User talk:Lost Fugitive

April 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page I Told You So: The Ultimate Hits of Randy Travis has been reverted.

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \babout\.com\b (links: http://countrymusic.about.com/od/cdreviewsmz/fr/rtravisulthits.htm).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 17:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

BlackHawk
I don't know too much about image use policies. You can ask at the help desk. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 17:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Project BlackHawk begins.

dottydotdot (talk) 16:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Project BlackHawk has been put on halt temporarily as problems are resolved.

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Postmarked birmingham.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Postmarked birmingham.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 11:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've tried to fix the rationale, let me know if I solved the problem. Thanks. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You need to explain more than this. Our non-free content criteria require that the copyright holder of non-free images is named, and that the image be helpful in understanding the article and not just decorative. Stifle (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Where would I find the copyright holder? I was looking at similar images and this one doesn't seem to be listed either. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 15:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I do not know where you could find the copyright holder. Thank you for pointing out that other image to me; I have tagged it for deletion also. Stifle (talk) 15:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to look for one where the copyright holder is listed so I can figure it out. Then I'll get back with you. Other than the copyright holder being missing, how does the rationale look now? --Lost Fugitive (talk) 18:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This image seems to have a very extensive copyright non-free use rationale but the copyright holder is not listed. In fact, the upload template does not have a section to state the copyright holder, unless I am mistaken, which is possible since I am a new user. I looked at similar images and they do not have the copyright holder lister either. Do you think the video linked above should be deleted or is there something on it that is not on the image we are discussing, which I could change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lost Fugitive (talk • contribs) 18:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for pointing out that image to me; I have tagged it for deletion also. The requirement to quote the copyright holder is noted at WP:NFCC under point 10a, among other places.
 * The rationale on File:Postmarked birmingham.jpg is sufficient other than for lacking the copyright holder. Stifle (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Love & Gravity
I had to remove most of your content addition to Love & Gravity, as almost all of it was sourced to unreliable lyrics websites that basically didn't back up the information very well if at all. I've kept some of the information which was properly cited. I would suggest trying to expand BlackHawk's main article before going for the albums. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 22:56, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem isn't so much your content as the sources. Things like Metro Lyrics are not reliable sources. If you could have backed it up with reliable sources (CMT, Country Standard Time, GAC, Allmusic, etc.), then maybe. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 23:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand what you're doing. I'm still a creature of habit, and I think that it would make more logical to build up the artist's article before building up the albums (which is exactly what I did with Diamond Rio and McBride & the Ride). Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 23:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Dougweller (talk) 18:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, since you don't understand why, it is the statement " I find your actions appalling and I hope you can better explain your actions rather than defacing an article.". Saying I've defaced an article is accusing me of vandalism. Dougweller (talk) 18:50, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm not done. I'm doing twenty trillion other things at once so I can't always respond instantly. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 04:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Blackhawk
Their official website lists it with a lower case H, so I can presume that's the official spelling. It's also listed with a lowercase H on Billboard's charts. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 17:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Love & Gravity
Okay, I still don't like the use of lyrics sites (even reputable soures like CMT) to verify the song's content. E-Chords and Amazon shouldn't be cited either, as the former is unreliable and the latter is a commercial-only site. I really can't think of a better way to present most of the song summaries without delving into original research, so I think it would be best for the article to have subsections only for the two singles from that album, as there does seem to be (barely) sufficient info for them. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 21:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Just one "content" section is fine too. It might need some copy-editing, some of it seems a little wordy. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 22:27, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I still have some issues with the prose, so don't remove the tags yet. I have to go to class, so when I get back I'll help. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 22:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, that looks a little better now. I still think it could be tightened up a little, and it needs more actual sources besides just lyrics sites, but I think most of the original research has been removed. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 01:33, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Ships of Heaven
All I did was merge the Ships of Heaven article to the Greatest Hits album, since the Greatest Hits article was fairly short. I don't see what's so questionable about that, it was a bold merge. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 00:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Would it be acceptable to balance out the rest of the article so that there's more info on the entire album? Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 01:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I fleshed out the rest of the album's article, so that there's as much weight on the other songs as there is on "Ships of Heaven". Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 01:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

John Anderson
Good work. User:Tony Fox has been working on fixing up John's biography, so it's good to have two contributors focusing on the same artist. You might want to watch your links though — you had the Easy Money article linking to John Rich instead of John Rich (musician), Shannon Lawson instead of Shannon Lawson (singer), et cetera. It does make a difference. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 17:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Dion
Dion is a disambiguation page; clarification needed as to which (if any) article applies. 58.8.17.151 (talk) 17:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Eddie Rabbitt
Good work. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 16:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Evidence
I left the album article alone, but you really shouldn't link them if they're low charters. The album article is a good enough link. A similiar thing was done on Eric Church. I made an article on his current single "Love Your Love the Most". However, it was redirected to the album article Carolina (Eric Church album), and the single infobox and stuff was merged into that album article (which was similiar to what you had done on Blackhawk's Love & Gravity album article). Then on Eric Church's sinhles table, the link to "Love Your Love the Most" was also erased, meaning that redirect links aren't really supposed to be on a singles table, and since "Hole in My Heart" and "Postmarked Birmingham" were low charters and being just redirect links to the article, it wasn't supposed to have been linked on that table. However, i'm still confused about things on this website despite my 13 months as a member here, so feel free to add the links back on. Or if you want, tell another user about that edit i've made, TenPoundHammer would be the best one to tell about it. But that's just an option. If that's not clear enough, like i said, you can revert your edit back if you want. I was just doing what i thought was proper here at Wikipedia. By the way, the evidence is more of an example, just take a look at Eric Church's singles table, and his Carolina album, and you'll see what i'm talking about. Have a nice day (or night). Ryanbstevens (talk) 03:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Pipe links
I'll say it again. Please don't forget to pipe your links. You had Restless Heart linking to Larry Stewart instead of Larry Stewart (singer). Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 21:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The edit history showed you adding a table of band members only a month ago. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 23:32, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My bad. Sorry for over-warning. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Many otters • One hammer • HELP) 23:40, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Make It Home
No good. The quote from Allmusic wasn't in the link, and the only other sources are directory listings or not related at all to the album. Face it, this album isn't salvageable, there's nothing about it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Make It Home
It doesn't have to be a review, just anything that gives non-trivial information on the album. For instance, I can't find any reviews of What Mattered Most online, but the album produced a #1 single and was on Epic Records, This album was on a small indie label, had no singles, and came and went without a trace, just like at least two of Collin Raye's recent albums. The source you added only very trivially mentions the album, and verifies that he hadn't had a hit since 1990. The fact that he hasn't had a hit since 1990 doesn't pertain to this individual album at all. There are only 192 hits for hit, which is not a lot at all. Just verifying that it exists is usually not enough; it has to have more notability beyond "it exists" to warrant an article. We can verify that it exists and nothing else, so just like Collin Raye's Fearless album in 2007 (which was deleted for not having been covered in sources) it shouldn't have an article either. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that WP:NALBUMS only says that albums by notable artists may be notable, and album articles that can't be expanded beyond a tracklisting should be deleted or redirected. We can't have an article on everything. There's no hope of ever expanding it beyond the stub that it is. Never mind, it seems the consensus is against you anyway. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:59, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * How can it be expanded without delving into original research and citing lyrics sites? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Meh. That'd still get slapped with fact tags I'm sure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Primary source material like that is only acceptable in articles that also have significant information from secondary sources as well — i.e., more than just the most basic information that Allmusic gives. Understand that we have to have some sort of cutoff, or every single trivial release by every artist would be included. We can include it in the discography since we know that it exists, but there's just not enough info out there for a full article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:36, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Images
Actually i took those myself. I didn't find those anywhere. What says that they're not mine? I took those shots myself. This is just a little misunderstanding. Ryanbstevens (talk) 01:51, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I just don't understand about the fact that i'm not the copyright holder of my own pictures. Did i pick the wrong license? If i did should i change it? Ryanbstevens (talk) 01:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * So basically, you're saying that i took the photo, but the photo now belongs to somebody (or something) else, and is not mine anymore? On the image pages, there should be an iPhone data table. By the way, where did you get those pictures on Love & Gravity? Did you take them, or did you find them somewhere? Ryanbstevens (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Never mind. I see what you mean there. Ryanbstevens (talk) 02:19, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Request
Hey, sorry, I don't have the technical capability right now. See if you can get someone else to do it. —Gendralman (talk) 00:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Neal McCoy
Good point. Maybe subsectioning by label would make more sense. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:36, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not even close. It needs way more sources and a section on his critical reception and musical styles. See McBride & the Ride, an article that I started ages ago, for a (very rare) example of a country music GA. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:54, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Roger Miller's article looks a lot better now. Good work. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:15, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Almost all the country music articles are in wretched shape. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:20, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Make It Home AfD
Please read the AfD; to me, there appeared to be a compelling consensus to delete the article as described by its side's proponents. I'm confident in my closing, but if you'd like to take it to DRV, that's certainly within your abilities. One two three... 14:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Eddie Rabbitt
Just letting you know that I failed the GA nomination for Eddie Rabbitt. The article still has several issues which I addressed in the review. I think that the article still needs at least a two- or three-fold expansion with more diverse sources, as almost half of it is cited to Allmusic. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, first of all, "A lot" is two words. "Alot" is a figment of your imagination. :-P As for sources, there are certainly plenty on Google News and Google Books. After I finish my work on The Kentucky Headhunters (which, for the record, has 33 citations), I'll help you expand Eddie Rabbitt's article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 02:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * My expectations aren't too high. I'm guessing you think WP:WIAGA's are. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You don't think the fact that "Every Which Way but Loose" was once the highest chart debut on the country charts is noteworthy? That should certainly be in the article. What about more info on his critical reception? There're also plenty of unsourced passages, such as the second half of the first paragraph in Early life and career, third paragraph of Crossover success, first paragraph of "late career." Even a GA should have a proper citation in every paragraph. The "death" section is also unreferenced, especially the claim "Although during his career he was widely believed to have been born in 1944 (this year can still be found in older publications and texts), it was revealed at the time of his death that he was in fact 56 years old, putting his year of birth in 1941." And like I said, the awards table needs a source too. And please don't forget your links! You were linking to BMI instead of Broadcast Music Incorporated. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. Once I'm done with The Kentucky Headhunters I'll help too. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:14, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

File:Rabbitt wanderer.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Rabbitt wanderer.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 01:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You can't use video screenshots in an infobox. Video screenshots should only be used in sections to discuss the video itself. There is a pretty long standing precedent against using video screenshots for any other purpose. If you want, I can help you find another image of him. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, there aren't likely to be free images of him available, but a video clip still isn't acceptable. I'll see if I can find a promo image or something, like I used for Dan Seals. How about this one? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I added the image I found, which falls under Non-free historic image. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:29, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Roger Miller discography
I added all of Roger Miller's Canadian peaks for you. Eric444 (talk) 06:10, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

George Strait discography
To answer your question about the new George Strait single: I found the information on the Pulse Music Board, Country forum. I have no clue, though, where the author of that post got the info. --Tristinarocks (talk) 20:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The new single is verified here. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:21, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

My life
Hi, I guess I mixed up the tags, I was told is the appropriate one instead of , sorry about that! Lilaac (talk) 21:19, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Ronnie Milsap
Thanks. You could have just removed it from the list yourself. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Oak Ridge Boys
The other albums should have (The Oak Ridge Boys album) as the qualifier, since the parent article has a "The" in it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 13:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

re: Eddie Rabbitt
sorry, I didn't even notice I had - it was unintentional but I'm glad someone noticed! (I hope this is the correct way to reply to you- its not obvious how to respond so my apologies if its not) Lindum

Living for the Night
Oh, I see, I misread your addition. I changed the wording since the source verifies that it's the first solo single of his career that he co-wrote. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:15, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

More stuff
First of all, very good work on the DYKs. You're really getting the hang of writing a proper article. I still think that you should use the cite web template, but that's just a cosmetic issue more than anything else. Anyway, I answered your question at Talk:George Strait discography. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The 3rd Time Around
1.) I added a so that it'll ignore "The" in the title. 2.) You don't have a source citing that it's his only #1 on Top Country Albums. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Eddie Rabbitt
If you want to resubmit this to Good Article nominees, now might be a good time. It looks a lot more developed than the last submission. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 15:13, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Words and Music (Roger Miller album)
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. ≈ Chamal  talk ¤ 04:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

2008 in country music
Please don't add non-top 20 songs to the list. We've decided to make 20 the cutoff, to match other similar music lists (e.g. 2009 in music). Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 23:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The list should not be a compilation of songs that peaked over 20. There are many songs that are notable hits that did not reach the top 20, while there are also some top 20 hits that are not notable. The classification as a "hit" must have a source to back it up, or an all-encompassing source that states that all top 20 songs are automatically "hits." --Lost Fugitive (talk) 00:55, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Using a definitive number prevents any possible argument over what's a "hit". PR people aren't going to call a song a "dud" are they? No, they're going to "hit" the hell out of every song. I agree that the Eddy Arnold song was a milestone, but given the special push that song got just to set a record, maybe it should be listed (with a source) under "notable milestones". Just saying that such-and-such song is a "hit" is so subjective, and giving an actual cutoff point should prevent any argument over what constitutes a "hit". I agree that some songs carry a great deal of notability without even reaching Top 20, and not all Top 20s carry a great deal of notability (especially songs like "15 Minutes", which spent one week at #20 and <15 weeks on the entire chart), but the #20 cutoff is present on other lists such as 2009 in music, and the other country music editors (Ryanbstevens, Caldorwards4, Eric444, Martin4647, etc.) have established a consensus of using #20 in the country articles. I do appreciate your work here, but you sometimes seem unwilling to accept community consensus and you seem to like having things your way and only your way. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 13:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So in other words, the goal of building an encyclopedia and the concept of verifiability is useless? Defend your argument. Why use an arbitrary number rather than notability? Rankings do not make a song a "hit," the media it receives, does. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 22:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Using a specific number prevents arguing back and forth on what isn't a hit. I told you, the other editors have set this as a threshhold, and you're the only one that disagrees with it. Also, "Hit" is a relative term; just because one source calls a song a hit doesn't necessarily mean that another source will say the same. Also, it's an easily verifiable fact that such-and-such song peaked at #2 or #9 or #17; it's an opinion as to whether it's a "hit" depending on what some music critic says. Certain songs are often cited as career songs in reliable sources (e.g. "Independence Day" for Martina McBride), but does that mean that the #1 "Wild Angels" wasn't a hit because it came and went so fast and you don't hear it anymore? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 16:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry TenPoundHammer, but I've lost all respect for you. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 17:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Love & Gravity on hold
Hi. I've reviewed Love & Gravity for GA, and I've put the nomination on hold. You can see my comments here. Tim meh  ( review me ) 02:44, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I just failed your GA nomination because it has been much longer than a week since I put it on hold, and the concerns have not been addressed. Please don't let this discourage you from nominating the article again when you've made the needed improvements, though. Tim  meh  00:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Tim meh  23:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:John J. Hickey.jpg
File:John J. Hickey.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:John Joseph Hickey.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * File:George baxter.jpg is now available as Commons:File:George White Baxter.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * File:John campbell.jpg is now available as Commons:File:John Allen Campbell.jpg. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

"The Long Haul"
It was cut in 2007 during the Cowboy Town sessions. It was released as a promo single via iTunes and Amazon in 2007 but never officially released to radio. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks Hammer. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 19:47, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:14, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism warning
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Tyw7 (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 09:39, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

It Just Comes Natural
Hello User:Lost Fugitive, I noticed on George Strait's It Just Comes Natural CD page, producer Tony Brown is named Tony "Hit Man" Brown. I don't think this is correct and should be reverted back to Tony Brown as all of the other CD's list him by his just his name. I see you have helped to keep George Strait pages clear of vandalism and errors so I was wondering if you could give me any input on this. Thanks, Ngs61 (talk) 17:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention. It seems the name was added with this edit. Other than being inappropriate, I could not find any notable use of the nickname. I will remove it. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 19:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ngs61 (talk) 04:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 17:45, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

WP:Good article reassessment/Eddie Rabbitt/1
Eddie Rabbitt has been nominated for community reassessment. Your comments would be welcome: see the link in the section header. Geometry guy 23:11, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * So me saying that you have WP:OWN issues is an attack, but you calling me "monkey boy" isn't? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Roger Miller
Hi, I am reviewing your GA nomination and have entered some comments at Talk:Roger Miller/GA1. Best wishes, Xtzou ( Talk ) 22:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello, I have picked up this review as it appears that Xtzou has withdrawn from Wikipedia. I shall complete the review tomorrow. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:31, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roger Miller
The article Roger Miller you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Roger Miller for things which need to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Dude, lay off the attacks please. It seems you can't even talk to me anymore without calling me monkey boy. Also, unless you're reverting vandalism, please refrain from editing others' userpages. You've done nothing but insult me in the past few months, so I've taken it to the Administrators' noticeboard to have something done about it. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 03:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive756 regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Moxy (talk) 03:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

July 2010
Please do not attack other editors, as you did at User talk:TenPoundHammer. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Civility
Calling another editor's actions nonsense as you did here is in conflict with WP:CIVIL. You seem to have a problem interacting with others politely. If this continues, you will be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 05:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Excuse me for calling a spade a spade. Also, next time you post on this page, please be sure to capitalize the title. Thank you.--Lost Fugitive (talk) 05:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I also find it curious that you did not block Ten Pound Hammer for his comments. He called my edits "crap" which is far worse than calling an action "nonsense".--Lost Fugitive (talk) 06:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * it's not an isolated incident.  Toddst1 (talk) 06:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * How often do you use the term "poppycock"?--Lost Fugitive (talk) 06:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that the above link was referring to a non-notable nonsense song.--Lost Fugitive (talk) 06:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for doing this. Toddst1 (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If you really didn't mean it, then that's good. However, I would suggest trying to calm down just a little. I'll see how much of an article I can make on that song. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 19:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think you're going to get blocked since you apologized. Just like I said, please be a little more careful. You're doing fine as far as article editing. I kinda misread your comment and made an article for Lovin' Her Was Easier (Than Anything I'll Ever Do Again), but if you wanna add something to it and/or DYK it, you may. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 20:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Oak Ridge Boys
I would say that a reliable source (Allmusic, Billboard, Joel Whitburn) trumps a fansite every time as far as reliability. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 01:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The site is definitely in the wrong. If "Mama's Table" had charted, it would've been listed under Allmusic or Billboard. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 20:36, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Boys Are Back (The Oak Ridge Boys album)
The article of The Boys Are Back (The Oak Ridge Boys album) that you nominated for as a Good article has failed. The article needs major improvement, before it gets to GA status. See Talk:The Boys Are Back (The Oak Ridge Boys album)/GA1 for the review. Thank you. Novice7 |  Talk  12:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:
 * This permission does not give you any special status or authority
 * Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
 * You may wish to display the Autopatrolled top icon and/or the User wikipedia/autopatrolled userbox on your user page
 * If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it
 * If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 21:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Roger Miller
Can you please tell me why you removed a perfectly good addition to the above mentioned article? The add was viable and verifiable and pertinent to the subject. I will be re adding it to the article if you cannot give a good reason for its removal. Thank you --Canyouhearmenow 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Three reasons: 1. Parodies of songs are not pertinent to the biography of the artist of the original song. However, it may be pertinent to the song's article (in this case "King of the Road"). 2. In relation to #1, the addition altered the flow of the paragraph and swayed the topic. 3. "Musicbuzzer" is not an RS. Thank you and my apologies for not using a proper edit summary. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 00:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The song is not a parody. It is an "answer song" which are far different from parodies. I will accept the argument and agree that it would be better placed in the article relating to the song versus where it was placed. In the future, if you could give a proper edit summary it would help in letting other editors know why you made the revert. Thanks for your attention! --Canyouhearmenow 01:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Rabbittland.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Rabbittland.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 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the notification. I assume an act of vandalism caused this misunderstanding.--Lost Fugitive (talk) 00:08, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ace in the hole band.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Ace in the hole band.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 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Pure country.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Pure country.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ace in the Hole (band)
The article Ace in the Hole (band) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Ace in the Hole (band) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. AJona1992 (talk) 18:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Ace in the hole band.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Ace in the hole band.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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:56, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar
I move barnstars to their own page. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:44, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * ]User:TenPoundHammer/Barnstars. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:46, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ace in the Hole (band)
The article Ace in the Hole (band) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ace in the Hole (band) for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself?

Short but good :) ! Repect to you writing such a good article about a very underground band :) ♫GoP♫ T C N 16:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Just letting you know that I nominated it for Good Article Reassessment. I think it has the potential, but I also think that Pumpkin passed it prematurely. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:42, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Roger miller.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Roger miller.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:07, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

ANI
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 04:45, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
This is your only warning; if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Roger Miller, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. ''You are clearly messing the article up to make a point. The article is in absolutely dire shape and missing sources in a lot of sections. This smacks of article ownership and it's still very dodgy that you came out of retirement just to snipe at me over something so petty.'' Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:37, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Sex & Gasoline
Your work on Sex & Gasoline is very good so far. Thanks for improving the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:24, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:51, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

Replaceable non-free use File:Roger miller show.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Roger miller show.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the file description page and add the text  below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing   with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
 * 2) On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 09:00, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:43, 7 May 2023 (UTC)