User talk:CloversMallRat/Archive 1

Kansas City Zoological Park
Hi. I see you've put quite a bit of work into this article; I read it a bit, and some of it sounds like it was taken directly from a website. I couldn't find where that might be; I just wanted to alert you, however, to Wikipedia's copyright policies; if this is the case, the page will need to be reworded. Thanks. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 23:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and no, I did all the descriptions of the sections, and named all the snack, gift, and cafe places on my own. But I did get the histroy from the Kansas City Zoo's website, same for the IMAX and Events. I look on their website every now and then to update the events or IMAX movies.CloversMallRat 21:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As long as no wording is taken directly from the website (i.e., you use your own wording), everything should be fine. -Patstuart(talk)(contribs) 21:55, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I reworded it and left out some info, making it shorter CloversMallRat 21:58, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Antioch Center
A "" template has been added to the article Antioch Center, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. DGG 19:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

New Article
A tag has been placed on Kelso's Pizza & Pub, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Dlh-stablelights 08:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Looks like an advert on first glance... Although I may hav been a bit hasty. The first sentance seems pretty POV, which is what flagged it up. I'll tidy it up a bit and remove the tag. Dlh-stablelights 08:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! ^-^ I was just adding to the Encyclopedia 'cause I was kinda trying to relieve myself... I won't get into it but I just experienced what hackers do to forums... >_< anyways, I was just helping out, and pardon my mistakes plz

Speedy deletion of Kelso's Pizza & Pub
A tag has been placed on Kelso's Pizza & Pub, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD g11.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Postoak 03:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Pizza Shoppe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.  W ODU P  03:38, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Kelso's Pizza & Pub requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Accounting4Taste 21:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Pizza Shoppe requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Accounting4Taste 21:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

^ STOP DELETING IT!!! It's not fair, they don't lack importane just because they're not widespread companies... haters CloversMallRat 21:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

They do lack importune. Unfortianatley, we cannot have articles about non-notable places. They're not important. And we are not "haters."  Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake)  21:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

What's the point of being able to edit and add stuff if everything is taken down? Do you think I'd take down "Bob's pizza place" in California that has only one location and is useless, but you added it because it's a notable pizza place WHERE YOU LIVE CloversMallRat 21:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Dude, calm down. It's no big deal. We talking about encyclopedia articles, not closing pizza shops. A pizza shop is a pizza shop, and unfortianatley it only wastes space in an encyclopedia.  Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake)  21:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * In order to demonstrate notability, you might try to find an article in a magazine, for instance, that says that this company makes the best pizza in the area. I'm not saying that that would guarantee the article would be retained, but that's the kind of thing that's required.  You haven't asserted notability -- you've just said that the company exists.  If you can assert notabliity and verify it, that would be what was required.  I hope this helps.  If I can help further, leave a note on my talk page. Accounting4Taste 22:00, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I sorta understand Accounting4Taste, but isn't giving the "official website address" to the pizza place all the proof needed? I mean, it gives out the important stuff - and another thing, couldn't help noticing that Sheridan's Frozen Custard remains intact, yet it is the same as what I've been posting (a local Kansas City area restaurant), but it also has nothing like magazine articles and such CloversMallRat 22:25, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sheridan's Frozen Custard is a whole chain of locations and the place you're talking about only has like 2.  Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake)  22:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * What an organization says about itself -- or a person says about him/herself -- isn't proof of notability. In Wikipedia terms, the only way to demonstrate notability is by independent, third-party, arm's-length sources.   Read up on Verifiability.  And I'm afraid "other articles exist" isn't accepted as a reason for keeping an article here -- all that means is that nobody's gotten around to deleting or improving other articles yet.  If you feel this other article is spam, or non-notable, propose it for deletion and see what happens.  Accounting4Taste 22:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

@JetLover: Kelso's does have only 2, as numerous locations have come and gone - but Pizza Shoppe has like 15 buddy, do your research first >_< Including Nebraska and Oklahoma too

Anyways, I'm re-adding Kelso's, I found a magazine article for Kansas City - thx Account4Taste!! CloversMallRat 22:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No promises -- it's up to an administrator, not me -- but that's the way to demonstrate notability. The more, the better. Glad I could help, and thanks for trying to work within Wikipedia's boundaries.  Accounting4Taste 22:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Please be civil, Clovers.  Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake)  22:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure, as long as you don't correct me when your wrong, then it'll be a-ok ^-^

Thanks much Acc4Taste, your great! :) CloversMallRat 22:52, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I mean putting the angry >_< face.  Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake)  22:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

To me it means "pinch" - like when your irritated, I use it a lot on forums, some of them use the emoticon, and they use :pinch: = >_< so... CloversMallRat 23:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. -- Finngall talk  23:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

How is it inapropritate?? Uhhh... Sheridan's is still there and it has almost nothing on the page! Also, I gave legitimate resources: A review in a Kansas City newspaper CloversMallRat 23:18, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * One: If a single review were enough to establish notability, then we'd have entries on every restaurant in the world here. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not merely a repository of indiscriminate information.  From what I see so far, it's just another pizza parlor.
 * Two: Due the nature of Wikipedia, where pretty much anyone can create and/or edit an article and not every article gets the attention it deserves, the mere existence of an article does not constitute any sort of "Seal of Approval" from the community. Because of this, using the existence or quality of article X to justify the existence of article Y at best carries little weight and at worst can be an exercise in madness.  With regard to Sheridan's, I'd rate it as shaky at best and will consider nominating it for deletion myself. -- Finngall  talk  23:32, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

So, what's wrong with having every restaurant? I've seen some pretty useless pages here, so one about a restaurant shouldn't be slandered

And I'm not talking about that page - Sheridan's Frozen Custard, not simply "Sheridan's"


 * Why not every restaurant? Because it is the consensus of the community here that the subjects of articles should meet a certain standard of notability--those standards can be found here.  Also, as an encyclopedia, all information herein should be verifiable from multiple independent reliable sources.  One follows from the other--if those sources don't exist, then the subject is likely not notable enough for inclusion.  Please also see What Wikipedia is not.


 * Sheridan's Frozen Custard: the article is certainly lacking in sources and I've flagged it as such, which should call it to the attention of more potential editors. I'm more hesitant to call for its deletion outright since at least it's a chain with locations in multiple states, whereas Kelso's is a single parlor.  But if nobody steps up to improve it, then it should go.


 * Useless pages: One, again, if a useless page exists, it doesn't necessarily mean it should--it may simply mean nobody's gotten around to deleting it yet. Two, "useless" can be subjective--what is useless to me is not necessarily useless to you or someone else. -- Finngall  talk  00:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok - that's true, but why did Pizza Shoppe get deleted in that case? Like Sheridan's, it has 20 or so locations in Kansas/Missouri, 1 in Oklahoma, and 1 in Nebraska - however, I actually gave more info and such on it - so, if anything it should definitely stay

And Kelso's has 2 locations, but it's still notable for the city it's located in - but the point is, I verified it with a review, and if you need more - I'll look for more, I really want to contribute without ppl telling me something is useless when it may very well be to someone here: I'm in Kansas City, most of ya'll probably are Texans or New Yorkers, etc. - people that wouldn't know about it, just like I wouldn't know about things there CloversMallRat 00:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Kelso's Pizza & Pub
A template has been added to the article Kelso's Pizza & Pub, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please tag it with db-author. JodyByak, yak, yak 02:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kelso's Pizza & Pub
Kelso's Pizza & Pub, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Kelso's Pizza & Pub satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Kelso's Pizza & Pub and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Kelso's Pizza & Pub during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Into The Fray  T / C  03:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

It said to remove it if I suggest it not to be deleted though... ? Anyways, I wrote in the talk page of it CloversMallRat 03:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You were correct to remove the prod template, but I do not feel that the article satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines. If you disagree, that's what the AfD (article for deletion) process is about.  You should discuss it here.  I note that the article has been speedily deleted in the past.  Into The Fray   T / C  03:08, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Kansas City
Hi. You may want to check out WikiProject Kansas City. -- Jreferee  (Talk) 03:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I joined - thanks again!! CloversMallRat 03:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The Chain (Deana Carter album)
Hi there - this article appears to have no content apart from the infobox. I will add in a brief introductory sentence, but i don't know enough to write even a stub article for this! Could you help, please? Best wishes - Fritzpoll (talk) 21:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

^ I just started it, I'm workin on it... couldn't help but notice that she has only one album of the 5 with an article -- so I thought I'd make some CloversMallRat (talk) 21:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea - my advice would be to add text straight off when creating the article, so that it doesn't look like an empty space! BEst wishes - Fritzpoll (talk) 22:48, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ^_^ Ok... yeah, when I created it I only put the infobox in first

Notability
Have you read the notability criteria? In order to meet them, a subject must be discussed in independent references that confirm its importance. In the case of a local restaurant like Pizza Shoppe, that means, not the yellow pages, and not even the kinds of local restaurant reviews that all restaurants get, but articles that clearly show why this restaurant is so important that an international encyclopedia is incomplete without an article about it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

But it has World-famous dressing... CloversMallRat (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Pizza Shoppe
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Pizza Shoppe, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Pizza Shoppe. FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The dressing is famous, makes it notable... CloversMallRat (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, if the dressing is famous, that might be an assertion of notability. So all you need to do is find articles about the dressing in two or three food magazines, and add them as references. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Food magazines? you mean online? CloversMallRat (talk) 21:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ideally, yes- most print magazines have web pages, and many make articles available. All articles need good, independent references, like books, newspapers, and magazines.  Have any books been written about this restaurant?  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Better Get to Livin'
The song may indeed be her "comeback" single (notwithstanding that she charted two duets in 2006), but really, what else is there to say about it besides that it got to #48 and that a music video was made? The page on Better Get to Livin' is a permanent stub, and per WP:MUSIC's criteria for song pages, it would be best to just merge the information to Backwoods Barbie — that's common procedure for marginally notable songs. (By the way, it's best to always use an edit summary, especially when doing something like undoing a redirect.) Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 14:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry CloversMallRat (talk) 17:00, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kansas City skyline picture
As a member of WikiProject Kansas City you may be interested in a skyline picture debate taking place at Talk:Kansas City, Missouri. If you would like, please stop by and voice your opinion. Grey Wanderer (talk) 18:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Bucky Covington
Template:Bucky Covington has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 13:31, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I still think it's a little too early for Bucky to have a template. Kellie has five chart singles (counting the Santa Baby cover) and an album. Generally, I use the rule of five; a template should probably have at least five directly related articles (e.g., four singles and an album). All three of Bucky's singles are off one album, so I think it's kind of redundant to have a template now. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:34, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Redirect of Caitlin & will
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Caitlin & will, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Caitlin & will is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Caitlin & will, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that '''this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here''' CSDWarnBot (talk) 01:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Can You Duet
Template:Can You Duet has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Can You Duet
How do you think this template can be added onto? Only one of the winners is notable, for one. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 16:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you have an answer? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:02, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Related topics that I've prob left out... and I based it off of American Idol temp - so I cut out a bunch of stuff and made it fit to how I thought Can You Duet looked... CloversMallRat (talk) 03:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Meh, I still don't think there's much else to add. Only one of the winners seems to be notable at the moment. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I've added more to it CloversMallRat (talk) 11:30, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Non-article links in Template:Billy Ray Cyrus
Navigation boxes are for navigation to actual articles so consist of links to articles only. See WP:NAVBOX and Template:navbox instructions. Other navigation boxes not following the rules means they should be fixed to conform, not used to justify doing other navboxes wrongly. The purpose of navboxes is not to provide primary information - that is for articles. This really shouldn't be to much of a restriction. Piped links to the actual information about an entry would get the entry in the navbox and still allow wikilinks to where the information about that entry resides. --NrDg 04:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

So propose an alternative, don't just revert
The limit is 18. Which 7 would you delete instead?&mdash;Kww(talk) 04:13, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

None, they are all important in their own way ^.^ I propose raising the damned limit; 18 is quite low and unreasonable CloversMallRat (talk) 04:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * 18 is unreasonably low? I'd set it closer to five or six, myself. Follow normal procedure, then. Go over to Wikipedia talk:Record charts, and try to gain support for raising the limit. If you succeed, fine. Until you actually gain consensus to raise the limit, either choose 7 charts to remove, or stop reverting people that make the article conform with existing guidelines.

edit warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. &mdash;Kww(talk) 04:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

I stopped and I made a proposition on the charts pg thingy instead CloversMallRat (talk) 04:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

An achievable proposal
I'm surprised that you haven't comment at WT:Record charts.&mdash;Kww(talk) 21:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Little Big Town
I can see your reasoning for splitting off the discography. However, it's generally best to ask consensus before creating sub-pages of an article. Personally, I don't think it should be split off, as it's not that long (other, longer discographies, such as McBride & the Ride, have never been split off). If you still think that the discography should be split back off, I would suggest creating a new section on the talk page, asking other editors what they think. Creating sub-pages can be a controversial move at times (although really, a discography is pretty low on the controversy scale), so it's good practice to always ask consensus before splitting anything off. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I made a section on the Talk page. CloversMallRat (talk) 17:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Sara Evans discography
I noticed you and Dottiewestfan1 are having disagreements over the formatting of Sara Evans' discography. First of all, featured-list discogrpahies, such as Diamond Rio discography and Carrie Underwood discography, use the format Dottiewestfan1 has been trying to add, so that seems to be the preferred format. If you think it should be different, once again I say take it up on the talk page instead of edit warring. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 22:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Sara Evans' discography idea is derived from some the most detailed and acknowledged discographies of musical artists on Wikipedia. When people reserach a musical artist, it is especially helpful for them to see an overview of the album in the discography's album table, which includes its release date, record label, format, etc. It is the preferred and expected way of designing and making album tables on Wikipedia. It just took some time for country music pages to pick it up. For example, notice the detailed descriptions on the album tables of the Carrie Underwood and the Janet Jackson discographies. Like TenPoundHammer suggests, create a discussion on Sara Evans' discography talk page about the album listing before putting things into actions. However for now this is how it should be. You should have messaged me days before to let me know your disagreements, never be araid to share what you feel. Have a pleasant day and I hope there will be no more disagreements. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 02:50, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Third Single
Please take it up with the admin, but do not check reverting. Creation of the single is actually blocked at the moment, because we have serious doubts about the reliability. Please work with us, not against us, while we sort this out. — Realist  2  03:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Deana Carter discography
I see you got Deana Carter's discography under format, nice work. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 20:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Discography format
Yes, all the albums are suppost be bolded. If you want you can bold the discographies that been unbolded by the user. I think it's a new user anyway that's not familar with the formatting details, so maybe you could message him and tell him how everything is formatted. I'm a little busy to message him because I'mn working on formatting some of the older artists' discographies like Kitty Wells, Charley Pride, and Ray Price. But again I think if you tell the user how they should be formatted he will know how to do it for the future. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that I don't agree with you. You have to give me a better reason for adding boldness, or I will keep reverting.
 * I have my reasons here:

Hopefully you will see my points. Please give me your points ASAP. Langdon (talk) 05:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)i7114080
 * 1) the purpose of bolden something is to make it clear. Well now the album boxes are not messy, because we now only put release dates in them. Also they are small. So the title do not need to be highlighted.
 * 2) this page here WikiProject Discographies/style does not talk about the boldness of the title. I really do not like this page, but I respect it. So why does it have to be bold?
 * 3) Do not say "Oh, every page does that" or something like that. What they do on those pages are not really right.


 * I messaged the user who wrote things above me. I don't think he's listening to anybody though. Dottiewest1fan (talk) 20:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Retail wiki
Hey, I noticed you've been the only active user on the retail wiki. Any ideas as how to get more traffic there? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 01:16, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you think we should notify other users here about the presence of this wiki? It wouldn't hurt, and I'm sure it would get more traffic, since unlike Wikipedia, the retail wiki is meant to have those store location lists we love so much. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:20, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Deana Carter
The live album isn't notable. Trace Adkins, Joe Diffie, Mark Chesnutt, etc. had live albums on the same label, and none of those albums are notable either (no sources). Therefore, since we don't list theirs, I don't think we should list Deana's either. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:08, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Back to Tennessee (album)
Thank you for standing up to keep Back to Tennessee. I do think it should stay, and it only has just over a month until its release date. Even though "Somebody Said a Prayer" didn't make the top 20, it did make the top 40, which is notable enough. So, once again, thanks! Us Missourians know good music! :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 16:20, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have been anxiously waiting for the track listing to come out so I could finally make the article. I definitely will get the album the day it's released. I have every single record he's released, and I'll be glad when I finally get it. I, too, love "Somebody Said a Prayer", but there isn't one song that I don't think of his. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 18:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:BoyLikeMe.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:BoyLikeMe.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

"Back to Tennessee" video
Speaking to another Billy Ray fan, in the video for "Back to Tennessee", during the performance scene, if my eyes are correct, but is that Marcel playing guitar in his band? I know he has a cameo in the HM Movie, so maybe thats his cameo. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 15:45, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ha, okay then. Nevermind! :D EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:30, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Kate & Kacey Coppola
A tag has been placed on Kate & Kacey Coppola, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 23:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Kate & Kacey Coppola
I have nominated Kate & Kacey Coppola, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Kate & Kacey Coppola&. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 23:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Carter Twins
A tag has been placed on Carter Twins requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for musical topics.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ttonyb1 (talk) 04:36, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Cartertwins.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Cartertwins.jpg. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 04:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Cartertwins.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cartertwins.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 17:33, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Sara Evans
It's on her Twitter page. Primary source, but I would have no reason to believe it's dubious. Phil Vassar's new single is on the charts but there's no mention of it outside his MySpace. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 01:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not that I know of. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 01:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Back to Tennessee album sales
I'm sorry, but I have looked around for what seems like an eternity. The only sales figures I can come up with are the albums first week sales and second week sales. I don't know where else to look. I, too, would like to know how many copies it has sold, but its almost impossible to keep track of sales if an album hasn't gone Gold yet. Billboard/Soundscan know where to look, but they won't say where unless you give them big $$$! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:55, 9 May 2009 (UTC) I agree 100% on that. I really do think that Home at Last should've gone Gold a long time ago. Once the duet starting climbing the country charts, the sales boomed! I know but the time the single fell from the charts, Home at Last had sold nearly 450,000 copies. Again, I agree that Back to Tennessee is extremely good and much better. I play it everyday in my car going to school :] EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:36, 10 May 2009 (UTC) True, but I think I'm going to go ahead and do so. I already did for "Wher'm I Gonna Live?". EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 02:44, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I see. However, I'm not trying to be ignorant, but how do you know those are accurate? The sales aren't sourced. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course American Idol does that! I know, so do I. It's very, very irritating. I wish his fan club would do that, but I guess it's too much to ask for. Someone, somewhere must known the sales figures. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:08, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I feel the same exact way. I was so angry that Back to Tennessee only made #13 compared to in 2007 when Home at Last debuted #3. The highest amount of sales of Back to Tennessee I've seen is just under 20,000 copies. I would love to know the sales figures for all of Billy Ray's albums. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It was a critic review of the duet of "Ready, Set, Don't Go" and mentioned that. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess it could work. I haven't looked yet, but I'm sure someone'll remove them say to source them. If I could source the sales for Home at Last, I would. But that was 2 years ago, and how am I supposed to remember the link to the review? EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * EXACTLY! Like why can't Billboard do that? I, too, wanna know other artists album sales...but we gotta dream, don't we? EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:56, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Would you want to help me make pages for Billy Ray's singles that don't have 'em? EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 02:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ha, yeah I know. That was a dumb thing to make the page for that song because I didn't much about it other than its charts. Sure I had it on my iTunes, but that didn't help. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 03:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Deana Carter
I don't think that Angels Working Overtime is notable enough for an article as it only peaked at #35 and the article didn't contain a single source. I think that it would be better to expand Deana's main article (which is far too short; the infobox is longer than the text!) instead of creating new stubs on her material. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Angels Working Overtime
I have nominated Angels Working Overtime, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Angels Working Overtime. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Meh. That's borderline still, given the Billboard source. Would you be okay merging the content to the album article, like I did with Carolina (Eric Church album) and That's Why? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Please don't use "sophomore album". Precedent from other articles is that "Sophomore album" is a slang term and should not be used. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Thrillbilly music video
Would you happen to know who directed the "Thrillbilly" video? I can't seem to locate a director for it. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 12:58, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha okay! I looked around for one, but that didn't go down as planned. Oh my, I love "Thrillbilly!" It's probably my second favorite song on the album, behind "Somebody Said a Prayer". I knew from the getgo that it was going to be the third single, and like you, I'm so excited that it is. It's a shame radio didn't give either SSAP or BTT a chance, but who knows with song. =D EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 13:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I always try and wish that his singles make the Top 20, but lately, that's not the case. I really do like "Thrillbilly" and can't wait to hear it on the radio! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 23:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Really? I think I've heard "Somebody Said a Prayer" maybe 15-20 times on the radio and maybe "Back to Tennessee" 10 times (give or take). I like listening to CDs in my car as well, especially if their are songs on them that I like that don't get radio play, like an album cut. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 14:40, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, well lucky for me I have satellite radio so I don't have to worry about silly commercials after every 2 or 3 songs. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 19:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:52, 16 June 2009 (UTC)