User talk:Kitchen roll/Archive 2

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:19, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Talk:Saint Dominic's Preview/Comments
A tag has been placed on Talk:Saint Dominic's Preview/Comments requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ww2censor (talk) 17:12, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Images
Thanks for the link - I just found that website recently and used it already for images. I think the BSOTR image looks okay. Don't you? Agadant (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Ray Charles vandalism
Will you also check the Ray Charles article every day for vandalism? It's a mystery to me why the disgusting, destructive vandals are so attracted to this article. Agadant (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

song articles
I guess one thing we have in common is we both know how hard we have worked on the song articles. They are as well written and as notable as almost any others on Wikipedia, in my opinion. I think you feel the same. Agadant (talk) 02:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree with you, We have put in many hours on those song articles and one editor can't decide they are not notable, especially one not familiar with Van's recordings except for the Bang material.  (United we Stand..Divided We Fall...) And I have not fought putting the Bang material into Wikipedia, although I myself do not feel like it should be included in any official discography or even the template but I have left that alone for now, because I do not want to spend the time or energy on it.   Thanks,  Kitchen roll, and I agree about the vandalism issue.  Agadant (talk) 16:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank You
Kitchen roll, thanks for all your good work and I hope this holiday season will be the best ever for you! Agadant (talk) 21:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Writing this from a very even, happy and balanced frame of mind: Have you forgotten that an independent editor agreed that the editor involved was obviously retaliating and either (you or I) should take him to edit conflict?      That's not me talking, that's someone else's viewpoint. I'm also wanting everyone to get along but I will maintain my right to assume my editing skills, knowledge and judgment are as good as either you or Cloonmore and therefore insist on my right to dissent if I disagree but I will not put my utmost energy into getting into subjective dialogues with other editors. Music is a very subjective subject in the first place and probably next to religion and politics causes the most hard feeling for opposing views.  Thanks, and Happy Holidays! Agadant (talk) 14:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Great, I'm all for that but I think the articles should stand alone and not be incorporated into the album article as suggested by someone with no more knowledge in editing than you or I. The interested parties in Van Morrison's songs have as much right to read a song article on his memorable songs as any other major singer-songwriter such as Bob Dylan. Remember that Rolling Stone and other important critics rank Van Morrison next to Dylan in influence.  Agadant (talk) 15:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * One of the most useful features of a separate song article is the featured musicians on it (which you have included in many) and the other albums and videos it has appeared on as well as covers. These can not be addressed properly except in a separate article. Agadant (talk) 15:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I do not like the formatting of the songs as on His Band and the Street Choir and Moondance. I have spent a few minutes looking over album articles for Bob Dylan and U2 and have only found the one album Desire with the song articles in such a manner. I personally find it distracting to the article and it is not commonly done. Well, I couldn't find it anywhere but Desire, Moondance and His Band and the Streetchoir. Kitchen roll, I also noted that you rated the album, Desire as TOP on Wikiproject Albums.  I don't know who is allowed to do the ratings but I don't think just any editor can decide this.  I certainly wouldn't rate them myself. (Not getting on you, just being informative.) I guess I have no choice but to spend time on here with my viewpoints as it seems like if you don't you become unimportant in making decisions on articles that have consumed some of your life's hours.  Agadant (talk) 17:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Your comments
Hello, I'm replying to comments you made on my talk page and elsewhere. You seem like a sensible fellow and in my experience have been willing to engage in dialogue about proposed edits and disagree respectfully. So I'm sorry and surprised of late to see you get caught up in the hysteria that appears to be the calling card of User:Agadant. A notability tag is simply a notice that an article may not be up to snuff and could use improvement to meet the notability criteria. (See WP:N). It is meant to draw attention to the article. (And it did!) It is not a proposal for deletion. It is not a "claim" by me that an article is not notable. It does not mean that I don't "like" a particular song. (E.g., I've owned No Guru for ~20 years -- since before you were born, and I think "In the Garden" if a fine song, but still believe the article could use improvement or be merged in the album article. Thank you for making some recent improvements.) Agadant's reactions are bizarre and outlandish, but, then, I have no idea of what to make of a Wiki editor who won't dialogue, so I won't speculate. You and I chatted about the notability issue some months ago, and I recall you agreeing that merging some of the songs into album articles might indeed make sense. You appear to have changed your view. I have no issue with that. But please don't fall into Agadant's bad habits of making wild accusations, assuming bad faith, and reverting whatever you don't agree with. Thank you.Cloonmore (talk) 02:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. I'd recommend that you go back to your archives to read what I and others have been saying for months about song notability. As another editor wisely stated (before me) in response to your reference to other less notable song articles: "an article is not automatically notable just because there are articles already on Wikipedia about less notable stuff. You can see how this would create a free-for-all, I'm sure." As for your question to me about why I said that poorly sourced Dylan articles were "OK", I said no such thing. What I wrote was: "'I haven't seen any Dylan song articles that I'd consider non-notable, but maybe some are out there. Back to Van: I seriously doubt whether some of these songs, like 'Stranded', are notable. I think you'd be more well-advised to direct your efforts at incorporating those song articles into the relevant album articles. For an excellent example of this style, see the 'Song Information' section of the article on Desire.'" I stand by that. I think Desire's a good album with many good songs, and if you examine that article, you'll see that most of the tracks are well-discussed therein (not in separate articles), and that some of the song sections in that article are more well developed (even tho' lacking citations) than some of the Van song articles I've tagged. A very merry Christmas to you and yours. Cloonmore (talk) 13:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

"All the Tired Horses"
You're right, I'd never seen that one. It's a pretty unremarkable song from a pretty bad album, and the article is weak. I slapped a tag on it. Let's see if anyone has the ability to improve it. Cloonmore (talk) 16:33, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Understood, but I edit not for the sake of it but only where I think I can contribute something. I don't have anything to contribute to that article, and what's written there by others doesn't appear to measure up, but maybe somebody knows something that I don't about the song, its significance, etc. Don't know why a WP:N tag should cause such hyperventilating and an edit war by some, but if so, so be it. (Be bold!) Maybe it will inspire someone to improve it. Cloonmore (talk) 17:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. FYI, one of the very first articles I created, re the American guitarist Jody Harris, was slapped with a notability tag (as well as an "unsourced" tag) within a half-hour of its creation! Rather than get defensive, I took the tag as a fair criticism per Wiki guidelines and a challenge, and I worked to improve the article. I didn't remove the tag for 3 months, until I felt I could defend the article on its own merits as meeting at least the minimal notability criteria (not that it doesn't still need work). That, IMO, is the way the process is supposed to work! Cheers. Cloonmore (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, I don't own the Collis book. But even if I did, IMO, a biographer's mere mention of a song, like a reviewer's mention of a song in the course of an album review, does not by itself make a song notable. Van biographers are nearly as obsessive as Dylan biographers, but not every word the guy uttered is notable (and I say that as a big Dylan fan). I still, for example, fail to see the notability of "That's Entrainment", and a BBC drivetime guy's comment doesn't enlighten me (pun intended). Anyway, I take you comments as constructive and will continue to edit where I think I can help improve an article.Cloonmore (talk) 17:57, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * KR, you can see all the song articles whose notability I questioned just by looking at Agadant's contributions page. His/her aggressive reverting is easy to spot. :/ "BtR" is a better article than when I first questioned it, but it still doesn't tell me why the song merits an article. It wasn't a single; it wasn't a hit; it hasn't been covered by anyone else. From what I read, it's lyrically and musically similar to many, many other Van songs. A few reviewers from minor papers apparently praised it in the course of their album reviews, but so what? Every album review necessarily includes discussions of the album's tracks. Does the best or second- or third-best track on every album deserve its own article? I guess some might argue so, but I'm not so sure. Cloonmore (talk) 15:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, KR, I saw your list and will take a look when I have a chance. I see you're doing some good work. Happy new year. Cloonmore (talk) 02:43, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

note scroller "thingy"
Just to let you know I "ripped off" your idea with the notes scroller thingy and gave it to Paul McCartney too. He needed it bad as he had like 349 notes. Thanks, Kitchen roll, Agadant (talk) 20:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Wondering
I've been looking at the Bob Dylan article more now that it has been worked on so much, and was wondering if in your new reference to Nick Drake, there may be a quotation referring to the NIck Drake influence that you could write into the reference as they do in the BD article references sometimes? Ha! We almost had a collision there! I usually go back a little later and read my edits again and see them in a new light - errors and all! Agadant (talk) 22:09, 9 January 2009 (UTC) i formatted one for the Elton John quote in the manner that I'm talking about. But if the quote is too long, (you can use only part) or etc., don't worry about it. Your reference as you've entered it, is already fine. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 13:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That's good, Kitchen roll..I mainly was interested myself in seeing it...I'll have to become more familiar with Nick Drake. I've heard him mentioned a lot but don't know anything much about his music.  The Wiki article on him is well done, isn't it? Agadant (talk) 14:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quote! Agadant (talk) 15:11, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Foggy Lyttle
Do you know—or can you find any information about Foggy Lyttle, who was important enough to have the album, Magic Time dedicated to him? Seems like he was a fantastic guitarist who should have an article. I've often thought about starting one but can't find much although I know he is much respected in the music business. Do you want to try to work on this together? If so, I'll see what I can find. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 18:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I found this as the first link when I googled his name. Seems like he had played with many great artists, as I thought I remembered from reading about him over time.   Van is only one of many.

Agadant (talk) 17:12, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Foggy Lyttle - virtualtourist.com

covers
Maybe you misunderstood that I'm trying to put an end to these endless careless, usually minor entries for everyone's favorite cover band. Or in some cases I'm sure they are put in by some small town band trying to use a Wiki article to get a mention. Not referring to Johnny Rivers, but that opens it up to all kinds of comments. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 17:37, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

song articles
I'm going over the song articles that I started originally or worked extensively in the past and getting them in better form. I know you'll want to help with looking for errors that I may have made in the process, but I work best by going back a day or so later and taking a second look myself. That'll also leave you free to work on whatever you may have planned. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 00:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops! Answered your message on my own talk page. Agadant (talk) 16:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Websites, downoads, etc.
I don't know where you are getting your ideas as to Reviews, references, allowing downloads, etc., but that's exactly what I'm having to clean up. Promotional edits for other artists (or even for Van as far as commercially slanted websites. ) I know you didn't put the reviews I'm referring to, or the artist's websites (Well, until now with J. Rivers) or downloads but you did edit afterwards without removing. I think I'm applying the rules correctly - it's what I learned when I first starting writing on music articles. Have the rules changed? Hope you don't take this wrong. (It's Friendly!) I'm not sure about Johnny Rogan, sometimes. I'm trying to write him off the articles as much as possible. Agadant (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Here's the point to keep in mind—What if all cover artists were given equal treatment and each had their own website included as a reference and they could have a link to a website with a download available or if amazon & ebay were allowed as references for all albums or songs, etc. It would get pretty crazy!  So you can't make exceptions for one.  The same with Youtube videos.  I really wish those were not allowed at all. Agadant (talk) 17:56, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this
Hey, Kitchen roll, you're one of the good guys, that I know! I was just surprised that you didn't check out the previous edits when you went on an article. It's so hard to keep it all cleaned up, isn't it? I'm going to put a little more on the YDPNPBYDPTR about what the lyrics say. Only VM, in his typical non-commercial way would title a song thus. I mean you can't exactly see it on the Top Billboard 100. BTW: What's with people, like the one giving a new rating on the Top albums, according to his tastes. Everyone is on an ego trip! Agadant (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

BSOTR
I remember checking that out when I first started editing (2006) and found it was true, although in those days there was very little sourced on VM's or any other articles on Wiki. So I've never questioned it for that reason. I'll have to look for a source but I don't think it should be removed at this point. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 19:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Tench
Kitchen Roll, many thanks for your generous and helpful input with this page. I do not understand the C rating, especially against the Freddie King page which was given a B and A ratings!

If the discography was more 'encyclopedic' would this help?

I have had input on many musician pages on my journey with Tench and this has emphasized that Tench should have good represntation in Wikipedia! Best wishes and happy editing!--Tunebroker (talk) 15:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Live at the Roxy Van Morrison
Yes I know it was originally a Warner promo but it was Released in Italy (1989) by Seagull (SEAGU009) - trust me! Regarding Personnel AMG is suposed to be reliable!--Tunebroker (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Kitchen roll: according to this reliable source, the release by Seagull was a bootleg. Hate to say that after Tunebroker said: trust me!. Hope this helps!  Agadant (talk) 20:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Live at the Roxy
You and Agadant have done good research on this. Indeed Seagull(Italy) was known as a bootleg label. I got the info from AMG sometime ago and noted it down. Bootleg or not it was reissued again by Seagull, after 1989, but OI cannot trace my origianl notes on this.

I understand completely your rational for removing this, also now that there are tracks from the "Live at the Roxy" promo, on the remastered version of Wavelength, this bootleg has much less significance.

I will run it through Catco (the official reference point for the music industry), when I have a moment.--Tunebroker (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Quality rating
Thanks agin for your help on this. I too will dig around for a photo. I look forward to the Bobby Tench page being improved! Regards --Tunebroker (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Boxer album Bloodletting
I see that in your clean up of Boxer, that you feel that Bloodletting should be two words. On the album cover it is spelt Bloodletting.

Can I change the spelling back to Bloodletting. Also there were links to the boxer albums, can they be restored?

I appreciate your help with the Bobby Tench page and the time you are giving it. I hope that my efforts to make the page better, don't hinder you! --Tunebroker (talk) 21:18, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Tench
Hi Kitchen Roll. I noticed that you have been keeping an eye on The Bobby Tench page-thanks. You will notice a new layout and headings. I feel these reflect the article and the musician. I have also contibuted to the links from the Bobby Tench page, have a look and see if you can improve them. Thanks for your help. Do you think we are nearer a better grade on the Bobby Tench page?--Tunebroker (talk) 01:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Microsoft Explorer and {{Reflist|3}
I notice that when using {{Reflist|3} (or any other column instruction), the columns only view in Firefox. Have you any advcie on how to make the Notes columns show in more than one column when vieweed in MS Explorer?--Tunebroker (talk) 09:54, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Release date
I have worked on this article for 2 months, many hours of research. I do know that it shows released in the UK last week. i didn't miss that. I also checked how the album Working on a Dream by Bruce Springsteen was done and when the tag was taken off and it was with the US release even though it was released first in Europe. Thanks for trying to help, but give me a little credit please and wouldn't you like to be the one yourself to take off the tag if you were me and put in so much work? Think about it? Agadant (talk) 21:19, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I took the UK release date off because you didn't seem to understand that this didn't mean it was officially released, just because it was out in the UK. As far as the tag goes, of course, it wouldn't be important for you to remove it, you're not invested in the article. I asked you to think about it, I see that you were not able to get the point. I will remember that you're only fifteen as you show on your user page.  I mostly try to overlook that. As far as Van's company Exile goes, they show March 10th as a release date on  Ytube and it is their release.  Thanks, Agadant (talk) 14:42, 21 February 2009 (UTC) As

Updating ratings
What's this about? Those are all different Wikiprojects with different member editors rating in most cases, and even if not why would you feel like you should rate them when you have done some editing on them? Doesn't make sense. I know you look for things to do but there is so much especially outside of the Van Morrison articles. Look around, everywhere there are articles in need of help. Why do you continue picking and picking at these same ones with edits like this that are basically meaningless? Thanks, Agadant (talk) 17:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

New song article
You should have (and I would have otherwise) given the new editor a day or two to develop his article a little more before jumping on it. Agadant (talk) 23:52, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't find your reasons valid, although I'm sure you are sincere in what you think.   I notice on "Everyone" you jumped on it within 30 minutes after he created it with  six edits to his one that had less than half the content of his one.   That could be intimidating to an editor who was looking for the proper way to put in some more material. I know how stressed you've made me feel when you jump on what I'm working on at the same time.  You really don't have to feel like you have the responsiblity for these articles (and even Van's album sales.)  I always check on them even if I don't edit everyday and have for 2-1/2  years now.  As for the watchful editor, that was a strictly personal move and fairly evident and documented. You shouldn't worry so much and just enjoy your teenage years.  Thanks, Agadant (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It was a little over one hour from when I wrote the above that the comment was posted. Everything is read that I write on these VM articles, even our talk pages.  This will be read too! Agadant (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Tribute album
I'll upload an image for the new album soon. I don't think I knew about this album. Looks like a good one. Agadant (talk) 19:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Per this edit the tribute albums were changed in the infobox to compilation: revision history: 20 Feb. 2009/ No Prima Donna. I asked the editor if the information on the discography page and template should be changed also from tribute album to compilation album and he said "no" - just in the infobox. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 17:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You know me, I always question everything also. If you read the discussion he refers to though, you'll see that it was a decision that was arrived at by editors at Template: infobox album.  Agadant (talk) 18:02, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Foggy Lyttle
Hmm....interesting. I suggested on your talk page in late January 2009: Foggy Lyttle that since I had often thought of starting an artilce on him that we could work on one together. I noticed on March 26 (with no notice to me) that you created the article (using  in part a source I furnished) and on March 27 deleted my friendly &  inclusive offer from your talk page? Will be fun to see how you explain how you were just naive and wouldn't have minded it yourself, only thinking of others and the good of the Van Morrison articles, etc., etc., etc........Agadant (talk) 13:00, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Why don't you ever work on your own articles? I set mine up for myself to work on, not for your convenience. Agadant (talk) 14:27, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiBirthday
I saw from here that it's been exactly one year since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 18:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Band members
I actually used a photo taken of the band naming each band member on stage to list the band in the main article. I, of course had seen the fan's write up of the band that you cited but I don't use fan's comments or lists to reference edits in the main article. The fan is probably right, I will admit, but to me "seeing is believing" and the photo showed the band exactly as I listed it. Agadant (talk) 16:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I removed the band listing as I have often thought would be best as it is not really verifiable from reliable sources and changes too often. Even more so now when his concerts are more infrequent and different musicians usually are in the band when he  plays in different countries.  So don't feel like it has to do with your edit.  Thanks, Agadant (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 07:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Van Morrison
I'm looking at this article, and it is stacking up as mostly meeting the criteria for a Good Article. I think some of the structuring and section titles need looking at, and we need to drill down on some of the wording and detail, and look into a possible section on personal life, but it seems to me at the moment to be well researched and mostly well written. I think a week or two of polishing it up and we can nominate it. It can sometimes be a long wait for someone to review it, and it can then be a period of addressing the reviewer's concerns, but I feel confident Van Morrison will be a Good Article this summer.  SilkTork  *YES! 22:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. I thank you for the message on my talk page, but I have decided to stop editing the Van Morrison pages for the time being (unless my help is absolutely vital). I think that you and user Agadant will do a good job on making the article GA. Thanks Kitchen roll (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If you could keep an eye on the talkpage and chip in with your view now and again that would be helpful. It's useful to have a different perspective, and for edits to be challenged. Agadant picked up on the negative comment on Morrison's live performances in the lead and I think he is right so I have removed that. Regards  SilkTork  *YES! 12:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Van Morrison references in Bobby Tench article
Hi kitchen Roll. I notice your comments on these references on the history page. I am not sure what was going on there but I notice that there is no reference to Tench and Feat being recommended by Peter Van Hooke on Miguel Terol's, Musicians Olympus web site. That ref may be better placed elsewhere in that section.

I can also address the comments. The problem for me is that what has been written is not incorrect but I am not aware of any written primary souces covering these facts. So, I will probably end up removing these factoids!

Did you ever find a solution to the columns issue I raised sometime back, on your yalk page?

Best wishes--Tunebroker (talk) 16:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Tench page and Ref List option
Good tips, yea an input on {{Reflist|3} issue would help-thanks --Tunebroker (talk) 21:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Bobby Tench rating RESULT
The article has made B rating but failed GA. I am not sure what the reviewer found confusing and am not a beleiver in the strong emphasis on personal details, an obsession of our times. Until a full interview is conducted with Tench and a primary source reference is obtainable of such an event, I feel that we have maximised the potential of this article for the time being.

Many thanks for your efforts in bringing this to B rating. I am sure that you may have more to add and edit in the future!

Meanwhile I have concluded my research into references and those have been added, along with some 'tweaks'.

Enjoy your work and stay strong with your edits.--Tunebroker (talk) 10:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Cheer up
Hey, kid. Don't take this stuff so seriously. You're a fine editor, better than the vast majority out there because you've got interests and passion and drive. Don't let yourself be bullied by some anonymous jerk who sets him/herself up as the arbiter of others. You've got nothing to apologize for. Wikipedia can be a big waste of time, so don't stick around if you're not enjoying it. But don't leave just because some nobody told you to get lost. You've got as much right to edit any article as anyone else. All the best.Cloonmore (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your help on my new article but it is not a listing to contain every cover of every song. I have spent hours verifying every artist on the list for prominence and accuracy on the cover version and plan on more checking and  putting more information and referencing before adding more to it. A project that I plan on taking time to complete, so feel free to use your valuable time elsewhere. Thanks, Agadant (talk) 16:40, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I took it off because of all your recent editing - thinking you might get the hint. I don't like working fast and furious and I have plans for the list to eventually be completely accurate and up to date as far being a list of prominent cover artists.  Thanks again for your help. Agadant (talk) 16:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)