User talk:TheJazzDalek/2009-05

"you are mistaken"
Regarding this edit and associated comment: "you are mistaken", could you kindly explain how, where, and/or in what aspect(s), "I am mistaken" please? Thanking you in advance in anticipation of your reply, Pdfpdf (talk) 13:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken in your thinking that Soil is an exception to any rule, specifically MOS:CAPS. (c.f. K.D. Lang) TheJazzDalek (talk) 22:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was mistaken in saying that they are an exception. In fact, the wording of MOS:CAPS caters for their situation, and the situation of k.d. lang too. Viz:
 * "Some individuals do not want their personal names capitalized. In such cases, Wikipedia articles may use lower case variants of personal names if they have regular and established use in reliable third-party sources. Editors disagree on how often this should be done; some editors would never do it; some would always follow the personal preference of the subject."
 * My interpretation of that phrase is that both SOiL and k.d. lang are consistent / compliant with that guideline. From your reversion, I am guessing you interpret it differently? If so, may I bother you to explain your interpretation please? Again, thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Soil is not an "individual's personal name", nor is it not capitalized—it's a mixed capitalization. Additionally, the consensus is that your favored example should appear as K.D. Lang, so I'm not sure I understand your argument. TheJazzDalek (talk) 09:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Mmmmm. Nor I yours. We don't seem to be communicating.
 * OK, let's split it into bits and deal with them one at a time and see if that is any more successful.
 * Probably k.d. lang is the easiest place to start.
 * So, what consensus where says it should appear how? When I look at k.d. lang, I don't see anything to suggest anything definitive of anything, much less a consensus. Please explain. Pdfpdf (talk) 17:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * We seem to be getting sidetracked here. Please explain how the above sometime-exception (personal name/no capitalization) applies to SOiL, a band's name with mixed capitalization. TheJazzDalek (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "We seem to be getting sidetracked here." - I don't think so; your answer(s) to my questions will help me express my interpretation in a manner which will (I hope) address your concerns, and in form that (I hope) you will understand. It will also help me understand your interpretation. Without that understanding, I think it likely that we will continue to talk at cross purposes and not understand each other. Pdfpdf (talk) 11:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Hello? Pdfpdf (talk) 11:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Rocco Deluca and the Burden
All information in the section "Mercy" is verifiable through the Local 47 Los Angeles, Ca musicians union. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BryanRichie (talk • contribs) 17:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that isn't a viable source for Wikipedia. Please read WP:RS, WP:CITE, and WP:V for an idea of what you need to provide. TheJazzDalek (talk) 23:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Concept Album
Just wanted to say that it is nice to see others taking care of the article since I stopped editing a year ago. Ridernyc (talk) 08:19, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Second account?
Do you also have another account here? Forgive me if I'm wrong but your edits appear very similar to another editor who stopped editing around the time you started. If you do have another account, it's better to be open about it. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good heavens, am I being accused of wrongdoing? TheJazzDalek (talk) 11:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * No, you're simply being asked whether you are operating two accounts, which you haven't answered. Operating two accounts does not constitute "wrongdoing" as long as you are open about it.--Michig (talk) 12:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * According to WP:SOCK, it's not required to link multiple accounts. If you suspect someone is operating more than one account for nefarious purposes, that is one thing. But if, as you claim, the account that you think edited similarly to me isn't even editing any more, I can't imagine what difference it would make if it were me (unless, of course, that account was blocked or similarly disciplined). Bottom line: unless you think there is wrongdoing going on, you're just being nosy. TheJazzDalek (talk) 13:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Gone Fishing
The article meets the criteria for WP:NALBUMS since its official and the Cool Kids themselves are a significant source. I can't say i actually know why you're trying to delete an article that's based on official work by recording artists. gameworldduelist2 (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you're making this (misguided) argument on my talk page instead of the AFD itself. Being an "official" release is not one of the criteria at WP:NALBUMS, and a band is not a "significant source" (whatever that means). The problem with this mixtape is it has not received significant coverage (meaning substantial—more than just a track list and a paragraph announcing that the band released a free download). TheJazzDalek (talk) 16:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Obviously you can't read anything thoroughly because in the 1st or 2nd line of WP:NALBUMS it says it need significant coverage by a source. If coverage is seriously your reason, (which is the stupidest thing I've heard since that woman tried to sue a coffee company for making their coffee too hot) then here's a shitload of coverage by hip hop sites.12345678910 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.180.195.166 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * OK Einstein, what did you find with your great big brain? 1,2,4,5,6,7: blog posts consisting of the cover art, track list, and download link; 5: the same as the others but also includes an embedded YouTube video; 3: a 1 paragraph blog post; 8: 1 paragraph blog post with download link; 9,10: actual reviews, but from blogs. Your only worthwhile links are 9+10, and you can throw in 3 since it's a blog on the Voice's website.
 * Here's the pertinent part of WP:NALBUMS, in case you didn't read that far: Demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only, and unreleased albums are in general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources (emphasis mine). What you posted here does not add up to significant, and most (including 9+10) are not from reliable sources. And by the way, you sign your posts with 4 tildes (that squiggly thing next to the exclamation point on your keyboard), not by pasting in an old signature. TheJazzDalek (talk) 18:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright Mr. Man, then can you at least explain to me why you're concerning yourself with my article and not the other vast amounts of mixtapes on wikipedia that fit in the criteria that supposedly makes my article not worthy of a page? It's an official mixtape by a well-known group and executively produced by one of the most major names in hip hop mixtapes. What makes my article so different from Dedication (Gangsta Grillz), A Kid Named Cudi, Dat Kid from Cleveland, Freshmen Adjustment (which you already got to), Autopsie volume 2, Dedication 3, So Far Gone, etc. You are obviously a menace to the mixtape articles on wikipedia. See What is a troll? and you perfectly fit into this criteria. I'll bet the pages i just named are next. It is only a matter of time before you get to other perfectly reasonable mixtapes, God willing you realize the error of your ways and stop this tomfoolery soon... P.S. Thank you for telling me how to sign, good bye and good day to you, sir Gameworldduelist2 (talk) 19:25, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not hunting down mixtape articles (you can check my edits), I just happened across it. I will, however, be happy to take a look at those other articles you mentioned, if you think they're unworthy of inclusion on Wikipedia. Seriously though, no trolling on my part, dude. You might also want to check out WP:OWN regarding your comment about "my article". I suppose if God wants particular articles on Wikipedia, they will be deletion-proof. TheJazzDalek (talk) 19:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You know what? You should seriously stop being a pain in the ass cuz i said bye yet you keep talking your talk that nobody wanna hear. Its obvious you needa getcho shit together cuz im just tryna do something good for my lil bro helping him start his first mixtape article but nah, you gotta go and be a bitch-ass about it. Its niggas oops i mean bitch-asses like you that i try to keep my lil bro away from dealing with. And Whats Dis Shit about me acting obsessed with an article? Im just tryna help my bro make a good article so Pleaseeee unlike you i actually got a life between night and day... N' Plz don't reply cuz not only i ain't gonna read it, you just gonna be waisting your time that you apparently have so much of. Deucesss Brah!! Gameworldduelist2 (talk) 00:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You do realize that you're the one who came back here to read what I wrote; no one told you to. My favorite part is the sudden appearance of gangsta-speak in your last post. You really crack me up. "Peace out, yo!" TheJazzDalek (talk) 01:24, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

FAC Request
Hi there, I have just sent Fantasy Black Channel to FA Review and, if you have the time, I'd appreciate any comments, support, or even a constructive oppose here. Cheers. Rafablu88 (talk) 18:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I've never been involved in any FA discussions but if I get a chance, I'll check it out. TheJazzDalek (talk) 18:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)