User talk:MusicforthePeople/Talk archive/2013

Most of the time I'll message you on your talk. I will reply here, on my talk, sometimes.

Thanks, and happy new year
Hey, yeepsi. Forgot to say a big thank you for sorting out that Hari's On Tour > Hari's on Tour article title for me – you're a star. I'm gradually getting closer to that long-promised George–Ravi 1974 tour article, what with new Hari's on Tour (Express) and a rewrite I'm doing on the Dark Horse piece (loads of info I've got from new GH/Beatle books, also at least 3 highly favourable album reviews I've come across. Wo-ho!). Hope you're doing well. JG66 (talk) 06:05, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Yeepsi. That's two excellent questions you've asked me, so I'll be brief (ha!). Yes, I've got, and I absolutely adore, Early Takes. (Where's volume 2?, I think I'm not alone in asking.) Took me a couple of listens – and then boom [sound of penny dropping very hard] ... Awaiting, Run of the Mill, Woman Don't You Cry, Light That Has Lighted the World, Locked Door, Let It Be Me, ATMP – they're just amazing. (Great to play along to on guitar, too.) Funnily enough, it's only My Sweet Lord that doesn't really do it for me on that album. I've made an iTunes playlist mixing all the tracks with stuff like Gently Weeps (acoustic, Anthol 3 version), Let It Down and Sue Me (demos), Dark Horse (acoustic, from Pirate Songs) – dynamite. Have you got Early Takes? What do you think?


 * As far as Hari bios go, I'm hard pressed to come up with a top 3 actually, because Simon Leng's book just towers over all the others. I don't think Leng's book is perfect, by any means, and I think he pushes his claims a bit far at times, but he's the first and only guy who's realised that you've got to factor in all George's other projects, not just his official solo work or his face-value contributions to the Beatles, to get a true picture of his musicality. I think that's consistent with the praise While My Guitar Gently Weeps has received, basically. When I first read Leng's book in about 2007, it was such a great feeling – FINALLY, someone's pointing this stuff out ... I get so pissed off with the John-and-Paul Fabs-duopoly idea, and most Beatles authors, it seems to me, are just too straight, basically: like George Martin, they don't get Indian music, it sounds weird to them, John and Paul could only take it in small doses; therefore these authors can (and do) continue to consign George to the "weird" basket and his full input is always overlooked. Same with Ringo, of course. It's easy to miss the fact that (without forgetting their incredible talents) John and Paul were able to look so good and achieve so much in the Beatles because George and Ringo were there to let them do that – that was the band dynamic. And band dynamic ("greater than the some of their parts", or whatever the saying is), that's what makes a great band, with or without great songwriters. But the point is that those two great songwriters, Lennon and McCartney, were able to flourish because of the band set-up they were in. Nowadays, Keith Richards never misses an opportunity to acknowledge Charlie Watts' input in the Stones, for instance (a bit overdue though, I think), and anyone who understands music and what makes a band tick gets that – i.e., not you average Guardian/Q/Mojo/RS-contributor Beatles author, I'd say(!). I notice that people outside of the Beatles nostalgia-bubble – musicians' musicians, you might say; or people writing about 1960s counterculture or influences on '80s world music, those who happen to come to the subject of the Beatles via a broader topic – they will pick up on George's personal contribution to western culture, but Beatles biographers tend to follow and encourage the same old perceptions. (And whaddya know, these same books end up on WP:Beatles recommended lists. I should add that I haven't bothered to read the latest batch of Beatles books, and I'm mainly judging them on what is reflected in magazine and WP articles. A rather blinkered approach of my own, admittedly.) And I can't help thinking it doesn't help that Mac, Martin and Yoko are always prepared to give interviews at the drop of a paperclip – everything snowballs with each decade ...


 * Which is all a very long way of saying that Simon Leng's book, for its occasional exaggeration (understandable, surely, when the distortion is coming so strongly from the opposite direction) and the odd mistake, is so valuable in the Beatles' story, and essential in George's.


 * So, with the other Harrison bios, I'd probably put Alan Clayson's George Harrison (aka The Quiet One) at #2. And that surprises me, because I hate that book – or rather, I hate the perception of the author that I get from reading the book. It's difficult to explain: there's a sarcy (sarcky? sarky?) attitude running through every comment Clayson makes, as if he's incapable of imparting information or writing anything genuine without adding a poisonous spin. He's interviewed no one of consequence for his book, but that doesn't stop him from interpreting a situation as if he was there. Clayson seems to thrive on ridiculing George Harrison, and I can't help wondering whether it really bugged him that George wanted nothing to do with the book (it was first published in 1996, then updated in '02, I think), and apparently no one else in the GH circle wanted to speak to him either. You compare that with Simon Leng, who's got fantastic contributions from Klaus Voormann, John Barham, Gary Wright, Andy Newmark, Joey Molland, Bob Purvis from Splinter, and others – there was obviously something about Leng's approach that instilled trust in those interviewees. Okay, it should be said that George had recently died when Leng was preparing the book, but he points out that he was amazed at how utterly loyal everyone he spoke to was about George. From everything I've ever read or understood about George, that loyalty in his friendships didn't suddenly appear during his last years or after he'd died. Clayson speaks to no one that I've ever heard of in a Beatles/GH context, but that doesn't stop him from writing that "friends laughed behind his back" or casting events in a dark light whenever possible, etc. Having said that, for a mainstream bio, it is very thorough and seems well researched. There are a fair amount of errors, but perhaps that's because all these years later (after 1996), other info has come to light. I use the Clayson book a lot for wikipedia because it does give a lot of detail on things that other biographers would skip over. He's absolutely there on the history of Friar Park, for instance, and the atmosphere of sleepy Henley. (I think he was stalking George maybe, and ended up talking to gossipy bar staff at the Row Barge ...)


 * I don't know about the others, in that they can all be so wrong, and you can't offer date-of-original-publication as a valid reason, because they're all 2006 onwards. (You mentioned some GH bios that had mistakes; I wonder which ones?) I've got a soft spot for Joshua Greene's Here Comes the Sun – that would be my #3, I think. On attitude and approach, and the whole reason for dedicating a book to one particular subject, this would get the jump on Clayson any day. But Josh gets a lot of things wrong – I mean, a lot of things! It's a book that readers love, if I remember right from looking on Amazon, and I can see why. It concentrates plenty on the big spiritual years, '67 to '74, in fact that period makes up about two-thirds of the book. And it tells George's story with a lot of affection while explaining his spirituality in very real (non-religious) terms. I get the impression that Greene makes up a lot of conversations that may or may not have taken place – eg, taking text from I, Me, Mine and making out that George said the very same thing to Swami Bhaktivedanta – but it's an enjoyable read from an author that's obviously got a generous heart. I find Greene's book is useful on wiki articles in small doses, but the direct quotes are absolute jewels each time. I recently added one in the "Give Me Love" article: spiritual concepts were "distilled" into phrases "so elegant they resembled Vedic sutras: short codes that contain volumes of meaning". I can't claim to completely understand that point, but it's such a cool thing to say(!).


 * By the way, when I talk about an author's "affection" for the subject being important, I don't mean a book's got to be all flowery, complimentary and hagiographic the whole time, far from it. A bad album is a bad album. I guess a good example of my thinking on this would be to compare two first-wave Beatles books (from the mid/late '70s): Nicholas Schaffner's Beatles Forever is written with enthusiasm and an obvious affection for his subject, but that doesn't mean he holds back when a harsh opinion is required (eg for crap music like Ram, Wildlife, Sometime in NYC, Red Rose, much of Dark Horse, Ex Tex). Utterly brilliant book, Schaffner's, because as a reader you trust the author. Carr & Tyler's Beatles: An Illustrated Record, on the other hand, seems to be a platform for two NME journos to ridicule the majority of Beatles solo releases. The favouritism and bias (pro Comrade John, relentlessly anti Paul until BOTR, out to crucify George throughout, Ringo just a loveable drummer) is so obvious, it's impossible to take their opinions seriously. Of the recent books, Robert Rodriguez's Fab Four FAQ 2.0, covering the 1970–80 solo period, does a great job of capturing that Schaffner approach, I think – no obvious bias for any one Beatle, achievements praised or failures lambasted, depending on the album/song/tour under discussion. And Rodriguez offers some pretty well-reasoned opinions of his own, I'd say. Peter Lavazzoli's Dawn of Indian Music in the West is another example of good authoring, imo; there's only a chapter on George among Lavazzoli's pieces on many artists relevant to our understanding of Indian music in the western world, but that one chapter grasps GH's musicality better than entire books that have been published and are dedicated to his life and career. I've never bothered tracking down Giuliano's book Dark Horse, or Albert Goldman's Lennon bio, on the other hand, because from what I understand, those authors set out with a definite agenda of their own, to tell a sensationalist story. (Perhaps I should check out the Giuliano one, I don't know.)


 * Quick round-up of the other GH bios: Dale Allison's 2006 "spiritual biography" is quite interesting, but it's just a list of links to spiritual themes in George's songs basically. Like Greene, Allison's coming from a good place with his observations (that's clear from his introduction to the book), which makes The Love There That's Sleeping best-of-the-rest for me. The Ian Inglis and Elliot Huntley books really annoy me for completely different reasons. I really wanted to like Huntley's Mystical One, but he's too shoot-from-the-hip, too ready with an outraged opinion stating how great George was/is. Not only that, but while Huntley occasionally acknowledges that he's quoting a point made by the likes of Schaffner, there are loads of times he lifts some other author's conclusion (particularly Schaffner's) without giving credit. (Come to think of it, one could level a similar charge at Rodriguez; bits of his book do seem very familiar, as if he's checked with the likes of Schaffner and Leng, and inserted an adjective of his own.) With Mystical One, for instance, and I only noticed it when putting together that long Plagiarism Suit section in the "My Sweet Lord" article, Huntley completely takes portions of Joseph Self's online essay about the MSL/He's So Fine case, pretty much word for word, and presents the words as his own. The degree of overlap is astonishing, and there's no reference section at all in his book, no index – very dubious author's ethics. I find Inglis a pompous ass, to be honest, and the amount of mistakes he makes is just hilarious. He's the total anti-Huntley, in that he almost never offers a personal opinion. For me, Inglis' (2010) book loses massive points because he includes a section at the back giving a brief critique on each of the books or other sources he's used – so finally, a personal viewpoint from the author(!). In that section, he dishes out a pretty harsh judgement on Huntley, and to a less extent, Clayson; but it's the fact that Inglis feels qualified to make these judgements, at the end of a book littered with embarrassing factual errors and cold, detached observations, which bugs me. Unlike Huntley, Inglis provides references most of the time, but I don't trust some of his research for a moment. His citation to support a statement that the majority of reviews for the 1974 George-Ravi tour were negative is a case in point. Aside from the issue that Leng's book has established that, from a study of all the reviews of the concerts, the majority of them were positive (some unbelievably so), Inglis' source for his statement is none other than Ben Fong-Torres's Rolling Stone beat-up piece from Dec '74, reproduced in the RS Press tribute book Harrison. Two things wrong with that: Fong-Torres's "Lumbering in the Material World" was itself one of the review pieces that were very critical of the tour (it just happened to provide quotes from other negative reviews as well); and the article only covers the early portion of the tour up to and including Los Angeles (show 10 of 45), so it can't possibly serve as a picture of critical reception tour-wide. Not to mention the issue that "Lumbering" has been identified by a number of other authors as a hatchet job, with Fong-Torres having taken comments from Ravi, Preston and Scott out of context to further his own argument. So, not impressed with Inglis either. There is one Hari bio I haven't got – by Mark Shapiro, I think – but the last one I have is another so-called spiritual biography, by Gary Tillery. Pretty rubbish on all fronts, that one, imo!


 * There you go, Yeepsi – way more than you asked for, as always with me ... I notice you've done some housework and archived all past messages on your talk page – you'll probably need to do that again now, with the length of this treatise of mine! (I'm starting to think I should attach [hide] tags to all my messages on personal and talk pages ...) Anyway, it's been a pleasure to sound off, from my point of view, of course. Take care – ring out the false, ring in the true, 'n all. JG66 (talk) 07:01, 5 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Yeepsi. Great to hear from you – I was getting worried that maybe all my blurting above might've been too much. (Thinking about it though, maybe it just took you a week or two to read through it!) Yes, I'd forgotten you're vinyl-preferred – nothing wrong in that one bit, but I guess MP3 playlists are out of the question then. Going back to the books: that one you mention, Life and Times of George Harrison, that's the Guilano one, I think (not sure about spelling of surname). I guess I will get it one day, but again, I really can't stand a book – any book – that sets out to beat someone up (which is what I understand Guilano's does). That's what's so disappointing about Clayson's Harrison book, because as an author he's done all the good work, with his research and the scope of the book, but he ruins it all with his snake-like storytelling.
 * Taking the current GAs to FA? Man, no way! I just couldn't stand the whole procedure, and I'd only be losing out time-wise on what I do like doing on wikipedia – which is working on an article and taking it up to GA if possible. Having said that ... I seem to recall telling you I wasn't interested in GAs either, midway through last year – wasn't that right? Hmm. Best not to say "never", I guess! Cheers, JG66 (talk) 12:29, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Syd Barrett
Hi there. I'm going to change the ref formatting in Syd Barrett to sfn, in order for the article to comply with other Pink Floyd article. Plant&#39;s Strider (talk) 12:28, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * At the WP:CITEVAR guideline, that reason is specifically mentioned as not valid as a basis for changing reverence style. It says there is no need to change reference style of one article "to make it match other articles". Binksternet (talk) 14:09, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree. WikiProject Pink Floyd suggests SFN as the reference style. Plant&#39;s Strider (talk) 14:21, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Underneath it it says The other way''to use a full citation. yeepsi (Time for a chat?) 14:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 *  Project's preferred method for this is inline citations using the tag. doesn't specifically mention sfn. yeepsi (Time for a chat?) 14:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * But all other Pink Floyd articles use sfn/harvnb, plus it's much more convenient. Plant&#39;s Strider (talk) 14:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * A large majority don't. The convenience of it is up to the user, cos if I'm going through a book I would just copy and paste the cite template and change the page number/chapter when necessary. yeepsi (Time for a chat?) 14:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * CITEVAR is bigger than the project guideline, which in any case offers two methods without specifying a preference of one over the other. Binksternet (talk) 15:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It's not about preference, it's about consistency among Pink Floyd articles. Plant&#39;s Strider (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Which brings me back to CITEVAR. Consistency among articles is not a reason to change an article's established reference style. Binksternet (talk) 15:31, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the only solution to this problem is to let other users vote on the talk page. Plant&#39;s Strider (talk) 15:39, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:FiremanStrawberriesOceans.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:FiremanStrawberriesOceans.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * You've got the wrong user. yeepsi (Time for a chat?) 18:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Did you attempt to add a category for the file? (which is on Common)?Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Yea, probably. yeepsi (Time for a chat?) 22:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Jugband Blues/GA1
Hi Yeepsi, I have put your GAN for "Jugband Blues" on hold so some outstanding issues can be addressed. See the GAN review page for details, and feel free to ask questions. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, I pointed out a few more issues that still need to be resolved. If you need me to clarify anything further let me know on the GAN page. WesleyDodds (talk) 13:18, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I've clarified the last remaining issues on the article GAN page. The article is very close to meeting the criteria, so address my final points as soon as you can. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:22, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There's just one prose issue left, as noted in the GAN page. If you need another day or two to reexamine your sources, that's fine, but let me know if you do. Any longer and I'd have to fail the article. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There's still a slight wording issue, so I offered some examples on the GAN. Let me know if they accurately reflect the cited text. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:55, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

The article has been passed now. Good work. I suggest having some experienced copyeditors look over that article and any other current/potential GA noms to help you clean up the prose even further. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:50, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot – January
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:10, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mind Games, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Insecurity (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:17, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

IP edit warring on Ummagumma
I think that's the third time an IP from that range has done the same unsourced edits on this article - I left it because two reverts is a slippery slope towards WP:EW. Cheers for picking up the baton. If it happens again, I can just revert with "see talk page" Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   14:33, 30 January 2013 (UTC)

Lennon
Good work on the Lennon articles. However, don't base the majority of your changes on Blaney, he gets alot of things wrong. There are 3,000 books written about Lennon; in order for a "new" one to sell they need new info, which is fine, as long as it's correct and not author's subjectiveness. Hotcop2 (talk) 01:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank. Don't worry, I don't plan to. I'm slowly working through Google Books. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 08:35, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 21:05, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Dark Horse (song) GAR
Hey Yeepsi. If you've got a minute, my "Dark Horse" GAR requires an okay on images' copyright status and fair use in the article. There's only the one image, the US pic sleeve. PaulMacDermott's kindly done the review, but his text-to-speech program means he needs second opinions regarding images and punctuation (the last of which Wizardman has just taken care of). Would you mind? No probs if not, of course. Cheers, JG66 (talk) 12:27, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks anyway, Yeeps. Yes, turned out it wasn't necessary after all! Thanks for your compliment – I'm pretty pleased about this one myself actually(!). JG66 (talk) 11:47, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * All Apologies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Cassette


 * Rape Me (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Cassette


 * Rock 'n' Roll (John Lennon album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Thirty Days

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Ram Archive Collection.png)
Thanks for uploading File:Ram Archive Collection.png. 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:46, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ram (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ATV (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:23, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

SPI
Your input would be appreciated here. GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  21:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot – February
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bring the Light (Beady Eye song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Digital download (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:51, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Roger McGough and Category:Songs produced by Roger McGough
I have nominated both of these categories for deletion. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 20:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Out of the Blue (Electric Light Orchestra album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Album of the Year and CBS Records


 * Time Tour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dave Morgan

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:25, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
...for keeping an eye on the Floyd album articles. Sometimes I feel as though all I do now is hit the undo button. Parrot of Doom 15:31, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Gives me something to do on wiki from time to time. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 15:31, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I Am The Walrus
Regarding the "consensus" I agree that it falls short of that mark, but I wasn't the only one who held this belief. I was responding to another IP user's post, so there are at least two of us. Assuming Freebullets was also convinced based upon his undoing of his own edit, that makes three of us.

I didn't undo your edit- I felt that would not be a tasteful gesture on my part. However, I know that the information on the page is utterly fallacious. How do I convince the community to allow it to be removed permanently? 74.197.35.71 (talk) 20:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It isn't my intention to add any new information; I never put any of my "own research" into the article. The need for a reliable source does not apply to removing dubious information.  With regard to the source cited in the article, it is clearly published for the entertainment of a lay audience.  It is not scholarly, and the author possesses no expertise on the subject.  The "About the Author" section of the book indicates that he possesses no degree- he received an "honours diploma from the Guitar Institute of Technology at the Musicians Institute in Hollywood, California, in 1988".

74.197.35.71 (talk) 21:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!
Hey Yeepsi. Thanks mucho for giving that new "Grey Cloudy Lies" article a B, and ditto for "Beautiful Girl" and "Learning How ..." a while back. (I actually get a bigger kick out of moments like this – starting a new article and landing a B!! – than I do when helping expand an existing article and getting it through GAN.) Don't think the song article I'm currently working on, for "Maya Love", is quite worthy of a B somehow, but who knows – early days. Oh, and talking about GAs – congrats on getting those Lennon and [Shallow]Mac album articles promoted. Way to go, Yeepsi! Cheers, JG66 (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Wow, great work with that Dark Horse discog. I'd always planned to add text to that article, as there's plenty on the subject in Harrison's biographies – might just get down to it soon now that I've seen what a difference you've made. Could be a good article in that. JG66 (talk) 08:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!
Wanted to thank you for all the hard work you've done keeping the Beach Boys articles all nice and tidy. Trying to get such a mess of a topic in order is an uphill battle and your contributions have definitely aided a heap. Hopefully we'll be able to start up that Beach Boys Wikiproject you proposed someday and really get the ball moving in the right direction. Jamekae (talk) 17:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * How many people would be needed to establish a WP? I'd perhaps be able to rope in a few to bring up the tally. Lots of great BB books are set to be released this year and it'd be great to have a team of people to help plugging the info into articles. Jamekae (talk) 02:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Face the Music (Electric Light Orchestra album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass


 * George Harrison (album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass


 * Live in Japan (George Harrison album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass


 * Out of the Blue: Live at Wembley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass


 * Showdown (Electric Light Orchestra album) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass


 * The Light Shines On (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

more song GANs
Hi there Yeepsi. I've got a few Harrison song articles up as GANs, a couple going back to December that I'd really like to get cleared (hopefully promoted). I was thinking of contacting PaulMacDermott to see if he could do the honours again. Knowing he uses a speech/text program, I was wondering, would you be able to step in, as and when, to look at the things his program misses – images and punctuation? Of course, he might be otherwise engaged, but if I could offer someone upfront to provide an opinion on those two issues (i.e. to spare him the rather drawn-out FAC-ish situation that occurred with the "Give Me Love" GAR), that would be great. There are no images in the first/oldest of the articles, "Hari's on Tour (Express)", so that rather cuts down on the workload there! No problems if you can't of course. Best, JG66 (talk) 02:57, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Fabulous, thanks Yeepsi. I'll see if Paul's up for it – he could be a bit over-Georged (it can happen, I'm told). Cheers, JG66 (talk) 12:09, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Yeepsi. Ready when you are, over at Talk:Hari's on Tour (Express) and Talk:Ding Dong, Ding Dong. Paul's given them his okay pending the two issues of images and punctuation. Cheers, JG66 (talk) 23:55, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Yeepsi. Thanks again for being the pic & punc wizard, I'm so chuffed with those song GAs, especially "Hari's". Quick question: I've finally decided to do something about my rather sad, desolate user and talk pages (archiving for a start), but how do you get that GA Contributor category appearing on your user page? No great rush, but when you got a minute ... Cheers, JG66 (talk) 04:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It's okay – I got it now, I was just being an idiot! Best, JG66 (talk) 04:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:The Fireman (music)
Category:The Fireman (music), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

RE: Valotte
I just saw that you were expanding the article for GA, and saw that it needed the section. I might add to his other albums' articles if you plan on expanding those as well? Dan56 (talk) 00:46, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks for the barnstar! Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 21:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Very nice indeed
Nice one, thanks Yeepsi! JG66 (talk) 14:45, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 13:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot - March
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

GAN review
Hi. Would you be interested in reviewing my GAN for Song of Innocence? It's been sitting around for a month, and I'd like to nominate it for FA when it passes. If not, no need to reply back. Dan56 (talk) 06:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Instant Karma's gonna get you
I began the review at Talk:Instant Karma!/GA1, and there are a few points I'd like your thoughts on. Thanks for all your work on this and other music articles! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to ping you to see if you're still interested in finishing out this review. There's at least one more major point in the list I'd like your thoughts on (critical responses). -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Instant Karma! (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Tony Cox


 * The 50th Anniversary Collection (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Corrina, Corrina

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:53, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Flaming Pie (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Dave Stewart


 * It Don't Come Easy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Promotional video

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks (as usual)
Hey Yeepsi, was just putting "You" up for GAN and noticed this. Thanks – as always. BTW, what's happened to your User page? (Not that it's any big deal of course.) Best, JG66 (talk) 02:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Standing on the shoulders ...
Can't help but notice you undid my change to the Newton quote, despite the version you show being wrong - why so? You could check the page on Isaac Newton to see the reference for his original statement if you'd like. F./ Fizzackerly (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot - April
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Dylarooo
I don't understand why you would undo all my track listings on A Day To Remember, it looked a lot better plus showed total length. Now it just looks like a mess. Nice going .... Dylarooo (talk) 13:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Well alright then. I just see pretty much every other band having that and I personally think it looks nicer. Anyways good day. Dylarooo (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Signed by Sinebot
Just letting you know that your talk page got signed by Sinebot. Seqqis (talk) 15:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wedding Album, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heartbeat (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Images, images
Hey Yeepsi. Hope you're well. Thanks for the recent B ratings on new GH articles; it's great to know you're usually first-on-the-scene with Beatles-related articles, because that means there's an element of consistency over all new articles created. (You're dead right, for instance, that I Am Missing You only deserves a Start on the quality rating.) Can I tap into you for another point of consistency – on another thing that I think you're pretty clued up on? (Way more than me, that's for sure.) I'm in the middle of uploading images for some George song articles but I'm a bit worried that resolution might be a bit high, even though I've scanned at pretty low res and then exported from iPhoto as lowest-quality JPGs. Do you think these face labels are okay, not too large on the page ... World of Stone, Hari's on Tour (Express), I Don't Care Anymore (George Harrison song)? (Haven't always done the best job of minor touch-ups on the scans, you'll notice; eg, smudge effect on white surrounds, particularly top left in the World of Stone image.) I've also uploaded scans of US pic sleeves for "You" and "Isn't It a Pity" – I think they're okay though. Also, I thought I'd uploaded a better version of the Bangla Desh pic sleeve ... but it doesn't seem to have come across in the article. I'm all right with writing and editing articles; just completely useless with the image side of things! As always, no sweat if you're busy elsewhere, but any help/advice would be much appreciated. Thanks Yeepsi, JG66 (talk) 05:05, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that, Yeepsi, I'll bear the "less than 350px by 350px" point in mind. I know what you mean about Bangla Desh – and that's what confused me. Because if you look at the Bangla Desh image I uploaded as a replacement, here it is – but make sure you don't click on the image or follow the link – and then compare with the one in the article, they're not the same. (For example, note the black vinyl poking out the top of the sleeve.) If you do click on that new image though, it actually takes you to the rather shoddy-looking version that's currently in the article. I think I'll just upload the BD sleeve again; it must be the way I uploaded it, as a replacement, instead of as an all-new file. Confusing! Thanks again. Cheers, JG66 (talk) 14:23, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey yeepsi. Whatever you did with the Bangla Desh pic (if it was you), the page looks absolutely fine right now, with the version showing vinyl sticking out of the top of the sleeve. Perfect! Thanks for your time on this, as always. If I could possibly intrude further: I always felt those new labels appeared too large on screen, which is what made me question image size, so I've tried to reduce to 185px in the articles. Thing is, Hari's on Tour (Express) has worked out fine, but if I do the same to World of Stone and I Don't Care Anymore, I get this happening, with strange text appearing around the image. Any thoughts? PS, no worries about you making changes in that GAN, aside from the comment I made there. (I do stress: please don't think I meant it in any way other than friendly advice. Aside from burying my head in George H articles, the thing I really like about wikipedia is working with people who add such positivity and enthusiasm to the experience. Even within the confines of compiling an encyclopaedia, surely we're all passionate about the subject(s) we choose to work on. I start to doubt that, though, in the few FACs that I've seen, because it becomes so darn formal (Leave it, JG66, leave it!!). Any road, working on new articles and GANs, and seeing the likes of you around the traps, more than makes up for that. Sorry – waffling on again, I think.) Cheers, JG66 (talk) 06:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * About the Bangla Desh image – yep, just a case of a lag in the system, like you said. The new image for Ding Dong has likewise come through okay; and I investigated at Help desk and found that the reduce-size function was removed from single (and album) boxes in December 2010, but obviously not from regular song boxes. Anyway, all sorted, and I've recently uploaded images for "Deep Blue", "Miss O'Dell" and "Māya Love", to ensure there's some sort of uniform look to these B-side labels. (Hey, thanks for indulging me through all of this – I'm happy now!)
 * With my comment about "leav[ing] alone what are obvious suggestions (as opposed to points concerning GA requirements)", I meant that quite a few of Evan's comments in the GAR were only suggestions for making a possible change – they certainly weren't requirements or instructions. In fact, some were even lighter in tone than suggestions, I'd say; more like "things for your consideration". (Eg: Might "at the start of 1970" read better as "in early 1970?" and Not a big deal, but the adjective "cinematic" might be preferred to the hyphenated "film-like." also: Very, very minor, but perhaps change "Beatles author Bruce Spizer" to "Beatles biographer Bruce Spizer"?) There's room for discussion in situations like those, and I've always found that good reviewers welcome that; they're not just laying down the law ... I feel bad, because I don't want to make a big deal out of it – and certainly not with you of all fellow contribs, yeepsi. It's just that personally I wouldn't jump in and carry out changes at GAR if I wasn't the one nominating the article, although I realise that other editors can do that. But if I ever did, I'd definitely be leaving those grey-area suggestions/considerations/points for discussion, etc, well alone, for the nominee to handle – you know? With the comment I wrote in the GAR, what I meant was, go ahead and fix typos, a broken article link, url or some other issue that's indisputable, but perhaps leave points involving editorial opinion to the person who's put the article up for nomination (assuming they've done most of the recent work on the article). Sorry, I know you did it with the best will in the world, and I'm probably just sounding precious now ... JG66 (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Socks and more socks
Can you take a look at Sockpuppet investigations/Chowkatsun9? I am wondering whether you think all of the indicated accounts are from the same sockmaster, or did I include one too many? Thank you for your continued vigilance at music articles. Binksternet (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Driving Rain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Bass, Organ and Tampura


 * Yoko Ono/Plastic Ono Band (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Bass

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Mind/Walls/Ram
Hi Yeepsi. I was just checking on the GA noms page to see if anyone had picked up any of my nominated articles yet – alas, no, "Behind That Locked Door" continues to gather dust – but I saw you've got a few album GARs under way. Quick point I noticed with Mind Games: there's a 29 October 1973 release date in the article's infobox, but sources I have here give November (as, in fact, per the article's lead section currently). From books that are close to hand, Keith Badman's Beatles Diary Volume 2 gives 2 November for US release and 16 Nov in the UK; as does Castleman & Podrazik's All Together Now, an old, old book I tracked down, but one I trust implicitly. On the other hand, in Bruce Spizer's more recent The Beatles on Apple Records, 31 October (but not 29 October) is given for the US release date ... Perhaps you've got alternative info, but from what I can see, Apple issued Yoko's Feeling the Space, Ringo and Mind Games all on the same day in America, 2 Nov 1973. Just thought I'd raise it with you here, instead of complicating the GAR.

Also – and this is just my opinion – the Ram article seems very light on background/context for what was an extremely fraught (and intriguing) period in Mac's career. (It's sort of George's Dark Horse and Extra Texture periods rolled into one, I'd say.) I'm thinking of Paul's massive bust-up with George in New York in December 1970, John's vicious Rolling Stone interview that same month, Paul launching the suit to dissolve the Beatles partnership on 31 December and his appearance in court in Jan '71, Paul & Ringo attending Mick Jagger's wedding in St Tropez and ignoring each other. Also, the war of words between J & P in the UK press is touched on under "Feud" (I think I added the mention, actually, sometime last year), but it was under way all through 1971 following publication of the Lennon interview in January, and it fed directly into songs like "Too Many People". I don't want to interfere with the GAN – and, hey, perhaps I'm suggesting too much in the way of background details(!). But might be an idea to add these points (or some of them), do you think? Happy to help if you need it. Best, JG66 (talk) 07:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Added a couple more dates to your Mind Games tally over on my page, yeepsi, to keep conversation on that issue intact. Re "D'you thing "Feud" section is worth splitting into "Background" and the "Release" sections?" – definitely, yes. Just my opinion, of course, but I don't think that Feud section is very GA-ish. More importantly, though, McCartney being on the outer vs the other three – and in the sin bin with critics – is pretty essential to the context in which Mac approaches the album. He describes having to sue the other three as the worst thing he ever had to do (or something like that); after meeting with George in NYC in mid December, he angsts away over Christmas in Scotland before deciding to launch the suit in the High Court. These are things that feed into Ram, no question, and "How Do You Sleep?" etc is at the other end of this drama. Plenty on this in Doggett's book. And some enlightening stuff about the Ram sessions in Sounes' FAB (Mac bio), from Dave Spinozza and producer Jim Guercio. (The latter was brought in as a sort of sounding board/co-producer but quit, confused about what his role was exactly and by Paul's indecisiveness, apparently.) Cheers, JG66 (talk) 13:33, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

re "I'm not sure if this is happening to you as well JG ..."
No, all fine for me – sounds weird, though. Careful with that axe (Eugene), when it comes to "taking your computer apart"! JG66 (talk) 14:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:This guitar us.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:This guitar us.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 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:43, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited McCartney (album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Eastman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Ram
Hey Yeepsi. I finally got around to taking a closer look at the Ram article, and I can't help thinking it needs a lot more work before it's approaching GA quality. It's not just the Feud section seeming out of place and those missing points about background we discussed. The structure seems out elsewhere – eg the rather inconsequential Content section (where text about "Ram On (reprise)" and the composite nature of "Uncle Albert" appears to belong in the previous Recording & Structure section, but mention of the music videos should go under Release, surely, as part of the album's promotion). Also, going by discussions in Madinger & Easter, Spizer and Sounes, pretty much all the basic tracks were taped at Columbia Studios in November and December 1970 – not January 1971, and not at A&R Studios. (Looking at Badman's book, he's inconsistent about this start date: under November 1970, he says sessions began that month and went through to December, but then he later gives January '71 as the start). According to those other books I mentioned, overdubs were carried out in NYC in January 1971, at Columbia and A&R; then, in March–April more work took place at Sound Recorders in LA. Apparently, "Dear Boy" was recorded in LA in its entirety. Sorry to have to say it, but the more I see of the article, the more I think it might be an idea to pull the nom. My thinking is that this is an important album and there's a lot missing regarding background and context on release; also, with so many music articles up for nomination, it seems a bit unproductive to be asking any potential reviewer to take on this GAN when s/he might be able to handle two other reviews where the articles are closer to meeting the standard. What do you think, yeepsi – pull the nom and then let's work on it pretty leisurely, but make sure the job gets done? Best, JG66 (talk) 10:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * "I should probably wait until ... my current noms are done before I nom anything else (is it bad I nom'd two more, after just a few days work on them?)" Hell no, you go for it, Yeepsi! Personally, I put a lot of time into articles I nominate – perhaps too much (because they all end up so darn long) and perhaps it's just that I work too slowly. I wasn't trying to say, Don't add any more to the backlog of GANs. When an article's ready, it's ready. But, as we agree now with the Ram article, that one seems pretty undercooked. Also, I guess I had the late 1970-early '71/Beatles-in-High-Court period stuck in my brain, because I was working on "Run of the Mill" and thinking about the follow-up (as it were), "Sue Me, Sue You Blues" – that just made me realise how much was going on in ex-Beatleland while Paul was working on Ram. Cheers, JG66 (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.

We have added information about the readership of the suggested articles using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Biker Like an Icon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First Look (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:08, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Comment?
Hi. Would you care to comment here regarding an original research dispute at My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy? Dan56 (talk) 10:02, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Good Vibrations (album)
I believe that the album should have it's own page. Millions of people use Wikipedia to find information on albums that they have or purchase, myself included. Yes the album is one of a billion other compilations, but for people seeking information on the album, it is perfect. Alex weiner (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Please see this article's talk page, where I have moved this conversation so that it can be discussed further. &mdash; MusikAnimal talk 05:14, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Y Not - What was the point in that?
To answer your question What was the point in that? about my c/e and your revert to Y Not ...

There are two (2) conventions that are generally followed with infoboxes in Wikipedia, which assist with maintainability of the articles:
 * 1. The information is staggered, immediately following the tag word, for example:
 * name = John Smith
 * birth_date = 1 January 1900
 * spouse = Mary Jones
 * 2. The information is consistently lined up after the longest tag word, for example:
 * name       = John Smith
 * birth_date = 1 January 1900
 * spouse    = Mary Jones

Since the infobox in the Y Not article was already close to the second style, I edited it for consistency with that style. Truthanado (talk) 15:11, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject banners
Hi Yeepsi. WikiProject banners serve a variety of uses - the main one is to let folks know there is group of people who are interested in a topic, that they have drawn up guidelines on how to structure articles, that they will be able to offer advice on sources and deal with queries, etc. They also simply advertise the project, drawing in new members. WikiProject article assessment in general will usually be the same - though can at times differ. An album, for example, may be highly important to WikiProject Albums because it was the first stereo album, first coloured vinyl, etc; but less important to WikiProject The Beatles because it wasn't one of the band's more significant or popular albums. The WikiProject Council regards keeping WikiProject banners visible as quite important. See WP:WikiProject coordination.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  23:19, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 28
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Back Off Boogaloo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Promotional video


 * Intro – The Gift Recordings (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Organ


 * Live – The 50th Anniversary Tour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Horns


 * What Separates Me from You Tour (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to It's Complicated

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:32, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Quadrophenia
It's very odd, because changes of this nature usually come with even a "Hey, doing this per Template:Infobox album#Chronology." would of saved you from being reverted. Mlpearc ( powwow ) 01:34, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Brian Jones/Rolling Stone EP
Hello yeepsi, I would like to know why Five By Five which is an (EP) by The Rolling Stones cannot be stated as such. Am I missing something? The other 2 EPs are followed by (EP) so what is different. I would like to know? (Shelgold (talk) 21:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC))

‘With the Beatles’ Australian Cover
What ‘millions for the other albums’? As far as i know, there are very few alternate covers for ‘With the Beatles’ or other Beatles albums. In any case, this is a major alternate cover that is completely different from the standard cover and that was released in its stead in an entire market. The alternate should therefore be included in the article. Esszet (talk) 23:59, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Pigs on the Wing - French promo single (320).jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:Pigs on the Wing - French promo single (320).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 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 09:41, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Made in California, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Compilation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:33, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding "Eclipse"

the source reference that was ALREADY there where you removed my edit supports what I wrote.

http://ca.music.yahoo.com/blogs/stop-the-presses/pink-floyd-dark-side-40-years-later-40-205227757.html

"At the very end of “Eclipse,” in the right channel, there is the faint sound of a Muzak version of the Beatles’ “Ticket to Ride.” This was apparently playing in the background when they recorded the closing snippet of chatter. So far as we know, the Fab Four never demanded any royalties over this."

Since this closing snippet of conversation was the bit recorded with Gerry Driscoll at Abbey Roads. 2 + 2

Also Lennon was a fan of Muzak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.76.83 (talk) 20:40, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Flaming Pie
I've begun the review for Flaming Pie, and it looks close to passing; just a few points I'd like your thoughts on. Thanks for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and sorry you had to wait so long for a reviewer. This one made the dreaded Pink Box of Five at WP:GAN. -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

A flaming barnstar for you!

 * And thanks for your patience with the long wait for a reviewer. -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:52, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Valotte
Best if you make your request on its talk page, that way other editors will know why it was failed/withdrawn. Best of luck on its future development.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:35, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stop and Smell the Roses, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page WBEN (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Pink Floyd song Keep Talking
Why did you remove the personnel section for this song? You did not leave any comments explaining it. Or at least I didn't see the comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.76.83 (talk) 15:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * It's still there, I haven't even removed. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 16:00, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Strange! I could swear it wasn't there.  Sorry about that.76.97.76.83 (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Ringo songs
Hey yeepsi. Thanks for the Bs on those two new Ringo song articles. (I enjoyed writing them as well – there's so little information to wade through, compared with a George song!) I noticed your comment about "You and Me (Babe)" being "a good song to boot", so I just wanted to say, have you listened to it through headphones? What struck me when writing the piece over the last day or two (with the song playing in me 'phones) was how amazing the whole arrangement is on the recording – it sort of flatters the actual composition, I think. In best George Martin/mid-period Beatles fashion, it's all in the details: the horns used in certain places, marimba arriving on the middle-eights, Ringo's overdubbed percussion (floor tom at the start, then extra hi-hats on the middle eight), George's beautiful jangly guitar fills, then the way his solo corresponds with the orchestral strings and horns, and best of all, the way the strings launch straight after Ringo's final line in the monologue ... Amazing – but perhaps none of this is news to you! JG66 (talk) 10:15, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey yeepsi. Ah, the quad sound – much talked about at the time, as I understand it, but the idea went nowhere! On the subject of Ringo articles, I can see that you're "the man", so to speak. Are you okay if I finish off Boogaloo? I think that one and "Early 1970" are well into B territory by now; in fact, I'd say Boogaloo could be worth GAN-ing in the near future (it surprised me how well that article came together, from the info I've got here). But like I say, I consider you the Ringo champ here, yeepsi – is it an article you wanted to develop? Should I "Back Off"?(!) Thought it best to run this by you, because I'm sure I remember seeing "It Don't Come Easy" and maybe "Boogaloo" on your list of intended GAs, back when you had a user page ... No probs either way, as far as I'm concerned – there's plenty for me to do on Planet George.
 * Oh, and congrats on the Live Peace GA – that looks really good. Cheers, JG66 (talk) 15:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yeepsi – just thought it important to check first, because you've made such extensive contribs to Ringo song/album articles across the board. It's funny what you say about side 2 of Toronto – I've read some amusing comments from Delaney Bonnie about playing "Don't Worry Kyoko" at the Lyceum in December '69! Back to the subject of Boogaloo: that's a seriously good single, isn't it? I'd always sort of overlooked it, in favour of "Easy" and "Photograph". JG66 (talk) 16:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll look out for the Bramlett quote – could be a while coming, I have a feeling it's in one of my dusty old Mojo magazines ... With Ringo's singles (or his music generally, in fact), it's only the 1971–73 stuff for me, I'm afraid. Everything after that I find so disappointing – as Peter Doggett says, it's as if Ringo "dials" in his performance on Goodnight Vienna and his albums following that one. Just my opinion, of course (supported by a verifiable source!). Cheers, JG66 (talk) 14:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shine On You Crazy Diamond, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LP (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Live Peace in Toronto 1969
The article Live Peace in Toronto 1969 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Live Peace in Toronto 1969 for comments about the article. Well done! Mdann52 (talk) 13:01, 4 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 13:07, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of songs recorded by A Day to Remember, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joe King (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

McCartney
Hi Yeepsi, I came here to thank you for the work you just did on Pure McCartney‎, and when I saw that you helped several articles reach GA status, I additionally want to add a small word of admiration. I'm currently working on trying to get a few articles about albums and musicians to reach that level as well. The highest I've gotten is B, so I'm definitely looking up to someone with 13 "tilted pluses". Wow! --Eddyspeeder (talk) 16:24, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

GA Nom for Memory Almost Full
Howdy- I wanted to let you know that I am taking on your GA nom for Memory Almost Full. I have done a few reviews already, although (admittedly), albums are a little out of my comfort zone. I still think I will be able to match up the criteria, and will look into it a little more to make sure it meets Focus and covers everything necessary. Thank you for the work you already put in. Sorry it took so long (around 3 months) for someone to review it. I should be able to start my review with initial thoughts later today. Have a good one. PrairieKid (talk) 18:30, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:55, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Jeremy McKinnon categories.
I have nominated for merging lyrics and music categories here. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 19:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to join a discussion
Through this way, I inform there is a discussion about partially disambiguated titles, known as "PDABs". This subguide of WP:D was approved at VPP. I notify you about this because you has participated in at least one RM discussion in which PDAB is cited (in any form). You are welcome to give ideas about the future of this guideline at WT:D or to ignore this message. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  05:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Unfinished Music No. 1: Two Virgins
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Unfinished Music No. 1: Two Virgins you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- 19:16, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Track listing
You are really taking that numbered list thing out of context. The whole reason the templated track listing exist is because it looks better, and this track listing is complicated info. Koala15 (talk) 16:17, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * How is a simple numbered list "complicated"? Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 16:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

But where is the rule that says we are not allowed to use templated track listings. Koala15 (talk) 16:33, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There isn't a rule that says we can't use it, but neither is there a rule that says we can't use a simple list. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 16:40, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * BTW, "because it looks better" isn't a reason for the template's use. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 16:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

That does still does not make any sense, your argument is basically "because it looks better" too. Koala15 (talk) 17:28, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I haven't said the list looks better, I said there wasn't a rule against either. The existence of the template isn't solely "because it looks better", as you say. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 17:46, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Per MOS:ALBUM#Track listing: "In more complicated situations, a table or the template may be a better choice" like an extra disc or bonus tracks (for example, Dig Out Your Soul). Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 17:51, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

It still does not say we aren't allowed to use templated track listings. Koala15 (talk) 18:40, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Would it make sense to start a discussion on this to get other users opinions? Koala15 (talk) 18:43, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not say that it isn't allowed to be used, I'm saying that the simple list is used for just the main album, with the template used for additional tracks and/or bonus discs. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 18:44, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Memory Almost Full
The article Memory Almost Full you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Memory Almost Full for comments about the article. Well done! Thank you very much for the patience. PrairieKid (talk) 15:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Unfinished Music No. 1: Two Virgins
The article Unfinished Music No. 1: Two Virgins you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Unfinished Music No. 1: Two Virgins for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- 18:08, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Warped Tour 2013 Tour Compilation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alternative (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Storm Thorgerson
Regarding your edit, I don't see how Floydian Slip qualifies as a fan site. It's a radio show that has been running for nearly 20 years and is aired on, by my count, 45 stations all over the world. But at least you didn't remove the info that I posted as well. So there's that. Dismas |(talk) 01:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll admit I was referring to the site as whole, rather than the particular page; after re-reading what is considered a RS I'd say the news bit is fair to add. I'll revert. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Unfinished Music No. 2: Life with the Lions
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Unfinished Music No. 2: Life with the Lions you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of LazyBastardGuy -- 05:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Unfinished Music No. 2: Life with the Lions
The article Unfinished Music No. 2: Life with the Lions you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Unfinished Music No. 2: Life with the Lions for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by GA bot, on behalf of LazyBastardGuy -- 05:58, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom Denney, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hardcore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Oasis - Stop the clocks
Hi, I edited the Oasis pages since I was listening to "Stop the clocks" album and read about the tracks while listening to them. In some pages, the link to the next/previous track wasn't available, so I decided to contribute and fix them.

Its a shame you just removed my work without even leaving me a comment about this, and only writing "Not needed". I thought you guys at wikipedia appreciate help. I guess I won't contribute to wikipedia ever again, its just a waste of time, some Yeepsi dude just comes and erases your whole work without even giving you a reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DarkL88 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The infoboxes are for first release, not for every subsequent release. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Paperback Writer
Just a heads-up. I've reported him here.  freshacconci  talk to me  14:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 14:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Stand By Me
Why did you revert my edit in "Stand By Me" by Oasis? --Soren84 (talk) 19:45, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The content added was trvia; the amount of times a chorus in a song is repeated doesn't mean its notable. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 20:50, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I guess itø's kind of trivial. It's just that the chorus is repeated A LOT and it makes it different from other pop/rock songs. Anyways, it doesn't matter that much. Best regards, --Soren84 (talk) 07:43, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Insulam Simia (talk · contribs) 20:09, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Gary Barlow - genre need source
Hi Yeepsi, I need your help, genre need source for Gary Barlow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.171.179.205 (talk) 10:01, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You'll have to make a convo on that article's talk page if you want to change the genres. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 10:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello
How's going it, bud. I just want to suggest to you that next time, before nominating an article to be GA, you take another look through it to see if any cleanup needs to be done to it. I did that with an article you nominated, but great work expanding the article and good luck! 和DITOR E tails 03:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the corrections, I have been missing a lot of typos recently ever since the autocorrect for my IE stopped working. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 03:59, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Rubber Soul
Why do you keep undoing the "Rock" tag from this album?It is NOT ONLY a "folk rock" album.Some of the tracks are ,some of the tracks aren't.Nothing is one-dimentional if we're talking about The Beatles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drummerkamil (talk • contribs) 10:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * A RS source is needed for the Rock genre. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 14:23, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool update
Hey Yeepsi. I'm contacting you because you're involved in the Article Feedback Tool in some way, either as a previous newsletter recipient or as an active user of the system. As you might have heard, a user recently anonymously disabled the feedback tool on 2,000 pages. We were unable to track or prevent this due to the lack of logging feature in AFT5. We're deeply sorry for this, as we know that quite a few users found the software very useful, and were using it on their articles.

We've now re-released the software, with the addition of a logging feature and restrictions on the ability to disable. Obviously, we're not going to automatically re-enable it on each article—we don't want to create a situation where it was enabled by users who have now moved on, and feedback would sit there unattended—but if you're interested in enabling it for your articles, it's pretty simple to do. Just go to the article you want to enable it on, click the "request feedback" link in the toolbox in the sidebar, and AFT5 will be enabled for that article.

Again, we're very sorry about this issue; hopefully it'll be smooth sailing after this :). If you have any questions, just drop them at the talkpage. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) 21:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beaucoups of Blues, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fontana (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:59, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:ATMP 2001.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:ATMP 2001.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 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 '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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 18:37, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions
We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:


 * Views/Day : Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.
 * Quality : Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:


 * Content : Is more content needed?
 * Headings : Does this article have an appropriate section structure?
 * Images : Is the number of illustrative images about right?
 * Links : Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?
 * Sources : For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:51, 8 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lennon Bermuda, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Roy Young and Chewstick (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:35, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Common Courtesy
It's no secret that Alternative Press just did a massive 3-page interview with Jeremy McKinnon about Common Courtesy. But I was wondering if you were in the process of doing a wiki article for it in some sandbox? because I also have a printed source or two for you. (I think for the structure of the article if it were to a bibliography source like Death Is Birth it would help, GA articles do better with bibliography structure). But also I have a printed source and it's citation to give you. Jonjonjohny (talk) 07:52, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I briefly skimmed the AP interview last night and plan on citing it at some point later today. Indeed I am, the CC work-in-progress is here. Thanks for the source! Most of the sources I've used are webpages (I've got them all backed up with archive.is incase any links go dead) with just a single page, so the Bibliography section won't be that much bigger than the one in Death Is Birth. Thanks again for the citation! (If you have any more sources, for like previous albums and such, I'd love to use them). Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 08:07, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I wish I did. I'll look back through but I only really started buying and keeping music magazines from 2011 onwards. Will look out though. What country are you from? I get Big Cheese, Kerrang!, Metal Hammer and Rock Sound in the UK. (When I can) If you're from the US perhaps you get Alternative Press or any printed source from the country? Jonjonjohny (talk) 08:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm from the UK too, I get the odd music magazine every now and then. I have found images of pages of AP magazines on the internet here and there that I've pretty much squeezed the 'juice' (as it were) out of them. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 08:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * In which case perhaps you could help me out. I'm looking for one of these three magazines (all Rock Sound):, , ? Jonjonjohny (talk) 09:09, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I know that you can find a .pdf version of the last one (I've come across it before while I was working on Selfish Machines some time ago), just gotta search the magazine name, issue and put pdf at the end, but I'm not sure about the others. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 11:05, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've looked over the source you gave me and it's safe to say I've used it previously. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 12:41, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:A Day to Remember singles
Template:A Day to Remember singles has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 18:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Homesick (A Day to Remember album)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Homesick (A Day to Remember album) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Moswento -- 08:41, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of What Separates Me from You
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article What Separates Me from You you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ScoobyHugh -- 21:32, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks (re. Nirvana singles)
Just wanted to thank you for staying on top of Hjfcool's genre war in Nirvana singles. I've bumped him/her up to a level 4 user warning, so any further disruption should be met with submission to AIV. Thanks, and happy editing! DK  qwerty    03:36, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Violence
WHAT? Are you kidding me? --Zack Tartufo (talk) 18:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll admit, some websites say the band just streamed "Violence", but on the band's site they class it as a single. I'm going with the band on this. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 18:23, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
Why did you revrse my correction about peter brown?--Inon (talk) 00:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * O.K. I found it. I've been stupid. I have relied on the Hungarian page (and now correct it). Thank you!--Inon (talk) 09:13, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of What Separates Me from You
The article What Separates Me from You you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:What Separates Me from You for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ScoobyHugh -- 07:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Ringo Starr filmography
Template:Ringo Starr filmography has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 17:36, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of What Separates Me from You
The article What Separates Me from You you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:What Separates Me from You for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ScoobyHugh -- 12:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Billy's MSL
Hey Yeepsi. It's been a while – hope you're doing well. Good luck with "Instant Karma!", by the way, I just noticed you'd nom'ed it a while back. Also hope you don't mind that I've just replaced the image in the second "My Sweet Lord" infobox, with a European pic sleeve (I figured there had to have been one available somewhere in the world). Reason is, I think those close-ups of face labels don't look so great. It's not so bad when it's from 12" vinyl, but when it's 7", with everything magnified ... I don't know, I just think it looks pretty terrible. Are you okay with that? I quite like the pic sleeve image, personally.

Oh, and sorry ... I know I said I'd help get Ram knocked into shape sometime soon. I will, I will! Best, JG66 (talk) 05:34, 8 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hmm ... just slightly Instant Karma-ish, isn't it! Yeah, with those single labels (generally), the problem is that some contribs got together and had the sizing function removed from infoboxes. Not sure why, but at least the regular song infoboxes still have it.


 * Anyway, I still hope to Ram soon, because I came up with so much useful info, for both that album and McCartney, when I was working on song articles like "Run of the Mill", "Early 1970" and "Sue Me". Only problem is, I just can't get excited about Ram at all – as I think Robert Rodriguez says, it's traditionally an album you either love or loathe. Bye for now, JG66 (talk) 04:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey Yeepsi, thanks! I only meant to improve the article, to get it out of its lowly Start status and then, well ... it went so well and I kept going!
 * That's a good idea about raising the issue on Talk infobox single. May well do that. Speaking of issues raised on talk pages, I'm slightly floored by this that's just come up. I'll wait for the user's reply to my comments, but depending on how that goes, I may ask for your input there, and also get word out to some of the reviewers I've worked with recently. It's an odd one – maybe I'm missing something, I can't see the problem at all.
 * So are you saying Kisses on the Bo— I'm sorry, I just can't say that title (and I thought Tripping the Live Fantastic was bad enough!). Let's call it Kisses – are you saying that Kisses isn't good either? JG66 (talk) 14:45, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You're a pal – we'll see what happens over at that discussion.
 * With Mac, I have to say I'm so disappointed by pretty much everything I've heard since the Beatles. (Sorry, I know you're a fan!) He needs/needed Lennon, and according to Linda, George Martin and others, he knew that only too well. That's one of the reasons why I find Harrison's music so rewarding, I guess. Because – again, as acknowledged by Martin and by Neil Aspinall, Ken Scott and others close to the action – George never really had anyone else's support in his songwriting, so there's little if anything to "miss" when it comes to his solo work. (Albeit, I do think Paul's contribution to the performance of Harrison songs was often fantastic – everything from Think for Yourself and Savoy Truffle to While My Guitar and I Me Mine – but not that over-busy bassline in Something!)
 * The one Mac album I do like, and I'm sure I'm in the minority, is London Town. It's got "I'm Carrying", for a start; but he's also working with another songwriter and the compositions actually sound fleshed out and realised. To me, he seems much more convincing on that album than on – I was going to say Band on the Run ... – certainly than on Ram, Venus and Mars and so much of his other 1970s material. With Ram I just want to say to him: Mac, stop making music for a while. You're in a mess – take a year off!
 * Anyway, that's my two-and-a-half cents worth for the day ... JG66 (talk) 18:07, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi again, Yeepsi. Feel free to forget all the above! If you did want to join in over at Files for deletion/2013 October 10, that would be great. Best, JG66 (talk) 07:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice one, Yeepsi. You've got a knack for stating in a brief sentence or two what it takes me half a talk page to convey! Best, JG66 (talk) 23:34, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hey, absolutely no problem about the "late jump-in".
 * It's interesting to read what you say about those McCartney albums in the '70s. Robert Rodriguez makes the point that, listening to them now (having been a big fan at the time), he wonders "What on earth were we thinking?" In that: even though Wings' stuff sold in huge quantities, he finds much of it is embarrassing now, whereas Harrison's stuff improves with age, and he holds up Ringo's Beaucoups of Blues and Rotogravure as examples of albums that appeared to pale beside McCartney's work yet stand up much better decades later.
 * Being decidedly retro as I am – fascinated by the Beatles' first decade as solo artists, which Rodriguez's book covers – I've never found a reason to move forward and check out Mac's albums in the 21st century, on the basis of his 1970s and early '80s output. I'm sure he occasionally gets it right, though.
 * But I've got a problem about the way Mac has a problem with being viewed as somehow inferior to Lennon in the Beatles history. I mean, Paul made the likes of "Mary Had a Little Lamb", Red Rose, that 1973 TV special (check it out!), "Wonderful Christmastime", the Frog Chorus thing, Give My Regards to Broad Street ... With that commercial approach, he banked the cheques, and he got more gold and platinum discs than all the others put together – but then he can't also expect to be taken seriously as an artist, can he? (Well, we know the answer to that one.) It sort of disappoints me that McCartney's determination to control that history, and yes, rewrite it, hasn't found its way into any wikipedia articles, because it's a subject that authors like Hunter Davies and Peter Doggett have explored in some length. Many more, I'm sure. For instance, the level of critical commentary afforded McCartney's (inadvertent) announcement of the Beatles' break-up, to promote his first solo album, is just extraordinary – from Schaffner, Woffinden, Sounes, Doggett and others that I know about. But you'd never know it from the wikipedia articles. I'd like to introduce some of that commentary in the McCartney and Ram articles, but I guess I'm concerned other contribs might think I'm being pro-George, anti-Paul. To me, it's a notable point in those discussions, just like some of the less flattering details about Harrison are that commentators identify in relation to his music ...
 * Ah, I wish I had your talent with a single sentence. Bye for now! JG66 (talk) 03:38, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:A Day to Remember webisodes
Category:A Day to Remember webisodes, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Scream Thy Last Scream
The link to the book is for the benefit of other readers - it helps verify the information, and verifies it in context. As the book has been digitised, it is useful to link to the page. This saves a reader having to track down a physical copy. Such are the benefits of the digital age! I will restore the link (such links are standard). If you continue to feel that because you have a hardcopy, nobody else should be able to check the book online, then drop me a note on my talkpage so we can chat further. Peartork (talk) 00:03, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Homesick (A Day to Remember album)
The article Homesick (A Day to Remember album) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Homesick (A Day to Remember album) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Moswento -- 13:12, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Driving Rain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tampura (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:29, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ringo 2012, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Organ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Category:Jeremy McKinnon
Category:Jeremy McKinnon, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 02:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of For Those Who Have Heart
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article For Those Who Have Heart you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adabow -- 20:41, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of And Their Name Was Treason
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article And Their Name Was Treason you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- 00:51, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Andrew Wade, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wonderwall (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of And Their Name Was Treason
The article And Their Name Was Treason you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:And Their Name Was Treason for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- 01:31, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Beatles Live at Star Club Lp
Greetings... this album was an "unofficial" release (actually a bootleg) by an independant record label and received great fanfare because of the 'historical nature" but I'm not certain it should be credited as the next album after "Rock N Roll Music" Hotcop2 (talk) 13:20, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I had completely forgotten about status of the album, maybe this is something to be brought up at the WPBeatles talk page? Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 13:48, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

If you happen to have a minute ...
Hey Yeepsi. If you get a chance, it would be great if you could take a look at three articles I've been working on over the last three weeks: Material World Charitable Foundation, Raga and In Concert 1972. The first two are lowly Starts right now (the horror!) – I'm hoping they might be due an upgrade? A couple more points to add to Raga (end notes) but it's pretty much there; bit more to come with In Concert. See what you think.

Btw, this should now free me up to go back to Dark Horse Records again and provide the long-promised text there. (Having said that, my travels via Material World CF, Ravi etc, have been steering me towards getting "It Is 'He' (Jai Sri Krishna)" up at GAN. Then "Try Some, Buy Some" came into the picture … I don't know, so much to do ...) As I say, would be fab if you could look at those three articles; my plan is to get Shankar Fam & Friends and Music Festival up to B as well. No rush, of course, I can see you're pretty busy as it is. Best, JG66 (talk) 12:04, 8 November 2013 (UTC)


 * You're an absolute champ, Yeepsi, thanks. Hey, I see you've got "Instant Karma!" up for GAN, which is great. That's one of the few(ish) Lennon songs I was always keen to work on (along with "How Do You Sleep?", "Gimme Some Truth", "I'm the Greatest" …) So let me know if you want a hand with Karma – I'd love to see you get it to GA. If you wanted any more in the way of details on recording and especially critical reception, I'll be happy to help. Best, JG66 (talk) 14:06, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, pleaseconsult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:06, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=580795071 your edit] to Blue Sky Noise may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:51, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * | Genre      = Emo, experimental rock , post-hardcore

Your GA nomination of For Those Who Have Heart
The article For Those Who Have Heart you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:For Those Who Have Heart for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Adabow -- 21:26, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Have you thought about bringing their newest album to GA status? It definitely has the potential to reach that level.--Вик Ретлхед (talk) 07:10, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of And Their Name Was Treason
The article And Their Name Was Treason you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:And Their Name Was Treason for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Вик Ретлхед -- 07:16, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Back to the Egg, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages New wave, Yellow Submarine and Promotional video (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:50, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism!
Hi Yeepsi. Hey, you're on a roll – congrats on all the above!

Me, I've been a bit distracted … Would you be able to look in at User talk:Quadell? Mighty strange situation, regarding a new Harrison biography. If you felt like hitting "helpful" on the Amazon review linked from there, that would be fab. I'd just like to ensure that the review is helpful/popular enough to register in the book listing's main space. Thanks, Yeepsi. Best, JG66 (talk) 16:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

PS. You'll find my review on the Amazon page as "HariG", by the way. JG66 (talk) 17:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Yeepsi, thanks for your help & support with the above issue. I'll look into your suggestion about Backwardscopy temp. But what a drag – this is so far away from why I choose to contribute to Wikipedia. (I keep wondering whether Mr Thomson thought that nobody could possibly have read the Wikipedia articles, that no one would notice, you know? Unbelievable. But maybe I'm being unbelievably naive.)
 * Anyway – "Instant Karma!" ('s gonna get you, Graeme Thomson …). I hope you saw my message to you here? I mean it – please be bold, and keep me in line! In that spirit, I thought it might be best to run through a few issues here …
 * Looking at Khazar's review, I can see there are still quite a few issues with the article's prose. In the case of "Melinde Kendall mentioned karma …", the point seems unclear, in that Melinde Kendall comes out of nowhere (I'm thinking: who's she?), and the mention of Lennon knowing about karma after having gone to India is rather lame, if you don't mind me saying. (He'd investigated plenty about the concept of karma while sitting in his beanbag in Weybridge, Surrey, way before going to the Himalayas!) I suggest the often-made observation that Lennon was so impatient would be a good thing to add on this – I know he said something along the lines of: "Everyone's always talking about karma in the context of an entire lifetime. But I'm always impatient – I want everything NOW."
 * I also think some important points are missing or incorrect. For instance: this session for "Instant Karma!" impressed Lennon and Harrison so much, they immediately offered Spector the job of salvaging Let It Be (pretty notable); Harrison and Spector were not yet working on All Things Must Pass, merely talking about it; Lennon and Ono returned from Denmark with dramatic-looking, crewcut haircuts – much commented on at the time, especially after their TOTP performance; the live version on Live in NYC probably needs some more comment (recorded in August 1972 at what I believe was Lennon's only full-fledged concert performance post-Beatles). Also, with the refs, do you want full publication details appearing each and every time? (Well, this is applied inconsistently, actually.) I'm all for retaining whatever style of citations is already in place in an article, for sure, but it seems as though the approach needs to be looked at, from the point of view of consistency if nothing else.
 * Sorry, Y – you're probably thinking, What the hell have I unleashed here? We'd only talked about the song's critical reception, after all. It's your nom – your call. I'm just pointing out issues that immediately spring to mind without picking up a book or investigating in any way. To my understanding, "Instant Karma!" is a mammoth song in Lennon's solo career; I think it's fair to say that, for a dedicated 3 or 4 minutes of recorded sound from the entire solo Beatles output, particularly when one thinks of their single releases, only "My Sweet Lord" matches it in terms of power, intensity and purpose. ("Imagine" might be more popular than "IK", but that's like comparing "Candle in the Wind" with "Like a Rolling Stone"!) So it's surprising not to see more of this message coming out in the article – that's my take. Let me know what you think, okay? Best, JG66 (talk) 10:53, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Instant K
Hi Yeepsi, thanks for the vote of confidence there! Added a few things under Composition today.

Just wanted to return to that issue of citation style … Are you really wedded to the idea of full pub details appearing in the first cite from each book, rather than having just a very brief cite in all cases (Blaney, p. …) followed by a separate Sources list? I can't help thinking it makes sense to go with the latter option. That way, it's so straightforward for readers – because rather than them having to search up in a list, not knowing where full details for "Blaney" might appear, they're diverted to a logical, alphabetical list. As a for-instance, just now I was rephrasing some of the article text and wanting to name the authors ("Urish; Bielen") who make the point about Lennon chiding his listeners; I looked for the full entry above, no joy, so I started looking for it later in the list, with the same result. Then I noticed that what I was searching for was actually in the cite immediately above the Urish; Bielen one – I'd completely missed it, probably because the multiple cites (a, b, c, d etc) indent the text, taking it out of the line of sight as one's running an eye up or down the surnames, along the left-hand of the list. What do you think? JG66 (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd seen another GAN of yours and wondered about the lack of a separate list (Mind Games, I think it was). Personally, I changed my citation method sometime late last year, or early this – to Citations, followed by Sources – and then had to go back to previous articles also. (That was fun.) I think it's a case of we contribs needing to think like readers – something that's not always done, or encouraged, I feel, in the world of community consensus, MfC, MoS, WP:StiflesYawn, etc … Thanks, I'll change to include a separate list! JG66 (talk) 14:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey Yeepsi. I hope I haven't gone over the top with detail – the article's grown enormously ... I had been planning to cut a couple of things, but after reorganising Release section, I actually think it all works now. What do you think – okay as is? There's a couple of things I might try to rephrase and an end note to add, saying that some sources give JL on piano not elec piano; otherwise, it's pretty close to finished.

Just a note on those new charts peaks you've added. When I said, "I removed US Cashbox chart placing; b/c if that *is* included, then surely NME and MM charts for UK also, and Record Week in US?", what I meant was, Cash Box should not be added, imo, because otherwise there's a whole host of other charts that could be included (RW, MM, NME, and more). I'm sure I've read somewhere on an MoS page that only Billboard should be included for US (even though Cash Box was more influential for many years). I can't find the page now (typical!) – but maybe you know something about this that I don't. Do you think those extra UK and US chart peaks need including? It's not as if they offer anything new: they're exactly the same peaks in each case as on the main (UK national and Billboard) charts, so it's sort of bordering on the trivial. I should have a couple more international charts to add, but you know, I'd say delete RW etc. What do you think? JG66 (talk) 11:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey, I'm so relieved to hear you're okay with the slight(!) increase in size. One reason for including detail on the haircuts and Malcolm X was to establish grounds for an image from the TOTP appearance, so that would be great if you could add a screen shot. Preferably including Ono blindfolded, I suggest, because that's a point mentioned in the text. (It's the knitting version on Legend, I think.) Somewhere, I had something about Ono's knitting, the blindfold, the cue card messages all being open to interpretation as a statement on freedom of speech and female stereotypes. Would be good to include that type of comment (if I could find it now), to ensure there's a good level of "critical commentary" for another non-free image.
 * Good to see those alt UK and US chart peaks have gone. I'd seen Cash Box included in "Imagine (song)" but, even though it is a different placing from Billboard there, I really don't think they belong in that article either. Otherwise, there's the potential for situations where we've got 3 or 4 different charts for a 1960s/70s song, or 6 to 8 accounting for both UK and US, if chart peaks happen to differ. An instance where Cash Box and RW might merit inclusion, imo, would be J&Y's "Happy Xmas", because the single didn't earn a place on Billboard but CB and RW had different criteria for their charts. On the other hand, like "Wonderful Christmastime", a point of notability regarding "Happy Xmas" is that it failed to chart in the US (the way commentators look back on it now, with BB being the undisputed US sales chart); so in fact it would seem wrong to include CB even in that instance. So I think, in cases like "Imagine" where an alt chart like CB, MM or NME offers a higher peak position, mention should be made in the main text – but even then, possibly relegated to an end note. That's my take, bro!
 * PS, I've had a couple of reviewers objecting to that JPGR site appearing, even as an external link. Might be an idea to pre-empt and remove the link at the end of the article, do you think? Cheers, JG66 (talk) 01:49, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * PPS: Oh, and thanks for uploading that image for Joi Bangla the other day. That was very kind of you (cos if there's one thing that bores the pants off me, it's filling in a fair-use rationale!). JG66 (talk) 02:06, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Yeepsi. Yeah, that's exactly where I was thinking – early in verse one. There are a few later shots that would work just as well, but having watched that clip so many times over the last week, I do the same thing every time: get so into the performance and forget to keep an eye on the timing! (Amazing to think the public believed the Beatles were still going at this point.) I'll give the article a quick read-through today; will also keep an eye out for those comments I was on about, re interpretation of Ono knitting & cue cards – that might be useful.
 * With the Joi Bangla sleeve, I assumed you'd got it from the discogs link included in cite #11 actually. Obviously not. It looks fantastic – which reminds me, I need to get back to the text in that article. (Got somewhat distracted, what with the Thomson business …) Bye for now, JG66 (talk) 22:04, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * HI again. Just to say, I've made style consistent for individual cites. I went for the option [author name] [comma] [page no. followed by full stop], simply because it was the one most widely used. I'm sure it's me that introduced the inconsistency (I only just noticed they weren't the same). If you want to go with the other style – [author name] [year] [comma] [page no. without full stop at end] – let me know and I'll go with that for all instead. JG66 (talk) 08:00, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Liverpool 8, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Organ (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Instant Karma!
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Instant Karma! you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SilkTork -- 19:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

ELO
Good call and good solution. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 16:39, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't want people to misinterpret those two events as ELO performances. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 16:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Back to the Egg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Keyboard (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Category:Song recordings produced by Tom Denney
Category:Song recordings produced by Tom Denney, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Richhoncho (talk) 14:27, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

A Day To Remember
Hello. This is regarding your reverts to my changes. A couple things:
 * 1. Who is Jason? There is no proof that he was ever in ADTR (A PureVolume page is NOT a reliable source) Also the fact that there is no last name is also a red flag. Unless you can provide actual proof that there was a Jason in the band, he is not going to be listed.
 * 2. Tom Denney has been out out the band since 2009. The fact that he was not at all involved with Common Courtesy should be enough to tell he is not a session member.

I will not revert the article back to the changes I made, but I want to straighten this out. If you disagree with the point I made, please reply. TheSickBehemoth (talk) 15:42, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The source is the band's actual account on PureVolume, not a fan-made account. Denney had also mentioned in an interview that Josh replaced him. Denney has been retained as a session musician as per, . Re: "he was not at all involved with Common Courtesy", the fact he co-wrote 9 out of 13 songs on the original edition of CC clearly proves he was involved with the album, and its recording process (and featured in the CC webisodes). Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 15:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Untitled
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. While edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, breaking the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. ''Please stop reverting 86.168.205.226 without discussion. If you both continue to revert each other, you both could get blocked from editing. I will tell Yeepsi the same thing.''  Sports guy 17   (Chat with me!)  23:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * 86 changed the release date without a source, so I simply reverted back to how it was - how is this edit warring? Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 23:50, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Please see this. Your reverting is not under this exemption. If he is adding incorrect information, at least try to discuss it. Simply reverting without giving him a chance to explain himself is unfair. That said, both of you are doing the same thing, so either discuss and everyone is happy or continue edit warring and risk a block.  Sports guy 17   (Chat with me!)  23:54, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Paul is dead
It says: For though they may be parted "PAUL IS DEAD" / (You can't remove this from the song!) Böri (talk) 07:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Troll. yeepsi (Talk tonight) 13:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm NOT a troll! As I said before: You can't remove this from the song! Böri (talk) 11:40, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Edits to "My Chemical Romance discography"
Hi Yeepsi, I want to first apologize for reverting your edits to "My Chemical Romance discography". I understand the need for uniformity among discography articles and I welcome your efforts to update this article. My revert of your edits was unwarranted as, in retrospect, I only have two minor objections that I would like to discuss with you:


 * 1) The headings added to the tables seem redundant to me as each table is in its own section and therefore already has a title. I don't think these additional headings serve a purpose.
 * 2) The width parameters were removed from the the studio album table, which caused it to be unnecessarily wide. Since the band has several particularity long album names that table in particular has all the information in the right-most column bunched up, which makes it hard to read. By forcing the first two column to a set width, this problem would not exist. Also, for aesthetic purposes, I think it would be nice to have uniform width for the first two columns of the album and EP tables. I've made this change to the tables, so take a look and see exactly what I'm talking about and so you can see what you think about it. Best regards, – Zntrip 21:13, 1 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Cool, I'll make the relevant changes to the article. Feel free to contact me with any concerns you have. Keep up the good work! – Zntrip 21:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

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

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:28, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Instant Karma!
I'd like to finish the review, but my time available for Wikipedia has shortened considerably since I took on a batch of reviews, including Instant Karma!, last month. I'm hoping the time issue should resolve itself shortly; though I've been hoping that for a little while now, so it's fairer to put the review back in the pot. I'll clear the review page, though keep it watchlisted, and if I do find I have the spare time before someone else picks up the nomination, I'll be able to finish the review (hopefully before Christmas). Sorry for the inconvenience. Regards  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  22:24, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It's alright with me, no rush at all SilkTork. Hope the time issue resolves smoothly. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 22:29, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Noel Gallagher
In a way, you're both right with regards to this. However, the information should be removed. This is not because the link isn't active any more, but because it is sourced to the Daily Mail, which should never be used as a source in a BLP. :) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 12:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and could you archive your talkpage please? It is way too long. See Help:Archiving a talk page if you need help with that. :) Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 12:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair do's then. I archive yearly, so I'll probably get 'round to it very shortly after new years. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 16:13, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Nirvana
Wouldn't the opening sentence read "Nirvana were" rather than "Nirvana was" because Nirvana is plural (referring to the bandmates)? teratogen (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You might be right there, but I think its "Nirvana was" due to U.S. English (there's a guideline I'd link but I can't find it currently). Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 19:10, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


 * It's right here: Comparison_of_American_and_British_English. Also a good discussion going on over at Reference_desk/Language if you're interested. teratogen (talk) 19:35, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi
there is no need for the cats on Redirect since cats on redirect duplicated on About You (Paul McCartney song) redirect which now exists. Please see Talk:About You. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 00:28, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There's nothing on that talk except the project template. Am I missing something? Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 00:30, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Duh. Talk:About You (song), sorry. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I'll revert back. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 01:28, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

W&B backstory
Hi Yeepsi. Blimey, who's that guy above asking you to archive your own talk page?! What a nerve …

Hey, thanks for producing this, by the way. I see a certain user got involved there, weaving his usual pedantic madness – maybe the archive was best left buried after all! Best, JG66 (talk) 12:06, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi again, Y. I notice with Walls that someone decided to remove the reviewer ratings box. (I'll be honest, that's why I wanted to see the archived talk page!)
 * Is that why you've done the same in Back to the Egg? I can see that in the Lennon album article, someone's taken the scores to sit as prose instead (which seems a pretty weird thing to do). Thing is, Egg got some dreadful reviews, with low scores to match, but the harshness of the reviewers (that is, as implied by the scores) is not exactly reflected in the wording or direct quotes under Reception. Sorry, I don't want to put you on the spot, and I'm not suggesting you add "two stars out of five" etc in the text (that's what the RR box is for). I'm just curious about why you followed that example of dropping the box, you know? Best, JG66 (talk) 15:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Selfish Machines
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Selfish Machines you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MusikAnimal -- 17:31, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Selfish Machines
The article Selfish Machines you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Selfish Machines for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MusikAnimal -- 02:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)