User talk:Mudwater/Archive 2

BK page edits
Just a thankyou for a good article edits on Billy's page. The Linda info is no longer correct but I'm not touching it W/O Billy's OK. Anyway- hope to meet you in Wikiworld Marcia Wright (talk) 03:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

photo
Mudwater-you have your photo-Enjoy ! (I did not catagorize it just uploaded to Commons. titled: BillKreutzmann.jpg Marcia Wright (talk) 03:32, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I've added it to the article.  I like that picture.  Do you know what year it was taken?  That information could optionally be added to the caption.  Anyway, thanks again.  — Mudwater  16:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading the GD article as well, a heck of a lot of information spanning 30+ years!!! Marcia Wright (talk) 04:59, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome-and if it is OK, I'd like the replies under your talk page. I love that photo but don't remember the date

Re: Disputed fair use rationale for Image:ABBAmUni.jpg
cheers, friend. now to clear the rest of the ones on my talk page ;-)  tomasz.  21:39, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Yellow Fever (album) rename
No problem, and thank you. It is nice to be appreciated every once and a while. Prodego talk  01:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've sent you an email. Prodego  talk  02:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Unreleased Albums
I noticed you recently voted in AFD concerning an unreleased album. I invite you take part in the conversation here Wikipedia_talk:Notability_%28music%29 any input you have would be appreciated. Ridernyc (talk) 09:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou
Thanks for the tag for photoreq on Snow Mountain Wilderness talk page. Hope you are doing well. I now consider myself a wikiaddict as I am using our work computer too! As for a date for the BK photo, 1975 is a good year. Please feel free to give me any peer review -type comments (if that is not out of line to ask for). I really did not mean to take on so much but after coming across some really bad articles-Lake Pillsbury the worst, I just had to. Cheers, Marcia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcia Wright (talk • contribs) 01:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Marcia. I've also made a series of changes to the Snow Mountain Wilderness article itself, to give it more "standard" Wikipedia article features. In a way you could consider this a peer review of the article. If you look at what I did, and how I did it, you will see a few things about how to make an article be more "Wikified". One way to see what I did is this:


 * 1) Go to the article.
 * 2) Click on the "history" tab, to go to the article's "revision history" page. There you will see all the changes made to the article, with the newest change on top and the oldest at the bottom.
 * 3) You'll see that I made the last six changes (unless someone changes the article after I write this). For each change, I included an edit summary.  For example, the edit summary for the first change says, "Fix link to reference".
 * 4) For each change, you can click on "(last)" to see a comparison of that version of the article with the previous version. At the top it shows, side by side (before and after), the Wiki markup that was changed, and below that is the version of the article.
 * 5) After that you can click on "Newer edit" to proceed to the next newer change.

If you do this you'll see that the first change fixed the link to the web site in the References section. The next two changes were to make some of the markup a little more Wikipedia-standard. The change after that was to add a category. Ideally any article will have at least one category. The next change was to add an infobox. Many articles have infoboxes, but articles about different subjects use different kinds of infoboxes. This article uses the "protected area" infobox. Last I enhanced the infobox by adding a locator map.

As for the article's Talk page, in addition to the photo request, I added banners for two "WikiProjects". If you look at the Talk pages of different articles, you'll see that most of them belong to one or more WikiProjects. Basically that's a way of bringing an article to the attention of other editors who are interested in that particular subject.

That's a lot of stuff to think about, but I had fun doing it, and, if you check out what I did, you might find it interesting, from the perspective of editing Wikipedia articles.

Have fun, and let me know if you have any questions or comments.

P.S. 1975, eh? I'll add that to the caption. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:52, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I really appreciate the time you are taking for this help Mudwater. Marcia Wright (talk) 15:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand the items you listed except for one: the unordered reference. My guess is that if there is only one source referenced, it does not need intext citation.(?)

An unordered list is the same thing as a bulleted list. Instead of separating what were then two references using the " " tag, I made them into a bulleted list, by starting each one with an asterisk. That's this change.

As far as whether references should be footnotes or just be listed at the end of the article, both are good, although a footnote is considered somewhat preferable, even if there's only one, because it shows which part of the text you are using the reference for. I would therefore vote for undoing this change. (You can try clicking "undo" for this change on the "revision history" page, but since it's not the latest edit, that might or might not work.)

Also, the standard is to enclose section titles with two equals signs, e.g. "==Flora and fauna==". Titles for subsections (sections within sections) should have three equals signs, e.g. "===Birds===". Some people think the fonts look a little funny that way, but if you check out some other articles, that's how they're generally set up.

Let me know if you have any questions about this change, which fixed the links to the disambiguation pages. For that matter, let me know if you have any other questions too. I think you're doing really well and I'm glad to help you. :-) — Mudwater (Talk) 00:53, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wilderness Act
Ah, nothing like a fesh pair of eyes to highlight someone's (me)laziness. Thanks for that Mudwater- I am not being detailed-oriented enough. And I had meant to check out the two different Acts, assuming one was an expansion of the earlier one. Also, a related question: Should I remove the red link to the North Coast Wild Heritage law since there is no article on it?

(I just hate red links-they cry out :WRITE ME, write me ) Sincerely,Marcia Wright (talk) 15:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a judgment call when to add or remove red links. The main reason to have a red link is if you feel pretty strongly that there should be such an article.  In that case you're pointing out that the article needs to be written, and also pre-linking to the future article, so to speak.  If you think something isn't likely to end up having its own article, or if you're not sure, it's generally better not to have a red link.  If you find that certain red links are getting on your nerves, I think it's fine to de-link them, and I've done that myself.  After all, if the article does end up being written, the link can always be put back in at that time.  See also Red link. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Dan Wesson
Hallo Mudwater !

Thank you for your support !

How & where to note improvement for: Daniel B. Wesson, which is on the list for improvement WikiProject Firearms:image?


 * Daniel B. Wesson (I.)(1916-1978) co-founder of Smith & Wesson company
 * Dan B. Wesson (II.)(1916-1978) founder of Dan Wesson Firearms
 * Dan B. Wesson (III.)(19x-1990) son of II.

some family background User:Dan Wesson/Sandbox/Dan Wesson Thanks Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 23:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not 100% sure what you're asking. If you mean that the Daniel B. Wesson article is listed as needing cleanup on the WikiProject Firearms page, I wouldn't really worry about that.  The members of the project can improve the article further or take it off their list if they get around to it.  If you mean that you want to improve that article yourself, then you should just start editing it.  Also, I can see from your talk page that you were working on an article called "Dan Wesson" that was speedily deleted.  I think sometimes articles get marked for speedy deletion when they shouldn't be, but I don't know much about that.  It looks like you're already working with an administrator on that, which is good.  I hope this answer is helpful. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mudwater !

I work hard on the complete theme 'Dan Wesson' this includes the story and the weapons, the

history of Dan B. Wesson II. a grand-grandson of Dan B. Wesson I. + additionally we have a 'Daniel B. Wesson III.'

That will say the article has to be splitted in 3 parts (of family members). That would change the article completely.

I can support II. III. (after additional research also I.) I do not want to change structure before discussion.

PLS. read my comment at: - no need to repeat it here.

Go and have a look in my /Sandbox [Dan Wesson article group]

Than you will understand. Regards Tom —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dan Wesson (talk • contribs) 01:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Manufacturer Explanation: Dan Wesson Firearms is still the manufacturer as a subsidiary company of CZ.

Thanks for helping me with the other edits :) you were 'quick as a rocket' it was hard to follow :) Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 01:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I was glad to help with "Dan Wesson M1911 ACP Pistol". Also, good luck with the "Dan Wesson" article.  Have fun. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh you helped me so much ! Thank you ! I you were a girl i would give you a big kiss now! So i just try to follw the advices you gave me now by editing and make some more nice articles as present :) Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 02:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mudwater! I made some more improvements to my article Talk:Dan Wesson M1911 ACP Pistol - what do you think now about upgrading rating ? I would be a pleasure for me. Regards - Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 13:46, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you mean changing the rating of the Dan Wesson M1911 ACP Pistol article from "Start" to "B"? If you look at a large number of Wikipedia articles, you'll find that it's pretty hard to get a "B" rating.  You can see the formal requirements at WikiProject Firearms/Assessment.  But to really see what this means, go to Category:B-Class Firearms articles and click through to look at the articles about firearms that are currently rated "B".  (The links there are to the talk pages, but of course you want to look at the actual articles.)  To be honest, I used to think more about article grading, and how I could improve the ratings of certain articles.  Now I just try to improve the articles that I enjoy working on, and usually I don't worry too much about the ratings. — Mudwater (Talk) 00:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

hmm i looked at M16 rifle ariticle which is really better you are right - compared to other B rated its not so far away. Thank for explanations ! Tom --Dan Wesson (talk) 00:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

re: User templates
Thankyou for the information and compliment. I have a template up on my user page for "Wikipedians in Northern California", should I add the other templates as well? Also, I am learning about tables thanks to your work on the section "notable peaks". Much appreciated! This is more addictive than Tombraider- HA! (And better for the brain-although I do miss Lara she was just so cool!)

Can you believe that I didn't know that federal US gov. images are Public Domain? DUH

Again, Thanks for the help, Cheers, Marcia Wright (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

New York Review of Books/Wikipedia
Here's an article about Wikipedia, from the New York Review of Books. I really enjoyed reading it, and you might too.-Mudwater Oh my God, I laughed so hard, tears ran down my cheeks and when he got to the part about "Nipples and broccoli" I completely lost it and was on the floor! Best thing I've read in a very long time.

I nominate this essay for main page feature article!!!!!!!

On April 1st of course.

Here's the link for your talk page readers. Excellent, Thankyou Mudwater Marcia Wright (talk) 01:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you liked the article. Yes, it's recommended reading all right. — Mudwater (Talk) 00:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:WoodstockMoviePoster.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:WoodstockMoviePoster.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 02:41, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Image size
To solve the current problem on images in infoboxes not sizing correctly, remove the "px" from the imagesize parameter, that solves it. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  12:01, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Not Qualified
Hey Mudwater, J. has asked me to do his bio-I told him no, I am not qualified. I would rather that the most experienced editor in Wikiproject: BLP (and/or Musicians?) write it up if they/he/she would be interested in doing it. I don't know anyone else in these groups-nor do I want to give out personal contact info either. He (J.) is very smart. talented and witty like Steven Wright-ish type humor. He deserves a bio IMHO. So, what should I do, if anything? Cheers Marcia Wright (talk) 21:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * When creating a new article about a person, or for that matter about any subject, the key is to establish notability, otherwise the article is extremely likely to be deleted. According to Notability, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable." Notability (people) has more specific guidelines for biographical articles.  Please take a look at both of those pages, especially WP:N, WP:N, WP:BIO, and WP:BIO.  An editor creating an article would have to meet those guidelines by providing appropriate independent references.  The references can either be published on the internet or on paper, but some things won't be accepted as "reliable", for example, internet forum discussions or blogs.  With this in mind, I don't know if J. would qualify or not, whatever his merits as a creative professional and a human being.  So, take a look at those guidelines.  Would you be able to provide several references that would meet those criteria?  If yes, then I would probably be able to write a short article, based on the refs, that would not be deleted.  In fact, looking at your work as an editor, I'm sure you're qualified to do so also, although in this case I might be, ahem, more objective.  Let me know what you think about all this. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thankyou for that compliment, you are sweet.
 * If you have the time, I'd like you to check out J's page on MySpace, he has a bio there.
 * If all his works that are listed can be solidly verified, do you think it would pass Wiki BLP standards?

Here's the link: Myspace

Also, if on Myspace, there is  contact info for him, go for it, just let him know you are from Wikipedia, I have already mentioned you to him in email. Marcia Wright (talk) 01:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems that J. is having a successful and interesting career. He also seems like a cool person.  Based on checking him out online for a short time, I like him, and I am a fan of that video he's linked to here on WP.  But the question is, would he meet the BLP standards for notability?  My own reading of the guidelines is that a person must have had at least a few things written about them, published by reliable, independent sources.  That basically means books or articles that are about the person, or that, if they're not specifically about the person, at least talk about him or her at some length.  And it's not just what was written that's important, but where it was published.  For example, here is an interview of J.  But, the interview is in someone's blog on Blogspot, which, for what we're talking about, might not count.  If the same thing was published in the San Francisco Chronicle, that'd be a different story.


 * In other words, I think it's all about the references. Without a few of those that would be accepted by the WP editors who look at these things, it's likely that any article would be deleted.  I have been involved in a small number of "AfD" discussions, and it seemed to me that those were decided based on references.  Of course, this is just my opinion.  Other editors have way more experience in this area than I do.


 * In looking at this a bit more, I figured out that there was a WP article about J., and it was deleted. In fact, this seems to have happened three times.  Since the articles have been deleted, and we're not administrators, we can't see the articles, but if you go to the article creation page, you can see the "deletion log".  It starts, "Notice: You are re-creating a page that was deleted...."  Click here to see it.  Also, here is a copy of one of the deleted articles, on another web site.  I stumbled across it when using Google.


 * Let me know what you think. — Mudwater (Talk) 02:55, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Update Dear coeditor? Mudwater :) Here is the mission I have launched. Just want to keep you informed. I have read more pages/policies/guidelines/etc under AfD than I care to admit!!! (And the garbage people try to put on WP)!!! Marcia Wright (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Cool. Thanks for the info.  Yes, you're really a full fledged Wikipedian now.  By all means let me know what ends up happening.  — Mudwater (Talk) 23:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

To end this thread of Not Qualified, the only thing to be done with J is to add to Personal life section of BK which either you or I can do. If you are too busy, let me know and I'll give it a try. The deleted copy from Admin Jerry has one good "issue", then she(author) deleted it and wrote in summary "person not relevant" !!!! I hope to never cross paths with her as she does not play well with others.

Let me know OK? I am not trying to dump this on you   Marcia Wright (talk) 23:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd say go ahead and update the article, you've got this covered. My one suggestion is to word things as neutrally as possible. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Slight problem with references
I have added some information under Personal life section but when I footnoted the last sentence, I realized the whole article is set up differently. I am an absolute freak for footnotes but I will not step on anyone else's editing style, so what do you recommend? Marcia Wright (talk) 23:46, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Footnote freakiness is encouraged, and I feel similarly obsessed. The article had a references section but was not set up for footnotes.  Both of those things can peacefully coexist however.  I've gone ahead and implemented my preferred approach with this edit.  See also Guide to layout.

Just stopping by
Hey Mudwater, Just checking in with you, hope all is well. I just had my first vandalism and of course reported it. A real downer for me. Let me know how it's going with you. Cheers, Marcia Wright (talk) 13:19, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It's going well, thanks. Lately I've been editing WP a bit less than before, but still a fair amount.  Some of my recent edits, which you may have noticed, include this, this, and this, not to mention this.  As for your vandalism, was it on an article, or your user page?  Can you provide a link to the edit in question?  Also, I've never actually reported any vandalism, how do you do that? — Mudwater (Talk) 22:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Nice work, especially the edit on Billy here,


 * The vandalism was in an article that I had expanded from an existing stub about the indian tribe, Achomawi.Here is the vandalized page, and here is the user's talk page showing increasingly serious warnings. I found the reporting page by just typing in vandalism in the search engine then followed links that looked about right.
 * That page is here. This user is an IP address so cannot be indefinitely blocked as there may be a whole buch of different people using it i.e. a school network for example. There are "dynamic" addresses and "static" ones. You being interested in computers probably know alot more than I about this. I'm sorry to hear that you will be editing less-if you leave, can you give a personal website for me to check out? Mine is here already- but I don't see a link to one on yours.

"Just don't tell them you knew my name, my darling Sugaree" Cheers, Marcia Wright (talk) 13:25, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm planning on sticking around for a while at least.  I don't have a web site but I could send you my email address, or you can send me an email from WP.  (You know how to do that, right?)  Re the vandalism, I applaud your efforts to get the offender blocked.  I'm watching a fairly large number of articles, some more seriously than others, and a few of those articles get vandalized somewhat frequently.  I've become a bit blasé about the whole thing, just reverting the edits and moving on, but it's better to go after these people, to try to stop them from doing it more (depending also on the level of offensiveness, in my view).  P.S. I love the "homemade barnstar" on your user page. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Thumbs up (and thumbs down)
Thankyou for that quick tutorial on photo size in the edit summary! I assumed it was an "either or" choice of thumbsize w/ caption or larger pixel w/o caption.

Glad you like my homemade barnstar, just poking a little fun at WP.

And lastly, I am now getting messages just before signinng into my account about this IP address and am worried about being blocked due to vandalism from another user. I copied the message to have the instructions it provided in case this happens. Kind of ironic- I try to report a vandal and end up getting blocked because of a vandal, Murphy's Law in effect!

Again, thanks for all your help. Sincerely, Marcia Wright (talk) 12:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Modereko, etc.
Hey, thanks a lot for the help on the Modereko and other jam band/album related articles in the last little while :)  Addionne (talk) 13:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. Thank you for saying so. — Mudwater (Talk) 00:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Festival Express
Is there a reference to this historic event in any Dead-related articles? Also, same question for David Crosby's If I Could Only Remember My Name album.

Marcia Wright (talk) 23:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not 100% sure what you're asking. Is the question whether there are any references to Festival Express or If I Could Only Remember My Name in any Dead related articles on Wikipedia, as opposed to reliable outside references?  If so, I don't think there are.  Although I suppose that could be arranged.  Also, why do you ask?  Let me know. :-) — Mudwater (Talk) 00:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes -Are there any references in any WP articles about Fest. Express?
 * Are there any references to David Crosby's album in any WP articles also?
 * Sorry, my brain works in severe-shorthand-mode only. I am asking because both those items are ones I think should be ::here somewhere. Festival Express is self-explanatory-I'm sure you are already familiar with it- but Crosby's is kind ::of specialized or rare even. (?)
 * Oh, and let me add a third- In Cold Blood, SF band, Lydia Pense(Pence?), lead vocals
 * I think I'm trying to show off here but don't know why. :0 Marcia Wright (talk) 01:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * How about actual articles? Would that "exceed your expectations"? "Festival Express" — "If I Could Only Remember My Name" — "Cold Blood".  Let me know what you think. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * WOW I'm impressed~much work has been done for music on WP!! My dad took me to see Cold Blood once and I have fond memories of that-I remember digging the oriental guitarist in particular. As you can tell, our dad was a really cool guy. Too bad he recorded over the tapes he made of the band practicing in the living room-not that he would've sold them or anything like that.
 * You must be an expert on Fair Use rationales from all I've read here.


 * And one last question- what is your all time favorite GD song, if you HAD to pick just one? Mine have changed over the years and currently is one not written by them but a longstanding classic (Morning Dew). As a teen I was into hard rock so then my favorite was from  the Live Dead album. Ok I'll stop rambling now. Cheers Marcia Wright (talk) 14:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * PS Will the GD article go up to the next step from GA status?


 * The Grateful Dead article is rated B by the Biography WikiProject. There's also a notice near the top of the Talk page, explaining that the article was demoted from GA to B, about a year and a half ago.  I haven't studied this too closely, but I believe that these days, if you want an article to be rated GA, you have to have it reviewed outside your WikiProject -- see Good article nominations.  Another potential GA candidate is the Jerry Garcia article.  But, it seems that us Deadheads are a bit too laid back to worry much about how "conventional society" rates our articles.  I'm half kidding, I guess.  Personally I'm a bit daunted by the prospect of trying to get the Grateful Dead article rated GA.  I generally prefer to take on smaller tasks than that.  It would be an interesting challenge though.  In my view, the most important things for any article are also the hardest to accomplish -- really good writing, combined with really good references.  (If you go to Featured, you'll see a list of music related articles that are FA status.)  Anyway, the Dead have so many really wonderful songs, I can't honestly say that I have a favorite.  Although "Sugar Magnolia" and "Dark Star" are pretty high on the list.  I'm seriously considering having the phrase "What a long, strange trip it's been" carved on my gravestone, so "Truckin'" would have to be considered another top pick I suppose. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:35, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Origins of the Dead
Maybe you can shed some light on this for me, since you seem to be a fellow Deadhead, and bit of an expert (or so it seems). I was listening to Sirius 32 - the satellite radio Grateful Dead channel - not long ago, and heard what I think was an interview with Dead archivist David Lemieux. I only caught the tail end of the talking, so I am not sure if it was him or someone else. It seems as though they were talking about the Dead's origins as a Rolling Stones cover band. I haven't been able to find much about this (you try googling 'grateful dead' and 'cover' and see what happens...)

Anyway, I think if this is a fact, it is certainly noteworthy in the Dead article, not to mention it is an interesting tidbit... Do you have any idea if this is true, or if I misheard what was going on in that interview? Thanks for any insight. Addionne (talk) 01:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The Grateful Dead did not start out as a Rolling Stones cover band, so they must have been talking about something else on Sirius. They started out as a band of folk musicians, among other things, who had turned electric, and the band was originally called the Warlocks.  This is mentioned in the Grateful Dead article.  Probably the best place to read about the history of the Dead is in Dennis McNally's book, A Long Strange Trip: The Inside History of the Grateful Dead.  See if your local library has a copy, or you can buy it on Amazon for $12.89.  I actually started reading it myself not too long ago, but I haven't gotten that far yet.  In fact, I'm exactly at the point in the book where the Warlocks form as a band.  I seem to end up spending a lot of time on Wikipedia and not much time reading books.  I should probably do something about that. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:44, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:StoegerCoachGun.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:StoegerCoachGun.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media 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 taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images 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 (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

GD article edit
I'm having a go at this but am really feeling uncomfortable for several reasons, some of which are the article's structure and tone almost prevent adding information, i.e. the "flow" is affected. Also my style is different and I lack self-confidence as well. I am considering backing out of this one-there are many problems with the article as it is. For example, under a New Type of Sound section, the last paragraph or two discuss Jerry specificially so where would a section on the drug bust go? The only other possibility is after the paragraph ( "The early records reflected...") on the two albums released in 1970, which would be period-consistent at least. Maybe I'll just wait for the smoke to clear (literally) Signed, Confused and Smoked Out in Northern California- (Marcia) Marcia Wright (talk) 16:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, come on now. Be bold.  Putting the New Orleans bust info after the "The early records reflected" paragraph is probably a good idea, because it would fit into the chronology, as you say.  After that, maybe you can even make some other improvements.  I think one of the things the article needs is for someone to look at it as a whole a little more.  For example, those two paragraphs about Garcia that you mentioned don't fit very well in the "History" section, as you are sort of suggesting.  Anyway, I'd say just add the info where you think it's best.  Most likely other editors will come along later and change it anyway. — Mudwater (Talk) 02:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Mudwater/draft4
Sorry that I reverted your blanking-the-page revision of User talk:Mudwater/draft4; I thought it was someone vandalizing your page. Dabby (talk) 01:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the note. I appreciate your vigilance. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The times... they are a-changin'
Do you know about this Mudwater? If so, what is your opinion? Since I just finished laughing my arse off at the vandel who vandalized the article Vandalism by blanking it and putting F***, I might miss no longer seeing vandalism, but then again, maybe not.

Someone needs to write a Masters thesis in Sociology on behavior in Wikipedia ( see article Vietnam War history pages and pages and pages for example!!!)

Marcia Wright (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm really not sure about this, but I think that FlaggedRevs is not actually being used to control the display of Wikipedia pages. As far as I know, any edits are immediately visible, including to readers who are not logged in.  If I get a chance I'll try to find out more about this.  — Mudwater (Talk) 12:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Per this brief discussion with one of the FlaggedRevs programmers, it's being used on the German Wikipedia but not the English one now. — Mudwater (Talk) 19:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Navbox for Keller Williams - want advice
I have been working on a navbox for Keller Williams, as much to play with the navbox as it is that I feel he needs one - I would love to have some input on it if you get the chance - not sure how familiar you are with Keller, but you seem to be a great resource for advice - so if you see anything you might change, add, remove, etc... Thanks a lot! Oh - it's here. :) Addionne (talk) 19:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know much about Keller Williams, so I can't say if anything else should be in there, but as a navbox it looks good to me. As a minor point, Template:Navbox Musical artist says that "links do not line break in this template", so you don't need to use  or , and you can use  •  instead of  .  Also, the current draft skips from group3 to group5.  I've created a version that incorporates these changes, here.  It displays exactly the same, it's just that the markup is a little simpler.  I basically figured this out by looking at the examples on the navbox page. — Mudwater (Talk) 12:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:FarewellTour1968.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:FarewellTour1968.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Relix magazine
I have word that there is something in the latest issue but I don't have easy access to a newsstand and the website only has a promo picture of it. I have no idea what IT is. If you have the time / inclination to enlighten me (and Wikipedia if applicable) I would sure appreciate it, the suspense is too much!!

Cheers,

Marcia Wright (talk) 14:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds intriguing, and it's possible that I would be able to check this out. Do I get any more hints?  What, if anything, do we know about this something?  For example, is it related to anyone who plays the drums, or anyone who works in film and video perhaps?  And, are we sure specifically which issue we're talking about? — Mudwater (Talk) 23:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * LOL! The cover shot is Jerry, today is his birthday, summer of '68 was forty years ago...hmmm-I haven't a clue ;)

Marcia Wright (talk) 13:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I see what the deal is here. Thanks for the tip.  Let me study this.  After that I'll send you an email. — Mudwater (Talk) 23:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

A sad edit
but true, they are no more. Just getting a little (sniff,sniff) nostalgic. I will try to get a photo for the article. JK gave a name of a person regarding photos. No promises tho. Marcia Wright (talk) 13:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, a good photo of the group would be great. You don't have any yourself, perchance, do you? — Mudwater (Talk) 13:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I'm sorry, I've looked and nothing even remotely usable, nor has there been a response from this "publicity" guy Justin recommended. Oh well so it goes.....C'mon Deadheads- contribute!!!! It's good for your Karma.
 * Cheers, Marcia Marcia Wright (talk) 04:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7
I appreciate the work you're doing in selected article version. I'd suggest looking at Featured Articles and selecting diff links of the best versions first, because (in theory) it shouldn't take too long (once again, in theory; the articles could be unmaintained and thus have become utter crap since passing FAC). WesleyDodds (talk) 00:45, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you explain that a bit more? I don't quite get what you're suggesting.  I'm not sure how much more I'll be doing this, so any ideas about how to select versions better are welcome. — Mudwater (Talk) 00:49, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Featured articles. These are what are considered the best articles on Wikipedia. Select versions of these articles first. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:55, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. Let me see what I can do.  Thanks for the suggestion.  "P.S." As you can probably tell, I'm only spending a few minutes on each album.  Basically I'm trying to do a pretty good job of selecting a large number of article versions, due to the short time left and my own limited availability.  To save time I'm only looking at relatively recent edits of articles.  In hindsight I'm wishing that we'd "rallied the troops" for this about three weeks ago.  "P.P.S." Not a big deal either way, but it might help a little if you could put the album titles in your edit summaries.  Anyway, thanks again.  — Mudwater (Talk) 01:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I believe that versions have now been selected for all the album featured articles on the Wikipedia 0.7 list. "P.S." Looks like you fixed a few things that I did, so thanks for that. — Mudwater (Talk) 01:56, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Hal Kant
This response reaffirms my belief in why Wikipedia is a good thing... Just a quick thank you for writing the article on him-(I didn't think I'd find anything.) Good work Sincerely, Marcia Marcia Wright (talk) 14:04, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. After I saw the obituary for him, I couldn't believe that I had never heard of him, I couldn't believe that there was no article for him and I couldn't believe that the only existing articles where his name was mentioned were about the World Series of Poker and not about the Grateful Dead. It was truly fascinating to me to learn about Kant and to fill a hole that existed in Wikipedia. My read of your user page only makes your thank you that much more meaningful. Alansohn (talk) 16:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy editing! Marcia

Re: Dead Set
Oh my apologies to any mishap caused, I should've checked for all links that lead to that article. Jammy (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I have gone through chronologies amd discographies and fixed the links so that it leads to the album article. I hope I have covered everything. Jammy (talk) 21:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)


 * All done, except for one page which says the link exists but I cannot find it nor can Mozilla Firefox find it, only place it's in is the template and that is the Dead Set (album) link. Jammy (talk) 19:13, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

SPAM
Thanks for following up on that; I'm kinda embarassed that, once I made the switch, that I did it so sloppily. Thanks for fixing it up right and proper. Unschool (talk) 00:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Sure thing. I think it was one of those cases where you keep analyzing something in so much detail that you lose sight of the big picture.  We've all been there. — Mudwater (Talk) 00:51, 24 November 2008 (UTC)