User talk:TheImpossibleMan

Thank you
I figure you might be an O's fan, so I especially appreciate your evenhanded fixes on the Red Sox Nation page. Thanks for doing that. As you might imagine, there has been a fair amount of mutual vandalism on Yankees and Red Sox pages, and hopefully the third parties who view and edit those pages can keep it all in line. Thanks again. Friejose 15:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I took a peek at your contributions, and there were a few Orioles-related entries, so I guessed as to your allegiances. Was I right?  Thanks again.  Friejose 17:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Hey, TIM!
Hey, TIM! Michael 15:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC) here! Listen, I really like your Article on Yondu... It was really spot on, really like it. I added a picture I thought was spot on, too... Hope you like it! Michael 15:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Removal of "POV" text from Queen
Just so you know, normally it's polite to reword rather than delete "POV" sections. It could be that only a couple of words need to be changed to improve it. If you do delete, it's best to move it to the discussion page, rather than killing it altogether. You would also do well to spell out your concerns with the paragraph..."POV" is a pretty vague term that gets used to describe all manner of sins. Thanks. Stevage 13:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi! I like that you are "taking care" of the Queen article. However, I'm wondering why you removed the mention of the tribute albums here? Aren't they significant enough? The last one certainly is, having big names like Sum 41, Joss Stone, Gavin DeGraw, etc. It ought to be mentioned. Jon Harald Søby 19:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Blocking
Sorry about that, it's the Autoblock. I believe I can unblock you, but I need to know the IP address to unblock. It should tell you this in the error message you're getting. Let me know and I'll unblock as soon as I see the message. You could try the template to get more attention too, in case I'm not around when you know the address. Friday (talk) 00:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The IP address is in the error message it gives you when you try to edit, by the way. Please post the IP so you can be unblocked. -- Rory 0 96 18:53, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Queen
Okay, I believe I'm finished with Queen now. If you find citations where I added  and fix some of the things AndyZ mentioned, I think it'd be a great FA candidate. Jon Harald Søby 12:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you could list that book (Mercury and Me) in a "Literature" section. Plus some other books on Queen, if you know of any. Jon Harald Søby 10:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Of course I will! =) Jon Harald Søby 11:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

American Civil War
Hi! I just thought you might be interested: there's a military history peer review process that you may want to submit the article to as well. Kirill Lok s hin 15:21, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I am the Walrus
Hi! You can actually use the same reference many times – instead of  , write  . Then, to re-use that reference, simply write   (with no  ; the slash in <ref&gt; does this) where you'll use it. Jon Harald Søby 13:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Queen (band) GA Nomination
Dear TheImpossibleMan, your recent nomination for Queen (band) to be promoted to good article status has failed on various grounds which have been listed on the article's talk page. Please expand on these comments and re-apply for Good Article Status. Thank you for contributing, keep up the good work, Highway 22:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

WHAT?
So just because you disagree with my decision you're telling me not to participate in the process again? I'm sorry but that is nothing short of personal attack! I would happily award the article good if you adapted it but this is not a good article status article! I have read Beatles article are of much a higher standard, I reccommend you read some of them before harassing other users! Highway 19:53, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Reply to "Question about failure of Queen article"

 * Articles in the Main namespace are expected to be "brilliant prose," not simply boring words on the page. I would say that as an encyclopedia, the most important aspect of any article is the arrangement and selection of the words with which we express information. If we write informally, we become an informal source of information. If we elevate our diction, we become an exemplary source, a shining beacon of information and authority through which we share our knowledge. However, the elements of style which we have in our hands, namely voice, word choice, phrasing, and presentation, do not have to present a boring article. Indeed, we want to present an amazingly well-written article that is easy and pleasurable to read, as well as unambiguous identifying the information which it presents.
 * Secondly, the Good Article and Featured Article processes are two very different systems meant for two different purposes. Good Article Evaluation and Status is meant to be an extreme form of peer review: One Wikipedian, who is not at all connected with the article, evaluates it on an impartial scale, seeing if it meets his personal expectations for what an article should look like. The result is an in-depth look at what one Wikipedian thinks of the article.
 * However, Featured Article Status denotes a community who, having examined the article, consider it a good example of both their own handiwork and also the expectation that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Since it is a communal process, it is not graded or scored on a rubric, but instead is discussed and analyzed via discussion. The resulting article, once qualified, is fit to be put on the Main Page.
 * It is sad indeed that the two processes are often linked. They are meant to be different simply by their nature. Nonetheless, I do not feel as if I should have to retract or discuss my grading: I carefully weighed my words, and meant every single one of them. I would, however, like to remind you that I am a Grammar Nazi, and as such have a history of pedantically singling out large numbers of small problems in order to justify a complaint. I have a feeling that with a bit of work, Queen (band) will quite easily make Featured Article Status. Please don't take my words as a personal insult &mdash; you have done quite well with the article. It is one of the better articles in the encyclopedia. Never have I nominated any page authored by myself for Good Article or Featured Article Status &mdash; I am not foolish enough to hope that any of them will qualify. If you would like, I can examine and attempt to correct grammatical and Manual of Style-related problems with Queen (band). I bear you no ill will, but I do not slant towards you either. It is necessary, if we are to produce neutrally honest prose, that we be as impartial as possible.
 * This response will appear on User talk:CorbinSimpson as well as User talk:TheImpossibleMan. - Corbin Simpson 00:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Queen
Hmm. Those two sentences are pretty wiggy. They might be accurate, but they don't really pertain to Queen in terms of introducing it as a rock band. Where else in the article might we be able to move them to? - <strong style="color:#003399;">Corbin <em style="color:#009933;">Simpson 07:37, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Re Led Zeppelin
I see you've started the noble(and overdue) task f footnoting the LZ article. I have tried provide some links(some of them shots in the dark...but it's all part of a slow process)...and I've noticed a few other editors are taking a stab at the cleanup as well. Just so you know(although I'm sure you may have noticed by now) a young 14 year old whipper snapper has hacked the entire "History" section into it's own separate article. A common practice in Wiki, however, when he chopped it...he failed to include your footnotes(and an image) so now the LZ article itself is barren, and the new history article has reference links that go nowhere. Hopefully by the time you read this he will have cleaned up his chop job and built both articles into something remotely readable. I can't see where this drastic move was ever discussed on the LZ:Talk page? It was just starting it's long growth into a good article. Maybe all will work itself out. I know I don't have time to fix it. And your plate looks quite full with the Queen article(looking better n better all the time, BTW) Anyways...Take Care! Anger22 17:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Update...previous post was all for not. Someone else took exception to it too. Stability wins. Cheers! Anger22 19:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Genesis
Hi TheImpossibleMan, Genesis is currently an FAC and since you've previously contributed to the Zeppelin and Queen articles, I was hoping you could review the Genesis article and vote aye or nay on the FAC page. Thanks AreJay 04:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for participating in the Genesis FAC. I have worked to address some of your concerns, can you please take another look and provide some feedback? Thanks! AreJay 19:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Greetings from WikiProject The Beatles!
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? - It's all here

Civility in edit summaries
Please deal with other contributions in a polite and constructive manner. Rude behavior is discouraged by Wikipedia policies. See Civility. Thank you. -- PKtm 04:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Unfortunately, you are continuing to post uncivil edit summaries, such as "You clowns are unbelievable" and "Terrible idea". Please reconsider that behavior. Meanwhile, please know that I will revert any edits I see from you with abusive edit summaries, and if this behavior persists, I will take this dispute to the next step. Again, please review WP:Civil. Thanks. -- PKtm 17:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblock request
Reason: ''"Bunchofgrapes and Antandrus". The reason given for Bunchofgrapes and Antandrus's block is: "too similar to existing usernames, plea Your IP address is 152.163.101.10. ''
 * Unblocked. --Sam Blanning(talk) 19:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 2, June 2006
Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? - It's all here

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 3, July 2006

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 4, August 2006

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 5, September 2006

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 6, October 2006

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 7, November 2006

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 8, December 2006

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 9, January 2007
Hi. You are not receiving The Beatles project newsletter because we believe you are inactive. Click the link in the title, above, to see it. If you want to move yourself back to active, and get copies again, please remove your name from WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Inactive and add yourself to WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Active Thanks for your interest in the project. This is probably the last notice you will receive. ++Larbot - run by User:Lar - t/c 19:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:AlternateWalrus.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:AlternateWalrus.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

News Time

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

BetacommandBot 23:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles
Your user name is on the “Inactive, or have just popped out for a cup of tea...” list on the Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles page. You can move it back to the “Participants” list if you feel this is not the case. :) -- WikiProject The Beatles 15:13, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:QueenTeo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:QueenTeo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)