User:LuciferMorgan/Archive 3

Re: Megadeth
Hell yes, any and all help is much apreciated! I think in order for any article to achieve GA status or above, there needs to be a group of dedicated editors working on it, not just one. Feel free to fix/improve/change anything and everything - I sure as hell am! I am starting from the top, so I haven't reached the awards section, but I will be sure to mention all nominations along the way in the history section.

As far as inline citations - I currently use the external link type, but I think the classier and easier to read citations are the numbered references that link to the bottom of the article (not sure of the official name) like the ones in the Rush article.

For references, I've been using the ultimate Megadeth archive site - "Realms of Deth" interviews and articles. The place has a crapload of archived interviews, and has been validated by Dave himself at the Megadeth bulletin boards. Also, the official Megadeth page has a really comprehensive timeline here:  and a press release section here:

With all of these solid references, I think it should be easy to verify most stuff in the article - though I am having trouble finding Dave quote references that the original author used in the article. I know that a lot of this stuff is straight out of Mustaine's mouth from the VH1 Behind the Music DVD, I'll have to check it out again to see if it can add anything. But I have no idea how to reference a DVD interview... will we need a video clip or somthing online?

Anyway, thanks for any help you can offer! \m/ Skeletor2112 06:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Right on, thanks for the help - I am starting to get those inline citations better, so once I get through the history revamp, I am going to go back and hit all of those that are external links right now(there are a crapload of em) And thanks for the rockdetector.com heads up - I've already referenced the site a few times in the article, there's a pretty extensive bio - although some of their info contradicts Megadeth.com's official timeline, which I am going on as the "bible" of Megadeth info for now. Thanks again, and good luck with saving Maiden (I'll be sure and vote when the time comes) we really need those FA metal articles! \m/ Skeletor2112 11:41, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, I think those inline cites are much better to work with than the imbedded links - should the article be strictly one or the other, or a mix of both? As for the "critics say" line, I see what you mean... I don't know if "Stephen Erlewine Jones of AMG" is a notable enough reviewer to quote by name in the article (but then I'm not up on who's notable for metal reviews), but how about somthing like "prompting All Music Guide to cite Rust in Peace as Megadeth's strongest musical effort"? I want to illustrate the vast jump in quality from So Far, So Good... So What! to Rust in Peace, without saying "Many fans say best album blah blah blah" kind of stuff. Skeletor2112 10:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Surely Countdown to Extinction is the best? ;) --kingboyk 19:16, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks a million for all the recent cite work you did on the Megadeth page - I've been on vacation for a week, so I'm just seeing it all now. As far as the "" notes you left regarding the $8,000 advance for the first album, and Lee Hazlewood's quote on "These Boots" - both those are direct quotes from the Killing is my Business... remaster booklet I referenced later in the paragraphs. Should I "double reference" those paragraphs, or just put one general one at the end of the paragraph?  Do I need to scan the booklet for future reference, or do you think the booklet reference is enough?
 * And as for the "weasly statements" - which albums are you refering to? I am really trying to steer clear of anything even remotely point of view, which is hard because personally I love Megadeth and nearly everything Mustaine has released.  But certian albums need mention of vast musical changes, such as Risk and the pretty much universal backlash it recieved.  I tried to quote Mustaine regarding a lot of that stuff - thankfully he comments a lot on it, (mostly for the Huff/Prager fiasco years), and use multiple references to bad reviews.  Anyway, I think we are getting this one close, keep up the good work, and thanks again dude! \m/ Skeletor2112 07:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey, just wanted to let you know I put Megadeth up for Peer Review here, and any help would again be appreciated. I know you mentioned weasely stuff, if you could, paste the exact sections you are talking about, and maybe a recomendation of how to change it, if i need a reference or somthing?  Thanks again for the help, dude! \m/ Skeletor2112 08:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Hey dude, just wanted to let you know I changed my name from the old SHOUTED AND OH SO EVIL one to this fancy new name. Also I have added the beggings of a "Legacy" section, which like I said may be the best place to include some of the better pop culture stuff.  Holidays mean I'll be gone for a bit, but I think in the next week or two this could (hopefully) go up for review.  Looking at the GA requirements, it seems the article may be long for GA - even though at least 35 of the 82k article is citations - I think it was at 50-somthing before I began converting.  What do you think? After the stuff that needs completing, would it pass FA? GA?  Thanks again for all the help - shit, before this I had never even used a cite... NOW I WILL TAKE OVER THE WORLD WITH METAL!!!1! Skeletor2112 08:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Macca
I haven't got to that bit yet, but I will :) --andreasegde 18:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have done the trivia bit in Paul McCartney as requested. I know it all looks a bit thin after The Beatles, and I will fatten it up, but I have to get rid of the last couple of 'citations needed' first. (Of course, it's Yoko. Wouldn't you just know it?) --andreasegde 18:14, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Uhhh... inline citations for people he has influenced? Not many of them will own up to it. Most artists say they "heard them at the time, but it didn't really influence us"... Also, The Beatles influence on popular culture, and The Beatles Trivia deal with that. I'll have a look though. --andreasegde 19:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Iron Maiden Lead
Some tips I could think:
 * Citations of the lead can, of course, be used later. This is not a problem. I think there is also no problem with the actual info. But don't just copy them. Rephrese them, analyse, expand if necessary.
 * Instead of these three small paragraphs after the first one, you can make a concise one, which would summarize better the infos of the article. The lead is supposed to give a concise summary of the whole article that can stand alone as an overview of it.
 * I think there is too much information about Eddie in the lead.
 * There will be no confusion about the Mick Wall book, if you mention that you use the 2001 edition. It would be Ok!--Yannismarou 09:58, 15 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't think of that. If I were you, I'd ask this "hypothetical" user to add the corresponding (to the 2001 edtion you had used) and specific page numbers of this last edition. Otherwise, I'd kindly ask him not to insist in such a change, because his intervention would be incoplete and inconsistent with the FA status of the article. But I haven't been in such a situation and I can be sure about how these things would work.--Yannismarou 11:55, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

The Beautiful People
Don't know if you'd already noticed it or not, but I got a happy surprise when I got home today: "The Beautiful People" is now a Good Article. Thanks for nominating it; I'm still working on the article with the goal of eventually getting it Featured, and if you've got any further contributions you'd like to make, they're always welcome. Thanks again for your help -- keep sleep ing   slack   off!  21:24, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

re: citations at Marilyn Manson (band)
I was actually a little concerned about that when I saw how many old FAs had popped up on FA Review recently. I, personally, think it's cited well enough to avoid the goon squad, but if it should happen to come under the FAR microscope it's certainly easy enough to fix. I may, depending on how much time I've got, go over the citations in the near future &mdash; at the time it was nominated for FA, the citation requirement was already pretty stringent, so there was some careful work involved in referencing it in the first place. I know for a fact that at least every direct quotation is cited, which already makes it better than several current FAs. -- keep sleep ing   slack   off!  01:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "On June 21, 2001, Manson did indeed read from the Bible onstage in Denver, Colorado, presenting such passages as Leviticus 20:9 ("For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall surely be put to death") and Psalm 137:9 ("Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones") as evidence the band's lyrics were, at least, no more violent than the Bible itself." Stuff like that needs to be cited. If it's based on the unpublished testimony of an audience member, it can't be on Wikipedia. Agree though that it's some way above the standard of the articles currently on FAR. --kingboyk 10:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Ack, yes, that one did get by. I'm not sure what citation style to use for that, though &mdash; it's from a live recording that was released as a b-side. -- keep sleep ing   slack   off!  21:38, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That's alright, just note or cite that in a footnote. That's a perfectly adequate source and, even if it weren't, a less than premium source is generally better than no source at all. --kingboyk 21:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)


 * More closely inspecting this article, it needs a ton of work if I'm to be frank, especially the "Influences" and "Composition and lyrical intent" sections smack of original research - they need a radical overhaul. I could add least 50 "cite" tags no problem to the whole article, and more. LuciferMorgan 21:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Doublechecking
Just doublechecking before I do the notifications: I saw that Johnleemk already has one article in FAR (Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson). Are you sure you want to nominate I Want to Hold Your Hand while he's got another article on FAR? Just wanted to be sure before I notify ... Sandy (Talk) 22:35, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, just wanted to check. Sandy (Talk) 23:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Co-operation
Thank you so much, LuciferMorgan, for being truly honest (Beatles project) Is there a Barnstar for that? (If there is, you're gonna get it.) Your contributions should never be "looked down upon" by anybody. Do what you can, and it will be very much appreciated. (BTW, I had exactly the same feeling when I had absolutely no idea what an "in-line citation" was... lol...) Join us on the Macca page, and let's get it an FA. We will appreciate your help. --andreasegde 19:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

FA and inline citations
Someone mentioned here that "inline cite requirement is not applied to FAs that passed before that requirement took hold." What do you know about that? -- Stbalbach 15:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

TS FAC
I had missed the access dates on the full-text and PDF links - thanks for pointing it out at Featured article candidates/Tourette syndrome; now done. Sandy (Talk) 17:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm only too willing to help. The only thing I was wondering with the cites is are they for single sentences, or a few sentences of text? I just wish the interests I have had such great coverage on Wiki like you et al have been doing with the health related articles - all the articles I'd be interested in (Metal/Horror) attract a bunch of fancrufty tripe! LuciferMorgan 17:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've seen the problem you mention. I kind of gave up on trying to help on those articles you're working on, because it seems to be two steps forward, one step backward.  Like I told you a while ago, it looks like improving those articles is a tough roe to hoe, because of the edits from others.  I don't think you can avoid the fancruft on your articles; I also gave up in many other areas of Wikipedia, and have to deal with a lot of fancruft and vandalism on TS as well.  What are we to do ?  It's a wiki ... WRT TS, whenever there is a cite after several sentences, that cite typically covers all sentences, because basically, every sentence is referenced unless it's a corollary. Some cites may cover all sentences preceding it, and/or the entire paragraph. Sandy (Talk) 17:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * hmmm, good question. Are you giving up there ?  I feel like peer review is very neglected - I try to get involved there whenever I have time (I've not had time lately, due to travel).  That's an area where your FAC/FAR experience can be used to help orient editors just beginning to work on articles, and you can work on a variety of interesting topics, picking and choosing those you like ... ????  Sandy (Talk) 18:02, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

He's not listening, he's not going to listen, I'm not going to engage further - someone else can explain. Sandy (Talk) 19:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

John Dee
I've done a lot of work on this since you suggested it be removed at FARC. Can you have another look? Cheers, Yomangani talk 02:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I've referenced "Thought" and provided a reference for the Prospero claim in "Fiction". I could provide imdb links or isbn numbers for the other items, but I don't think this is really necessary as the sources are stated in the section by default. What do you think? Cheers, Yomangani talk 11:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Re:Civility
I might have overreacted a little, as in the past months I have witnessed some gross examplse of incivility. I appreciate it you have recongized that you went a little to far; I perfectly understand how one feels when the other side is stubbornly ignoring most arguments, but you must not lose your 'cool': it will only reflect bad upon you and your side. If they are really stubborn and non-responsive, others will see it and simply ignore them or criticize them together, by insulting them you make yourself look worse than they.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 02:34, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

"Deaf as a post"? No, I am not. Actually I have a number of close friends who are deaf, but I am not. Lucifer you seem to have a serious problem with respecting other people (#1) and their points of view (#2). I also noticed you would be going after featured articles "with a hatchet" - this is exactly the kind of thing that makes "Good Faith" a serious concern. Maybe your not mature enough to handle FAR? Just a thought, I don't know. -- Stbalbach 23:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I have deaf friends also, only they listen when they're spoken to via lip reading. I respect others opinions, only when they listen though. "Good faith" I have, as instead of nominating articles every day I nominate once every 2 weeks to ensure people have time to work on the articles. Indeed, "with a hatchet" I'll review articles - this is the only way they end up being improved, and why FA guidelines aren't lax. FA should be something prestigious. LuciferMorgan 23:48, 29 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I respect others opinions, only when they listen though. How about we agree to go our separate ways, there is no need for you to be involved further, I can get help from others, I appreciate your help thus far but obviously it does not seem to be working out between you and I. -- Stbalbach 00:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


 * You have asked for the opinions of several people, including myself. You haven't listened to any of us, and I'm not the only person who has expressed dismay. You keep saying the same thing, and we keep informing you - it's a circle that's tiring. Indeed, I have no desire to speak to people who fail to listen to the truth - WP:WIAFA tells you what I've been saying in black and white, yet you take no notice. LuciferMorgan 00:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I recognize what your saying, I understand WIAFA. You have not recognized what I am saying. -- Stbalbach 00:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

GroundHog Day
Regarding this comment:


 * Have I stepped into 'Groundhog Day' with Bill Murray? LuciferMorgan

I would request that you not post in reply to me unless you can do so in a respectful manner. Thank you.

--Stbalbach 23:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Macca
Wonderful work on the McCartney article. If you see a POV/cruft thing in the future (which you spotted) just cut it straight out. You don't have to ask us. Your contributions are much appreciated. --andreasegde 02:21, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot. I know how to do in-line citations now (thank goodness) so I have put a lot in. I put your great link (edited because of copyright) into the MPL section. Send us more! --andreasegde 03:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


 * No, no, no, this will not do at all, LuciferMorgan (lol) You have to get hands dirty like the rest of us. What we all had (the lads over at Macca) was a bit of a punch-up, and, like good cowboys, we got up, dusted ourselves off and shook hands like real men. :) (lol) "Come on in, the water's lovely", as they say. We need your keen eyes to spot anything untoward. --andreasegde 11:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I put them in (sorry) but I recently started to put page numbers in on Jane Asher after Kingboyk told me about it. I've been ill this week so I haven't been able to work on them a lot. I'll get back to it today, or tomorrow. If we put them all in, it will definitely be over the 300 mark. Funnily enough, I actually enjoy doing it.... --andreasegde 15:51, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * (Hoping I don't cause an edit conflict for the page owner!) Sorry to hear you've been ill - did wonder where you'd got to! I think we can work around this issue in the meantime - Mr Morgan can ignore the old style citations for now. I already noticed you'd migrated some of the old ones to include page numbers, that's great work. It's quite fun to see an article take shape and the citations list gro and grow isn't it? :) --kingboyk 16:05, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It's very gratifying, to be sure. --andreasegde 19:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Street or creek
We are up the creek, but with a plentiful supply of paddles. I have finished Early years, and am on Quarrymen. --andreasegde 19:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)