User talk:Tim Pierce/Archive/2006

Williamsburg, Brooklyn
so I've ended up with edits by you, seeing no other way to reply I guess I'll post it here:

> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Jump to: navigation, search > > Hi, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia! Regarding the Williamsburg, Brooklyn page, > please bear in mind the advice at Wikipedia:Make only links relevant to the context, particularly > the bit about not adding lots of links to articles that don't go anywhere. I don't think there's > anything wrong with including information about the music scene in the Williamsburg article, but > having lots of links to individual small bands (even the ones that work) seem distracting from the > main purpose of the page. Tim Pierce 16:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I disagree, if for no other reason than because what is small or unimportant to one, is not so much to another. Put simply; it's very much in the eye of the beholder. Further, I think I'd probably challenge your assessment and credentials for deciding what is or isn't "small."

The page we're discussing will most likely be used by someone planning a trip or possibly contemplating a move to Williamsburg, Brooklyn. Since the section in question is about music, clearly having links to the relevant players in the scene will help someone know where to start in their exploration of the scene. Linking to those bands' and businesses' entries will help someone reserach and see what is to their taste. It also serves as a historic document. Furthermore - what's distracting about some text being clickable and in blue?

I would understand editing if someone were using the Encyclopedia for the purposes of self-promotion (which I have read and seen unchallenged countless times). That is not the case here, the object is to list as much relevant information as possible. 69.86.83.250 07:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi, and thanks for writing back! The principle of keeping only to relevant links is part of the Wikipedia style guide, and is defined in Make only links relevant to the context.  If the bands actually do have Wikipedia entries already, then it makes sense to link to them, but if there's no Wikipedia page there then there's no point creating a broken link for them.


 * I would personally find it distracting to be reading up on an encyclopedia page for a city and find it dominated by the music section with links to lots of local bands, but that is definitely an "eye of the beholder" thing and not part of Wikipedia policy :-)


 * And, for what it's worth, there are already well-established guidelines for whether or not a musical act is notable enough for its own Wikipedia entry: see WP:MUSIC. You don't have to take my word on that. :-)


 * Are Frank's Museum or Formaldehyde Blues Train still playing anywhere? It's been years since I've seen them and I can't find anything about them on the web.


 * I appreciate your willingness to talk about the issue :-) Tim Pierce 12:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Frankie lives in Italy these days, and FBT have just recently gotten back together with the founding line up and two former members of Frank's Museum... http://www.myspace.com/formaldehydebluestrain - Deek 12/28/06 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DeekSkusting (talk • contribs) 02:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC).

your AfD nomination
just out of curiosity, on what basis did you nominate Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not for deletion? Given that albums such as The Man Who or Free All Angels, or absolutely countless other albums from relatively small bands are found across Wikipedia? You described the Arctic Monkeys as 'small' or words to that effect... what exactly constitutes this definition? UK#1? Most anticipated album of 2006? Favourite for the Mercury Music Prize? I'm really at a loss, and can't help feeling I'm missing out on something. Deano 20:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi - I'm not going to debate the issue at great length; I nominated the article for deletion, my reasoning is there, and there's probably not much more to say :-) but essentially I don't agree with adding an article for an as-yet-unreleased debut album by a band that has been recording for less than a year, no matter how popular their singles or live performances have been. Wikipedia obviously disagrees with me, and that's fine :-)   I still think that it runs afoul of the principle that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.  I'm not impressed by a lot of the music entries I've found and think that mostly WP should stick to bands, not individual albums and almost never individual songs.  Tim Pierce 21:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay that's a fair enough POV. Thanks for clearing that up! Deano 22:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi mate - hope you're well. Please don't take this the wrong way, but I thought you'd like to see what happened to the "not-yet-released album by a minor English band".  Even I am amazed!  Take your pick from BBC, Bloomberg, Guardian Unlimited or The Telegraph.  Who would have thunk it, eh?  [[Image:Anglo-Indian identity.svg|20px]] Deano (Talk) 17:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Syriacs are not Syrians!
Hi

I would appreciate if you could remove the redirect from list of syriacs from list of syrians, due to that syrians and syriacs arent the same people. Syrians today are arabs. syriacs are (arameans/assyrians) Suryoyo 02:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

The thing is that the complexity of the name assyrian, syriacs, arameans, chaldeans is still debated. Currently "assyrians" is a more political name and syriacs is more uniting name for all arameans, chaldeans, assyrians. I think we can leave both and due time we will adjust those to lists. Suryoyo 02:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Regarding afd vote
I'd like to encourage you to reconsider your vote on Articles for deletion/Daniel R. Anderson, particularly for Anderson himself. I you look at the first section of his revised article, it is evident he is a major force in the children's television industry, having helped develop Blue's Clues, Dora the Explorer, and Go! Diego Go!, the three highest rated programs currrently for kids 2-5 years old. -- user:zanimum


 * Hi -- I agree that the programs that you mention are culturally significant, but without knowing to what degree Daniel Anderson was "involved" with developing them, it's hard for me to say that it makes sense to devote a Wikipedia entry to him, let alone the other members of the Sesame Beginnings board. Quite honestly, I respectfully think that you've let your enthusiasm get away with you on the whole Sesame Beginnings front, and am hard-pressed to justify the entries for Crown Crafts, Hamco and AD Sutton too. :-)  Tim Pierce 20:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Tim Pierce
As seen above, the article about you is currently up for deletion. If it matters to you whether the article stays or goes, you may wish to vote or at least comment. --Metropolitan90 05:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Derek Vestey
Good research on the obituary. I have access to Newsbank, which includes The Telegraph, but for some reason it wasn't there.

I'm not massively interested in financial stuff, but there's a wealth of untapped material about the Vestey Group. The reverberations are still continuing from the co-founders reorganising the company c.1915-1920 into various overseas entities so that it could function in the UK but avoid paying UK income tax. See and. Tearlach 02:33, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Edit war at WP:AUTO
There's currently an edit war going on at WP:AUTO, with Democritus trying to insert the language he proposed in the Deborah McGuinness case, despite a lack of consensus for it. We've started a section to discuss his language on the talk page. Please contribute your opinion if you're interested. Thanks. -- BrianH123 04:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Hello there! Seems you've been here before: Talk:FC Universitatea Craiova; coming from Romanian wikipedia where the article was disputed, it seems that I've touched a soft spot; just to let you know... :) --Vlad 12:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've never been on the Romanian wikipedia. I encountered this change while reading WP:AUTO. If you want to fill me in on the background though, feel free to post to my talk page.--BrianH123 06:10, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Arctic Monkeys
The page you wanted to have deleted about the Arctic Monkey's debut album where you refered to Arctic Monkeys as "a minor English band", I would like to inform you now that Arctic Monkeys have had 2 no. 1 singles in the UK and their album is set to become the fastest selling debut album ever, outselling all the other albums in the top 30 combined, and selling 120,000 in the first 24 hours. This is not malicious in any way, I just wanted to inform you :-) Arctic Monkeys —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.5.135.13 (talk • contribs)

Image:CateBlanchett.png
Thanks for uploading Image:CateBlanchett.png. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Oden 19:08, 19 November 2006 (UTC)