User talk:Auto movil

Velcome to the Vikipedia
Here are some links what I find useful:


 * Fleer
 * Udo
 * Serum Amygdalism
 * Elastophonemic
 * Ring Ring Bananaphone
 * Civet

Feel free to ask me anything what the links and talk pages don't answer. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like suchforth: wiki! wiki! wiki! wiki!

Cheers, Auto movil

Nominating Featured Article Candidates
Hi, just noticed that you'd nominated Oceanic Whitetip Shark as a Featured Article Candidate. It's usual for people nominating just to include a couple of remarks about why they think it should be featured, and sign their nomination; I don't suppose you'd be able to add this? Thanks! &mdash; Matt 02:38, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I got your note on my talk page. Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. V V   03:55, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

re: Nominating Featured Article Candidates
Boy, that was a good article until everyone started hitting it with waffle irons and jumping on it with pogo sticks. I note this in private. Auto movil

Fake etymology, and minor edits
Hi! Re your recent changes on Fake etymology, I think you may have missed the point of the article &mdash; fake etymologies are invented (and thus incorrect) etymologies, so it's not necessary to establish that each example is incorrect.

Also, please be careful with the "minor edit" checkbox &mdash; I noticed you've essentially rewritten Choronzon from scratch in a long series of minor edits. Rewriting from scratch is admirable, don't get me wrong &mdash; but since the point of flagging as a minor edit is to make it not appear to those who've excluded minor edits from their watchlist or Recent Changes it's usually a good idea to avoid marking any changes to article content as minor. Minor changes tend to be spelling corrections, copy editing, fixing broken wiki syntax, that sort of thing, and a big series of minors that substantially changes an article might raise some red flags.

Hrm, I see now that Shit was the same sort of thing but without the minor flag. Don't forget that you can preview an article before saving. &mdash; mendel &#9742; 03:43, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)


 * And now on folk etymology too. Your edit left the article with:


 * A folk etymology in the linguistic sense is an accurate explanation of the origins of a fake etymology or a misunderstanding of the history of the word or phrase.


 * Reduce that for a second: "A folk etymology is an explanation of the origins of a fake etymology". No, that doesn't make sense at all; a folk etymology is an etymology, and thus it explains the origin of a word or phrase. The etymology of "kitty-corner" is a folk etymology; that folk etymology explains the origin of "kitty-corner" and not the origin of people misunderstanding what "cater" meant. I realize this sounds pedantic, but I don't see any reason for being imprecise on something that a great percentage of the population regulary get wrong. &mdash; mendel &#9742; 21:17, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)


 * Eh, we're not so much tangling now. When I saw one of your first edits on fake etymology that appended "No" after one paragraph and "That's a load of bullshit" after another I wasn't sure if it was well-intentioned, and when I saw a lot of substantial edits marked "minor" I was a bit suspicious, but that's taken care of. Right now I'm more concerned with getting folk etymology unambiguous, because a couple weeks ago it was awful &mdash; pretty much identical to "fake etymology".


 * I think we're in agreement that that's not what we want, but that's what laymen think it means. So if we don't want that, why not explain exactly what it means according to the discipline that coined the term? To "explain the origin of a fake etymology" just doesn't make any sense. "Bob came up with an acronymic expansion of 'Fuck' and told Sue"? That's the explanation of the origin of a fake etymology, and they'll all be identical &mdash; someone thought of it and spread it around. The key bit about folk etymology is that even though it was based on a mistake it's part of the real history of a word, and that's what I think most people miss. It's easy for someone to understand that since "fuck" wasn't an acronym then the acronym story is a fake etymology, but it's not as easy for them to get that if it became "fucq" over the years because of the fake etymology (and, uh, the Queen :-) that the acronym part would be part of "fucq"'s accurate etymology.


 * Hrm, now that I think of it, it doesn't make much sense to say that folk etymology explains the origins of a word, either &mdash; it's a process, not a thing, which might be why that wording's sort of odd there. Yeah, I think that makes more sense. "Kitty-corner" has an etymology, not a folk etymology; part of that etymology is where "cater" became "kitty" through the process of folk etymology, but "cater" becoming "kitty" isn't a folk etymology. Does that sound right to you?


 * If it does, I'd propose the following:


 * Strike the whole "A folk etymology is" paragraph, and replace it with something like


 * Folk etymology, then, is the process by which a fake etymology becomes a legitimate part of the history of a word or phrase.


 * In fake etymology, replace the "folk etymologies, which are (presumably)..." with something like


 * folk etymology, a process by which a word or phrase develops based on a fake etymology.


 * What do you think of that? Having spent a night or two fixing all of the folk/fake etymology confusion in the articles that linked to Folk etymology, though, I'd like to at least make sure that it's clear to Wikipedians.


 * The Agincourt thing is fine, I guess. I don't meant to contest the accuracy; I know it's a lark, but it just sits odd to have the explanation followed by "This is untrue". Maybe the explanation should go in V sign, and Fake etymology should just link to the articles that talk about fake etymologies like folk etymology does for its examples.


 * It's really nothing personal, now, though I started down that road at first &mdash; the combination of the minor edits, the style of the first changes you made, and then you showing up all over my watchlist after I mentioned it seemed like a red flag at first but I'm satisfied it was just coincidence.


 * Oh, and another wiki tip: you can add a signature with datestamp with four tildes ( ~ ) &mdash; it's conventional to sign comments on talk pages like that. &mdash; mendel &#9742; 15:05, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

Folk/fake etymology, clamato
Clamato ended up on my to-do list after an IRC discussion (not in #wikipedia) about the absurdity of adding clam juice to, well, anything, really. I found a neat history while trying to find out why someone would do that, and thought it'd fit nicely into an article.

As for folk and fake etymologies, the difference is a lot bigger than you'd think. "Fake etymology" is easy: an etymology (history of a word of phrase) that isn't true but is popularly believed. It's really just a purported etymology that doesn't pan out.

Where it gets tricky is that the "etymology" in "folk etymology" isn't talking about the same meaning of "etymology" as "fake etymology" is. In "folk etymology", "etymology" refers to the process of change itself, and not the historical account of the change.

In "fake etymology", the etymology is. A synonym for "fake etymology" might be "contrived history". In "folk etymology", the etymology happens. A synonym for it might be "modification based on popular belief". Fake etymologies are countable &mdash; "fuck" has at least two fake etymologies (the acronym and the archers). Folk etymology isn't countable; both "rake-hell" and "kitty-corner" developed via (one process called) folk etymology.

Does that make it clearer? I really wish the terms didn't look like they were meant to be opposites. I'd never use "fake etymology" outside of Wikipedia; even when I was fixing a lot of the articles that linked to "folk etymology" but talked about wrong but popular etymologies I linked to popular etymology. I'd almost go so far as to say that "fake etymology" isn't so much a concept as it is merely the word "etymology" with the adjective "fake". &mdash; mendel &#9742; 21:56, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)


 * I figured that instead of talking to you and Pasquale about folk/fake etymology on your talk pages, that we should probably be discussing it on Talk:Folk etymology. I just summarized what I've said to you and Pasquale there; we should probably continue the discussion there so that anyone else interested in the article knows it is going on. :-)


 * Back on the subject of squeezing clams into a glass: the Bloody Caesar is a quintessential Canadian summer drink (although I can't stand them myself, but I don't like tomato juice much, let alone tomato juice with clam, let alone tomato juice with clam, tabasco, and Worcestershire sauce, even if there is vodka in it), so Clamato itself is pretty unremarkable Canada-wide. I imagine using it for something other than a Caesar would be as uncommon as anywhere else. As for its history, give a read &mdash; that's the article I mention in my to-do list, that made me want to write a Clamato article in the first place!  &mdash; mendel &#9742; 16:05, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

Procedure
"Kevin, it's not personal; it's procedural."

I agree. I initally thought you were a troll, this is true. I was not overly concerned though until you delete the tag. That sent up a ton of red flags for me. That is the wrong procedure. The correct thing to do was to put a comment on the talk page that you were still working on it, then continue to work on the article. The first administrator that came along would have seen your comment and then removed the tag.

Then when you blanked the talk page, I was even more concerned. That is even moreso the incorrect procedure. You should have simply added your comments and then continued to work on the article. If the article got to a place where it was no longer a candiate for speedy deltion or VFD then it would not be a problem and it would neither be deleted nor moved.

Finally, as far as you making claims about my level of contribution on the vfd page that were not true, I don't appreciate that. I think that most of your contributions are of a fairly low quality, but I've never said anything to that effect in a public forum. Clamato is a very poor encyclopedia artice (in my opinion) but I've never put it, or you, down. Please refrain from intimating that I am a deletionist who doesn't contribute to the Wikipedia project as both of these claims are patently untrue. In fact, I've saved more than one article from VFD by adding to it. If you really feel that it's not personal but procedural please stop spreading untruth about me. Kevin Rector 19:15, Nov 20, 2004 (UTC)

Who Will Rid Me Of This Turbulent Priest? (re:Procedure)
Just to keep the facts straight, the word 'nonsense' appeared in the text box minutes after I began the article. It was like, 'How odd. That shouldn't be here.' When it appeared again, I left it and found a speedy-delete tag on the page. This was not erased.

As votes for deletion appeared, I wiped them and left a note in their place saying that the page was in the process of being written, and sent Kevin (above) a message saying to please come back and judge the article when it was, in fact, an article, rather than two sentences of an article.

Kevin (above) restored everything but my note on the talk page, wiped my message on his talk page, and went into 'I am unable to admit I'm wrong' mode, ignoring requests to stop marking things for deletion. Hilarity ensued.

Rather than deleting his comment (as he deleted mine), I leave it here as testimony that my contributions are of a fairly low quality, and that Clamato is a very poor encyclopedia artice [sic]. Auto movil 21:35, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

G'day

Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I have replied there. Andrewa 19:46, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:


 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Demon
Thank you for your accurate and clarifying edits at this entry. --Wetman 09:16, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Stratocaster
I reverted your edits on Stratocaster because material was deleted yet it was marked as a minor edit. According to Minor_edit, marking a real change as a minor edit is considered bad behaviour, even more so if it involves the deletion of some text. Please reconsider your changes, and fill in the summaries when you do. Icd 08:35, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)

The change was removing a list of 'famous Stratocaster players' that had been pasted into a paragraph where it didn't belong. If you want to include favorite Stratocaster players, please add them to the existing list at the bottom of the article. Auto movil 15:17, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Note to all: In general, when I write an article, it stays written -- my watchlist rarely shows a substantitive change in a major piece of text. This is, I think, because the text is pretty good and people like it.

However, the watchlist shows a lot of links added, lists of things appended and interspersed, and (recently) people trying to get their own names into articles such as Hardcore punk, apparently for vanity's sake alone (see that article's talk page for gory details). I monitor that fairly strictly on several articles, and don't always signal my changes well. I am, in fact, a notably sloppy, piecemeal editor who wades around in chaos making a million tiny changes until everything gets pulled together in the end.

If I've deleted something you've added, it's 100% not personal, 100% not because I'm being overprotective of an article (I rejoice over good edits and additions), and probably only 50% cursory -- especially if it's a self-reference or a mention of a favorite band, guitarist, oyster, sausage, mythological personage, et al., who's included because it seems (to me) to be one's favorite, and not because it's objectively lacking from the article. Sometimes I'm over-hasty. I'll try to signal changes better in the future, and I thank Icd for issuing a mild smack on that account. Auto movil 15:54, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * The latest version looks much better now. That paragraph did look very awkward with a laundry list of guitarists jammed in it. However I am glad to have the list retained, I think the attraction of the Strat is 10% what it looks and sounds like and 90% who has played it. Icd 00:54, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

re: L'affaire Jewbacca, including Veriditas and also that other guy
I've removed this stuff from the page. It's available for view if anyone wants to hit the 'history' list, but I noticed earlier that comments by me were summarily deleted from the other relevant talk pages, and good gracious, I don't want to look at this every day. Auto movil 17:05, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Kraut juice
I felt the deleted sentence was a little personalized and POV, but with hindsight, you're probably right. As you say, it's a tiny article. I have no objection if you want to reinsert. Slim 20:19, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Nah, fine with me. I might try adding something to the article at some point, but 'kraut juice' is about as minor a topic as one can find around here. Auto movil 20:22, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I will be trying to mediate between you and Jewbacca. Please contact me with your side of the story at your earliest convenience. Danny 17:02, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to ask if you are interested in mediation with Jewbacca. If so, please contact me. Danny 00:21, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I will convey that message to Jewbacca. Hopefully, everything will be settled. Danny 02:20, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"new jersey"?
If you're talking about the state, New Jersey is generally capitalized. HTH, -- Infrogmation 19:41, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It's usually capitalized, yes. Unfortunately, when one does a search for a term in lower-case, then clicks on the 'write this article' link, the title becomes carved in stone -- unless you know some way to get in and change it. Auto movil 19:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Certainly. The "move this page" feature that is in the task bar of every page while you're logged in. (Alternatively, you could manually capitalize the relevent letters in the url before editing to avoid making a page that needs to be moved in the first place.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation 19:56, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Got it; thanks! Auto movil 20:50, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Bad Brains?
Hi, I was just wondering, um, what the heck is going on with the Bad Brains article? Is their some controversy that isn't being worked out? Is a compromise possible? Paige 00:57, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Tried that; the anonymous guy keeps reverting his POV and copyvio. I'm about out of patience with the article; it's becoming work keping it maintained. Auto movil 08:45, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Excuse You
Pardon? --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:27, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Ahh so your the pelican shit vandal then. Well i guess i ought to go report you then. Thanks for playing. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:35, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This guy has nothing better to do. Check his talk page. Auto movil 08:43, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well thank you for being an a@@. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:44, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Well if you are so "offended" by it, they go ahead and report it, i could care less, i have better things then to go around a be a jerk. --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 09:13, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

All of a sudden he has something better to do. This is one of the things about working on Wiki articles late at night: Strange people will be cruising around looking for things to mess with and little quarrels to get into, instead of doing anything productive. Sometimes they can't even write in decent English. This guy, for instance, can't spell or punctuate, as his talk page makes clear. Why is he here? To mess with things and find little quarrels with people. It really kinda gets old after awhile. Auto movil 09:23, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Seeing in your eyes
There's some links 'n' stuff regarding "(The) Flowers of Romance" over at the bottom of Gyrofrog's talk page, the album having been released in America and Canada with an extra word in the title - at no extra cost. Perhaps it was just a ploy to make collectors buy the same album twice, thus doubling its sales from a lot number to a slightly less low number.-Ashley Pomeroy 12:11, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! Perhaps PiL can reissue a couple of tracks on a single in the UK, call it 'The,' and make up the difference. Come to think of it, you had all those records by 'The The' on the charts there, so you're still ahead by one. Auto movil 18:14, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lenape
I read your comments on Wetman's page regarding the Lenape name for their homeland. I assume you meant Herbert Kraft, not Bob. In any case, as you are probably aware, Algonquian linguistics has an extremely controversial history. I certainly think that's worth mentioning in the article, if it had be done with sources. However, to delete the mention of Lenapehoking outright is, in my opinion, taking a POV stance regarding the particular issue. To say the least, there is not universal agreement on it.. As I said, I would certainly be interested if you can find some references regarding this. It's a very interesting topic. -- Decumanus 04:04, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)


 * I think Whritenour's opinion--that it was invented 20-30 years ago--is definitely worth mentioning. I'll see if I can give it a good wording. It would be good perhaps to start an article about him, since he has very definite opinions that are worth airing, in my opinion. You seem to know more about him. I cannot find much background on him or his credentials. I think a Wikipedia article would be useful. -- Decumanus 04:53, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Auto movil 04:18, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bad Brains
My pleasure. I can't remember what brought me to the article now (but I'll have to try to find some of their stuff; it sounds interesting). Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 15:58, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * You watch Abyss too? You get around... Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 18:17, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Philosophy &mdash; though I've pretty wide interests. I'm also a Random-pager and a Recent-changes watcher... Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 20:09, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Telecaster
Thanks for your positive comment on my recent changes to the Telecaster article. I am hoping to gradually expand it and make it more authoritative with references from several books I have, all of which have notes on the Telecaster. Most informative have been Duchossoir's The Fender Telecaster and Bacon and Day's The Fender Book. If you do not have these books yet, I highly recommend them. The Duchossoir book is especially fascinating for its exhaustive detail, though the other has great color pictures of all the Fender models. Rohirok 02:21, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Re: The Pretenders
Please see my (lengthy) response to you on Talk:The Pretenders. Wasted Time R 12:44, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re: Great White Shark
Thought your description of what happened to your great white shark article was a riot, and of far greater intrinsic worth than either the elegantly simple original or the ornately baroque final version. mlt 00:32, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oceanic whitetip
A little detective work has led me to your door (and I apologize in advance for dredging up what may be bad memories). A long time ago you added a considerable portion to the behaviour section in the Oceanic whitetip shark article, most of which survives today. I'd like to add a reference to avoid claims of OR, so do you by any chance recall where that originated? Thanks. Yomangani 10:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hardcore
I have semi-protected the page. This means IP addresses can't be used for edit warring. I have also asked User:SlimVirgin to look at the situation. I hope an amicable and accurate solution can be found. Moving the content to the Bob article was a very good idea. Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 16:50 4 October 2006 (GMT).

You continue to change an accurate description of NYCHC evolution
By repeating Spylab's posting that the "midnight riot" was suggested is false and misleading. I knew all the players at the time and "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" (produced by Salese) prompted the show. The record was a staple in hardcore history of NYC but that would be disputed by those that were jealous of it's popularity. I assume that those jealousies still exist today and are part of the reason that the articles are butchered. I've tried to present an accurate potrayal in few words while including key figures. Now you say I am being warned. I don't understand your reasoning. If you want a fictional version of histroy then that's fine by me. You would be doing an injustice to readers of Wilkipedia. I think the refs. to Sallese that you moved was a good idea but that still doesn't warrant repeating falsehoods posted by Spylab. It is quite obvious that he has a bone to pick and his predjudices are hurting Wilkipedia.

PUNKNYC


 * Wow, I came here for a different reason, and again I see Punk NYC attributing things to me that I have not done. Please read carefully and direct your comments to the appropriate person instead of obsessing about me. I do not appreciate your unwarranted attention.Spylab 18:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab


 * The Big Apple Rotten to the Core compilation was one part of a much larger story in NY.

Kraut already had two records out in 1981, and had opened for The Clash at Bond's Casino. The Bad Brains were in town, and had a ROIR tape out. Urban Waste had an EP out. Heart Attack had a single out. Cracked Actor and The Corpsicles had singles. The Beastie Boys had an EP out. The Nihilistics had a single. The New York Thrash tape was out.

That's not a complete list, as you know.

Now, please listen to me here, Punknyc. This article is about ALL hardcore in THE ENTIRE WORLD. A known promoter of ISM and (briefly) The Mob, plus a bunch of bands like The Headlickers, certainly deserves a mention, but is not entitled to this encyclopedia article, written with much effort by many people, as a vanity platform.

He is certainly entitled to his own article, which someone ought to write.

Auto movil 19:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * All those bands were certainly important but the fact of the matter is that before the release of "Rotten To The Core", the scene in NY was in a downspin and going nowhere. The commercial exposure reignited the scene.  I hardly think a blurb about heavy commercial airplay of "John Hinckley Jr." which led to a late night hardcore show on commercial radio is dominating the page.  The blurb I edited is more accurate than stating that it was "suggested".  This is supposed to be an encyclopedia.  The fact is that that "Rotten To The Core" & "John Hinckley Jr." by Ism, prompted commercial airplay for a host of local groups and  long  established bands from the West Coast like Black Flag & The Circle Jerks.  This was a turning point for hardcore in NYC.  The story WAS appropriately placed in the "early support" section.  It was a major turning point in NY whereas the West Coast had been getting commercial support much earlier from the likes of Rodney Bingenheimer.  Furthermore, Spylab continues to post personal attacks and falsely identifying people with little knowledge of what he is saying yet Wilkipedia adminstrators allow this rubbish to stay and delete key information.

PUNKNYC


 * Yes, in Long Island. That's one of five boroughs in New York City, not counting New Jersey. I'll tell you what you should have done. You should have put out that Heart Attack stuff that ended up never being released until like two years ago, and/or tried to work with the Nihilistics, and if that failed, you could have done a Satan's Cheerleaders album or something. Or fired Lyle Hysen from the Misguided and done a record with a decent drummer. I'm talking just Long Island. If you want to talk Queens, Murphy's Law was super-huge, yet didn't record until like 1985. Paths untaken.

Honestly, Salese/Jism stuff gets as much mention in this broad survey article as The Germs. Why is that not enough? I mean honestly now. Auto movil 20:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not about to do anything. I'm just a fan of the genre.  Queens is one of the five Boroughs but part of Long Island. Queens was birthplace to the Ramones and many only pioneers of punk.   The majority of Long Island is in Nassau & Suffolk Counties.  Long Island is not a borough.  Big Apple was predominately a NYC comp (see the "just the facts" in talk for hardcore punk).  "The Headlickers" were the only band that didn't hail from NYC but played at A7  All those bands you mention were important as well if you're talking early NYC hardcore.  Murphy's Law evolved in the later days and I suspect were influenced very much by The Mob since they were at all their gigs.

PUNKNYC

Ok, geography lesson absorbed. I'm working under the unshakable and evidentiary proposition that as a user who only edits articles in order to add references to Bob Salese, you are in fact Bob Salese. With that in mind, what I said was twofold. You ought to have released some other records back then, if you're now going to claim foundational status in the early NY hardcore scene. Big Apple and some ISM records is good and important, but it isn't exactly the Posh Boy of the East Coast (and please note that Robbie Fields isn't even mentioned in this article). It's more like Rat Cage Records, historically speaking. (And Dave Rat Cage isn't mentioned at all either.) (And neither is Javi Savage, or for that matter Jack Rabid.)

The other thing is the 'because.' They aren't mentioned because this is a broad survey article about the ENTIRE hardcore movement in the ENTIRE world, from 1978 to 2006. I'm not sure you understand this. Long Island (including Queens) circa 1982-1983 was one part of one scene, out of literally dozens in America alone. I'm stretching my arms all the way out. "Big." Now I'm putting my palms together about three inches apart. "Small." This article is about "Big." What happened in Long Island in 1982-1983 is "Small." Auto movil 05:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


 * There wasn't much happening on "Long Island" in those days.  Punk pioneer like the Ramones were from Forest Hills, Queens and Johnny Thunders was from Bayside, Queens.  So I don't understand what your obsession with using the term "Long Island"  since native NYers always refer to Nassau & Suffolk as "Long Island.

My posts refer mainly to bands that were from the 5 boroughs. I have met most of the players that you mention here and was planning to update this site regularly. I began with certain key points that were totally left out. This stuff has been deleted & distorted over & over again. You say the whole page is about Jism/Salese yet there is no mention of Jism, "Ism" and one mention of Sallese as the page stands. I'm sorry, but "John Hinckley Jr" & "I Think I Love You" were getting major commercial airplay in the NY metropolitan area and in NJ as well. The ref: to "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" has been completely & repeatedly removed over the years while I and a few others restore it. If I can't get past step A, how can I get to step B? Plus...little mention of the "False Prophets" or "The Undead", no mention of Pat Duncan or Tim Sommer until today...What about "Butch Lust & The Hypocrites" with Lenny Steel of "Pure Hell" and later with Screaming Mad George of "The Mad"? What about "Even Worse" or "The Young & The Useless" or "Killer Instict" (one of the early female "hardcore bands")? So little mention of "A7"... Rat Cage records was extremely important. "The Beastie Boys" were a much better hardcore band than they are given credit for. Jack Rabid ( who by the way, use to be another claiming that he came up with the term "Hardcore") was very important on the scene. Javi Savage important as well and a very nice person I may add. Not enough on "The Stimulators" if you want to talk about the early days. Not enough on "The Mob" & "Kraut" either. You are stuck on this "Long Island" thing that just never existed. There were a few good bands from Nassau County like "The Nihilistics" and "The Headlickers". I thought "Heart Attack" had some members in Nassau County also as well as Whitestone Queens. "The Big Apple" comp was a pure New York CITY comp with only one band from Nassau County. Ism (Queens, NYC), The Mob (Queens, NYC) Butch Lust & The Hypocrites ( Brooklyn & Manhatten, NYC), Squirm (Brookyln, NYC), Killer Instinct (Queens & Manhatten, NYC), The Headlickers (Nassau County)

The funny thing is that you admit that this article is lacking in so many ways and yet try to justify it. When anybody adds valuable input that upsets the status quo, they get deleted, accused of being somebody else or distorted. It appears this site is being ran by a select few members of a hardcore clique that want to go back in time and remember things as they wished it was instead of as it actually was. Yeah, I could point fingers and name some names but that's not my style because even the A-Holes were part of an exciting moment in music history. They should all get credit where credit is due. Each and every one of the people & bands that we both named should have AT LEAST one link at minimum leading to a bio. Unfortunately that takes time and if I can't even manage to put one ref. with a link to "Ism" without it getting deleted, how the heck can anyone find the time or want to find the time to constuctively contribute to this article to make it completely accurate??????????????

You can think what you want about who I am but you are wrong and what difference would it matter anyway? The entire site is posted by people hiding behind aliases and I don't care who they are as long as they get their facts straight. If you want this section to be accurate, the administrators should stop it from being torn apart by a few people with an agenda. From my reads, that agenda is to create a fairytale & candy coated illusion of what really happened.

PUNKNYC

Nonono, I'm going to be very clear here. The article, 'Hardcore Punk' is a survey article about the entire genre. It's ALREADY beyond the recommended length for Wikipedia articles. It simply cannot include everything that's important or relevant. There simply is not space.

But the way it works is that there are OTHER articles devoted to individual hardcore scenes, bands, and people. Each of these can be just as long and detailed. Also, if one doesn't exist yet, it can be created.

When you add stuff into the broad, comprehensive 'Hardcore Punk' article, it's competing with gigantic amounts of other relevant information. Whereas, adding brief factual information into the article on NY Hardcore, or really specific and detailed information into the articles on ISM, Bob Sallese, WLIR, etc., is absolutely wonderful.

Auto movil 18:52, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Your editors continue to make the article a joke. If you take out all brief explanations of key players and leave no links then what would be the point to have more detailed seperate bios and articles.  As it stands, all references to Pat Duncan, Tim Sommer, Bob Salese, Ben Manilla, Jack Rabid have been omitted.  Yet Rodney Bigenheimer & Tim Yohannon info stays.  This is a very one-sided article.  These names were equally important in NYC as were Bigenheimer & Yohannon were on the West Coast.  The beginning of the article is a joke too..."Hardcore originated in North America, primarily in and around California, Texas, and Washington, DC, although Chicago, Detroit, New York City, Vancouver, and Boston were also important."  What the fuck!@#$@#$%^&&&?????????  This is a total OPINION!!!!...and in my opinion....California, NYC, DC, & Boston were the most important places.  To write this article suggesting Texas & Vancouver were more important than NYC or Boston is a joke!

Also, what about the other key players without even a link...The Stimulators, The Mob, Bad Brains, Ism, Kraut, Butch Lust and the Hypocrites with punk veteran Lenny Steel of Pure Hell on guitar, The False Prophets,The Undead....all extremely important in NYC in the early days which made the way for the movement to carry on. Oh that's right, this article for some reason wants to discount the importance of NYC even though Hardcore was a direct evolution from punk which was basicly born in Queens NY with the Ramones grew up in Manhatten at CBGBs & Max's Kansas City. Nah, NYC and the key players to this genre mean nothing...The article as it stands is now a joke. In the early days, hardcore was dying in NYC because...nobody wanted to book the bands...nobody wanted to play it on the radio...Nobody could afford to put out a record or distribute it right...A7 was EXTREMELY important, Pat Duncan & Tim Sommer were extremely important, Dave Rat Cage Records & Bob Sallese were extremely important. "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" was extremely important. Nobody could get a good comp out and get it played commercially as well. It was a turning point and not to list briefly the importance with links to the players is a joke!!! The success of Ism's "John Hinckley Jr." & "I Think I Love You" on WLIR leading to the first commercial broadcast in the NY metro are of Black Flag and the first commercial hardcore show with Ben Manilla were extremely important. Ben Manilla went out on a limb with the station. He also almost got fired over an incident at Nassau Colliseum when he & Jism of Ism sang the Star Spangled Banner hardcore style before an indoor Soccer game. They pulled the plug and the station was never even warned about they were going to do it.

The early support section is a joke. The Stimulators, The Mob, Bad Brains, Ism, Kraut, Butch Lust and the Hypocrites, Lenny Steel, A7, Bob Salese, Jack Rabid, Tim Sommer, Dave Rat Cage Records, The Beastie Boys, Pat Duncan, "The Big Apple Rotten To The Core" & "John Hinckley Jr.", Ben Manilla, WLIR, should all have links & breif explanations SOMEWHERE in this article. If not, it is one-sided fairytale meant to pump vanity writings for a select group of individuals and bands. When someone like myself comes along with an extensive knowledge of the era, they get squelched. I wonder how many others with valuable input have been turned away from the site after reading the farce. You are doing the young readers an injustice and anyone else who want to learn about the subject. This is not an encyclopedia but a PR page for a select group of individuals and bands. Granted, some may not liked how history unfolded but what happened is what happened and they can change it in this fairytale but they are only fooling themselves. I will add this message to the discussion page and see if anyone with one iota of common sense wants to fix the article.

User:PUNKNYC

How to add citations
Hi, Auto movil, the way you did the website citation on my talk page is the correct way. After the sentence, add the website address in between [ ] characters like this: [website address] and it will appear like this: There's a different method for adding book footnotes, which I've never done.Spylab 18:56, 4 October 2006 (UTC)Spylab

userpage/talkpage
You posted discussion to User:PUNKNYC's userpage - did you mean to do that, or did you think you were posting to his talk page? wikipediatrix 19:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks & false allegations
I don't think it's fair of you to make personal attacks and false allegations against specific parties whose reputations can be compromised and cause specific damages. Even worse is doing it with no certifiable sources. Even though I may not be "certain parties", I can easliy get in touch with them. I beleive all personal attacks (including my own) should be removed and false accusations should never be posted. I think the article is starting to look very legit now and am pleased that Kraut, Pat Duncan, Salese, Tim Sommer, The Mob and Ism have been noted for their important contributions to the genre. Despite what you may think, I believe we are on the same side. Not to sound like Rodney King but hopefully, we can all just get along.

User:PUNKNYC

Now look. I seem to have made a mistake in discussing this with you as though there were two sides to the issue -- in trying to explain and convince rather than simply taking action. What you're doing is adding multiple vanity references to an article over and over and over, and reverting them back again and again and again. And when people ask you to stop and explain why it's necessary to stop, you keep doing it again and again and again, always with some new, contradictory story as to why the additions are relevant. I believe I've summed up the situation with admirable restraint.

What this is, is ridiculous. It is an obvious, flaming, arm-waving, 900-foot-tall violation of Wikipedia practice with blinking red lights and smoke billowing out of its ears and other orifices, for which you have been warned and warned and warned and warned, by several editors and at least one admin.

Maybe you think I'm your problem. Your problem is that you're trying to put stuff into an encyclopedia article that doesn't belong there. It doesn't matter whether you, personally, are Bob Sallese, or whether you're a dogged Bob Sallese fan of some sort. In adding multiple references to Bob Sallese to an article that has very little to do with Bob Salese, you are in violation of Wikipedia practice. In violation of Wikipedia practice. In violation of Wikipedia practice.

Violation, violation, violation. I hope this is clearer now. I fear it isn't.

You may wish to further debate the historical relevance of Bob Sallese. Google shows that nearly all the references to Bob Sallese on the Internet point TO THIS ARTICLE, and specifically to text added by yourself and by aliases of yourself. Sock-puppetry constitutes another violation, as it happens. There is a surfeit of violations, a galaxy of violations. There are violations like sand grains on a beach.

I am, as you know, aware that Bob Salese existed and that he released an early hardcore vinyl compilation in New York, as well as several records by the band ISM circa 1983-1984. I have for that reason kept a reference to Bob Sallese in this article. I am beginning to see this as a mistake. You will repeatedly revert edits unless there are MULTIPLE, PARAGRAPH-LONG references to Bob Salese, including information relevant only to people who are: A) devoted scholars of the life and career of Bob Salese, or B) Bob Salese. I have previously copied some of this text to the article, Bob Salese, where it would better serve the Bob Sallese community.

I have also previously recommended that some of this text may be appropriate and beneficial in the articles on New York Hardcore, ISM, and other subjects. It does not, however, demand several references in the master article for Hardcore Punk, for reasons imminently obvious and impossible to expound upon without doing violence to the very concept of rationality.

However, I'll try once again. The article would suffer from space constraints even with a fair and appropriate ratio of Bob-Salese-related material -- which, if one were being objective and strictly following Wikipedia guidelines (as I am being generous in interpreting), would approach or achieve zero.

I am going to ask that you agree not to tamper with this article any further. The next thing I do will be to request that you be banned from editing articles on Wikipedia. Auto movil 18:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I hate to ask you this but where did you study mathematics? There has consistently been 1 AND ONLY ONE reference to Bob Sallese in the entire article which you continue to remove.  There are two references to Ism, one pertaing to Jism and Salese's joint venture to bring hardcore into the mainstream which goes on to explain how the first commercially aired hardcore song in NY led to the first commercial hardcore radio program in the NY metropolitan area. How do you count multiple ref. to Salese.  Admit that you have a personal vendetta against this person.

I also added a ref. to Pat Duncan, & Tim Sommer which you have not omitted. It's quite strange. The second ref. to Ism is justified because it points out a historic momenmt when hardcore entered the charts competing with mostly supergroups of the 80's. This is a seperate accomplishment and worthy of mention in the article which is suppose to be an encyclopedia of hardcore punk. There is so much other vanity postings and opinionated trash in this article that I have not touched but yet you continue to vandalize facts to the history of hardcore along with verifiable sources and citation

So please, stop the double talk. One and only one ref. to Salese, one ref. to Jism (where Ism is mention to clarify who Jism was) and one actual ref. to the band Ism is hardly "MULTIPLE REF". Why the game playing? why the lying about multiple Salese ref? I have e-mailed a copy of all the discussion of Sallese off to him and to Ism handlers. I think they have a right to know about false allegations posted on these boards. User:PUNKNYC


 * To itemize:


 * 'Bob Salese' has appeared by name in multiple places in this article, frequently more than once at a time. The name is like a whack-a-mole -- when deleted from one inappropriate passage, it swiftly pops up in another. All previous edits of the article are viewable in the History section.


 * Ism was never on the charts except for once (as you claim) in the 30s on the CMJ chart, which tracks college radio play. This is non-notable, as many hardcore bands were on the CMJ chart at higher positions. It represents a special POV pleading to include the band Ism in this article.
 * Ism's radio play on WLIR is not notable, however it is perhaps appropriate for an article on New York Hardcore or one on Ism. For perspective, please review this list of bands competing in the WBCN Rock & Roll Rumble during the same time period. This represents another special POV pleading to include Ism in this article.


 * Excising other factual information from this article in order to turn around the charge of 'vanity editing' constitutes deliberate vandalism.


 * You have been warned by an admin, and there has been an RfC filed.

Auto movil 19:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

signing thing
I would sign that thing you messaged me about, but someone just banned me for 24 hours for "excessive" editing, even though all my edits were productive additions to an article (and someone else put those additions back in anyway, just in a different formatting).

Hi Auto
The warning can be found here and was for 3RR, you can I'm sure provide extensive diffs, which will support the RFC. I think from what you have said RFC is probably a good idea, and not too harmful (I know it's perceived as a last resort, but it needn't be negative). Long term agenda pushing is one of the unresolved concerns for WP. Rich Farmbrough, 22:22 14 October 2006 (GMT).
 * Note that User:Punknyc (the real user) is not User:PUNKNYC - as he signs his comments. Rich Farmbrough, 09:15 18 October 2006 (GMT).
 * Yeah, either from the RFC or request for arbitration he'll get banned. This applies to the person, not the account. Rich Farmbrough, 19:47 18  October 2006 (GMT).

Regarding comments on Talk:Shit
To discuss, please feel free to swing by the uniquely-aptly-named Wiki page, talk:shit. I wish I had thought of it. Rintrah 16:13, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Your irresponsible AFD comments, which you should apologize for
Gosh, thanks for all those well-thought-out, carefully checked commets at theOphelia Benson AFD. In the future, to improve the level of your contributions to Wikipedia, might I suggest you improve your practices in two areas. First, you should actually read the article you are commenting on, and take note of its contents. Second, you should consider the claims made in the article against the relevant notability criteria, even, as necessary, checking the references and external links provided for the article.. Ophelia Benson is a well-known published author, not merely a blogger (although she is probably notable as a blogger, too). Her two books are listed by title in the article,even though none of you astute readers noticed that. (Apparently the identification of Benson as an "author" and the listing of the book titles in distinctive type was insufficient to tip off careful and well-informed Wikipedia editors like yourselves; perhaps one or two of you may have suggestions on how to improve such descriptions.) Her books meet the notability criteria, having been reviewed and discussed in major media. In fact, Benson is a native of the UK, and both her books have been reviewed/discussed in the TLS, which even Wikipedia acknowledges as "one of the world's preeminent critical publications." (The second review appears in the October 20, 2006 issue, and is not yet directly cited online.) Benson's two books may be only available through such obscure retailers as Amazon.com  and Barnes & Noble , and the relevant pages give samples of reviews and indicate the caliber of Benson's audience.  Now I recognize that article deletion is a holy and privileged activity, and that deletion of articles about women whose claims to notability don't involve performances emphasizing, flaunting, or exposing their mammaries is a virtual sacrament which shouldn't be disrupted or contested, however ridiculous or inaccurate the basis, unless the circumstances are really really unusual. But while one of England's "leading cultural critics" is apparently not, by Wikipedia editor consensus, as notable as a moderately obese middle-aged woman who films herself having sex with dogs, and the TLS is apparently by the same consensus not a "major" publication with the stature and reputation of Color Climax Anal Sex or Big Fuckin' Tits, or even Juggs, I think she deserves to be included in Wikipedia. I now realize that the excessive literacy and cultural awareness I displayed in recognizing the name of a well-known figure in the British academic-literary world is inconsitent with the qualities required of a good Wikipedian, and fully justifies the assumptions of bad faith you have all made. I now know that in-depth knowledge of any subjects outside of pornography, Pokemon, and professional sports can only damage the Wikipedian enterprise, and I will do my best in the future to follow your lead and to contribute only with regard to subjects about which I know nothing, or next to nothing.

Now (dropping the ironic stance) I deserve a public apology from each of the posters whose sloth, carelessness, malice, or incompetence led them to make unfounded, uncivil, derogatory comments about me (and about the entirely blamess Ms Benson). And I deserve a display of abject, public, unqualified self-execration from the ArbCom member who charged to the head of the attack. I expect, of course, nothing but renewed incivility, personal attacks, and evasion of responsibility. VivianDarkbloom 20:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * This is about what, now? Auto movil 20:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Re Votergate;
The actions of these editors are all laid out right here. Votergate featured Andy Stepehenson who was the subject of a bitter AfD.

MfD

Improper Noticeboard

Cheers -- Fairness And Accuracy For All 21:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Ophelia Benson
The Ophelia Benson is better than it was before, with several reviews added as references. Could you please take another look at the article? --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 22:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Only as Life
That made me laugh as much as anything this year on Wikipedia... Vizjim 16:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Speedy keep the AfD discussion if nothing else...its literarity has perhaps far surpassed that of the subject. Please don't feel your efforts have been wasted just because they're floating in the breeze above certain heads:) DMacks 09:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

And since one good favour deserves another, I'd like to inform you that |Every man’s nostril is despondently empty. Vizjim 09:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Sadly, No
I had to speedily delete your re-creation of Sadly, No according to General criterion 4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, as it was a copy and paste of the deleted version. of the motives of the nominator, the AFD reached a consensus to delete, and the article should only be re-created if the concerns raised in the AFD can be met. If you would like to contest the deletion, feel free to open a deletion review. --Core desat  09:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Benjamin Rowe
Another editor has added the "prod" template to the article Benjamin Rowe, 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 Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. 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. BJBot (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)