User talk:Spike Wilbury/Archive 4

Articles for deletion/Bald Freak Music
Hi. I have closed this AfD as "delete all the rest, but merge and redirect Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal to Guns N' Roses". Would you now like to do the merge and redirect? You seem to know the subject. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:59, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure, I can do it within the next 12 hours or so. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 21:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I have done a formal merge, though it was rather nominal as I found little that wasn't in the GNR article already. Could you (a) consider whether there is more that could be moved across, eg whether he should have a short para in the GNR article when he joins, and (b) check that I have done the formal aspects of the merge right, as it's the first I have done. My reason for getting a first pass at the merge done is that a user who I suspect may be the man himself has appeared on my talk page asking what has happened to the Bald Freak Music page. Next job, to answer him. Why did I let myself be talked into an RfA? JohnCD (talk) 12:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for undertaking this. I got wrapped up in the holidays here and neglected to follow through on it. I looked over what you did and nothing jumps out at me as missing. I knew eventually he would come back and ask what happened to all that stuff—hopefully we can explain it in terms that will make sense. Being an admin is a dirty job, but someone has to do it! --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:23, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. There are some related articles that probably should have been swept into the AfD, like Fortune Favors The Bald (album) and related (see the non-existent category at the bottom for the others). --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

bumblefoot
thanks for the apology. i have known about bumblefoot for years as i've read about him in guitar magazines etc. i think he has been covered, its just hard to find non-gnr stuff given how much gnr stuff there now is. i don't know if he satisfies wp:band but i thought he maybe only had to satisfy wp:blp as he is a living person not a band. there has been plenty of coverage about him, and most of the article is about his work for hire, not his own albums. if its worth anything it looks like the article was even created before he was in gnr, and not by him. Aisha9152 (talk) 21:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * and yeah i saw that it was you who tried to clean it up. Aisha9152 (talk) 21:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Spike:FYI - long discussion with Aisha9152 here. JohnCD (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks John. I think with a little bit of mentoring we can get a positive result from this. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 02:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * IP has been busily undoing all the Ron Thal/GNR changes. I have changed them back and explained things on his talk page. In undoing his changes to Guns N' Roses I have also reversed these two edits  . The first is certainly mischievous, the second has no edit summary and the author has only one other edit, but you might check that reverting it was the right thing. Thanks. JohnCD (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, smells like a sock or meatpuppet. I think either Thal himself or close associates are editing using a number of accounts, so we'll need to keep a close eye on the situation. I agree with your revert there. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Please see this thread on the same subject and feel free to comment since you are obviously interested in this. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:47, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Bibliocommons page
I was looking for info on Bibliocommons and noticed you had deleted whatever had existed before. There is not much about them as a company online as they appear to be running really quite but it would be good to have a place to start gathering what info there is available. I think there will be interest since they are going live at more libraries (including my local one which is why I was interested). I would be happy to start a page but I don't know what you deleted or why exactly so don't want to waste my time. What I start would be kind of sparse given the little data available so far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valcar (talk • contribs) 04:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I deleted it because it was promotional in nature and did not provide independent sources proving the company's notability. You are welcome to recreate the article in a neutral tone, and provided sources that prove it meets WP:WEB. Thanks --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Recreating page for Tenderpixel Gallery
Hi Spike. I was going to create a page of basic information and history about Tenderpixel Gallery in London. Records show that you deleted a page by the same name in 2007 (marked as spam). The article wizard informed me to contact you before recreating the page. Please advise.

Thank you.

Londonart (talk) 16:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi Spike. I had been working on a information/notable page for Tenderpixel. I am having a difficultly separating "notable" things about the Gallery and "promoting" the Gallery. I had started with the Cecil Court page because I thought adding a notable fact about Tenderpixel to an existing relevant page would be a good way to start (apologies this is my first attempt at adding to wikipedia). The entry I have been working on for Tenderpixel does include external references for each statement...mentioning important events and noteworthy artists represented. Would it be alright to proceed? Thank you Londonart (talk) 15:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Odette Krempin
Hello Spike,


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Odette_Krempin&action=historysubmit&diff=330911336&oldid=330908953

Do you think this section could be reinserted, maybe copy-edited or shortened? Right now there is also news coverage about it: http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=Odette+Krempin+Frontal

--84.184.38.166 (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * We cannot have that type of information in the article without a reliable English-language source, per WP:BLP. I have no idea what those articles say. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 21:08, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ummm ... I don't know why I'm mentioning it here, other than that you were the nom, and are a sysop, and appear quite civil (believe me--that doesn't always go w/being a sysop), but I do hope that some of our fellow editors who just provided German translation to the articles don't take offense to the crackpot comment just now of one of your fellow "delete" voters.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:09, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah that was a bit off-kilter in my book. The closing admin will hopefully disregard it. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Or better yet, let it inform him/her to disregard the vote as pov-based, and perhaps even make mention of the goal of civility.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Tx much for leaving your comment (both as to the substance and as to making the point that you made).--Epeefleche (talk) 15:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * tx again.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If the page IP problems continue, semi protection may well be appropriate.--Epeefleche (talk) 20:48, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we'll see. I don't expect major problems. As for your previous question about disallowing admins from closing AfD's, I've not heard of such a thing occurring. I think if you wanted to pursue the issue, you would want to start by engaging the admin. If that fails, you could try opening a Request for Comment on use of admin privileges and open it up to public comment. Usually admins are willing to discuss their decisions. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 02:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

photo deletion
Just curious about why the photo of Sam Golden that I uploaded and added to the page was deleted. It's a family/company photo, and I have the family's permission to apply it to the Wiki page for Sam Golden. Can you help me understand how I can make such additions without running against any rules? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seventex (talk • contribs) 13:23, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Ron Thal
Have another look at Article Incubator/Ron "Bumblefoot" Thal. Aisha has added some material, and I'm inclined to let it go back to the mainspace. In the immediate aftermath of the AfD I think I said somewhere that before going back it should be re-AfD-ed, but considering the whole situation I don't feel that necessary. Any comment? JohnCD (talk) 22:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks fine to me. If I randomly saw it in that condition, I probably wouldn't give it a second thought. I intend to keep it watchlisted to keep it from becoming a trivia-fest and to watch for COI issues. Thanks for all your hard work on this—it speaks highly of the job you are doing as administrator that you didn't just close the AfD and walk away. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 04:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It has certainly been an interesting experience. I have now restored the Incubator version; my heart sank when I realised that would require a history merge, but I think I have done it correctly. There was one last complication when last night a new user overwrote the redirect with a version of the article; it looked similar but from the byte count was not identical with any previous one. I didn't bother to compare texts, but userfied her version for her, and told her she would have to edit the new one when I restored it. Phew. What next? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * "I intend to keep it watchlisted" - yes, it may need an eye - see here and here. JohnCD (talk) 13:54, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh geez. Well, I knew this particular can of worms was going to open sooner or later. I'll keep a careful eye on it and hopefully the Thal community will take time to educate themselves on the correct way to improve the article. If not, we might have to post to the COI noticeboard to get more eyes on it. Thanks --Spike Wilbury (talk) 04:13, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I semi-protected the page for a few days. It should fend off any random people that wander over from the Thal forums and decide to play with it. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 04:17, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Your note
Thank you. I have replied there. Crum375 (talk) 20:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Query
Dear Spike, you wrote in my talk page:

"I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but do you have some connection with or professional interest in the events surrounding Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907? I noticed that you have focused solely on this subject in all your time here. I am trying my best to see your point, but please understand that some editors react badly to single-purpose accounts".

I have strongly suspects that Crum375 is a sockpuppet of a real person named Richard Pedicini. This is what I write in talk page of Gol Accident:

"Crum, one of your reliable sources is Richard Pedicini, who wrote your reference NTSB, Cenipa at Odds over Midair Accident Report. Joe Sharkey, describes him as “my correspondent in Sao Paulo” and this is how Globo describes Pedicini “The American Pedicini Richard [...] was on Friday (8) to the headquarters of the Superintendent of the Federal Police of São Paulo, [...], to assist pilots Joe Lepore and Jan Paladino. He attended the Federal Police in a suit, tie and panama hat and a mustache similar to Santos Dumont. "What better time to do a tribute to Santos Dumont?" he suggested. You need Santos Dummont spirit to analyze, summarize and interpret primary source? (NTSB as an organization is not primary source, NTSB team is). Sdruvss (talk) 19:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)"

And this is what Crum375 answered:

"Here is how Richard Pedicini describes himself. He is apparently a freelance writer, and in our own case his byline is on the AIN reference. When we use a published source, it is normally the publisher which lends credibility to the source, because the publisher does the vetting, and the publisher accepts legal responsibility for the content. A reliable source is often without byline, i.e. anonymous, and it is perfectly acceptable for Wikipedia as long as the publisher is reputable, as is Aviation International News. And Santos Dumont was a great aviator and instructor; his spirit could certainly help analyze primary sources, if the analysis were published by a reliable secondary source. Crum375 (talk) 20:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)"

He knows even Richard Pedicini blog. Crum375 also speaks Portuguese very well as he proved. Shouldn't you query him too?

Regards. Sdruvss (talk) 16:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

PS: I believe that you know that this Gol 1907 article is a kind of Sharkey blog summary, don't you. Sdruvss (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure you completely understand what a sockpuppet is. A sockpuppet is an alternate account here on Wikipedia. In other words, more than one username that you edit under. If you want to say "Spike Wilbury" is a sockpuppet of my physical self sitting at my desk, then I guess that's true, but that's not what it means here on Wikipedia. I don't find it unusual that Crum375 has a deep knowledge of this subject and related people, because he is responsible for the Featured Article on the topic and has therefore researched it thoroughly. Nor do I find it unusual that he might speak Portuguese and might therefore be drawn to Brazilian topic areas. These are just red herrings really, and you have not answered the main concern about your use of socks. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, you are right, I used a wrong word. Since you queried me if I have some connection with or professional interest in the events, I think that this question should be formulated to Crum375, since he uses Pedicini as his source and has a huge connection with the events. You said "you have not answered the main concern about your use of socks", I believe I did. Sdruvss (talk) 16:43, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You're still avoiding the question of whether you used multiple accounts improperly. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:21, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't used multiple accounts improperly. Sdruvss (talk) 21:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Citation needed in Obadiah Parker article
In my opinion, these are two different facts: 1 - Artist André 3000, who performed the original, has made positive comments about Weddle's version. 2 - Despite the popularity of the track, Weddle has stated that he has no intention of covering other hip-hop songs Sure they are both supported by the AZ Republic article, but only the second is referenced in the Wikipedia article and users don't know a priori that the reference supports both facts.

--Capgre (talk) 11:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I duplicated the citation. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of 24-7 Prayer Movement
A tag has been placed on 24-7 Prayer Movement requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. SuaveArt (talk) 03:15, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Spike Wilbury! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 21:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Owen Bieber -
 * 2) Sonia Levitin -

GA Reassessment of Phoenix Zoo
As you are a signicant contributor to this article, I wanted to be sure you were aware that Phoenix Zoo has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have started working on the article. One of the main questions is "where was the painting from Ruby that you took?" This is relevant for two reasons: First, if it was not on public display (or owned by you) it may be in copyright violation. Second, it's good to have better provenance anyway (how do we know it was by Ruby?). I think updating the image summary would probably be good enough. Also, you might want to consider moving it to Wikimedia (or copying it there) so that it can be categorized with other Phoenix Zoo images. Donlammers (talk) 18:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

We never seem to be able to meet up on here anymore
I have been traveling so much I just haven't had any time for the project at all. I did what few uncategorized pages I could see. (seems to be about the only thing I've been able to contribute) I saw a huge new book in my local bookshop from Tony Bacon. I expect it would be a wealth of technical reference material. It seems that lately, when I am not boarding a plane somewhere, I am being admitted to hospital. Spent most of December including Christmas in an out of the local cardio-ward. Some plumbing has been repaired and I am back on the fly again. Annual trip to Cuba soon. After that I am home for a week. Whether I can contribute or not I will still check in again to see what is going on. I fear the project may dry up completely without a few key people making some regular guitar related edits. Cheers and take care! Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 02:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Camp Stephens
Before I do a page, why was original one deleted?

Bruce Owen http://campstephensalumni.blogspot.com/

campstephensalumni@gmail.com

Buymymgb (talk) 21:01, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

WHY DID YOU PROTECT VAN HALEN????
ARE YOU A MEMBER OF THE CABAL??
 * Yes. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 19:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks, Spike, for your thoughtfulness. Welcome deeply appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimeffindandy (talk • contribs) 03:03, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Barabbas
Can I ask you to sanity-check something for me? There's a paragraph in Barabbas that I don't like - the one that says he was a terrorist and/or freedom fighter. There are sources adduced but they are funky - the first three appear to be sectarian books from shady publishers, and the freedom fighter points is cited to Gerry Adams (duh!) and the Pope (wtf?) - two well-known unbiased reliable sources... :) Anyways - please let me know if you agree with the deletion, if you have a free minute.  Thanks, -- Y not? 01:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I would nuke that whole passage... those sources don't belong in a proper article about a historical figure. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks. I'll get one more guy to look at it and then I'll zap it. -- Y not? 16:28, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

akro van tension
Not sure why you would remove an entry in "Material covered by other artists" when my entry was about an internationally recognized hip hop producer who used all Van Halen samples to re mix the album of an even bigger name in world wide hip hop. Did you click the link? Did you hear the album? My entry was every bit as relevant as the others mentioned in the section "Material covered by other artists". Look it up, it's an amazing project that was downloaded tens of thousands of times. Please take a moment to check it out! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.202.92 (talk) 22:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not doubting the significance of the work, I'm merely removing it because you didn't provide any independent sources that prove it is notable. In fact, in light of your note, I removed that whole section for the same reason. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 03:16, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I am not vandalizing the page of Tucson, Arizona. The locals there are referred to as T-Locs, and that is valid information.

Helical Scan page
Noticed that in some Mac browsers, the first two or three edit links that normally show up at the right hand ends of the headlines, don’t, instead clumping together, overlaid by text, inside a subsequent section. Where can I learn how to fix that? Jimeffindandy (talk) 04:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Found How_to_fix_bunched-up_edit_links, which seems to be the applicable article, but I’m not smart enough to understand how to follow the instructions. Where/how do I invite somebody smarter to help? Jimeffindandy (talk) 04:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, and your kindness. I almost understand, so I’ll work on it more, later, and report success/failure, here. Then I’d still like to learn whom is the right person to bother, and how, so I don’t wear out my welcome with you. Jimeffindandy (talk) 05:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Got it. Followed a link to Template:FixBunching, followed the steps, previewed, then all the edit links were gone! Went to the sandbox, pasted it in, saved, and they showed up exactly correctly. Saved the actual page, and they showed up correctly, there, too. Apparently a minor shortcoming in edit preview. Now, you can tell me where to go (Hahahahahaha!), though I might even be able to muddle that through, myself, using the Welcome links you gave me. Jimeffindandy (talk) 05:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Spike Wilbury wrote: “...I might not be as fast as the village pump.” ET from my initial query to your initial response: One minute. Faster than a speeding bullet! They’ll have to go some, to beat that. Ain’t a-gonna expect you and I’ll always happen to be working at the same moment. Thanks for all your help and encouragement. Jimeffindandy (talk) 18:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Bywater
While you're doing a bit of Bywater-slapping you might want to take a look at. --Simple Bob (talk) 22:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * You might also be interested in contributing to the Bywater-related SPI - Sockpuppet investigations/KingOfTheLynn - there are two obvious socks, including the one you pointed out to me (thanks). The admin was previously inclined to treat it as an AGF incident, but I think it's unlikely to end there. Regards.Claritas § 22:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

R.I.P. Bob
Epic fail — whom am I supposed to be vandalizing now? Rest in peace, Bob. -- Y not? 12:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I am stunned but not surprised. Bob always seemed like more of a "live fast, die young" fella. I feel like I have no direction now. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Chess Records revisions
You undid some revisions I did to the Chess Records article. I neglected to reference them, so I guess I had it coming. I've since added the citations / references that verify and confirm the information in my revisions. Over and done.

But I'm really confused by your revision note "User caught inserting misinformation in other articles". Where? When? Please elaborate, because I have no idea what you're referring to. I've been guilty of making unreferenced revisions a few times (when I don't have the reference info at hand), but never have I inserted "misinformation". Never.

As a side note, strictly from a philosophical point of view, even if you provided evidence that I'd inserted some misinformation somewhere - and I assure you, you can't, because it's never happened - how exactly would that invalidate the 100% verifiable info I added to the Chess Records article? It doesn't, of course, nor does it give you the right to vandalize an article without any logical justification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.194.190.20 (talk) 18:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Deleted page?
Hey there,

I guess were not sure exactly how we should put in our content for our Wiki page. Can it not have a description of our group, members, w/ links to our sites?

Can you give me an example of a band page?

Thanks in advance,

Rob(Vokab Kompany (talk) 21:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC))

Note for notability
I added new secondary sources to IEEE AlexSB page, please take a look. --MOHAMED ELRAYANY (talk) 14:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
I've been seeing your name on all sorts of nominations lately. Thanks for reviewing! Karanacs (talk) 19:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks! Just trying to help out however I can. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:12, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Notability here
Hi there. You've written in your edit summary that "notability is asserted". Could you please briefly explain how notability is asserted? Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 19:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, the author is asserting that she is notable via her roles in television and movies. Even if the claim doesn't meet our notability criteria, you can't speedy delete it. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 19:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's interesting to know, thanks. Is there a Wikipedia Guideline or Policy that supports what you've written? Thank you. Amsaim (talk) 19:15, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Criteria for speedy deletion, criterion A7, which you cited in your nomination. Please make sure to carefully review the criteria before you nominate articles for speedy deletion. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 22:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you for the info. Amsaim (talk) 01:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment at ANI
Based on your recent comment on 3RR in regards to William M. Connolley, could you look at WP:ANI? I find it troubling that I was banned while confining my discussion to the talk page, while WMC continued to edit the article. The details are at the linked location. Regards, GregJackP   Boomer!   18:08, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Please review the two sources I have added to my statement which cite WMC's article in exactly the same manner that I did, as an example of alarmism from global cooling. One is peer reviewed, one is a book. Thanks, GregJackP   Boomer!   12:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi GregJackP, I'm not interested in getting involved in the content dispute. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 17:10, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No prob by me. I was just notifying each admin that had commented.  Regards,  GregJackP   Boomer!   19:24, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Dana Perino edit-war
Regarding this, any reason that the reporter was not blocked? Here's the fourth revert.--Chaser (talk) 06:32, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hm, he seems to have performed that revert shortly after I investigated the report and blocked 2tuntony. I had logged off and didn't continue to track the reporter's edits, although I answered a query on 2tuntony's Talk page. Worth revisiting for sure. I have extremely limited time right now; would you mind following up on it? --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:01, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I see that he has already been blocked for that revert. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Familiar bickering
Hi, could you please check in here, where Nableezy has reported Shuki for edit warring? It seems that you are familiar with these two, and I'm afraid I might be spinning my wheels investigating all of their various interactions. I've been at it for 20 minutes and I'm afraid I've barely scratched the surface. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 21:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm just off for the night, I'm afraid. Sorry. Stifle (talk) 21:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Reflections
I spent the last 24 hours "reflecting", as you suggested. Here is what I have concluded: You have permanently, and irrevocably besmirched my name, as a contributor to this encyclopedia. 2tuntony (talk) 05:45, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a shame that in all your reflecting you failed to recognize that your own actions caused the block. That several other administrators declined to unblock you should have provided some additional revelation. As long as you continue to point the finger everywhere else, you'll not accomplish much around here. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Once again, my actions were not only permissible, but required by Wikipedia policy. It is clearly stated that removal of BLP violations are an exception to 3RR. It was not "my actions", but rather your misconduct as an administrator that caused the block. I am not "pointing the finger everywhere else". I am pointing the finger (guess which one) at Spike Wilbury, who both caused me grief, and brought disrepute to my name, while refusing to be held accountable for it. 2tuntony (talk) 06:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm always willing to be held accountable. If any administrator finds my actions inappropriate, they are free to modify or reverse them. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Deleted Page.
I was wondering if you could unprotect the Vinnie Langdon Page. I rewrote the page best I could in my drafts and was wondering if you could have a look at it??? Here's the link I couldn't make a reference link so I just posted to where I wanted the reference at and the Link of the reference  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightbeast50 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I unlocked the page. However, I will say that it is likely to be deleted again based on what I see in your draft. The main problems are that you don't really describe how the subject meets our notability criteria for people, which are listed at WP:BIO. You also have to have reliable sources (like newspapers, magazines, journals, etc.) that back up the claims to notability. I would advise that you add those things before you recreate the article. If you cannot find them, it likely means the subject is not notable enough to have an article here. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 14:25, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Official Notice
I am posting this here, per WP:ADMINABUSE, as evidence that I have taken the step of attempting to resolve the situation by talking directly with the administrator in question. I have been here just under 2 months. I have made well over 1000 good contributions to this project, and until this incident, enjoyed my time here very much. This has been a nightmare, and I very much wish to put it behind me. However, as a matter of principle, I feel I must continue to do what I feel is right, even though it would be much easier to just drop this, and even though I have very little chance of ultimate success. I realize that to err is human. I'm not looking for your head on a platter. I'm not even looking for an apology. I too, am human, and far from perfect. In the time since the incident, I have not conducted myself in the most appropriate manner. The fact is, that while I may very well owe an explanation, and/or apology for some of it, it has nothing to do with the original block. You mentioned the fact that several other administrators declined to unblock me. Without veering off into another topic, as far as why that is only partly true, the fact is that this is not about what any other administrator has or hasn't done. You were the one who blocked me, and it is only you from whom I can request accountability. In earlier comments, you've made it quite clear that you are willing to be held accountable before your fellow administrators. I however, am asking that hold yourself accountable for your actions to me; the common user, who was affected by a decision that you made. It remains my position, as I have said before, that I did not deserve to be blocked. You blocked me for violating WP:3RR. 3RR clearly states that the removal of BLP violations is an exception to the rule. Furthermore, you stated on my talk page, that I "should have stopped reverting, and attempted to gain consensus" on the talk page. WP:BLP states that violations "should be removed immediately, without waiting for discussion." My actions were in line with WP:BLP, and did not violate WP:3RR. Therefore, I am formally, and respectfully, asking that you acknoweledge that although acting in good faith, you erred in judgement when you blocked me. I thank you for your time, and await your response. 2tuntony (talk) 10:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * (Talkpage Stalker) 2tuntony, I would advise you to drop the stick. This won't go anywhere good if you pursue it, and I'm speaking as someone who has had conflicts with admins before.   GregJackP   Boomer!   14:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * @2tuntony - I appreciate your reasoned discourse. To be clear, I believe I'm accountable to the whole community, not just other admins. However in your case, I stand by my decision. I think you were overly-aggressive in applying the BLP policy, and it was an extremely gray area at best. In those cases, you should seek consensus at the article Talk or on the BLP noticeboard. I realize this is the sticking point, that you believe you were acting within the bounds of BLP, and I believe it was a situation that required consensus. Chaser concurred with me in his block decline notice here. You are welcome to continue pursuing the matter in whatever ways you see fit, but I believe I acted correctly. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. While it appears that I erred in leaping to the judgement that you are "a corrupt administrator", and apologize for that, as well as related remarks, your response remains unacceptable to me, as I firmly believe that my edits were in complete compliance with Wikipedia policy. I have taken this matter to WP:Editor assistance, as I have no idea what my next step is supposed to be. I reiterate that I am not seeking any punative action against you, but rather the addition of a simple annotation to my block log, explaining that my edits were in compliance with policy, and did not violate WP:3RR. Thank you. 2tuntony (talk) 18:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Dawaynebailey.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Dawaynebailey.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file 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 '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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

edit warring over a Talk page
We've got an edit war emerging over not an article, which you recently protected, but the protected article's Talk page, if you can believe it. I think I am entitled to the preservation of my Talk page comment, not least because I have conceded to my comment's deletion if the other editor is willing to concede the content issue by allowing other editors to add candidate information on a case by case basis. The other editor could always just respond to my points on the Talk page instead of just deleting them, but in the interests of putting a stop to the whole affair, I wouldn't protest a one month topic ban (of both articles and Talk pages, if necessary) of both editors (ie myself included), the topic being the upcoming Oct 18 Edmonton municipal election (or, more appropriately in my view, all Alberta municipal elections, since the editor in question has applied the exact same candidate-information-blocking formatting that provoked the dispute over Edmonton's page on Calgary municipal election, 2010 and Lethbridge municipal election, 2010)Bdell555 (talk) 20:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I really don't think a topic ban is going to be productive, especially since there is probably a limited number of editors who are interested in developing these articles. I would much rather you work out the dispute, although progress might be slow or non-existent right now. I do agree that the other editor should not remove or refactor your comments without addressing them, so I will place a note to that effect on his talk page. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 21:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am confused, I thought Bdell555 said I could delete the comment. 117Avenue (talk) 03:12, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that he would accept removal of his comment if his conditions were met. I don't see where you attempted to meet his conditions. Additionally, you still cited an inappropriate policy in your edit summary, which doesn't match up with your claim that you were removing the comment at his request. Please correct me if I have the wrong impression. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 03:36, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I saw the paragraph as a personal attack against me, but I have responded to it there. 117Avenue (talk) 03:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Rajesh Khanna article in wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Active_Banana - this user is continuing his same old story of sites not being relaible and that blogs have been used etc..... yesterday Hebrides (talk) even helped me in converting them to citation format, including the title, publisher, date, etc. even she agrees that the 68 were genuine. now i added up more sources which are yes relaible upto 75 to convince all detractors.. now what needs to be done to ensure that the article contributed by me at present which contains solely and solely facts supported by valid references is being made open to public for reading and not deleted? please help seriously i need ur helpShrik88music (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2010 (UTC) following are the references i provided from reputed magazines,newspapers,websites of tv channels,news channels,articles on filmstars etc,..... i know all my 75 references are valid but do not understand y no action can be taken to make such biased editors away from such articles. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rajesh_Khanna&oldid=387349101

I request that this issue be resolves at the earliest and i assure u that all 78 references are genuine.....

infact i want seniors, experts too see it coz iam sure biased anti khanna fantic fans are deleting scentences..activebanana and shshshs are one of them... infact please u also go thru the article and even u will seee that all sources are magazines,newspapers, websites of news channels etc...Shrik88music (talk) 17:06, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Correction : I did not “agree that 68 references were genuine” as stated above. I simply ran Reflinks on them. Thank you. — Hebrides (talk) 18:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not interested in getting involved in this dispute; please do not continue it at my Talk page. Please go to dispute resolution. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 19:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Your 3RR closure
Hi. Did you close this 3RR report because you did not think 3RR had been broken or for some other reason? We were both typing at the same time, I suspect. I added a bit after your close. Novaseminary (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think the spirit of the rule was broken, no. My general impression of the situation is that you have a disagreement with Orlady that has thus far involved complex sequences of edits and page moves in which you have stepped on each others' toes. I'm not sure what result you were after, but a block would suggest that any of the parties was acting in bad faith or with malicious intent, which I just don't think is the case. Much of what Orlady was doing was in accordance with advice she received on how to fix the pages, something that is difficult enough without another person making edits to the pages at the same time. I think the most productive course of action is for the two of you to step back and gather consensus on the best place for the various content. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 18:58, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Spike. That is fair enough. While I don't entirely agree, especially since it was the second time, I see your point. Orlady has done it again, though. See User_talk:Orlady. Any thought on this one? Novaseminary (talk) 13:40, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied on Orlady's talk page. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 14:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry
I am very sorry for making that edit, Spike. As you would know if you have visited my user page, I have ADHD. I made that edit at noght after my medicine wore off. Although there is no excuse for vandalism, I thought it would be a funny joke at the time. And I am also from the Call Of Duty Wiki, so I know the works around here, somewhat. Right now, I am trying to get my signature just right, and then I will start editing constructively on this boring wiki about anything. A Word Of Advice From Beastly20:   Don't Be Silly,   Wrap Your Willy!

21:39, 8 October 2010 (UTC) Call it what you want, but I am not obsessed with Genetalia. Fascinated, but bot Obsessed. And until I get a formal warning about my signature being offensive or innapropriate, Im not gonna change it. Im not going to say something to you that will get me blocked, but I want to. Leave me alone. Have a good day. A Word Of Advice From Beastly20:   Don't Be Silly,   Wrap Your Willy!  22:12, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

"Minor" edits
Please do not mark edits such as this as minor. Any edit that makes substantive changes to content should not be marked as "minor" because many edits filter minor edits out of their watchlists and they may miss these changes. Please reserve this classification for typo fixes, formatting, vandalism reverts, etc. Thanks! --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's a revert. To me returning to a previous state is often a nonevent.  If it sets your mind at ease, though, it's a revert of an edit that's part of an incredibly long-running edit war that admins have done precious little to curb.  The reverted edit was both non-factual and borderline vandalism. ¦ Reisio (talk) 01:12, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

If anything is clear on that page, it's that a revert is always an event. I'm sure anyone involved there would agree. As an aside, there is little admins can do when users do not take responsibility for their own behavior. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 04:07, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


 * If anything is clear on that page (and virtually every other page having remotely anything to do with Western Sahara), it's that a disproportionate amount of involved people make edits to benefit a bias, and those edits should be reverted. There is little else users can do when admins do not help. ¦ Reisio (talk) 04:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Was there a recent mediation on those pages? Are the involved editors mostly the same or did some of the problematic editors leave? --Spike Wilbury (talk) 05:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


 * There has never been a mediation that I'm aware of (despite pleas for help in official places). Some editors have gone, some made their biased changes and are waiting to see if anyone will revert them (a taxing endeavour, especially when spanning years — I know I've taken breaks from it).  As I said it's a very long edit war (a propaganda war, one could argue, between people biased towards Morocco, towards SADR, and those who merely want to be accurate [with a sprinkling of annoying people who just want the last word and don't care either way]), and there's no end in sight.  I don't remember Collounsbury making quite so many edits I found questionable in the past, but circumstances change don't they, or perhaps there were greater concerns at the time.  In these articles it's not enough that text be technically correct (though this is still a problem) — they need to be devoid of perceivable bias, because the combatants will take every foot hold they can get (one of the reasons there are so many Western Sahara related articles). ¦ Reisio (talk) 12:52, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I really don't mind helping out but I'm sure you understand by now that admins won't intervene unless someone is clearly vandalizing or acting disruptively. A lot of times with these articles where nationalistic tendencies run high, everyone believes they are "right" and few people are hanging around just to cause problems. Those people I don't mind getting rid of. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 23:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That would be welcome. ¦ Reisio (talk) 00:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Is the Sahara Press Service considered a reliable source for Western Sahara-related articles? --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:54, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * ¦ Reisio (talk) 02:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Question as to why the William Alexander page was deleted.
Spike, I could not find your resons over why the page was deleted? He is notable enough. Just wondering since I am working on a new one? --Wer2chosen (talk) 13:52, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The entire text was plagiarized from a copyrighted source, so it was deleted. If you are recreating the article, make sure you include reliable sources that establish his notability. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:05, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

You've been making contributions to marcus hendersons wikipedia page, and I appreciate this, being that i'm new to wiki editing and he's requested I do a few changes (lots of which I have) I figure you're the best person to ask for a few more tweaks I can't seem to figure out!

He most recently wanted me to add that he now works for Total Guitar Magazine (UK) I placed this under achievements/awards since similar information went there. It should perhaps go elsewhere, that's for you to decide I suppose. Also I want to put a picture up but CAn't seem to figure out how. I'm now going to make an account on wikipedia. I've made an account, it's "vVv Dan" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.89.235.193 (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

SEG - Editor abuse
Might be useful for you to glance at the handful of lines I wrote on my user page.

One more time, I’ll bother you with something. I’m not interested in warring over WikipediA. You may have a higher estimate of WikipediA or its participants, and may wish, if you find any merit in my opinion regarding this next, to speak a word in the right place.

I’ve encountered a number of assholes at WikipediA who imagine themselves to be suppositories (sic - ha ha) of knowledge and power, which imagining I grant any man, until they abuse their power. My most recent such encounter was with Tim Shuba, hell-bent upon continuing in the best tradition of David Levy, and I had a brief conversation with him. He redirected the SEG article, effectively destroying it. I believe he ought not to have behaved so high handedly, and would have been better given to more constructive repairs. Jimeffindandy (talk) 04:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Got your response. Thanks! I understand, so much better, now. My involvement was miniscule. Yours was massive. I feel so sorry for you. You are much better behaved than I. I apologize for thinking and saying you, too, had gone in the crapper, when all you had done was slip silently away, as I am about to, albeit not quite so silently. You had to have known, (if not, know, now) that I looked up to you as my mentor. I never did quite figure out where you were on the administration ladder, but you were never a janitor. ’Sa shame for us, and presumably, many others, to be discovering what we have about Wikipedia. I know they will be worse off without us, and our ilk. Alas, they may not figure that out until much too late. I saw a number of your contributions, and know you to be one of those subject matter experts who made WikipediA what it was. I wish you well in all that you do, Spike. Jimeffindandy (talk) 04:24, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 01:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Coming?
NYC is even prettier in Christmastime -- Y not? 17:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 03:21, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Robert Lam
The page Robert Lam should be speedily deleted as the person in question is NOT NOTABLE ! Instead of doing so, you protected the page. Keeping the page would only tarnish Wikipedias reputation as a source of knowledge ! I am a Malaysian and I have lived in the country all my life and I know things on the country much better than you do.

Robert Lam was a Malaysian newscaster and he read the English news bulletin on TV3 ( a private TV station) for many years before he left to start up his own English language center. But that does not make him notable enough to have an entry on Wikipedia. He did not make any significant contributions for the country and neither was he a famous politician or celebrity.

There are only two interesting facts on him which might make him notable to Malaysians. Firstly, he was a pilot prior to becoming a newscaster and he survived a few plane crashes ( perhaps someone should add that to the article). Secondly, he succumbed to malignant melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer which is a very rare cancer in Malaysia.

Over the years, I find that Wikipedia has lost its credibility as a source of information and knowledge and its partly due to the adding of trivial or unnotable articles and the administrators  like you. You arbitrarily remove other users edits and label it as vandalism without studying its contents properly. You abuse your power.

What I am stating is no different from what other discontented users might say about Wikipedia.

I am very disappointed with Wikipedia and I have removed it from my favorites list which I have kept for years.

It doesn't matter to me now whether the article will be kept or deleted even if it goes through another round of AfD as I know the outcome very well as all my efforts will be futile again as the determination of "notability" lies in the hands of the "ignorant ones"!

60.52.127.24 (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


 * You're a funny guy. No, it's not going to be speedily deleted because it makes an assertion of importance. It has also already been through the Articles for Deletion process once. You are welcome to nominate it there again when it's unlocked. I protected the page because anonymous editors are edit warring templates and redirects out of process. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Like I said, open an AfD and state your reasons. You're not going to get any traction here because I've already explained why the speedy was declined and what you can do next. If you're unwilling to follow procedures and want to lash out at other editors to following them, we don't want you here anyway. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 04:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Define "reliable"
Since the source I cited, Rolling Stone, wasn't good enough yesterday and Planet Rock wasn't good enough today, please define what a reliable source is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.213.197.254 (talk) 16:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You didn't actually provide a citation for Rolling Stone, only for the Planet Rock source. The Planet Rock source doesn't support most of what you said, or even mention the stage greaser guy. The content is fine, but we need to make sure to include a source that backs those statements up. I can help you format the Rolling Stone citation if you would like assistance with that. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Van Halen
Hey bro!

I still edit now and then, but not too often. I much prefer writing in a collaborative fashion, since I like to debate over editing thoughts and things, so if you're game to go edit the VH pages, happy to dive in with you! (Chill (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC))

eddie said in an interview for guitar legends and interview with dweezil zappa that he was born in 1957 and was 21 years when he make out his first album it's also my favourite guitarist and band favourite — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.250.217.60 (talk) 13:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - 3RR Protection
Hi Spike, Thanks for your work just now to protect various settlement articles from an edit-warring IP. I do hope they see sence as you suggest!Tmol42 (talk) 21:43, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

your notice on conflict of interest
Spike, I received notice that you flagged me for potential conflict of interest, I am sorry but I have an issue with the flag. page creator is clearly an animal activist, and the balance of the he overal article is heavily towards that topic. I believe CRO's serve a purpose in the success of the human health progression. I understand people object, however they should get the government to change regulations, so alternate methods are approved. I do not understand why I am considered as a risk for content editing as a result. I posted on the talk page months ago, I discussed with Slimvirgin, she posted the neutrality request.. the only feedback was the images, that I after posting on talk removed. Please reconsider this flag. Cromng (talk) 19:14, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Re: Gandhi (film)
For the record, Roguana, MassassiUK, and 88.104.16.200 all appear to be the same user. I could be wrong of course. Viriditas (talk) 03:19, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You are indeed wrong, and your deliberate problematic behaviour on the Gandhi talk page is indicative of what a troublemaker you are. Furthermore, you are in no position to be accusing people of being sockpuppets since you have 418 shared article and page edits with MarnetteD who you are so desperately defending. Roguana (talk) 03:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Only problem is, MarnetteD is in Colorado, and I'm in Hawaii. Apparently Roguana, MassassiUK, and 88.104.16.200 are all in your home.  Am I wrong? Viriditas (talk) 03:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You are indeed wrong, and your baseless mudslinging isn't going to help you one bit. It is far more likely you are trying to hide your own wrongdoing. Roguana (talk) 04:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * So, you won't object if I ask a CU to look into this? Viriditas (talk) 04:14, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't object at all, especially since I can see how desperate you are. In fact, I may file a sock/meatpuppet report of my own and let them investigate the 418 intersecting edits you've made with the other user you have been so vigorously defending all day. Now I really suggest you stop cluttering up somebody else's talk page with your childish nonsense and go and find something better to do with your time. You're done here. My apologies to Spike. Roguana (talk) 04:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * We are not done. Please file the CU.  You quite clearly do not understand what an intersecting edit is and when it is significant, and I'm in need of a good laugh. Viriditas (talk) 05:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Viriditas, are you planning to file a CU for the three mentioned above? --Spike Wilbury (talk) 13:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * What would you advise? Viriditas (talk) 19:47, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it's worth pursuing after reviewing the contributions of all three. It's almost WP:DUCK territory, and the accounts have been used to create the appearance of support for a position in violation of WP:SOCK. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. I'll consider filing a report. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 03:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Liberal Party of Australia still locked?
Hello,

A number of Liberal Party of Australia article editors have wanted the article to be unlocked. Any advice would be cool.

131.217.255.209 (talk) 06:36, 14 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I've unlocked it. I don't see much agreement on the Talk page about the issue that was being edit warred, but I'll hope for the best. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:35, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Harrison FAC
Thanks for your kind and helpful comments at Featured article candidates/George Harrison/archive2. I've made a series of edits that I hope have addressed most of your concerns. In particular, I've now re-worked the Guitar work sub-section so as to be a more satisfing read for musicians. I hope you can find the time to revisit the FAC. Cheers! GabeMc (talk&#124;contribs)  21:25, 7 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Is there anything in particular holding-up your support that I could address? GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  23:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * No, you have addressed my comments thus far. I just wanted to give it another good read-through before I make any further comments/declarations on the FAC page. Thanks! --Spike Wilbury (talk) 15:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Happy 70th birthday, Spike!
Many happy returns in the next life. -- Y not? 14:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * You shouldn't have! --Spike Wilbury (talk) 01:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * lol -- Y not? 18:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * About time someone fixed that caption. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 18:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's the least I could do for the restoration of world peace. -- Y not? 19:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Great, now they're engaged. Thanks, nameless contibutor! -- Y not? 22:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Eric Clapton
Helo. I`m newbie there but I can say that Eric Clapton never played hard rock. I listen Clapton since I was 8 years old (now I`m 20). I`m a big fan of Mr. Eric and that`s very serious mistake that eric clapton is rock musician :) I think that wikipedia is a trusy source for people and we would work to reduce mistakes . Eric Clapton is a great BLUES MAn and there is not mentiond blues :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xorxeli (talk • contribs) 21:06, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Dozens of people come to music articles here every day and change genres to whatever their personal opinion is. The only thing that matters is what's reflected in the preponderance of reliable sources. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 21:54, 18 April 2013 (UTC)