too. Since the article is not about the album, I would say that the Psychedelic Album cat can go. But, I think it's only tangentially LGBT. The show isn't about LGBT themes; the characters that would be classified as gay or bisexual certainly don't self-identify as such. I don't really think it's appropriate. — Music Maker 5376 21:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Categories (Phish)

I can change the LivePhish Download sorting today so they'll show up by date, that's not a problem. I did redirects for shows that are available as both download and CD (i.e., the ones already listed in the Live Phish Series, like 2-28-03, 7-15-03, Brooklyn, etc.). Even though they were commercially released later, they were released first as downloads. I just thought that those shows are part of the whole LivePhish Downloads package, which is why I included them with the rest. But, if you think it's redundant, go ahead and make the changes as necessary. I just wanted to let you know why I did what I did. Hope that makes sense! Rjvaughn1979 (talk) 12:08, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I noticed you added Colorado 88 to the Downloads category. Are you going to add Vegas 96, Brooklyn, and New Year's 95 in there? Also, are you just going to have those in the category sorted by title, or by date like the others? Rjvaughn1979 (talk) 13:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I like the new template, good job. I'll go ahead and keep making pages then adding the shows to the template as I go. I'm also putting the cover art in them as I get more time. Check out livephish.com though, because I think there are 4 on there that aren't on the category: Vegas, New Year's, Brooklyn, and even the White Tape. Rjvaughn1979 (talk) 15:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Sweeney Todd

Here seems as good a place as any to reply. The stage show is through-sung, eeeh? Hmm. Probably. I guess I could be wrong. It's just, I've seen videos of it on YouTube. And listened to the cast recording. And I thought I heard dialogue between and before songs. I mean, look at this video of the Showtime production. It's parts like 4:44 to 5:05, or 6:14 to 7:02, or 9:11 to 9:29, that threw me off and made me think there was unsung dialogue in the play. But you're probably right. VolatileChemical (talk) 03:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

WP:MUSICALS

Hi, MM. I think that your response on the talk page will discourage people from helping start an article. Would you kindly not undermine my efforts to get people to help us at the project? I am glad that we seem to be getting along a little better lately, and I would ask that you please try to be supportive of what I am trying to accomplish, at least when you do not disagree with me. I always try to support your initiatives, except in the rare instances where I really disagree with you. I guess you were trying to make a joke, and I am sorry to be so humorless, but it is very difficult to get anything done. Nothing on our "to do" list has been addressed in many months (e.g. content forks), the Collaboration of the Month has not been worked on (in fact, the only COTM project that was actually worked on was worked on basically by me, with a little help from Jean and hindrance by now-blocked sockpuppet guy), and the project is basically dormant. Jean is working on a lot of articles, and Marian Kroy is helping with plot synopses occasionally, but other than that, the only progress being made in the whole project is when an editor has a pet project, like Hair, Hairspray and Wicked. We need to try to get more editors to actively collaborate if we are ever to get a lot of articles past the start level. I could rant further, but behold, I have said enough. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I definitely did mean it lightheartedly -- you collected quite a bit of information. I agree we have been getting along better lately and I thought you'd see the joke. I was running out the door from work -- and Gemignani had been in the back of my head for awhile. It's almost embarrassing that he doesn't have an article, but everyone seems to forget about the Musical Directors....

At any rate....

I'm a Wikipedian because of one of those "pet projects" -- Phish. I worked hard to get it up to GA, then found WPMT. People who have pet projects go on to other things, and it helps the project in the long run. Let our collaborations find us. We'll turn people into good Wikipedians -- HM is now an admin.... Even though you were the sole dissenter in his RfA, you helped get him there. I certainly hope MB sticks around.

My approach to WP is very "There is no deadline," so the fact that the CotM doesn't happen doesn't bother me. Basically, I don't feel any pressure to get anything done. Wikipedia will NEVER be finished. EVER. So, if it takes 10 years to get a respectable section on musical theatre, we have the time. But we're getting there.

Regardless, please don't think that I'm trying to undermine you, or that I'm not supportive, or that I don't think you're an asset to the project -- both WPMT and WP. I obviously do want things to get done, or I wouldn't be here.

And it's hard to not at least try to be funny while I do it. :-) — Music Maker 5376 01:38, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate your response. I'm not very patient, I admit, and I like to feel the wind on my face as we speed forward. I thought I said so before, but if I forgot, congratulations on your fine work on Phish. I really do feel frustrated at the state of the "average" WPMT article, although we are undeniably making progress. I also do appreciate your anti-vandalism efforts, as I have absolutely no patience with that. I agree that the project is always going to be a work-in-process, but I would like to see the day, sooner rather than later, when a user of the encyclopedia could look up any of the 1,000 or so most famous musicals and 1,000 or so most famous performers/directors/creators, and see *at least* a B-class article with a good lead, synopsis, background, description of major productions and reception; and at least starts/hardly any stubs for the rest. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

And that day will come. It just won't be tomorrow. Especially not with only three of us editing with any regularity.

But people will join and MT will grow. Eventually our college kids will graduate, and, hopefully, they'll be around a little more. (Or, they become jaded and focus on career....) The project isn't stagnant -- the project was stagnant before 2006. Since then, quite a lot has been accomplished. Slowly.

At any rate, I've been planning to do another roll call to slim our list of "participants" and light a fire under some butts. Probably for the month of June.... — Music Maker 5376 16:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Spring Awakening

Check it out. All the little cast members have articles now, and by do they suck. Leave me a message about where I can vote. Oh, plus, the photos being added to their articles seem to be copyvio to me. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:25, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, I speedied one -- if that speedy goes thru, I'll just speedy the rest. — Music Maker 5376 14:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. You da Man! -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Hair GA review

We got GA review comments. Would you please take a look? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Let me know if I can help with anything (set and costumes?) - Mblaxill (talk) 19:32, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Most definitely! Do what you can with that! — Music Maker 5376 19:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

re music, you have MacDermot describing the African influence, and if you listen to the album, it's really just your standard pop rock type thing - similar to what many of the bands like the Beatles and Rolling Stones were playing. If you want me to find something in Horn i can try - Mblaxill (talk) 21:18, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on the GA rating for Hair. Your work in whipping the article into shape was excellent. Well done! -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey Musicmaker! - just wanted to say thanks for all the great work. I was a lot of fun to getting to GA with you! PEACE - Mblaxill (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Emma Hunton

I converted your prod to an AFD and mentioned your reasoning there. I hope that's alright with you. Rmhermen (talk) 20:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

That's cool. — Music Maker 5376 20:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Creatures of Impulse

I've made the changes you suggested, or tried to - could you have another look? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 16:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reviews of Creatures. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Anytime. It's a nice little article; seems like a funny show. Someone should try to recreate the music. — Music Maker 5376 13:17, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

If you like Hamlet and want to read a funny little Gilbert show, see Rosencrantz and Guildenstern (Gilbert). -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback request

Hello MusicMaker5376, I've granted your account rollback rights in accordance with your request. Just remember that rollback should only be used to revert vandalism, and that misuse of the tool can lead to it being removed. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 19:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you much! — Music Maker 5376 19:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your rollback rights. Just a friendly piece of advice (although you're more tech savvy than I am - hell, my grandmother is more tech savvy than me, and she's been dead 30 years!) that rollback can be a little dangerous. After being burned a few times by using it incorrectly, I now make sure only to use it in cases of obvious vandalism and the like. In other cases, it is better to edit normally and leave a clearer edit summary. You probably already know that, but I didn't when I got rollback. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks much. I don't know how much I'm going to end up using it. As "tech savvy" as I might be, I'm still a creature of habit.... — Music Maker 5376 22:29, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Curtains (musical)

Hi MM, thanks for your generous advice. (Therefore, if Mr. Holmes doesn't want to see his synopsis used for commercial purposes, we can't use it in the encyclopedia. However, if he would like to license it as such, he can contact me)

I alerted Rupert Holmes to the fact that the existing "synopsis" of his musical was spotty, did not incorporate the song titles as is often traditional, and contained some mis-information. Mr. Holmes suggested I use the detailed synopsis he created for the show, which he considers to be in the public domain as long as no one changes his words and attributes those changes to him. It seems to me that the most acurate plot summary would come from a person who has access to his own script and created the plot. If you wish to contact Mr. Holmes for verification of this, please let me know and I can try to put you in direct touch with him. Thanks again for all your kind effort. Skittle123 (talk) 15:51, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think we would need some sort of verification of that. I've only worked on licensing things like that for images; I'm not sure how it would work for text. I'll look into it when I have a little more time.

Also, Mr. Holmes should be aware that, with the way Wikipedia works, anyone can come along and alter the synopsis (like I did when I got rid of it). So, basically, anyone can change his words, and, in all likelihood, someone probably will at some point. There's no way for us to guard against that, and doing so sort of runs counteractive to the whole concept behind Wikipedia.

As for the synopsis itself, I agree that it is an improvement over the old one. However, it's a little un-encyclopedic -- basically meaning that it's a little too well-written. It's more promotional than encyclopedic, if that makes sense. If you look at some of the other synopsises on WP -- Drood for example -- you'll see that they're a little more "clinical". They're basically there to convey the plot rather than the mood of the piece.

I would suggest writing an entirely new synopsis. The one that's there is not exactly ideal, but I don't think Mr. Holmes is going to go for the idea that his words will be changed. We can use his as a reference. That way, he'll be protected, and the article will be ultimately better.

If you or Mr. Holmes have any other questions, don't hesitate to contact me. If Mr. Holmes would like to contact me directly, there's an "Email this user" link on the left-hand side of my talk page. You can e-mail me, and when I respond, you'll get my email address. — Music Maker 5376 16:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for writing. I'll have someone (myself or another amateur) write a synopsis that is more cut and dry. I don't think Mr. HOlme's synopsis is so much "promotional" as it is entertaining and I understand the point that you make regarding that. Thanks so much again. Skittle123 (talk) 17:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Anytime. Also, there's been some debate in the past as to whether the article for Drood should be titled Drood or The Mystery of Edwin Drood (musical). If you or Mr. Holmes has any opinion there it would be well-received. — Music Maker 5376 18:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to hit you twice, but, just to let you know, someone here may end up writing a new synopsis. If so, and you or anyone else can improve upon it, feel free. (On a side note, Curtains looks like a really fun show; I'm sorry I'm going to end up missing it....) — Music Maker 5376 18:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Seussical.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Seussical.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing the template. I see what you mean on the new issue. Let me know if you need help. Feel free to use my e-mail link. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Young Frankenstein Musical cast replacements

Just to let you know Kelly Sullivan, Beth leavel, and Michele Ragusa have officially been confirmed to take over the roles in Young Frankenstein. It was confirmed in this article: [1]

Kinda Urgent

I just tried to change an article rating to the NEW C class, but our banner doesn't recognize the new class. Can you fix it? If not, can you get Omtay to fix it? Obviously, all the Start and B class articles will need to be re-assessed (no rush though), to see which ones ought to be C class. Some time ago I had wished that there was such a Class designation. Be careful what you wish for!! I'm reassessing all the damn G&S project articles right now. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmmmm.... I will definitely take a look. No promises, tho.... — Music Maker 5376 21:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Imagine that! I seem to have done it! The cats are going to need to be created, however. — Music Maker 5376 21:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Nice work. It's showing up in the banner now. Good luck with the assessment page/project page fixes. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

RfA Review

Hello MusicMaker5376. I've noticed that you have a completed set of responses to the RfA Review question phase at User:MusicMaker5376/RfA review , but they don't seem to be included on the list of responses here. If you've completed your responses, please can you head to Wikipedia:RfA Review/Question/Responses and add a link to them at the bottom of the list so that they get included in the research. We have a closing date of midnight UTC on 1st July, so please add your link before this date. Once again, thank you for taking the time to participate in the Question Phase of RfA Review.Gazimoff ^Write _Read 15:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Hair

Sorry, no, I don't have that book. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Er, I certainly *did* work on the Scientology Pageant musical's FA article. But, I agree that if Hair passes FA, it will be our first real project FA. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol -- sorry about that! You know what I mean, though.... — Music Maker 5376 15:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Page protection

FYI, to protect a page, an admin needs to see, I think, at least half a dozen or more instances of vandalism per day. Like the Thrill Me situation, if you remember that one. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:10, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think the request would go thru, but figured it was worth a try. — Music Maker 5376 17:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

The Force

LOL! -- Ssilvers (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I try.... — Music Maker 5376 14:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

You have retrieval dates listed in references that are not web references. I think you only need retrieval dates for web references, to protect against link rot. Let me know if the retrieval dates refer to something else, as I would learn something new if I'm wrong about this. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I forget why I put them in there originally -- I think it said to on the {{cite video}} doc page. I'll get rid of them. — Music Maker 5376 23:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Then We Are Decided

Hey MM, I noticed you had made a few edits to this article a while back, so I thought I'd drop you a notice in case you had any thoughts the matter. —MearsMan ^talk 00:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow -- I must have been feeling generous when I came across that one.... I definitely do not object to its deletion, and thanks for the heads up! — Music Maker 5376 00:54, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

AFD discussions

Hi, I've noticed a couple of comments you've made to me in some current Phish-related Afds. Please could you try to assume good faith? I did long searches for sources, as I always do when I comment on deletion discussions. I'm not saying I'm always right by any stretch of the imagination, but I try to contribute meaningfully to Afds. If I see a better argument than mine in the opposite direction I'm always willing to change my mind. I have nothing against Phish or any articles about them, I'm just working with my interpretation of the policies & guidelines that's all. (Actually I can imagine it's pretty annoying to have so many articles you have worked on up for deletion at once.)--Beloved Freak 02:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

(ec)I apologize for the tone. I didn't bring up the pointy aspect of all of those noms, but someone else did. It wasn't what I needed to see first thing in the morning, having just gone through this not long ago with The Man Who Stepped Into Yesterday. However, it took me all of ten seconds to find references in four books. It would seem to me that any serious search for references would have found them. It also seemed obvious to me that you didn't look at the first AfD, where the source aspect had been addressed. Again, I apologize for the tone and I know the articles need work, but I really don't think you made a serious search. — Music Maker 5376 03:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

(post-ec)It was pretty annoying to see. I apologize for having taken it out on you. — Music Maker 5376 03:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Which 1st afd do you mean? For The Man Who Stepped Into Yesterday? No, I didn't look at that, but I wasn't commenting on that Afd. The ones I was commeting on I was looing at individually. "Articles needing work" is really not a problem to me, that's not what Afd is about. Anyway, I will keep looking into this and change my suggestion/!vote/whatever if necessary.--Beloved Freak 12:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I realized after I wrote that that I was conflating two AfD's. Sorry again. — Music Maker 5376 14:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

A Chorus Line

Hey, MusicMaker, thanks for catching my error at A Chorus Line! I assumed it meant the Broadway production (after all, how can a Broadway production originate in London?) so I hid the text, thinking Phantom held the title. I now realise what you meant by that, and PoTO was certainly originating in England, not the US. Cheers, —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 02:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC).

Not a problem. Frankly, I think the claim is a little constructed -- I mean, really, who cares where a production originated when you're talking about long runs? I think that whomever wrote that line was trying to say that it was the longest-running American musical, but maybe paid attention to the discussion a couple of months ago when we got rid of the musicals by nationality categories. Maybe the line in Chorus Line should read "longest-running American musical", rather than the convoluted verbiage currently there.... — Music Maker 5376 02:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, that's a good idea. Should I change this? —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 03:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that would be even more ambiguous. I'd vote for either leaving it alone or saying that it held the record for awhile. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:06, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Meh. Then leave it.... — Music Maker 5376 13:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I got quite a 'LOL' when looking at your userpage (the Charo disclaimer was hilarious as well). ;-) I see you've been to New York City; interesting, because that's my birthplace. —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 03:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I try.... If you can't laugh at Charo, who can you laugh at?

I live in South Jersey, so NYC is the nearest "cool" place (Philly and Atlantic City don't count. At all.) I haven't been up there since April, unfortunately, but it is the Greatest City on Earth! — Music Maker 5376 13:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Audio files

Hey MM, I know you uploaded some audio files for Hair (musical) (awesome article btw), and I think this sort of things would make a valuable addition to most if not all musical theatre articles. Anyway, I was just wondering if you had any advice on how to go about obtaining/creating and uploading the sound clips. I haven't had too much Wiki experience uploading files of any sort, but this is something I can see myself working with in the future. I originally started thinking about this when looking at the Little Shop of Horrors (musical) article (it seems to be focus of the project at them moment), and if you happen to have any song suggestions they'd be much appreciated (Little Shop has a lot of standout numbers for me, but the title song, "Skid Row", "Somewhere That's Green", and "Suddenly, Seymour" are ones I've considered). —MearsMan ^talk 04:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

You know, they're pretty easy to do if you have the right software -- and luckily, the right software is free! Audacity is open source and easy to use. You can start from an mp3, do fun stuff like fade in and out, and whatnot. When you go to create a file, for fair use concerns, the file has to be 10% of the size of the original, or less than 30 seconds, whichever is smaller (10% usually is smaller). The fun part is playing around with the song to find the right 18 seconds or whatever! When you export it as an ogg, I think you want the quality set to less than 5 -- it's been awhile.

If you have any other questions or run into problems, feel free to hit me up! — Music Maker 5376 13:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

As for your selections for songs from LSoH, they're good choices, but all from the first act. Maybe instead of the title song or "Skid Row", do "Don't Feed the Plants"? Since it's not in the movie, people aren't as familiar with it as the others.

Also, Wikipedia:Upload is definitely geared toward images, but you can use it to upload a sound file, too. You need a fair use rationale -- use the ones on Hair (musical) as a guide. Let me know when you've uploaded them, and I'll check them out. — Music Maker 5376 17:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the help! I've uploaded my first song clip at Image:Suddenly, Seymour - 2003 revival.ogg, although I've also added it to the LSoH article if you'd like to check it out there (and yes, it's from the revival cast... I would have ideally liked to use the original cast recording, but unfortunately I don't have access to those files). I figured I'd wait and see if there were any problems with this clip before trying to create and upload more. Oh, and you weren't lying when you said that finding the right sound clip was both challenging and fun! I enjoyed playing around with it, and I think I finally settled on a pretty decent clip of the song. Hopefully there aren't too many problems with it, but let me know what you think! =) —MearsMan ^talk 18:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, the rationale looks good. Unfortunately, I can't play oggs on my pos machine at work, so I'll have to check out the clip when I get home.

I have the original soundtrack. Somewhere. I'm sure Ellen Green knocks whomever sang in the revival out of the water! If you want, you can hit me up on AIM (same screenname) after around 7:30 EST and I can send them to you. — Music Maker 5376 19:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Evie and the Birdman

Regarding the copyvio in the above article. I removed the speedy because there's nothing on the external site which indicates when the text was posted; our article's text was added in 2005. It is not uncommon for external sites to lift language from Wikipedia (without properly giving attribution under the GFDL). It should of course be deleted if the text on the external site predates but do you have some evidence it does? Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

answers on your les miserables questions

hi, a time ago you responded to my diiscussion about les miserables and the new orchestrations. ive answered, would you please take a look and look what you could do? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Les_Mis%C3%A9rables_(musical)#Why_deleted.3F_if_its_becouse_of_wrong_enlish.2C_please_make_it_good.2C_and_not_delete.3F

Hair and politics

Hey! Now that the show is getting publicity i suspect that there will be some, um, "interesting" folks visiting the discussion and bringing a lot of negativity, case in point the two comments in the last few days, one from a "proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy" (Wall St Journal postee). Just a heads up i guess ... PEACE - Mblaxill (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Something entirely unexpected from someone you never met...

		The Excellent Userpage Award
		Awarded to MusicaMaker5376 for having a beautifully organized and wonderfully themed userpage. Congrats, from a fellow music maker! —La Pianista ^(T•C•S) 21:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

I was just scrolling by here and couldn't help but notice. :) You said you would "always love more" awards, anyway... —La Pianista ^(T•C•S) 21:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, MusicMaker5376. You have new messages at La Pianista's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:YoureaGoodMan.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:YoureaGoodMan.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:America the Beautiful.ogg

Hi, I wondered about the source for this sound file - the copyright notice given here is "life plus 100 years" but the recording itself doesn't seem to be 100 years old, and there is copyright both in the performance to consider, as well as the song being performed. Any chance of clarifying the licensing of the recording? Ta, Purgatorio (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:1776-musical.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:1776-musical.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:13, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:The Navy Hymn.ogg

Erm, Where is this sourced from, because it's remarkbly clear for a 1923 era recording?

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:22, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:America the Beautiful.ogg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:America the Beautiful.ogg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:The Navy Hymn.ogg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:The Navy Hymn.ogg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 00:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem: 12 days.png

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as 12 days.png, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from , and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), versions 1.3 or later then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:12 days.png and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GFDL or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:12 days.png with a link to where we can find that note.
If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:12 days.png.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:12 days.png saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! 86.140.114.202 (talk) 14:01, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:West Side 001.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:West Side 001.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media 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 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Happydays.png

Thanks for uploading File:Happydays.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 19:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rod (Avenue Q) (2nd nomination)

Hi! I noticed that you've made a number of contributions to Avenue Q, and I thought this delete discussion might interest you. Skiasaurus (skē’ ə sôr’ əs) 06:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)