User talk:Nathew

Talk to me, beatches! -Nathew 00:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- WHO ARE YOU CALLING A BEATCH — flamingspinach | (talk) 21:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barf. Teiladnam 03:18, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute... Nate is a nickname too.Teiladnam 05:45, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wait a minute... Asa is a homosexual too. -Nathew 21:13, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NO!

Hi Nathew!

Regarding "NO!": Have you ever listened to the CD? Apart from "Where do they make balloons" and possibly "John Lee Supertaster" and at a stretch maybe "the middle" and "half past two", they can't be listened to safely more than twice by even a normal adult. Try listening to "violin" twice in rapid succession and tell me again that it isn't pure children's music. Remember, Disney movies are "for the whole family", but most normal adults (except parents with small kids) simply gag at the level of kitch. "For the whole family" generally means "for kids". And it does say "NO! is for children" on the CD cover. --Slashme 05:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

They tell NPR it's a children's record:Why children's music? The two Johns --- Flansburgh and Linnell -- explain that TMBG's music already sounded child-like with its simplicity and energy. "There's always been the thing about the spirit of They Might Be Giants as a band that is very childlike . . . Making a children's album seemed like a natural," says Flansburgh.
the TMBG FAQ says: They Might Be Giants are slated to release No!, an album of songs for children in spring of 2001.
No stranger to the realm of children's records, They Might Be Giants have seen success with their CD No! and the book and CD combo Bed, Bed, Bed.
Sure, this is their first officially designated "kids" album.
They Might Be Giants triumphantly return to the kids' section, following up the success of their No! CD
While They Might Be Giants' clever, playful melodies and lyrics make their music nearly ideal listening for kids anyway, their first children's album, No!, is one of their most dizzying and delightful in years.

OK, so I got "four of two" wrong. I must admit that I don't like "NO!" much. I have "where do they make balloons" and "John Lee Supertaster" on my playlist, but the CD itself is sitting on my shelf collecting dust. And it's not that I don't like silly little TMBG tracks. I have all the "fingertips" tracks on my playlist, and I think they're great. I liked "Minimum wage" the first time I heard it.

The next question is where I got the idea that somewhere on the CD it has the quote "NO! is for children". I'll have to drag out the CD and have a good look at it!

Regards --Slashme 07:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:TMBG-early promo photo.jpg

I have listed this image on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because it does not meet the guidelines for the {{Promotional}} tag. The tag itself atates that the image has been "released by a company or organization to promote their work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit." This would mean that it came from either an ad, or from something specifically distributed by TMBG themsleves like their website, or a newsletter. The source you provided pretty much ignores copyright itself, and only provides a list of people who found or scanned images for them. If you can find the original source that would be great. If you would like to dispute this claim, by all means do so on WP:PUI! —User:ACupOfCoffee @ 00:59, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Avery

Hello! Because of your interest in similar musicians, I wanted to direct you to the Ryan Avery article and the corresponding [[1]]. Thanks! PT ^(s-s-s-s) 20:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Matt and Kim

Hi there.

You are more than welcome to take the article over to deletion review, you can even request the article be temporarily restored. Just a couple minutes following the instructions is all you need. I just ask that you please note that CSD A7 was my reason for deletion, the reference to MUSIC was so that someone could brush up on guidelines. MUSIC was not my criteria. I have no problem with anyone requesting a review of any of my actions. Thanks for contacting me! Teke^(talk) 03:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man, if you can write up a nice new article on them with sources and whatnot, by all means go for it. Just because it was deleted once doesn't mean it can't be recreated. DRV is if you want that specific version back. Start a new article, there's no rule against it :) Teke^(talk) 04:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Tmbg0105pics06.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Tmbg0105pics06.jpg. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 20:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use Image:Kimyadawson.jpg

Replaceable fair use

Thanks for uploading Image:Kimyadawson.jpg. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 23:13, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]