User talk:Antares33712

Hi! welcome to Wikipedia!

Hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. Be bold in editing pages. Here are some links that you might find useful:


 * Try the Tutorial. If you have less time, try How to edit a page.
 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, Articles for deletion page etc.) use ~ (four tildes). This will insert your name and timestamp. To insert just your name, type  (3 tildes).
 * You can experiment in the test area.
 * You can get help at the Help Desk
 * Some other pages that will help you know more about Wikipedia: Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines, Neutral point of view, Civility, Wikiquette, What Wikipedia is not
 * If you made IP edits before creating a user account, you can attribute your IP edits to your account at Changing attribution for an edit.

I hope you stick around and keep contributing to Wikipedia. Drop a note at New user log.

-- Utcursch | Talk to me

I wish I knew how to quit you
Ok, terrible joke. But I do seem to talk with you a lot.

I ran across the article on vocal weight which I think you created and which you've edited. I was a bit confused by a few of the classifications in that article, several of which I've never heard of and can't find used anywhere else. I'm asking various folks who've been involved in that article to drop by Talk:Vocal weight and see if they can't give me a hand. Many thanks. --George 03:00, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Minnie Ripperton
Hi there. I've reverted your change to the Minnie Ripperton page. For as long as I've watched the page, people have attributed various pitch ranges to her without citing any sources. While I appreciate your attempt to be more resonable by citing liner notes from one of her albums, liner notes are unfortunatley not trustworthy on this topic. As you're doubtless aware, liner notes are promotional material written by a combination of the musicians, producers, promotional departments, and so on. They are in no way an objective assessment of anything, except in some cases the lyrics as they were originally written.

While I have no objection to listing a number for Ripperton's pitch range, it must be from an objective source. Inflation in this area is utterly rampant in pop music circles, particularly among female soul/R&B singers and even more particularly among those who use the whistle register. Given that, promotional material created by people who have an interest in making the singer look as good as possible are simply not adequate. I do thank you for your interest in this area, though, and look forward to hearing more from you. --George 23:29, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Just wanted to let you know that I've replied to your posts on my talk page. Do take a peek over there. Thanks. --George 20:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Why was this created
Anteres, what is the purpose of Template:Singers who can access the whistle register? It looks useless as far as I can tell, should probably be deleted, unless you have a good reason. Fawcett5 16:17, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Anteres, I'm not an admin, so I can't delete it myself. If you put the tag on it though with a comment that it was a mistake it will be quickly cleared away. Fawcett5 16:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Whistle Register - my edit
No problem. Examples are great, but become lists too quickly in this medium and unbalance the article. Something similar has to be done with character actor, which is completely out of hand.

Also, if you're an expert on sopranos, can you check out my recent edit to coloratura? Quill 23:07, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

re: conador
Just so you know, in retrospect even though I disagreed with the merits of keeping the article I agreed that greater thought should be put in before deletion and I was about to change it to vfd, however the article had already been deleted. I apologize for jumping the gun on that my bad. Jtkiefer 01:02, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

Automatic Speech Recognition
Hi Antares! Your version is good, thank you very much for a nice save! Sjakkalle (Check!)  07:44, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

VfD on Richard Vanderpool
Recently you voted in the VfD debate on Richard Vanderpool (Votes for deletion/Richard Vanderpool). I recommend you take a second look at this, as the version of the article listed for deletion had been heavily vandalized. Thanks, Carnildo 23:43, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nichole Arsenault
Any idea what happened to the article on Nichole Arsenault? It seems someone's deleted it? Samw 02:19, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, someone speedy-ed it and I'm NOT happy. What is the purpose of fighting and agreeing to rewrite something if it only gets speedy-ed by someone pointing to a Vfd (that I wasn't a part of).  IF I repost (adding what we discussed), and it gets speedy-ed again, then I'll be labeled a vandal.  This sucks.  Antares33712 19:13, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

lalallallalal
Gone now. Rich Farmbrough 21:54, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC) Or will be once the 'pedia responds to a confirm. Rich Farmbrough 22:00, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I noticed you asked Xcali how people see new articles. Go to the Recent changes page and you'll see new edits. RickK 21:59, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Welcome to Wikipedia.  RickK 22:29, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

How to delete etc.
You need to be an administrator. Rgds Rich Farmbrough 22:32, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

What to list for speedy deletion
Although I don't fully agree the rules for speedy are quite clear. They are at Candidates_for_speedy_deletion - and don't include hoaxes, vanity or non-notability. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 22:51, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nichole Elizabeth Arsenault
Not without a chance of bringing it back. It was listed on VfU. Rich Farmbrough 23:14, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have some sympathy with you over the process. However the content seems un-notable, and it also seems you are the original author of the article User:12.127.169.222, which could have been mentioned. If she can be shown to be notable, a fresh VfU could take place. Rgds. Rich Farmbrough 23:26, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

In particular I agree that many articles get speedied which should go through VfD, see discussions on the talk page of Criteria for Speedy Deletion. Rich Farmbrough 23:28, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[], Rgds. Rich Farmbrough 08:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

A pleasure. Remember it's not the article that needs to be notable, but the subject. Rich Farmbrough 15:20, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Steven A. Cohen
Antares33712 - what is wrong with the Steven A. Cohen page? It is already wikified.

Speedy deletion
Antares, I do believe your speedy delete was properly removed. There is some discussion at Deletion policy/Reducing VfD load to hasten the deletion process on some articles, but vanity under the current procedures cannot be speedied. As much as we all dislike it, please don't disregard the rules, as that works a hardship on everyone. DS1953 19:45, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Angel Daniel Figueroa is the one I was talking about. You had it on VfD and then switched it back to speedy.  No administrator should delete it under the rules (although administrators are human, too, so you may get your wish).  It's just not the way to do it. DS1953 19:53, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * My point was only that your posting to the VfD was the correct action and that the speedy was not. DS1953 21:19, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Adam Lopez
Thanks, like I said, those terms need to be explained, and if they're not possible, then the article neds some sort of references or else it needs to be rewritten. RickK 20:29, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

3RR
3RR = 3 Revert Rule. The rule is that if you get into an edit war with another User or Users, you may not revert the article to the same or similar language more than three times in 24 hours. It has also been extended to include things like 4 times in 24 hours and 1 minute, so the exact time and exact count is not necessarily fixed in stone. If you violate the rule after you've been warned, you can be blocked for 24 hours at the discretion of an admin. See WP:AN3 for current complaints about 3RR violations. RickK 21:46, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Does that count if the initial page was vanity fluff and they just keeping removing the {vfd} or {speedy} added?
 * Yes. It's felt that if you need to edit war over something like that, then you need to get help from an admin or another User.  RickK 22:00, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Editing 4 times is fine, it's when you get into an edit war and revert the other person's edits. But if nobody complains about you, nobody is going to do anything about it, anyway.  RickK 22:07, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Octave scale
Very nice. But tracking down the image, it was suddenly revealed to me that it was uploaded by User:Adam Lopez, who also created the Adam Lopez article I was complaining about to begin with. It's an autobiography! I'm going to list it on VfD and see if we can't get it moved to his User page. RickK 22:54, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Well, we can let it play out on VfD. RickK 23:06, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Minnie Riperton
It looks like all of the Mariahcruft has been taken out, which is as it should be. Let the Mariah info be in her article, although in an NPOV format. RickK 19:52, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Whistle Register
You might bring up your concerns on WP:RFC to get some more eyes on it. RickK 21:12, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Andrew McClurg cleanup
Hi, I appreciate your eagerness to see articles properly developed, but could you please allow at least a little more time before putting a cleanup tag? Cheers. -- BD2412 talk 15:44, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)
 * Thanks - I totally understand how RC patrol can make an editor into a cynic! :-) -- BD2412 talk 15:52, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

VfD - please complete all the steps
You recently added tags to several pages. This is only 1 step of 3 in listing a page for VfD, please see Votes for deletion. On a related note I am not sure that those pages are truly candidates for deletion, they do appear to contain real (if POV and not wikified) information about masonic organisations. -- pcrtalk 17:47, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Whistle register
Well, Artimius Hollins isn't in either google or yahoo, so they'd fail the google test for a start :-). No-one's ever responded to appeals for info either, so "remove at will", I suggest! Dan100 (Talk) 21:36, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Baba Gurditta
Hi, I saw your message and replied! Sukh 28 June 2005 22:49 (UTC)

Whistle register singer
Hi Antares, I discovered Wikipedia yesterday morning. I’m another “male whistle register singer”and I can sing very high sounds, if you want some information about me and samples of my songs you can contact me

VfD
It looks like you tagged IBM Global Services for vfd, but forgot the other steps, making the subpage and linking it on the daily log. See the instructions at Template:Vfdfooter. Of course, you can ask me if you have any questions. Thanks. --Dmcdevit·t 02:01, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

On the vocal profiles
Is there any way we can create a page to have a consensus on what we are reporting as far as vocal statistics. The reason I ask is, I thought about it over the weekend, and I believe we may be approaching this from a multitude of different angles. My reason for debate for example, on the Minnie profile, it says highest and lowest note. Those are the highest and lowest recorded notes, so far anyway. We don't know what she hit in the shower! Is that her TOTAL range? No, her published range is five (5.5 per her Petals legacy album). I think if we stuck to the highest recorded note, lowest recorded note, and a vocal range per record label website (if possible), a lot of the bickering would stop. Maybe not with Britney, but most.... Antares33712 15:46, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Good day Antares, and thank you for raising some very good questions! If there is an officially published range for any artist, we should definitely include that within the article and then WP:CITE it as the source.  Furthermore, if you can provide a scan of the album cover, this could be uploaded to Wikisource to put quash any further reverts on this particular article.  As for the others, I'm afraid we still need to provide some form of reference for our information to avoid falling under the umbrella of original research.  Hall Monitor 16:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * If you do a search on Minnie or Mariah, it will say five octave range. Using http://www.music.msn.com/artist/?artist=16117745, and http://www.music.msn.com/artist/?artist=16074698 as examples, we can easily derive the range.  But if you see, D3 - F#7 does not equal five octaves.  That is because the low and high notes listed are only for recorded notes.  So when someone says her range is 4.3 octaves (D3-F#7), I go and try to correct that, since I know (have known for a long time), since she is well-known for having a five-octave range.  The range is only recorded, so I would rather we have protected the section and discuss range changes first.  The most edits come from the least knowledgable.  It part isn't fair.  Antares33712 16:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * How are the ranges being derived from music.msn.com without using original research? Any edits you make which make direct reference to a credible external source have my full support, by which I will prevent others from making their own opinionated edits.  Hall Monitor 17:11, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Ammonium thioglycolate
Hi, Following up on a request, I did a rewrite on ammonium thioglycolate. However I question the chemistry, of the thioglycolic acid transferring a hydrogen onto sulfur to break the S-S bond; rather, I suspect that the thiol group is involved. Do you have a reference for this information? I added a "disputed" tag to the article, but I would like to remove that ASAP after settling the issue one way or the other. Cheers, Walkerma 04:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Update: One of our other chemists has fixed the article to my satisfaction, can you check that you think it's OK? Thanks, Walkerma 06:56, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Blue eyed soul
What was that fucking piece of shit? Leave wikipedia, never write here again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.163.100.65 (talk • contribs)

Image Tagging Image:Minnie riperton chess.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Minnie riperton chess.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Longhair 04:29, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Keke_promotional_picture.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Keke_promotional_picture.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you. -- Carnildo 11:29, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Adamlopez_promoshot.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Adamlopez_promoshot.JPG. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as db-unksource.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 04:07, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:Adamlopez_promoshot.JPG
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Adamlopez_promoshot.JPG, has been listed at Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. The JPS 16:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for edit summary
Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 11% for major edits and 17% for minor edits. (Based on the last 142 major and 150 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 14:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Boris_kodjoe_promo.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Boris_kodjoe_promo.JPG. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as db-unksource.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 06:38, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Image:Adamlopez promoshot.JPG
Please send me an email with Adam Lopez's email address and I will verify. His address should be at the adamlopez.com.au domain. Thanks.  howch e  ng   {chat} 01:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Soubrette singing in current popular music
Soubrette singing in current popular music has been proposed for deletion. Please see the article for details. NickelShoe 04:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Unequalled Vocally
Let me first say that I agree with you wholeheartedly! I personally think the statement is not POV, but even under the guidelines of POV it can be introduced as such. I will take the time to read all the concerned pages regarding the editing of articles before I prepare a formal response. I am certainly not pleased with the handling of this article for some time by some specific people and we have been trying to compromise without success, there are many ways by which bias can be inflicted on an article and as expected the more power you have the more ways. I sent you an email a few days ago but I do not know if you got it, please drop me a word at rebel.crusader@gmail.com or at my talk page.Rebel.crusader 01:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. While the Wikipedia community appreciates your obvious efforts to increase the amount of information on the site, we'd like to point out our policy against original research and for citing sources for the information you provide. This increases the reputation of Wikipedia as a whole and aids in checking the factuality of that article.

Also: Remember to mark your edits as minor only when they genuinely are (see Minor edit). "The rule of thumb is that an edit of a page that is spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'." Extraordinary Machine 18:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I am not an administrator, but that's irrelevant. The first and third webpages you linked to are copies of previous versions of the Wikipedia article; the second makes no mention of Rolling Stone magazine. Additionally, you'll also need a source for the statement "this may be in fact be a misstatement of the fact she sings in the seventh octave", otherwise it qualifies as original research. It is written in the book She Bop II: The Definitive History of Women in Rock, Pop and Soul (2002) that Carey has an eight-octave vocal range; even if this weren't true, the book appears to be reliable so it's worth mentioning the fact that different sources report different things. Extraordinary Machine 22:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Please cite
Please provide an independent citation stating that Reese Witherspoon is a whistle-register singer. Look, you could very well be correct. You probably are. But we need verifiable confirmation from an independent citation before it can stay. This has already been discussed on the article page. --Yamla 15:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Why do we need a CITE to hear a pitch? I guess this is were I have a problem because like it or not, the entertainment companies are not packing them in to test their abilities scientifically. This is just one of those areas where it is easy to hear whether a pitch is high or low. I think nearly anybody can tell if a pitch is high or "glass-shattering" high. Sorry, just my two cents. Antares33712 16:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)


 * We need a citation because Wikipedia has a policy against original research, because Reese Witherspoon's whistle register abilities are disputed, and because you had already been requested to provide this citation on that article's discussion page. --Yamla 16:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Blue eyed soul (band)
Hi there. Another editor has added the "prod" template to the article Blue eyed soul (band), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the relevant issues at Talk:Blue eyed soul (band). If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. NickelShoe (Talk) 06:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The article may be deleted this weekend, but if you object to the deletion, follow the instructions and remove the prod notice, providing as much information as you can. NickelShoe (Talk) 17:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Your ZIP Code
You're just across the Bay from me. :) Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 05:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Fashion icon
I fixed this AfD for you...I suggest bookmarking Template:AfD in 3 steps--it's a good resource that makes listing a snap. -- Scientizzle 19:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Category talk:Billboard Hot Dance/Club Play artists
Yea I don't particulary care if this one stays or goes, but historically if a category is as vastly popualted as this one, someone will keep recreating it from the redlinks on the articles. A full CFD included depopulating the articles as part of the deletion. — xaosflux  Talk  00:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Piccolo (disambiguation)
You removed the link syntax from the red link Piccolo (coloratura) on Piccolo (disambiguation) without using an edit summary. Can you explain why you did this? Is it your opinion that Piccolo (coloratura) is a topic on which we are unlikely to ever have an article, or on which we should not have an article? It's not that I disagree with you; I'm just trying to figure out your reasoning so I can try to keep the disambiguation page in conformity with Manual of Style (disambiguation pages). Cheers! —Caesura(t) 14:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Crap, I just realized what actually happened. There used to be a Piccolo (coloratura) page, and then it got ed. (I would have no way of knowing about this if it weren't for the Google cache—would be nice if they left a note on the talk page or something when they deleted something through PROD.) The reason given was apparently that piccolo isn't a recognized term for a coloratura. I guess if that's the case, it's best to remove that usage from the disambiguation page entirely, so I'll go ahead and do that. Let me know if you disagree. —Caesura(t) 14:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure, that's reasonable. If it's going to be on the disambiguation page, though, it really needs to link to a relevant article. Disambiguation pages aren't supposed to contain "dictionary definitions". So I guess, in my view, our options are to either Let me know what you think. Thanks! —Caesura(t) 15:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * go through deletion review to try to get the deletion of Piccolo (coloratura) overturned or
 * find an appropriate article elsewhere that we can link to for this topic. I don't know, Whistle register maybe? This is a topic I know absolutely nothing about (the only reason I've been keeping an eye on Piccolo (disambiguation) is that I play the piccolo), which is why I'm bugging you about it.
 * Cool, I've restored that meaning to Piccolo (disambiguation), with a link to the Seventh octave article. Does this look OK? —Caesura(t) 19:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Your addition of nonsense
Please refrain from adding nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Talk:Krukenberg tumor. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 20:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, yes, I see. Well, there's probably no need to delete it, it's fine being blanked. --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 20:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Do not repost deleted content
It can be considered vandalism. You reposted the article Ryan Toby after it was deleted by an administrator. Brian 17:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball
 * Sorry, my mistake. I saw the repost of deleted content and didn't see that it had been CSD as opposed to PROD or AfD Brian 17:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)btball

Hi Antares, I saw your message on the Toby Ryan talk page. Here's my response (also on the talk page):
 * Please add this information, along with supporting sources to the article itself. That would improve the chance of it not being deleted again.

Thanks, Gwernol 17:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion
I noticed that you tagged the page Pogoaddiction for speedy deletion with the reason "spam". However, "spam" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use  if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 23:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion
Please review the procedure for nominating articles for deletion before doing so. Be sure to follow ALL THREE STEPS; two of your nominations appeared strangely on today's AfD log because you skipped Step 2 in the process. Thanks! -- H·G (words/works) 00:34, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No big deal, it looks like you just skipped the second step, adding
 * ...to the article's AfD discussion page. So when you added it to the AfD log, it listed each of your nominations as part of the preceding nomination's discussion. -- H·G (words/works) 05:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * ...to the article's AfD discussion page. So when you added it to the AfD log, it listed each of your nominations as part of the preceding nomination's discussion. -- H·G (words/works) 05:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Fresh Records
Thanks for editing that page, I was a bit confused that goth/punk band Play Dead were apparently signed to a New York rap label! I'll do what I can to flesh it out a bit and find some content for the US and UK versions. Note there is a current UK dance label using the name, which I've added to the article. --Canley 00:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Amel_Larrieux_promophoto.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Amel_Larrieux_promophoto.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 09:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Amil_Rapper.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Amil_Rapper.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 08:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

WARNING
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. While the Wikipedia community appreciates your obvious efforts to increase the amount of information on the site, we'd like to point out our policy against original research and for citing sources for the information you provide. This increases the reputation of Wikipedia as a whole and aids in checking the factuality of that article. --I&#39;ll bring the food 14:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Blu Cantrell
I have restore the section on voice that you ha removed. Whilst it needed references, I feel that it would have been better to {fact} or {cite} rather than remove an entire section. This is especially true since some of the information in that section has remained in place since April. Checking on the talk page, it turns out that IMDB at least can be used to somewhat substanciate the claims. Added the IMB reference, going back now to {cite} the section. LinaMishima 12:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Good call on removing the whistle register catagory. Better to have this verifie before adding the catagory. I should have removed it, really. LinaMishima 12:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I am willing to begrudgingly accept the IMDB ref to her 7th octave as I actually like her singing, despite the fact IMDB trivia is user-submitted but it does not mention Whistle register so that must stay out for now. whistle is lower, but there is not automatically an ability there.--I&#39;ll bring the food 12:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * By definition of the register (not the whistle voice), whistle register is range of pitches above E6. Since she is qualified as a 7th octave singer (per IMDB), how is she not a whistle register singer.  Antares33712 15:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Because it is possible to have gaps in ones vocal range--I&#39;ll bring the food 15:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It is not possible. You are saying it is possible for someone to be able to sing F6 and not be able to sing a C6?  The highest requires more vocal adduction than the lower.  Name an example Antares33712 16:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I can sing an E5 but I cannot sing anything between f4-d#5.--I&#39;ll bring the food 16:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I CREATED THEM!!!!! But 7th octave singing is a superset of whistle register singing, not an entirely different category Antares33712 16:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * In the same way that a singer in 7th octave is not a whistle register singer, Slayer are not a Rock band, despite making Thrash Metal. Thrash metal is a superset of Rock, but it is not actually Rock, they have little in common with The Rolling stones. If one does not sing in whistle register and is not acclaimed for it, one is not a whistle register singer--I&#39;ll bring the food 16:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Tamar Braxton
Don't have a problem with the note requiring a cite, but requiring a cite to show she is soprano (when she said on some program about Toni raxton that she was always the highest and demonstrating coloratura technique, you're reversions are silly. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see she is a soprano, unless you are now trying to assert she is a contralto (which would be very absurd)   Antares33712 16:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I assert that without a reliable authoritive source, your edits are nothing more than original research which is utterly forbidden on wikipedia.--I&#39;ll bring the food 16:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It's so sad the cats are gone
I killed the remaining pages in Whistle register and Seventh octave, so we can just let the categories go. Right about now, I am sick of Wikipedia! 216.141.226.190 02:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I added you to my friends list on AIM just so ya know. And yes If you need any help with a site, I'd be happy to help. I'm getting tired of this whole wikipedia thing too. It was good while people cooperated at making the whistle register category a good one. Myke 11:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Not writing a reply just yet, but...
I'm at work right now, so I shouldn't write an authoritive response. However I saw your message to me, and thought I would acknowledge it. You'll see from article histories that I originally opposed the changes by Miessier Food bringer, until his reasoning was explained to me. The problem with WP:LIVING is that if an artist or other living person threw a hissy fit over a claim, apparently kind or otherwise, wikipedia gets in trouble. I generally err on the side of inclusion with {fact} tagging, however I ended up in a rather crazy debate instead which has taken far too long to realise the problem is with defficiencies with current policies. However therein lies a dilemma - to {fact} one unproven claim on a living person would be to allow all unproven claims as long as they are {fact} tagged.

You made some good points about the whistle register and aquiring proof - I would suggest you post them on the talk page, or perhaps one of the many places for policy discussion. Although I've sided with the safer interpretation of WP:LIVING, I have to say this whole thing has been quite stupid, and I'm keen on getting some more sensible resolution. I'm also one of the parties involved less likely to say a wildly provocative comment (and mix up supersets and subsets :P). If you tell me were any discussion about this issue lies (if other than on the catagory talk page), I'll come in and prod people to see if we can get a sane resolution.

You may also wish to suggest using the wayback machine internet archives to reach the site you talked about, and use wayback references. This entire mess would have been much less hassle if that site had been mentioned earlier. With respect to self-publishing proof, if any of those involved happened to be a recognised musical academic or analyst and could place the information in a respected source, then I think at least this one would try and sneak it in ;) (a respected source by a qualified person is a respected source by a qualified person, tbh)

The adding of {fact} to a claim made in the talk page was not my doing. I suspect it was down to some guideline changes currently being discussed on Wikipedia_talk:Talk_page_guidelines. Personally, I'm currently nuetral in the matter. Whilst {fact} tags may help to visually remind people involved in long and bitter arguments that some substance is needed, I also worry about how it may enrage people to have there comments edited. Infact, I would very much appreciate it if you would go there and state your annoyance at it, and how you would have prefered a response asking for references instead (obviously, you probably would have prefered nothing, but assume that they would have done something). The person backing this change is being very optomistic about how people would react to such changes.

Before I finish, can I ask you to join me in encouraging all involved in this, well, farce, to be civil and avoid personal attacks? Whilst on a quick glance over the exchanges you appear to have been fairly cool, some others on all sides have not. I find this terribly tragic, since being polite tends to help you get listened to and generally promotes healthy discussion far better than slurs.

Finally, I have to encourage you again to look to discussing the problems with the guidelines and policies. As I have stated, the problem lies with these (both the interpretation, and the absense of how to deal with issues such as obviousness to the experienced). I likely will support sensible changes in this regard which perserve the spirit originally intended (although I stop short of saying that I definately will), and back you up on the reasons for changes being needed.

LinaMishima 22:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Octave scale
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Octave scale, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * no sources since before April 2008, no definition, proof of notability, or indication of concept's use. "__ octave scale" appears to be used mainly to refer to the number of octaves in which a scale is practiced, as in "three octave scale".

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Hyacinth (talk) 03:33, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Antares33712! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 10:15, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Smooth (singer) -
 * 2) Donell Jones -
 * 3) Carina Andersson -
 * 4) Jesse Powell -

AfD nomination of Faith-based community
An article that you have been involved in editing, Faith-based community, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Shrillness


The article Shrillness has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Dictionary definition. Unencyclopedic. Not accurate. Unreferenced. Take yr pick.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 23:53, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sam Malone (politician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Welt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Carina Andersson for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carina Andersson is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Carina Andersson until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Wgolf (talk) 21:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Chris Thompson (blogger) moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Chris Thompson (blogger), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Britishfinance (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Chris Thompson (blogger) concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Chris Thompson (blogger), a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:21, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Chris Thompson (blogger)


Hello, Antares33712. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Chris Thompson".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 18:59, 30 January 2020 (UTC)