User talk:NSR77

What needs the most attention? re: WikiProject Alternative music
Hello, reaching out as a beginner Wiki editor to see if there are certain areas in the Wikiproject Alternative music that deserve special attention. Let me know if you have any ideas! Js4189a (talk) 12:16, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Ruining your nice clean talk page
Do you need any help with anything? Let me know if you do. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I heard about it. Didn't know if you had, though. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh. Actually, the line breaks have been in the Cure infobox I really haven't given them a second thought before. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You can change the spacing, but I feel the genres should proceed chronologically, with post-punk and New Wave coming before alt-rock and goth. The Cure's had a long career, and they're equally important to the post-punk/New Wave period and the alt-rock genre. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:18, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, if you read the Cure article, post-punk is the only genre Robert Smith will admit to beng classified as. The band's post-punk phase extends quite a bit, since gothic rock was birthed directly from the genre. There's lots of great bands that define post-punk: early Public Image Ltd., Young Marble Giants, Gang of Four, Josef K, Echo & the Bunnymen, and Delta 5, just to name a few. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems pretty well-defined to me. It's only slightly more vague than alternative rock. Dark, fractured music that resulted from punk but that has "anti-rockist" elements and attitudes to it, incorporating influences such as reggae, dub, free jazz, and even disco. Which begs the question: have you read Simon Reynolds' Rip It Up and Start Again: Postpunk 1978-1984? Great book, proabably my favorite book about music overall. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:47, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess just saying "the 1990s" would suffice. I typically divide decades into early and late halves, only throwing in the middle (Jimmy Eat World is playing in my head right now) when necessary. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I do own Bleed American. Then again, I never listened to it much. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:29, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Just let me know when you need my help on Mother's Milk and I'll come a runnin'. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I'm actually going to be in LA this weekend, specifically the UCLA campus. It'd be funny if I bumped into you. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Quite good. Went to a house show, walked around Westwood a lot. The frat mansions were ridiculous. Five of them were playing music really loudly. Four of these were playing hip hop, while the fifth was playing New Jack swing, of all things. Which is fine by me, since I like New Jack swing. The campus is beautiful, but I can never warm to LA as a whole. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * In short, I hate the concept of Southern California as a whole. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:17, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

By the way, since I checked out the 33 1/3 series book on In Utero from the library, expect that to be finally added to the long GA cue once I cite the hell out of it. Probably won't start until I get home tomorrow night, though. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:22, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm home for Thanksgiving. The reason why In Utero has been taking so long is because I was working on it with Brandt Luke Zorn, who had the 33 1/3 book, but he hasn't been as active lately. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:27, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * He's not that obscure. I think the problem is just finding people who are both willing to listen to Beefheart records and sit at a computer editing for hours. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:38, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Just let me know when you want a hand with Mother's Milk. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It took me a while to figure out what you were on about until I read the NME website today. Good Lord.  See, the problem is that one of Corgan's strengths is that he can craft solid albums that work as a cohesive whole. Unfortunately, Zeitgeist was total ass, aside from "Tarantula". I firmly believe what the Pumpkins need right now is to work with a producer who will stand up and say, "No, Billy, you can do better.  Rewrite that song.  Come up with better lyrics. Try that solo again." He needs someone to work against that won't allow him to sink into more "I'm so misunderstood" rants. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:38, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Billy backtracks a bit. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's best to ignore the cranky bald man sulking in the corner and reflect on better times. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There was a time in high school when I came to realize a lot of my musical heroes (such as Corgan, Kurt Cobain, John Lennon, and Billie Joe Armstrong) could be real jerks, and that disappointed me. I thought, "Is that what it takes to make great music, being an utter asshole?" Luckily there's guys like Ian MacKaye, Mike Watt, Dave Grohl, and Dimebag Darrell to balance that out. Hell, I'm not into Guns N' Roses at all, but Slash seems like one of the nicest guys ever. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speaking of 80s bands, Johnny Marr of the Smiths from all reports is one of the coolest, nicest guys you could ever meet. On the other hand, I don't know how anyone can tolerate being a fan of Morrissey, who's so self-entitled and seems to hold a seething disgust of anyone who even slightly disagrees with him on anything. Paul Westerberg is another guy who seems to be bitter about everything. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The funny thing about the Gallagher brothers is that sometimes they can be really, really kind and considerate. It's really odd. I read that when filming interviews for the Live Forever documentary on Britpop, the director asked Liam if he could be less intimidating (during his bits he's sitting in a couch acting standoffish and brooding). So Liam got up and gave him a big hug. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm almost done with In Utero and am close to listing it at the GA nominations page (yeah, I saw your post on the talk page, but I like having a level of review before the long slog to FAC). The music section is giving me the biggest problems, since while sources like to go on about how abrasive the album is, they don't go in-depth about the songs. Will also need soundclips soon ("Heart-Shaped Box" plus ???????), plus the lead needs expansion and reworking. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This is great. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, I mentioned that you were hoping to work on Trout Mask Replica to User:DCGeist (a good man who works primarily on film articles, but joined me steadfastly in arms for the Punk rock and Heavy metal music FARs, among othe music projects) and he seemed interested in helping. You should drop him a line. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Working on it. The way I view the GA and FA statuses is that a GA article would be something I wouldn't mind someone randomly browsing the internet reading; it's functional and not embarassing but can always be improved. An FA will be the best possible piece of writing I can create about the subject. Definitely won't go for FAC until I am absolutely sure about I've done the best I can with the article. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't worry. I was just saying I agree with you. The music section needs the most work; might redo the entire second half of that. An optimisitc goal is to have this ready for FAC before the start of the new year. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:28, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! Here's hoping we're both still here this same time next year. You do great work. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:43, 25 December 2008 (UTC) This is so bad it's awesome. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:23, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking at youre recent edits, it just occured to me that Hillel Slovak might be a good project to work on, since you don't need to grapple with too many sources. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:44, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I should be able to do a thorough copyedit late tonight when I return home from Christmas vacation. I really wish Amtrak had WiFi. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's harder to find source material for Nothing's Shocking than I thought it would be. Even the biography I have sepnds more time talking about their bickering during recording than the recording process itself. I'm particularly having trouble finding a good source for their Grammy nomination for the first Best Hard Rock/Metal Performance award (y'know, the infamous one where Jethro Tull won). I'm definitely sure they were nominated, because I was watching a TV recap about it once and they reaired a segement from the actual show announcing the nominees (Iggy Pop was nominated for the award, too). WesleyDodds (talk) 07:56, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I liked 2008 in music better than that. While I'm not into MGMT, there were great albums by Los Campesinos!, British Sea Power, Vivian Girls (albeit highly derivative), Stereolab, Squarepusher (fucking awesome), and Nine Inch Nails (I was pleasantly surprised to find that The Slip was one of the groups' best and most consistent albums ever). If you're into 60s/70s R&B, check out the reissue releases and compliations on Numero Group that came out this year, and if you're into hip-hop and electronic music, there was great three-disc Ninja Tune comp called You Don't Know. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Vampire Weekend are horrible, and horribly overrated. Their whole existence is somewhat condescending; hey, it's a bunch of white trust fund kids from the hip part of Brooklyn supposedly influenced by Afro-pop! Goddamn you, Pitchfork. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Speaking of marijuana, I have a funny story. I went to see Stereolab at The Fillmore in October. I was up pretty close; the only people between me and the stage was a row teenagers. As the band came on, they pulled out some pot and started smoking it. The were right in front of the band's new keyboardist (who apparently was playing his very first show that night); since his instrument blocked his view, he couldn't see where the smoke was coming from.He had this very concerned look on his face, and kept trying to look at the back of his instrument because he obviously though it was the keyboard that was generating smoke. Laetita Sadier could see everything from where she was standing, and was smiling while singing. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Going back to Mother's Milk, I think you should trim the Background section. It seems most sensible to start with the death of Slovak, since it's the incident that sets the events that lead up to the creation of the album in motion. Also, don't forget to ask JD554 for help with the chart positions if you need it. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:41, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Why does the publisher info for the books in Mother's Milk include full dates listing day and month? WesleyDodds (talk) 01:25, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * What I mean is this: . Why is there a full date listed for a book? With books, you only ever list the year of publication. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:46, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The prose still needs some work, mainly in the first half. I'm still trying to figure out how to rewrite some parts. Also, remember to start off with the death of Hillel Slovak, and then follow on from there (Jack Irons leaving, Frusciante and Chad Smith joining, etc.). WesleyDodds (talk) 03:38, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I also told Ceoil to get his ass in gear and give it a once-over. However, I know he doesn't like the Chili Peppers, so we'll see how that goes. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:43, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that really disappointed me, but I'm sure he has his reasons. That's why I stay away from all the bueracracy, because at certain levels it becomes this clique that argues with each other, seemingly detached from the practice of, you know, actually writing articles. Here's hoping he comes back. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:48, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, no. I figure I might get a GA out of it; it will probably end up looking a lot like "In Bloom", except with less recording and lyrical info. I wish I still had my siamese Dream tab book, because it had a long piece by Guitar World in the front where Billy Corgan goes into detail about the composition of the songs and how they were recorded. I remember there being nearly a full page devoted to explaining "Cherub Rock". God, I loved that book. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, I did plan to take "In Bloom" to FAC at some point. Really, the only thing I was waiting for was to see if there was any useful material from Heavier Than Heaven. I looked at it in Borders yesterday and there really wasn't. There's an assertion that Kurt wrote it about his friend Dylan Carlson, but I've never found anything concrete to back that up. As for the Siamese Dream tab book, I lent it to my best friend in high school, but he's moved quite a bit and lost it at some point. I'm not upset that he lost it (given I lent it to him during a period after his mom died to cheer him up), but what actually gets me is that the book is now out of print, so I can't buy a new one. It was still viewable on the Amazon.com book reader as late as 2007, which is how I was able to cite it in The Smashing Pumpkins and the "Today" article. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:07, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, there's nothing about Mellon Collie at all in it. I was just commenting that it was a good source for Pumpkins songs that I really wish I still had. I do still have my Mellon Collie tab book, which has Billy Corgan's Guitar World columns from 1995 (with info mainly on Gish and Siamese Dream material). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The 33 1/3 In Utero book talks about how the band recorded it several times over the years, and were never truly happy with the sound of it. There's an entire chapter on it. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:18, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I feel like there should be a place to ask about it, at least. This will involve removing project templates from dozens of pages, so I don't want uninformed people to get indignant about that without having a proper response to give them. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:22, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind if it's someone from a band I've included before; it's individuals I've been trying to avoid repeating. In fact, when I was going through the Jane's Addiction bio, I was trying to see if I could find anything amusing by Flea. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:42, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Do that. I generally pick ones that take up one to three lines, and it must be able to stand apart from a dialogue if it was originally part of one (my favorite example of this is the Gibby Haynes quote I used from Our Band Could Be Your Life from when he was being interviewed with Thurston Moore). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That one makes a little too much sense. The more nonsensical, the more fun. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm watching VH1 Classic's new 100 Greatest Hard Rock Songs countdown. It's frustrating; some songs are great, while other choices are utterly bewildering (Evanescence, really? Autograph's "Turn on the Radio? Fucking seriously??). Apparently, "Mountain Song" outranks "Bullet With Butterfly Wings". WesleyDodds (talk) 06:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The problem I have with "Mountain Song" (and really, Jane's Addiction records in general) is that the production isn't all that dynamic. It's supposed to be this big, surging epic anthem, and it really doesn't come across on record. Aside from the bass intro, everything bleeds into everything else; there's no depth. The acoustic guitar on that record is almost inaudible. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:17, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, after reading that first Flea quote you gave me again, I think that's the one to go with. I somehow glossed over the part where he's saying it's the guys who go crazy for him. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, this is a good source for "1979", although at this point I hate using fansite reprints for references, since I've gotten pretty good at tracking down the original sources for lots of things I'm looking for. Do you want to handle the composition section using that article? I'm not sure I can write a decent one for this song. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I just need to think of what section of the song I want first. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:32, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Ideally I'd want an "In Bloom" soundclip to include the dynamic shifts as well as Kurt and Dave Grohl harmonizing, but I don't think we can fit all that in a fair use sample. I suppose make a clip that starts at "Spring is here again" and goes on until you reach 10 percent of the song. WesleyDodds (talk) 15:58, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh man, I almost completely forgot about Zwan. Judging by "Honestly" alone, that should've been the next Pumpkins album instead of Zeitgeist. Notice how the first singles from both albums charted pretty well. People want to give Billy Corgan the benefit of the doubt, but he always fucks it up. WesleyDodds (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of audio samplee, once I rewrite the second half of the Music section in In Utero we'll have a better sense of what clips we need for that article. Although I won't be tackling it today, since I'm really tired right now. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, we'll probably need one of the noisier, more abrasive songs ("Scentless Apprentice", "Milk It", "Radio Friendly Unit Shifter"). WesleyDodds (talk) 22:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have plans to expand it in the future. It can definitely support its own article. WesleyDodds (talk) 16:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't have any concrete comments for the FAC yet. The only thing that concerns me right now is the prose, but I need to re-read the article a few times before I get a complete sense of what needs to be rewritten. Did you leave a notice at the WikiProject talk page? WesleyDodds (talk) 20:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't be afraid to completely tear up the Gothic rock article. It totally needs it. WesleyDodds (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the IP who "nommed" it (Papa November actually had to complete the nomination, because it was set up incorrectly like three times) was just ticked off a bit about the revamp of the musical style section. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It was in a one-page magazine piece on Gondry, with brief comments by him. I could've sworn it was in the last issue of Spin I bought (April 2008), but I just looked through it and it wasn't in there. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try and work on the music section in In Utero tomorrow, and then I'll let you know what other track I settle on. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:18, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you seen the Stéphane Sednaoui music video DVD? There might be a feature or commentary on the "Give It Away" video (I have the Anton Corbijn video compilation DVD, by the way). WesleyDodds (talk) 03:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You could always rent it . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 03:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Aside from "Heart-Shaped Box", this is one of the best Anton Corbijn videos: WesleyDodds (talk) 04:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, "Losing My Religion" hasn't held up well. R.E.M. has done much better videos, like those for "Finest Worksong", "Fall on Me", "Orange Crush", "Nightswimming", and so on. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:17, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The whole point of "In Bloom" was to lighten the mood at the end of 1992, after all the drug rumors (which ended up being true, so it really annoying to read about Kurt denying that he was addicted to heroin at the time). "Tonight, Tonight" is one of my favorite videos; I actually think it melds with the song perfectly. It's too bad that Bauhaus' videos were ignored upon release, because they made some pretty cool ones. And while I don't like The Smiths and the band hated it, "How Soon Is Now?" is a great video. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I've never liked The Smiths, mainly because of Morrissey (there are few people I've read about that are fuller of themselves). I worked on "This Charming Man" primarily because I was assisting Ceoil, who like all indie fans from the British Isles, quite likes the band. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That reminds me, this totally sounds like Morrissey is trying to do his best Oasis impression (the fact that he actually isn't makes it worse). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

The funny thing about that is that Oasis' other guitarist Bonehead totally called Noel Gallagher out on it the first time he played the song for the band. In the Stop the Clocks bonus DVD, Noel says Bonehead said, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, you can't do that, that's fucking T. Rex", to which Noel responded, "Yeah, well it's my fucking riff now." WesleyDodds (talk) 05:08, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * All I've heard from it is the single "The Shock of the Lightning", whih is decent. I actually think it was the band's highest charting album in the US in a while, and "The Shock of the Lightning" was their highest-charting song on the Modern Rock charts since 1998. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thoughts? Especially since you wrote part of that bit that he's trying to change. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * CloudNine has that; we used it to cite Grunge music. If there's anything to be added to "Come As You Are", "Lithium", "In Bloom", or "Heart-Shaped Box", go ahead and add it, because I've exhausted pretty much all the reliable sources available. Conveniently, Azerrad's book is pretty much the "ur text" of Nirvana sources; most sources draw from it, and if the book doesn't mention something, it's going to be hard to find elsewhere. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Well I've Been
... busy. Haha. Sorry :( I'm so swamped with work right now I barely have time to get online to check my email. Editing here is way down on my list of priorities. It's not even on the list, in fact! I left my med degree course and got a job as a full time web developer instead, and now I'm busy flat hunting and stuff. How's the get-every-RHCP-article-on-Wikipedia-to-Featured-Article-goddamnit thing coming along? I might get back to editing at some point when everything's settled down. I'd like to improve the Jens Lekman article. I watched this YouTube video earlier and it was just to cute it renewed my adoration for all things Lekman once more. Lol :) Naerii. 81.158.210.46 (talk) 03:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Hah. I forgot my password. Why do they tell people to use different passwords for every website? It makes no sense. Oh well, it's an excuse to make a nice pretty sig. I've got the rest of the week off, which means it's a prime time to get cracking on the Jens Lekman stuff. Or should I do some more Muse (band)? It's so hard to decide what to edit when your editing interests are based on whatever you're currently listening to :/  THE GROOVE   04:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's a Muse song, fool :P  THE GROOVE   01:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Seventeen Seconds
Hi, I noticed that you changed the release date of Seventeen Seconds from 22 April 1980 to May 1980 as that is what Allmusic has the release date as. I've reverted your change as The Cure's official website as the release date as 22 April 1980. I suspect that the Allmusic date may be the US release date. Cheers, --JD554 (talk) 07:53, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the nice words re the Echo & the Bunnymen articles. From seeing the depth of information in some FA-class album articles, I don't think I've got the sources needed to take them to FAC. I'm going to get back to working on the rest of their studio albums soon though, I just needed a break from all things "bunny" for a while and, being a sad "statto", I've enjoyed working on lists and chart positions in the meantime. Cheers, --JD554 (talk) 07:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Kaleidoscope
I saw that you didn't find this part relevant. As it was mentioned by many critics last year, I introduced it in another way with one credible source to back up the influence. Carliertwo (talk) 18:36, 25 november 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:CureMTVEuro1989.jpg)
[Etc by bot] BJBot (talk) 05:24, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Trout Mask Replica
Sorry for the delay on replying to this, but I was trying to find sources before I decided whether to go for it or not. There was a fantasitc article on its creation in on of the UK monthlies about 6 months ago, but I've failed to find it. I will, but my magazines are scattered all over the bloody house. Its just a great story; the man was mad, his band were mad, and they were all very angry and stoned. Have you mentioned this to Wesley? Anyway, there is some stuff on rockspages, if you dont have access I can reprint on user space, or you can mail me and retrieve them yourself. Ceoil (talk) 15:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Because I'm such a nice bird, I'm usually slow to swear on the internet. But.I. fucking.love.the.captains.lyrics.
 * You may phone a friend to block me for this bad taste and obsinity if you wish, MF. Ceoil (talk) 00:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Radiohead
Someone reverted the whole superfluous chunk I deleted from the Style and songwriting section. I noticed that you made the suggestion and I acted on my own to trim the section and make it better, not such an overkill and an onslaught of information to the users. So, if you think I did right, please back me up on the talk page. Regards: The Mad Hatter (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Back me up on the talk page. Another guy is maintaining that the information is needed in order to keep the article featured. That's the dumbest thing I've ever seen, but hell, it happens. So, please back me up. Regards: The Mad Hatter (talk) 17:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for November 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 02:52, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image deletion of Image:FleaHydePark2004.jpg

 * Thank you for your message. While I understand your frustration, please consider being more civil in future.
 * While I'm happy to answer questions, it looks like your question could have been answered and resolved more quickly if you had used my message wizard. It's linked as "Talk" after my name and at the top of my talk page. Why not try it next time?
 * For your information, the purpose of Wikipedia is to create a free encyclopedia, which involves using as little free content as possible. The German Wikipedia, indeed, permits no fair use images at all and does not seem to be too badly affected.
 * I have not deleted the image you name, only marked it for possible deletion. Non-free images of living people are generally not permitted on Wikipedia in accordance with the non-free content criteria, which state that such images are usually replaceable by a free image which either exists or could be created. As the image tag suggests, you can place the tag on the image page to point out to the administrator who reviews this image that you consider it irreplaceable. [[User:Stifle|Stifle (talk) 18:28, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:FleaHydePark2004.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:FleaHydePark2004.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:11, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yo blood (took me ages to figure it out)
As requested I've had a look at Mother's Milk. Along with the bit of copy editing, I removed the chart history section as this was given in prose anyway in the 'Promotion, release and reception' section and was just duplication. I'm struggling to understand what the last sentence of the first paragraph in the 'Background' section is trying to say. Also the bit that mentions Keidis' past drug use will need a citation per WP:BLP. Hope this helps, --JD554 (talk) 09:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I may have a crack at getting Ocean Rain to FA at some point, I just need to lay my hands on a couple of more sources to flesh it out, and then I'll call in that favour. Cheers, --JD554 (talk) 17:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with that, although I'd say that Heaven Up Here > Porcupine too. Hope you have a Happy New Year, --JD554 (talk) 23:36, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've just expanded Evergreen (album). Would you be able to give it a copyedit before I take it to GAN? --JD554 (talk) 20:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Cheers --JD554 (talk) 20:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations, well deserved for the hard work you put in. --JD554 (talk) 12:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, do you know if this edit is correct? I don't have access to the source. --JD554 (talk) 07:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for December 2008
SoxBot II (talk) 17:37, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Red Hot Chili Peppers - Higher Ground.ogg)
You've uploaded File:Red Hot Chili Peppers - Higher Ground.ogg, and indicated that it's used under Wikipedia's rules for non-free images. However, it's not presently used in any articles. Wikipedia policy requires that non-free images be either used or deleted, so if this image isn't used in an article in the next week, it will be deleted.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 11:09, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:ChiliPepperstour89.jpg)
Thanks for uploading File:ChiliPepperstour89.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

New section fades
Huh, I never noticed any reference to River Phoenix in the "Give It Away" lyrics. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Speaking of Phoenix's, I'm ashamed that Joaquin Phoenix directed a video by ultra-lame Joy Division/Interpol rip-offs She Wants Revenge. I guess when you win an Oscar you're allowed to do shit like that. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:30, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I always thought it was interesting that despite their macho image the Chili Peppers were pretty open about supporting homosexuals and weren't afraid of hugging and kissing each other. I remember at the end of the Behind the Music episode where the band is on stage and Kiedis randomly tells Flea he loves him. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have access to the original "I Am One" single. I showed it to a friend of mine who also likes the Pumpkins, but she didn't like it. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Not really into Incesticide; starts out great and it good through the Peel Sessions, but drags once you get to the really early stuff. When it comes to B-sides/rarities comps, I prefer Pisces Iscariot. WesleyDodds (talk) 19:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Redid the music section in In Utero. What do you think? Also, I think we'll go with a clip of "Milk It"; start with the opening line and keep going until the fair use limit. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:15, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Cobain referenced books he had read in his lyrics for the album" isn't passive, since Cobain is still the subject performing the action. It's merely past-tense. WesleyDodds (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The soundclips might need trimming; they need to be either 30 seconds long or no more than 10 percent of the recording, whichever is shorter. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to do some work on "Pennyroyal Tea" right now even though I'm not really into the song. I have the sources, so might as well. -shrug- WesleyDodds (talk) 03:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, my favorite songs off of In Utero are "Heart-Shaped Box", "Rape Me", "Very Ape", "Radio Friendly Unit Shifter", "Tourette's", and "All Apologies". "Milk It" is my least favorite song, although I'll still listen to the whole album through. Now that I think about it, since there's no verification that "Pennyroyal Tea" charted anywhere, and since it wasn't technically released, we might have to redirect it. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:53, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * No, limited promo copies were released. The commercial release itself was cancelled. You can buy one of the few rare copies off of eBay, but I can't find evidence that anyone ever bought it in a shop back in 1994. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Azerrad acknowledges that in the last chapter of the book. Nonetheless, it is the ultimate primary source on Nirvana information. Most everything out there draws from it anyway. And comparing it to Charles Cross' bio, Azerrad is a better jouralist (he makes it clear in the text where his information is coming from) and he's a better writer. At the other end of the spectrum, Evertt True always put himself across as Kurt's BFF, so I've waded through his bio with extreme caution. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:19, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It's a well-meaning idea, but in practice I think it'll come off feeling like edit conflicts, except annoying in a different way. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:02, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Notice how many album articles are at FAC now? It's interesting how different they are from one another. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You know, I would suggest collaborating on Daydream Nation, especially since my libary has four books about the band on the shelf. Problem is I don't care enough about Sonic Youth to spend hours reading about them. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:55, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Out of all the bands in Our Band Could Be Your Life, the one I just couldn't get into was Beat Happening. And it's not like I don't like shambling twee indie pop. I just think the band isn't that great. In related news, I talked to Calvin Johnson on the phone last week. He was really nice. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I just got back from the local university library, where I have a library card through my alumni membership. It's annoying that as an alumni I can't borrow things through interlibrary loan, and I can't check out bound collections of periodicals. I wasted nearly two dollars trying to get the photcopier to copy the pages I wanted correctly. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Now this is cute. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking at the history for Mother's Milk, I'm pretty sure Laser brain accidentally turned some quoted sentence fragments into complete sentences (which thus necessitate placing punctuation inside the quotation marks), even though you only quoted part of a sentence. Recheck all your quotes to make sure everything is formatted and quoted correctly. Also, feel free to undo my recent changes to punctuation where I put some periods outside the quotation marks until you've double-checked everything. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I plan to, I'm just waiting for you to double-check all the quotations. I have to go to work now, so I won't be able to do anything until tomorrow night. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I wanted the quotes double-checked because of edits like this: . Not sure which were originally full quotes and which were fragements, I stopped altering the punctuation about halfway through my last edits of the page. I think in general you should cut down on the quotes and only quote the fragements as much as possible, which would make the whole logical quotation/punctuation deal less of an issue. I want to do more copyediting, but I want this cleared up before I start rewriting sentences. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I really wish the Led Zeppelin articles on Wikipedia were better. Led Zeppelin IV devotes about a third of its space fussing over the title. And why are there articles for every song on Presence? WesleyDodds (talk) 00:25, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone has a new Featured Article . . . WesleyDodds (talk) 03:07, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Part of the reason I only work on more contemporary music articles is because I've had some bad experiences on the talk pages for The Beatles and the Led Zeppelin WikiProject. You can browse the archives if you are curious. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:42, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I like my New Wave funk a little more on the amatuer side. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * More bands should be this awesome. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll tell you one thing I've learned from experience: if you listen to nothing but modern indie rock for a few weeks and then throw on a Led Zeppelin album, the record will sound like The Voice of God. Sometimes I wish bands these days had more musical ambition. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Apparently I need "approval" from the Led Zeppelin WikiProject to replace five rock subgenres in an album infobox with plain old rock music. What the fuck? WesleyDodds (talk) 05:37, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey, you said you had a list of concerns at the In Utero FAC. Put them up before the FAC closes and I'll take care of them. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:13, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep in mind I'm redoing the "Recording" section a bit today because I need to work some things in and I'm not happy with the prose in some places. Hope you feel better soon. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My solution is always to plow right through and let my immune system do all the heavy lifting. That's probably not the best appraoch, but it saves money. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * If you want to join. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:55, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I need to get started on Unknown Pleasures; will probably start tonight. Michig reminded me that the 20th anniversary of the release fof The Stone Roses is also this year; unfortunately I don't think I could juggle both and finish them in time. I was kind of thinking of doing some work on Urge Overkill, who I've been checking out a bit recently. Isn't this a great a song? WesleyDodds (talk) 01:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't like them until five days ago. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I actually don't like that cover. Nothing can top the original recording, which is one of my favorite Beatles songs. The best part about the Banshees version is how in the music video Robert Smith tagging along is almost treated as an afterthought, which is pretty amusing. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you split that "notoriety" section and move parts into the "early years" and Psychocandy sections? I need to head out soon for a few days. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * A staff retreat in a cabin in the woods. I'm bringing Purple Rain on DVD. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * We really need an FA article on Morris Day & The Time. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I was thinking about that myself right now. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

It's interesting going and and listening to all those early 90s alt-rock bands pegged as the "next Nirvana", like Helmet, Afghan Whigs, Urge Overkill, and Pavement. Great bands, but most didn't sell for shit. I'm sure the music industry wasn't pleased when only one "next Nirvana" band, The Smashing Pumpkins, came anywhere close to being the next Nirvana. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Pearl Jam outsold Nirvana up until Kurt died, and now their cumulative sales are about even. What I find a shame is that in retrospect, Pearl Jam only gets recognition from most people for Ten, when Vs. and Vitalogy are equally good and were insanely anticipated when they were first released. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't listen to rock music until 1995, and I didn't listen to anything past the 70s until about 1998, so it's interesting what I recall having heard from the early 90s. I got exposure to "Smells Like Teen Spirit" via documentaries and news reports over the years regardless, but I do recall hearing at some point or another "Give It Away", "Under the Bridge", and "Losing My Religion", as well as that song. I have no idea how I heard them (except for a brief period in 1992, I didn't have cable until 2000, and I didn't watch music videos), but I already had heard them by the time I began listening to anything beyond classic rock radio. That's a bit of a sign as to how big those songs were. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm 25. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm so old my favorite cartoon growing up was Ninja Turtles! WesleyDodds (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Speaking of cartoons, I just finished watching an episode of Batman: The Brave and the Bold, which is actually pretty good. In it Batman's still a hard ass, but he's a hard ass with a great sense of humor. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I like the art form. What I'm interested in varies: I like straightforward superhero comics, but I also like mature readers titles. My favorite writer is Grant Morrison, who bridges those areas and can create some quite brillant work at times. WesleyDodds (talk) 02:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm bored, so what's up? WesleyDodds (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Aside from getting stressed out dealing with well-meaning on one article and what might possibly be a horde of sock puppets on another, I'm doing alright. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

When you come back in full-force, give me a heads up. It's been quiet around here with you gone. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I've drastically cut back on my wiki editing because I've been trying to find a second job. Job hunting itself is time-consuming, but to be honest the reason I stepped back was because I was just too depressed by my situation to edit. Once things are resolved I'll be back in force, I assure you. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:37, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * We need to work on a project together when we're both back up to speed. Maybe Pornography? WesleyDodds (talk) 04:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Congrats! Let's hope it doesn't disintegrate too much that day. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Cheers
Good to see you too! I am ashamed to say I have listened to very little RHCP of late, mostly in favour of Augie March and Radiohead. Aaaah well. Giggy (talk) 00:58, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Austria was amazing - incredibly picturesque and just a great way to spend a month. The people there a really nice, the beer is cold, and the skiing is awesome. And that was my trip in a nutshell! Giggy (talk) 01:16, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (I love the fact you mention an article directly after you mention methods of getting drunk.) Yeah, slowly adding some content to Strange Bird at the moment. Giggy (talk) 01:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You're over 18 - come to Australia! Giggy (talk) 01:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Reaching out
Hi there. I hope you don't think I'm just breaking your balls over at Mother's Milk. On the contrary, I'm keenly interested in getting the best articles featured. However, there is a shortage of serious reviewers and an even greater shortage that are willing to look at pop culture articles. They stick to academic topics and often your type of article gets little serious prose examination. That being said, when I review an article, I usually try to gauge if its "almost there" and if its problems can be solved at FAC. If the problems are few, I'll go ahead and list them. If there is a plethora, I list examples and either ask for a copyedit or withdrawal. It's really nothing personal, but reviewers' time is limited.

Anyway, it's probably best we learn to work together because you'll probably nominate more pop culture FACs and I'll probably review them. If they need substantial work, I'd rather help at peer review or other places before they get to FAC. -- Laser brain  (talk)  04:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, will review the article again tonight and update my comments. If it's nothing much, I'll just fix them so we can get it out of there. -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

What was that crash? Oh, it was silence breaking.
Hey buddy. I'm sorry I've been so busy lately...Well--computerless, I should say. But I'm not dead... Anyway, excellent work on everything; you're a monumental badass. Reason why I'm breaking the silence (and I know it sucks that I needed to have a reason) is, you should submit a FA main page request for John's article for March 5th, his birthday. Today would be a great day to do it too, since the date is over two weeks (15 days) away. I'd do it myself, but logistics won't allow it. Thanks brother, hope all is well.

Grim (talk) 15:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for February 2009
SoxBot II (talk) 03:06, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for March 2009
SoxBot II (talk) 02:06, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Mother's Milk
Why is this not relevant? The entire backing track of "Butterfly" (a U.S. number 1) is taken from the RHCP song - I'd say that's worth mentioning on that page. If you can find somewhere better to put it, feel free. — sjorford++ 19:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * How is that song relevant to the album? It is clearly relevant to the song "Pretty Little Ditty", but it has no relevance to Mother's Milk at all. The "music" section of the Mother's Milk article serves the purpose of analyzing the songs and styles present on the record, not other songs. NSR 77  T 14:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

But there isn't an article on Pretty Little Ditty - if you search for it you get redirected to Mother's Milk, so that seems a reasonable place to put it. It doesn't have to go in the "Music" section either - perhaps it would fit better under "Aftermath". — sjorford++ 08:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The information doesn't need to be presented. It isn't important to anything regarding Red Hot Chili Peppers, so therefore non-notable in regards to inclusion in the article. NSR 77  T 19:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

I disagree - I think it is important to the RHCP that one of their songs was used as the backing music to a number one single. — sjorford++ 10:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:PrayerTour89.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:PrayerTour89.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. Stifle (talk) 09:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup? Really?
If you're going to revert seven discrete edits by a respected editor who was clearly trying to improve the text in measurable ways without altering the intent, then you owe the wikipedia community a better edit summary than (Cleanup). That this article made it to FA status without such minor but essential changes reflects poorly on the FAC process. Plainly reverting edits (whatever the method) and using such non-descriptive edit summaries might lead an uninvolved reader to believe such actions demonstrate a form of page ownership. BusterD (talk) 13:34, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There's nothing in my above comment that could even arguably be considered vicious or personal. If you've got a problem with me, first get someone to agree with you, and then take this to ANI. I was an uninvolved editor until I saw your complete reversion of multiple good faith edits with a questionable edit summary. My efforts in this matter would withstand any scrutiny, on the other hand, your rant on my talk comes across as angry and defensive (and personal). Hey, it's a really great article, and you should be proud. It's just not finished work. Every page can be improved. Deal with it. BusterD (talk) 23:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have responded to NSR here. Are we going to see a program of improvements to this article? If not, I'm inclined to take it to FAR, where helpful supervision can be provided. I hope there are no ownership issues bubbling away here.  Tony   (talk)  11:59, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

C'mon, maaaaaaaan
I definitely feel you should reconsider. Tony's a stickler about grammar (and at times not the most polite person about it) but he always has good advice. The Frusciante article has improved a bit; I think the best thing to do is to explain to the editors you've been dealing with how stressful the situation is for you while also asking for their advice. They all seem like reasonable fellows. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Much politer than I used to be, one of my staunchest enemies says. Please do explain the stress; it's the essence of wiki-cooperation. I have little time, but may be able to offer a few stints at c-e ing, as Hoary did. This page is not on my watchlist. Tony   (talk)  12:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd like to add an apology for any boldness on my part for raising stress levels. My intention was to see the page improved, and if my section head or tone came across as flip or disapproving, that was my mistake. I intended to assume good faith throughout, pointing out what I thought was obvious. Bold, revert, discuss. For my part, I've been watching mainpage FAs for the last few weeks, to see what happens to them (other than random vandalism) during their day. When I saw Hoary's multiple saves undone, I read further. At that point I posted the section above. In truth, I meant you no additional stress. BusterD (talk) 12:21, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I hope your personal issues work out for you (I have my own, which have severely cut into my editing habits in the past month). If you ever feel like it, feel free to e-mail me, dude. WesleyDodds (talk) 00:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey. Been awhile. Anyway, just want to say that someone reverted a removal of an equipment section I performed by citing WikiProject Guitarists. I get the feeling that given the work you've done on the Frusciante and Flea articles that you would agree with my opinion that those are some bad guidelines that wouldn't result in quality articles. WesleyDodds (talk) 01:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

If you're serious about following through on "Give It Away" I'll copyedit it this week. Take care. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:32, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Without specifics, today is one of those days where I understand why you leave Wikipedia for stretches at a time. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm doing alright. Got to go to work in a few minutes. I'll be a'editin' later tonight. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Aside from the Flea and Frusciante articles, which get the most traffic? WesleyDodds (talk) 05:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you back from vacation? Just wondering if I still need to keep those pages on my watchlist, or if you're on top of them. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:51, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, forgot about that. If you could help review A Weekend in the City (not one of my projects, but an article I can see needing some outside eyes) at FAC that will help take some pressure off me so I can do it. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for April 2009
SoxBot (talk) 10:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: "Higher Ground"
Hi, I'm sorry for not discussing the merge beforehand on the talk page. I saw the article listed at Proposed mergers and agreed with the proposed (User:Hatto0467). I did look at the talk page discussion from January, but it seemed there was no consensus either way then. I looked at the "With a Little Help from My Friends" example, and that article works fine with multiple cover versions and three infoboxes. There was much less information in the two "Higher Ground" articles combined than there was in "With a Little Help from My Friends", so I decided to make a bold merge and discuss if someone disagrees. In retrospect, it would have been a better idea to discuss it first. My mistake. I'll try to discuss controversial mergers like that in the future instead of just merging as proposed. If you'd like, I'll revert my merger and we'll reopen the discussion at Talk:Higher Ground (song). Jafeluv (talk) 08:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi again! I reopened the discussion here. Jafeluv (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've closed the merge discussion as "no consensus" and removed the merge tags. It's a shame no more people participated in the discussion but I think it's understandable given the size of the backlog at Proposed mergers. Good luck with the article if you still plan on working on it, and sorry for the disturbance :) Jafeluv (talk) 12:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Fru Martin
I noticed your revert of a user that added JF's Martin to the list of his guitars. Not sure about sources, don't have the time - but, when you hear him playing an acoustic guitar, it is always (almost) his Martin. There are probably as many songs playing that Martin as there are recorded with him playing his strat. Tparameter (talk) 01:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I gotcha. I guess it probably seems more notable to me because I have a bunch of video CDs of his live solo performances, and in every one he exclusively plays the Martin. As a solo artist, it is his most important guitar. Tparameter (talk) 11:55, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for May 2009
SoxBot (talk) 10:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Dani California
The article Dani California, for which you seem to be largely responsible, is undergoing a review as part of the good article sweeps project. The article does not seem to meet current requirements for a good article. It has been put on hold for a week; if these issues are addressed satisfactorily within that period the article will be kept as a GA, otherwise it will be delisted. Lampman (talk) 16:11, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Higher Ground (yet again)
Just as everyone thought it was all over, the merger discussion has been reopened at Talk:Higher Ground (song). Thought you'd like to know since you participated in the last one. Jafeluv (talk) 12:46, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for June 2009
SoxBot (talk) 22:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of The Velvet Underground & Nico
I have conducted a reassessment of this article and have found a few referencing concerns, which need to be addressed if the article is to maintain its GA status. The reassessment is at Talk:The Velvet Underground & Nico/GA1. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:44, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for July 2009
SoxBot (talk) 08:02, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessessment of The Cure
I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:The Cure/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:08, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

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

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of '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. BJBot (talk) 06:02, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Alternative Music Newsletter for August 2009
SoxBot (talk) 15:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Holla
I know you don't pop in these days much, but guess what? I finally got Blood Sugar Sex Magik. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The main thing that struck me was that it didn't have a typical album start; it was more like dropping me in halfway through. Also: a lot of songs. WesleyDodds (talk) 10:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been doing all right, although I really wish I have a steadier/higher paying job. I also have an unpaid writer job I should tell you about in e-mail. In the Wiki realm, recently I've been butting heads with a lot of people when I try to venture into other wiki areas.  Word of advice: if you ever try to edit a Beatles or comic book character page, be prepared to deal with people who only work on those types of articles and are extremely set in their ways. I really should focus on finishing Nevermind, but that relies on flashes of inspiration and motivation. I might clean up Green Day, but that might be another high-stress venture. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * So I hear Frusciante left the Chili Peppers. WesleyDodds (talk) 08:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Next time you're around, could you add the reference for Kiediss quote about "Tearjerker" in One Hot Minute? I've been digging into the page history and I can't seem to find if an inline citation was ever added to it. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:30, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear about all that. Best of luck to you. I'd definitely approve of going to SF for school. It's a rad place. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:34, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Consensus and bold edits
Regarding your revert of my edit to Blood Sugar Sex Magik: I'm curious about the rationale of reverting someone's edit simply because something isn't consensus yet. I was just trying to be bold to better assess the response people have to the change, so we could really see if it would end up bettering the encyclopedia. I was hoping that it would get reverted because of an actual objection to the merits of the edit, rather than simply because it hasn't been officially written up as a guideline yet. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 21:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well it turns out the whole matter is moot now, so nevermind. It's pretty clear that consensus has been reached, and all that's left is to write it as a guideline and start implementing it in a larger scale. &mdash;Akrabbimtalk 05:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Captain Beefheart
I have concerns about the way the Captain Beefheart article, to which you have been a significant contributor, is developing. Please join in discussions about the best way forward. Talk:Captain_Beefheart/GA2.  SilkTork  *YES! 08:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have failed the article as it is not neutral. Work needs to be done on making it more rounded, and to take into account the varying views of Beefheart's music. I would be willing to cask my eye over it for neutrality before it is resubmitted for a GA review.  SilkTork  *YES! 09:58, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kiedis1996.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Kiedis1996.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 16:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:JohnNiandraLades1994.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JohnNiandraLades1994.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 03:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hullo again
Nice to see you still around. I do go back and try to clean up your pages every once in a while. I should see if John Frusciante is in need of some reverting, actually. WesleyDodds (talk) 03:04, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 16, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/August 16, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors or his delegate, or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  03:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

 

Mother's Milk is the fourth studio album by rock band Red Hot Chili Peppers, released on August 16, 1989. After the death of guitarist Hillel Slovak and subsequent departure of drummer Jack Irons, vocalist Anthony Kiedis and bassist Flea regrouped with the addition of guitarist John Frusciante and drummer Chad Smith. Frusciante significantly altered the band's sound by placing more emphasis on melody than rhythm, which had dominated the band's previous material. The record was a greater commercial success than the Chili Peppers' past three studio albums combined. Mother's Milk peaked at number 52 on the Billboard 200 and received widespread recognition for singles "Knock Me Down", the Stevie Wonder cover "Higher Ground" and "Taste the Pain". The album became their first gold record in early 1990, and was the first step for the band in achieving international success. Although the record was not met with the same positive critical reception that its predecessor The Uplift Mofo Party Plan had garnered, Mother's Milk, according to Amy Hanson of Allmusic, "turned the tide and transformed the band from underground funk-rocking rappers to mainstream bad boys with seemingly very little effort". (more...)

Hiatus
Hey NSR, feel free to come back anytime you like; the place needs you. Maybe you can break away from this (overrated) real life for a moment to have a look at a discussion on Talk:List of Red Hot Chili Peppers band members about a four-day group member--it's a bit silly, but without more participants it's difficult to reach a conclusion (or enforce it). Thanks, and happy days, Drmies (talk) 12:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Californication (album)
This is a note to let the main editors of Californication (album) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 11, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/December 11, 2011. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:



Californication is the seventh studio album by American rock band Red Hot Chili Peppers, released on June 8, 1999 on Warner Bros. Records. Produced by Rick Rubin, Californication saw the return of John Frusciante, who had previously appeared on Mother's Milk and Blood Sugar Sex Magik, to replace Dave Navarro as the band's guitarist. Frusciante's return was credited with changing the band's sound. The record marked a shift in style from the Navarro era. The album's lyric's incorporates various sexual innuendos often associated with the band, but contains more varied themes than previous releases, such as lust, death, suicide, California, drugs, globalization and travel. The Chili Peppers' most commercially successful studio release, Californication has sold over 16 million copies worldwide. The record produced several hits for the band, including "Otherside", "Californication" and the Grammy Award-winning "Scar Tissue". Californication peaked at number three on the U.S. Billboard 200.(more...) UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:RHCPCOTWCurrent
Template:RHCPCOTWCurrent has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Bulwersator (talk) 14:28, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

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

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 17:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Disintegration (The Cure album)
This is a note to let the main editors of Disintegration (The Cure album) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 1, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/May 1, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:



Disintegration is the eighth studio album by English alternative rock band The Cure, released on 1 May 1989 by Fiction Records. The record marks a return to the introspective and gloomy gothic rock style the band had established in the early 1980s. As he neared the age of thirty, vocalist and guitarist Robert Smith (pictured) felt an increased pressure to follow up on the group's pop successes with a more enduring work. This, coupled with a distaste for the group's new-found popularity, caused Smith to lapse back into the use of hallucinogenic drugs, the effects of which had a strong influence on the production of the album. The Cure recorded Disintegration at Hook End Manor Studios in Reading, Berkshire, with co-producer David M. Allen in late 1988 through early 1989. In spite of Fiction's fears that the album would be "commercial suicide", Disintegration became the band's commercial peak. It charted at number three in the United Kingdom and at number twelve in the United States, and produced several hit singles including "Lovesong", which peaked at number two on the Billboard Hot 100. Disintegration sold over three million copies sold worldwide. (more...) UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Talk:We're Only in It for the Money/GA1
A Good Article review of We're Only in It for the Money has been put on hold for seven days to allow contributors time to address concerns.  SilkTork   ✔Tea time  15:31, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Helloooo
I saw you editing recently. Always nice to see you around, mate. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:03, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey!
Glad to have you back. I've kept Disintegration (The Cure album) and Under the Bridge in great shape while you were away. Everything else probably needs a cleanup--been meaning to go and clean up John Frusciante last couple of months. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've just done some cleanup on Blood Sugar Sex Magik. WesleyDodds (talk) 09:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Rhcpcalifornication1.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:Rhcpcalifornication1.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a non-free file with a clearly invalid licensing tag; or it otherwise fails some part of the non-free content criteria. If you can find a valid tag that expresses why the file can be used under the fair use guidelines, please replace the current tag with that tag. If no such tag exists, please add the Non-free fair use tag, along with a brief explanation of why this constitutes fair use of the file. If the file has been deleted, you can re-upload it, but please ensure you place the correct tag on it.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, 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 from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Redsky89 (talk) 06:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:EarlyRHCP.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:EarlyRHCP.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 not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Тимофей ЛееСуда . 16:21, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

FAR listing
I have nominated Flea (musician) for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.

Nomination for deletion of Template:RHCPCOTWPast
Template:RHCPCOTWPast has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:31, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Precious
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:06, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Three years ago, you were recipient no. 1534 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

File:SlovakChiliPeppersUplift87.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:SlovakChiliPeppersUplift87.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:56, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

FAR for John Frusciante
I have nominated John Frusciante for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 15:42, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

FAR for Niandra LaDes and Usually Just a T-Shirt
I have nominated Niandra LaDes and Usually Just a T-Shirt for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 00:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:JohnNiandraLades1994.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:JohnNiandraLades1994.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 not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:40, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:WikiProject Red Hot Chili Peppers/COTW
Template:WikiProject Red Hot Chili Peppers/COTW has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Niandra LaDes and Usually Just a T-Shirt scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 22 November 2022. Please check that the article needs no amendments. Feel free to amend the draft blurb, which can be found at Today's featured article/November 22, 2022, or to make comments on other matters concerning the scheduling of this article at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/November 2022. I suggest that you watchlist Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks and congratulations on your work. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you today for the article, introduced (in 2008): "Niandra Lades and Usually Just a T-Shirt is the obscure, avant-garde debut album by John Frusciante. He quietly released this during his leave from the Red Hot Chili Peppers. It is an article on the short-side, indeed. Considering the obscurity of the album, though, Niandra Lades and Usually Just a T-Shirt consults every available source, ranging from published books to online articles. It was promoted to GA status a little less than two months ago and since then Grim-Gym and I have put the finishing touches on it." - Miss you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

CfD nomination at
A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at  on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Qwerfjkl talk  09:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)