User talk:Tasketz Kayo

Sole and the Skyrider Band (album)
The article you created above is a duplicate of Sole and the Skyrider Band, and so I have merged the contents of both articles and redirected the duplicate article back to the original article. You are free to edit the original article but please leave the redirected article as it is.

Currently we have articles named Sole and the Skyrider Band (band) and Sole and the Skyrider Band, but requests can easily be made to alter them (and this will also retain the article's edit histories). memphisto 08:07, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

June 2012
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give Sole and the Skyrider Band a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. Just linking the above since it has useful information Muhandes (talk) 08:26, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Bracken (band), etc.
Please see the talk page for this article; simply reverting my edits while using the same reasoning is unconstructive. Chubbles (talk) 16:12, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chubbles (talk • contribs) 19:37, 21 June 2012‎

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for persistent failure to edit collaboratively, including edit warring and refusal to accept consensus. You have been disruptive on numerous pages, both from this account and by anonymous edits from various IP addresses, over a long period. The length of the block takes into consideration the fact that you have already had at least one short block as an anonymous IP editor. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Moved material
Since the talk page is for discussion and not for article drafts, I took the liberty and moved the material to User:Tasketz Kayo/Sandbox. I hope you find this useful. --Muhandes (talk) 16:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your input. But I can't edit the sandbox since I've been blocked. This talk page is the only one I can edit now. --Tasketz Kayo (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize that, I was just trying to be helpful. I don't know if it is against any policy to do it on your talk page, I guess you can try copying it all back here and see. Seriously, it is a shame you keep getting into edit wars, cause I think that in general you can make valuable contributions. --Muhandes (talk) 07:07, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Block

 * Since youo have resumed the previous edit war, and since you have continued to also give other indications of unwillingness to edit collaborativley, you have been blocked again. When the block expires, please try to understand the collaborative nature of Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not work by individuals inisiting on forcing their preferred edits through by edit warring, nor by threats or angry remarks to those we disagree with. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Which part of my edits are you talking about? --Tasketz Kayo (talk) 18:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Chubbles is ignoring Manual of Style on Baths (musician) etc., so I warned him on his talk page and reverted his edits. Am I wrong? --Tasketz Kayo (talk) 18:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Editing collaboratively means discussing your desired changes on the article's talk page when you know that other users disagree, and creating consensus before making the changes. I can't find any evidence that you did this- or even that you know that you are supposed to do it. Can you link to any edit where you politely entered into a discussion of this with other users, and explained what you were trying to do? This is a template warning that would be used for a brand new user who doesn't know the manual of style exists, but it doesn't explain what you are doing or why, and it's a little insulting to use a newbie template on an experienced editor. You don't seem to have attempted to edit collaboratively at any point since your last block. Do you understand that 'collaboration' means working together with other people to make decisions? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:47, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If I might add to this, the cycle is WP:BRD. Bold, Revert, Discuss. The cycle you seem to be adhering to is Bold, Revert. No discuss whatsoever. Another editor has already pointed out below this why your reverts are counterproductive. This is an an encyclopaedia. We should be aiming to communicate as much information in as little space as is possible. Whether it looks pretty as far as you're concerned is very far down the list of what's important - before that comes relevance and verifiability to name two things. I'll echo Chubbles's comment from earlier - I am also in no doubt that you want to improve wiki. You're not a vandal. You just need to work with other people, because that's the way things are done on wikipedia. Kaini (talk) 22:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Label and release date information in discographies
This info is relevant in an artists discography - infact, the style guideline you link to confirms it: Manual of Style/Lists of works. When there are matters of opinion on Wikipedia it is always a good idea to look at the most popular articles (because this is where concensus is usually arrived at first), so I suggest you look at The Beatles discography where label and release date information are both included. memphisto 22:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of No More Wig for Ohio


A tag has been placed on No More Wig for Ohio requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a musical recording which does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, and where the artist's article has never existed, has been deleted or is eligible for deletion itself. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for music.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. VIVEK RAI : Friend?  12:03, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 16
Hi. When you recently edited Collected Remixes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lucky Pierre (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:57, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Cvlwr for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page.

94.12.133.144 (talk) 18:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Watered Lawn
I have deleted your page, Watered Lawn, because you are a blocked user, according to criterion G5. Creations by blocked users with no substantive edits by other users may be deleted at any time by placing the tag on any of the pages made by a blocked user. 94.12.133.144 (talk) 07:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)