User talk:MusicforthePeople/Talk archive/2011

Messages for 2011.

April 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not replace pages with blank content, as you did with this edit to Talk:God Save Oz, as this is confusing to readers. The page's content has been restored for now. If there is a problem with the page, it should be edited or reverted to a previous version if possible; if you think the page should be removed entirely, see further information. Thank you.  Wikipelli   Talk   17:22, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

June 2011
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Talk:Loudness war. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ''Do not unilaterally change the rating of an article from 'B' to 'GA'. There is a special process (WP:GAN) to follow in order to assign GA status.'' Binksternet (talk) 22:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Question about talk pages
Hi Yeepsi - I see you've been creating talk pages with WPBeatles. Should the pages in Category:Paul McCartney concert tours also receive this template, or should they get something else? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:23, 20 June 2011 (UTC) Italic text

Removing a tag
Thanks I appreciate you adding a tag to Category:Apple Records compilation albums, but you don't have to remove album. You might want to make sure that you don't remove relevant tags in the future. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:50, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem If you look at my talk, I've got many such slips. You're also removing categories from Mono Masters--why? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:58, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Categorizing Redirects from albums are categorized. Entire categories are even built around redirects (e.g., one of many: Category:The Balham Alligators albums.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Going Down on Love
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Going Down on Love, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.beatlesbible.com/people/john-lennon/songs/going-down-on-love. As a copyright violation, Going Down on Love appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Going Down on Love has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Going Down on Love and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Going Down on Love with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Going Down on Love.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Planetary Chaos Redux (talk) 09:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problems
Your articles about John Lennon songs are much too closely copied from entries in beatlesbible.com. Minor rewording is not enough to avoid a copyright violation - please read Copy-paste and WP:Close paraphrasing. Copyright is a very serious issue for Wikipedia. I will have to look further, and maybe take advice, to see whether anything can be saved, but please do not make any more articles based on minor rewording of beatlesbible entries. JohnCD (talk) 11:54, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * More importantly, beatlesbible.com is a self-published source (fan site), not a reliable source.  R ad io pa th y  •talk•  03:58, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The about this site link explains that it's a self-published source. It is a fan site. It is not a reliable source.  R ad io pa th y  •talk•   15:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Love (Cirque du Soleil)
Don't give an article a GA rating, especially when the article is not good enough.--andreasegde (talk) 17:45, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

removal of "songs" tag from Beatle songs.
Hi, Both of us have done this, so no cause for concern. The reason I did it was because anything tagged as Beatles song would appear in the songs template. Somebody, for whatever reason, recently has changed this, so the wpsongs template needs to remain, when appropriate. Yeah I know, why the change? Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 08:06, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Since my comment above, I have found out that if you put song=yes in the Beatle template it works just prefect! Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 16:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Bye Bye Blackbird
I have opened a discussion at Talk:Bye Bye Blackbird to see whether or not the song should be included in WikiProject The Beatles. If users decide it should be added, I will add it to the song for you. Housewatcher (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

August 2011
The Beatles album titled "The Number Ones" is actually an alternate titled used only in Australia for "20 Greatest Hits (The Beatles album)". Therefore, you edit to the "Past Masters" album has been reverted. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Take the Long Way Home
Can't be a start class with NO references. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 07:44, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Adding The Beatles template.
You forgot to add the template to Sewage collection and disposal. I assume one of the Beatles took a dump sometime somewhere. Just so you understand, the Beatles template does NOT belong on every article, most of the ones you have added need removing. To add the template it needs some significance. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:25, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * In which case it should be in the article and referenced. If it's not it is quite reasonable to remove the template. Also there needs to be references and details for any article for it to be anything more than a stub class (repeat of my comment above). Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:33, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * PS You are not even adding the template correctly for the Beatle project either. I suggest you check what is required by the project. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I just removed WPBeatles from I Can't Tell You Why, Iko Iko, and You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet, as I don't see any mention of any of the Beatles in these articles. Even if the articles were updated to mention that these songs were covered by Ringo Starr and His All-Starr Band, I don't think WikiProject Beatles needs to monitor these articles.  Thanks!
 * Fair do's. Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 21:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Tight A$
Hi. It's great that you are creating new articles on the Beatles, but I see that copyright problems have been an issue for you before. In your newly created Tight A$ article, I had to remove a sentence as it was clearly a copy/paste from the Beatles Bible reference. It is not to ok to just copy sources verbatim. You have been warned for this before and, I'm sorry, but if you continue to breach copyright I will have to report you. Please just rewrite the information in your own words and there will be no more problems. Best, Jenks24 (talk) 15:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This has been an issue for you before, so I'm struggling to see how this was an accident, but I will assume good faith anyway. You say it's "not your fault", but you are responsible for your edits and, whether intentionally or not, you have been introducing copyright violations. I hope this truly was an accident, but if it occurs again I will have to report you to an administrator. Jenks24 (talk) 15:47, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not so sure that these new articles are great; AFAICT, they are non-notable album tracks, are adequately covered on the album page, and don't qualify for separate articles per WP:N. Uniplex (talk) 17:49, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that these album tracks pass WP:N? Notability should be established in the lead, whether the article is marked as a stub or not.  Also, it seems that you are continuing to use a source which was pointed out above as being a fan site, not a WP:RS; please don't. Uniplex (talk) 16:40, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * First port of call for Beatles-related articles is books: WP:TB lists about 50 of the better ones on this subject (and there are hundreds more). Uniplex (talk) 16:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Some of the books are available online. Google books allows searching of many books and can be used to obtain or confirm citations. Uniplex (talk) 17:33, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Back to the main point: “Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song”. Songs such as Tight A$ are non-notable album tracks; please delete the articles that you have recently created, flesh out the section on the song in the relevant album article with any new information that you have, and only if/when it becomes unwieldy, spawn a daughter article for the song. Yes, we know that WP is ‘a bit of a mess’, but that's no reason to make it more of a mess. Uniplex (talk) 08:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

September 2011
The quote in the article The Beatles Stereo Box Set is 'complete collection of original Beatles albums' so The Beatles Box and The Beatles in Mono do not qualify as 'complete collections of original Beatles albums.' Steelbeard1 (talk) 18:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Dead Links
Please could you exercise a little caution when removing dead links? This edit removed a link tagged as dead only last month. The purpose of tagging dead links rather than simply removing them is so that the Way Back Machine or other archive can be used to replace the link. Removing even dead citations without replacing them doesn't help article accuracy. Absconded Northerner (talk) 19:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * In fact could you go back and revert yourself on all of the twenty or so pages where you have done this. then please read WP:DEADREF for instructions on what to do when you find an apparent deadlink. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

I'd Have You Anytime
How on earth did you come to the conclusion I'd Have You Anytime is start class? The present entry is little more than one line discography entry. Not the first time I have reverted your assessments, and I rarely, if ever, have I had to change somebody else's assessment. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 13:23, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

A belated welcome!
Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Yeepsi. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia: Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on, consult Questions, or place helpme on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Jezhotwells (talk) 22:52, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of You Are Here (song)


The article You Are Here (song) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable, non-charting song. Just being by Lennon isn't enough.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravendrop 06:43, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problems with What You Got (song)
Hello. Concerning your contribution, What You Got (song), please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.beatlesbible.com/people/john-lennon/songs/what-you-got/. As a copyright violation, What You Got (song) appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. What You Got (song) has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:What You Got (song) and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:What You Got (song) with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:What You Got (song).

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Uniplex (talk) 13:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Beef Jerky
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Beef Jerky, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.beatlesbible.com/people/john-lennon/songs/beef-jerky/. As a copyright violation, Beef Jerky appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Beef Jerky has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Beef Jerky and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Beef Jerky with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Beef Jerky.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Uniplex (talk) 14:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Lennon/McCartney or Lennon–McCartney
There is a discussion here where we could use your input. Thanks. Curious Eric  23:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Sep '11
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Magical Mystery Tour‎. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. Uniplex (talk) 13:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Second request to please use edit summaries. Thanks!  GoingBatty (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

The Beatles Anthology
The Beatles Anthology (documentary) is identified as a Good Article, but I do not see a Good Article review on the article's talk page or anywhere else. Did you follow the process outlined at WP:GAN to promote this article as a Good Article? Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 15:11, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello. I was planning to follow up the article w/ a GA review, but as time went on I forgot. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 15:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Will you be able to do one soon? It's ideal to do a GA review then go ahead with the promotion. Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 16:52, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Remind me in 30mins - 1 hour, I shall have free time, to do it then. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 16:54, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Nudge! Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 17:51, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Danke. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 17:53, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Have a look. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 18:30, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks. :) Erik (talk &#124; contribs) 18:46, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears, tht the GA review has been removed. --Yeepsi (Talk to me!) 18:56, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

GA "review"
There is a detailed process which must be gone through before nominating and then getting articles reviewed Reviewing good articles, so I have delisted. Read up on the guidelines first please. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:00, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Beef Jerky


The article Beef Jerky has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non notable album track, fails WP:NMUSIC

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Intuition (John Lennon song)


The article Intuition (John Lennon song) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Fails WP:NSONG as non-charting and lacking significant third-party coverage. Simply being by Lennon does not make the song notable.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravendrop 23:43, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Beef Jerky for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Beef Jerky 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/Beef Jerky 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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniplex (talk • contribs) 10:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Colours
hello,

before you use colours excessively, you must establish your practice does not violate WP:COLOUR. Regards.-- ♫GoP♫ T C N 13:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Paul McCartney discography
Your major revision to Paul McCartney discography was significantly flawed. Wings information should not be duplicated in McCartney's solodiscography, wings one have their own articlemike-hilal (talk) 15:07, 26 December 2011