User talk:Rm w a vu/Archives/2007/March

Image:Hi-5-photo.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Hi-5-photo.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 06:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Jm_cbr.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jm_cbr.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 lacking such an explanation will 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. &mdash; Rebelguys2 talk 06:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Brookefraserlifeline.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Brookefraserlifeline.JPG. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 lacking such an explanation will 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. ↔NMajdan &bull;talk 15:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Track listing table on Continuum
I see that you reverted my conversion of the track listing table to a wikitable. I suppose a wikitable isn't required. It just makes Wikipedia look better when there is some consistency in the layout of pages on a certain subject, such as albums. In my sample of 1357 albums, 98.5% of album pages use the standard ordered list format for track listings, while the majority of the rest use a wikitable. Other than this, I also converted the first row to proper table header cells (&lt;th/&gt;s rather than &lt;td/&gt;s). (I see on your user page that you consider yourself an advanced HTML user, so I won't have to explain the reasons for doing this.) I also enclosed the track names in double quotes (as per WP:ALBUM) and fixed capitalization (as per WP:MOS). Just letting you know, because I may take it upon myself to redo these changes. Have a nice day. --PEJL 06:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (Following up to User talk:PEJL.) I just prefer consistency. For that reason artist templates (or TV show templates) should get more leeway in terms of non-standard formatting, simply because they are templates, which appear consistent on all pages they are used on. Track listings and album infoboxes and such are a different matter, because they are used on all album pages. I also think users expect all track listings and album infoboxes to be formatted similarly, while I doubt they expect artist templates for different artists to be so. As for the singles template, it seems to integrate well with the album infobox, which is nice. I have some suggestions though. Firstly, you might consider changing the date to not be italicized, as italic on album pages is almost exclusively used for album titles, so it may be visually confusing. Secondly, the dates don't use the date formatting the user has chosen in My preferences &gt; Date and time. Thirdly, the single name should be enclosed in quotes (as per WP:ALBUM). --PEJL 07:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The second point about the singles template was because the years used piped links to year in music rather that simple links to the year. That's discouraged, see WikiProject Albums. I've fixed this on Continuum. --PEJL 07:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * (Noting for posterity that I went ahead and changed it back, and you then reverted that change.) Sorry, I misunderstood your response to mean that you accepted this change. On my talk page you said: "I'm fine with the adjustments". Which parts of this change do you still object to? --PEJL 04:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The remaining non-stylistic issues with the track listing table are: no proper table headers and incorrect capitalization. Will you object if I change these back? --PEJL 05:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Extra Tracklisting
Thank you! Frick, it's so amazing to finally get a response from someone! Thnak you!. As for what I want done, I just want a Type field added to the template so you can change the colour. Like for the Infobox Album template and your Singles template, you put the album type according to the type and color layout (ep, live , compilation  etc.). Because the example of where it creates a problem is Mind's Eye (song). I gave it the track listing on the Dimensions EP, which is an EP obviously instead of a studio album, yet it shows up as   instead of  . You follow? If you could help out with that that would be great! Cheers. -- Reaper  X  20:30, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, precisely what I wanted. Thank you very much. -- Reaper  X  02:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey Linca, would it be too much to ask you to tend to the template again? When Infobox Album is not designated with an album type, the colour is  , and I'm sure many articles are plagued with it now that the type field has been added. Now is that happens, those pages are automatically added to Category:Non-standard album infoboxes. Could we do that same with the tracklistign template, except the category being called Category:Non-standard Extra tracklisting templates? Thanks alot. -- Reaper  X  04:31, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Template talk:John Mayer
As I stated, of course there's not going to be a full discussion of it. People don't visit the Template talk namespace. Regardless, there were complaints that it looked "childish" and unencyclopedic. The quote came from Template:Navbox generic, by the way. I'd like to ask for a third opinion since people generally don't visit the Template talk namespace. ShadowHalo 10:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Record charts
Template:Record charts has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. I have also nominated Record charts 24 and Record charts 72 for the same reasons. — ShadowHalo 13:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)