User talk:Krobertj

"Beat it" is rock, not R&B

Hi, Krobertj.

Pyrrhus16 doesn't know about genres, he doesn't know the American Culture. If he doesn't know about genres, he must not edit in wikipedia. He must learn to read and understand his sources.

HIS SOURCE Stylus said: "There’s a nervy, frenetic, epic opener (“Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin’”), some jazzy R&B numbers (“Baby Be Mine,” “P.Y.T.”), a conceptual, campy, dancefloor banger (title track), rock-dance (“Beat It”), stories (“Billie Jean”), a duet with the former King of Pop (“The Girl Is Mine” with the irrepressibly silly Paul McCartney), and the smoothest of ballads (“Human Nature”)."

STYLUS SAID:"rock-dance (“Beat It”)", IT MEANS "BEAT IT" IS ROCK.

THE PART:" Eddie Van Halen performs a metal guitar solo—on an R&B record!" , R&B record is refered to Thriller album.

RECORD = ALBUM ------------> R&B record ------> "Thriller" album

SINGLE = SONG ------------> Rock song -------> "Beat It" song

You can read it in:http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/diamond/michael-jackson-thriller.htm

Pyrrhus16 UNDERSTAND WRONG HIS OWN SOURCE. ALSO ALL THRILLER REVIEWS SAYS "BEAT IT" IS ROCK MUSIC. Rolling Stone said "BEAT IT" IS ROCK MUSIC. Stephen Thomas Eewerline of All Music Guide says "Beat It" is hard rock.

About "Beat It", Michael Jackson is quoted in Rolling Stone magazine's Top 500 songs issue as saying of this, "I wanted to write the type of rock song that I would go out and buy. But also something totally different from the rock music I was hearing on Top 40 radio." YOU CAN READ IT IN: http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=459

IF MICHAEL SAID THAT "BEAT IT" IS ROCK MUSIC, IT IS ALL. BILLIE JEAN IS R&B. "BEAT IT" IS ROCK OR HARD ROCK, NOT R&B. YOU SHOULD edit "Beat it" page, removing R&B, BECAUSE IT IS NOT TRUE. WIKIPEDIA MUST HAVE CREDIBILITY. YOU CAN HELP. Thanks --201.230.64.66 (talk) 01:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

"Record" can very well mean the track, not just the album. "Record" has an interchangeable meaning. — R² 06:00, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Genre "wars"

Thanks for the post on my talk page. But I don't think anything can be decided by two people talking privately on user pages. I've been on Wikipedia for over a year, and seen a lot of discussion on the subject. Regarding the points you raise, a lot of people are opposed to using Allmusic (or anyone else) as an authority as policy. Since we are a non-commerical and independent site, it isn't very progressive for us to defer to someone else to decide genres for us. Also, some have made a good case for stating that Allmusic is often wrong. The "styles" issue has also been discussed in the past, and there was pretty much consensus against using it, as most people would regard it as two levels of genre, and would not use a style field any more accurately than they currently use genre. The biggest problem is that genre fiddlers usually haven't been following the discussions, and are not aware of any rules we may have in place, and may not care either. My feeling is that the best way to deal with the problem, is not to regard it as a "war", because these editors are just making changes randomly or on the fly, and that's the real problem. There isn't enough planning or thinking going on to call it a war. We can try to educate newcomers, but that's about it. I have found that reverting and explaining why I'm reverting, does the trick 98% of the time, whether it's about genres or anything else. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 09:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

(In response to my talk page): They handle it in various ways. One thing I know that they do is they (for instance) put Neil Gaiman books in the Young Adult section, as well as the Graphic Novel section. This bothers people who don't want to be known to read YA books - so there is some parallel here with how people feel about genre. Luminifer (talk) 15:06, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

ELO & Beatles Songs

Thanks for fixing the Electric Light Orchestra article. I didn't notice that the Beatles songs were mentioned at the end of the sentence. My mistake. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Group or band – which one?

We are holding a straw poll (in a very friendly way, of course) to decide if The Beatles should be called a group, or a band. You can add your user signature to one or the other by clicking this link, Group or band – which one?. Thanks.--andreasegde (talk) 23:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Astra band.jpg

File Copyright problem

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

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 04:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Im not 100% sure, but i think {{non-free promotional}} would be your best bet to add to the image. You would then also have to add a fair use. This image could also come under deletion, as it could be viewed that a free option is available, however im not concerned about that. Hope that helps, Salavat (talk) 14:39, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Keep it up!

Thanks for the help you gave me, Krobertj! Are there any articles you played a significant role in and think should be up for "Good Article Nomination" (like I'm Your Captain ? ) V Schauf (talk) 11:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Pink Floyd album genres

I don't have Pink Floyd album articles on my watchlist anymore, but I'm not surprised the genres have changed. It's nearly impossible to make previous decisions current when talk page discussions are archived, and old decisions are hard to find. It may be better to argue "common sense" rather than old decisions when reverting. But the old discussions are still in the archives, and we can refer to them. Hope that's helpful? --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Let me know if you run into problems in trying to re-establish standards. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Obscurity (album)

I have nominated Obscurity (album), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obscurity (album). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Smoking Blues

I have nominated Smoking Blues, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smoking Blues. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Smoking blues.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Smoking blues.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:44, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Pink floyd obscurity.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Pink floyd obscurity.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 12:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stranger than Fiction (Pink Floyd album)

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Stranger than Fiction (Pink Floyd album). We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stranger than Fiction (Pink Floyd album). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:05, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The/the Beatles

Yes folks, it's here again. Please look at this link [1] and leave your vote. I thank you.--andreasegde (talk) 08:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

"The" versus "the Beatles"

There is a vote taking place in which we could use your input. — GabeMc (talk) 00:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:Krobertj/sandbox (April 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Krobertj/sandbox.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the .

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

• Please remember to link to the submission!

• You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 21:03, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:Krobertj/sandbox

Hello Krobertj. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "sandbox".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|User:Krobertj/sandbox}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 15:33, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Krobertj. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)