User talk:Stackedaktor

Speedy deletion nomination of Loras John Schissel
A tag has been placed on Loras John Schissel requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Whpq (talk) 12:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Gershwin first music video
Do not continue to push your original research idea that George Gershwin was involved in the first music video in 1931. Baloney! Assuming as you have that the term "video" can include any moving image source such as film, have you never heard about musical shorts? They preceded the film Delicious by five years, and were popular and well known. Do you have some book you are reading which makes the assertion Gershwin's number was the first music video? If you do, trot it out so it can be examined. Otherwise, stop trying to force the connection. Take a careful look at WP:CITE and especially WP:RS so that your contributions can begin to have the authority they now lack. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 02:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

SINCE I CANNOT DIRECTLY REPLY TO BiSTERNAK:

I have the evidence- its called Delicious and maybe you should see it before you claim it was NOTHING like anything preceding it.

I think you could be constructive in your criticism without being insulting. Obviously wikipedia's standards are low to allow someone who is an editor to get so personal.

If you fail to see the significance of Gershwin writing a piece to be included in a movie as a stand alone sequence divorced of plot (really just metaphor of the city) - really just pure imagery interpreting sound, then you are rather foolish (especially if you consider the things you keep nominating as music videos are 8mm reels that no one back then saw versus a noted composer writing all ORIGINAL material for the purpose of tripping out a Hollywood audience) especially since no one wrote a real score until King Kong three years later, and that was underscore, not audio written specifically to be joined with trippy visuals.

You obviously want these no-name videos that were curiosities to be considered a music video, but not a sequence from one of the first sound movies that stands alone divorced from the rest of the film. If you saw this movie, and realized the year it was made, you would realize how stupid it is to consider these scratchy little movies on par with what was light years ahead of its time in 1930.

But whatever. Why would a significant composer writing music to be performed on the screen NOT be considered a music video, not when we have scratchy poorly lit and directed and little-seen curiosities from someone's attic?!?!

Maybe you should get off your high wiki-horse and use your noggin.


 * Did you read the links I supplied? We don't write things in this encyclopedia that are a result of our own observations and consideration, we write about observations and opinions that have been published in reliable sources. Please read WP:NOR for the relevant guideline, a deeply-rooted, foundational tenet of Wikipedia. You will have to locate published, reliable sources to include your observation that Gershwin composed music for a musical sequence that has been hailed as the first music video. Good luck in that. Binksternet (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did to Delicious (film). Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 03:35, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Music video. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Binksternet (talk) 03:36, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Overture to Shall We Dance
A tag has been placed on Overture to Shall We Dance 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. Cleave and Smite, Delete and Tear! (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hoctor's Ballet


The article Hoctor's Ballet has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Doesn't meet WP:NSONG - it doesn't even get more than a passing mention in the article about the original film.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Darkwind (talk) 04:48, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
--Darkwind (talk) 03:59, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Goldilocks planet
Hi, I really appreciate your addition of the Goldilocks planet information to the Gl 581 g article. However, discussion on this matter is leaning towards removal for several good reasons. Please also remember that the media is not known for their accuracy and scientific coverage. Viriditas (talk) 07:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)