User talk:Ceoil/Archive 3

Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter
The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Christ Illusion
Hi Ceoil, I've been keeping an eye on your sandbox and the rough version of Three Studies for Figures at the Base of a Crucifixion is shaping up rather nicely, so much congratulations on that. I'm just enquiring as to whether you feel the "Recording" section of "Christ Illusion" is up to standard now, or you feel it needs more work before the article can be submitted to FAC? What are your thoughts? I'm really grateful to have someone more knowledgable with the process really helping. LuciferMorgan 21:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. The sequence of events you laid out on my page isn't correct at all unfortunately, so I'm going have to clear it all up. I'm sure there's a Jeff Hanneman interview from April'ish which'll help clear a few things up. As concerns Rubin being executive producer, he's their label boss so can do what he wishes lol - he was switching his distributors from Columbia back to Warner (I'm going to have to put that in the article). Also they found out about Metallica after the album was wrapped, and Brian Warwick is an assistant engineer in Westlake Studios, and not a producer. This is implied by the start of the sentence which explains Dave Colvin being an assistant engineer at NRG Studios. I'm going have to overlook the section again to clarify things.

Thanks for your advice on the actual FAC itself - I'll make sure in my nomination that I ask contributors to say they contributed to the article in their votes. I've noticed music articles are slow in picking up comments for some reason - biographical based articles seem to attract more comments it seems, but I spend more time in the FAR room than the FAC room. I'm real grateful to know that someone as experienced as yourself will be able to help me should I need any once the article's at FAC. LuciferMorgan 22:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Which aspects of the "Recording" section do you wish to be clarified? LuciferMorgan 23:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, so I'm assuming you mean the parent label switch, ie. American Recordings changing distributors. I'll rectify that. (PS - They don't have any intention of leaving American Recordings though as they've been there for years. If you knew the way Kerry King is about people in interviews, you'd know what I mean). LuciferMorgan 23:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * True, I'll agree you seem to have a wide knowledge on music. Give me just tonight, and I'll have a go on that Rubin section. Then you can have a look and do whatever you feel necessary on Friday and Saturday like you said. Once again, thanks. LuciferMorgan 23:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I've done the major rewrite to the "Recording" section, and given it a major rearrangement. It's more chronological than the previous version - feel free to copy edit the section and weed out any redundancies you may find. Thanks in advance for this help. LuciferMorgan 02:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Do you think the article is ready for me to take to FAC now? LuciferMorgan 21:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

coil article
I added additional sources to the places you recommended. is this sufficient? and how long does it take for a FAC to be on the front wikipedia page? -- Alex Ov  Shaolin  03:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Heavy Metal
Ok, I'll see what i can do M3tal H3ad 00:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Most notable metalcore band is Trivium, so i guess they would be a good one. Something from their album Ascendancy, probably "Like light to the flies" or "Pull harder on the strings of your martyr" M3tal H3ad 10:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I have no suggestions re sound files, though I'd go for pioneers of the respective subgenres. If you know whom is deemed so (I always thought Venom was classed as the precursor to Black Metal), then feel free to add them to the article as you see fit. LuciferMorgan 21:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply
First of all abide by WP:NPA, do not personally attack me again. I have explained to you twice already that WP:STALK states; "This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, nor does it mean reading a user's contribution log; those logs are public for good reason."

Second of all. You are not Sylvia von Harden, you didn't paint Portrait of the Journalist in 1926. You also don't own all of the images or music media in which I have fixed the tags to either. Images need the correct tags or else they are in violation of Wikipedia's official upload policy. Hope this helps. - Deathrocker 01:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You're not very good at this whole obiding by policy thing are you? Claiming my logic is "specious", when I'm merely pointing out Wikipedia's official policy to you, is both a personal attack and bad faith on your part.


 * You contacted me, requesting information... and so I replied attempting to make things clear, now you're not interested?.. ooooookay. - Deathrocker 01:37, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Ceoil 01:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Freak Out!
Hi. You have not revisited your evaluation on the article Freak Out! I feel that your concerns have been addressed, and that it is well deserving of a "support" vote. Please take a look at the article and reevaluate its state. (Ibaranoff24 05:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC))

Heavy Metal dispute
I have left a comment to Deathrocker. The Heavy Metal talk page has obviously strayed from "comment on the content, not the person." I suggest keeping solely focused on content issues and not addressing Deathrocker directly. Also: read through Image copyright tags and its sub-pages and try to properly tag your images, where they are not. Marskell 05:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * My advice: retain diffs and comments you feel you need to, but do not pursue this or post regarding it further if the editor leaves you alone. In fact, you might post to them again, and solely (and of course with civility) comment on content. Marskell 19:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Ceoil, my last post to User:Deathrocker clearly indicates the potential for blocking. While I understand you have concerns, intervening on my talk or his or her talk, unless specifically asked to do so, is disruptive. Not that you can't; I'm suggesting you don't. Marskell 21:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

What's doing?
Having fun being stalked yet? I admit I was terribly annoyed at first, but now that our petulant little pal has targeted me a second time, I realize it's a fine opportunity to bring my images up to code en masse. Though if you'd like to pursue some sort of sanctions at any time, I can not only resummon my ire but provide evidence of much less defensible actions .—DCGeist 17:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I certainly agree that Wikipedia, both as an encyclopedia and as a community, would be improved immeasurably without Deathrocker's current and well-established manner of participation. I'm at your disposal.—DCGeist 17:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been around long enough to witness his contentious relations with fellow editors. Over a year ago there was this sprawling debate between Deathrocker and a user named Leyasu. In that debate I tried to mediate a little between the pair because they both had their occasional points even if they were insanely stubborn about them. However now the heavy metal article is in the midst of a FAR, something that requires concetrated effort and cooperation, and I'm finding it difficult to get work done when he flies increasingly in the face of consensus as well as reverts multiple editors (I don't even want to mention how he threw in an "Object" vote on The Smashing Pumpkins' FAC, which he is certainly free do to, but given his debates with me and Geist on the punk rock talk page I can't help but feel it was a bit suspect). WesleyDodds 08:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Please stop stalking me
Will you please stop stalking me and hounding me, as you have done here? When you have absolutely nothing that makes sense, to say... I suggest you take Marskell's advice and leave me alone, unless commenting on content. Some of us have better things to do, like working on the project, thanks. - Deathrocker 20:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Very funny. See you in court. Ceoil 20:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * You're the one stalking, i removed POV edits from Heavy Metal then you replaced them, i reverted then you go around tagging all the images i've uploaded? Woah big man. Some editors such as Ceoil are trying to improve the article whereas you're an obstacle in improving the article - your unhelpful edits are not needed. M3tal H3ad 03:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Issue de table
Well, the feast is over for this time, and off we go into a period of intellectual fast. But mayhaps will we meet again some day to make more medieval merry! My regards to you for your comments at the nomination.

sincerely, Peter Isotalo 07:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Campbell's Soup Cans FAC
I thank you for your editorial contributions to my FAC nominee, Campbell's Soup Cans. I agreed with the majority of your editing and reverted what I disagree with. Let me know if you feel strongly about the changes I have reverted in this edit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 16:03, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
 * I should be thanking you. You have done some great copyeditting.  I was wondering 2 things.  First, if you like the article why haven't you posted your support at Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans.  Second, it seems you have decided not to copyedit the last few sections.  Is there a reason? TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 20:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If you are planning to support as you indicate, the sooner the better, because they can close out a FAC at any time after 10 days, I believe and I am going on day 14. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 20:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not an art student. There is probably a technically correct word that I don't know. Anyone can edit.  Maybe someone knows. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 14:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Rhinoceros soundclip
Hey, I added the "Rhinoceros" soundclip back to The Smashing Pumpkins a week or to ago based upon FAC recommendation of including one clip per album. Unfortunately, I added it back after all the other clips were reduced in quality. I asked the editor who did the reducting on the other clips for help on making the "Rhinoceros" clip fit standards, but he hasn't responded. Have you figured out how to reduce clips to the preferred quality yet? Also, the song is 31 second; we should trim a few off at the end for stronger Fair Use. WesleyDodds 08:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Eyes of the Insane
Hi Ceoil, I was just wish to once again thank you for your help with Christ Illusion. At the moment I'm thinking of elevating "Eyes of the Insane" to GA status which I think is possible, and maybe FA if enough sources are available. Right now it's at peer review, so any feedback you may have is greatly welcomed. LuciferMorgan 21:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for giving the article a copyedit, which is much appreciated. That should aid it in its GAC :) LuciferMorgan 22:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Angel of Death
Thanks for giving it a copy edit, just to let you know I'm going to take to FAC soon and would appreciate it if you could give it a look, both prose and content wise (anything missing). If you don't have time then no probs, thanks for your time :) oh and some idiot vandalized your page. M3tal H3ad 12:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, much appreciated. Do you think its ready for FAC? M3tal H3ad 12:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * again, thanks for your help with the article :) M3tal H3ad 07:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice copyedits on kulintang article!
Good job on those copyedits. I'm watching you as you do this and its great. I REALLY needed a copyeditor. Thanks so much. PhilipDM 22:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Slayer FACs
I agree with your assessment of "Angel of Death" as being close to FAC which Metalhead seems keen to take there, but I don't think "Eyes of the Insane" is nor "Jihad" (another Slayer song I rewrote if you wish to copyedit it sometime, which would be real appreciated). "Eyes of the Insane" has all the info currently available (the song came out in August 2006) in the article save for paper sources which I don't have access to in order to check, so likely some may object for the article not being comprehensive (same with "Jihad"). So, what are your thoughts as regards these articles? LuciferMorgan 18:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The only thing I can add to "Eyes" is that King thinks the song is crap to play on the guitar really. I can't see much more information being available, unless someone releases some sorta book on the band. If you honestly think it's close to FA material though, once it's GAC nomination has finished contact me as concerns how the article can be improved (aside from adding content I don't have) and I'll be only too happy to work it up towards nomination. Thanks for being willing to have a look at "Jihad", which I think could pass GA at least (hopefully FAC one of these days). LuciferMorgan 18:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Metal press is largely boring to be honest. As concerns the Beatles songs, there used to be a lot more song FAs than there is (I FAR'ed a load), but some are left. I don't like their structure really. Once "Eyes" is through its GAC, I'll FAC it after the addressing of any 1. a. concerns you may have with the article. I'll leave "Jihad (song)" until this is out of the way. Thanks for all your help which is much appreciated - I hope your articles are going well. LuciferMorgan 19:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * With "Jihad" I need to add a sound clip. You know anyone who can do this? Thanks for your time. LuciferMorgan 19:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for adding a sound clip which is much appreciated. One thing though; on the fair use rationale it says 30 seconds is used, which doesn't qualify as fair use. Since the song is 3:31 or 211 seconds, only 21 seconds of the song can qualify as fair use per Music samples which would be 10% of the song (which is the limit). Is there a way you can cut the fair use sample by 9 seconds? And on "Eyes of the Insane", can you cut it by 10 so that will qualify as fair use? And also, can you cut 2 seconds on "Cult" in the Christ Illusion article so that counts? Thanks, I'm real grateful for everything. LuciferMorgan 21:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. You never know who will pop up at FAC so it's best to cover all bases. I noticed you signed up to the Project, and you're a welcome addition too :) LuciferMorgan 21:08, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Heavy metal and pedal point
No problem, mate! I've just added some other explanations about pedal point. Btw feel free to correct my english in my recents edits.Frédérick Duhautpas 17:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Consecutive fifth
No problem. I will provide the source about the consecutive fifths soon. Basically that's absolutely not a problem to provide it, as any harmony textbook can confirm that. But english wikipedia editors seem to demand exclusively english speaking sources and as I'm not living in a english speaking country, I have to go to the library to get some proprer english speaking sources. I will do that within this week. Same goes as fror the pedal point stuff. No problem.Frédérick Duhautpas 17:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi, I provided the sources you asked. I picked some english speaking ones.
 * As for your correction and reformulation, it was perfect...Thanks! Greetings Frédérick Duhautpas 22:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Heavy metal soundclips
I was looking the NWOBHM soundclips currently available on Wikipedia, and oftentimes they were a minute long. COuld you possibly (if you have it) add a fair us soudnclip of Iron Maiden's "Purgatory" to the page? WesleyDodds 18:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I picked "Purgatory" because it showcases the punk influence mixed with classical influence. Plus it's fucking awesome.  WesleyDodds 19:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

For "mainstream dominance" I think we can take out the Iron Maiden cover since we have some Iron Maiden media there with the soundclip. We could probably have one or two more soundclips for that section. Possible suggestions include: Van Halen, solo Ozzy, Motley Crue, Guns 'N Roses. Also, the Trivium soundclip seems more appropriate for the "Recent trends" section. For nu metal I'm thinking the clip should be Korn's "Freak on a Leash" or Slipknot's "Wait and Bleed". WesleyDodds 23:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Campbell's Soup Cans
Previously you stated support at Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans. Debate has been reset. I would appreciate confirmation of your support. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 22:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Nick Drake Main Page nomination
Good luck on the nomination! I hope both our nominations get selected since that would be quite a coup for the folk music genre! Woo hoo! :-) Kmzundel 12:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I can be patient when necessary! ;-)  Kmzundel 20:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

teh Cur3
You wouldn't happen to have any Cure soundclips would you? The Cure is the current Alternative WikiProject collaboration, and we could use a few more. WesleyDodds 04:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Early stuff, later stuff, important stuff. Thete's quite a few Cure soundclips that would be relevant. A few off the top of my head (that aren't there already) include "Killing An Arab", "Boys Don't Cry", "One Hundred Years", "Friday I'm in Love", and "The End of the World." Use your discretion on which ones to add. WesleyDodds 07:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I just came back from vacation and on the train ride there and back I wittled my time away by finally reading all the Cure articles in my copy of the NME Originals Goth issue, so I'm going to add a bunch of quotes and citations soon. WesleyDodds 07:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Rip out what you think needs to go. I also happen to have Never Enough; I just haven't gotten round to reading it. Most of my time browsing through it has consisted of being tickled by Robert Smith's wedding photo (seriously, Robert? Couldn't you at least have worn nice shoes?)


 * I'm starting to fill out the new sections I created, such as "Musical style" and "legacy". Add any important aspect you can find. I'm also tryig to figure out a way to include this quote from a 2005 issue of SPIN I have about Smith's opinion of the whole goth question. I've thought about cutting it down and just making a quote box in the "Musical style section". Here's the complete response to the interviewer:


 * "Spin: Whether or not you consider yourself goth, it's always going to be part of your legacy, isn't it?


 * "Robert Smith: No, I don't think it will. These days, if the major publications in the U.S. or the U.K. ever call us goth, it's always qualified. Goth pop or goth rock. Goth alt-rockers. Goth alt-pop stars. It's never just goth on its own. The goth tag is slowly disappearing. I think people are beginning to realize that it isn't really a good way of summing up what the Cure does. But when we did the MTV Europe Icon show last year, I wanted Marilyn Manson to host it. So I'm not denying . . . [Long pause] I'm quite happy to embrace it. It doesn't bother me in the slightest."


 * I find this quote hilarious because it starts off "No, goth is too limiting a term to describe the band" and ends up "I'm happy with the band being called goth". WesleyDodds 22:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

We can probably use this Guitar World article to help fill out the "Musical style" section. WesleyDodds 03:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I usually only buy a magazine if there's a feature that interests me (which makes me wonder really why did I pass on that Joy Division Mojo cover story last month?). I have nearly two years' worth of Spin issues just because I got a free subscription for going to CMJ two years in a row. I might still be able to find it around here; we have a magazine store in town that carries a lot fo stuff. On a related topic, I've found I really don't care about the Cure's history prior to "A Forest" (given I've been filling out references from that period onwards). I might need you to fix up any discrepancies and citations needed in the "Formation and early years" section.

In other news, we've still got to finish referencing the Recent Trends and Themes sections on heavy metal music. Aside from that, we've got to format all the external link references. Then we're pretty much done, unless you can think of anything else that needs fixing. WesleyDodds 23:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I'll work that in over the next few days. I also dig the Morrissey diss ("At least I've got two songs, 'The Lovecats' and 'Faith'"). WesleyDodds 00:36, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Black Metal
So...wtf?? Other people (including yourself) are allowed to edit the article, but Im not? Dude. As far as I can see, youre not even a Wikipedia mod or anything. I should not have to raise a conversation on the talk page when noone else contributes to it as it is an absolutely pathetic summary of black metal, and I already have rewritten it. Why cant I? I dont care if the article is "under review"...this is fixing it...Isilioth 06:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Celestiial
Hi there Ceoil. I have been in contact with LuciferMorgan of late, and he said to me that you were an editor who was particuarly good at reviewing music articles, and so, if you have time, I would very much appreciate it if you could take a look at Celestiial, which I have been writing recently, and make any reccomendations you have as to ways to improve the article. Thanks. J Milburn 18:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. I have the album myself, I have never bothered uploading sound files before- could well be a good time to start! I look forward to your comments. J Milburn 17:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Bam Thwok
The problem is that I can't see to find any professional reviews, written or web. All I can find is blog reviews; that user review on BBC seems to the most reliable one I can find. Should I remove the critical reaction parts, or acknowledge they are fan reviews? CloudNine 19:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * For now, I've acknowledged that the reviews come from fans. CloudNine 08:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Homer's Enemy
It was giving me quite a challenge as well; I've been pressed for time lately, so I haven't had the time to correct anything but the most obvious issues. &mdash; Deckiller 22:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it looks good. &mdash; Deckiller 21:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

SLTS
Thanks for all the edits to Smells Like Teen Spirit. You wouldn't happen to have any UK press reviews of the song would you? I'm particularly curious as to what the original NME and Melody Maker reviews of the single have to say, if it was even reviewed before the album broke through. WesleyDodds 00:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * My list of sources I own has prompted the creation of this, so if you feel like adding anything, that would be great.


 * I haven't read the talk pages, but I'm sure the whole "DaddyCool" thing is misguidely humorous. The other day I was combing through my contributions logs and said to myself, "Hey! I never posted the the talk page of some person named . . .oh. Well, that's something." WesleyDodds 01:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I can also use these for the Nevermind article. Do you happen to have the day for the New York Times article at the top? WesleyDodds 11:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I just replied to your last point in the peer review. Thanks for all the help. WesleyDodds 14:17, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * It's up. WesleyDodds 14:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative music and sources
As part of the Alternative music WikiProject, we're gathering a list of sources on this page. Could you take a look and perhaps add any written references you have access to? Thanks! CloudNine 10:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Representative Peer
Amazing work with that article! &mdash; Deckiller 14:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks again for the copyedit to RIB, also feel free to put Angel of Death under "Articles contributed to:" if you wish, because your copy edit it brought up the writing standard. Thanks again (Seeing Slayer this Thursday :D) M3tal H3ad 02:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the GHUA ce, you probably already but it's the next FA goal. M3tal H3ad 07:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks again!, some of them errors had been there awhile :$. M3tal H3ad 12:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well the coverart and title section needs to be expanded, and some more info added to recording (there's a 23 minutes audio interview with Hanneman and Araya - all they talk about is the album), and there was an interview with King (i think) where he says he attended the Grammy awards but was at the bar 90% of the time and didn't care about the nomination (need to find it), and when Lucifer has some free time he will add some more, that's about it, unless you can think of anything else? :O —The preceding unsigned comment was added by M3tal H3ad (talk • contribs) 13:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC).

This charming page
Hey, given you have all those NME issues, you might want to take a look sometime at "This Charming Man". It used to be a Featured Article, but was delisted soon after appearing on the front page because of its small size and concerns about POV. Certainly not a pressing matter, but keep the page in mind. WesleyDodds 05:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * A wonderful song imho, and it would be a worthy FA. Any help you could give would certainly be appreciated by this editor. --kingboyk 10:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

The Orb

 * Wooo! The Orb is now a featured article.  Thanks for all the feedback and work you've put into the article.  Have a good one!  Wickethewok 06:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Butthole Surfers
Hey there, just wanted to FYI you to my latest comment to your comment on the Surfers' FA nomination page -- thanks again for the offer, greatly appreciated!

From the FA nom page: "Thanks, Ceoil, I gladly accept your offer -- fresh eyes & a fresh perspective never hurt in a situation like this, and I've largely been going it alone (outside of some source info) since the revamp began. Sorry too for reverting your complete edit from last night, but after the glaring error in the lead was brought to my attention by another reviewer, and not having time to go through the entire edit at that point, I felt it was best to revert it all and go back and re-add later on. Thanks for your criticism & help! The Haiku Master 22:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)"

The Haiku Master 22:54, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Do you want to divide up copyediting and reference-formatting in a certain way so we don't get lost? WesleyDodds 09:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm a little bogged down this week too (and on top of that I think I'm getting rather sick). I'll do what I can. WesleyDodds 10:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Genesis
Hi Ceoil, thanks for all your help with the Genesis article. I have not been able to contribute as much as I would have liked to the process because of work commitments (unfortunately, I have been fairly inactive here on Wikipedia this past year). Incidently, I do agree that there are too many ogg files and many of the ones that should in fact still be there are far too long in length. I will try to work on deleting unnecessary ogg files over the weekend, but I don't think I will have time to edit/alter the lengths of the ones that I feel we should still keep in the article. We may just need to delete those ogg files altogether. Again, thanks for your help AreJay 02:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello again...as promised, I've gone through and looked at all the ogg files and I've narrowed down the list from the 15 that are embedded into the article to 6. The ones that I have chosen to not delete have specific importance to the article and to the band's history (first single, first number one hit, critically acclaimed album, etc). You can find the list of removed ogg files here. Please let me know if you have any questions.  Thanks AreJay 02:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

List of songs containing covert references to real musicians
You may want to weigh in at Deletion review/Log/2007 April 15, since you were involved in a previous discussion of this article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I feel so extraordinary . ..
A couple of things:


 * This weeks collaboration is the guys Interpol, the Killers, and even U2 wish they could be. I know you're busy right now, so i'll take care of the heavy lifting; throw in cites and quotes that you think are appropriate. It's a great excuse to watch my New Order DVDs again anyways. I've got like two or three magazine articles on hand, but probably nowhere near what you have available.


 * I've copyedited most of Butthole Surfers. I think the "Live performances" section should be completely rearranged, but I'm not quite sure how it should be structured.


 * Just because it's silly: Deathrocker/DaddyKindsoul has now moved to the alternative rock page to start trouble (it's like he's going through all the rock genres one by one). Of course he's been reverting me and delivering statements on the talk page that verge on personal attacks. Whatever. Hilarity is him trying to argue that grunge, post-grunge, and pop-punk aren't considered alternative in the UK, which is followed by CloudNine responding in all his Britishness and me pointing out the BBC and British authors are cited in the article. It's like he's not even trying anymore.


 * Speaking of Joy Division, once I finish up with The Cure in a month or two I can work on that as a joint project with you, if you want to. The NME saw fit to include Joy Division in the goth reprint collection I've listed on the sources list; it contains interviews, single and album reviews, and even Ian Curtis' obiturary. On the other hand, I'm counting on the possibilty that you own Touching from a Distance, because I don't (I actually bought it for my brother for his birthday).

If you need help with anything, let me know. WesleyDodds 05:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm going to do a little bit more cleanup on New Order, but starting tomorrow I'll be out of town for a few days. References have been harder to find than I thought, and I can't find my issue of Spin that discusses Curtis' death and the start of New Order. If you've got anything you would be able to add while I'm gone that would be great. WesleyDodds 23:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Bradley Joseph
Hi Ceoil, if you have some spare time i was hoping you could look at this article on a musician which has been an FAC for almost 3 weeks and only got two replies, one of them being from myself. I commented on he excessive use of samples but can't see anything else major. Maybe you could take a look? the FAC is here, if you're busy i understand (I've been slacking off a bit because of work :$), anyway thanks gooday to you! :) M3tal H3ad 07:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Pixies
I gave it a quick runthrough, but it needs a bit more work to satisfy the FA criteria, as I'm sure you already know. Namely, it lacks neutrality a bit; I don't see any negative criticism. The other major issue is an inconsistency in punctuation inside and outside quotes, but that's trivial. &mdash; Deckiller 20:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Battle of Greece
Hi! I am almost finishing the rewriting of the above article, and I soon intend to nominate it for FA (it is my first article about a battle!). I have not yet proof-read and rewritten the last section ("Homage") of the article, but most of the hard work is already done (and to be fair, User:Periklis* was the one who brought the article to A-Class status). Despite that, I think the article is ready for a copy-editing by a native English speaker. You are obviously one of the best in this domain. So, I would be careful if you could give the article a copy-editing, and, of course, any additional remarks for further remarks are more than welcome. Thanks in advance!--Yannismarou 19:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. On Friday I'm leaving for a week in Europe; so it is not so urgent. I'll be happy to help you, but I'm afraid I'll be able to offer detailed remarks on the article on May 6 (because of this journey). Until I leave, I'll try to find some time to have a quick look at the article. Cheers!--Yannismarou 19:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Still Reigning
Hi Ceoil, could you give this article a quick run through if you have the time? I wanna take it to FA, yes it's short but it's comprehensive ;) The conception and production sections are a bit dodgy worded, and I'm not sure how to word it maybe you can help out. Thanks. M3tal H3ad 11:07, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Cheers M3tal H3ad 11:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

How you do that trick
Do you know if the NME ever did a single review of "Just Like Heaven"? I've got the Melody Maker review, but I can't seem to find an NME review online. WesleyDodds 11:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! WesleyDodds 21:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

That's ok. I just wanted to see if the "reception" section could be filled out more. I'll just go ahead and clean that up regardless. Aside from the "reception" section, do you think it's ready for a GA nomination? WesleyDodds 06:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Royal Assent
Ceoil, I'm sorry I never made it back there after the April 2007 nor'easter. I just wanted to commend you for another fine job. Please don't feel like you need to respond; I'm looking at everything I have to get through on my talk page and thinking of going to hide under the sofa. or just archiving it all without even looking at everything I missed :-) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Lol, I'll leave your talk alone, considering its littered with sections like "Sandy, help me", "Puzzled", & "Save the whales...". Saving the whales is a BIG ask of someone who has spent the last week drying carpets ;) Ceoil 21:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * LOL - good one ! Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Blasphemous rumors
This has really nothing to do with any articles we're currently woking on, it's just something I've been wondering about: is Depeche Mode only considered alternative/indie/whatever-you-wanna-call-it rock in the US? Personally it's taken me a while to accept that Depeche Mode are alternative rock (growing up I always thought of them as solely a New Wave act, and they did start out as part of the New Romantic movements), but there's enough sources from the late 80s and early 90s that label them as such that I've had to reorient my thinking (let's not even get into the fact that they really have no musical roots in common with virtually every other 80s alternative/indie band, coming from New Romantic/synthpop and all; that's always bugged me about labeling them alternative rock . . .). Nevertheless, the general impression I get is while they had a fanatical "alternative" following here in the States in the late 1980s and were considered an edgy underground act, over in the UK everyone basically saw them as the synthpop equivalent of the Backstreet Boys trying to be "grown up" and "edgy". I guess it comes down to a lot of Americans first experiencing Depeche Mode via Black Celebration and Music for the Masses, while you guys had them since Speak & Spell.

By the way, I'm really into Depeche Mode right now. I ended up buying the CD single for "Strangelove" when I already have two versions of the song on two different releases, for God's sake.WesleyDodds 11:49, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * It just occured to me that the difficulty in sourcing New Order is probably in large part due to that whole "refusing to do interviews" thing they had going for years.


 * I can at least explain the spelling and Seinfeld. The others make as much sense to me as they do to you. WesleyDodds 23:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm reasonably familiar with Viz because I read posts and articles by a Scottish comics critic, but I've never read an issue myself and I can't say I've ever noticed a copy at my local comic book store (they possibly do carry them, it's just I've never noticed or bothered to look for it). I've noticed British comics writers are prone to referencing rock music, especially alternative/indie rock, in mainstream comics. For example, Grant Morrison had an issue of Doom Patrol titled "Going Underground" that featured a train conductor named "Driver 8", and once had a Justice League villain talk in Smiths lyrics.


 * I do plan to work on Depeche Mode at some point, but I don't forsee it happening any time soon since there's other articles that are higher priority for me. Still, it's actually pretty far along, and I own one of the books not yet used as a source for inline citations. Maybe I'll get to it in the fall or winter. WesleyDodds 10:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, and about the way we Americans spell: Noah Webster WesleyDodds 11:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, let me know when you take the Three Studies article to peer review so I can lend you a hand. WesleyDodds 11:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, the section on 1980 will be depressing as hell, but I am filled with giddiness at the prospect of quoting Bono from the NewOrderStory documentary. "Joy Division . . . we worshipped them. They were originals of the species that later became goth! Never mind . . ." "What was with all the Nazi imagery? --sucking sound-- Whiskey!" WesleyDodds 08:06, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Genesis (band)
How do you feel about this one? Are you able to do the last bit of work or should it go? Thanks for all your great work lately. Marskell 08:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Related: you keep writing the possessives of years like "...1974s The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway...". Shouldn't there be apostrophes here? –Unint 22:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Responded on my talk, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 23:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I restored the broken link through the Internet Archive copy; did you delete the references to the box set booklets for any particular reason? (I assume "Revelations on Broadway" is part of the Archive #1 book as well...) –Unint 23:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, sounds good right now. I don't have Archive #1, so I don't know what information it contains. I'll check Archive #2... some time in the future. Good night to you. –Unint 23:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

God Hates Us All
Hey Ceoil, you said you wanted to ce GHUA before it went to FA, so just letting you know it's ready. Looks like your busy at the moment, so i don't mind waiting a few days or so, no rush to get it done. Have a good day :)

Reply
The Daddy does not necessary agree with your assessment. Although the Daddy will say this; some less established users who edit this site may be very familiar with one genre or “scene” in which they have devoted their lives and time to (Queercore for example) but choose to edit genres above their knowledge and above their board. This is when we get misinformation from people who are not experts in the area, which can lead to heated discussions.

The Daddy however, as a student of the arts and as a musical guru has a vast and fruitful knowledge in a wide variety of genres; this can be a blessing, but can also attract heated discussion with characters described earlier in this message when their ignorance and/or incorrect "contributions" are revealed (always with suitable sources of course). Also the Daddy's inability to lick arse and try to enter a silly little "clique", while instead seeking only hard facts and correct information to make this website the greatest in its field may have something to do with that.

It can be hard work, but thankfully Wikipedia has other editors like me fighting the righteous fight to make this place so great. Regards. - Daddy Kindsoul 02:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your tasteless personal attack

 * Nice try kiddo, although your personal attacks are much more amusing when you are depressingly moping around Wikipedia saying “sigh” all the time LOL. You should really disist from such comments towards me when you have been previously warned not to troll me by an admin, its against policy.


 * Regardless of the fact that my last edit summary did not mention consensus, but simply that I was re-adding a tag from an admin, that some emo-centrist had vandalised. A consensus that emo, is hardcore not punk has already been achieved here and is described in full on its own article; emo (music). And it was re-adding of a cite tag which remained unsourced, not a full removal. If you minded your own damn business, or had something better to do than sit up all night refreshing my contributions page and cyber-stalking me to any article I edit, and actually bothered to read the content of edits then you might have noticed this.- The Daddy 00:07, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Your (presumably drunken) ramblings on my talk are making little to no sense, don't bother replying unless you are going to discuss content. What is the point in showing up on Wikipedia if you have no interest in article content?.. this isn't a socialising joint, as enlightening as it has been.

You're talking to the Daddy, so please conduct your reply in a respectful manner if you're going to discuss articles with I. - The Daddy 00:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Where is the attempt at humour? Anyways, the Daddy has better things to do... like actually contributing to articles and doing my bit to make this place as great a source of information as it is. So if you're quite finished... - The Daddy 00:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha; you have other users to troll, I understand; see you back on TemplatePunkbox when your block log allows, ie tuesday morning; 10:19am; it'll be great! Ceoil 00:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

The Daddy troll users?... somebody call the irony police; Ceoil, you are the one who trolled me on my talkpage with uncouth personal attacks such as "tool" and lisp-suggestive comments like "Has it occured to to you that instead of authomatic reverts, you would be better spening mammys money on medical research".

You contacted me, you followed me, you are the one trolling the Daddy here. I am merely attempting to contribute to articles which need some of the expert touch.... goodness is my interest, kindness... not whatever you are trying to do following me around and on my talk. Hostility is not an interest of mine. - The Daddy 00:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Its bad enough that you personally attacked me on my user page. But now you're fidling with things I've wrote, changing them to completely different things, as a form of personal attack as you did here?here is in violation of WP:NPA, I suggest you read it or you may end up getting blocked. Please consider investing in a more product hobby than trolling my edits. Its rather sad, and I'm starting to feel sorry for you. - The Daddy 01:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

It seems you are unfamiliar with Wikipedia policy, simple vandalism does not count as a revert. Blatantly attacking me, changing my messages so it says something completely different and derogatory towards me (calling my edits "specious" and blanking my message) certainly falls under that. Keep it up, prove my point that you've got nothing better to do than troll me. How very mature. - The Daddy 02:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Just keep proving my point, I'm keeping a log of it all just to let you know. - The Daddy 02:20, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

You chose to contact/insult me; if you think I'm going to just let you violate Wikipedia's policies (WP:NPA, WP:VAN) where you change my own words on talkpages to commit slander against me & defame my good character, then you are very wrong. - The Daddy 02:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

And now you're vandalising my user page removing my userboxes, as well as not only continuing to change my own words on here to slander me, but you're still commiting vile personal attacks in the edit summary while you do it. When are you going to wake up and realise this kind of behaviour is not acceptable? - The Daddy 03:02, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Deathrocker, this is getting boring; can we just not let the facts say for them selves. You have evidence, so do I. As you suggest; AIN can figure it out. Ceoil 03:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

All you have to do is stop changing my own words on here to personal attacks against me, and comitting other general person attacks/acts of vandalism against me on Wikipedia. If it is boring, then stop violating. Simple. - The Daddy 03:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If its "too late" for you to follow our policies such as WP:NPA and WP:VAN then why bother coming here anyway? It seems obvious from tonight that you aren't interested in Wikipedia for the articles. - The Daddy 03:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

What about my message was there not to understand? It seems to be simple English to me; clarify if you will. - The Daddy 03:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Well that certainly isn't the case. My only interest is adding information/contributing to this website in a constructive manner. Also, I don't see how your opinion would somehow give you a right to violate policy in regards to personal attacks, etc. - The Daddy 03:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time seeing what your comment has to do with you continuing to slander me by changing my words on here. Policy is policy.. we don't violate it just to attack someone for the hell of it, that isn't what Wikipedia is for. - The Daddy 04:06, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You're going to have a very hard time explaining all of this with your recent further attacks suchs as "section title made by a spanner" and "wanker", and as I said don't worry its all been logged. - The Daddy 04:59, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't deface/vandalise my messages in an attempt to cover up your poor behaviour as you did here. - The Daddy 21:43, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You won't violate Wikipedia's policies such as WP:VAN and WP:NPA. - The Daddy 21:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

You really have nothing better to do with life than violate policy and commit personal attacks do you? There you go making me feel sorry for you again. - The Daddy 23:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You're a joke.... LMAO @ you "playing the victim" all of a sudden. Just to recap, you came to my talkpage to personally attack me, you have continued your personal attacks here as shown above and you are using bully boy tactics by A) cyber-stalking my edits around Wikipedia and messing around with them B) defacing my messages on talkpages to slander me. Yet you have the nerve to play the victim and pretend you're some sort of poor inocent editor when all I've seen you do is violate our policies?... gimmie a break; its funny to a point then it just becomes pathetic. - The Daddy 00:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Unlike you. I'm actually interested in contributing work to articles at the moment... I already logged all the above as I told you, so if you want to open a RFC where you try to explain how you think calling editors a "tool", "wanker", "spanner" and defacing their messages is "acceptable" then go ahead, it will no doubt by the source of much amusement. - The Daddy 00:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Regarding "although spanner is a compliment in Ireland, and means you have a nice bottom".


 * That isn't true and I know so for a fact, but even if it were; you think sexual harassment is acceptable on Wikipedia? - The Daddy 00:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Its an insult/attack in relation to intelligence. - The Daddy 00:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC) Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. - The Daddy