User talk:Sugar Bear/Archive4

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between 6 June 2008 and 2 September 2008.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to User talk:Ibaranoff24/Archive5. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. Ibaranoff24 (talk) 11:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

---

FAC "votes"

Ibaranoff24, per your recent "votes" at FAC pages (here and here), I implore you to consider your comments a bit more carefully. FAC is not a vote; you don't support "per" someone, you support because you have carefully vetted the article against the featured article criteria. Are you seriously saying that you carefully read through those articles and did not find any problems? In both cases, you posted your "support" right after I identified significant issues, which means you're either saying we should ignore those issues or you completely disagree with me. I went back through your other recent contributions to FAC and I see more of the same. Support "per" someone and never any substantive comments. The only time I see you opposing recently (here) is for a completely illogical reason.

At any rate, you are making the job of serious reviewers harder because we have to take more time to delineate the issues you are ignoring. --Laser brain (talk) 14:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Insane Clown Posse

The article looks good. I can't thoroughly scan it just now, but off hand, I think it's clunky in the infobox under the image. Maybe try to simplify that a bit. Plus, is that all the fair use/free images you can get? I'd be inclined to remove the "faygo" image unless you have at least two or three momre that's actually of the band. Maybe pop something in from a video clip. I know its not fair use, but you can substantiate purpose pretty easily. --rm 'w avu 22:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. Just to let you know, there's quite a volume of articles that are FA out there that have a substantial amount of fair use images in them. Have a look at Hollaback Girl for instance. As to the content, I've had a bit more of a skim through and I think you have a LOT of sic work there, and think you need to start paraphrasing lines. You can always include the actual quotation in a footnote or in a reference, but every line makes it look sloppy and reads poorly from the perspective of flow. I think there needs to be more information on their wrestling federation. I realise there's a whole article about it, but you should just use {{main}} at the start and have a section of this dedicated to articulating that. I think wrestling in general throughout the article needs a lot more thorough coverage. Generally speaking, it's a ratehr informative article, seems to cover the aspects of their music adequately (from the perspective of one who doesn't really know them, other than that they were complicit in Eminem's early-fame arrest). I think you need to put it forward to the league of copyeditors, beg and plead that they'd have a look over it, because they have a habit of fleshing out informating from references, as well as quality checking them, and most importantly, they write really well, which is something I think you need to review in regards to all of the quotations (especially in the live section). Oh, another thing I'd include would be a critical response to their live performances. If they're such an important and notably distinct live show, there's bound to be ample coverage from live music reviewers. I'd include that in there too. I know it possibly will end up a seemingly eroneously long article by including my suggestions, considering it's already longer than most, but considering the subject matter, it's only fair to assume (to me) that it should be there. --rm 'w avu 12:56, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a little busy right now. If you still need my help in a week, let me know. Cheers and good luck! – Scartol • Tok 12:33, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

It’s a neat article with a substantial amount of information. Though my main area is Indian based articles, I would surely study this one for further improvement. Good luck --Logic riches (talk) 01:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I actually do own a copy of the book. I haven't read it yet, but I will get on it and help get some citations from the book rather than their site. Juggalobrink (talk) 23:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey sorry, I actually don't have the book. --JpGrB 01:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

About the ICP FAC, well I've never worked on one before so I don't know where to go to answer the admin questions or whatever it was that you requested of me. But please, I am a Juggalo and love the music of ICP and if I can be of help to you in any way, just let me know and I will do it as soon as I can.Mutlee (talk) 16:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I've added the first reference using the book. As I continue reading and fall upon the info needed, I will add it to the page. Juggalobrink (talk) 20:26, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

In my recent edit of the Insane Clown Posse page, I expanded on how Inner City Posse changed into Insane Clown Posse. I wrote a paragraph on it. I would like to keep most of the stuff in, but I would appreciate it if you could make it a little less choppy, or leave it as is if you feel it is fine. The paragraph begins with "In late 1991, after decent record sales ...". Thanks. Juggalobrink (talk) 16:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

This article looks very good to me. Reviewers comments look fair, fussy but fair, fussy like they should be. You've got oceans of sourced information and some fans who can help gather printed sources. Keep up the great work and get that FA star! :)

I've copy-edited the lead. Copy-edit can be subjective when dealing with text that is already at a high level. I'll push on a bit more later today, but have other priorities atm.

Just a tip, some discussion of articles like this can indeed be subjective by FA reviewers themselves. Be patient, you've done great work, not all FA questions have black or white answers, yet that is the way some see it. Humour them (be a clown). ;) And keep up the great work! Alastair Haines (talk) 01:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I was wondering if you'd mind taking a look at the Insane Clown Posse article and doing some copyediting based on the concerns of the opposing FAC reviewers? - by Ibaranoff24, copied from my talk page.

Sorry, but I can't help you with this article because it has entered the realm of FACs, where I think both personal opinion and a stringent set of criteria comes into play. I don't want to copy edit the article because I am not yet familiar with the FA criteria, but maybe I'll drop by to help another time when I am. All the best, though! -Samuel Tan 04:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Ibaran, I'll take a look, but gimme a few days. ( Ceoil ^sláinte 17:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Update. Started on the Early history section. At about paragraph four, "group" and "duo" are being used interchangably, but it seems "group" refers to the three original performers (including John and wider fans, roadies, etc.), where "duo" refers to the ultimate shape of the act. I'll work out some way of clarifying this, but you could probably do this better than I could.

Cheers Alastair Haines (talk) 04:07, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want a FAC withdrawn or archived, please leave a note on the FAC or on my talk page; then you can re-nominate after a period of time to address issues raised, typically a few weeks. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello, please do not strike others' comments; they will strike them when addressed. I will revisit my comments at ICP later today. --Laser brain (talk) 20:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, mea culpa. Thought I looked through those comments, but my eyesight was failing after so much reviewing. Good luck. TONY (talk) 03:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you're right, and thanks for correcting it. Hard to tell in the edit-mode what is what, sometimes. Sorry. TONY (talk) 11:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I must admit that it was not smart of me to cap the previous complaints and not check the latest round. I promise to do that today and leave a new round of comments. As for striking my oppose, that will depend on what I find. Hopefully I was just reviewing a rough patch. Giants2008 (17-14) 14:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm just too busy right now to take on any more copyediting work. Good luck with the article! – Scartol • Tok 11:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I was trying to see where I could work this article into my schedule when I saw Ceoil's comment about it needing "an hour" of copyediting. For an article the length of ICP, I'd estimate at least a week to do a decent first pass, light copyedit. Perhaps someone else might know how to do a quicker job. --AnnaFrance (talk — blunders) 14:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, Ibaranoff, I'll see what I can do. I was just afraid that you really needed a while-you-wait copyedit. But I'll be happy to take a look at it. I'll go as fast as I can. :) --AnnaFrance (talk — blunders) 00:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I see you've got another copyeditor hard at work now, so I'll bow out. Good luck with the FA review! --AnnaFrance (talk — blunders) 19:49, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ibaranoff. You asked me if I would be able to C/E Insane Clown Posse. Unfortunately, I don't think I'll be able to do it at this time. My recent on-Wiki contributions have been less frequent (and less major) compared to a few months ago, due off-Wiki stress and stuff. I hope you manage to get someone else to look it over though, and good luck with the FAC. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I've done some work on it. I plan to divide the content into subsections to make it easier to read as well. Gmazeroff (talk | contribs) 19:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The 'Independent Releases' section had lots of factual content that didn't really fit well into subsections. My solution was to create a 'Miscellaneous Events' subsection that contains a list of these facts. Feel free to reorder them, etc. I should be able to finish the copy editing by tomorrow afternoon. Gmazeroff (talk) 04:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Can you clarify your decision to remove the "Miscellaneous events" subsection? I understand that ideally each of the list items in that section would benefit by being moved into a proper section. However, the sections to which you have moved those items don't seem to fit. For example, what does the incident involving Jacob D. Robida have to do with ICP's album The Tempest? If there is a connection, it should be stated.

Additionally, why was the "Bizzar and Bizaar" subsection moved up to the "Mainstream success (1998–1999)" section? That album was released in 2000.

Otherwise, I've copy edited all sections (other than checking reference formatting). Gmazeroff (talk) 15:05, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I left some comments. There's a few things to do before I can support. You've done well with it so far. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 18:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ibaranoff24, I'm going to leave the ICP article alone during the minor cleanup phase. Good luck with the FA nomination. I hope my contributions were useful. Gmazeroff (talk) 20:34, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

In case you didn't notice, I went through the article and improved the prose and reduced the amount of overlinking. My only concern left is the number of subheadings that make for shorter sections. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 07:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

We have a problem on the page. I am currently working on the JCW page, and I was going to get some info from ICP's page. Well I noticed multiple mistakes that the copy editors made. They linked stuff such as St. Andrew's Hall, which of course is wrong because the one we're refering to is in Detroit. But the major problem I found is that in the "ICP Strangle-Mania" section, they linked Dan Curtis. Dan Curtis was a local wrestling booker who died in 1998, Dan Curtis is a producer who died in 2006. They are completely different people, and anyone who actually read the article will notice that. I corrected these mistakes, but I can't go through the page and look for all of their errors. I'm sure there are at least a few more errors like this in there somewhere.Juggalobrink (talk) 19:46, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I was very diasapointed this didn't pass. Stick with it. Ceoil ^sláinte 10:19, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I have had a brief look at the article but feel I am not sufficiently knowledgeable on the subject to make changes to the content. Also apologies for the delay in responding. I have been embroiled in a big project at work and have had little time to log into Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deevincentday (talk • contribs) 00:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Requests for copyediting

Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song

Hi. I noticed you were on the list of LOCE members and a member of WikiProject Films. I was wondering if you would be interested in taking a look at the Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song article and doing a copyedit on it? The sections "Music," "Editing," "Response" and "Legacy" look great, but the rest of the article isn't quite up to standards. This article could be a great GA and eventual FA, but it's not quite there yet. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC))

Sure. VolatileChemical (talk) 21:32, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

If I can help, I'll try. :~)--AKIRA70 (talk) 23:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, I just got your request. I'll take a look. :) -Samuel tan85 (talk) 03:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll be happy to take a look tomorrow. I'm not the best copyeditor, but I'll do what I can. Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I'll not be able to. · AndonicO ^Engage. 22:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Frank Zappa

I'm not an expert, but I'll do my best with copyediting.Abeer.ag (talk) 07:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll help out as well.--T B C ♣§♠ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 14:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Me too, probably this weekend. Euryalus (talk) 05:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd be delighted to Copyedit this page - but my time is in short supply until the end of November. Your patience is appreciated!.

MarkCertif1ed (talk) 08:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia retirement

My sincere apologies about not being able to fulfill your request. Unfortunately, I have recently decided to leave Wikipedia for good, due to overwhelming studies and personal subjects.

In my place, I recommend User:Alastair Haines or User:Ceoil to do the job.

Sincerely yours, ^LaPianista! 17:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

A Little Invite

• I would like to Invite you to talk on my talk page under a new topic of mine titled "Can Wikipedia Change, Should it Change?" Also feel free to invite anyone else you think can contribute to this topic. Go all over Wiki is necessary. I'll try to do the same to. I thank you for reading this even if you don't respond to it. And if you do . . . Yaaaaaaay.:~)-BTJM--AKIRA70 (talk) 08:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Excuse Me?

My posts were up to wiki standards, it was not wiki who was taking my edits down, it was your boy juggalobrink, and some other asshole. There is mis information littered all throughout the Psychopathic pages, for example, I went in tried to fix the Dark Lotus page with its mis information on the release of Echoside, its wrong on the page, I tried to edit it and fix it, but old juggalobrink would have nothing of it. Echoside was released as a single at rock of ages, in Garden city Mi. I got serious beef with juggalobrink, I have been down for 12 years, and this guy comes along and tries to act like nobody but him is the authority on Psychopathic.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 1WickedClown (talk • contribs) 05:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Hi there. With your huge volume of edits and work on FAs, you might make a very good sysop. Are you interested in applying? Bearian (talk) 17:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

You're not the only one to think that way. :D Enigma ^message 17:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

You may also practice with rollback by asking for that at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. Bearian (talk) 22:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:The Flatlinerz albums

Categories like Category:The Flatlinerz albums are always acceptable even if the act in question only has one album. If you want to remove "the" from the category, take it to Speedy renaming instead. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 00:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Esham

I placed the GA nomination on hold for a week, as I think that the article needs some improvement. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• Okay. I still think there should be a whole section on his musical stylings. Most GA class singer articles have this. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• Is there anything about his personal life? 19:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• QST has given me some more suggestions on IRC. I'll add these to the review page. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:30, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• I'd say it still needs more about the critical reception. Only one Allmusic review is cited, making it seem kinda out of place. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

• Passed. I still think it could be a little longer, but you said that was pretty much all you could find on him, so I trust you there. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 21:05, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Behind the Paint

I've just added the Synopsis for the book. It would be helpful if you could go through it and remove any information you see fit. There is no template on how longer or short it has to be, but I did my best not to get into too much details. My eyes are killing me from looking at this computer screen so much that I just can't go through it now. Thanks man.

I'm adding this to the Psychopathic Records WikiProject page as well, so it's no pressure as if you have to do review the page yourself.Juggalobrink (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 07:49, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films August 2008 Newsletter

The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)