User talk:Granedit

Speedy deletion nomination of Howl (American band)
A tag has been placed on Howl (American band) 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. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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.  ttonyb (talk) 19:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC) - 		 -

Re: In reference to the iPhone as a musical instrument on Black Clouds & Silver Linings
- 		 - 	Oh, if that's the case, then I stand corrected. That bebot thing, if you ask me, is really cool. Thanks for the correction Backtable Speak to Me  about what I have done  02:14, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: 'Weasel Words' Rule in Black Clouds & Silver Linings: Reception
- 		 - 	Well, I did cite the weasel words for deleting that phrase because the feedback of the album is not entirely positive feedback. It is almost inevitable that all music will be looked upon by these following attitudes: people will be either passionate fans, obvious appreciators, ones who like the music, ones who aren't a fan but are still respectful of the music, or haters and dislikers. If that was confusing for you, then think of the five star rating scale of youtube and how very likely most videos will have all five different ratings (5 stars, 4 stars, 3 stars, 2 stars, 1 star) applied to them by viewers. Anyways, I don't believe one should say that "this album has received generally positive reviews" due to the diversity of the listeners' opinions. For instance, as of June 8, 2009 at 11:54 PM on progarchives.com (not a site to source on wikipedia, by the way), 19% of the 82 reviews are either two stars or just one star, while 16% rate the album as 3 stars, and 65% rate the album either four or five stars. So, the feedback isn't unanimously positive by any means. The text, due to the vague nature of it, was omitting the fact that is has received disliking reviews as well as feedbacks promoting excellence. All it said was that the album has received positive, and it was omitting the fact that some people have listened to it and don't like it. Also, it is what I like to call "filler text", since it is basically there just to fill up space and it is either not entirely true or too vague to be true. So, basically put, I erased that section of information due to varying opinions of listeners and also the fact that the statement is filler text. Thanks for your interest. - 		 - 	 Backtable Speak to Me about what I have done  04:34, 9 June 2009 (UTC) - 		 - 	PS: I would like to discourage the use of the edit summary "That was some very vague, useless information. Yes, I had to be blunt." in the circumstance of the anonymous user only having one edit of lower quality. In this case, it served me right being called an a**hole, since I used that tactic a little bit prematurely. Sometimes, I get caught up with the rules of wikipedia so much that I react negatively when someone does an edit, even in good faith, that breaks some wikipedia rules. It's probably just a personality thing of me, since that characteristic probably doesn't apply to all wikipedians. The problem of faulty edits is especially aggravating on the Black Clouds and Silver Linings page, since it is a regular event. Some edits are especially annoying if they are constantly brought up, such as the "the album got leaked" edit. Just thought I'd talk about that, since it is fairly relevant. Thanks again for your interest.

Porcupine Tree
I failed your GA nomination for Porcupine Tree as I felt that the article was far short of the GA criteria. You can read my review here for suggestions on how to improve the article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 18:01, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Congratulations (album). Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. F-22 Raptör Aces High ♠ 22:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
F-22 Raptör Aces High ♠ 23:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Full of Hell


The article Full of Hell has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * No indication of how this might meet notability guidelines. Lacks citations to significant coverage in reliable sources.  WP:CRYSTAL

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RadioFan (talk) 03:39, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)