|
Hello Dan56,
I did not mean to move anything that was not supposed to be moved. I just wanted to get a credit on the album since I worked on . I was the a&r executive working for Def Jam. I wanted to make sure I get credit for the work. I wanted to put a personnel section on the page so I could be included. (
Drumdragon7 (
talk) 23:52, 5 January 2013 (UTC))
This is Drpaulgleason again. Thanks for the helpful info. Now I know what to tell my boss about our reviews of more mainstream albums. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drpaulgleason ( talk • contribs) 13:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, I think there is some miscommunication here. "Laisse tomber les filles" is a massively famous song written by Serge Gainsbourg. I get the need to cite but I would not expect to have to cite that, say, "Here Comes the Sun" was written by George Harrison. In any case here is a page on allmusic showing the writing credit for the song. http://www.allmusic.com/album/release/france-gall-vol-1-laisse-tomber-les-filles-mr0001914461
As I have said twice I am not very experienced with Wikipedia conventions so instead of just removing valid information I would appreciate it if you would improve upon the information given since you seem to be an expert on this convention. Please let me know how I can assist in this matter. zellin t / c 19:18, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
This is tangential to the main point, but surely you agree we do not need to cite that Paris is the capital of France on every page where that information appears. That's what I'm saying with "Laisse tomber les filles," but I gave you a citation so that is beside the point.
You say "perhaps those elements it happens to use were those written by Gall, not Gainsbourg." Look at the citation. No element of the song was written by France Gall. Serge Gainsbourg is the sole author of "Laisse tomber les filles." This is documented all over the internet and is not controversial. Serge Gainsbourg's songwriting for France Gall is well-known.
Many of the song writing credits in Trilogy are inaccurate in minor ways, such as misspelled names. If your line of reasoning is that a) we know that the songwriting credits in Trilogy are incorrect but b) it is not Wikipedia's place to mention this, then I disagree but that is fine. If your line of reasoning is that the songwriting credits in Trilogy are correct you are objectively wrong.
I apologize if I seem to be coming off a little strong here—it's just that "Laisse tomber les filles" is an extremely well known song and this is a rather glaring error made by whoever put together these credits. zellin t / c 19:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I am going to try one last time. The fact that Serge Gainsbourg wrote "Laisse tomber les filles" is verifiable. I am not disputing that the Trilogy compilation credits France Gall, erroneously, for writing the song. If you are telling me that this verifiable AND true information does not belong on Wikipedia, I dare say that you are what is wrong with Wikipedia. zellin t / c 19:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
One example of a misspelling. "Simon Raymmonde" [sic] is credited as a co-writer for "The Knowing" on account of the Cocteau Twins sample. Simon Raymonde is the member of the Cocteau Twins. There's at least one other example, I remember going over these notes in detail—there are quite a few errors, mostly involving spelling but in the Gall/Gainsbourg case simply crediting the wrong person. You're out of your element, as I am mine by trying to reason with you. zellin t / c 19:55, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
As for the songwriting credit of France Gall. I defy you to find me ONE SOURCE ANYWHERE that says that France Gall wrote or co-wrote "Laisse tomber les filles." You will find sources that say she is credited for co-writing "Montreal," sure. But these are all sourced from the erroneous liner notes. If you simply Google search for this song you will find dozens of pages saying that Gainsbourg wrote the song. This is NOT CONTROVERSIAL. What do I have to do to find a citation that satisfies you, have an original copy of the 7" single? zellin t / c 19:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
What I'm proposing, as I've made clear many times, is that the Wikipedia page for Trilogy make clear that France Gall was credited for the song erroneously. There are countless other examples of incorrect songwriting credits (take a look at almost any Led Zeppelin song page for instance) and having both the listed credit and the correct credit is useful. Since I seemingly can't edit a page without you reverting it (ownership, anyone?) I'm asking you to synthesize this information in the proper way. Let me know if I can assist in this—otherwise, take care, and I again apologize for the heated exchange. zellin t / c 20:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
OK, really last post unless you ask for help, but your most recent edit is again incorrect. There is no sample of "Laisse tomber les filles" on "Montreal." There is an interpolation. Also, since the information in the "sample credits" page does not directly mirror the liner notes anyway, I see no reason why Serge Gainbourg can't be mentioned as the songwriter there. I agree about the credits in the tracklisting—they should mirror whatever is given in the liner notes. If there are errors, they should be noted elsewhere in the section. zellin t / c 20:09, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Wanna work together on it and try to bring it to FA status? — Tomíca (T2ME) 00:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
OK. Thank you for telling me. My love is love ( talk) 03:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:Climax (Usher song)/GA2. Till 13:59, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, nice to meet. I have opened a discussion here. I hope you can pass. Best regards, Chrishonduras ( talk) 19:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi, would you please participate in this discussion about the lead section of Kelly Rowland? Thanks. — Oz 02:26, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Your input strongly needed here: [1] WillieLimpD ( talk) 03:28, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks!!!! Ibrahimkhan7 ( talk) 03:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC) |
I saw you labeled my editions in the page as "unconstructive" and "disruptive". How so?! Even if you tought they were that, you should have clarified exactly WHY. One was a typo and the other is absolutely adequate. I hope you could answer back, regards. -- Watquaza ( talk) 02:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey there, I doubt he or she is even reading the messages, and would certainly never heed them. I figured the last warning on User talk:69.121.0.8 was needed before moving for a block. It will almost certainly be ignored and necessary. Cheers! JesseRafe ( talk) 03:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, what's up? I guess all the drama from yesterday will be gone now. Anyway, I see you are good at copy-editing, especially that you did couple of FA articles [mostly on your own i guess]. I am planning to nominate " Cry Me a River" for FA really soon, can you give it some c/e before I do that? I will appreciate it. Cheers! — Tomíca (T2ME) 09:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello, there is this user named Ridernyc who is constantly reverting edits I noticed on Btbam articles. Reverting sourced genres with many sources and reverting removals of unreliable sources on genres. Saying there isn't a consensus but started the argument recently. Currently, I need him to know that there hasn't been arguing on the genre until he came.
Ihy34 ( talk) 00:18, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Comments like this are great... until you add in jabs like "genius". Please don't do that. Cheers, m.o.p 04:30, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Danny, I responded on my talk about the issue what you suggested me to comment on. Have you seen the comment? Anyway, what happened with the Biilboard links and stuff? Greetings! — Tomíca (T2ME) 14:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dan56, thanks for your note. Unfortunately, I can't remember the last time I edited an FAC review page, and my infrequency there probably means that I'm not the best person to ask when it comes to reviewing the article to meet the exact FA critieria. I will say here, however, that Aaliyah (album) looks like an impressive, quality article, and I'd be surprised if it didn't pass the review. Best. Acalamari 23:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Sure, I'd love to. I'm not all that familiar with commenting at FAC reviews, though. Is there any specific way to do it? Snap Snap 16:28, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
In case you weren't aware, User:James edwin, who you have worked with, was blocked as a sockpuppet. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tony254trill/Archive. As the user seems to edit music articles you might be active in, you can help report on any future socks by observing past behavior. Thanks.— Bagumba ( talk) 02:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
GA Notice |
---|
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article
ATLiens in which you've been a major contributor, and has been nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to
contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. DivaKnockouts ( talk) 04:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC) |
· · · |
Hey Dan! How are you? I just wanted to tell you that I nominated "Cry Me a River for FA. Catch by if you can... Thanks :) — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:22, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Go look it up. It's not incorrect, I know not with which you're claiming that to be the case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.23.5.10 ( talk) 23:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
http://www.prefixmag.com/users/ClydeErwinBarretto/
Does this really appear to be a professional author to you? Really? It's self published. Read: Self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources. Nicholas ( talk) 05:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Please see here Since you have been involved in previous related discussions and editing in the past day or so. I have created this centralized discussion for further input. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 09:56, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I am willing to review this, but before I started I thought I would check to make sure you are still around to respond to any potential questions. AIRcorn (talk) 01:11, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Dance, Song, Video, Meme : How to tell the history? How was this excessively redundant, since the 3 pages are so small ? If everything I did has sources how is it a "dubious addition" ? Xb2u7Zjzc32 ( talk) 04:31, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
I have seen your edit. I read that the relapse had reached 6 million worldwide sales. Still i think i will re-edit it after finding some reliable sources. If you have some queries you can post it on my talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhinav0927 ( talk • contribs) 06:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Be sure to let me know when you'd like me to revisit. Best, — WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 22:06, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
How are you? Hey can you please comment at the " Cry Me a River" FAC... it is getting kinda of inactive. :/ Thank you — Tomíca (T2ME) 18:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
HI Dan Having looked through some of your articles I sense a trend in the way they are structured. It is my opinion that it could be beneficial for you to look at some other albums and maybe try some different methods. My issue is still that you could create a more neutral tone by keeping opinions about the album to the reviews section and only statements for the rest of the article, like this Odyssey Number Five article, that way people can easily distinguish it.
I also looked at your Aaliyah (album) page and noted you have done the same there. The difference I see though is that the music and lyrics section you give differing points of view which makes it work much better. Maybe you could do the same for this so it doesn't seem like you've only referring to one persons opinion.
Hope you understand my point. I am going to approve your article as GA since I may be in the minority in this view on this one. I am happy to continue this discussion though as I still think my original reasons for denying it based on its neutrality are right. Mebored81 ( talk) 19:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I reverted your recent edit to this article. WP:SEE ALSO says that the links included in such a section should reflect those in an article on the topic that's relating them, in this case Internet meme. Neither "Crank That" nor "Lisztomania" are mentioned in that article. Regardless, there are far more songs that share that meme aspect, and it wouldnt be practical to list them all or pick and choose. Dan56 ( talk) 13:58, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
"Artificial" is fine by me. 1960s Moogs were not digital, as the wave function was not discontinuous. I don't know about their more recent products. Evanh2008 ( talk| contribs) 03:44, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Wow! I award you this, original barnstar, for your AMAZING work at getting Aaliyah (album) to FA status! It happened oh so fast! I remember looking at the article a few months ago and it was a piece of shit! Great job man! Keep up the great work! — Statυs ( talk, contribs) 04:00, 6 March 2013 (UTC) |
I will give you an opportunity to make me a better wikipedian editor, since you know so much more than I do. So, where did I go wrong with respect to this article in the critical review section, which was basically nothing before I got to it. I could easily get bitter of The Truth About Love, which I will now focus on becoming a better editor instead, and grow from your criticism. HotHat ( talk) 23:37, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Do i have to go to the major label to get them to give me proper credit? Or have u call Chung King Studios nyc 212-463-0032 and have them send u copies of the session logs when and who the engineer was on the sessions? I know sometimes labels don't always get the credits correct or they forget some people cuz it was late into the album getting done and the artwork/credits were already completed. The John legend &roots album i help track a lot of the music , we did 4 days in a row,, it was when the yankees and phillies were in the world series cuz i had to bring the big screen from the lounge into the control room so Questlove and the rest of the roots (from Phily) could watch the game while they were recording and the engineer, Steve Mandel was the engineer , which they had brought from the jimmy fallon show.
The Common FINDING FOREVER album (also at Chung King Studios in the Blue Room) i worked with Bilal tracking the vocals for "Start the show" and Kanye was on the phone half-singing to Bilal how he wanted it to flow. And the other day was thee final day of the album when Common came in to track the vocal for the lead on "break my heart" and after he got done, he listened to the entire album with his A&R and i had to hook up an extra SUB to make it Boom more for him while he was listening to the album. Royalplaid1234 ( talk) 05:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
The Surreal Barnstar | |
For your new FA and all the good work on Wikipedia! Keep it up... — Tomíca (T2ME) 21:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC) |
Where do you think Adam's quote should go on the Illmatic page? I'm thinking the section "Retrospect"? Or do you think it should stay where it is? 150.209.41.46 ( talk) 04:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Despite some of my comments, I do recognise that you've done an excellent job there. I don't have a whole lot of respect for GA or FA processes, but good luck! If I can help, let me know. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 11:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC) PS: Just out of interest (!), what value does the latest RRG place on the UK LP? Ghmyrtle ( talk) 11:13, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan56, I notice you have authored a few featured articles. That's great! Can I get your input on the Illmatic page, to see how we might improve it? And hopefully, we can make that into a FA as well. Chubdub ( talk) 01:01, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, that would be helpful! Chubdub ( talk) 02:47, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
The critical response section looks easier to read now that you broke it up into section. I was thinking, should we include a pic of the 5mics from the source? Chubdub ( talk) 16:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan. I'm looking for an image for the hip-hop artist section. And I figured this would be a perfect one... copyright rules. http://speechismyhammer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/elzhi-elmatic-640x420.jpg Unfortunately, its copyrighted by XXL mag. Could I justify its use on the Illmatic page? Chubdub ( talk) 05:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
How can you ignore Wikipedia's own article on the subject of Third Stream Music? It's Gunther Schuller's own term meaning the merging of TWO streams, jazz and classical, into a new THIRD stream. I don't believe that "world music" was included in Schuller's definition.
I would hope that with your obvious dedication to Wikipedia that you could research the subject and further improve the paragraph.
Why did you omit "Quiet Nights?" Of the four Davis/Evans collaborations this is the one example that was informed by what could be reasonably called "world music." And by the way, this was not a "test edit." JaneOlds ( talk) 16:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan56, I notice you have authored a few featured articles. That's great! Can I get your input on the Illmatic page, to see how we might improve it? And hopefully, we can make that into a FA as well. Chubdub ( talk) 01:01, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, that would be helpful! Chubdub ( talk) 02:47, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
The critical response section looks easier to read now that you broke it up into section. I was thinking, should we include a pic of the 5mics from the source? Chubdub ( talk) 16:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan. I'm looking for an image for the hip-hop artist section. And I figured this would be a perfect one... copyright rules. http://speechismyhammer.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/elzhi-elmatic-640x420.jpg Unfortunately, its copyrighted by XXL mag. Could I justify its use on the Illmatic page? Chubdub ( talk) 05:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the link to the photo review page. Chubdub ( talk) 02:32, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan56, I was signed off on my work computer and noticed you left this message on my IP's talk page.
Unfortunately, that address is shared by many dozens of individuals, so it's unlikely your message will now reach its intended target.
Keep up the good work! tdmg ( talk) 19:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Category:Gil Scott-Heron, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 18:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Heres what it says in that article "Material for which no reliable source can be found is considered original research. The only way you can show your edit is not original research is to cite a reliable published source that contains the same material." which i cited a relibale source so how is that original research. Koala15 ( talk) 02:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Right no other articles about musicians post the album title in the discography section. Koala15 ( talk) 03:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Cool, understand what you mean about not having it on his main page and it breaking flow. What were you suggesting would be a good place to add this content? I think it's useful and relevant information. Jabrazeau ( talk) 04:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Adding it to his album page now. Thanks! Jabrazeau ( talk) 05:00, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dan56. I'd just like to say thanks for adding the reception section to Valotte. If you don't mind/not busy, could you also add reception sections for the rest of Julian's albums? Best, yeepsi ( Talk tonight) 15:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
The entire sentence regarding the Civil rights movement is as follows, "This is a large, cohesive work, and I'm not sure, besides the stated connection between Civil Rights Movement and the music—I was active for a while with the Civil Rights Movement in this country in the 50s and 60s, and into the 70s, and music played a very large part in that, whether it was Robeson or Pete Seger, Mahalia or Aretha, but I don’t hear those echoes in this music." It wasn't clear whether this was criticism or not, I guess Rusch simply meant that the work was inspired by the era, but he didn't hear the influence of the music of that era. As for the composition itself, he did have this to say: "This work, for the most part, is compositional, IE classical, and, like Leo's trumpet music, it's often sort of projecting spires out into the universe. Inner Space, with its mostly chamber sound, is Smith's own group, which he calls the Golden Quintet, which is Smith, Anthony Davis on piano, John Lindberg on bass, Pheroann Ak Laff on drums, and Susie Ibarra also on drums. I found all the four records here all engaging, but for the jazz listener who doesn't have broad tastes I guess you could program out the parts that aren’t with the quintet, which are mostly found on discs three and four." Again, I'm hesitant to put the whole thing online, but I hope this helps. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I created the critical section, which you might want to look at it, and get back to me if you have any problems with it. HotHat ( talk) 03:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
In your last message to me you said that the genre changes I made to certain Beatles albums weren't reliable because i got them from a source that "wasn't reliable" because it was copied from a previous wikipedia info box. The people who had copied the info box were the admins of the OFFICIAL Beatles website, the most reliable info source for the band, so surely if the previous info wasn't true they wouldn't have put in on the website. Therefore i think my changes had very reliably sources. Y45ed ( talk) 20:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I have notice nearly all the music artists articles you work on, even the ones you have received awards for do not even have sources for their genres. But you keep undoing everything that mention the genres Tinashe is consider. But for example your work. A few
Ray Ray, Illmatic, Southernplayalisticadillacmuzik, Congregation (album), LiveLoveA$AP, Life Is Good (Nas album)
But most artists in general don't have sources cited for there genre.
Nelly Furtado, Rihanna, Melanie Fiona, Jamie Foxx, The-Dream, Mariah Carey, Brandy Norwood, Christina Aguilera, Janet Jackson, Leona Lewis, etc, etc. no source cited.
She work with Producers in those Genres, She's often compared to artist of those genres. She even describe herself as being a mix of those genres. The statement is attributable, even if not attributed. Wikipedia:No original research Most artists don't have genre cited sources. Your over challenging this with no reason for rejection. Most artists don't have cited sources for music because no one is likely to object to it and we know that sources exist for it. The statement is attributable, even if not attributed.
Toneythegreat (
talk) 18:30, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I have reported him to 3RR. He then reported ytou to 3RR p b p 20:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
yo yo yo, what up Dan56. I was wondering what is up — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.146.185.201 ( talk) 19:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm replying to your message about my edit of the Channel Orange page. I added a new section to the talk page regarding my edit straight after I'd done it. Please check there (Golden Girl songwriter credits) and let me know what you think. Thanks. 27.252.192.64 ( talk) 15:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Dan, I'm not ignoring you, sorry I didn't respond more quickly. FWIW, I have had enough of genre wars in general, and more importantly, arguing with IPs. I want to help out, but have had my fair share of anon sock/trolls who are really just here to cause trouble, and seem to care little about improving the project. I suggest you ask an uninvolved admin for advice/assistance. GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 23:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Greetings Dan,
I corrected the information because my brother and I are the actual co-writers or the song. My name is Aziz Collins and my brothers name is Joshua Collins. I am aware that in the liner notes the credits have us listed as "A.Collins and J.Collins" if you would like to provide me with your email address I'd be happy to share with you our conversation with Bilal's management about our publishing info for our work on the song. I'm not sure who Albert Collins is and while some people may refer to my brother as "J" (Jay) his name is Joshua. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azizcollins ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh, course. When I have some time. Regards, Chrishonduras ( talk) 19:42, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
What exactly do the liner notes say? Monk's first studio appearance took place six years before this recording, and his Minton's recordings were several years before that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.109.75.127 ( talk) 04:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
See Talk:Goin' Home (album)/GA1 review. — Robin (talk) 20:42, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
For your contributions to bring Goin' Home to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! — Robin (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC) |
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
For your contributions to bring A Love Surreal to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! — Robin (talk) 21:27, 7 April 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Dan, Hope you're well. Feel free to go through some of the changes I've been making to the Illmatic and East Coast hip hop pages. I'm hoping to go through and include citations wherever they are still needed (it should take me another day, I'm just caught up with work). Also, I'm curious why the East Coast article was heavily cut down from its older version? It seems to be missing a lot of content that could still be relevant to the topic, don't ya think? Chubdub ( talk) 03:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Okay, the barnstar got caught up in my message. Chubdub ( talk) 04:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
On the album Wheelhouse, User:BuddylBat thinks that it is more important to put the tracks over the prose, so do we have a policy to cite to this user. HotHat ( talk) 23:26, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
I took and replaced Taste of Country with Billboard in the ratings box because I am learning something from you to ask the question, which source is the most reliable and trustworthy? No question, it is the well established and highly regarded magazine over the genre specific music zine. By the way, the reason is because Billboard finally is starting to provide some semblance of a rating. HotHat ( talk) 01:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi there,
I'm re-nominating Confessions along with its singles to become a Good Topic. As a major contributor to the main article in the series, I was wondering whether it would be alright to include you as one of the contributors. Et 3 rnal 20:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan,
I was having trouble including a new accolade on Illmatic's Accolade section. Do you know how to work the table in that section. If so, would you mind including this under the Rolling Stones section?
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/the-100-greatest-debut-albums-of-all-time-20130322/illmatic-19691231 Chubdub ( talk) 02:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
And this too
http://www.complex.com/music/2012/11/the-50-greatest-debut-albums-in-hip-hop-history/nas-illmatic Chubdub ( talk) 02:05, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
"may cause readability or accessibility problems" - in fact, it helps readability because that's how people talk. They refer to Rodgers & Hammerstein's The King & I not Rodgers, Hammerstein's The King & I. Who wrote HMS Pinafore? Gilbert & Sullivan not Gilbert, Sullivan... Thank you.--The Totter 21:59, 15 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Telegraph Totter ( talk • contribs)
In your opinion, do you think that the deluxe edition cover for Finally Rich meets the Fair-Use criteria for use in the article? I seem to believe it is very similar to the standard edition album image and should not be used per Template: Infobox album. What do you think? STATic message me! 02:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dan! I recently nominated Britney (album) for GA status, and seeing your fabulous contributions to music-related articles, I was wondering if you would be interested in taking on this review. Regards, WikiRedactor ( talk) 20:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Finally worked out how to use the talk page, having taken out that opinion thing you mentioned earlier and still getting my edit reversed please explain what I need to do for approval? The multiple IP addresses thing isn't intentional just seems to happen (at no stage have I intentionally changed IP address), I use different devices at home. Please understand that I have never edited a page before and having been learning with the feedback given from you and other users on that page, and am only trying to help rather than vandalise ( 92.5.238.211 ( talk) 08:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC))
Also I'd like to apologise for missing your messages on the various talk pages made for the IPs, as a new Wikipedia user I did not know these existed and I can kind of see why you thought I was being hostile, in truth I only found the messages a few minutes ago and had I seen them earlier we'd probably not have come to this situation. ( 92.5.238.211 ( talk) 15:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC))
I wonder what you think of Havoc and Bright Lights, since I worked on the critical reception section? HotHat ( talk) 05:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh goodness, you don't even want to know what my old critical sections used to look like. HotHat ( talk) 05:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
You reverted my edit again on In Utero (album), i really don't see where the guideline says that you can only use "a numbered list" while nearly every other album uses template a track listing Like all The Beatles album's and every other Nirvana album. Koala15 ( talk) 00:13, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
Thanks for your work to bring Goldenheart to Good Article status. Your prolific contributions are much appreciated. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 21:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC) |
Even Metacritic uses tabloids to get their scores from, such as The Austin Chronicle and LA Weekly to name two that I found. I just wanted to alert you to this fact that I found out. HotHat ( talk) 10:54, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I overhauled the Capital Kings critical section, what did I do wrong? HotHat ( talk) 09:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I have blocked the IP address of the editor who has been repeatedly adding disputed content to Reasonable Doubt (album). However, you need to be aware that your own edits to the article constitute edit warring. I am not blocking you, because you have repeatedly attempted to communicate with the other editor, and received no response, but you need to bear in mind that you should not edit war even if you are convinced you are right. Whether anything at WP:Dispute resolution can be any help I don't know, but you should at least consider it. JamesBWatson ( talk) 12:30, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Do you think that by adding Mojo to Rumours that I added to the article in a good way or not? HotHat ( talk) 23:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Sorry, the reason I added it was because on Timberlake's page for his album The 20/20 Experience, the genre is listed as neo soul, (which I thought was unusual/interesting) so I thought it may help the article to have more recent releases listed as it was referring to late 2000's music. Check it out and see what you think, otherwise sorry for changing it. Thanks 124.183.250.43 ( talk) 10:04, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
What do you think about Rumours 35th Anniversary ratings box put in the article that I created. HotHat ( talk) 04:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dan, it's been a while. How are you? I hope you are doing good. Hey, I was thinking about nominating Good Girl Gone Bad: Reloaded for a FA. I know the article is not big enough, but looks cute and I think it can become a FA. But before that can you give it a copy-edit treatment. I would appreciate it. Cheers! :) (Note: It is at GAN now, but I resolved all the issues so I guess it will pass soon) — Tomíca (T2ME) 21:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
For your copyedit of Good Girl Gone Bad: Reloaded, I award you this barnstar! Thanks so much for the help Dan! — Statυs ( talk, contribs) 17:42, 18 May 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 23:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Just wanted to get your opinion on a very interesting piece of information I found about Illmatic's cover. I've come across two blogsites that speculate whether the cover art for the album might have been influenced by an obscure jazz album, A Child is Born (1974) by Howard Hanger Trio. 1 2
I think it would be nice to include in the article, but I'm concerned that it might border too much on original research. What do you think? Chubdub ( talk) 05:15, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. I'm just trying to get some understanding of your revision of my recent edit and your comments "Why make a deal of this?". Well, I attempted to get some clarification about the year of the second RS list on the album's talk page and neither you nor anyone else gave a suitable response. So I changed the year. The source in the Sabbath article states 2009 and not 2012. Don't make it sound as if my edit was somehow inappropriate. You could have just answered my question in the first place. ChakaKong talk 10:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I think there may be a misunderstanding here. The versions of covers I've uploaded are not high resolution by any means, however they are of a higher quality because of less jpg compression, less cropping and a more realistic dynamic range -- this is a matter of accuracy to the original artwork. When you reverted I assumed it was because I did not take the time to explain the reasons for my uploads, which is fair. I made sure to state the reasoning when I reverted back to them. I understand that you may have a certain attachment both to the article and its related media, but the inherent philosophy of collaboration on Wikipedia is to be bold. That the article passed FAR is largely irrelevant and there is no precedent for lengthy talk page discussions or notifying an uploader of a new revision (watchlists take care of that).
I have no interest in a "beef" with you, my uploads were good faith attempts at improving content of a substandard quality. The album covers I use are minimized versions of official digital releases by record companies, not blurry uncleaned amateur scans. Note the differences between [2] (blurry, washed out scan) and [3] (a clean digital version of the original design released by the distributor). I think you are mischaracterizing my uploads. Please note that I am well aware of WP:ALBUMS guidelines as well as NFCC guidelines, I was actually involved in drafting the latter and in fighting for the inclusion of album art in articles to begin with. I am going to proceed to revert the Keys album art for the aforementioned reasons and I welcome a discussion of choosing the best version of the Axelrod covers. I don't have the time right now, but later this week I can link to several variations of the album covers and discuss the differences in fidelity and release history. Though your messages to me had an adversarial edge I look forward to a fruitful collaboration in hopes of avoiding future editing conflicts. Regards, ˉˉ anetode ╦╩ 18:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
What is more reliable when it comes to music reviews because I am just curious? Is it music magazines, music webzines, or newspapers? I would tend to think first and foremost music magazines secondly music webzines and lastly newspapers, but am I correct with this assumption or not? HotHat ( talk) 09:14, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
I have the Q and Mojo magazines from January-May of this year, and I got the Mojo for June, which I will be getting the Q. In addition, I have Uncut magazine from March, April, May and June of this year. I am telling you this if you want me to go and pull any reviews out of them for you to utilize on here on some album articles. HotHat ( talk) 15:55, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
You reverted my edits on some mixtapes about DatPiff downloads and I'm not mad, just hoping you could clear things up. Dozens of mixtape articles have that info. What's the problem with these? Are there certain articles that its not OK to do that? And also you said "if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else will probably have done so." If that's true, you could say that on any edit adding info because nobody has put that. Isn't that the point of WP? To add info while keeping it to the point? I just want to understand this so I don't make the same mistake. Thanks. Charlie the Pig ( talk) 00:25, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dan. Could you help on the Bleach page? ADN-9 added the track list template there, and previously on In Utero before you reverted them, and it seems Bleach is the only one they've re-added the template again to. Best, yeepsi ( Talk tonight) 23:29, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Damn. I was checking a previous revision, and didn't notice I was editing that instead of the actual article. My bad. — Statυs ( talk, contribs) 02:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
When you remove Cosmo Lee's references from all 50 articles (which all are extreme metal) then tell me it's not reliable.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 16:39, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
How did you find the entire digital version of the book Justice For All - The Truth About Metallica on Google Books? I was trying to get some other related books, but all I managed to get was a short preview. I would very appreciate your advice. Salutation.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 18:46, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
And please express your desire for a third side party at the L1A1 FAL's talk page. -- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 17:17, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
The genre is properly sourced, so please revert your own edit.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 19:37, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Reviewing my daily work, I coincidentally noticed this little mistake of yours. Seems you've got your own way of citing the reviews.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 21:42, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
One more question - Does www.setlist.fm serve as a reliable source? Thank you.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 08:16, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Listen, is my latest added Rolling Stone source enough for you to expand the Live Performances section?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 08:35, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
And now can you put them back?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 09:11, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
You got any expectations on the album getting promoted into B class on the album project quality scale?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 13:34, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Is this usable to be put in the Justice article - "Commercial performance" section?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 14:35, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Does AJFA stand any chance to be labeled as "good article" in it's current form?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 15:11, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Are you able to fix a little mess I've made? I've nominated ...And Justice for All (album) for GA article, but accidentally I've put myself as a reviewer. Thanks.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 20:49, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Move the quote a little, do not remove it. Glenn Pillsbury is professor and respected musicologist. His opinion should be heard.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 20:58, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Listen, you can read his biography in the reference I've put recently. See the article's old version. And place it where you think it fits the best. He is professor and musicologist.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 21:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
You don't have a basic idea how wrong you are. You can see what have I written (googled) if you look at the older version. It is a reliable source as it can be and it deserves to be placed in the article. I've asked you nicely where do you think it fits the most. And it sublimates the whole "progress and complexity" thing (listed first) and thrash metal (listed second). I'm being cooperative and I'm building the article structure so to "progressive metal" be mentioned first although I've found at least three (deleted) citations which indicate the opposite. You are the one who says "it's gonna be my way or nobody's way".-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 22:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Let me remind you of this: Wikipedia editors are not indifferent to truth, but as a COLLABORATIVE project, its editors are not making judgments as to what is true and what is false, but what can be VERIFIED in a reliable source and otherwise BELONGS in Wikipedia.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 22:16, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Well, I have come across William Tyler, who is a guitarist for the band Lambchop, and he does not presently have an article on Wikipedia. So, by looking at AnyDecentMusic?, Metacritic and Allmusic, do you think he and his albums are notable or noteworthy for inclusion in this encyclopedia? His first solo record was released on an Indie label and his second on a mainstream record label by the way. Do they have to chart for notability to occur or can they become notable by another means? Just curious. HotHat ( talk) 16:31, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan, I was going to attempt an edit on Vampire Weekend's album Modern Vampires of the City. The reason being is I saw a slight error in reference to the origins of their song "Step". On the page, it says this:
Step" was inspired by a lyric from Souls of Mischief's 1993 song "Step to My Girl", which sampled Grover Washington, Jr.'s cover of Bread's "Aubrey". The vocal melody of the chorus interprets the melody of "Aubrey" so close that the band had to clear it as a sample.
However, on their YouTube VEVO page for the audio of the song, they credit YZ and his song "Who's That Girl" from his debut album Sons of the Father- as does the website WhoSampled. The reason why Souls of Mischief came into the picture as a sample credit is they too used the same sample of YZ's song. I was wondering if it was okay to change that. Shallowharold ( talk) 18:10, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Frank is a nickname -- the format for nicknames with legal names is well established on Wikipedia and we could list hundreds of examples all inconsistent with your edit (everyone known by a nickname, essentially. If you really need examples, they couldn't be easier to find). -- Walor ( talk) 04:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Can you start a new discussion regarding Lift off not being a single?. 50.89.124.11 ( talk) 21:09, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dan,
I hope I am reaching you the correct way - I have not contacted a Wiki editor before.
I appreciate your interest in my edit to the "Critical Reception" section of the Beatles White Album page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_%28album%29#Critical_reception. If I may, I will take issue with your action to remove my edit of a quote from a review of the album by Chuck Klosterman (here: http://www.avclub.com/articles/chuck-klosterman-repeats-the-beatles,32560/).
The review as currently characterised on Wiki is misleading, in that it simply quotes the review as saying the album is "a blandly designed masterwork".
What this fails to reflect though is that the entire review (beginning to end) is highly sarcastic. For example, the article opens as follows: "Like most people, I was initially confused by EMI’s decision to release remastered versions of all 13 albums by the Liverpool pop group Beatles, a 1960s band so obscure that their music is not even available on iTunes." A little later the reviewer says: "It is not easy to categorize the Beatles’ music; more than any other group, their sound can be described as “Beatlesque.”"
The article continues in that fashion throughout, for example saying it's hard to remember the names of the band members and saying things like: "1967 proved to be a turning point for the Beatles—the overwhelming lack of public interest made touring a fiscal impossibility, subsequently forcing them to focus exclusively on studio recordings." Of course, it was their excessive popularity that made touring impossible.
This is the tone of the article throughout, so when the reviewer describes the White Album as "blandly designed" he is being tongue in cheek (or sarcastic or ironic, whichever word you chose) about an album that is the very antithesis of blandly designed. Indeed, the chaotic, sprawling, messy design of the record is the most remarked upon element of it amongst critics.
As such, I don't think leaving Wiki readers with the impression that any serious critic actually thinks of the album as "blandly designed" is correct. That the reviewer was being ironic needs noting I think, hence my edit to reflect this.
Best regards, David, Dublin, Ireland.
11Block | talk 23:22, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan56, just wanted to leave you a message to say that while we definitely had some opposing views on the whole Blabbermouth debate, that at no point did I mean anything personally (and I hope you didn't take anything I had to say personally). You're a great editor and I've seen a lot of great work from you, so I just wanted to make sure that you knew that, and that while we disagreed on this issue, I still have a great deal of respect for you. Keep up the good work! MrMoustacheMM ( talk) 18:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Is Hellhound Music a reliable and noteworthy source to use for album reviews? HotHat ( talk) 02:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Obviously it is going to be biased. It is an edit in a section called 'Reception' - a section talking about opinions. I stated his opinion, which is heavilz biased towards the album, and worthy of note since he is The Dean of American Rock Critics. Clearly this is a fact about an opinion not an opinion about a fact. This sort of thing is irritating. If you have a problem with the wording, edit it, but I merely highlighted a noteworthy detail. Sincerely, fuck off. (by the way, don't report this IP address it isn't mine, my account is P100jboo)
Hey, nice work on the critical reception section of My Way. However, it reads a bit like a quotefarm; would you be able to paraphrase the reviews a bit more? I did a couple, but many of the sources are offline. Cheers, Adabow ( talk) 09:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi Dan, how are you? Can you please tell me per which consensus the Metacritic is not included in the box for CR? Thank you :) — Tomíca (T2ME) 07:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
On the article ATLiens, the editor whoever put in Sputnikmusic failed to include the other staff rating and emeritus one, which give UNDUE influence to the one used from the site, so I put the other two in to give the site the proper balance it needs. See, this is the reason that I don't like to use sputnik in the first place is they have multiple reviews/ratings from staff/emeritus reviewers. This is similar to New Release Tuesday and Jesus Freak Hideout with respect to Christian music articles. This stuff is difficult! HotHat ( talk) 07:55, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan56
I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).
So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.
What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.
The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.
Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) ( talk) 22:20, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi.
Sorry, didn`t see it was already mentioned on legacy, but i put the template again since taht one should be anyway. Zidane tribal ( talk) 18:45, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Only reason you won't find Gigwise on Metacritic or ADM is because they don't give any scores in their reviews; it'd be impossible for a review aggregator to use them. 2.127.89.190 ( talk) 02:04, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Greetings my supervisor. You might wanna see the latest change I did to Metallica. Have a nice day.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 10:33, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I've begun the GA review for Misterioso (Thelonious Monk album), and would like your thoughts on a few small points; the article looks otherwise ripe for promotion. Thanks as always for your contributions, -- Khazar2 ( talk) 01:11, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
For your contributions to bring Misterioso (Thelonious Monk album) to Good Article status. Thanks, and keep up the good work! -- Khazar2 ( talk) 11:44, 3 July 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Dan56. I'm confused by a recent change you made to the article on Ram, undoing changes I made to the section on critical reception. Confused by your accompanying comment, more than anything else. In line with the point made in MOS:Album re Album ratings template, that "When choosing which reviews to include, consider the notability of the review source and keeping a neutral point of view. For older albums, try to include not just contemporary but also some more recent reviews", isn't it more informative, and a truer indication of this album's critical reception, to include the 1971 NME and RS reviews in the ratings box than going with a majority of 21st century ratings? I had/have every intention of adding to the main text, to quote from Smith's NME article. Having said that ...
I've just discovered your apparent reasoning while trying to paste in a link to what was until recently clear guidelines on the use of terms like "favourable", "mixed", unfavourable", etc. I see you've instigated a major change to the album ratings template. A change that I think is quite insane. Now, visually, a reader can come to an album article and with a quick glance at the ratings box, leave with a completely false impression of an album's standing among music critics. Simply because the majority of reviewers back in the 1960s and '70s didn't use a recognised rating system. And readers do skim through an article in such a way – not every reader is a contributor who's aware of wikipedia guidelines, far from it.
Needless to say, I wish I'd known about this proposal of yours, back in February. This is such a major change you've made, I also think it would've been wise to seek input from, say, any contributor who had nominated an album at GAN over the previous 6 or 12 months. I really despair when guidelines that invite a bit of intelligence are replaced by proscriptive rules ... JG66 ( talk) 03:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Dan. I simply corrected the tense in the commentary, not in the quotes. You can't discuss old quotes, and imply she is still living. The tense is untouched inside quotes. Venuzza67 ( talk) 21:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Dan56, you're full of it. Here's your quote on the Nicki Minaj talk page for Roman Reloaded, where you cite Meta Critic as the end-all.
By a show of hands (or comments), does this revision to the article's "critical reception" section smack of POV content removal (WP:VNT), editorializing (WP:WORDS), and undue weight to minority viewpoints (WP:UNDUE)? Oh, and being neutral in form, considering most of the reviews that the album received were "mixed", as verified by Metacritic and The Independent, both of which are cited in the article, yet the editor seems to overlook that ("using metacritic is lazy"?), along with a few other reliable third-party sources (GoogleNews' index of sources, The Huffington Post) Dan56 (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
The Aaliyah album was rated 76. That's a fact. Reverse me again and I'll bring your words from the other page to the forum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venuzza67 ( talk • contribs) 21:40, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Listen, I appreciate what you're saying. But it's also abundantly clear that you respect old-school artists- so do I. But, when I viewed the discourse, you showed a lot of bias on that Nicki Minaj album. Be reasonable. You can't "as verified by metacritic" on one, and then "it's not the end-all" on another artist. Let up on one or the other. You need to be consistent. i think you're probably a great editor- but that kind of thing will sink you. It's way too obvious you are leaning to the old-schoolers. Which I can't blame you for. I agree!! But seriously, when I read all your comments, your definitely in the old-school camp, and clearly "shaping it," shall we say. I'll change it to "highly positive." But if you get in those pissing matches trying to prove the new artists like Nikki whatever are not as cool, I'm gonna call attention to your contracdictions. Wikipedia has to be consistent and you are not the king- ok? I'll change it back if you feel that strongly. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Venuzza67 (
talk •
contribs) 22:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Undid my changes- wanted to show good faith.
Venuzza67 (
talk) 22:10, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
REchecked all the reviews. They are actuall a bit more negative. Have to use Metacritic as it stands.
Venuzza67 (
talk) 22:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey, Dan. Do you have any interest in weighing in on the above linked Chris Brown discussion? Given your experience with music biographies on Wikipedia, this discussion seems like something you should weigh in on. I've stated about all I have to state on the matter, and don't mind too strongly if the move closes opposite my "vote." But the discussion, so far, looks like it should be closed as "no consensus" to me. Flyer22 ( talk) 04:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan. I've added a bit on the Blowout Comb page using the liner notes from the 2013 re-issue. I was wondering if you would collaborate and help expand it from other sources, and possibly get it to GA status. Let me know. -- Blastmaster11 ( talk) 01:03, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Anyone visiting me here, if interested, feel free to voice your support or offer constructive criticism at my feature article nomination of Confusion (album), a relatively short article to review. Dan56 ( talk) 11:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Can you give your magic touch to the article and copy-edit it please? I am planning to use it as my next FAC. Thank you! — Tomíca (T2ME) 16:51, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I'll keep an eye out on the article. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 19:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
The Blessed Unrest has improved and greatly benefited because of your coaching me on here in the sections of music and lyrics and critical reception. Just wanted to let you know, and as always if you don't like something that I do alert me to the situation. HotHat ( talk) 23:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
I have got another started New Publications. HotHat ( talk) 04:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
About the charts. According to Hung Medien, the album entered the charts in Australia and New Zealand in 1986, but according to this and this, the years seem to be 1993 and 2010, respectively. Any solution?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 09:06, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
You see, in the chart section of the page I put the same reference for all international charts except the US and British. If you enter the reference No. 67 it opens the Swiss chart. I need the url that leads to the main page of Hung Medien about the album.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 12:00, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
I have an idea to write a paragraph about Burton's death. By writing it does the article "stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail" (as the GA criteria says)?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 13:55, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi again. Can you take a tiny look at Death Magnetic and see if I correctly used the BBC review? Thanks.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 22:04, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
I just want to thank you for taking my mis-shapen words or prose, and making them into something much more useful. HotHat ( talk) 01:42, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Ain'tchu got anything better to do, AllMusic says its R&B leave it be yeah! H.Mandem ( talk) 19:58, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello. What seems to be the problem on Master of Puppets? Is it the cover or the audio samples that need additional licensing?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 08:42, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
I removed the "Damage Inc." audio and placed the other into the lyrics section. As for the second issue, if I understood correctly, the first week sales were 75,000 copies without proper source?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 17:55, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Just to ask, should this review be placed in Dante XXI?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 21:32, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I've recently requested an assesment of the article for B-class, and the person who did it wrote that the personnel should be divided – usually musicians and technical personnel are separately: Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Album article style_guide#Personnel. Until now the personnel was copied from AllMusic, and as a result listed alphabetically, which didn't make any sense – eg. a stylist was higher than Timberlake! If it will make you feel any better, I will make only two columns: Musicians and Technical personnel. — Mayast ( talk) 20:32, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
With the Ciara you removed the stars, which Kerrang! gives KKKK, yet we are to use . Furthermore, XXL uses shirt sizes yet we are suppose to use for those as well. What makes Fact any different than those two instances? HotHat ( talk) 07:58, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Thank you, thank you, thank you... for the third time with your magic touch on my [edited] articles. " Diamonds" is a FA, and I appreciate your help there. New request coming soon hehe ;) ! — Tomíca (T2ME) 16:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC) |
I'm still at somewhat of a loss to understand why, when you implemented a change of wording in this edit, you won't accept the same change in the article text. Anyway, if you're not, I'm happy to go to WP:3O. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 10:00, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
You may want to have your say at this disccusion on Piero Scaruffi reviews. HotHat ( talk) 02:36, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan! Do you have a little bit of time to revise and copy-edit this section? The reviewer failed the GAN, because of the amount of quotes. Thank you! :) — Tomíca (T2ME) 11:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello there! I noticed you've made edits to articles related to Kelly Clarkson. I thought you may be interested in joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Kelly Clarkson a WikiProject working to improve the English Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to Kelly Clarkson and her discography. If you would be interested in joining feel free to
visit the Participants Page! |
Since you did such a beautiful job on Pull Up Some Dust and Sit Down and Election Special, I thought I would inform you of this article's existence: Live in San Francisco (Ry Cooder and Corridos Famosos album). Keep up the great work! -- Another Believer ( Talk) 22:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I overhauled the critical reception section for Paradise Valley, so if you want to go and take a look at it and tell me what you think, I would be more than happy to read your critique. HotHat ( talk) 22:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Danny. How are you? I hope you are doing great. Hey, I am kind of embarrassed to ask again :$ and I will understand if you can't. I am planning to FAC Talk That Talk (Rihanna song), do you have time to revise the prose?! Thank you (x100). — Tomíca (T2ME) 16:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Very good job. How is an article nomination done? Dogru144 ( talk) 17:04, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
You may want to have a chat with Lil-unique1 because the editor in question removed the Fact rating for The Boston Globe opinion. HotHat ( talk) 06:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I still don’t agree with the way you punctuate record labels and their hierarchy, Dan—every molecule in my body says your method isn’t right—so I asked Bill Walsh (author), the copy chief of The Washington Post, who’s an expert on the subject of punctuation, usage, and style and a published author on the subject, what his opinion on the matter is. I really don’t want to fight with you any longer. Peace. — MuzikJunky ( talk) 06:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Agharta (album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 17:00, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey there! As you may be aware, Magiciandude ( talk · contribs) and I have nominated Fijación Oral, Vol. 1 for FA late last month. However, since the nomination has been opened, activity has been very slow. It would be greatly appreciated if you could take a moment to leave some comments and help revive the discussion. Thanks! WikiRedactor ( talk) 20:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey dude, how's work going? What's your opinion on the "Track listing" and "Personnel" sections in the article? They look kind of unusual. Are they supposed to be that way? And if you have the CD, can you fix those two section I'm worried about?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 21:25, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
A little help providing the writing credits for the album?-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 16:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
The article Agharta (album) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Agharta (album) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 12:00, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi,
I`ll conply and make it a B, but it needs images and technical personnel; more categories would be fine as well. Zidane tribal ( talk) 23:26, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
The article Agharta (album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Agharta (album) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 10:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Hey there! As you may be aware, Magiciandude ( talk · contribs) and I have nominated Fijación Oral, Vol. 1 for FA late last month. However, since the nomination has been opened, activity has been very slow. It would be greatly appreciated if you could take a moment to leave some comments and help revive the discussion. Thanks! WikiRedactor ( talk) 20:53, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Dan56, why are you such a fucking control freak? And what do you mean that folk rock is the only verifiable genre for this album? Why is it the only verifiable genre? Allmusic labels it rock/pop, for instance. I can't be bothered to look for more to support the gospel genre, but it's definitely out there. Are you saying that Hear Me Lord, Awaiting on You All, My Sweet Lord, Let It Down aren't gospel rock?
I'm looking to cut down the size of this article, in line with concerns SilkTork raised in the GAR – that's one reason I want to lose the Rosen quote. I've seen you vigorously defending the content of articles you've helped promote, and I've seen you goose-stepping across the edit histories of other articles. It seems to me you don't/won't/can't concede on any point. Does wikipedia have to be made in your image, and in your image only? JG66 ( talk) 02:56, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
- Can you at least tell me why you don't think 'noiR&B' is a term for PBR&B, when I have cited two published sourced from two different authors that use that term to discuss the artists The Weeknd and Evy Jane, who are both clearly associated with the genre? [1] [2]-- Madrigalbladder ( talk) 16:53, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you've been edit warring on Crime of the Century (album), and that you responded to edits which direct you to the article's talk page with "Directing me to the talk page would have required notifying me at my talk page if you think it's a priority". I'm writing to inform you that this is not the case. In fact, edit warring is against Wikipedia policies even if the opposing editors haven't directed you to the talk page at all (though in that case, they'd probably be guilty of edit warring too). Certainly there is no rule requiring that notifications be sent specifically to an editor's talk page.
However, since you've requested such a notification, I'm formally instructing you to stop edit warring and use the article's talk page, just as Y45ed and Martin IIIa have. Furthermore, I suggest that you stop writing edit summaries in an antagonistic and imperious tone (e.g. " stop reaching for questionable sources to support this", " two uninformed comments at a talk page do not constitute consensus") and posting false accusations to other editors' talk pages, as I see you did on Martin IIIa's talk page. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that everyone can edit, so antagonizing other editors, especially over something so trivial as a single entry in an infobox, is not going to accomplish anything.-- NukeofEarl ( talk) 16:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I noticed you recently reverted my edit on the Beatles' album A Hard Day's Night. You didn't leave a reason for removing my sourced edit, instead you simply said "Seriously?". This album is listed quite high up in Allmusic's "Merseybeat Album Highlights", and Merseybeat is one of the genres mentioned on the album's Allmusic page. Y45ed ( talk) 20:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
The album 8701 was released on August 7, 2001, hence the title. That's pretty obvious, I don't know where you got July 1, 2001 from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodge1991 ( talk • contribs) 05:43, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Strawberry Bubblegum was identified as having a close paraphrase issue.
I did not see the purported source identified. Perhaps this?
You edited and removed the tag. You have enough experience that I do not need to double-check, but I just want confirmation that you believed you addressed the issue.-- SPhilbrick (Talk) 15:47, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi
recently i felt like people remove things without explanations for example /info/en/?search=Lungs_%28album%29 the sales based on the certifications approved that the album has sold over 5 million copies worldwide
and when i tried to fix the sales number and i added the sourse by saying the sales number based on the certifications and so on and the same thing with the second album , and everytime i try to do something users just remove it .
i got really mad and i dont konw what to do ???
so if you can check the two articals that would be good and any advice would be cool too ????
Thnaks sola$$$$$$$$ ( talk) 18:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Did you seriously just give me a warning? You are the one being disruptive. Koala15 ( talk) 14:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Please refrain from changing genres, as you did to O.N.I.F.C., without providing a source and without establishing a consensus on the article's talk page first. Genre changes to suit your own point of view are considered disruptive. Thank you. Koala15 ( talk) 14:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Did you read the first sentence of that review? Please also read this well-sourced section of the parent article. I assure you, writing Britpop as the genre for Blur is as absurd and wrong as you can get. If you spent any time at all (or even a couple of days) researching the band, you'd see that as well. A consensus of sources say that Blur say this, but you cling to a throwaway mention of "Brit-pop" in a throwaway review.
Anyway, good day. I won't bother with this any longer. Silliness like this is the reason I've stopped editing music articles.— indopug ( talk) 12:49, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan! How are you? Do you have some spare time? Can you give your magic touch to the section, it looks quite messy. Thank you! :) — Tomíca (T2ME) 12:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
wouldn't it be best with all that has "occurred" with Michael Jackson to simply put final Studio album ?in the process let the album and him be) just a thought , do what ever ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-- 65.8.187.216 ( talk) 20:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on November 8, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite ( talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 8, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) is the debut album of American hip hop group Wu-Tang Clan, released in November 1993 on Loud Records and distributed through RCA Records. Recording sessions for the album took place during 1992 to 1993 at Firehouse Studio in New York City, and it was mastered at The Hit Factory. The album's title originates from the martial arts film The 36th Chamber of Shaolin (1978). The group's de facto leader RZA (pictured), produced the album entirely, utilizing heavy, eerie beats and a sound largely based on martial-arts movie clips and soul music samples. The album's distinctive sound created a blueprint for hardcore hip hop during the 1990s and helped return New York City hip hop to national prominence. Its sound also became hugely influential in modern hip hop production, while the group members' explicit, humorous, and free-associative lyrics have served as a template for many subsequent hip hop records. Initially receiving positive reviews from most music critics, Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers) has been regarded by music writers as one of the most significant albums of the 1990s, as well as one of the greatest hip hop albums of all time. ( Full article...)
UcuchaBot ( talk) 23:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Per your reverting my edit of the personnel order on the page for Thelonious Monk's Misterioso, the order I changed it to is the order favored by almost every other jazz album article on this site. In years of looking at jazz albums every day I cannot recollect once seeing the personnel in alphabetical order with production and musical personnel mixed.
This serves absolutely no informational purpose whatsoever, it is the lack of any kind of intelligent organisation. Why you can't see sense in having musicians and production personnel seperated with musicians in leader/horns/reeds/rhythm order like practically every single other jazz article is quite beyond me.
I would give examples but there is no point in me doing this because they are extremely easy to find. Better would be for you to give an example of one jazz article with production and musical personnel mixed into alphabetical order.
Digztytwo ( talk) 13:12, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Too Much Too Soon (album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 ( talk) 12:21, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
For your contributions to bring Too Much Too Soon (album) to Good Article status. Keep up the good work--I'm always happy to see more of your stuff in the queue. -- Khazar2 ( talk) 00:58, 26 October 2013 (UTC) |
The article Too Much Too Soon (album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Too Much Too Soon (album) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 ( talk) 01:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Here's an award, and you can stick it up your ass. | |
What's this shit you're giving me about editing based on point of view. You think your point of view is any better? Either way it's point of view. What are you stupid or something?
Don't message me again, asshole. Your not the fucking boss of anybody. And STOP changing my FUCKING edits!! Eddster ( talk) 04:56, 27 October 2013 (UTC) |
I was editing the article to include the remaining and correct names of the songwriters for the album, and then I noticed this slight error:
Along with Riley and Hall, Guy featured vocals by Damion Hall and Gene Griffin, who also contributed to the album's production with Riley.[4]
Here's the problem with this one- the Allmusic credits on their debut are horribly wrong. Although Damion Hall did appear in the music videos for the singles released from the album, he was not involved in the recording in any way. In fact, he didn't make any appearances on this album by Guy. He did, however, contribute to vocals and production on their second album The Future. The person you see on the album cover is original member Timmy Gatling- who left the group within weeks of the album's release.
Also, Gene Griffin did contribute to the album's production, but not the vocals. I was wondering if that little sentence can be changed, as the Allmusic credits made things a little confusing in this regard. Thanks. Shallowharold ( talk) 11:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
The info I got was FIRST HAND info from the writers of the song themselves....
The BMI search reveals that the writers of the song Slow Wine are listed as.... SLOW WINE (Legal Title) BMI Work #1857792 Songwriter/Composer Current Affiliation CAE/IPI # HAYNES ONTARIO DAMON BMI 179396316 RHONE JOHN EDWARD BMI 179401362 ROSS BENJAMIN SCOTT BMI 179401460 STEWART MAURICE LAMONT BMI 179401950 WIGGINS DWAYNE P ASCAP 127787344
Publishers RAP AND MORE MUSIC BMI 247305478 Additional Non-BMI Publishers Artists TONY TONI TONE
This clearly states Dwayne Wiggins was NOT the only writer on the song. Rhone and Haynes are professionally known as "The Whole 9".
You also state Dwayne is the Bass player of the group, he plays guitar, Raphael plays bass on all recordings.
Cuajota ( talk) 04:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Dan! How are you? Do you have some spare time to view and check the article and give some comments at the FAC? I would be grateful. Cheers! — Tomíca (T2ME) 21:32, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
would it be possible to compromise and put at the beginning "his final studio album", and then in the second sentence or wherever 10th studio album( though it is his 6th with sony)??,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-- 65.8.187.216 ( talk) 09:42, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
good question,,,,,,,,,,,,the answer would be most aren't actually the FINAL studio album (no matter what; due to the event of 2009) which means there is a finality that is not the common norm,,,,,,,,,this I hope you agree,,thank you...-- 65.8.187.107 ( talk) 13:58, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Again it is the finality at the beginning of the article to let the reader know, do what you think best,,,,,--
65.8.187.107 (
talk) 11:25, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
opinion?,,,,,--
65.8.189.116 (
talk) 11:11, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
cant we include "tenth" album in the second line?,,,,,--
65.8.188.20 (
talk) 11:37, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
You may want to edit No More Hell to Pay. HotHat ( talk) 21:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, please do not vandalize articles by reverting cleanup changes, as you did with Chocolate Factory. Thank you. 216.150.182.2 ( talk)
I did, I found a reliable source with top40.com which states it as an R&B dance-pop album, even the page itself states R&B as a genre. 86.142.54.250 ( talk) 18:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
First of all that's R&B laced with dance-pop and going onto Unapologetic, I've got two pages that state it is R&B; so I win. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.54.250 ( talk) 19:02, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
London Calling is Just as much punk as post-punk. Also what you are doing is considered genre warring. I have listed 2 reliable sources yet you still remove them based on your OWN rules that it's not reliable.-- 76.107.252.227 ( talk) 10:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
That's not what i'm talking about. it's the fact you think A random music critic thinks this is Post-punk makes it so? also the albums that are listed in the genre section of allmusic are not based around what appears in the sidebar take "White light?white heat", for example. It is listed as Alternative rock in the sidebar but does not appear in Alternative rock albums listing.Quit making up your own rules. maybe you should read this WP:WINNING
"popular opinion among music listeners and not offering any professional critique to explain that side isn't in line with WP:SUBJECTIVE nor WP:NOR ("Articles must not take sides, but should explain the sides...")"
Funny cause you don't offer insight as to why this is posy-punk and you seem to be biased against punk because it's the "popular opinion among music listeners", and i'm aloud to add a genre is i have reliable sources to conclude it is punk. -- 76.107.252.227 ( talk) 11:03, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Hiya hon,
I found a article from Billboard's review on Unapologetic which states it's R&B; here is the link[ the article] to it and here in words are the article that mentions it, I've wrote it in italic; please see below.
"On paper, Rihanna releasing her seventh album in seven years would suggest a quantity-over-quality work ethic that's bound to wear thin. But on "Unapologetic," Rihanna proves once again that she can set -- and often raise -- the bar for modern pop music. Amping up on urban, dubstep-leaning R&B and scaling back on the often awkward sex jams that populated the second half of 2011's "Talk That Talk," "Unapologetic" is Rihanna's most confident, emotionally resonant work since 2009's "Rated R."
Hope that helps, happy editing D to the ina, R to the ae☻ 'My Talk Page 10:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Hey buddy. I assume you are busy, but when you have some free time, can you re-write the "Critical reception" of Killing Is My Business... and Business Is Good!? It currently reads like a quote-farm, and it would be awesome if you can re-arrange it, like you did with Master of Puppets. See you.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 18:13, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Your comments would be welcome at this SPI. Thanks, Ruby Murray 04:27, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
You have been reported here: Wikipedia:Administrators_noticeboard/Edit_warring for violating WP:NPOV and WP:GWAR ( 76.107.252.227 ( talk) 22:12, 15 November 2013 (UTC)).
the numbers on the yahoo article was wrong it said By April 2012, it had sold over 7,106,000 copies in the US. the riaa website said it was certified 8x platinum in 2001, 11 yrs ago from 2012. mathematically does that even make sense? Wayn12 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:44, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
I had written you about the intro to the Michael Jackson invincible page, however I don't see it anymore on your talk page nor do I see an archive?,,,,,,,-- 65.8.188.20 ( talk) 11:31, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Jesus Christ, you've messagedannoyed me with three messages, ain't you got any thing better to do?
217.43.167.49 (
talk) 18:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
can we get a concensus on this?.....--
65.8.188.20 (
talk) 10:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Describe by Allmusic as "blend of country and pop", but suddenly changed into pop rock. I should known that User:Status accidentally changed pop into pop rock as from genre sidebar without see that articles which says "blend of country and pop". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.176.9 ( talk) 11:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. However, you should read the
guide to appealing blocks first.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Toddst1 ( talk) 01:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Teflon Peter Christ ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I was wrong to slap warnings at the other editor's talk page and reporting them for edit warring, without myself engaging in more personal messages and efforts to discuss why they were making the edits they were making. I would like another chance at resolving this dispute, not to edit the article, but instead to start a discussion at its talk page (or at least someone can do this) regarding the content we edit warred about. I've tried and avoided this way of editing since my last block almost two years ago, but lost my cool in this case. I'm sorry for not discussing the changes and losing my cool to being reverted. I would like another chance to handle this properly and let someone else mediate changes to the article rather than me editing it. I should have known better, but had a moment of weakness and thought I could circumvent the most appropriate course of action rather than what seemed most convenient at the time. I apologize. Dan56 (talk) 02:19, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Accept reason:
Hey, I just wanted to let you know that I approved your requests for protection of those pages because the user appears to have a dynamic IP address in the range 86.128.0.0/10, which is 4194304 IP addresses. If you happen to see him doing that in the future, please let me know and I'll take care of it. I really wish UK telecoms didn't do stuff like that with their IP address allocation (</rant>), but if you want to file a complaint with his ISP, the form is here. Don't know if they will do anything about if you do, but yeah. Thingg ⊕ ⊗ 03:46, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello Dan. Since you're kind of more involved in the FA process, can you offer some advice how to nominate articles for that award? Furthermore, an opinion whether this list meets the criteria and what to improve will be welcomed.-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 10:05, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
I got the reverts arse about face - sorry! This is why edit summaries are useful, though. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)