User talk:Rodrigo15

Re: Nightwish
Alright, let me look through it and see if anything jumps out at me.
 * I'm seeing a bunch of 1 or 2-sentence paragraphs- in general you want to avoid those, as they're choppy to read.
 * You have some editorial comments/loose language that aren't backed up- i.e "But during the hiking trip, something obviously happened and even though they barely discussed the matter alone in the wilderness, they both understood he could not break up Nightwish that easily." You can't just throw down statements like that as if they were fact- you have to (in this case) phrase it as, say, "so-and-so says in x that they did not discuss the matter much while on the hiking trip, but upon their return he no longer wanted to break up the band." or something like that- the tone is just all wrong right now for an encyclopedia article. This is an example, I'm sure there are some other instances.
 * You have really good coverage with the citations- I see a few instances where you have bare sentences though, mainly at the end of paragraphs, and those will jump out at FAC since a lot of people tend to editorialize without references at the end of paras, so they look for that.
 * Make sure you fill out the publisher/author information on your references- for example, ref 9, the biography, you just have the title, author? and year- you'll need at least the publisher, and preferably the isbn.
 * Images look good, since they're pretty much all CC or public domain- you'll get dinged on that one non-free image in "International success" though, since it's hard to argue what it adds next to all the free ones. You'll also have a big fight about all the non-free sound files- I think they're useful, but there's a large bloc of reviewers who will try to cut it back to 1 or none if they can, so be prepared for that.
 * I mainly skimmed the article, but I saw a few instances of slightly awkward sentence construction- I'd recommend getting a copy-editor before you take the article to FAC. Actually, I'd recommend that regardless, they really hit prose quality hard at FAC. Get someone on or off-wiki to do it, or put in a request at WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors if you don't know anyone willing.
 * You have four links to disambiguation pages and one circular link; you also have several external links that a redirecting that need to be checked out, and the allmusic one is dead it looks like.
 * And, sorry to say, you will be dinged hard for only having been working on it for a few days. It should look better after you've addressed some of the above issues, but they're sensitive about "drive-by" nominations there. Keep plugging away at it, though.
 * Overall, it really looks good, I think you have a good shot at it. I'd recommend also taking it to WP:PR to get some other opinions about it. -- Pres N  20:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry man, I'm no good as a copy-editor, so I can't help you there. -- Pres N  00:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Nightwish discography
hello,

I don't see that the items with "not done" are solved. Please avoid to delete my comments, I will do it later. And don't claim you did that, because you definately didn't.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 21:56, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I also don't know why you reverted my edits on your disco? I actually want to help you to promote it.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 22:02, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The done means for me that you "completed" it, but it seems you write it in the FLC and then do that on that list. Please avoid it.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 22:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Could you give me the references, I don't know which you exactly mean.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 20:25, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Nighwish
Unfortunately, by doing that you have now made it look like they all charted on the UK Rock Chart, which isn't true either (the other two charted on the main UK Singles Chart). You either need to show the UK Singles Chart and UK Rock Chart in separate columns (with separate headers eg "UK" and "UK Rock") or else just have a column for the UK Singles Chart and leave "Nemo"'s number 15 placing out...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Rodrigo18, Rodrigo16?
Are you, User:Rodrigo18, User:Rodrigo14 and User:Rodrigo16 the same person? You have very similar usernames, you all (except for Rodrigo14, who has 1 contrib) edit each other's userpages (, you have similar edit summaries, and the same IPs edit the userpages. If you are, you should put a note on all the user pages to tell people. Thanks! --- c y m r u . l a s s  (talk me, stalk me) 02:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)