User talk:Jogers/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --Alhutch 21:20, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Fallen
I've tried to update the template but I don't usually update this type so could you check for me. I think it's right. Thanks. - JVG 13:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well done. Thanks :-) Jogers 13:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: New articles about albums by Kult
''Hi. I've noticed that you contributed to Kult-related articles. I've just started articles about Ostateczny krach systemu korporacji and Muj wydafca. I'd appreciate your revision. Thanks. Jogers 21:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)''


 * I'll try to help you in your effort. Unfortunately it won't be possible before the end of this month, as I have to get by project deadline in real life (at work). Kult template looks good IMO. --Wally77 13:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

''Thanks. I'll try get the articles about the remaining Kult albums started by this time. Jogers 15:07, 19 January 2006 (UTC)''

Regarding Rammstein
Ack, my bad. Good call on the "du hast" thing. Thanks for the correction. :) --Ashenai 19:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem :-) Jogers 19:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Ich will page move
When you want to move a page, please do not cut and paste an article's contents into the new page. Doing so destroys a page's history. Use the "move" button up at the top of the page. Thanks. Thunderbrand 03:01, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I moved few articles this way before I figured this out. As I've read in How to fix cut and paste moves it's quite a complicated process to sort this out, so once again, sorry. Jogers 13:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was thinking that you knew how to, since I saw that you moved the page back in early January, but I wasn't sure. I guess I wanted to just remind you. Thunderbrand 16:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Wake Me up When September Ends
''I've just moved the article from Wake Me up When September Ends to Wake Me Up When September Ends before I noticed that you did just the opposite some time ago. Which particular naming convention did you mean? I thought that the particles of phrasal verbs should be capitalized in titles. So do adverbs, anyway. Jogers 19:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)''


 * ===>What do I know? I thought any preposition, excepting those at the beginning and end of a title, was lowercase. I could be wrong... -Justin (koavf), talk 19:47, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

''I'm not a native Enlish speaker but it seems to me that "up" is the part of the phrasal verb in this context. Here I've read that in this case it should be capitalized. Jogers 20:14, 24 February 2006 (UTC)''


 * ===>Sure I might be wrong. Do what you gotta do, man. -Justin (koavf), talk 21:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Track list template
''I removed your notice on WikiProject Albums. I don't like the template you've created. It's completely unnecessary, in my opinion. Consider discussing this on the Project's talk page. Jogers 21:28, 3 March 2006 (UTC)''


 * Thanks for the comment. If you have more thoughts, please join the new discussion: here. bmearns.....(talk) 21:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Re:discussion about the Template:CurrentAlbums and the Category:Current albums
''I'm not sure what's the point about them. I thought that you might be interested in this discussion. Jogers 11:49, 4 April 2006 (UTC)''


 * Thanks for alerting me. I posted my rationale on the talk page.--Esprit15d 12:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks for fixing all those infobox 2's. I've seen dozens of your AWB edits popping up on my watchlist over the last couple of weeks too, so I think you deserve this :) Take care! Flowerparty ☀ 00:57, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much :) I guess I'll continue to pop up on your watchlist since this AWB stuff is just great :) Once again, thanks. Jogers (talk) 09:49, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Ditto - you are doing fantastic work Jogers and your barn star is well deserved.--DreamsReign 00:19, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you :-) Jogers (talk) 09:04, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

"    "
Just Curious if in this edit you added the extra line or if AWB added the extra line because they have 2 sequential AWB edits so it seems strange AWB would find more white space to fix a second time around. also is there a reason the page has "     " (try to say that 6 times fast). I was wondering why you are removing it. Because often Templates are copied from page to page. (such as the Alternative disambiguation link multiples rapidly. Could the nowiki thing be so that when the template is copied and somebody wants to add a review it doesn't try to do something else or is this hear for no reason)--E-Bod 22:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I added the extra line manually. I find the page easier to edit if there is a line between the infobox and the rest of the article. It doesn't change the way it is rendered. The   stuff used to be mandatory in order to display the reviews section correctly so it appeared in the guidelines about the album infobox use. Now, it's no longer necessary. Moreover, the reviews section is now optional and removing the    prevents it from showing up in case there are no reviews listed. Jogers (talk) 09:15, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Those album infobox TfDs
So, how about another round now that we've got all the bases covered? Plus, this is the perfect chance to get some feedback on all the new features. (I suppose I should do some conversions, then... Soon, soon.) –Unint 07:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Erm, wait... It's not quite working yet. I just managed to break something else by deleting the "Artist =" line entirely, here. –Unint 07:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It may be a good idea to convert the articles using the templates before we list them for deletion. I'll do it soon.


 * I fixed the problem on my talk page by making the artist parameter optional. Thanks for pointing this out. Jogers (talk) 10:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Are you going to tfd these. Why not just redirect (and preserve the history)? Flowerparty ☀ 12:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I haven't thought of this. Good idea :-) Jogers (talk) 13:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm, what's the procedure on replacing a template with a redirect? Any? I do want to clarify this because there's actually a third infobox that's become obsolete due to the new changes and I'd like to know what's the most appropriate action here. Also, we'd still have to re-do the fields by hand to get the proper text we want.


 * Oh, and if we redirect the various artists infobox, what do we do about Cat:Various artists albums? Is it really necessary? –Unint 22:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I would just convert the articles using the obsolete Template:Kalnoky album infobox and then redirect it to the Template:Album infobox. This is what I did about Template:Various artists album infobox. The templates we are talking about are obviously redundant and are not widely used so I wouldn't worry too much about procedures.


 * We could still use Category:Various artists albums without the template but personally I don't find it very useful. Jogers (talk) 16:39, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Album infobox advanced usage documentation at WikiProject Albums
''How do you like an idea of splitting the advanced usage information into a seperate section like this? Jogers (talk) 11:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)''


 * It looks good. The separation of the advanced section should help both migration and new users alike. Also, A Call to Arms does seem to be an ideal example to use. Now we just need an example on the Album infobox talk page... I was never sure why that seems to have been maintained independently. –Unint 15:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

''I'm not sure if it really has to be maintained independently at all. Maybe linking to WikiProject Albums for usage instructions would be a better solution. Jogers (talk) 16:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)''

Multiple Cover infoboxes Reply
''I've noticed that you created the Dual Cover Album infobox. The issue of handling multiple album covers in one infobox was recently discussed at WikiProject Albums (see the discussion). I think we figured out a more elegant and flexible way of dealing with it using Extra album cover template. Here are some examples. What do you think? Jogers (talk) 23:18, 10 May 2006 (UTC)''


 * wow, i couldn't seem to find any other templates for multiple infoboxes, and thats why i created mine.. anyway i put what i have to say about the matter here


 * jerkmonkee 04:35, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Administrator
I haven't really considered this before it came up on my talk page, and since apparently people think I would make a good admin, I might as well give it a try. So, yes, please go ahead and nominate me. --Fritz S. (Talk) 10:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. --Fritz S. (Talk) 17:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Although no consensus was reached in the end, I still wanted to thank you for your nomination and vote in my recent RfA. Thank you very much!!! Fritz S. (Talk) 18:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer. I think I'll wait a couple of months and then maybe try again, signing the acceptance and giving a little more eager answers. ;-) --Fritz S. (Talk) 11:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Music samples
The discussion in Wikipedia talk:Music samples seems to have stopped suddenly. What happened? I was happy with the improvements that we were making in order to create this guideline. I wish we could restart the discussion. Thank you. CG 17:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, I see you've responded to the straw poll at Wikipedia_talk:Music_samples. Since your vote, there has been some further discussion here, and I've suggested a slight amendment to the proposed guideline. I'd really appreciate your feedback on the subject. Thanks! -- Wine Guy  Talk  20:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Personnel / Credits
Is there any particular reason why the perfectly adequate term "Personnel" has been replaced with the overly general "Credits" on so many album pages? It seems totally pointless and in no way an improvement. Bretonbanquet 19:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I was changing "Personnel" to "Credits" because I was asked to do so here. It seems that it became a standard at WikiProject Albums after rather brief discussion some time ago. To be honest, I'm indifferent to the matter bacause I'm not a native English speaker and I don't really know which term is better. I didn't mean to do anything controversial with AWB so I'm stopping to make this change for now. Please consider discussing this at WikiProject Albums because if the term "Personnel" is somehow more adequate it should be restored to the guideline. Regards, Jogers (talk) 20:24, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

OK Thanks for your reply. My opinions aren't going to be of interest to anyone else, I suspect, but I'll try. Thanks again. Bretonbanquet 21:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Appreciation
Thanks, your appreciation is appreciated! Rich Farmbrough 10:50 5 July 2006 (GMT).

Track listing
''Do you use a regular expression to place songs in quotation marks like this and this or do you just fix it by hand? Jogers 12:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * Repeated reg-ex - under development and not perfect.

                <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" /> <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" /> <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" /> <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" /> <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" /> <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" /> <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*[\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*(([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+[ \t]+)*([\w&amp;\[\]\:\;\'\.\,\!\?]+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" />


 * Cheers, Rich Farmbrough 12:32 5 July 2006 (GMT).

''Thanks! I guess it will take me some time before I figure out how it works. Take a look at the regexes I use to clean up album articles (User:Jogers/AWB). You may find something useful there. Jogers 12:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * Thanks for the ref, I'm having a goosd look at your regexes.
 * You can cut an paste (from the edit window because of &amp; ) into an AWB XML file.
 * The first line gets rid of spurious spaces at the end of headers - these were mucking up the next line.
 * The next line attempts to normalise the header - note it doesn't work with headers other than level 2 (though this can easily be fixed).
 * The rest are more compleax versions of this
 * <datagridFAR find="==Track listing==(((\r\n)#\s*((\w+\s+)*\w+)([^\r]*))*)(\r\n)#[ \t]*((w+\s+)*(\w+))" replacewith="==Track listing==$1$7#&quot;$8&quot;" />
 * i.e. look for header plus zero or more lines consisting of (#, maybe spaces,one or more words, anything) and followed by one line starting with # and some words. Put quotes round the words. Last track done.
 * Then do it again.
 * It breaks when there's or - in the title, or other special characters.
 * It does nothing when there is text between the header and the first track.
 * It doesn't deal with numbered or *'d tracklists.
 * Regards, Rich Farmbrough 12:57 5 July 2006 (GMT).

''It didn't work properly here. I hope that helps. Jogers 13:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * Oh dear, I hope there aren't many like that. It's the reason the code above uses [ \t] instead of \s, so I'm not making any more of those errors. I just came across a listing where the times were in [] instead of . Bah!

Rich Farmbrough 13:09 5 July 2006 (GMT).
 * P.S. If you can post your .XML file, I'll incorporate it in what I'm doing, or maybe it could be a separate bot run? Rich Farmbrough 13:09 5 July 2006 (GMT).

''Here is another mistake. And my XML file: settings.xml. I'm afraid that most of these settings shouldn't be used in an automated bot, though. They are far from perfect yet and I still fix many things by hand. Jogers 13:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * Thanks, another loophole closed. Rich Farmbrough 14:00 5 July 2006 (GMT).

''There is another problem. "(Die Elektrik)" is a part of the title in this case. I have no idea how such thing could automatically be distinguished from information about composers. Jogers 14:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * It can't be automatically distinguished, in English I can usually spot them, though. Annoyingly I had intervened on that one becasue of the alternate titles to track 2 and the "additional tracks". Thanks for the note. Rich Farmbrough 14:14 5 July 2006 (GMT).


 * This is something I'd planned to do for a long time:

<datagridFAR find=" Type\s*=" replacewith=" Type   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Name\s*=" replacewith=" Name   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Artist\s*=" replacewith=" Artist  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Cover *=" replacewith=" Cover  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Background *=" replacewith=" Background =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Released *=" replacewith=" Released =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Recorded *=" replacewith=" Recorded =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Genre *=" replacewith=" Genre  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Length *=" replacewith=" Length  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Label *=" replacewith=" Label  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Producer *=" replacewith=" Producer =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Reviews *=" replacewith=" Reviews =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Last album *=" replacewith=" Last album =" /> <datagridFAR find=" This album *=" replacewith=" This album =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Next album *=" replacewith=" Next album =" />
 * Please feel free to use and share. Rich Farmbrough 15:15 5 July 2006 (GMT).

''Thanks a lot! This is very convenient, I used to line them up by hand. By the way, when I make an edit like this I usually remove any remaining characters from the "Reviews" field so the professional reviews section of the infobox doesn't show up. Do you have any idea how to automatize this? Jogers 15:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * This may do what you want.
 * <datagridFAR find=" Reviews *=\s*\*\s+" replacewith=" Reviews  = \r\n" />
 * Rich Farmbrough 17:34 5 July 2006 (GMT).
 * <datagridFAR find=" Reviews *=\s*\* *\r\n" replacewith=" Reviews  = \r\n" />
 * should be better. Rich Farmbrough 19:38 5 July 2006 (GMT).

''I'll try this out. Thank you for everything. If you improved any of these settings I would be very glad to know. My improvements and additions are usually reflected here. Regards, Jogers 17:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)''

Infobox subs
Improved sub ("Compiled by" is one letter longer than the others) <datagridFAR find=" Type\s*=" replacewith=" Type   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Name\s*=" replacewith=" Name   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Artist\s*=" replacewith=" Artist  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Cover *=" replacewith=" Cover   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Cover size *=" replacewith=" Cover size =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Background *=" replacewith=" Background =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Released *=" replacewith=" Released =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Recorded *=" replacewith=" Recorded =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Genre *=" replacewith=" Genre   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Length *=" replacewith=" Length  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Label *=" replacewith=" Label   =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Producer *=" replacewith=" Producer =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Reviews *=" replacewith=" Reviews  =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Reviews *=\s*\* *\r\n" replacewith=" Reviews  = \r\n" /> <datagridFAR find=" Compiled by *=" replacewith=" Compiled by =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Last album *=" replacewith=" Last album =" /> <datagridFAR find=" This album *=" replacewith=" This album =" /> <datagridFAR find=" Next album *=" replacewith=" Next album =" /> also <datagridFAR find="&amp;ndash;" replacewith="–" /> is useful

Next/Last album
I have tweaked these to avoid "this album" in the text. (I work with non-case sensitive - so it was capitalising This album.) <datagridFAR find="\| *(Last|Next) album( *)=( *)()?(n|N)one()?( *)(&lt;br ?/?&gt;)?" replacewith="| $1 album$2= " /> <datagridFAR find="\| *(Last|Next) album( *)=( *)()?(N|n)(/|\.)(A|a)\.?()?( *)(&lt;br ?/?&gt;)?" replacewith="| $1 album$2= " /> <datagridFAR find="\| *(Last|This|Next) album( *)=(.*)\(\[\[(1|2)(0|9)([0-9])([0-9])\]\]\)" replacewith="| $1 album$2=$3($4$5$6$7)" />

YYYY in music
What is the reason for unlinking this? Rgds, Rich Farmbrough 20:09 5 July 2006 (GMT).

Music samples is now a guideline
Music samples is now a guideline. Thank you for your active participation in the discussion. The guideline will always be open for new proposals and amendments. As for now I invite you to join to the discussion in Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion to adopt a new samples-related CSD criterion. CG 15:23, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: My appreciation
Thanks. --Fritz S. (Talk) 15:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox album
I just sent a warning to Varitphenpimol per Vandalism policies. Let me know if he keeps vandalising the page and i will get an admin involved. Thanks!--Gephart 19:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


 * User:DJ Varit has shown up, and appears to be the same guy. Also, he's just made a long string of similar edits to Template:Infobox musical artist that prompted an admin to protect it. (Maybe this finally explains how the album infobox got protected.)
 * Tangentially, I've been contemplating adding a message to the templates to explain that nothing happens when you enter data into the sample template on the template's page (or the project page). Think that's worth persuing? –Unint 02:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, didn't complete my sentence. I meant that, now and then, an editor comes along who seems to think that they should edit the template sample to get their text to appear on their article. I'm not sure if that was the case here, but it's happened before, yes? –Unint 21:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

LSB vs. Orange tally
Jogers, the poll for switching the hue used for the studio album templates is now closed. The consensus indicates support for switching to lightsteelblue.

Thank you very much for your involvement in the overall effort; as well as voting on the suggested change. --Cheers, Folajimi (leave a note) 16:05, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

PopMatters
'Tis done, all being well. Rich Farmbrough, 18:40 8 October 2006 (GMT).

Jankowski
Hi - just wondering why you removed the link to Horst Jankowski. He's a pretty famous pianist, therefore would suggest the link is a valuable piece of information. By the way, he's no relative of mine!

Dan Dan 20:17, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Extra album covers
Thanks for your help with my extra album covers question! By the way, tasteful choice for an example. Justin Foote 00:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Christian Metal Project
If you are interested in joining a potential Project Wiki Christian Metal project go here to sign up. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Christian_Metal --75.73.226.114 08:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Please give it some thought
I wish you would reconsider whether the most valuable use of your Wikipedia energy is removing piped links to "Year in music" articles. There is no WP-wide consensus that such links are inappropriate--see WP:DATE. When I've tried to find where such a consensus was reached for music, I've found pointers to discussions that in no way reached a consensus and references to policies that don't say what the anti-piped link folks say they say. Personally, I feel like someone looking for context about a musician's era would be much better served by a link to a page specifically about the musical era. Nareek 19:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I really appreciate it. Nareek 20:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Date preferences
Forget if I said as much, but thanks :) Schissel | Sound the Note! 02:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar thanks!
Thank you very much! Has made my day! :D Bubba hotep 12:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Happysad deletion

 * Could you reconsider your speedy deletion of the Happysad article? It is quite popular band in Poland and I'm sure that the article is going to be recreated soon. If you feel it should be deleted please nominate it for AfD instead. Thank you. Jogers 14:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure, if you can provide a valid assertion of a) why the band is notable and b) multiple reliable sources backing this up. Proto :: ►  10:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The band has released two albums on important independent label, has gone on multiple national concert tours in Poland (here is a scanned article from Gazeta Wyborcza about a tour with notable Polish artist Kazik Staszewski) and has been placed in rotation nationally by major radio networks. I'm aware that sources in English are preferred but I couldn't find any. Regards, Jogers 12:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks - I'll restore the artist article. Can you make sure those references go in the article? Cheers. Proto :: ►  12:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I see that you already did this. Why don't you restore articles about its albums too? Jogers 12:57, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Because they entirely failed to assert the albums' notability, containing just a tracklisting. Did either album rank in a significant way in a major national chart? Did either gain any awards? Proto :: ►  13:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure about it but it's customary that studio albums of notable artists have individual articles. Some editors expressed different opinions (see Notability (albums)) but they failed to gain consensus. If you would like to revive this discussion WikiProject Albums might be a good place to start. Jogers 13:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Bot malfunction?
I recently blocked your bot per the thread at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. It seems your bot is replacing links to years in music to just certain years. Please respond in the thread. Thanks. Cowman109 Talk 01:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Can you please halt the replacing of "XXXX in aviation" into years with your Jogersbot. The ones involved in the creation of aviation articles has put a lot of work into this and I suspect they won't be happy with this. --MoRsE 14:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Your bot is still at it, and I'm reverting it. This format is a WikiProject:Aircraft effort that your bot is undoing. I understand that the bot will leave just years alone, but the problem is, the Project uses this to note specific special events, like maiden flights, etc. There is no consensus to do away with the "Year in XXX" links, and the MOS even allows it, so until there is clear consensus, please make it stop! Akradecki 19:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, because the MOS is only a guideline, and that section even allows for a variance, in specific instances. Please see Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29, where you can clearly see a lot of debate, a lot of disagreement, but no clear consensus. It seems to me that a bot should only be unleashed only when clear consensus is present. Akradecki 19:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, you ought to go try and explain things over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft...you have a number of folks there who think you're not taking the correct approach. Given the additional comments below, I'd suggest that you suspend ops for the time being until a solution is found. Until then, I will be reverting any aircraft project articles that are changed by your bot. Akradecki 23:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Years in ...
Please desist from changing years in ... to years. Date preferences work with the years in ... and editors have chosen to be specific rather than general - specific links are more useful. See discussion at Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser--Golden Wattle talk 20:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

There seem to be several people who disagree with your approach. The deabte at WP:AN/I raised by User WhyADuck, my comments, comments above by MoRsE and Aradecki, comments at Talk:Timeline of aviation.

As per Aradecki, given the discussion elsewhere there is not full consensus for the date links, I do not think you should be operating your bot. It is undoing the work of a lot of editors who have given some thought about the links. For example, I think it is much more meaningful to link an Australian election to the Year in Australia in which it was held. Date preferences allow people to read 11 September or September 11. This is a document in words and I am less interested in pandering to people who wish to read 2001-09-11, that is not narrative. Such a way of expressing dates may however be a useful date preference for viewing lists of dates, not in text, thus if the preference doesn't work in text I am not concerned, there are plenty of unlinked dates and of course spelling variations. I imagine that the majority of people who bother to set their date preferences prefer day month or month day depending on US or Commonwealth English preferences. Because your bot is changing the work of so many editors, I maintain it is doing harm - it will be impossible to undo should consensus uphold the approach I and others have taken. I believe you should not be changing en masse the work of many editors. I have raised my concerns at bot approval. --Golden Wattle talk 20:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I must profess my undying love for you!
Someone finally added a pic of the cover to The Ungovernable Force. Thank you! I would have done it myself, but I don't feel comfortable with all the copywrite stuff involved in uploading pictures. Anyways, I've been waiting forever for that pic to be added. Thanks!  Ungovernable Force  Poll: Which religious text should I read? 01:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

rm covers from the chronology
Good work. Thanks ×Meegs 14:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have explained the issues to License2Kill; I think you should be able to finish the job without further problems. Best ×Meegs 11:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Covers in album chronologies
It was on the Illmatic page and that was a featured article. Not to mention admins have come across the pages many times and edited and they did not see no problem with them. I don't see it as decorative at all. They are used on discography pages in a similar manner and that isn't decorative License2Kill 20:09, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The same purpose that pictures on the discography serve. License2Kill 20:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Covers in the chronology
Why are you removing them? Is there a rule about them that I am not aware of?--Xxplosive 17:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia fair use policy states that copyrighted material must contribute significantly to the article (e.g. identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text) and must not serve a purely decorative purpose. Using fair use album covers in album chronologies is therefore inappropriate. This issue was specifically discussed after the Album infobox 2 template was created (this template had "last cover", "this cover" and "next cover" parameters which allowed adding album covers to chronologies). After extensive discussion the template was redirected to Infobox Album and deprecated . Jogers 14:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Well the rule states that it shouldn't be used for purely decorative purposes. Although those pictures do add decoration, they do help the user browse the albums based on picture. For example, a user might recognize the cover of an album, but may not recall the name.--Xxplosive 23:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not a lawyer. It's just one of the points raised at Album infobox 2's TfD and previous discussions . It was back in 2005 so consider discussing it again at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums or Wikipedia talk:Fair use. It would be much easier and more straightforward to create additional fields in Infobox Album - creating a separate template is now not necessary. But personally, I don't think that using album covers in this fashion is a good idea and I would be surprised if we reached different consensus nowadays. Jogers 12:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply and for the links. Peace.--Xxplosive 00:00, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Musicians guidelines
Those proposals have been sitting there for months. I'm trying to somehow get the word out to interested parties to bring it to a definitive conclusion. (Perhaps if album covers are excluded from the finalized guidelines, that can go some way towards pushing back the fair-use tide.) –Unint 04:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Album tag
I believe that I copied that from the album page quite a while ago... it's easy enough for me to remove that last |, but I really can't remember from where I got the original. SkierRMH 02:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Sandbox
Your recent edit to Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Sandbox (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 17:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

AutoWikiBrowser/Sandbox
Added to the ignore list for AntiVandalBot....... a few new pages had sprung up since the bot last ran :) -- Tawker 19:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Album tag
Thanks, I will be careful not to do that by accident again. Happy Pi Day! Dar-Ape 16:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Capitalisation
I wasn't aware there was a standard capitalisation of the English language, but in consideration of the image on When the Sun Goes Down, shouldn't it be at When The Sun Goes Down as per the artist's choice? Dmn € &#1332;&#1396;&#1398; 23:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It should be When the Sun Goes Down as per Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Jogers 23:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

mb20
Please stop incorrectly capitalising the band's name. The name is not capitalised, as per: The Official 'Site Last.FM The mb20 Official Fan Club The Naming Convention on Their Album Covers

Please stop and revert back your edits. Any more edits of this nature and i will warn you for vandalism, as you now know better. Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  11:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * My edits are in line with Wikipedia:Naming conventions. See also Talk:Matchbox Twenty. I suggest that you take a closer look at Vandalism before you warn me. Jogers 11:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Then surely the procedure then is to put a disclaimer on, which makes mention of the capitalisation being for technical reasons. Besides, the naming conventions refer to the article name, not how it is spelt in the article. Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  11:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The article mentions that the band name is sometimes typeset as "matchbox twenty" which is perfectly enough. Technical restrictions are not the case here. Jogers 11:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

The naming convention is a technical restriction on wikipedia pages, and the article should state this, wikipedia is the only place, minus unofficial, amateur and non-expert 'sites, where i have seen the capitalisation. If i renamed Microsoft as Micro$oft and claimed it is sometimes typeset as Microsoft, would this work just as fine? in both cases the official spelling has been replaced with a wiki-friendly version and not explained as such. Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  11:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, most pages I found on Google refer to them as "Matchbox Twenty". Manual of Style (trademarks) is another relevant guideline: follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment. Renaming Microsoft to Micro$oft would be a good example if the company officially used the second spelling. In that case the article should be named just Microsoft and possibly mention the stylized typography in the lead section. This would be more similar to this case when "official" capitalization is replaced with proper one. Jogers 12:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

What most places do is irrelevant, the point i am trying to make here is that official sources spell it without capitalisation, as per here. Since mb20 is not trademarked, it doesn't come under the rules relating to trademarks. And whilst the band uses this spelling, would it, then, be correct to write mATCH bOX tWENTY? this is exactly the same spelling, is it not? Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  12:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * What official sources do is less relevant than what secondary sources do. The proper capitalization in English language is "Matchbox Twenty". I'm not sure what is your point about "mATCH bOX tWENTY". Jogers 12:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, i should have made it more clear what i meant. My point is, one cannot claim official and unofficial spellings of a name has a bearing on capitalisation. Capitalisation doesn't have an effect on a spelling of a name as per a point i thought you were making a while back. To get back to the point. Official literature/ websites of the band write the name in lowercase and although there are rules about capitalising in article titles and capitalising trademarks, i can see no rule which says one must replace correct representations of the band name with incorrect ones. Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  12:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * According to what some folks say at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (trademarks) the band name qualifies as trademark. Please, consider discussing your doubts there. Jogers 13:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

That refers to none english characters. Think about the absurdity created here, rules exist- but rules have exceptions. Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  13:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't follow. WP:MOS-TM refers not only to special characters but also says to "capitalize trademarks, as with proper names" and "follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment". I find this perfectly clear. The issue of non-standard capitalization of band names has been discussed on several occasions and as far as I know the consensus was always in favor of standard English capitalization. I don't see a reason to make an exception in this case. Jogers 13:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, i see what you're saying, but in my opinion the whole precedent is backwards, and in matters of capitalisation- the band's standard should be the adopted standard. I agree as with matters of the Prince logo and Korn, where its a character that is the problem, but when a band uses a particular case it should be the same here- even if only in the interest of accurate articles. The point is moot now anyway and we've kinda gone off topic but i will say this- in certain instances things need to evolve from simplistic rules and laws which do not take every eventuality. The rule of law states that in order to stay relevant rules must evolve- by using the artist's official capitalisation, we have a new precedent and the system works- otherwise too literal an interpretation, which granted- stops abuse and keeps everything to a similar standard, creates an absurdity. Cheers, Jonomacdrones  (talk)  14:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I see no absurdity here but consider sharing your thoughts at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (trademarks). Consensus can change although I find it quite unlikely in this case. There is nothing special about this band name that would differentiate it from The Pillows or Kiss among many examples of articles that sparked extensive discussions about usage of non-standard capitalization of band names in Wikipedia articles. I'm sorry I wasn't more convincing. Jogers 14:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess I just don't understand why the groups KISS, matchbox twenty, or the pillows cannot be left in their correct typeset. I understand the limitations of the actual page name, but if I was the creator of the name of a band and it was used incorrectly, I would not be very happy. There are references all over the Internet, including official ones, which show that the capitalization is NOT corresponding to the standard of the English language, and in most cases this was done on purpose. It is not an accurate representation of the name ... I thought one of the things Wikipedia tried to strive for was accuracy. Firerescuelieut 21:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

black tape for a blue girl related articles
Why on EARTH have you killed the capitalisation on all of these? That is NOT what they are called- the band makes a point of not capitalising their own name, their album names and their song names. Why did you change them all? J Milburn 14:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Please see Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Manual of Style (trademarks), WikiProject Albums and WikiProject Music/MUSTARD. Jogers 15:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

So why capitalise them but not iPod, for instance, which is also a trademark? J Milburn 15:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * iPod is specifically discussed at WP:MOS-TM. Jogers 15:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, why is it any different? Surely, that also covers band, album and song names? J Milburn 15:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It is different because the second letter is capitalized as explained in the guideline. Jogers 15:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, if you say so... J Milburn 15:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Removing covers from the chronology?
Why would you do that? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Central_Cartel#Discography —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tasco 0 (talk • contribs) 04:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

Thanks
Hi, Thanks for pointing out the right use of the album template to me Sorenw 13:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Buck-O-Nine
Please leave the Buck-O-Nine page alone, as you are breaking links.Buck09

giertych
so, finally someone saw my edit. hmm. gr8 work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.206.229.194 (talk • contribs)

"Get off"
What makes you say that "get off" is a phrasal verb? Like "get on", it's merely the verb "get" with a preposition of direction; there's no new meaning not derived from the meanings of the two elements. --Mel Etitis ( Talk ) 16:01, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * That's OK; I didn't mean to sound too aggressive about it, as the question of phrasal verbs is one that anybody can get mixed up about, and I've got it wrong about some verbs in the past. When I used to teach English as a foreign language, it was a topic that I dreaded having to explain. --Mel Etitis  ( Talk ) 16:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

AWB Feature Request: Track Listing
Hi, Can you confirm i've done this right - All instance of anything like "Track Listing" or "track listing" etc etc, need changing to "Track listing"

Like this diff

Cheers

Reedy Boy 23:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

"Date preferences"?
It seems that last January you edited a lot of files, including many which I created, to change references to " in music" to simply send you to the " " page. This is counterproductive, and I've been reversing these changes whenever I find them. But what puzzles me is your explanation, "allowing date preferences to work." Following the link, I see nothing which might be construed as a Wikipedia policy (that Wikipedia prefers plain dates to " in " links?), and in fact I think that if there is anything that might resemble a policy it is to use the most specific link posible. I do not understand why you have done this, and your explanation gives no clue. I therefore will consider it my duty to reverse these changes whenever I find them, and I hope that you will desist in the future. -- BRG 20:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest
Dear Jogers,

Would you please skip over the Eurovision Song Contest article in your AWB editing. Thank you. EuroSong talk 14:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Because I would rather you not. If you wish to discuss this, please enter into a discussion on the article's talk page. In the meantime, I am disappointed that it looks like you wish to start an edit war, since you made changes directly yourself (not using AWB) after I asked you politely to stop. EuroSong talk 16:57, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Plus, you can see that the majority of uses of this song title include the capital "Of": hits. EuroSong talk 17:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I never said I own the article; and I'm quite familiar with that policy, thank you very much. I was simply pointing out to you that - since your edits were CLEARLY contested by myself - then the accepted course of action is for you to take your proposed edits to the article's talk page, instead of just deliberately re-doing them. I see you have now started a discussion on the page - thank you. That is the correct course of action. We shall leave it up to consensus to decide. EuroSong talk 20:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I have just made no further comments right now because I've been quite busy. I intend to dispute the MoS: both the actual guidelines, and the extent to which these "rules" should apply to in-line text (as opposed to only article titles, which is what the MoS heading is primarily about). However, because it's probably going to be some time until I get around to that, I shall let your changes stand. No point in warring over this. EuroSong talk 14:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Keel - The Final Frontier.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Keel - The Final Frontier.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The policy says that the boilerplate text is not sufficient on its own to justify a fair-use rationale. Fair use rationales need to include an explanation of why that specific image needs to be in that specific article, and the image needs to be used for some sort of critical commentary - that is, the image needs to be discussed in the context of the article somewhere. I understand that this isn't the prevailing usage on Wikipedia right now, but that is pretty clearly what our policy states. This is an issue of Foundation policy regarding copyrights, not consensus, so I don't know what taking it to the Wikiproject's talk page would accomplish. I am not proposing anything new or doing anything but asking people to follow existing policy. (ESkog)(Talk) 20:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Wilson_Pickett_-_The_Sound_of_Wilson_Pickett.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Wilson_Pickett_-_The_Sound_of_Wilson_Pickett.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

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 any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Bigr Tex  22:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Nickel Creek!
I've seen by your edits that you might like Nickel Creek...I invented this WikiProject to help improve the articles, but I can't do it alone! Please consider! - Thamusemeantfan 01:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wilson_Pickett_-_The_Sound_of_Wilson_Pickett.jpg
I have tagged Image:Wilson_Pickett_-_The_Sound_of_Wilson_Pickett.jpg as no rationale, because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. Thank you. Bigr Tex  17:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for adding the rationales. They help the fair use experts determine if the given claim of fair use is appropriate.  My understanding is that album covers on the pages about the albums are safe, but it's easier to require the rationales everywhere. ~  Bigr  Tex  19:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

What's with the colon?
On List5, you have the links with a colon e.g. Does the colon do something special? I know it does with categories, but not sure what it means for an article. Just curious. --Fisherjs 13:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * A Journey Into Space
 * It's just the way the AWB saves lists of pages since recently. I don't know why. Jogers 15:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Fair use rationale example
It's not a bad fair-use rationale; I would prefer to see more inclusion of critical commentary about the cover but I can live without it. My issue is that I think we will see (as we already see from other WikiProjects) a bunch of copy-pasting without actually justifying an image's use in a particular article. The whole reason we have to have fair-use rationales is because it isn't enough just to copy-and-paste a boilerplate rationale. Don't panic - your images are alright; I just don't really think it's a good idea to have a generic rationale in that article. It might be better if we found some great examples of rationales (like Image:As Nasty As They Wanna Be cover.jpg) to link to for users to look at. Are you aware of any other really strong examples like that one? (ESkog)(Talk) 16:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Films cap. offer
Many thanks for the offer!! I'd be glad to 'host' the list in my sub-userpage, where I already have a "toolbox" set up for easy reference User:SkierRMH/My Sandbox/Film toolbox. I'd be willing to accept a goodly number of false positives, as long as the net is wide enough to catch all of the real ones! I've been trying to fix them as I go (a basic arrgh to the Japanese titles) - this would be a great help! SkierRMH 05:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Is the link above ok? or is it better to put it in a separate subfolder? If the second is the case - feel free to create one under my username.  Thanks.  SkierRMH 09:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * THANKS!!! Just a question on deletion of the created redirect pages... is it ok to request a "speedy delete" of the incorrect capped pages?  I'm not sure of the protocol on that.  Thanks for any advice you can provide.  SkierRMH 19:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Believe it or not, not only do I check for double redirects, I normally will go to the "what links here" and follow all of the article links, correcting the old names within those articles. Probably not necessary, but my obsessive-compulsive nature just doesn't like loose ends like that!  SkierRMH 22:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Who is Cletus...
Put it there to double check that it wasn't an intentional mis-cap in the official title - one other source had the caps this way, wanted to look into it further - then went to bed. Will follow up on it today after work. Ciao! :) SkierRMH 15:35, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Double checked - & moved! SkierRMH 06:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Betty Blowtorch And Her Amazing True Life Adventures
Wanna confirm my gut instinct on this one? The actual title is:
 * "Betty Blowtorch (And Her Amazing True Life Adventures)"

My instinct is to do the move to that title as I typed, with the And left like that because of the ( - right??

I also put two items on the exception list. SkierRMH 06:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)