User talk:JD554/Archive 4

Thanks
Thanks for teaming up against Granada Plus for deletion of MusiJoke, you're a good person. HMR 20:00, 01 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again
Thanks for your help on ! ;-) Europe22 (talk) 18:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

About "Viva la Vida"...
I translate from my source: "COLDPLAY IN COURT FOR PLAGIARISM. JUDGE DISMISSES SUIT - An American court dismissed the suit filed by an American guitarist (Satriani) that accused the famous English band Coldplay..." etc. The source is ASCA agency, that took it from Agence France Presse. It's the first thing you find on google.it typing "Coldplay" (proof, see very 1st news item). Hope I cleared it. --Frank87 (talk) 23:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems strange that no other reliable source is reporting this, even though there have been more recent reports such as this one. I think it's best to leave it as it is and wait and see if another reliable source reports this in English. --JD554 (talk) 07:02, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm on the chopping block
Another chart positions request: "Heart-Shaped Box". If you want, you can also tackle "All Apologies", since I'll be getting to that one sooner or later. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:27, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * For my birthday last year, I saw the Mary Chain live, then went to go see Control. Guess which one was more fulfilling. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm trawling around Rock's Back Pages right now. Anything you want me to cite? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, since I'm doing good progress on it, what do you think of In Utero? While we're on the topic, what do you think of In Utero? WesleyDodds (talk) 12:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * True fact: Kurt Cobain got Anton Corbijn to direct the video for "Heart-Shaped Box" because he saw his Bunnymen clips. Later on Cobain asked him to direct a video for "Pennyroyal Tea", but Corbijn refused, saying he couldn't make a better video than the one for "Heart-Shaped Box". WesleyDodds (talk) 12:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I heard a Glasvegas song through a digital cable radio station the other day. Wasn't too impressed. The most recent British indie rock bands that have impressed me are Los Campesinos! and The Long Blondes (who just broke up, dammit). WesleyDodds (talk) 13:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think that might have been the song I heard. Oh yeah, I also like Editors, even though I give Interpol a hard time for sounding like 1980 and owing Ian Curtis' widow some royalties, and Editors are basically "Interpol but better".WesleyDodds (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't be the image in the Bunnymen infobox instead? WesleyDodds (talk) 12:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Got any albums to recommend for this month's newsletter? The criteria I use when selecting one each month is to not pick anything blindingly obvious (no Nevermind or OK Computer or the like, because in theory those sorts of first-rate records are what you should be checking out first above anything else), and (at least at this early point) to attempt to not select an album by an artist that has already had a record chosen before. Oh yeah, and it should also be really good. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:49, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Every time I see the Killers song "Human" in your edit history this pops into my head. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, it can't be hard to figure out. Just think of all the other songs named "Human" and the answer will be clear . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 13:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I get a big kick out of the song's overly-dated Eighties drum sound. It's so ridiculous it's sublime. I've been familiar with the song since I was a kid, but I didn't know it was a Human League song until a few months ago. Sounds like it should have been a solo single by one of the members of New Edition. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure if you'e a Depeche Mode fan, but I really like the drum machine sound in "Black Celebration". WesleyDodds (talk) 14:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * And it just happened again! WesleyDodds (talk) 21:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'm listening to a review copy of the Glasvegas album right now. It's decent. I'm on "Go Square Go" right now; the singer sounds an awful lot like Bono when he hits the choruses. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:34, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Random statement: I really don't like Simple Minds. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:43, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Cleaned it up a bit. Could use some minor prose tweaking, but it's good enough for GA status. Put it up. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * He does seem pretty vague about what he wants. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Temple of Love" really is the best thing they ever did. The original version that is, not the lame 1992 re-recording. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Per a comment at the FAC page, do you think we should add the sole chart position for "Pennyroyal Tea"? WesleyDodds (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

What's your favorite U2 album/song? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also: I just looked at the album cover for the new album for the first time. My reaction was sputtering "What the fuck?" aloud. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Tony Wilson's story about Bono is classic, although despite what Wilson believed, I don't think Ian Curtis would have done a better performance at Live Aid. Curtis' style best suited clubs, while Bono was born to play stadiums. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:25, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Wait, they were giving away free copies of Ocean Rain? Like, as a prize in a contest, or with every issue? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I get those free compilation CDs whenever I buy Mojo here but . . . complete albums, for free with the purchase of a newspaper? It's so overwhelming, the mind boggles. Also, love this quote: "When Glasvegas supported us, Will goes: 'Did you get the album?' I said: 'I didn't need to — I invented them.'" WesleyDodds (talk) 10:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Another FAC question: Do you have the page numbers for the references pointed out by Ealdgyth? WesleyDodds (talk) 22:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for November 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 02:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Human (The Killers song)
How did my edit remove content from the article, what you're saying to me right now is not making any sense. You're the one who keeps removing content like the Canadian Hot 100, and Hot Dance Club Play charts which belong in the article and you keep removing them. I undo your edits to put those charts back which you keep removing. Also Billboard should belong in the U.S. chart names because they are billboard charts, look for yourself in the WP:CHARTS article, and plus you should'nt be linking U.S. I undid your recent edit just now, so please don't change it. Hometown Kid (talk) 2:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Autoblock fixed
I apologize; when I reblocked the IP yesterday, I had put the wrong settings into my block. This has been fixed, and I've given you IP block exempt status, just in case the autoblock reappears.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙 ) 09:34, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, no probs. I haven't checked my email actually until you dropped a message on my talk page. Check your rights. IP block exempt. =) --Efe (talk) 10:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Aye blad
Hey, I'm currently finished with my most recent project Mother's Milk. Could you give it a copyedit? I'd be forever indebted! NSR 77 T 19:33, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot, man. It was better to just remove the chart section since it was so small anyway. As with the Kiedis thing, its referenced in the same citation further down in the paragraph but there's no point in putting the same footnote after every sentence; makes it redundant and almost silly, so I usually don't unless its a quote. Thanks again! If you need my help in something feel free to ask. NSR 77  T 15:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Porcupine > Ocean Rain, at least for me. Though the latter of the two is definitely considered better by the music press and was more popular. NSR 77  T 17:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You too, man. NSR 77  T 16:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Carnage Visors re-direct
Please see Talk:Carnage_Visors. Dickdock (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for December 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 17:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I did not create an article, i was responding to someone who called me an idiot, and i did not vandalize It's My Own Cheating Heart That Makes Me Cry. If you read the talk page you will see an explanation to my contributionRabAllan (talk) 11:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain what was the article i created, because i do not understand what you are talking about, i created a talk page for an I.P. address because they called me an idiot, i did not create a page about myself, please show me the link.RabAllan (talk) 11:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Street Sounds (record label)
Thanks for your helpful comments. I understand that moving the page preserves the history, so I took that course. Not sure why I would overwrite the new page StreetSounds (record label) with the text already at that page as you suggested, but I do know that I couldn't request a speedy deletion under criteria G7 as I was not the substantive author of the original article, as required. Aside from the fact that I am much more aware of the 'deletion nomination' process than 'speedy deletion', my method also has the big advantage that it could take its' course whether I am available or not, but your suggested course means that I would have to monitor the article to act at the correct time so that when the new StreetSounds page has been deleted by an admin I take the further action re the AfD nomination and stating the plan as you mentioned. Simpler, too, plus I was able to compose a disambiguation page to take care of the disputed spelling. As it is, I have no more essential role in the process, although I intend to participate in the AfD discussion.

As for the issue of the spelling, the original vinyl albums (e.g. album notes) and the in-house magazine 'StreetScene' (defunct), used one word. The links are certainly mistaken in that respect, or (as with the official website), they are referring to the current incarnation of the label, not the subject of the article. Morgan Khan, the owner of both versions, may well have split the terms now. Centrepull (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Lightmouse date scripts

 * I see you operate date script written by Lightmouse: A discussion at Lightmouse's house may be of interest to you. Ohconfucius (talk) 10:00, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Echo & the Bunnymen (album)
Hi, the GA review appears to have stalled. I'm not sure if I'm meant to be waiting for you or you're meant to be waiting for me. Cheers, --JD554 (talk) 08:24, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Not stalled. Just going slowly. I was there on the 6th making a few minor adjustments to the article as I read through it again, and doing a couple of ticks on the review. My last thought was to consider putting on hold until a couple of minor things were done. But then I thought I might just as well do them myself, however I then wanted a closer look at other GA album articles to get a general feel for a GA standard album article so that has delayed matters while looking at those. I think the additions you have made to background have been excellent. I don't see this heading to a fail at all. I see this being passed as a GA, but I just want to look over it and tidy up a few things first. Regards  SilkTork  *YES! 10:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I must try to be less impatient! Cheers, --JD554 (talk) 10:25, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm just wondering if you're going to revisit this GA review? You had no involvement with it for over 7 days now. --JD554 (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right. I intend to look at it tonight. Please accept my apologies for the delay.  SilkTork  *YES! 19:51, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Passed. It was just minor rewording for clarity - but it was bugging me a bit. Sorry for the delays. Regards  SilkTork  *YES! 22:53, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

GNG
There isn't good consensus about how the GNGs and SNGs interact. About half of us take my stance, which is that if there is a subject-specific guideline, then both the subject specific and GNG have to be met. The other half view it your way, that you can fail the subject-specific guideline but pass the GNG.&mdash;Kww(talk) 11:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Doesn't work well the other way around, either. If it's OK to meet just one, then you could pass an SNG without passing the GNG. That would allow you to create articles without sources, which obviously isn't a good idea. So, here's the choices:


 * Need to pass just the GNG: renders the SNGs useless
 * Need to pass just the SNG: allows the creation of unsourced articles
 * Need to pass both: gives us situations like we are at in "Get on Your Boots".


 * None of the three work really well, which is why the answer to this question as never been settled. I've got no particular problem with sorting out the articles that pass one but not the other at AFD. It's not like I will have my day ruined if I nominate an article for deletion and it gets kept.&mdash;Kww(talk) 11:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Let's see ... a low today of 24C and a high of 29C, strong tradewinds to keep things comfortable, blue skies. I think that beats any description that uses the word "snow". I haven't lived anywhere that water freezes for 30 years, and I don't miss it a bit.&mdash;Kww(talk) 12:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

U2 info
Well that edit certainly lasted all of about ten seconds. Can you please explain to me why information regarding U2's latest single is less relevent on U2's page than what songs they played at Obama's concert? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serac72 (talk • contribs) 13:52, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * But it doesn't mention that U2 have released a new single anywhere on their page; the most recent information a reader has about their current recording status is that they're working on No Line on the Horizon. Without going to the No Line article there's no way of knowing that U2 have actually progressed to the stage where they have released a new song... eh, I'm new to this. I'll respect your judgement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Serac72 (talk • contribs) 14:09, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay, cool. Thanks for the welcome and for helping me work on my addition! And sorry about messing your page up with two new discussions... Serac72 (talk) 14:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, cheers mate. I was cursing you when you edited me so quickly, but I appreciate your guidance. Keep up the solid and swift editing! Serac72 (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Re-review
Yes, it was a simple fix, good job though! Hope you get the GA. Great job on all the other Echo & The Bunnymen articles too! Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums
It's a rant and it serves only to enflame the situation and turn it into an "us and them", which is extremely damaging- not only because it's turned a scholarly discussion into a battleground, but also because no doubt it leaves me (author of two album FAs, and whose first edit was to create an article about an album) in the "them" pile. I'm not going to revert again, but, seriously, ask yourself- is that subdiscussion really adding to the discussion as a whole? If not, it should be removed. J Milburn (talk) 22:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Was and Were and Collective Nouns
The article opens up correctly...U2 ARE

The part I changes to WAS is correct...

A collective noun, according to Webster's II: New Riverside University Dictionary is: "A noun that denotes a collection of persons or things regarded as a unit. usage: A collective noun takes a singular verb when the reference is to a group as a whole and a plural verb when the reference is to members of a group as single individuals: The orchestra was playing. The orchestra have all gone home.". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.57.201.114 (talk) 22:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Rip it up and start again
So I'm thinking that when I'm finished with In Utero I'll get back to working on Unknown Pleasures. What do you think? WesleyDodds (talk) 12:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You'd think with all the raving twenty-something indie hipsters do about the band, there'd be other people aside from you, me, and Ceoil interested in fixing up their articles. Then again, I've just been reflecting on the realization that while there's plenty of great editors who pitch in on Nirvana articles, I'm the only one on this entire site who can say he's a major contributor to them. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:26, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "I'm only huuu-man/Of flesh and bone, I'm made . . ." WesleyDodds (talk) 07:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Doesn't James' "Born of Frustration" totally sound like they're trying to write the most U2-esque song they can come up with? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Unless they have a large collection of Whitehouse and Merzbow albums in their collection, they are only saying they like it to look cool. Fuckers. They should be bludgeoned with a copy of "Satellite of Love". WesleyDodds (talk) 08:15, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Bravo, my good sir. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Aside from Bowie, what musicians active before the late 70s are you into? WesleyDodds (talk) 08:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I listen to a lot of prepunk rock music, although the only ones I can honestly label myself a "fan" of are The Beatles, Led Zeppelin, and The Stooges circa Raw Power. Aside from that, I do dig: British Invasion and mod, the harder-rocking psych-rock, some early prog (particularly Soft Machine and early Genesis, back when Peter Gabriel was leading), early heavy metal such as Black Sabbath and Blue Cheer (not really into Deep Purple), obscure garage rock, late 60s/early 70s British folk, and Queen. I also like some 70s funk and classic 60s Motown hits. I'm also really intrigued by the sound of early 20th century jazz, but I haven't explored it enough. I could technically throw in disco, which did exist in the early seventies, but I associate that mostly with the end of the decade. Never really got into: blues, Elvis, Dylan, Bowie, Krautrock, the VU, seventies pop (horrid and saccharine, most of the time), Kiss. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The main reason I don't like blues is because I'm not fond of the blues scale. For instance, with Zeppelin, I prefer the heavier or folkier elements, and always skip over the outright blues homages. My favoriter album by them is Led Zeppelin III, but I always skip over "Since I've Been Loving You". WesleyDodds (talk) 11:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I heard about that. Why is his article not at "Lux Interior" in the first place? David Bowie and Elton John need to choke a bitch. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:59, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Stage names! WesleyDodds (talk) 09:11, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone should really sort these out. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:58, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if it was you I mentioned this to or someone else, but you'd think there'd be more music geeks editing Wikipedia, instead of spending their time reading Pitckfork Media and arranging their multiple foreign pressings of Kind of Blue on their shelves. In contrast, consider the number of high-quality Gwen Stefani and Slayer-related articles we have. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They probably think Rolling Stone is still relevant. On another topic, I'm listening to Thriller right now. Because everyone should listen to Thriller every once in a while so they don't forget how awesome it truly is. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Tonight I am being constantly reminded of one of the primary reasons I like Wikipedia: looking up sources about something you like is quite fun, and you can learn and help others learn. Better than high school. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

What do you think? WesleyDodds (talk) 08:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually it's a rather catchy, surging track from an album I listened to once but found kind of dull. Works much better in isolation. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, after watching that I looked up the new U2 single. All I have to say is that it really does not fit with the album cover. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what was a great song? "The Fly". Hands down my favorite song on Achtung Baby, even if the lyrics were a bit amateurish. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:36, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's pretty cool. It sounds like a post-punk "Monster Mash". WesleyDodds (talk) 09:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You hear about this? WesleyDodds (talk) 10:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My assumption is that they were the interviews he conducted for Rip It Up and Start Again. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked up "Whip in My Valise" on YouTube earlier today; not as great as everyone's comments about it made it out to be. "Stand and Deliver" is still the best thing Adam Ant ever did. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Question: what's the best Bunnymen love song that is not "The Killing Moon"? WesleyDodds (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I wonder that myself. On a related note, I looked up the video for "You're the One for Me, Fatty" last night. Seriously, Morrissey . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 09:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's the least of it. When the subject of the title opened the door eating a bag of chips . . . well, I'm not a fan of Morrisey to begin with, but that didn't do anything to increase my respect for him. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You know, I almost typed "crisps", but decided against it because I'm not British. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:27, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I'm usually up until four. For no real good reason, I must admit. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, now that In Utero is done, it's time to rework Unknown Pleasures here. As usual, I ask if you can tackle the chart info. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Need relevant chart info for The Stone Roses. God, the prose in that article is awful. This will take a bit of work. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't you think "Seven Seas" sounds like it could be an R.E.M. song? I think it's mainly because of the bassline. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * First three albums, particularly Murmur. "Seven Seas" and "Talk About the Passion" would make a great set. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * How about you handle the recording section in Unknown Pleasures and I handle the music section? WesleyDodds (talk) 08:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The video for "Get On Your Boots" is not very good. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:48, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll check the magazine article later, but i'm pretty sure it specifically says Hook and Sumner didn't like the sound. Hook said something like "If it were up to me and Bernard we would have turned the guitars up". WesleyDodds (talk) 11:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * By the way, if Savage mentioned items from the liner notes previously in his 1994 Mojo article on the band (it's on Rock's Back Pages), that should probably be given preference, since it was published by a third party news outlet. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sometimes I like to imagine Andrew Eldritch ordering food at McDonald's in that voice. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:37, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Any possible interest? WesleyDodds (talk) 03:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I watched the "Bedbugs and Ballyhoo" video a few hours ago and wondered, "Why is he wearing a pedal strapped to his back?" WesleyDodds (talk) 11:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Been meaning to ask you: how common is your music taste among other ex-RAF? Over here ex-miliary tend to like classic rock, metal, and hip hop, probaby because it's a good soundtrack to blowing things up. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what's a fantastic song? "Going Underground" by The Jam. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what I love? Reprint collections of old magazine articles. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The NME collections are good. However, I prefer these "The _______ Companion" series of books Schirmer put out in the late 90s, which pull from a wider section of magazines; they're comparable to Rock's Back Pages, although they include a lot of stuff you can't find there. I've used the R.E.M. and Nirvana books extensively, and I know they also made volumes for the Velvet Underground and The Doors. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * A quick Google search turns up volumes dedicated to Miles Davis, Louis Armstrong, Billie Holiday, B.B. King, John Lennon, Joni Mitchell, Madonna, and the Beastie Boys. Stores seem to have most of them for sale, but as far as I can tell the series is out of print. I bought my R.E.M. book at Strand Bookstore, and the others I mentioned before are at my library. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have a few of those at my library; I recall skimming the Smiths edition. Comparing the Led Zeppelin and R.E.M. editions on Google Books, the quality seems very erratic from volume to volume. The Zeppelin book just seems to regurgitate basic facts, while the R.E.M. version includes quotes from people. However, it doesn't inspire confidence when in the Acknowledgements page of the R.E.M. book the author says he sometimes cited sources and sometimes didn't, based on whether or not he could be arsed to do it. There's probably better sources for most of the artists covered by these books. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Once I finish this R.E.M. article, which shouldn't take long (honestly, I could finished it up and ship it off to GAC with a few solid hours of concentration, but . . . I'm lazy and I need to clean my apartment). WesleyDodds (talk) 10:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

sorry chief
i'd had a drink and perhaps was a little thoughtless, I didnt mean to sound so baity.

sorry, dear boy.

toodle-oo

by the way, i can see the removal wasn't your doing now.

Iam normally a reaonable chap i assure you, perhaps i get a little protective of my edits ;-)

tish and bibble, no matter!

Dr doris (talk) 22:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Real Radio (Scotland)
As you have witnessed and recently reverted vandalism on this article yourself, I write to illuminate the full extent of the vandalism here. Multiple edits have been made which refer to Real Radio DJ Paul Carlin (many using usernames related to him). These users are clearly relentless in their vandalism - I write to you to appeal for protection of this article from new and unregistered users as the material being introduced here is entirely fabricated. Thank you for considering my proposal. Screaming Treeman (talk) 16:06, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I'm new to Wikipedia. Screaming Treeman (talk) 19:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a heads up - I am thinking of involving checkusers on the situation and might need your help compiling the relevant data. Agathoclea (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * See Sockpuppet_investigations/RabAllan for a checkuser request to block the underlying IP. Did I miss any of the new ones? Agathoclea (talk) 09:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Echo
No problem. I'm just a tad busy with a couple things but I'll definitely get to it towards the end of the week. NSR 77 T 20:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks man. I'll get to Evergreen later today for sure. NSR 77  T 15:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Evergreen (album)
Hi.

While the article is quite good charts positions and certifications are missing and while is not a "must have" more categories will help.

Let me know if you have another question Zidane tribal (talk) 21:33, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Garbage discography
Hi, i found links that verify they charted at those positions, as for the corrs, i couldn't find any. Billy4kate (talk) 22:57, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Glasvegas
What's the deal with the Glasvegas history? Some weird usernames and edits going on relating to yourself. 81.170.0.158 (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Wikipedia admins are aware and it is being dealt with. --JD554 (talk) 12:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It turned out to be two lots of sockpuppets. I have now unprotected the article. Let me know should the problem arise again. Agathoclea (talk) 08:51, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI - see my comments at User talk:Damone Rhodes - Agathoclea (talk) 21:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism
http://robertchristgau.com/get_artist.php?name=coldplay linka

Dude goes to every article inserting this link and has vandalized one article already with a snarky comment about Offspring.

Maybe it wasn't vandalism but when it walks and talks like a duck and the only thing the guy posted otherwise is a rip on a group it's probably going to be a duck.--seattlehawk94 (talk) 15:25, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

You don't want revert fine....But when a guy's only "edits" are links to a poorly done website of an obscure writer, it seems like advertising..At the very least it smells fishy.--seattlehawk94 (talk) 15:27, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Your probably right.....--seattlehawk94 (talk) 15:32, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Question
Hello, you've been around for some time, contribute to content, care for the integrity of wikipedia and have a calm and reasonable attitude when interacting with others. In case you'd be interested in getting involved here further as administrator, I'd expand above admittedly stubbish rationale into a nomination for Requests for administration. No need for a quick answer as I'm back probably only next week anyways. One important note, though: RfA can get eerie at times and i haven't yet nominated myself someone there. If you need any other clarification before making up your mind, let me know. --Tikiwont (talk) 16:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that's fine. Meanwhile happy editing.--Tikiwont (talk) 09:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Cheers
Thanks for keeping an eye out on the U2 articles. not unnoticed. regards --Merbabu (talk) 12:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Labyrinthes
I responded at the AfD page. Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  18:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Cramps
Seeing as Lux was with Ivy for 37 years, the burden of proof is on someone to predict that the Cramps will continue, not the other way around. Lux & Ivy were the Cramps, that was thair project together. Until it's proven that they will somehow carry on, it's over. --BlackMath77 (talk) 09:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * -Butting in- You still need a source saying "It's over". WesleyDodds (talk) 09:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Years of Refusal


Please be mindful that you are skirting the limits of the three-revert rule at this article. There is an expectation that editors in an editing dispute will outline the rationale for their preferred version at the article's talk page. Reverting without doing so is often regarded poorly and I have already blocked one user for edit warring. It would thus be helpful if you could outline your arguments on the discussion page. CIreland (talk) 11:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Been Waiting (song)
Hi, i have a source that is telling me that sony has this planned for release, and im looking through their site now to see if it is in the release schedule which will prove it will be released, so can you please halt the deletion of the page until i get back to you ASAP. Billy4kate (talk) 09:20, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The physical release wasn't found on the site, but it is the official third single, so i don't think the page should be deleted, just reverted to the album until an official statement revealing this fact is revealed in a place other than a forum. Billy4kate (talk) 09:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Caught in the Crowd
It is being Physically released on March 2, therefore it should be suitable for the article. It was classified as a future single, as it hasn't been released yet, but is planned for March 2 release, so why re-direct the page? Billy4kate (talk) 09:53, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NSONGS#Albums.2C_singles_and_songs link, says if the song has a reliable source stating it's physical release, the article can reamin, and since the recrod label aswell as a retailer have both stated this on their websites, the article is in no need to be re-directed. Billy4kate (talk) 09:56, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * So, the song has only just been announced, so not much imformaiton will be revealed so quikcly, but withing the next few days, and when forthcoming singles by major artists like Britney Spears or Rihanna only have one source there is no question about deleting the article. The article will be extended very quickly as of tonight, if you let me work on it. The song will chart in a couple of weeks, and the article will then be complete, but for now im am adding the finishing touches on the article, so if your going to re-direct it don't delete it, because when you finally realise the single will be released, will you stop re-directing it? Billy4kate (talk) 10:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Ironic welcome
Why are you 'welcoming' me to wikipedia, is it your house or something ? I don't want your ironic 'welcome'. I think it should be o.k to expect a small explanation of a deletion - theres space provided to say why you've changed an edit. A deletion is a kind of attack aint it? And since edits don't make themselves there are people behind em it is personal too you know. I think 'mug' is not really an insult and if its too much for wikipedia to bear it doesnt say much for wikipedia does it. I find your snide politeness more chilling to be honest, but live and let liveSayerslle (talk) 19:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't know it was the template, it sounded sarcastic to me, so sorry for that. Personally I hardly ever delete things, but if I do I say why, that's all I'm saying.Sayerslle (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

Re: Bauhaus discography
That is, if the official website of Bauhaus not exist, you could replace it with the link to MySpace. Canniba loki  15:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, I added some tags in the lead, I think it easier that get talking, hope that you do not stay angry thinking which I did on purpose to harm you. I speak this because in every sentence you wrote, I put 15 different tags, I hope you did not quite work. I also did a few comments in the FLC page, take a look. Any doubts just talk.  Canniba  loki  16:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Been Waiting (song)
I have the official cover art and track listing for the song. Is that enough reason for the article to be re-diverted to its own page?. Billy4kate (talk) 05:18, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Caught In The Crowd
What do you mean by online sources?. Her official websites states it's release, and 2 other retailrs state it to, as well as the record label, and that should be enough to keep the article. Billy4kate (talk) 22:58, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thouse sources do explain stuff about the song, and they have been included in the article. Billy4kate (talk) 09:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

reversion
I notice you do a fair share of vandalism reverting. Do you think you would benefit from Rollback? It does come with a little more responsibility in terms of knowing when you can use it and when you have to use different tools. Agathoclea (talk) 13:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC) ✅ - please read Rollback feature and Help:Reverting before using the feature. Happy editing. Agathoclea (talk) 13:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The Cure release dates....
I've encountered release dates - even repeated by official sites - with errors. Typically, up until Spring 1982, all discs were released in the UK on Fridays, after which it switched to Mondays. But the real discrepancy has to do with the official UK chart book, entitled "British Hit Singles & Albums" (published by Guinness World Records in 2006; ISBN: 1-904994-10-5) that I possess and which has chart entry dates for many of their singles and albums which come BEFORE the release dates we originally thought to be true. For instance, "The Caterpillar" charted in the UK for the week ending April 7, 1984 (which means it actually entered on March 31). Because it would have had to come out 12 days before the official April 7 chart date (the Monday), that places its release date as Monday, March 26, 1984. If you need online proof that the May 1984 release date is off, check this out: http://www.chartstats.com/songinfo.php?id=11507

Similarly, there's no way "A Forest" could have charted the week ending April 12, 1980 (meaning it actually went in on the 6th) IF it was supposedly released on the 8th. Because Fridays were still the release date norm, that's how March 28 is the most likely release date. I'm not trying to upset the apple cart, but as you can see, even the official site has some of its information wrong. BGC (talk) 17:14, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

So the website link I sent you is not verifiable proof for you? It's based on the ACTUAL charts as they were released. It definitely shows that the info on the official Cure site is partially wrong, or maybe, "guessed at" by whoever put the discography together. Can you disprove that? BGC (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Rufus Wainwright discography
Thank you for taking the time to look at the above discography. I appreciate your time and suggestions. I have addressed the concerns you mentioned (and I believe had one question for you), and please let me know if there is anything else I can do to improve the list. Thanks again! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your feedback regarding citations in the header. Also, thank you for clarifying which reference you are referring to. However, the Allmusic page does not contain chart positions for Rufus Does Judy at Carnegie Hall, and the Billboard page does. Is it okay to keep both sources now, then possibly replace the Billboard source with Allmusic in the future when all chart positions are posted? -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:03, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have updated the references, as requested. Thanks again for your comments and support! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Billy4kate/Caught_in_the_Act
I was wondering if you could take a look at the page and see whether it's qualified to have it's own aritcle?. Billy4kate (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)