User talk:Musikxpert

Greetings - I know I'm supposed to be away, but I managed to get access to a computer so just had to check up on my watchlist! Thanks. -- Xyra  e  l  T 09:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Metallica
Not sure what the problem is? I double checked it and it worked fine for me. I counted down the artist list too..just to check if the position had changed but it hadn't. Beatles # 1, Elvis # 2, Garth(yuck)Brooks # 3......# 18-Metallica with 57M albums sold. Perhaps, just to verify for yourself try the RIAA main page and go from there. Hope that helps. Cheers! Anger22 22:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application
Dear Musikxpert,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.2 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. - Gl e n   TC (Stollery)  01:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Kudos on the HIM edit
Just last night I was contemplating putting an infobox on that page, but I couldn't find a photo to use. I'm glad someone made a box, and reorganized the article as well; I'd been wanting to do a bigger reorganization than I did originally, and redo the sections, but hadn't thrown myself into it yet. Good job. (I did make some corrections to your edit, but that's because I'm nitpicky. Is there a userbox for that?)

(Edit) Oops, forgot to sign my name. So much thinking, so very late.

Helfaery 06:56, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

HIM's Heartagram
HIM's heartagram is a logo of the band. The Image should have had the logo template on it. — The King of Kings  06:50 June 24 '06 06:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: Alt Metal
Hey, thanks for messaging me. To be honest I would have to (grudgingly) side with the references, the thing is there has been some argument in the past regarding the genre as a place people simply put nu-metal acts because they don't like the term nu-metal. I've been trying to keep the list trimmed down to the real innovators of the genre as a result. I hope my rationale makes sense. maxcap 11:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. I've been meaning to remove HIM as well, but I left it to see if anyone else would remove it. Adding Sepultura is OK, I suppose they were more likely to experiment than other metal acts. maxcap 12:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:FLlogo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:FLlogo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 11:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:NickelbackMain.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:NickelbackMain.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 03:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Staind
You recently contributed to the article Staind. Staind was cited as a source by a media organization today, November 30, 2006. I updated the Staind talk page with this and other templates. I thought that you may want to know as motivation to continue to improve the Staind article. -- Jreferee 18:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Issue regarding Avenged Sevenfold
Hey, Thanks for the message on my talk page.I thought it might be a goo idea to contact you about this page: Untitled Fourth Avenged Sevenfold Album. Is it really necessary? According to the Wikipedia Policy, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and seeing as it is to be released in October next year and not even its title are confirmed, it's a waste of an article at the moment, isn't it? I'm not sure if users like me can apply a page for deletion, but if you could or contact an Administrator if you find the page ot be superfluous, I'd be grateful. Musikxpert 04:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I added a merger proposal to both Avenged Sevenfold pages. If you agree to merge, don't just vote or vote per nom.  Take the merger arguments from Merging_and_moving_pages and specifically apply them to the Untitled Fourth Avenged Sevenfold Album merger proposal in your arguments.  There may be twenty votes to not merge and two votes to merge, but if the only reasonable arguments are for merging and they are based on the rules at Merging_and_moving_pages, then the consensus should be merge. If the consensus is to merge, you can do it yourself by following the Merging_and_moving_pages instructions.--Jreferee 14:31, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Trivium
Please join the WikiProject Trivium  Asics    Talk 22:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

RE;Slayer Image
I know that image is better, but it will fail WP:FUC # 1, that No free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information. Basically any image of the band can be placed there and free images should always be used over fair use. Promotional images are being deleted a lot due to copyright. M3tal H3ad 01:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 15:42, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Slayer2006.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Slayer2006.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 23:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Rock music Wikiproject invitation
Hello WikiProject Metal member. WikiProject Metal music is important in expanding encyclopedic coverage of the metal. It brings attention to the lesser-known bands, and significantly improves the quality of the famous ones. Five Featured articles and two formers is proof of that. This is the stuff I wish to achieve with the somewhat recently resurrected WikiProject Rock music. I hope to also attract attention to rock music articles of all sorts, and hopefully change some to GA or FA status. I invite you to come join us, and embrace the links between metal and rock music in general. Rock on. -- Reaper  X  04:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:StaindMain.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:StaindMain.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 10:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding edits to Faith No More
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, Musikxpert! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the link you added, matching rule \bangelfire\.com\/, is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia's external links policy for more information. If the link was to an image, please read Wikipedia's image tutorial on how to use a more appropriate method to insert the image into an article. If your link was intended to promote a site you own, are affiliated with, or will make money from inclusion in Wikipedia, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 04:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Vilefuck
A tag has been placed on Vilefuck, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. --Leon Sword 00:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Killing Loneliness.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Killing Loneliness.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Heretostay2.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Heretostay2.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Word Up!.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Word Up!.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Freakonaleash.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Freakonaleash.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Unquestionable Truth.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Unquestionable Truth.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 05:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Price to Play
I've left some comments on the talk page of the above article on how it could be improved. I've also removed the link to the lyrics website as it would almost certainly fall foul of WP:SPAM. I'd be happy to help expand the article a little and assist in finding references, so please get in touch. HJ Mitchell (talk) 02:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

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

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

"We R Who We R" - dispute
Hi Liclk,

Regarding your reversion of the edit on the page for 'We R Who We R'. Thanks for pointing me to the link on WP:GA. However, I still believe the page has some issues that need fixing.

First, the introduction. There is no need for the whole paragraph on critical reception in the introduction. It is too long for an introduction to an article, and is repeated almost exactly in the 'critical response' section. Further, the song about 'criticized for not being different from Kesha's other work' is completely baseless, as all of the three reviews listed of the song further down the page are positive. This contravenes the WP:GA policy, as it is not factually accurate. Further, some of the English and grammar is poor. It should be the 'chart's history' not 'charts history,' the word 'strong' should not be used twice in the same sentence, and the final sentence - 'The charting in Canada and the United States gave Kesha her fifth straight top ten hit in both regions' - is grammatically awkward. Please fix these issues.

In the composition section, the phrase 'a dominant dance-pop song' does not make sense - this means that it is a dance-pop song that dominates. It should perhaps read 'is dominantly a dance-pop song.' 'Vocally, the song follows previous singles footsteps in which Kesha uses her "signature" talk-singing vocal style present throughout the song' is also problematic. 'Singles' should be 'single's' although 'the song follows previous single's footsteps' is probably too much of a colloquialism to be used on Wikipedia. It would be good if a more appropriate phrase could replace this - if you must use it consider 'Vocally, the song follows in the footsteps of Kesha's previous singles...' ''Kesha uses her "signature" talk-singing vocal style present throughout the song' is also grammatically awkward - at the very least it should be amended to "Kesha's 'signature' talk-singing vocal style is present throughout the song."

If you're not happy with my edits, could you please fix them yourself or let me know what you think the best way forward is here by way of response?

Thanks, Musikxpert (talk) 16:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

?
Alright, lets break this down.
 * 1) First, the introduction. There is no need for the whole paragraph on critical reception in the introduction. It is too long for an introduction to an article, and is repeated almost exactly in the 'critical response' section. Further, the song about 'criticized for not being different from Kesha's other work' is completely baseless, as all of the three reviews listed of the song further down the page are positive. This contravenes the WP:GA policy, as it is not factually accurate.
 * The lead is written in compliance with WP:LEAD. There is no issue. Just because a song gets positive reviews, doesnt mean they dont get critiqued at one point or another. In critical reception, "Vena commented though the song isn't ground breaking and doesn't stray too far away from previous singles" + "there was nothing particularly original here " = "criticized for not being different from Kesha's other work".


 * 1) In the composition section there is nothing wrong other then the odd punctuation issue as that is my weakest point. - (CK)Lakeshade  -  talk2me  - 19:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Go ahead. - (CK)Lakeshade  -  talk2me  - 21:20, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

lovestrong.
yes of course! and i apologize about removing your tag on the page so abruptly. I meant to write on your page before, but unfortunately haven't had internet since today! Hahahaa But yes I appreciate your contribution to the page. Would you mind reviewing the entire lovestrong. page on it's talk page, so that I can perfect the entire page? It would really help the article and I would definitely edit it to your liking :] Theuhohreo (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Revived interest in the film Infernal Affairs
Invitation to participate in the poll for Infernal Affairs.

From your edits for the film Infernal Affairs there is presently a poll taking place on The Departed film Talk page regarding whether you believe a separate subsection should be included for (a) Infernal Affairs as a source for the plot of The Departed film, and/or (b) a second subsection for the recently captured crime figure Whitey Bulger as the source for the character played by Jack Nicholson in the film.

The recent capture of Bulger has revived the question from two years ago of Infernal Affairs from when it did have a separate subsection on The Departed film page which was deleted by User:RepublicanJ, now known as User:OldJ. Invite to visit The Departed Talk page, to the Bulger section at the end of the Page, to participate in the Poll currently taking place. 208.120.96.227 (talk) 11:21, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)