User talk:Mattchewbaca/Archive 1

Nomination of Low Happening for deletion
The article Low Happening is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Low Happening until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Broken Bones (song) for deletion
The article Broken Bones (song) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Broken Bones (song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Digital Hearts for deletion
The article Digital Hearts is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Digital Hearts until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Cities Burning Down for deletion
The article Cities Burning Down is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Cities Burning Down until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Into the Chaos for deletion
The article Into the Chaos is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Into the Chaos until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Setting Sun (Howling Bells song) for deletion
The article Setting Sun (Howling Bells song) is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Setting Sun (Howling Bells song) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Blessed Night for deletion
The article Blessed Night is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Blessed Night until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:56, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Wishing Stone for deletion
The article Wishing Stone is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Wishing Stone until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Howling Bells related media


The article Howling Bells related media has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This is all info that should be in the article on the band and has no reason for its own page

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Yaksar (let's chat) 05:59, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, but at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Howling Bells, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted (undone) by ClueBot NG.
 * Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG produces very few false positives, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been detected as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Howling Bells was changed by Mattchewbaca (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.874301 on 2011-02-05T06:13:51+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 06:13, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Howling Bells related media for deletion
The article Howling Bells related media is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Howling Bells related media until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 14:29, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Digital Hearts.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Digital Hearts.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Cities Burning Down.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Cities Burning Down.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Into the Chaos.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Into the Chaos.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Blessed Night.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Blessed Night.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Wishing Stone.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Wishing Stone.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Broken Bones.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Broken Bones.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Low Happening cover art.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Low Happening cover art.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:07, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
-- Lear's Fool 00:30, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Digital Hearts for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Digital Hearts is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Digital Hearts until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Yaksar (let's chat) 02:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

May I suggest
May I suggest adding some new information on these songs into the Howling Bells discography article? There's nothing wrong with having them in the encyclopedia, they just aren't notable enough for their own page.--Yaksar (let's chat) 02:39, 3 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You can suggest that but merging them with the discography doesn't make sense because of the length and detail I put into each song's article. The discography page would become unnecessarily expansive, and two of the songs were even notable enough to chart. mattchewbaca (talk) 02:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Blessed Night.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Blessed Night.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) 06:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Broken Bones.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Broken Bones.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) 06:11, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cities Burning Down.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Cities Burning Down.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) 06:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wishing Stone.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Wishing Stone.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) 06:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Howling Bells Setting Sun.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Howling Bells Setting Sun.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) 06:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Howling Bells articles
Hi Mattchewbaca (still love that username), sorry I didn't get back to you sooner! Regarding your articles, I'm afraid the reality is that each one probably doesn't have enough coverage in appropriate sources to support an article. Content needs to be referenced by reliable and indepedent sources, and I'm afraid most of your articles on the singles are referenced to self-published and other non-independent sources. I know you've had some difficulty with Yaksar, but I'm afraid I agree with his/her advice: whatever content is cited in reliable sources can be merged into the articles on the albums or the discography. -- Lear's Fool 12:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
-- Lear's Fool 12:57, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Radio Wars (album)
The article Radio Wars (album) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Radio Wars (album) 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. Novice7 (talk) 14:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Radio Wars
Hi Mattchewbaca. I must say, your work is just amazing. I hope to see many GAs from you. So, I saw your replies at the GA archive. Regarding the references, cite web template has a "publisher" and a "work" field. Work shows the website or magazine, and publisher shows the group/people who publish/maintain the website. We have to fill up both. Take Allmusic for instance. Here, we fill up work as "allmusic" and publisher as "Rovi Corporation" (in most cases the wiki page would have the publisher information). Take a look at Howling Bells (The reception section). I've formatted the references properly. Follow that pattern. As for Discogs, it contains user submitted content, which is not reliable. If you want to source something like producers, or engineers, try Allmusic or source the Cite album-notes. The table won't affect, but prose is better, in my opinion. I know I messed up the references thing, so feel free to post question on my talk page. I'll surely try to help you out. Novice7 (talk) 04:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey there, Novice7. Thank you for the kind compliments and for taking the time to show me how to edit better and the right way also. That is nice and I appreciate it. I have edited these: Howling Bells and Howling Bells, I think that they are pretty good now, what do you think? Mattchewbaca   &bull;  meow  06:00, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Very good. They look amazing now! Great job and good luck. Novice7 (talk) 04:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Howling Bells and Howling Bells at GAN
Unfortunately both these articles have failed their first attempt at GA. As indicated in my reviews there were considerable changes needed, especially in Criteria 1 and 2. You made a massive effort to get them improved and should be encouraged by how well they look now. With a little more work you can renominate them and hopefully they'll get passed next time.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 01:31, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help in improving the articles. They read a lot better now and the refs look great. I'm going to work on fixing the issues you're referring to. I'll leave comments concerning your review on the articles' talk pages. Mattchewbaca (meow) 21:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:HowlingBellsalbum.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:HowlingBellsalbum.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. Skier Dude2 (talk) 06:55, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Howling Bells renominated?
When re-nominating an article you should indicate that this is its second attempt at GA. You need to change the page number to 2. This will start a new review page so that users can see that it has occurred after you have improved the article from its first review. A new reviewer will be able to assess whether you've made the improvements that were still pending from before. Currently it looks as if I am still reviewing Howling Bells! I assure you that I am not, I finished its review on 11 April.

Typically once a review is finished further comments are not expected on the review page (which becomes archived) but should be placed on the article's talkpage below the transcluded copy of the review.

As for your comments in the review after I finished:
 * 1) "A Ballad For the Bleeding Hearts" should be styled as "A Ballad for the Bleeding Hearts" see Manual of Style (music) for rationale.
 * 2) As for Reflist see Manual of Style (footnotes) and this is covered by Criteria 1 (b) and 2 (a). The size of a column width of 30em is acceptable. When presenting the review the article had Reflist|2 and currently has Reflist|30em, which is not acceptable.
 * 3) No US release? You'll need to provide a referenced note to that effect: I thought Allmusic checked that sort of thing.

I applaud the addition of a music sample, but note it is to be 30s or 10%, whichever is less. With the track, "Low Happening" at 3:04, the sample should be 18s.

I wish you the best for this article's review.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 11:55, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Digital Hearts.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Digital Hearts.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. Courcelles 04:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Into the Chaos.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Into the Chaos.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. Courcelles 04:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Editing
Hi there! I told you that I'd let you know by now whether I'll have time to copy edit for you. Unfortunately, some real-life things are not allowing me to spend any significant amount of time on Wikipedia right now, so it's probably best for you to post another request at the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors page. I'm sorry that I won't be able to get around to it. Keep up the hard work! I can see you've written a lot :-) Armadillopteryx (talk) 17:56, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That's ok. Thank you for letting me know and thanks for your work on the article. If in the future I need a copy edit on something I'll keep you in mind ;) Mattchewbaca (meow) 22:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Feel free to ask; when I have more free time, I'll be glad to help. Armadillopteryx (talk) 01:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey, I noticed your articles are still waiting to be copy edited. It looks like I may have some short bursts of free time over the next few days, during which I might be able to edit a section or two of an article at a time. I definitely won't have the full block of time to do a whole article in one sitting, but if you don't mind slow and steady progress over the course of a few days, I think I can definitely get through at least one of them. Let me know if that works for you. Armadillopteryxtalk 06:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, that certainly works for me. Whenever you get to it is cool. I'd prefer it if you edit Howing Bells, as it will most likely be the first of the two that is reviewed. Mattchewbaca (meow) 21:48, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I should be able to start it later today. Armadillopteryxtalk 04:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Howling Bells
The article Howling Bells you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Howling Bells for comments about the article. Well done! Malconfort (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * High five! After one more week I was going to ask User:SilkTork to take over the review. You have helped improve the article though. Thanks! Mattchewbaca (meow) 21:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Mattchewbaca, congratulations on your efforts in raising the standard of this article. I hope you have similar success with your other GANs.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * High five! I thank you Shaidar for your comprehensive review. You have helped improve the articles immensely and they are in a much better state now than at the time of your assessment. I recognize that you deserve much of the credit for it reaching GA. Mattchewbaca (meow) 21:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Malconfort, for some reason GA bot has failed the article. Can you please add the icon yourself? Mattchewbaca (meow) 00:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's probably not a big deal if I just add it myself. I've got some minor editing to do on the article anyways. Mattchewbaca (meow) 21:57, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

A couple of questions
Hi Matt,

I've copy edited the first half of Howling Bells, and I just want to clarify the meaning of a couple of sentences with you. (1) Did the band sign to Bella Union because they (Howling Bells) were genuinely concerned about the music or because Bella Union was genuinely concerned about the music? (2) Was it Radio Wars that they released through Nettwerk Music Group?

Thanks, Armadillopteryxtalk 01:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It reads much better already, Armadillo. Yes, that's right, Bella Union was concerned about the music and Radio Wars not Howling Bells was released through Nettwerk.


 * Minor key issues :


 * Lead – Do you think you can change reviewed it negatively to reviewed it less favourably? They weren't negative reviews per se.


 * Background – I guess that, centring, is proper in British English, and also, you have arrange instead of arranged.


 * Thank you. Mattchewbaca (meow) 03:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Sure, I can make that change in the lead. I'll put back centring, too. I intentionally used arrange instead of arranged, because I was following the present tense of the previous sentence ("Some lyrics deal with the loss she feels by ending a relationship, while others describe a new romance forming"). I suppose I read these two sentences in the way one reads a literary criticism; even if the book is 1,000 years old, its plot still gets described in the present tense. I read the description of the music in the same way; the arrangement won't change. If you did want to make the whole paragraph more historical, maybe we can change the sentence I've quoted above, too. We could say something like this: "She wrote lyrics about the loss she had felt through the end of past relationships and about the euphoric experience of beginning new romance." I won't make that last change until I hear from you, though, since you may have a more specific intention for that sentence in mind. I'll be signing off of Wikipedia for several hours very shortly, so if I hear from you soon, I'll fix it now. Otherwise, I'll do it later today. Armadillopteryxtalk 03:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: I also added an internal link for Victoria, because I think many non-Australian readers may not necessarily know what it is/where it is. Is that okay with you? Armadillopteryxtalk 04:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we need to stay in the past tense, seeing as how the rest of the article is speaking in past tense. She wrote lyrics about the loss she had felt through the end of past relationships and about the euphoric experience of beginning new romance. I'm really not liking this. It just doesn't seem right. Let's keep it simple, like it currently is, but in the past. Something like this: Some lyrics dealt with the loss that she felt of an ending relationship, while others described a new romance forming. I really am clueless when it comes to proper grammar, so I don't know if that is good or not. You are going to have to decide what is best. Can the first two paragraphs be combined like they were, or no? It's just that the paragraphs are really small, and the subject matter doesn't seem to be shifting enough to warrant breaking it up. Yes, that's fine by me to link Victoria. Can you link Editors in the lead section while you're at it? Thank you. Mattchewbaca (meow) 04:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, we can simplify things; I wasn't especially happy with my previous proposal, either. The problem I see with saying that the lyrics dealt with those feelings is that this implies that they don't still say the same thing now. Therefore, we need to phrase the sentence in such a way that the verb can both describe the past event of the lyrics' creation and not imply that the lyrics themselves are a thing of the past. How about this? She wrote some songs about the loss felt through ending relationships and others about forming new romance. As far as the two paragraphs go, my reasoning for splitting them up was that in the first paragraph, the subject matter is strictly the technical production/release aspects of the album, and the second paragraph jumps to the artistic aspect of the songs. Looking over it again now, my suggestion would be to recombine the paragraphs by shifting a couple of sentences. This way, all of the production and release information is not separated by the two sentences about the songwriting. Let me know what you think about it; I won't change anything you don't want me to. Here's what I think:


 * "Howling Bells is the self-titled debut album of London-based Australian indie rock band Howling Bells. The album was predominantly written by vocalist and rhythm guitarist Juanita Stein. The majority of the album's themes revolve around her own relationships and feelings of affection. The album was released through Bella Union in the United Kingdom on 8 May 2006 and through Liberation in Australia on 1 July 2006. It was produced, engineered and mixed by Ken Nelson and was recorded at Parr Street Studios, Liverpool, in early 2005. Most of the songs were demoed in Australia, but all were recorded in England, as the band relocated there to work with Ken Nelson. Four singles were released from the album, and all appeared on the UK Singles Chart ... [continue as written from here]"


 * Armadillopteryxtalk 05:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * She wrote some songs about the loss felt through ending relationships and others about forming new romance. OK, this is better, so let's use this. I think you're getting confused, I was talking about the first paragraph in the Background section that you split up into two. I think we should re-combine these. What do you think? The lead is fine the way it is, so it's best to leave it alone. Mattchewbaca (meow) 06:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay. In the Background section, I definitely think those two should be split up because, to me, the content shift is drastic; the first paragraph talks about the songs' content, and the second paragaph begins the chronology of events that led up to recording. We can recombine them if you want, but I do feel that the organization is better when they're split. You can decide, though. It's not wrong to combine them; it just seems really jumpy to me. Armadillopteryxtalk 06:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, here's an idea that I like: Why don't we combine the second and third paragraphs? To me, that makes a lot more sense. Then, the whole chronology is together, and the section is back to two paragraphs. Armadillopteryxtalk 06:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's just keep it how it is right now. Mattchewbaca (meow) 06:47, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Matt, I'm just dropping by to let you know that I haven't forgotten about the article here; things just keep getting in my way. I finally had more than a few minutes for Wikipedia last night, but when I signed on intending to quickly check my watchlist and then finish the copyedit here, I ended up getting into a messy debate about one of my articles for a long time. I don't think I can get to it today, but I'm really going to do my best to finish it this weekend, okay? So sorry for the delay. Armadillopteryxtalk 09:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I've finished the copyedit. A couple of things:


 * (1) I added a few internal links to the locations where the singles were filmed.


 * (2) Regarding the following sentence, was inventive the last word in the sentence of the original quote? If not, British punctuation conventions would say the period needs to go outside of the quotes. However, if it was the last word in the original sentence, don't change it.
 * Chris Waugh admired Joel's guitar playing, calling it "brilliantly inventive."


 * Other than that, I'd say it's done from the grammar perspective. What do you think? Armadillopteryxtalk 21:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's very nice Armadillo. Thank you. I'll let you know if it reaches GA status. Mattchewbaca (meow) 05:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, good luck! You do a really nice job with these articles. They're very thorough! I hope it passes for GA. Armadillopteryxtalk 06:39, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Radio Wars (album)
Hi, Mattchewbaca. I was looking at the GA review for this article, and since the reviewer has given very specific edits they want you to do in lieu of copy edits, I don't think you will be needing the services of the WP:GOCE at this time. I would help you out, but we are experiencing a serious backlog right now, so this type of work that you can do yourself, will have to be foregone. Sorry about that. -- Diannaa (Talk) 04:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Howling Bells (album)
The article Howling Bells (album) you nominated as a good article has failed; see Talk:Howling_Bells_(album)/GA2 for comments. You are welcome to renominate the article once the issues on the good article review have been addressed. - Rp0211  (talk2me)  20:11, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Good article mix-up
Hey, Mattchewbaca. After looking at the comments I had made on Talk:Howling_Bells_(album)/GA2, I realize that I made a mistake with the article. I am willing to put that article back on hold for good article nomination and give you a week to fix the problems I have addressed and/or defend your claim on if any of my claims are either (1) wrong or (2) shouldn't be a claim at all. I'm sorry for the mix-up here.

I also want to talk to you about my good article nominations. I have interpreted that you are reviewing my good articles in the way you are because of the initial result of Howling Bells (album). However, I do not want that to affect the outcome of my good article nominations. I am human, and I do make mistakes. I apologize for not initially giving you time to fix the mistakes or defend the ones I presented. That is why I am giving you a chance to fix the mistakes on Howling Bells (album) for good article nomination. - Rp0211  (talk2me)  01:35, 29 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm going to be honest with you, I'm not going to pass your articles as GA, because frankly, they suck. But that doesn't mean an agreement can't be reached upon where your articles could still potentially reach GA.


 * First thing you need to know, is that Good Article status is a crock of shit. The criteria for it is a fair model, and it is not the problem. The problem is that it is not governed by a committee. Any bozo, like yourself, is allowed to review an article and ultimately decide if the article, in their mind, merits inclusion into CGD (Club Green Dot). The bar sits firmly in the mud. Snakes slither across it. My articles, on the other hand, never have enjoyed the benefits of exception. With extreme prejudice, they have been held to the highest possible standard set by the criteria.


 * Now we get to your GA review of Howling Bells, which I would like a full explanation for. That's one of the agreements that I have set forth, in order for you to avoid failure of your articles, by me. You can decide if you would like to abide by this resolution or not. Tell me something, are you on drugs, prescription or otherwise? If that offends you I apologize, but your review made me think of three things. Either somebody took a shit on your face and you couldn't see through it, you had a big D in your ass, or you were in a state of incoherence brought on by substance abuse. I must confess, I'm ashamed that I'm even having to talk to some punk ass high school kid who listens to crappy music. Not that I feel that I hold a higher place in this world than you, because Lord knows that's not the case. It's just that, I'm sittin' here having to deal with some goddamn little kid over the computer. Even at your age, I know you understand where I'm coming from.


 * There's not much of a reward getting an article to GA status, aside from that dot. A small part of me would like to see the article at GA, but it really doesn't concern me a whole lot whether it gets there or not. Howling Bells is at GA and that's basically good enough for me. As far as Halfway Gone goes, at this point, it's outta my hands. You're just gonna have to accept the fact the article could possibly be de-listed. Consider that your penalty for fuckin' around with other people's hard work.


 * Ok, so there are two agreements I have come up with that I think are very acceptable.


 * A full explanation of your GA review of Howling Bells (album). I'll guide you through it on the review page. If you decide to play ball, good on ya.
 * You must say the following to me, here on my talk page: I, Rp0211, am just a punk ass teenager, who loves Justin Beiber, loves the crappy music of Justin Beiber, and loves crappy music from many other crappy artists.
 * The font has to be huge too, none of this small crap. Also, see if you can do it in some kind of color, that would be cool.


 * Now, I will not pass your articles if you agree to this, but I will not fail them. Instead, I will explain on the review pages that any reviewing of the articles that I have done up until this point should be disregarded. My reasoning will be because of my inexperience as a first time reviewer has led me to realize that I am not capable for such a task. I will wash my hands of the articles, take them off hold, and request that another editor undertake the review. If you are unwilling to accept these agreements, than you leave me no other choice but to expeditiously fail the articles. Let me know what you wanna do kid. Mattchewbaca (meow) 01:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * None of this is acceptable here, and you should retract this if you expect to stay here longer. Below, you will find your one and only warning against personal attacks. I also urge you to consider proper manners--and we have guidelines on those, at WP:CIVIL. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 23:15, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

June 2011
This is your only warning; if you make personal attacks on other people again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. ''The remarks you made above to Rp0211 are completely unacceptable; a crankier admin would have blocked you on the spot. I urge you to redact them by striking them out and to apologize: such behavior will not be tolerated in a collaborative environment.'' Drmies (talk) 23:13, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You were warned and continued your uncivil personal attacks and harassment. I've blocked you for 24 hours.  Dreadstar  ☥  02:38, 1 July 2011 (UTC)