User talk:Parrot of Doom/Archives/2012/April

Release date
"how about this one - it isn't cited" "it isn't cited"? I cannot see anyone ever refer to any page anywhere... or?

Would you have removed the date if I did not refer to a page? (It was Deep Purple blog) I have removed other dates myself, because I know it was released at the end of March 1972. Better 30 March that 1 March (which stood for several months), because on 9 March 1972 (Deep Purple in Concert), the lead singer announced that "the album will be released at the end of this month)

Can you refer me to where it says "prove release date"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.45.41 (talk) 22:58, 3 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Album release dates vary from country to country and can be contentious subjects. I should know.  For instance, I have several high-quality sources on The Dark Side of the Moon and none of them agree about that album's release date.  If you want to insert a more precise release date for this album, then cite it to a reliable source like a book or reputable music website.  A blog isn't good enough. Parrot of Doom 23:20, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Album release dates vary from country to country (home country and USA counts) It does when when tracklistings vary. See Deep Purple's previous album Fireball.

Would you have removed the date if I did not refer to a page?

On 9 March 1972, the lead singer announced that "the album will be released at the end of this month) This confirms the album was not released yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.45.41 (talk) 18:05, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


 * This is going nowhere. If you want to include the date then add a citation from a reliable source.  Nobody said the article was perfect. Parrot of Doom 19:32, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

"This is going nowhere." Of course not, but I think the answer to my repeated question is  "NO". And that's strange but true. And disapointing.--88.88.45.41 (talk) 21:30, 4 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You're wrong. Your change simply highlighted the fact that the original date was uncited and needed to be removed. Parrot of Doom 23:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

It just said March 1972. I meant; If I added 30 march 1972 (without citing(?) the blog) you would not have changed it back. Because you didn't with the 1 March 1972, that stood for several months, which I bet you knew was completely wrong. But another thing..

Surprise...from the same article (TALK)"I hope nobody minds, but I fancy expanding this article to GA or perhaps FA. Parrot of Doom 22:54, 8 January 2011 (UTC)" What does GA and FA mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.88.45.41 (talk)


 * Either cite the date or go away. I'm not interested in discussing things with people who imply I'm a liar.  Find something else to do. Parrot of Doom 23:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Interestingly I read an article the other day about how no-one is quite sure when Super Mario Bros. was released. Didn't know DSotM had the same issue. Strange how very basic facts like that can be contentious, even for such influential works. the wub "?!"  21:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The simple facts are that I decided to improve Machine Head to GA or FA, only to find that reliable sources on the album are virtually non existent. So it's in an odd, half-finished condition.  DSotM is a different matter but I have all the major sources for that article and there's more than one point on which they disagree... Parrot of Doom 23:06, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

 * Done. Parrot of Doom 10:11, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll bet you said how impressed you were with the system - not! Richerman ''   (talk) 23:37, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The questions aren't bad tbh, but I did suggest that the civility policy needed to go. I also wrote that the present dispute resolution systems are too complicated and too numerous.  This is the 2012 internet, we should be using colourful buttons and fancy java controls, not boring white boxes of complicated-looking text... Parrot of Doom 23:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

you should look at this
I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone else is signing with your name. → ROUX   ₪  19:42, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

It's best that strange moniker signing (which Roux's pointed out) gets cleared up. You certainly don't want accusations of sockery flying your way. Somebody seems to be trying to get ya into trouble. GoodDay (talk) 20:10, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Look, I'm not trying to get him into trouble. I don't even know this person. It was a simple mistake, which I explained on my talk page. For once, can the people of Wikipedai not look at everything through a cynical lens... For once, can people uphold the Wikipedia policy of Assume Good Faith. Nations United (talk) 20:26, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation Nations United, even if you had been messing around it wouldn't have bothered me in the slightest. Parrot of Doom 20:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Current/Past Members of the Beatles
There is a straw poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:02, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem. Isn't it amazing how the most trivial details often become subject to the longest arguments? Parrot of Doom 18:55, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

2nd Straw Poll
There is a Straw Poll taking place here, and your input would be appreciated. — GabeMc (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I think I found a good solution to the template issue, take a look at the proposal now, it might satisfy everyone's concerns. — GabeMc (talk) 06:01, 22 April 2012 (UTC)